Can Principals Promote Teacher Development as Evaluators? A Case Study of Principals’ Views and Experiences

Educational Administration Quarterly

Volumn 52, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 711-753

  Kraft, Matthew A ^a   Gilmour, Allison F ^b  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

class observation; feedback; principals; teacher development; teacher evaluation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84993996140     PISSN: 0013161X     EISSN: 15523519     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013161X16653445     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Allen J. P., Pianta R. C., Gregory A., Mikami A. Y., Lun J., (2011). An interaction-based approach to enhancing secondary school instruction and student achieve-ment. Science, 333, 1034-1037.
2. Almy S., (2011). Fair to everyone: Building the balanced teacher evaluations that educators and students deserve. Washington, DC: Education Trust.
3. Blazar D., Kraft M. A., (2015). Exploring mechanisms of effective teacher coaching: Results from two cohorts of an experimental evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 37, 542-566.
4. Boyd D., Grossman P., Ing M., Lankford H., Loeb S., Wyckoff J., (2011). The influence of school administrators on teacher retention decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 303-333.
5. Bryk A., Schneider B., (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
6. Bryk A., Sebring P. B., Allensworth E., Luppescu S., Easton J., (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
7. Camburn E., Rowan B., Taylor J. E., (2003). Distributed leadership in schools: The case of elementary schools adopting comprehensive school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy, 25, 347-373.
8. Center on Great Teachers and Leaders. (2013). Databases on state teacher and principal evaluation policies. Retrieved from http://resource.tqsource.org/stateevaldb/
9. Center on Great Teachers and Leaders. (2014). National picture: A different view. Retrieved from http://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/42states.pdf
10. Cubberley E. P., (1916). Public school administration. Cambridge, MA: Riverside Press.
11. Curtis R., Wiener R., (2012). Means to an end: A guide to developing teacher evaluation systems that support growth and development. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
12. Danielson C., (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
13. Danielson C., McGreal T. L., (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
14. Donaldson M. L., (2012). Teachers’ perspectives on evaluation reform. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
15. Donaldson M. L., (2013). Principals’ approaches to cultivating teacher effectiveness: Constraints and opportunities in hiring, assigning, evaluating, and developing teachers. Education Administration Quarterly, 49, 838-882.
16. Donaldson M. L., Papay J. P., (2014). Teacher evaluation for accountability and development. In Ladd H. F., Goertz M. E., (Eds.), Handbook of research in education finance and policy (pp. 174-193). New York, NY: Routledge.
17. Donaldson M. L., Peske H. G., (2010). Supporting effective teaching through teacher evaluation: A study of teacher evaluation in five charter schools. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
18. Frumkin P., (2003). Creating new schools: The strategic management of charter schools. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
19. Garet M. S., Porter A. C., Desimone L., Birman B. F., Yoon K. S., (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915-945.
20. Grissom J. A., Loeb S., Master B., (2013). Effective instructional time use for school leaders: Longitudinal evidence from observations of principals. Educational Researcher, 42, 433-444.
21. Hallinger P., Bickman L., Davis K., (1996). School context, principal leadership, and student reading achievement. Elementary School Journal, 96, 527-549.
22. Halverson R., Kelley C., Kimball S., (2004). Implementing teacher evaluation systems: How principals make sense of complex artifacts to shape local instructional practice. In Hoy W. K., Miskel C. G., (Eds.), Educational administration, policy, and reform: Research and measurement (pp. 153-188). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
23. Halverson R. R., Clifford M. A., (2006). Evaluation in the wild: A distributed cognition perspective on teacher assessment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42, 578-619.
24. Hanushek E., (2009). Teacher deselection. In Goldhaber D., Hannaway J., (Eds.), Creating a new teaching profession (pp. 165-180). Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
25. Herlihy C., Karger E., Pollard C., Hill H. C., Kraft M. A., Williams M., Howard S., (2014). State and local efforts to investigate the validity and reliability of scores from teacher evaluation systems. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1-28.
26. Hill H. C., Blunk M. L., Charalambous C. Y., Lewis J. M., Phelps G. C., Sleep L., Ball D. L., (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 430-511.
27. Hill H. C., Kapitula L., Umland K., (2011). A validity argument approach to evaluating teacher value-added scores. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 794-831.
28. Honig M. I., (Ed.). (2006). New directions in education policy implementation: Confronting complexity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
29. Horng E. L., Klasik D., Loeb S., (2010). Principal’s time use and school effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 116, 491-523.
30. Hoy A. W., Hoy W. K., (2012). Instructional leadership: A research based guide to learning in schools (4th ed.). London, England: Pearson.
31. Johnson S. M., Kraft M. A., Papay J. P., (2012). How context matters in high-need schools: The effects of teachers’ working conditions on their professional satisfaction and their students’ achievement. Teachers College Record, 114, 1-39.
32. Kane T., Kerr K., Pianta R., (2014). Designing teacher evaluation systems: New guidance from the measures of effective teaching project. New York, NY: John Wiley.
33. 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 (MET Project). Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
34. Kane T. J., Staiger D. O., (2012). Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains (MET Project). Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
35. Kennedy M. M., (2005). Inside teaching: How classroom life undermines reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36. Kraft M. A., Blazar D., (in press). Individualized coaching to improve teacher practice across grades and subjects: New experimental evidence. Educational Policy.
37. Kraft M. A., Marinell W. H., Yee. D., (2015). School organizational contexts, teacher turnover, and student achievement: Evidence from panel data. Brown University Working Paper.
38. Kraft M. A., Papay J. P., (2014). Can professional environments in schools promote teacher development? Explaining heterogeneity in returns to teaching experience. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36, 476-500.
39. Kraft M. A., Papay J. P, Charner-Laird M., Johnson S. M., Ng M., Reinhorn S. K., (2015). Educating amidst uncertainty: The organizational supports that teachers need to serve students in high-poverty, urban schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51, 753-790.
40. Lacireno-Paquet N., Morgan C., Mello D., (2014). How states use student learning objectives in teacher evaluation systems: A review of statewide websites. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
41. Ladd H., (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of their working conditions: How predictive of planned and actual teacher movement? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33, 235-261.
42. Lavigne A. L., Good T. L., (2015). Improving teaching through observation and feedback: Going beyond state and federal mandates. New York, NY: Routledge.
43. Leithwood K., Louis K. S., (2011). Linking leadership to student learning. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
44. Leithwood K., Mascall B., Strauss T., Sacks R., Memon N., Yashkina A., (2007). Distributing leadership to make schools smarter: Taking the ego out of the system. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6, 37-67.
45. Louis K., Dretzke B., Wahlstrom K., (2010). How does leadership affect student achievement? Results from a national US survey. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21, 315-336.
46. Maxwell J. A., (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47. May H., Supovitz J. A., (2011). The scope of principal efforts to improve instruction. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 332-352.
48. McGuinn P., (2012). Stimulating reform: Race to the top, competitive grants and the Obama education agenda. Educational Policy, 26, 136-159.
49. Miles M., Huberman M., (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
50. Newmann F. M., Smith B., Allensworth E., Bryk A. S., (2001). Instructional program coherence: What it is and why it should guide school improvement policy. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 297-321.
51. Papay J. P., (2012). Refocusing the debate: Assessing the purposes and tools of teacher evaluation. Harvard Educational Review, 82, 123-141.
52. Papay J. P., Johnson S. M., (2012). Is PAR a good investment? Understanding the costs and benefits of teacher peer assistance and review programs. Educational Policy, 26, 696-729.
53. Papay J. P., Taylor E. S., Tyler J., Laski M., (2016). Learning job skills from colleagues at work: Evidence from a field experiment using teacher performance data (NBER Working Paper No. 21986). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
54. Patton M. Q., (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55. Peterson K., (2002). The professional development of principals: Innovations and opportunities. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 213-232.
56. Popham W. J., (1988). The dysfunctional marriage of formative and summative teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 1, 269-273.
57. Rivkin S. G., Hanushek E. A., Kain J. F., (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73, 417-458.
58. Robinson V. M. J., Lloyd C. A., Rowe K. J., (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 635-674.
59. Rockoff J. E., (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94, 247-252.
60. Sartain L., Stoelinga S. R., Brown E. R., (2011). Rethinking teacher evaluation: Lessons learned from observations, principal-teacher conferences, and district implementation. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
61. Sebastian J., Allensworth E., (2012). The influence of principal leadership on classroom instruction and student learning: A study of mediated pathways to learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48, 626-663.
62. Spillane J. P., Halverson R., Diamond J. B., (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30, 23-28.
63. Spillane J. P., Kenney A. W., (2012). School administration in a changing education sector: The US experience. Journal of Educational Administration, 50, 541-561.
64. Sokol M., (2015, October 29). Hillsborough schools to dismantle Gates-funded system that costs millions to develop. Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved from http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/eakins-panel-will-help-hillsborough-schools-move-on-from-the-gates-grant/2251811
65. Steinberg M. P., Donaldson M. L., (in press). The new educational accountability: Understanding the landscape of teacher evaluation in the post NCLB era. Education Finance and Policy.
66. Steinberg M. P., Sartain L., (2015). Does teacher evaluation improve school performance? Experimental evidence from Chicago’s excellence in teaching project. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 10, 535-572.
67. Strauss J., Corbin A., (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68. Stronge J. H., (2005). Evaluating teaching: A guide to current thinking and best practice. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
69. Supovitz J., Sirinides P., May H., (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 31-56.
70. Taylor E. S., Tyler J. H., (2012). The effect of evaluation on teacher performance. American Economic Review, 102, 3628-3651.
71. Thomas E., Wingert P., Conant E., Register S., (2010). Why we can’t get rid of failing teachers. Newsweek, 155(11), 24-27.
72. Toch T., Rothman R., (2008). Rush to judgment: Teacher evaluation in public education. Washington, DC: Education Sector.
73. Tucker P. D., (1997). Lake Wobegon: Where all teachers are competent (or, have we come to terms with the problem of incompetent teachers?). Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 103-126.
74. Turnball B. J., Haslam M. B., Arcaira E. R., Riley D. L., Sinclair B., Coleman S., (2009). Evaluation of the School Administration Manager Project. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.
75. Turnball B. J., White R. N., Arcaira E. R., (2010). Achievement trends in schools with school administration managers (SAMs). Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.
76. Waters T., Marzano R. J., McNulty B., (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
77. Wayne A. J., Youngs P., (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, 73, 89-122.
78. Weisberg D., Sexton S., Mulhern J., Keeling D., Schunck J., Palcisco A., Morgan K., (2009). The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. Brooklyn, NY: New Teacher Project.
79. Witziers B., Bosker R. J., Kruger M. L., (2003). Educational leadership and student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 398-425.
80. Yoon K. S., Duncan T., Lee S. W. Y., Scarloss B., Shapley K., (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.