Refocusing the Debate: Assessing the Purposes and Tools of Teacher Evaluation

2012 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Papay
Keyword(s):  
Professional Development ◽  
Teacher Evaluation ◽  
Teacher Development ◽  
Teacher Performance ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Evaluation Tools ◽  
Development Tools ◽  
Measurement Tools ◽  
Value Added Measures

In this article, John Papay argues that teacher evaluation tools should be assessed not only on their ability to measure teacher performance accurately, but also on how well they inform and support ongoing teacher development. He looks at two major approaches to teacher evaluation reform: value-added measures and standards-based evaluations. Papay analyzes these two approaches both as measurement tools and as professional development tools, illuminating the advantages, drawbacks, and untapped potential of each. In the process, attention is refocused towards a broader conception of the purpose of teacher evaluation.

Value Added and Its Uses: Where You Stand Depends on Where You Sit

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 418-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Corcoran ◽  
Dan Goldhaber
Keyword(s):  
Performance Evaluation ◽  
Teacher Evaluation ◽  
Teacher Performance ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
High Stakes ◽  
Practical Utility ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Value Added Model ◽  
High Level

In this policy brief we argue that there is little debate about the statistical properties of value-added model (VAM) estimates of teacher performance, yet, despite this, there is little consensus about what the evidence about VAMs implies for their practical utility as part of high-stakes performance evaluation systems. A review of the evidence base that underlies the debate over VAM measures, followed by our subjective opinions about the value of using VAMs, illustrates how different policy conclusions can easily arise even given a high-level general agreement about an existing body of evidence. We conclude the brief by offering a few thoughts about the limits of our knowledge and what that means for those who do wish to integrate VAMs into their own teacher-evaluation strategy.

scholarly journals Can Value-Added Measures of Teacher Performance Be Trusted?

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassandra M. Guarino ◽  
Mark D. Reckase ◽  
Jeffrey M. Wooldridge
Keyword(s):  
Teacher Performance ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Value Added Measures

Technology Evaluation Tools and Teacher Performance in Public Schools

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-69
Author(s):  
Pauline Stonehouse ◽  
Jared Keengwe
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Teacher Evaluation ◽  
Educational Policy ◽  
Teacher Performance ◽  
Technology Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Tools ◽  
Public School District ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Impact Of Technology ◽  
The Impact

The purpose of this study was, (a) to describe the introduction of MVAL software and Charlotte Danielson Rubrics (CDR) as teacher evaluation tools; (b) to compare the process and outcomes of the new initiative with traditional systems, and (c) to evaluate the software from the perspective of participants in the system. This study highlights the need for public school district to improve the process of teacher evaluation using technlogy evaluation tools such as the mVal software. Addtionally, educational policy makers ought to examine effective standards-based criteria and the impact of technology tools on teacher evaluation and reflective practices.

If a Tree Falls in a Forest, but no one Hears…

2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 34-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary W. Ritter ◽  
James V. Shuls
Keyword(s):  
Teacher Evaluation ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Sole Source ◽  
Learning Gains ◽  
Tree Falls ◽  
Value Added Measures ◽  
Source Of Information

Value-added measures shouldn't be the sole source of information in a teacher evaluation system, but they can play an important role in a system that values student learning gains.

Taken by the Numbers

2016 ◽  
pp. 634-651
Author(s):  
Robert William Smith ◽  
Scott Imig
Keyword(s):  
Standardized Test ◽  
Teacher Performance ◽  
Value Added ◽  
The United States ◽  
Teacher Experience ◽  
Standardized Test Scores ◽  
Teacher Pay ◽  
Survey Results ◽  
Alternative Approaches ◽  
Value Added Measures

A debate is currently being waged across the United States over the value of teacher experience and education. Multiple states have introduced new methods of calculating teacher pay based on how much growth has occurred on students' standardized test scores. Survey results from 300 principals illustrate the value of teacher experience and education, questioning the oversimplified view of teacher performance represented only by value-added measures (VAM). Legislators and some VAM researchers have been captivated by the idea of a single metric of teacher effectiveness, viewing VAM as a silver bullet for school reform. However, other than ranking teachers, there is little evidence that VAM supports teacher or school development. Alternative approaches to VAM's focus on individual teacher performance are considered.

scholarly journals Learning from what doesn’t work in teacher evaluation

2018 ◽  
Vol 100 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Close ◽  
Audrey Amrein-Beardsley
Keyword(s):  
Teacher Evaluation ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Teacher Ratings ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Teacher Evaluation Systems ◽  
Value Added Measures

Recent lawsuits reveal common mistakes plaguing current teacher evaluation systems. Drawing on arguments in court documents for prominent cases, the authors find that evaluation systems using value-added measures (VAM) suffer from a) inconsistent and unreliable teacher ratings, b) bias toward and against teachers of certain types of students, c) easy opportunities for administrators to game the system, and d) a lack of transparency. They urge others to engage with these (and other) arguments to design better, more valid, more useful, and ultimately more defensible teacher evaluation systems.

The Intertemporal Variability of Teacher Effect Estimates

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 572-606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel F. McCaffrey ◽  
Tim R. Sass ◽  
J. R. Lockwood ◽  
Kata Mihaly
Keyword(s):  
Middle School ◽  
Middle School Teachers ◽  
Test Scores ◽  
Sampling Error ◽  
Teacher Performance ◽  
Value Added ◽  
School Teachers ◽  
Student Test ◽  
Student Test Scores ◽  
Value Added Measures

The utility of value-added estimates of teachers' effects on student test scores depends on whether they can distinguish between high- and low-productivity teachers and predict future teacher performance. This article studies the year-to-year variability in value-added measures for elementary and middle school mathematics teachers from five large Florida school districts. We find year-to-year correlations in value-added measures in the range of 0.2–0.5 for elementary school and 0.3–0.7 for middle school teachers. Much of the variation in measured teacher performance (roughly 30–60 percent) is due to sampling error from “noise” in student test scores. Persistent teacher effects account for about 50 percent of the variation not due to noise for elementary teachers and about 70 percent for middle school teachers. The remaining variance is due to teacher-level time-varying factors, but little of it is explained by observed teacher characteristics. Averaging estimates from two years greatly improves their ability to predict future performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document