Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accountability in the evaluation of teacher effectiveness: views of teachers and administrators

  • Published:
Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 08 February 2024

This article has been updated

Abstract

Student learning outcomes have been used to measure a teacher’s accountability for student learning in the evaluation of teacher effectiveness. This study employed a survey research design and investigated the views of teachers and administrators regarding using student learning objectives (SLOs) and classroom observations in the evaluation of teacher effectiveness in one southeastern state in the USA. The results revealed that administrators had significantly more positive views than teachers regarding the impact of SLOs and the classroom observations. Educators had less positive views of the impact of SLOs and the classroom observations after the full implementation of the evaluation system. Educators reported various concerns regarding the issues of using students’ assessment results, assessment methods, subjectivity in goal setting, and lack of feedback. The findings can inform policy making, development and implementation of teacher evaluation system, and teachers’ professional learning and development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Teachers and administrators who participated in the surveys were informed that the data collected would be kept confidential, and only researchers in this project have access to the data.

Change history

References

  • AERA. (2015). Statement on use of value-added models (VAM) for the evaluation of educators and educator preparation programs. Educational Researcher, 44(8), 448–452. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15618385

  • Anagnostopoulos, D., Wilson, S., & Charles-Harris, S. (2021). Contesting quality teaching: Teachers’ pragmatic agency and the debate about teacher evaluation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 98, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzanò, G., & Grimaldi, E. (2013). Discourses of merit: The hot potato of teacher evaluation in Italy. Journal of Education Policy, 28(6), 767–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2013.774439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bovens, M. (2010). Two concepts of accountability: Accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West European Politics, 33(5), 946–967. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2010.486119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2010). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 303–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, C., & Braaten, M. (2018). Teacher evaluation and the demoralization of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 49–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, D. C., Chattergoon, R., & Burkhardt, A. (2019). Examining the dual purpose use of student learning objectives for classroom assessment and teacher evaluation. Journal of Educational Measurement, 56(4), 686–714.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, D. C., & Dadey, N. (2017). Principal holistic judgments and high-stakes evaluations of teachers. Educational assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29, 155–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R. J., Kyriakides, L., Mujis, R. D., & Robinson, W. (2010). Differential teacher effectiveness: Towards a model for research and teacher appraisal. Oxford Review of Education, 29(3), 347–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2019). The trouble with teacher turnover: How teacher attrition affects students and schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27(36). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3699

  • Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014a). Measuring the impacts of teachers I: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2593–2632. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014b). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2633–2679. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clinton, J., & Dawson, G. (2018). Enfranchising the profession through evaluation: A story from Australia. Teachers and Teaching, 24(3), 312–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1421162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clinton, J., Dinham, S., Savage, G., Aston, R., Dabrowski, A., Gullickson, A., Calnin, G., & Arbour, G. (2015). Evaluation of the implementation of the Australian professional standards for teachers: Final report. Centre for Program Evaluation, The University of Melbourne. Retrieved December 2015 https://rest.neptuneprod.its.unimelb.edu.au/server/api/core/bitstreams/ac67f530-368e-5581-b1b5-4abcf71866ee/content

  • Clinton, J. M., Anderson, M., Dawson, G., Dawson, A., Bolton, S., & Mason, R. (2016). Teacher effectiveness systems, frameworks and measures: A review. Centre for Program Evaluation https://www.dese.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/resources/teacher-effectiveness-systems-frameworks-and-measures-review

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosner, S., Kimball, S. M., Barkowski, E., Carl, B., & Jones, C. (2015). Principal roles, work demands, and supports needed to implement new teacher evaluation. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 27(1), 76–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouse, K., Gitomer, D. H., & Joyce, J. (2016). An analysis of the meaning and use of student learning objectives. In A. Amrein-Beardsley & K. Kappler Hewitt (Eds.), Student growth measures: Where policy meets practice. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielson, C. (2013). The framework for teaching evaluation instrument. The Danielson Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluations right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Young, P. (2002). Defining “highly qualified teachers”: What does “scientifically based research” actually tell us? Educational Researcher, 31(9), 13–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delvaux, E., Vanhoof, J., Tuytens, M., Vekeman, E., Devos, G., & Petegem, P. V. (2013). How may teacher evaluation have an impact on professional development? A multilevel analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.06.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derrington, M. L. (2014). Teacher evaluation initial policy implementation: Superintendent and principal perceptions. Planning and Changing, 45(1/2), 120–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, M. L. (2012). Teachers’ perspectives on evaluation reform. Center for American Progress http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/ uploads/2012/12/TeacherPerspectives.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, M. L. (2016). Teacher evaluation reform: Focus, feedback, and fear. Educational Leadership, 73(8), 72–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, M. L. (2021). Multidisciplinary perspectives on teacher evaluation: Understanding the research and theory. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, M. L., & Papay, J. P. (2015). Teacher evaluation for accountability and development. In H. F. Ladd & M. E. Goertz (Eds.), Handbook of research in education finance and policy (pp. 174–193). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, X. (2022). Teachers’ perspectives on the evaluation of teacher effectiveness: A focus on student learning objectives. Teaching and Teacher Education, 110, 103604.

  • Flores, M. A. (2012). The implementation of a new policy on teacher appraisal in Portugal: How do teachers experience it at school? Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 24, 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-012-9153-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, T. G., & Hewitt, K. (2020). Better integrating summative and formative goals in the design of next generation teacher evaluation systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 28(63), 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, H. A. (2004). Vaughn Elementary’s innovative teacher evaluation system: Are teacher evaluation scores related to growth in student achievement? Peabody Journal of Education, 79, 79–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality http://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/docs/EvaluatingTeachEffectiveness.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (1997). Evaluating the effect of teacher degree level on educational performance. In W. J. Fowler (Ed.), Developments in school finance, 1996 (pp. 197–210). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2002a). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 45–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2002b). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2016). Gauge impact with 5 levels of data. Journal of Staff Development, 37(1), 32–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallinger, P., Heck, R., & Murphy, J. (2014). Teacher evaluation and school improvement: An analysis of the evidence. Journal of Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 26, 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A. (2009). Teacher deselection. In D. Goldhaber & J. Hannaway (Eds.), Creating a new teaching profession (pp. 165–180). Urban Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, S. G., & Skedsmo, G. (2016a). Teacher evaluation – Accountability and improving teaching practices. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28, 105–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-016-9241-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, S. G., & Skedsmo, G. (2016b). Educators’ responses to policies and accountability expectations. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28, 295–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-016-9253-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E., Bergin, C., & Murphy, B. (2022). Principals may inflate teacher evaluation scores to achieve important goals. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 34, 57–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-021-09366-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, T. J., McCaffrey, D. F., Miller, T., & Staiger, D. O. (2013). Have we identified effective teachers? Validating measures of effective teaching using random assignment. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lachlan-Haché, L., Cushing, L., & Bivona, L. (2012). Student learning objectives as measures of educator effectiveness: The basics. American Institutes for Research http://educatortalent.org/inc/docs/SLOs_Measures_of_Educator_Effectiveness.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 255–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S., & Zhao, D. (2013). Teacher evaluation in China: Latest trends and future directions. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 25, 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-013-9168-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Visone, J., Mongillo, M. B., & Lisi, P. (2019). What matters to teachers if evaluation is meant to help them improve? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 61(2019), 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, J. R., McCaffrey, D. F., Hamilton, L. S., Stetcher, B., Le, V. N., & Martinez, J. F. (2007). The sensitivity of value-added teacher effect estimates to different mathematics achievement measures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44(1), 47–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machin, S., & Vignoles, A. (2006). Education policy in the UK. Centre for the Economics of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maharaj, S. (2014). Administrators’ views on teacher evaluation: Examining Ontario’s teacher performance appraisal. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 152, 1–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, J. C., Smart, J., & Alston, D. M. (2016). Development and validation of Teacher Intentionality of Practice Scale (TIPS): A measure to evaluate and scaffold teacher effectiveness. Teaching and Teacher Education., 59(2016), 159–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J. (2012). The two purposes of teacher evaluation. Educational Leadership, 70(3), 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meng, L., & Muñoz, M. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions of effective teaching: A comparative study of elementary school teachers from China and the USA. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(2), 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9230-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milanowski, A. (2004). The relationship between teacher performance evaluation scores and student achievement: Evidence from Cincinnati. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 33–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, R. M. R. (2017). The impact of a high stakes teacher evaluation system: Educator perspectives on accountability. Educational Studies, 53(2), 178–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. B., Hodge, K. J., Trepinski, T. M., & Anderson, L. W. (2014). The stability of teacher performance and effectiveness: Implications for policies concerning teacher evaluation. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(95), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n95.2014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morganstein, D., & Wasserstein, R. (2014). ASA statement on value-added models. Statistics and Public Policy, 1(1), 108–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odden, A., Borman, G., & Fermanich, M. (2004). Assessing teacher, classroom, and school effects, including fiscal effects. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 4–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papay, J. P. (2011). Different tests, different answers: The stability of teacher value-added estimates across outcome measures. American Educational Research Journal, 48(1), 163–193. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210362589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papay, J. P. (2012). Refocusing the debate: Assessing the purposes and tools of teacher evaluation. Harvard Educational Review, 82(1), 123–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paufler, N. A. (2018). Declining morale, diminishing autonomy, and decreasing value: Principal reflections on a high-stakes teacher evaluation system. International Journal of Education Policy & Leadership, 13(8). https://doi.org/10.22230/ijepl.2018v13n8a813

  • Paufler, N. A., & Clark, C. (2019). Reframing conversations about teacher quality: School and district administrators’ perceptions of the validity, reliability, and justifiability of a new teacher evaluation system. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 31, 33–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-019-09292-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, L. A., Dudek, C. M., Peters, S., Alperin, A., Kettler, R. J., & Kurz, A. (2018). Teachers’ and school administrators’ attitudes and beliefs of teacher evaluation: A preliminary investigation of high poverty school districts. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 30(1), 47–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-017-9263-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockoff, J. E., & Speroni, C. (2010). Subjective and objective evaluations of teacher effectiveness. American Economic Review, 100(2), 261–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romzek, B. S., & Dubnick, M. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47(3), 227–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowan, B., Chiang, F. S., & Miller, R. J. (1996). Using research on employee performance to study the effects of teachers on students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 70, 256–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, S. V., von der Embse, N. P., Pendergast, L. L., Saeki, E., Segool, N., & Schwing, S. (2017). Leaving the teaching profession: The role of teacher stress and educational accountability policies on turnover intent. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salazar, M., & Lerner, J. (2019). Teacher evaluation as culture: A framework for equitable and excellent teaching. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, W. L. (2000). Value-added assessment from student achievement data: Opportunities and hurdles. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 14(4), 329–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, M. C., & Johnson, R. L. (2019). Using formative assessment to support student learning objectives. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, R. (2019). Jumping through hoops: Troubling music teacher dilemmas in the new era of accountability. Music Educators Journal, 105(3), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0027432118816146

  • Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2011). Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(4), 1029–1038.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skedsmo, G., & Huber, S. G. (2017). Evaluation of educators’ performance-balancing various measures to improve practice. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29, 107–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-017-9262-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skedsmo, G., & Huber, S. G. (2018). Teacher evaluation: The need for valid measures and increased teacher involvement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 30, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9273-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slotnik, W. J., Bugler, D., & Liang, G. (2014). Real progress in Maryland: Student learning objectives and teacher and principal evaluation. Mid-Atlantic Comprehensive Center https://www.wested.org/resources/real-progress-in-maryland-59136/

    Google Scholar 

  • Slotnik, W. J., Smith, M. D., Helms, B. J., & Qiao, Z. (2013). It’s more than money: Teacher Incentive Fund-Leadership for educators’ advanced performance, Charlotte- Mecklenburg Schools. Community Training and Assistance Center (CTAC) http://ctacusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/MoreThanMoney.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2019). Understanding teacher shortages: An analysis of teacher supply and demand in the United States. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27, 35. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.27.3696

  • Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (2009). Teachers’ perception of the new teacher evaluation policy: A validity study of the Policy Characteristics Scale. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 924–930.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (2011). Stimulating professional learning through teacher evaluation: An impossible task for the school leader? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(5), 891–899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (2014). The problematic implementation of teacher evaluation policy: School failure or governmental pitfall? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(4_suppl), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213502188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuytens, M., Devos, G., & Vanblaere, B. (2020). An integral perspective on teacher evaluation: A review of empirical studies. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 32, 153–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-020-09321-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, 100 E Cameron Ave, Chapel Hill, NC, 27514, USA

    Xumei Fan

Authors
  1. Xumei Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xumei Fan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised to update the copyright line of this article.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fan, X. Accountability in the evaluation of teacher effectiveness: views of teachers and administrators. Educ Asse Eval Acc 35, 585–611 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-023-09419-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-023-09419-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation