Teacher Evaluation Systems: Major Challenges and Potential Solutions

TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEMS: MAJOR CHALLENGES AND POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS

Most districts implement teacher evaluation systems with the expressed purpose of improving the quality of teachers and/or teaching. In order to fulfill this purpose, any evaluation system must:

1. Provide a fair, accurate, and consistent method for measuring teaching and teacher quality
2. Guide individual and collective key human capital decisions, such as hiring, dismissal, professional development, tenure, and promotion

As districts begin to design, implement, and use data from evaluation systems, they move through the USHCA’s Pyramid of Teacher Evaluation Systems[1]. Most districts areoperating in some way in all four areas in the pyramid, but challenges abound in all areas.

This tool explores the commontechnical challenges/questionsin each stage of the pyramid and, where possible, we list potential solutions to these challenges, grounded in research and our best thinking. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list. Adaptive challenges, such as those that require a change in culture and norms of an organization, must be addressed within a district’s specific context.

Implement an Accurate, Fair System

No shortage of information exists on how to design teacher evaluation systems. In fact, between the work of the Gates Foundation’s Measures of Effective Teaching Project, TNTP, and multiple other organizations,districts know much about how to build and implement more accurate systems than ever before. Still, details matter for long-term success and buy-in.

• How can principals realistically and best evaluate all teachers annually?

• Evaluations should be conducted annually, but observation (a component of evaluation)frequency within a year or across years can be differentiated by level of experience/need - novice teachers or lower-performing teachers may need additional support[5]
• Use less time-intensive measures than observations, like student perception surveys and test scores, to assess teacher performance quickly and identify areas of concern/development for all teachers[6]

• How will you define effective teaching, learning, and performance in each subject?
• Which measures apply to/are available for which teachers?
• How will measures be applied in different teaching contexts (e.g., team teaching, Special Education, ELL)?

• Define and communicate what constitutes effective teaching, learning, and performance in each subject.[8] Note: Pick an existing rubric and modify it, if needed, to meet your district's needs.No single observation rubric is perfect, but many have been tested thoroughly[9]
• Clearly identify and communicate how different types of teachers and contexts will be evaluated[10]

• Fewer options exist to judge student achievement/learning in non-tested grades/subjects – what counts as evidence of student learning in these subjects?

• Involve teachers in the development of how their subject will be evaluated – Student Learning Objectives, portfolios, new assessments are all potential measures[12]

• Multiple raters are costly and require extensive training

• Ensure at least some teachers are observed by trained, impartial raters to assess overall reliability of ratings[14]

• How can districts involve, gather, and analyze all teachers’ feedback?

• Seek teacher feedback through surveys; be sure to share results and take action. Sample teacher survey here[16]

Exit Low Performers

Districts often use the results of teacher evaluation systems to address low performance first. Key questions asked should include:

• There is no definitive answer to what constitutes low teacher performance, although the common standard is teachers whose student achievement data does not produce one year's growth for a year's time
• How much time and support is available to a teacher before termination?

• Districts must determine (with states, if appropriate) the level of performance that justifies termination. Clear and defined evaluation measures are critical. Also, define the support and timeframe available
• We recommend identifying teachers in need of improvement when teachers whose student achievement data does not produce one year's growth for a year's time or whose students' achievement levels decline during the year

• Documentation requirements can be burdensome
• Efforts may not result in termination
• Principals lack time to complete paperwork

• Oftentimes, districts over-interpret regulations. Most can exit low-performing probationary teachers with minimal requirements
• Work with your state and/or union to outline a process for dismissing teachers, particularly those with tenure, for poor performance.[18] Create alternatives to formal dismissal[19]
• Train principals to hold difficult conversations with under-performing teachers.[20] See a model coaching conversationhere
• Consider a peer assistance and review program, if funds allow, or provide centralized support to principals through your legal team[21]

• How then should evaluation data be used when implementing new tests?

• Districts should adjust weighting of value added measures until additional years of the new test’s data are available. Seek flexibility from the state, if needed[23]
• Districts should review and align their evaluation measures in light of Common Core implementation[24]

Grow Teacher Practice

Arguably the most important focus of teacher evaluations is to grow and improve teacher practice; here, the evaluation rating is less important than the conversation to discuss the teacher’s performance.

• How do you scale meaningful and quality feedback?
• Observation instruments are the same across grades and subjects

• Utilize coaches, department heads, and district staff with subject matter expertise in addition to the principal to provide specific, actionable feedback[26]
• Highlight areas of strength/“reinforcement”, questions, and areas for “refinement” or “quick hits[27]
• Identify key skills and practices that many teachers need and provide “feedback bundles” that evaluators can use during debriefs such as video clips, curriculum materials, master teachers, etc.[28]
• Supplement generic evaluations tools with subject-specific evaluation protocols available for use to those in need of additional support and feedback[29]
• Consider using video feedback if internal district resources don’t exist, like TNTP’s Great Teaching, Great Feedback

• Principals do not have expertise in all subject areas
• Generic observation tools often provide general and broad guidance for improvement

• Utilize coaches, department heads, peer colleagues and district staff with subject matter expertise in addition to the principal to provide specific, actionable feedback[31]
• Supplement generic evaluations tools with subject-specific evaluation protocols that contain more subject-specific and actionable elements[32]

• How can districts keep the notion of alignment among initiatives front and center?

• Involve district staff with subject matter expertise in designing professional development and “feedback bundles”[33]

Leverage Top Performers

A district should leverage its top performers for maximum impact – by assigning them to schools and classrooms with the highest needs, incentivizing them to share their expertise with other teachers, etc.

• Ratings often converge around effective/ highly effective making it difficult to distinguish the top performers

• Provide additional training to raters on a clear definition of effective teaching using a multiple rating scale. Use videos as a teaching tool[35]
• Train principals to hold meaningful conversations with teachers.[36] See a model coaching conversation here. Also see TAP’s model

• How can a district keep top teachers?

• Focus on tracking and retaining top teachers. TNTP’s Irreplaceables report and accompanying toolbox have a multitude of strategies and tools[38]
• Hold principals accountable through their evaluation for the loss of highly effective teachers (assuming the reason for the loss was not retirement, child care leave, or other reasons beyond the control of the principal)

Key Resources

• MET Project -
• Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (
• TNTP -
• TAP -

Endnotes

1

Teacher Evaluation Systems: Major Challenges and Potential Solutions

[1] Structure adapted from Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

[2]TNTP (

[3] ASCD (

[4] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[5] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[6] MET (

[7] MET ( TNTP (

[8] There is no universal definition of effective teaching, although rubrics that define effective teaching abound like Danielson, Marzano, etc.

[9] TNTP(

[10] DCPS IMPACT (

[11] MET ( CAP ( AFT ( TNTP ( )

[12]

[13] MET ( TNTP ((

[14] MET (

[15] Aspen (

[16] Aspen (

[17] CAP (

[18] CAP (

[20] CAP (

[21] CAP ( and

[22] CKN (

[23] CKN (

[24]

[25] , TNTP (

[26] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[27] and

[28] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[29] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[30] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[31] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[32] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[33] Hill & Grossman, 2013 Learning from Teacher Observations: Challenges and Opportunities Posed by New Teacher Evaluation Systems (

[34]

[35] MET (

[36] CAP (

[37]

[38]