Teacher Evaluation and School Improvement

Hide Document

0eacher Evaluation and School Improvement
MILBREY WALLIN MCLAUGHLIN Stanford U,,;,'ersity

Policymakers at all levels of government are pressured to respond to critical conclusions about the status of American education 1 and to escalating public demand to "do something" about the schools. Questions of education quality, consequently, are on the agenda of most state legislatures and local school boards2 and the debate about "solutions" is heated. Teacher evaluation, this article argues, can be
a

powerful strategy for achieving these school
∑

improvement goals. Practitioners may find this position surprising if riot wrong-headed. Many doubt that teacher evaluation can serve both accountability objectives and improvement concerns. Indeed, many practitioners have divorced improve ment and assessment purposes in teacher evaluation so that staff-development activities will not be seen as punitive. But it is also true that few districts have actively pursued links between teacher evaluation and improvement. Most educators see current teacher evaluation practice as a waste of time and resources. In a majority of school districts, teacher evaluation constitutes an uneven, desultory ritual that contributes little to school improvement but much to teacher anxiety and administrator burden.s As teacher evaluation typically is conceived and practiced, it could be little more. Most teacher evaluations comprise standard checklists completed by the principal after a brief classroom observation. Principals usually base ratings on their own sense of good practice; not surprisingly, assessments based in the "I know what I like" school of evaluation can vary among schools and classrooms. Evaluation in this instance reflects a principal's individual preferences rather than a consistent set of criteria to inform either accountability or improvement. However, principal inconstancy is less problematic than it might be because most teachers receive "satisfactory" or "outstanding" ratings; "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory" findings are rare. Administrators explain the preponderance of these salutory assessments in terms of the political and bureaucratic problems associated with teacher evaluation. Low ratings risk conflict with the teachers' organization; evaluators do not have the skills to confi<;lently do more; support from "downtown" is often not forthcoming in the event of a negative or controversial appraisal; insufficient time and resources are available to respond to less than satisfactory ratings anyway.
Volume 86, Number I, Fall 1984

OJ 61-4681/84/860 1/193$1.25/0

. 191

TI-achns Coilegr Rrcord

Teacher El'aitllliion

∑195

" ,ir i

,:.
.'''

;

Teadlers arc no happier with tIlt' current state of assessment practice. Strong teachers complain that this system does not acknowledge excellence, . provides feedback too general to be useful, and fails to document incom petence. \\!eaker teachers are also dissalidied. They express resentment that hoped-for diagnosis and assistance is not a result of their {'valuation and that their satisfactory marks arc meaningless. ∑Teachcrs assert that a checklist approach to evaluation, especially one grounded in a process-product model that assumes specific teacher behaviors evaluation tool, lead to particular learner outcomes, is an irrelevant and inappropriate A number of serious concerns are raised about this∑ deterministic approach to teacher evaluation. Among them:

principal. and contribute significantly to the vitality and coherence of the II A number of school districts have adopted teacher evaluation schooL

essentially blllT,1l1n;Jtic mechanism. present teacher evaluation prl('tices can inform neither practice nor policv in a nH'aningful way . But theory and experience suggest that teacher cvaluation of another stripe can support tea cher growth and development, strengthen the role of the

practic es based in principals' strengthened supervisory, diagnostic, and prescriptive skills. In districts that arc moving away from the deterministic,

1. Learner outcomes are cumulative; it is difficult to isolate the effect of any
one teacher on student performance.

process-product model of teacher evaluation, principals are trained to observe cbssroom practices, assess teacher solutions to classroom problems, gauge the quality of teachcr-student interactions, and analyze the structure of edges the conditional nat me of teacher effectiveness and focuses on individual tcacher judgments and choices within broad and widely held categories for (,ffective tcaching.12 instructional processcs. Principal training framed in this model acknowl

2. Teacher behaviors and activities interact with numerous factors to affect
student performance. Student socioeconomIc status, school climate, pupil abilities, previous instructional treatment, are but a few of the many factors that determine teacher effectiveness for any given student.4 Teacher "effectiveness," however defined, is highly contextual and conditionaL

TEACHER EVALUATION AND IMPROVEMENT
Experience shows that teacher evaluation based in this process perspective supports the formal authority of the principal a; evaluator with functional authority based in tcchnical knowledge, evaluation skills, and shared language. Teacher evaluation grounded in this design is a potent tool for school improvement because it can affect factors that are fundamental to how teachers and principals go about their jobs and how well they carry out their responsibilities for instruction and management.13 Most important are: teacher motivation and sense of efficacy effective communication and shared goals principal's instructional leadership teacher learning and development

3. Teachers vary enormously in the practices that work for them and the
problems they confront in their particular classrooms.s As Good, a longtime student of teacher effectiveness, put it: "One myth that has been discredited by classroom observation is that schooling is a constant experience with teachers curriculum."6 No single instructional program works for all teachers or all students; effectiveness depends on the classroom context. Thus there can be "no single, simple method of evaluating teacher effectiveness because there is no single concept of what the teacher should be undertaking in the class room."7 behaving in similar ways and pursuing similar goals with a common

4. Teachers' effectiveness varies depending on the goals defined for the

student or the class. Not only are the objectives described for students multiple and substantively diverse (e.g., academic, emotional, or social outcomes) but the strategies successful in achieving one goal (memorization of facts, for example) are often counterproductive for other instructional objectives (e.g., higher-order problem-solving skills).8 Further, the effectiveness of particular teacher practices may be curvilinear: Too much of a good thing can depress outcomes.9 Yet most teacher evaluation activities, with their closed-ended checklists, prescriptive categories, and ambiguous standards, disregard this complexity. The incompetence of principals as teacher evaluators compounds instrumen tation problems. Teachers seldom respect principals as experts on classroom practice or as skilled classroom observers,1O and in the absence of principal credibility, teachers consider the evaluation illegitimate comment on their practices in most districts, then, misgivings about the ability of teacher performance and ignore its findings. Given the state of teacher evaluation evaluation to contribute to school improvement are unsurprising. As an

TEACHER MOTIVATION AND SENSE OF EFFICACY
It is axiomatic that teachers' motivation and their sense of professional effectiveness are central to school-improvement efforts and to maintaining high-quality classroom practices. Teachers' sense of efficacy is tied to an educator's primary source of satisfaction, the intrinsic rewards associated with the teaching role-service to youngsters or transmitting knowledge associated with a particular discipline,14 The extrinsic rewards attached to a teaching career are low; the ancillary benefits (with the exception of a long summer vacation) are effectively nonexistent. Yet it is difficult for teachers to collect the intrinsic rewards that motivate them and provide satisfaction. The greatest obstacle to teacher sense of efficacy, ironically, is lack of feedback about their performance-credible this point, significant and recurrent doubt about the worth of their work with information about how well they are carrying out their responsibilities. To

∑),;•'il.'n∑tftltft'e

5_Æ."hiW∑,ij&*.", .∑,

.

∑,<,

,196

Teachers College Record

Teacher Evaluation

197

students is a consistent teacher characteristic.15 Efficacy, as this suggests, is not entirely an internal construct; it relies on environmental response that participation in what Lortie calls "craft pride" or efficacy.17 The structure of acknowledges good performance.16 A number of factors frustrate teacher

perceived as "stolen."24 But even if opportunities for peer observation were

peers, to compare classroom practices, or to comment on collegial practices. Instead, time spent with colleagues during the school day typically is increased, the norms dominant in most school settings prohibit collegial

the profession itself makes it difficult for teachers to experience professional

progress, not by a static positiol) of competent practice.ls Teaching, however, accomplishment and success in other professions-medicine or law, for they are doing a good job.

accomplishment. Most professions ideally are characterized by explicit career is a relatively "flat" occupation, with few of the stages 'or plateaus that mark example. Thus there is little in the structure of the profession to tell teachers Another impediment to teacher sense of efficacy is inherent in the teaching

support to make peer criticism unprofessional. So strong is this ideology of noninterference that even when teachers know about "bad" practices, they adminstrators.25 will make no move either to assist a colleague or inform responsible The principal, in his or her role as evaluator, thus has a crucial role to play in providing the credible feedback essential to a teacher's sense of efficacy. Regular classroom observations, based in principal-evaluator classroom

assessment. Conventions of teacher autonomy join with norms of collegial

no agreed-upon technical core of knowledge or unambiguous set of

task. Unlike other areas of professional or semiprofessional activity, there is

expertise and observational skills, can provide the review and diagnosis visits from a competent principal-evaluator as a "threat" or a waste of time, teachers view them as professionally and personally rewarding. To this point, evaluation study provide strong evidence of teachfr support for this principal

guidelines for successful practice.19 Furthermore, "outcomes" for teachers are relatively complex, ambiguous, indeterminate, and long-run. A lawyer can

essential to teacher satisfaction, efficacy, and growth. Far from perceiving

judge success by case outcome; an agronomist can measure achievement by the

have no such unequivocal or unitary measure. Student achievement scores,

number and type of new agricultural techniques in place. Teachers, however,

districts studied as part of the preliminary research for Rand's teacher

effectiveness, in the teachers' view, rests in the successful diagnosis of

not seen as adequate measures of effectiveness by teachers.20 Classroom

the outcome measure favored by school boards, citizens, and policymakers, are

evaluation visits on two occasions, somewhat playfully filed a grievance diagnostically based teacher evaluation system voted to continue funds for teacher evaluation as a high priority when the district's budget was trimmed. In Washington state, teachers amended their collective bargaining agreement for being overlooked. Teachers in a Minnesota district with a strong,

role. A teacher in one New Jersey district, imidvertently excluded from

producing long-term changes in youngsters' altitudes and capacity. As one effectiveness research put it: "Teachers are not hired to cram information into objective tests. Teachers are hired to educate children, to produce important, particularly acid commentator on the process-product school of teacher

classroom problems and the selection of strategies to meet them and in

students' heads to be retained just long enough to enable them to pass

were not seeing what was "really going on." and so the feedback to teachers positive and negative-was less useful than it might be. In districts such as information about their performance and primary support for their sense of these, teachers have come to value their evaluations as an important source of efficacy and so for their professionalism.

to include more and unannounced principal visits; they felt that principals

lasting changes in their behavior, not short-term changes in test scores."21 practice itself.

Successful teaching outcomes, in this view, are as indeterminate as the Ironically, then, while self-reflection lies at the heart of professionalism,22

COMMUNICATION AND SHARED GOALS

no template for success that teachers can lay beside their performance and goals. And long-term outcomes may never be evident to

self-monitoring and assessment are difficult for teachers to carry out. There is

assess the extent to which they have achieved their personal and professional

administrators is characteristic of effective schools26 and a factor in success includes significant emphasis on instructional, not just administrative, Communication of this nature is not easy to achieve and is not part of the

Open, frequent, and candid communication among teachers and school ful planned change activities.27 Effective communication is two-way and

be credible, it must come from individuals who teachers believe can make authoritative judgments about their performance. The norms and the process of schooling preclude those individuals most

gauge their effectiveness and support professional pride. For this feedback to

Consequently, teachers must rely on the reflection and feedback of others to

teachers.

matters.

normal character of information transmission within school buildings. than conversation between teachers and administrators. Even when. the Bureaucratic pressures encourage one-way telegraphic communication rather

structure of the school and the isolation of teachers in their classrooms is much remarked upon.23 Teachers have little opportunity to observe their

able to provide that feedback-fellow teachers-from doing so. The cellular

might be because teachers and administrators lack common language. An important result of principal training in clinical supervision is acquisition of

occasion for exchange presents itself, communication is less effective than it

l!JS ' Teachers College Record

Teacher Evaluation

199

this common language.28 Such training permits principal-evaluators to speak interpret classroom events, and to analyze teaching practices. Principals are thus able to move beyond global statements about teacher performance ("Keep up the good work!" "More discipline is needed during seat work.") to clearly, precisely, and very specifically to teachers about their performance, to

district priorities, and knowledge about more effective practice.s2 Teacher occasion, structure, and information that support these activities, namely, assistance to teachers through regular feedback and analysis. 3s

and keeping activities of the professional staff apace of changing school needs,

evaluation can be the key to principal leadership because it provides the

concrete examples gathered by observation (e.g., pointing out that a teacher teacher, commenting on her principals' supervisory and evaluation expertise, spends most of her time teaching to the right side of the classroom). As one

discuss particular concepts of classroom practice and provide teachers

regular teacher observation, discussion about teacher work problems, and Teacher evaluation also allows principals to exercise effective control over

what needs to be improved and [concerning her own documented improve evaluation."29 ment] I really don't think all of this would have been possible without Providing principals with the skills to make classroom observations of this

put it: "It puts words on problems as well as strengths. I have a clear notion of

improvement and -growth and assists in the "counseling out" of less effective

the quality of classroom practice because it appeals to teacher incentives for

teachers. Schools are normative organizations and teaching is a craft in which one's best. Coercion and punitive oversight are not effective strategies for excellence relies heavily on commitment, enthusiasm, and the desire to do

promoting excellence in teaching or school improvement broadly defined. 3 4 actually make things worse in the classroom because teachers do not see the outcome measures typically employed-namely, student achievement scores-as legitimate or the process sufficiently sensitive to the complex Indeed, experience suggests that heavy-handed accountability measures can

directly to classroom practice supports communication in the other direction report that they' talk much more with principals about classroom issues Little noted this phenomenon in her study of school success and staff as well. Teaching staff in schools where principals possess this expertise

diagnostic nature and communicate findings in ways that teachers can relate

because shared language makes such a conversation possible. Judith Warren development: "[Only administrator observation of classroom practices] and feedback can provide the shared referents for the shared language of teaching,

process of teaching. The result, too often, is bitterness at "the system," frustration, and decisions to give up goals of eX6ellence and instead do just enough to "get by." However, a teacher evaluation system that furnishes

content of the communication associated with effective schools and improved practice-concrete talk about instruction and strategies for improvement.

observation and diagnostic skill, in short, provides both the language and the

talk about teaching useful."so Teacher evaluation rooted in administrator

and both demand and provide the precision and concreteness which makes

can engage teacher commitment to growth and enthusiasm for learning new skills. The same information that motivates teachers to grow professionally can

specific, detailed, and believable information about classroom performance

counseling out of teachers who appear ill-suited to teaching and unlikely to

also increase the quality of educational services in a school through the profit from in-service education opportunities. In the face of detailed, concrete information that points to performance problems, and given adequate remediation opportunities, most teachers who continue to have difficulty in

between teachers and administrators that is necessary to combat the segmented it can provide the information to enable teachers and administrators to align strategy thus moves both knowledge and practice of a school's professional and sometimes incompatible practices seen in many schools. At the same time,

goals. Thus teacher evaluation can support the mutual understanding

about school-wide goals and to assess teacher performance in terms of these

This kind of evaluation allows principals to inform teachers regularly

the classroom are amenable to suggestions that they seek another vocation.

The same norm of service that encourages teachers to gain new skills in the

light of documented problems, it appears, supports decisions to resign when personal lack of fit with the profession can be demonstrated. To this point,

instructional content, classroom activities, and instructional goals. This

one Lake Washington, Washington, principal who counseled out seven teachers in the past five years commented that "with only one exception, they all left with a smile." 35

ness.Sl

staff toward the shared goals crucial to school improvement and effective

TEACHER LEARNING AND D EVELOPMENT PRINCIPAL LEADERSHIP

The central and essential function of the principal in school improvement and school effectiveness as "instructional leader" or "gatekeeper of change" has become a truism. A substantial body of research focuses on the activities good classroom practices, integrating school-wide instructional activities, associated with this pivotal role-for example, identifying and supporting

Teacher evaluation that describes and diagnoses teacher practices in specific,

concrete terms can provide the most effective and legitimate means of "quality

control" because it appeals to internalized norms of professionalism and

points the way to do better. Teacher evaluation of this stripe relies on the teacher development and changr.

normative power of legitimate authority and informed feedback to stimulate

200

Teachers College Record

Teacher Evaluation

201

authority in the school organization, but is also compatible with what we because someone tells them to. Indeed, demands to learn new skills, know about how adults learn.Unlike children, adults seldom learn simply

Such teacher evaluation not only is compatible with notions of effective

minimizing teacher evaluation.

teacher evaluation. Principals tend to minimize conflict in this area by Finally, teacher evaluation is but one of the multiple demands on a

potential incompatibility between these two roles more apparent than in

particularly where they involve replacement of existing routine, threaten an

plishment.Adult motivation to learn new things must come from within. Teacher evaluation has an important role to play in stimulating this inter nal motivation. To this point, Brundage concluded on the basis of a comprehensive review of adult learning that "what seems most clear in arise from within the learner. These are not something added on by an

adult's already well-organized self-concept and established level of accom

building administrator's time and energy.Indeed, in terms of urgency, two broad classes of concerns eclipse teacher evaluation and performance issues: relations with parents and the community and student discipline. Until these inclined to turn to questions of classroom quality and teacher performance.4 o Given all of these factors, it is not surprising that principals tend to spend little time on evaluation (approximately 5 percent of their time) and that the

issues central to administrator control are resolved, administrators are not

discussions on motivation is that the tendencies which are labeled 'motives'

to further motivation. 36 Similarly, Knowles says that adults are motivated to " Concrete information about areas in which teaching practice can be improved

contributing either to feedback or to reinforcement and by this route indirectly learn as they experience needs and interests that learning will satisfy. 37

external agent.. ..The behavior of the external agent must be viewed as

assessment of teacher performance is largely pro forma and cursory. Teacher capacity to carry out.

evaluation, in short, is an activity that most principals have little interest in or "Business as usual" conditions cannot promote and support teacher

evaluation practices of the type .discussed here. Rand's teacher evaluation program that can contribute substantially to school improvement: extensive and regular training for principals

authoritative and legitimate feedback on ways to be a more effective teacher. about how teachers learn to teach. Teachers learn to teach primarily in two weak role in teacher development. Teacher learning requirements are 38 The salience of teacher evaluation in this role is amplified by what we know

furnishes precisely the most powerful kind of motivation for teachers

study points to at least five conditions essential to a teacher evaluation

ways, as students and on the job; preservice teacher education programs play a

teacher participation in program design

resources for evaluators

development; it is only after teachers master fundamental teaching skills that they begin to concentrate on the relationship between what they do and student behavior. This means that on-the-job learning is most significant to 39

developmental. As Nemser details, first-year teachers engage in formative skill

explicit central office support and involvement

integration with other district management activities41

TRAINING FOR PRINCIPALS

teacher performance and that support of this learning, as well as assessment

of performance, must be keyed to a teacher's developmental stage. Experience

identification of differentiated strategies of diagnosis and assistance that can teachers, support teacher development. Given the centrality of on-the-job learning for teacher evaluation may be one of the

too little too late.A strong teacher evaluation program is essential to the

has shown that unitary or uniform staff-development activities too often are

In most districts, principals receive little if any training related to their teacher evaluation responsibilities. For teacher evaluation of the type assumed here,

principal training is substantial and ongoing.A weekend workshop as the program is getting underway is insufficient to give principals the requisite clinical, diagnostic, and staff-development skills. Training of this sort requires substantial initial investment; equally as important, there must be continued attention to refreshing, refining, and building on the diagnostic skills of principals. In Lake Washington, for

development strategies available.

most potent teacher

CONDITIONS NECESSARY TO EFFECTIVE TEACHER EVALUATION

example, district administrators attend a two-week wokshop each August. Teacher evaluation and teaching processes are always a focus of these devices, administrators workshops. Through simulation, role-modeling, videotapes, and other receive extensive and increasingly sophisticated

Teacher evaluation is not something most school principals like to do. For consistent, and meaningful evaluation of teachers' classroom performance. the school and encapsulate the tension school administrators feel between their roles as instructional leader and building manager. Nowhere is the Second, teacher evaluation and the associated anxiety threaten the stability in one thing, they have little confidence in their ability to carry out fair,

training in clinical observation, notetaking, reporting, and conference skills. In addition to these yearly training retreats, follow-up administrator Training principals to development seminars are held at least once a month. ongoing, iterative activity. carry out this role, in short, is not something that is "finished"; rather it is an

._L

.2{)2.

Teachers College Record

Teacher Evaluation

203

EVALUATOR RESOURCES

The Rand study found that teacher participation was important to building the trust between administrators and teachers necessary' for the system to work; it also provides concrete evidence that the district did not intend to implement

the credibility of the evaluation activity. When principals lack the authority

effective responsibility both undercuts building principals and undermines

not have the authority or the resources to act on their findings. This lack of

In most school districts, principals have responsibility for evaluation but do

goal. 44 If an evaluation system is to serve teacher-improvement objectives, it is essential that teachers see it as equitable and relevant. Teacher participation is

a "gotcha" system of teacher assessment and that improvement is a mutual

or resources to respond to problems identified in the process of evaluation, the activity becomes little more than a time-consuming but empty exercise. from evaluation without appropriate follow-up may be counterproductive to Further, the teacher frustration and alienation that can be expected to result

crucial to teacher commitment to do something about evaluation outcomes.
EXPLICIT DISTRICT-LEVEL SUPPORT

a necessary means to that end. Finally, teacher participation in design is

improvement goals.

Resources for principals to use in response to evaluation findings are

Teacher evaluation is not something to which building administrators would

crucial if principals are to take teacher evaluation seriously and if evaluation

devote substantial time or attention, all other things being equal. It conflicts

is to support teacher improvement. For one thing, evaluators must be able to

with their facilitative and supportive role; it consumes already inadequate quential teacher' evaluation program. Principals and teachers must see

respond quickly in order to make the tie between evaluation and improvement an effective one. Teacher motivation to respond to evaluator assessment will be highest immediately following an evaluation session and the nature of

time. Express district-level commitment is essential to a strong and conse teacher evaluation as a district priority and something that is taken seriously by the superintendent and central office staff. Without this support, evaluation will remain a pro forma, bureaucratic responsibility. Central office support can be shown in a numBer of ways. Support will be evident, of course, in the resources made available for principals to respond to teacher performance assessment. Less tangible elements of support are

improvement concerns will be freshly defined. Resources for evaluator use are

also important from the perspective of the most effective support for teacher Districts handle this requirement for decentralized and nonstandardized

learning because evaluators can "tailor" a teacher-development prescription.

resources in different ways. In Lake Washington, for example, each school has a discretionary fund that principals can use to support the in-service education activities suggested by a teacher's evaluation-special workshops, a course at the nearby university, enrollment in a district in-service activity,

released time for observation in another setting, and so on. Salt Lake City has a

required as well. Active central. office oversight of principals' evaluation activities conveys a strong signal about the priority afforded evaluation and the attention it should receive. To this end, some districts review principals'

remediation team composed of central office specialists and especially

identified consultants who work with teachers identified as having difficulty. respond individually and immediately to principals' request for assistance in evaluation effort that serves school improvement Other districts use mentor teachers or teachers on special assignment to

the quality of their evaluation. Some districts even attach sanctions to teacher evaluations in an effort to focus principals' attention on the issue and halt

evaluation reports for care and comprehensiveness. Indeed, in many districts where teacher evaluation is unusually effective, principals are evaluated on

a classroom. Evaluator resources such as these are necessary to a teacher accountability rituals. rather than merely

what one teacher called "the dance of the lemons." In one California district, for example, principals are penalized at salary time if a teacher they rated as competent proves incompetent when transferred to another school.45 Political support from "downtown" is critical. Sometimes principals will

TEACHER PARTICIPATION

not act on observed teacher problems because they fear the political fallout. Decisions about teacher probation are inherently political; in making this recommendation, a principal risks problems with the teachers' organization as well as parent or community members who may believe that a teacher has

The effective teacher evaluation practices examined in the Rand study

Teachers and administrators agreed that teacher participation was a necessary ingredient in the success of the program. Teacher involvement is important for a number of reasons. One of the most salient is the fact that teachers can specifying the criteria and strategies used in assessing their performance and

included teachers in the development of district teacher evaluation practices.42

been judged wrongly. And many principals have found little if any support from downtown if a probationary placement became a heated issue. Principal confidence that the superintendent and central office staff will be supportive on tough decisions and will not, as one principal put it; "leave us out on a evaluation system.46

maximize the transitive rewards of teaching only if they have played a role in that of their students.4 3

limb while they back off for political reasons" is essential to a strong teacher

204

Teachns Col/f'gf' Record

Tf'acher Evaluation

205

contribute to improvement goals, it must demand it, support it with multiple resources, and give it the political and bureaucratic backing it requires.
INTEGRA TION WITH DISTRICT MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

In short, if a district wants a strong teacher evaluation system that can

Improve Education across the Nation (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, November 15, 1983). 3 In preparation for identifying case study sites and developing an analytical framework, Rand analysts conducted an extensive literature review and national search for promising teacher evaluation practices. This preliminary work, which provided an overview of current theory and practi ce, is reported in L. Darling∑Hammond, A. E. Wise, and S. R. Pease, "Teacher Evaluation in the Organizational Context: A Review of the Literature," Review of Educational Research 53, no. 3 (Fall 1983): 285-328; and A. Wise et aI., Teacher Evaluation (Santa Monica, Calif.: The Rand Corporation, 1984). 4 L. J. Cronbach, "Beyond the Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology," American Psychologist, February 1975, pp. 116-27; and B. H. McKenna, "Context/Environment Effects in Teacher Evaluation," in Handbook of Teacher Evaluation, ed. J. Millman (Beverly Hills: Sage publications, 1981), pp. 23-37. 5 D. Armor et aI., Analysis of the School Preferred Reading Program in Selected Los Angeles Minority Schools (Santa Monica, Calif.: The Rand Corporation, 1977); and T. Good, "Research on Classroom Teaching," in Handbook of Teaching and Policy, ed. L. Shulman and G. Sykes (New York: Longman, 1983), pp. 42-80. 6 7 8 T. Good, "Teacher Expectations and Student Perceptions: A Decade of Research," R. M. W. Travers, "Criteria of Good Teaching," in Millman, ed., Handbook of Teacher N. Bennett, Teaching Styles and Pupil Progress (London: Open Books, 1976); and J. A.
>

integration

A strong and meaningful teacher evaluation system demonstrates substantive activities. The development of technical knowledge is relatively useless in the and strategic consistency with other district management

teacher evaluation is rendered effectively inconsequential by its isolation from

absence of organizational structures and processes to use it. In most districts,

other district management activities. For example, Rand's preliminary

activities typically had no connection with district planning, staff develop ment, curriculum development, or program evaluation activities. Where teacher evaluation was effective as a school-improvement strategy, however, there were explicit interrelationships among these district activities-each informing and reinforcing the other through common goals, expectations, and processes. -In this way, teacher evaluation is a central part of an

assessment of teacher evaluation practices across the country found that these

Educational Leadership 38, no. 5 (February 1981): 418. Evaluation, p. 22. Centra and D. A. Potter, "School and Teacher Effects: An Interrelational Model," Review of Educational Research 50; no. 2 (Summer 1980): 273-91. 9 10 II Darling-Hammond, Wise, and Pease, Context." S. Feiman-Nemser and R. E. Floden, "The Cultures of Teaching" (draft manuscript, W. C. Jacobson, "We Brought Teachers Up to Snuff, and So Can You, " , The Executive Michigan State University, 1984), p. 46. Educator, February 1984, p. 41; R. P. Manatt, K. L. Palmer, and E. Hidlebaugh, "Evaluating Teacher Performance with Improved Rating Scales," NASSP Bulletin 60, no. 401 (1976): 21-23; Millman, Handbook 12 Good, of Teacher on Evaluation; G. B. Redfern, Evaluating Detailed Teachers and the various Administrators (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1980); and Wise et aI., Teacher Evaluation. "Research Classroom Teaching." description of approaches to practices that fit within these broad parameters is beyond the scope of this paper. For details see the work of Madeline Hunter, Richard Manatt, and George Redfern as well as the case studies reported in Wise et aI., Teacher Evaluation. 13 See, for example, M. Cohen, "Instructional, Management, and Social Conditions in Effective Schools," in School Finance and School Improvement, A. Odden and L. D. Webb (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing, 1983). 14 D. C. Lortie, "The Balance of Control and Autonony in Elementary School Teaching," in The Semiprofessions and Their Organization, ed. A. Etzioni (New York: The Free Press, 1969); idem, Schoolteacher (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1975); and G. H. McPherson, Small Town Teacher (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972). 15 Lortie. Schoolteacher; P. T. Ashton, R. B. Webb, and N. Doda, A Study of Teachers Sense "Teacher Evaluation in the Organizational

administrator's responsibilities, not just a categorical and ancillary require The necessity of substantive and strategic consistency with district

ment.

management practices draws attention to the fact that there is no "best model" of teacher evaluation. To this point, the unusually effective teacher evaluation

systems examined as part of the Rand study differed along every possible "design" dimension-the role of the teacher, the role of the principal, the

timing and nature of the evaluation process, the resources available to evaluators, and the criteria established for teacher performance. While each of

management style and tenor.

these four systems offers important lessons to inform choices in other districts, their effectiveness reflects the fact that they fit the district's particular In summary, teacher evaluation can be a potent school-improvement tool

not because it puts a floor under classroom practices-the goal of account central to individual development and the teacher's sense of professionalism. ability-based evaluation models-but because it addresses the incentives

Evaluation when seen in this light cannot be subjected to the quick fix, but central to the teaching profession.

requires the interaction of a host of factors that build on the norms and values

of

Efficacy (University of 'Florida, Foundations of Education) nd; P. W. Jackson, Life in

Classrooms (New York: Holt, Rinehart

&

Winston, 1968).

Notes
Reports on Education, 2nd. ed. (Chelmsford, Mass.: The Northeast Regional Exchange, 1983). 2 United States Department of Education, Meeting the Challenges: Recent Efforts to J. L. Griesemer and C. Butler, Education Under Study: An Analysis of Recent Major

16 A. Bandura, "Self-Efficacy Mechanisms in Human Agency," American Psychologist 37, no. 2 (1982): 40; and B. Fuller et aI., "The Organizational Context of Individual Efficacy," Review

Of Educational
17 18

Research 52, no. I (Spring 1982): 7-30.

Lortie, Schoolteacher, p. 121. W. Moore, The Professions (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1970), p. 80.

, 1206

Teachers College Record

Teacher Evaluation

207.

19

Lortie. "The Balance of Control and Autonomy in Elementary School Teaching": idem.

Schoolteacher; Ashton. Webb. and Doda. A Study of Teachers Sense of Efficacy; Jackson. Life in Classroom.,; and S. Sarason. The Culture of the School and the Problem of Change, 2nd ed. (Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 1982). 20 Jackson. Life in Classrooms; Ashton. Webb. and Doda. A Study of Teachers Sense of Efficacy; G. D. Fenstermacher. "A Philosophical Consideration of Recent Research on Teacher Effectiveness." in Review of Research in Education, vol. 6. cd. L. S. Shulman (Itasca. III.: F. E. Peacock. 1978). 21 D. M. Medley. "The E[[ectivness of Teachers." in Research on Teaching: Concepts, Findings and Implications. ed. P. L. P. Peterson and H. J. Walberg (Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing. 1979). p. 17. 22 23 D. A. Schon. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action (New York: S. L. Lightfoot. The Good High School (New York: Basic Books. 1983); Jackson. Life in Basic Books. 1983). Classrooms: Lortie. Schoolteacher: E. L. Boyer. High School: A Report on Secondary Education in America (New York: Harper 24 25 26 27 Vol.

interrelationships among district policies and the need to support evaluators and administrators with information and resources for remediation. 42 43 44 45 46 Wise et al.. Teacher Epaluation. Lortie. ∑"The Balance of Control and Autonomy in Elementary School Teaching," p. 36. Wise et aI., Teacher Evaluation. Bridges. The Identification. Remediation and Dismissal of Incompetent Teachers. Wise et aI., Teacher Evaluation.

& Row. 1983):

M. Fullan. The Meaning of Educational Change

(New York: Teachers College Press. 1982); and McPherson. Small Town Teacher. McPherson. Small Town Teacher, p. 51. Ashton. Webb. and Doda. A Study of Teachers Sense of Efficacy. p. 240. Cohen. "Management and Social Conditions in Effective Schools." P. Beman and M. W. McLaughlin. Federal Programs Supporting Educational Change. VIlI: Implementing and Sustaining Innovations (Santa Monica. Calif.: The Rand
'.

Corporation. 1978): and J. W. Little. School Success and Staff Development: The Role of Staff DC7.∑elopmmt in Research. 1981). 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Jacobson. "We Brought Teachers Up To Snuff. andSo Can You": and Wise et al.. Teacher See the Lake Washington case in Wise et al.. Teacher Evaluation. Little. School Success and Staff Development, pp. 102-03. Cohen. "Instructional, Management, and Social Conditions in Effective Schools." A. Blumberg and W. Greenfield, The Effective Principal: Perspectives on School Evaluation. Urban Desegregated Schools (Boulder. Colo.: Center for Action

Leadership (Boston: Allyn and Bacon. 1980). J. B. Wellish et aI., "School Management and Organization in Successful Schools," Etzioni. The Semiprofessions and Their Organization; and R. E. Elmore and M. W. Sociology of Education 51 (1978): 211-26. McLaughlin. "Strategic Choice for Federal Education Policy: The Compliance-Assistance Trade-Off." in The 81st Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, ed. A. Lieberman and M. W. McLaughlin (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1982). 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Wise et al.. Teacher Evaluation. D.. H. Brundage. Adult Learning Principles and Their Application to Professional

Planning (Toronto: Ministry of Education, Ontario, 1980), p. 40.

M.

Knowles. The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species (Houston: Gulf, 1978). p. 31.

S. F. Nemscr, "Learning to Teach." in Shulman and Sykes ed.. Handbook of Teaching and Ibid.. p. 162. Blumberg and Greenfield, The Effective Principal. Wise et al.. Teacher Evaluation. These conditions are consistent with the "organizational

Policy, pp. 150-70.

approach" for managing teacher incompetence developed by E. M. Bridges, The Identification, Remediation and Dismissal of Incompetent Teachers (Burlingame. Calif.: Association of California School Administrators. 1984). In particular, Bridges stresses the importance of tight

Hide Document