Evaluating Teaching

A Guide to Current Thinking and Best Practice

James H. Stronge

• Publisher: Corwin
• Year: 2005
• ISBN:
  9781483334172
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education Administration

This invaluable resource demonstrates how to foster the development of highly qualified teachers through designing and implementing a solid teacher evaluation system.

Teacher Evaluation and School Improvement Improving the Educational Landscape^1 James H. Stronge

1

---

So why does teacher evaluation matter? Because teaching matters: “Without capable, high quality teachers in America’s classrooms, no educational reform effort can possibly succeed” (Stronge & Tucker, 2003, p. 3). The core of education is teaching and learning, and the teaching-learning connection works best when we have effective teachers working with every student every day. While effectiveness can be defined in myriad ways (Cruickshank & Haefele, 2001), the essential issue is that we have the most effective teachers possible guiding the learning of students. And, “without high quality evaluation systems, we cannot know if we have high quality teachers” (Stronge & Tucker, 2003, p. 3).

Teacher evaluation is, first, about documenting the quality of teacher performance; then, its focus shifts to helping teachers improve their performance as well as to holding them accountability for their work.

In recent years, as the field of education has moved toward a stronger focus on accountability and on careful analysis of variables affecting educational outcomes, the teacher has proven time and again to be the most influential school-related force in student achievement. (Stronge, 2002, p. viii)

Given the emphasis on teacher quality as expressed in No Child Left Behind, as well as legislation, public policy, and practice in every state (and, for that matter, many nations throughout the world), a premium must be placed on high quality teacher evaluation systems to a degree that didn’t exist heretofore.

So why does teacher evaluation matter? Because regardless of how well a program is designed, it is only as effective as the people who implement it (Stronge, 1993). Thus, a conceptually sound, well-designed, and properly implemented evaluation system for teachers is an important—indeed, essential—component of an effective school. Despite the fact that proper assessment and evaluation² of teachers is fundamental to successful schools and schooling, this key element in school reform is too frequently neglected—due not to the absence of teacher evaluation, but rather to the implementation of poor evaluation systems and poor evaluation practices.

The basic needs in a quality teacher evaluation system are for a fair and effective evaluation based on performance and designed to encourage improvement in both the teacher being evaluated and the school. The purpose of this book is to explore key elements for constructing and implementing fair and effective teacher evaluation systems. This introductory chapter attempts to set the stage by discussing critical components for a quality teacher evaluation system and by identifying how effective teacher evaluation contributes to effective schools. Specifically, the chapter addresses the following questions:

• Why is there a need for quality teacher evaluation?
• What are the basic purposes of a teacher evaluation system?
• What are obstacles to quality teacher evaluation systems?
• What are key features of an effective teacher evaluation system?
• How can a teacher evaluation system be designed for school improvement and personal growth?
• How can self-reflection and feedback improve teaching?

WHY IS THERE A NEED FOR QUALITY TEACHER EVALUATION?

Failures of Educational Reform

Too often, educational reform has produced disappointing results (Clark & Astuto, 1994) or outright failure (Pogrow, 1996). Fullan (1996) noted that one of the reasons for failure of systemic reforms is fragmentation: “Fragmentation occurs when the pressures—and even the opportunities—for reform work at cross purposes or seem disjointed and incoherent” (p. 420). Other reasons for the failure of systemic reforms are that reform efforts are implemented too quickly, from too many directions, and without regard to how the reform effort and the subsequent changes will affect teachers (Bascia & Hargreaves, 2000). Thus, reform efforts fail.

One example of cross-purpose, disjointed, and incoherent reform that is played out in schools on a regular basis is as follows: (1) change school policy for a given innovative teacher program, (2) provide some level of staff development on the prospective innovation, (3) ostensibly implement the innovative practice, and (4) continue to use existing evaluation practices. When reform efforts are disconnected from assessment, there is no way to measure success in the reform effort. Such a disconnect is a formula for failure.

A conceptually sound and properly implemented evaluation system for teachers (and, indeed, for all educators) is a vital component for successful reform efforts. “A rational relationship exists between personnel and programs: If program effectiveness is important and if personnel are necessary for effective programming, then a conceptually sound and properly implemented evaluation system for … education personnel is essential” (Stronge, 1993, p. 445).

Balancing the Needs of Teachers and the Needs of the Organization

A dynamic relationship between the teacher and the school exists in a healthy organization: What’s good for the organization must also be good for the teacher. This type of synergistic relationship enhances the ability of both the teacher and the school to achieve desired goals. Moreover, balancing individual needs with institutional expectations is essential for fostering productive work environments (March & Simon, 1967, 1993).

An organization’s beliefs about performance appraisal are inherent in the assumptions underlying the development of an appraisal system. Castetter (1996) explained that these assumptions “form a basis for achieving integration of individual and organizational interests” (p. 282). If the assumption is correct that individual and institutional goals are intertwined, then it is logical to consider teacher evaluation as a vehicle to facilitate and assess success for both the teacher (e.g., personal growth and performance improvement) and the school (e.g., goal accomplishment and accountability). Thus, teacher evaluation can and should be considered a vital part of the total improvement-restructuring efforts in education.

Improvement can take numerous forms, including

• improvement in performance of individual teachers, and other educators (administrators, support personnel);
• improvement of programs and services to students, parents, and community; and
• improvement of the school’s ability to accomplish its mission.

Fostering improvement in teacher evaluation systems means balancing individual and institutional demands. Little (1993) stated that “the language of reform underestimates the intricate ways in which individual and institutional lives are interwoven” (p. 147). As Fullan (1991) noted, “Combining individual and institutional development has its tensions, but the message … should be abundantly clear. You cannot have one without the other” (p. 349). In order to accomplish personal and professional goals, the individual needs the institution. In order to accomplish organizational goals, the institution needs the individual.

Purposes of Teacher Evaluation

In addition to the basic function of school, teacher, and, ultimately, student improvement, how can the requisite time, effort, and resources needed to design, implement, and support a quality teacher evaluation system be justified? Why should school divisions develop a teacher evaluation system? The Personnel Evaluation Standards of the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (1988, pp. 6–7) identified ten distinct purposes for high quality teacher evaluation as depicted in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Purposes for High Quality Teacher Evaluation From Joint Committee on Personnel Evaluation Standards

---

• evaluate entry-level educators before certifying or licensing them to teach
• identify promising job candidates
• assess candidates’ qualifications to carry out particular assignments
• guide hiring decisions
• assess performance of educators for tenure and promotion decisions
• determine recognition and awards for meritorious contributions
• assist faculty and administrators in identifying strengths and needs for improvement
• plan meaningful staff development activities
• develop remediation goals and activities, and, when necessary
• support fair, valid, and legal decisions for termination

---

The two most frequently cited purposes of personnel evaluation are accountability and professional growth (see, for example, Danielson & McGreal, 2000; Peterson, 2000). The accountability purpose reflects the need for determining competence of teachers in order to assure that services delivered are safe and effective (McGaghie, 1991) and typically has been viewed as summative in nature. The performance improvement purpose reflects the need for professional growth and development of the individual teacher and typically has been considered to be formative in nature.³

There is room in teacher evaluation systems for both accountability and performance improvement purposes. In fact, evaluation systems that include both accountability and personal growth dimensions are both desirable and necessary for evaluation to productively serve the needs of individual teachers and the school and community at large.

Performance improvement and accountability purposes are not competing, but supportive interests—dual interests that are essential for improvement of educational service delivery. These two roles are inextricably intertwined in the total evaluation process. Moreover, a conceptual framework for [teacher] evaluation should emphasize the dynamic relationship between individual and institution where the needs and interests of one fuse with and support the other. (Stronge, 1995, p. 13)

For multiple purposes in teacher evaluation systems to be feasible, however, there must be a rational link between the purposes (Stronge, 1995). McGreal (1988) argued that multiple purposes of evaluation can be met successfully with a single evaluation system when the system is viewed as one component of a larger mission—furthering the goals for the school. This conception of teacher evaluation ties evaluation not only to teacher improvement but also to school improvement. Thus, a comprehensive teacher evaluation system should be rooted in two broad purposes:

• It should be accountability-oriented, contributing to the personal goals of the teacher and to the mission of the program, the school, and the total educational organization, and should provide a fair measure of accountability of performance (i.e., summative focus).
• It should be improvement-oriented, contributing to the personal and professional development needs of the individual [teacher] as well as improvement within the school (i.e., formative focus). (Stronge, Helm, & Tucker, 1995)

Accountability Orientation

The school or systemwide purposes form the basis of all organizational action. An effective school is one in which the school or systemwide purposes become a unifying agent (Stronge, 1993). A sound evaluation system revolves around the mission and goals of the individual school and of the school district (Danielson & McGreal, 2000; Stronge & Helm, 1991). The evaluation system should facilitate not only accomplishment of the school’s goals but also compatibility with and support for individual teacher goals. Given the various implications of the No Child Left Behind Act, accountability to teacher evaluation is required. In addition, if goal accomplishment (both school and teacher) is fundamental to success, then the evaluation system should reflect this orientation (Stronge & Helm, 1992).

Ralph Tyler (1942) reflected the outcome/goal orientation that should serve as a basis for teacher evaluation systems:

A … basic assumption involved in evaluation is that the kinds of changes in behavior patterns in human beings which the school … seeks to bring about are its educational objectives. The aims of any educational program cannot be stated in terms of the content of the program, or in terms of the methods and procedures followed by the teachers, for these are only means to other ends. Fundamentally, the purposes of education represent these changes in human beings which we hope to bring about through education. (p. 495)

Improvement Orientation

While a teacher assessment and evaluation system should be oriented toward accomplishing the school’s goals, it also should be focused on improvement. Goals typically reflect a desired state of being, not an existing state. Therefore, if established goals (for both the individual teacher and the school) are to be achieved, a...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Preface
• About the Authors
• 1. Teacher Evaluation and School Improvement: Improving the Educational Landscape James H. Stronge
• Part I: Designing a Teacher Evaluation System
• Part II: Assessing Teacher Performance
• Part III: Implementing the Teacher Evaluation System
• Author Index
• Subject Index