Education Drivers

Teacher Evaluation Feedback

Feedback is information about performance that improves performance. It should not be confused with teacher evaluation. The difference between evaluation and feedback is that evaluation summarizes performance across a large time span (annual). Feedback summarizes performance across a much shorter time span-performance today. Feedback can be likened to formative assessment, as it provides guidance to improve performance during the year. Feedback informs teachers about how they are performing relative to expectations and worthy educational outcomes. Principals can use feedback as a valuable supervision tool. Principals give feedback to teachers to reinforce work that meets standards or when necessary provide corrective information for improving administrative, instructional, behavior management, and soft skill competencies. Performance feedback may be as simple as giving praise or exacting as when systematically delivered as a part of coaching. For the best results, feedback must meet these four conditions: (1) It is objective, reliable, measureable, and specific; (2) it provides information about what was done well, what needs improvement, and how to improve; (3) it is delivered frequently and immediately following performance; and (4) it is about performance rather than personal characteristics.

Performance Feedback Overview

(Wing Institute Originl Paper)

Cleaver, S., Detrich, R. & States, J. (2019). Overview of Performance Feedback. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/teacher-evaluation-feedback.

Teacher effectiveness has been a persistent concern in education (Greenwood & Maheady, 1997; Scheeler, Ruhl, & McAfee, 2004). As evidence emerges about which teaching practices are most effective, it is important to help all teachers develop and strengthen their instructional efficacy. Fortunately, there is consensus about which teaching practices have the most consistent positive impact in general education (e.g., Ellis, Worthington, & Larkin, 1994; National Reading Panel, 2000) and special education (e.g., Albers & Greer, 1991; Carnine, Silbert, & Kame’enui, 1997; Ysseldyke, Algozzine, & Thorlow, 2000).

Teachers require professional development to improve their effectiveness and strengthen their ability to implement evidence-based practices (EBPs), or practices proven effective in advancing student knowledge and skills across multiple settings (Domitrovich, Gest, Jones, Gill, & Sanford DeRousie, 2010). In general, teachers face challenges learning, using, and sustaining new practices (Hemmeter, Snyder, Kinder, & Artman, 2011; Mesa, Lewis-Palmer, & Reinke, 2005). Given these challenges, professional development is particularly important as more schools work to successfully implement EBPs (Domitrovich et al., 2010). Performance feedback is one method of providing teachers with the skills necessary to implement effective instructional strategies (Scheeler et al., 2004).

This overview examines the current understanding of research on performance feedback as a way to improve teacher performance and student outcomes. 

Defining Performance Feedback

Learning is a process that occurs constantly in classrooms and professional development settings. Within that process, feedback is the practice element at the core of many established practices such as active student responding and formative assessment. However, when learners do not receive feedback or when feedback is vague, the translation of learning into actual performance is not clear. The more specific the feedback a performer (teacher or student) receives, the better the performance (States, 2019).

            Within a clearly defined target behavior, performance feedback is a way to show a person his or her current performance level as well as how it relates to previous performance and the goal (Mortenson & Witt, 1998). In schools, feedback that incorporates data-based information about a specific, observable behavior is given to teachers to improve the delivery of an instructional practice (Scheeler et al., 2004; Solomon, Klein, & Politylo, 2012). It is information (e.g., quantitative data, descriptive feedback) about an aspect of teaching behavior (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007).

            As an aspect of professional development, performance feedback typically follows instruction on the behavior such as a training session (Scheeler et al., 2004) and can be adapted to meet the needs of the teacher and context (e.g., Kaiser, Ostrosky, & Alpert, 1993; Mudd & Wolery, 1987). For example, it can be provided via email to teachers who had demonstrated mastery with a practice and in person to teachers who would benefit from conversation about an instructional strategy.

            Performance feedback can be provided in various forms including the following (Scheeler et al., 2004):

  • Corrective feedback (identifies errors and provides ways to correct them)
  • Noncorrective feedback (identifies errors but does not correct them)
  • General feedback (nonspecific)
  • Specific feedback (objective information about a behavior)
  • Positive feedback (praise contingent on the demonstration of a desirable behavior) 

Performance feedback has been organized into various aspects (Van Houton, 1980):

  • Type of feedback given (e.g., the content of the feedback, the information collected)
  • Method of delivery (e.g., in person, audio, video)
  • Frequency and timing of feedback (immediate or delayed)
  • Person delivering the feedback (supervisor or peer).

In this overview, performance feedback is the feedback given to teachers on established EBPs.

How Does Performance Feedback Fit Into Teacher Development ?

Professional development is intended to improve teacher practice and subsequently student outcomes (Yoon, Duncan, Scarloss, & Shapley, 2007). It is incorporated into the practice of coaching teachers, which often involves training and modeling a practice, observing a teacher using the practice, and providing feedback (Yoon et al., 2007). Performance feedback is a key aspect of coaching that has been shown to produce changes in teacher behavior (Kretlow & Bartholomew, 2010).

Why Is Performance Feedback Important?

Performance feedback is proving to be more effective than other interventions in improving teacher practice. For example, performance feedback has a greater effect size (ES)—0.73—than interventions such as charter schools (0.21), smaller class size (0.21), increased spending (0.08), and high-stakes testing (0.08; States, 2019).

Performance feedback may demonstrate positive impacts because of how performance feedback aligns with effective instructional methods that involve modeling a skill followed by practice with feedback. When teachers are asked to learn and implement new practices, they need support to implement those practices with fidelity. Frequent, specific feedback provides teachers with the information they require to improve practice. For example, in a single case design study in a middle school classroom, when a teacher was provided with real-time visual performance feedback, for example, showing a graph of student praise provided during a lesson, the amount of positive feedback the teacher provided to students (the desired behavior) increased. The amount of positive behavior by students also increased (Sweigert, Landrum, & Pennington, 2015).

Research on Performance Feedback

There are decades of research on performance feedback. Scheeler et al. (2004) reviewed 10 studies that involved nine in-service and 199 pre-service teachers from the 1970s to the early 2000s that examined the impact of at least one aspect of feedback. Across the studies, various types of feedback (e.g., general, corrective) were incorporated. When teachers received feedback on a behavior (e.g., increasing the use of positive feedback or decreasing “um” and “like” during instruction), that behavior increased or decreased depending on the feedback.

The results from these 10 studies indicated that positive, specific, and corrective feedback produced changes in teacher behavior, specifically an increase in the use of specific teaching behaviors. When feedback was given immediately, teachers acquired new behaviors faster and with greater accuracy. Feedback provided by supervisors and peers was equally effective in increasing effective teaching behaviors and decreasing unwanted behaviors (Scheeler et al., 2004).

            In another study (Noell, Witt, Gilbertson, Ranier, & Freeman, 1997), teachers were provided with daily feedback on their implementation of an academic intervention for three 3rdgrade students. The teachers demonstrated high levels of treatment fidelity for the initial 2 to 4 days, after which the fidelity decreased. The use of feedback and the subsequent increased fidelity improved performance for two of the three students.

In another study (Mortenson & Witt, 1998), four teachers were provided with feedback on their use of a reinforcer-based classroom intervention. The focus of the feedback was to increase the fidelity of implementation. Teacher implementation improved in three of the four teachers. Student data did improve but was more variable than teacher improvement.

In a study that focused on teachers’ use of behavior-specific praise for six students (Reinke, Lewis-Palmer, & Merrell, 2007), feedback was given using a visual representation to teachers. The performance feedback produced an increase in behavior-specific praise from teachers relative to baseline, and there was some generalization as teachers increased their use of behavior-specific praise. After the intervention, teachers exhibited more praise than baseline (before the intervention), but at lower rates than during the intervention.

In another study (Hemmeter et al., 2011), data-based performance feedback was delivered via email with a focus on increasing preschool teachers’ use of descriptive praise. When teachers received training and email feedback, they demonstrated an increase in using descriptive praise and a decrease in challenging the behaviors of preschoolers.

Solomon et al. (2012) studied the impact of performance feedback on implementation fidelity. Findings indicated that performance feedback was moderately effective in increasing teacher fidelity in implementing an EBP after it was introduced. In addition, performance feedback was a way to stem any decrease in fidelity after training.

Targeted reading instruction, an intervention that uses one-on-one instructional reading skill lessons, uses teacher coaching as professional development in the strategy. Virtual or in-person coaching is used to provide feedback and problem solve around student concerns (Vernon-Faegans et al., 2012). Students who received this intervention scored higher in reading skills than those who did not (Amendum, Vernon-Feagans, & Ginsburg, 2011; Vernon-Faegans et al., 2012).

Finally, a study by Rock et al. (2104) of bug-in-ear eCoaching, that involved providing real-time feedback using technology, examined the practices of 14 teachers at multiple points in time (before coaching, during coaching, and 2 years afterward). Two years after the initial feedback sessions, teachers had maintained their improvements.

Synthesis: What We Know

This research tells us that specific, positive, corrective feedback leads immediately to positive changes in teacher behavior (Scheeler et al., 2004). Also, performance feedback is an established way to support teacher implementation of new skills in a classroom setting (Hemmeter et al., 2011; Solomon et al., 2012) and to maintain that impact over time (Rock et al., 2014).

When performance feedback is incorporated consistently into teacher professional development, it can produce gains in student achievement (e.g., Vernon-Faegans et al., 2012). And when performance feedback is provided for specific tasks (e.g., EBPs), it can improve teacher fidelity or the use of a practice (e.g., Solomon et al., 2012).

What Is the Impact of Performance Feedback on Student Outcomes?

While performance feedback does improve teacher practice, its impact on student outcomes is less evident and consistent (e.g., Scheeler et al., 2004). However, it has been shown to increase on-task behaviors of students. Sutherland, Wehby, and Copeland (2000) investigated the rate of behavior-specific praise given by teachers in classrooms for students with emotional and behavior disabilities. When teachers increased their use of behavior-specific praise, through the use of feedback, student on-task behavior increased from 49% to 86%.

In a study of targeted reading intervention, which included real-time performance feedback for teachers (Vernon-Faegans, Kainz, Hedrick, Ginsburg, & Amendum, 2013), struggling readers who received the intervention improved their reading skills faster than struggling readers who did not receive the intervention (ES = 0.36–0.63 on student academic tests). This indicates that struggling readers that received the intervention significantly outperformed struggling readers in the control groups. Other studies have also shown an impact on student achievement (e.g., Vernon-Faegens et al., 2012), although it is not clear if the difference in progress was related to the intervention or to feedback.

            Currently, additional research needs to be done on the following:

  • Impact of technology advancements on feedback delivery and subsequently on teacher practice and student outcomes
  • Parameters for the most effective feedback in terms of length, duration, and frequency

Implementation Considerations

The research that has been conducted on performance feedback connects feedback to EBPs (e.g., Kretlow & Bartholomew, 2010; Noell et al., 1997; Vernon-Faegans et al., 2013). To this end, it is important to identify and focus on an EBP for performance feedback (Stormont & Reinke, 2013). A general practice or a specific, targeted intervention should be the focus, but whatever is chosen should be an EBP.

            Once an EBP is identified, teachers should be trained in the intervention using explicit instruction that involves modeling, practice, and feedback. Then, feedback should be provided until teachers demonstrate mastery during the training phase and in the classroom setting (Stormont & Reinke, 2013). How feedback is delivered has an impact on outcomes; in one third of the studies on feedback they reviewed, Kluger and DeNisi (1996) found that the feedback had produced a negative result. They also concluded that when the feedback related to the task, the impact on behavior was greater than when the feedback was personal.

            The selection of who will be giving the feedback is important. That person should know both the practice and how to deliver feedback (Showers, 1985; Stormont & Reinke, 2013). One factor to bear in mind when choosing a person are any power considerations. For example, a power dynamic must be considered when feedback is given as part of an evaluation (e.g., a principal providing feedback to a teacher) (Showers, 1985).  

            Finally, performance feedback should be delivered in an effective manner (Stormont & Reinke, 2013). Aspects of effective delivery supported by research include the following:

  • Building rapport: A supportive relationship makes it more likely that teachers will voice concerns and be open to problem solving (Reinke, Herman, & Sprick, 2011)
  • Setting a purpose for the observation: The purpose may be to provide support when a teacher needs it most or to strengthen implementation of a practice in general
  • Identifying data to collect that is
    • oCritical to the intervention being delivered
    • oObservable in the classroom setting
    • oSelected in collaboration with the teacher to identify the most useful data
    • oRelated to student outcomes (e.g., student behaviors, student work)
  • Providing feedback immediately or within 24 hours of the observation
  • Determining the feedback delivery method (e.g., verbally in person, email, written communication, graph or other visual representation of teacher behavior) before the observation
  • Supporting individual teacher skills, personalities, and abilities
  • Establishing sustainable structures, such as peer collection of ongoing data, to ensure that results from performance feedback are maintained over time

When delivering feedback in an email, provide the following information (Hemmeter et al., 2011; Schepis, Reid, Ownbey, & Parsons, 2001):

  • A positive statement about something effective that was observed,
  • Supportive feedback based on what the teacher did correctly,
  • Suggestions for improvement,
  • Request for a response, and
  • A closing positive statement.

Ideally, feedback will be provided weekly or monthly (Casas‐Arce, Lourenço, & Martínez‐Jerez, 2017; Lam, DeRue, Karam, & Hollenbeck, 2011), although timing will differ from teacher to teacher. Teachers with immediate needs may receive more frequent feedback (Barton, Kinder, Casey, & Artman, 2011). For example, a teacher who is implementing a new strategy may need more support than a teacher who is maintaining implementation of the strategy. In addition, teacher characteristics also influence the frequency of feedback (e.g., new teachers may need more feedback than veteran teachers).

As performance feedback is used, it is important to assess the impact in teacher practice and student achievement (Barton et al., 2011). Establish a way to determine whether or not the feedback has been effective (e.g., teacher fidelity of implementation of a strategy, student academic outcomes).

Cost Considerations

Performance feedback can be implemented within a feedback structure that provides for observation and communication (e.g., in-person meeting, email) and fits within a school’s existing structures.

Performance feedback is often part of a broader coaching plan, the cost of which varies depending on district and goals (e.g., the amount to hire a coach versus providing feedback using existing staff). One study (Knight, 2012) found that the average cost-per-teacher for coaching across three schools ranged from $3,620 to $5,220, a cost 6 to 12 times more than traditional professional development. This cost will vary from district to district and may be worthwhile for boosting student outcomes.

Conclusion

Performance feedback is a promising way to build teacher skill and increase teacher use of EBPs, practices that have been shown to improve student achievement. Furthermore, when provided around a task and in real time, performance feedback can impact both academic and functional student behaviors.

Citations

Albers, A. E., & Greer, R. D. (1991). Is the three-term contingency trial a predictor of effective instruction? Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(3),337–254.

Amendum, S. J., Vernon-Feagans, L., & Ginsberg, M. C. (2011). The effectiveness of a technologically facilitated classroom-based early reading intervention. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1), 107–131.

Barton, E. E., Kinder, K., Casey, A. M., & Artman, K. M. (2011). Finding your feedback fit: Strategies for designing and delivering performance feedback systems. Young Exceptional Children, 14(1), 29–46. doi: 10.1177/1096250610395459

Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., & Kame’enui, E. J. (1997). Direct instruction reading(3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Casas-Arce, P., Lourenço, S. M., Martínez-Jerez, F. A. (2017). The performance effect of feedback frequency and detail: Evidence from a field experiment in customer satisfaction. Journal of Accounting Research, 55,1051–1088.

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Domitrovich, C. E., Gest, S. D., Jones, D., Gill, S., & Sanford DeRousie, R. M. (2010). Implementation quality: Lessons learned in the context of the Head Start REDI trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 284–298.

Ellis, E. S., Worthington, L. A., & Larkin, M. J. (1994). Executive summary of research synthesis on effective teaching principles and the design of quality tools for educators.(Tech. Rep. No. 6). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators.

Greenwood, C. R., & Maheady, L. (1997). Measurable change in student performance: Forgotten standard in teacher preparation? Teacher Education and Special Education, 20(3),265–275.

Hemmeter, M. L., Snyder, P., Kinder, K., & Artman, K. (2011). Impact of performance feedback delivered via electronic mail on preschool teachers’ use of descriptive praise. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(1), 96–109.

Kaiser, A. P., Ostrosky, M. M., & Alpert, C. L. (1993). Training teachers to use environmental arrangement and milieu teaching with nonvocal preschool children. Journal of the Association for People With Severe Handicaps, 18(3), 188–199.

Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284.

Knight, D. S. (2012). Assessing the cost of instructional coaching. Journal of Education Finance, 38(1), 52–80.

Kretlow, A. G., & Bartholomew, C. C. (2010). Using coaching to improve the fidelity of evidence-based practices: A review of studies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33(4),279–299.

Lam, C. F., Derue, D. S., Karam, E. P., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2011). The impact of feedback frequency on learning and task performance: Challenging the “more is better” assumption. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 217–228.

Mesa, J., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Reinke, W. (2005). Providing teachers with performance feedback on praise to reduce student problem behavior. Beyond Behavior, 15(1), 3–7.

Mortenson, B. P., & Witt, J. C. (1998). The use of weekly performance feedback to increase teacher implementation of a pre referral academic intervention. School Psychology Review, 27(4), 613–627.

Mudd, J. M., & Wolery, M. (1987). Training Head Start teachers to use incidental teaching. Journal of Early Intervention, 11(2), 124–134.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups(NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.

Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Gilbertson, D. N., Ranier, D. D., & Freeland, J. T. (1997). Increasing teacher intervention implementation in general education settings through consultation and performance feedback. School Psychology Quarterly, 12,77–88.

Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Sprick, R. (2011). Motivational interviewing for effective management: The classroom check-up. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Reinke, W. M., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Martin, E. (2007). The effect of visual performance feedback on teacher behavior-specific praise. Behavior Modifications, 31(3), 247–263.

Rock, M. L., Schumaker, R. E., Gregg, M., Howard, P. W., Gable, R. A., & Zigmond, N. (2014). How are they now? Longer term effects of eCoaching through online bug-in-ear technology. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(2),161–181.

Scheeler, M. C., Ruhl, K. L., & McAfee, J. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(4), 396–407.

Schepis, M. M., Reid, D. H., Ownbey, J. B., & Parsons, M. B. (2001). Training support staff to embed teaching within natural routines of young children with disabilities in an inclusive preschool. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34(2), 313–327.

Showers, B. (1985). Teachers coaching teachers. Educational Leadership, 42(7),43–48.

Solomon, B. G., Klein, S. A., & Politylo, B. C. (2012). The effect of performance feedback on teachers’ treatment integrity: A meta-analysis of the single-case literature. School Psychology Review, 41(2), 160–175.

States, J. (2019, January). Maximizing the effectiveness of teacher evaluation.Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on Education, Honolulu.

Stormont, M., & Reinke, W. M. (2013). Implementing Tier 2 social behavioral interventions: Current issues, challenges, and promising approaches.Journal of Applied School Psychology, 29(2), 121–125.

Sutherland, K., Wehby, J., & Copeland, S. (2000). Effect on varying rates of behavior-specific praise on the on-task behavior of students with EBD.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(1), 2–8.

Sweigart, C. A., Landrum, T. J., & Pennington, R. C (2015). The effect of real-time visual performance feedback on teacher feedback: A preliminary investigation. Education and Treatment of Children, 38(4), 429–450.

Van Houten, R. (1980). Learning through feedback.New York, NY: Human Science Press.

Vernon-Feagans, L., Kainz, K., Amendum, S., Ginsberg, M., Wood, T., & Bock, A. (2012). Targeted reading intervention: A coaching model to help classroom teachers with struggling readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35(2), 102–114.

Vernon-Faegans, L., Kainz, K., Hedrick, A., Ginsberg, M., Amendum, S. (2013). Live webcam coaching to help early elementary classroom teachers provide effective literacy instruction for struggling readers: The Targeted Reading Intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1175–1187.

Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B.., & Thurlow, M. L. (2000). Critical issues in special education(3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

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(Issues and Answers Report, REL 2007–No. 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/REL_2007033.pdf

 

Publications

TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
Performance Feedback in Education: On Who and For What
This paper reviews the importance of feedback in education reviewed the scientific model of behavior change (antecedent, behavior, consequences).
Daniels, A. (2013). Feedback in Education: On Whom and for What. In Performance Feedback: Using Data to Improve Educator Performance (Vol. 3, pp. 77-95). Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute.
Thirty years of Getting Teachers to be More Effective
This paper presents a model for building a school organizational culture that trains and supports teachers in an effective, efficient, and sustainable manner.
Fitch, S. (2013). Thirty years of Getting Teachers to be More Effective Retrieved from ../../uploads/docs/2013WingSummitSF.pdf.
Working with Staff to Promote Data-Based Decision Making: Recommended Strategies and Common Pitfalls [Publication]
This paper discusses evidence-based ways of working with staff to promote program intervention integrity and accurate data collection.
Reid, D. (2010). Working with Staff to Promote Data-Based Decision Making: Recommended Strategies and Common Pitfalls.Journal of Evidence-Based Practices for Schools, 11(2), 169–186.

 

Data Mining

TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
How does performance feedback affect the way teachers carry out interventions?
This analysis examined the impact of performance feedback on the quality of implementation of interventions.
Detrich, R. (2015). How does performance feedback affect the way teachers carry out interventions? Retrieved from how-does-performance-feedback.
How often are treatment integrity measures reported in published research?
This analysis examined the frequency that treatment integrity is reported in studies of research-based interventions.
Detrich, R. (2015). How often are treatment integrity measures reported in published research? Retrieved from how-often-are-treatment.
How well are Interventions Implemented in Educational Settings?
This analysis examined two studies to understand the reliability of self-reporting of practitioners implementing interventions.
Detrich, R. (2015). How well are Interventions Implemented in Educational Settings? Retrieved from how-well-are-interventions.
Does Feedback Improve Performance?
This review is a summary of the effect size of the effectiveness feedback to improve both student and teacher performance.
States, J. (2011). Does Feedback Improve Performance? Retrieved from does-feedback-improve-performance.
Does the use of coaching as a professional development strategy improve student performance?
This review examines research on the effectiveness of coaching as a teacher training tool that can improve student performance.
States, J. (2011). Does the use of coaching as a professional development strategy improve student performance? Retrieved from does-use-of-coaching.
What Distinguishes Effective Supervisors From Marginal Supervisors?
This inquiry looks at research on the impact of supervisors and the activities they engage in that most improve staff performance.
States, J. (2011). What Distinguishes Effective Supervisors From Marginal Supervisors? Retrieved from what-distinguishes-effective-supervisors.
How does coaching compare with traditional staff development in improving student achievement?
This analysis compares the effectiveness of coaching compared to traditional forms of professional development for teachers.
States, J. (2012). How does coaching compare with traditional staff development in improving student achievement? Retrieved from how-does-coaching-compare.

 

Presentations

TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
Performance Feedback: Use It or Lose It

This paper examines the importance of performance feedback systems at all levels of school, staff and student outcomes to achieve desired results over time.

Keyworth, R. (2011). Performance Feedback: Use It or Lose It [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2011-aba-presentation-randy-keyworth.

Performance Feedback in Education: On Who and For What
This paper reviews the importance of feedback in education reviewed the scientific model of behavior change (antecedent, behavior, consequences).
Daniels, A. (2011). Performance Feedback in Education: On Who and For What [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2011-wing-presentation-aubrey-daniels.
Using Student Data as a Basis for Feedback to Teachers
This paper offers an alternative to evaluating teachers based on student performance on annual high stakes tests.
Detrich, R. (2011). Using Student Data as a Basis for Feedback to Teachers [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2011-aba-presentation-ronnie-detrich.
Care Enough to Count: Measuring Teacher Performance
What teachers do with students is important. It should be measured to assure that they are doing the important things.
Detrich, R. (2013). Care Enough to Count: Measuring Teacher Performance [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2013-aba-presentation-karen-hager.
Thirty years of Getting Teachers to be More Effective
This paper presents a model for building a school organizational culture that trains and supports teachers in an effective, efficient, and sustainable manner.
Fitch, S. (2013). Thirty years of Getting Teachers to be More Effective [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2013-wing-presentation-suzanne-fitch.
ROKs: Remote Observation Kits
This paper presents a teacher coaching model using high quality audio and video technology to address the needs of teacher training in remote areas.
Hager, K. (2013). ROKs: Remote Observation Kits [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2013-wing-presentation-karen-hager.
Teacher Induction: Where the Rubber Meets the Road
The paper examines one of the most critical components of teach training: an on-the-job, ongoing system of coaching and performance feedback to improve skill acquisition, generalization and maintenance.
Keyworth, R. (2010). Teacher Induction: Where the Rubber Meets the Road [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2010-aba-presentation-randy-keyworth.
Teacher Coaching: The Missing Link in Teacher Professional Development
Research suggests that coaching is one of the most effective strategies in training teachers. This paper identifies the critical practice elements of coaching and their absence in teacher training.
Keyworth, R. (2013). Teacher Coaching: The Missing Link in Teacher Professional Development [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2013-calaba-presentation-randy-keyworth.
Project AIM: Assess, Improve & Maintain Effective Teaching Practices
This paper shared a model for teacher assessment and professional development that address theneeds of large school districts in an effective and efficient manner.
Lewis, T. (2013). Project AIM: Assess, Improve & Maintain Effective Teaching Practices [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2013-wing-presentation-teri-lewis.
Working with Staff to Promote Data-Based Decision Making: Recommended Strategies and Common Pitfalls
This paper discusses evidence-based ways of working with staff to promote program intervention integrity and accurate data collection.
Reid, D. (2009). Working with Staff to Promote Data-Based Decision Making: Recommended Strategies and Common Pitfalls [Powerpoint Slides]. Retrieved from 2009-wing-presentation-dennis-reid.
TITLE
SYNOPSIS
CITATION
Performance Feedback Overview

Performance feedback is a practice used to improve performance. Principals give feedback to teachers to clarify expectations and to provide information for increasing administrative, instructional, behavior management, and personal competency skills. Research finds that principals depend on unreliable sources of data such as “walk-throughs,” brief informal observations that provide snapshots of classroom activities but are not designed for performance improvement. Principals should replace traditional walk-throughs with more effective feedback practices, such as coaching, that are better suited to improving specific teaching skills.

Albers, A. E., & Greer, R. D. (1991). Is the three-term contingency trial a predictor of effective instruction? Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(3),337–254.

Amendum, S. J., Vernon-Feagans, L., & Ginsberg, M. C. (2011). The effectiveness of a technologically facilitated classroom-based early reading intervention. The Elementary School Journal, 112(1)107–131.

Barton, E. E., Kinder, K., Casey, A. M., & Artman, K. M. (2011). Finding your feedback fit: Strategies for designing and delivering performance feedback systems. Young Exceptional Children, 14(1), 29–46. doi: 10.1177/1096250610395459

Carnine, D. W., Silbert, J., & Kame’enui, E. J. (1997). Direct instruction reading(3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Casas-Arce, P., Lourenço, S. M., Martínez-Jerez, F. A. (2017). The performance effect of feedback frequency and detail: Evidence from a field experiment in customer satisfaction. Journal of Accounting Research, 55,1051–1088.

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Domitrovich, C. E., Gest, S. D., Jones, D., Gill, S., & Sanford DeRousie, R. M. (2010). Implementation quality: Lessons learned in the context of the Head Start REDI trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 284–298.

Ellis, E. S., Worthington, L. A., & Larkin, M. J. (1994). Executive summary of research synthesis on effective teaching principles and the design of quality tools for educators.(Tech. Rep. No. 6). Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, National Center to Improve the Tools of Educators.

Greenwood, C. R., & Maheady, L. (1997). Measurable change in student performance: Forgotten standard in teacher preparation? Teacher Education and Special Education, 20(3),265–275.

Hemmeter, M. L., Snyder, P., Kinder, K., & Artman, K. (2011). Impact of performance feedback delivered via electronic mail on preschool teachers’ use of descriptive praise. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(1)96–109.

Kaiser, A. P., Ostrosky, M. M., & Alpert, C. L. (1993). Training teachers to use environmental arrangement and milieu teaching with nonvocal preschool children. Journal of the Association for People With Severe Handicaps, 18(3), 188–199.

Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284.

Knight, D. S. (2012). Assessing the cost of instructional coaching. Journal of Education Finance, 38(1), 52–80.

Kretlow, A. G., & Bartholomew, C. C. (2010). Using coaching to improve the fidelity of evidence-based practices: A review of studies. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33(4),279–299.

Lam, C. F., Derue, D. S., Karam, E. P., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (2011). The impact of feedback frequency on learning and task performance: Challenging the “more is better” assumption. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(2), 217–228.

Mesa, J., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Reinke, W. (2005). Providing teachers with performance feedback on praise to reduce student problem behavior. Beyond Behavior, 15(1), 3–7.

Mortenson, B. P., & Witt, J. C. (1998). The use of weekly performance feedback to increase teacher implementation of a pre referral academic intervention. School Psychology Review, 27(4)613–627.

Mudd, J. M., & Wolery, M. (1987). Training Head Start teachers to use incidental teaching. Journal of Early Intervention, 11(2), 124–134.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups(NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.

Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Gilbertson, D. N., Ranier, D. D., & Freeland, J. T. (1997). Increasing teacher intervention implementation in general education settings through consultation and performance feedback. School Psychology Quarterly, 12,77–88.

Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Sprick, R. (2011). Motivational interviewing for effective management: The classroom check-up. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Reinke, W. M., Lewis-Palmer, T., & Martin, E. (2007). The effect of visual performance feedback on teacher behavior-specific praise. Behavior Modifications, 31(3), 247–263.

Rock, M. L., Schumaker, R. E., Gregg, M., Howard, P. W., Gable, R. A., & Zigmond, N. (2014). How are they now? Longer term effects of eCoaching through online bug-in-ear technology. Teacher Education and Special Education, 37(2),161–181.

Scheeler, M. C., Ruhl, K. L., & McAfee, J. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(4), 396–407.

Schepis, M. M., Reid, D. H., Ownbey, J. B., & Parsons, M. B. (2001). Training support staff to embed teaching within natural routines of young children with disabilities in an inclusive preschool. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34(2), 313–327.

Showers, B. (1985). Teachers coaching teachers. Educational Leadership, 42(7),43–48.

Solomon, B. G., Klein, S. A., & Politylo, B. C. (2012). The effect of performance feedback on teachers’ treatment integrity: A meta-analysis of the single-case literature. School Psychology Review, 41(2), 160–175.

States, J. (2019, January). Maximizing the effectiveness of teacher evaluation.Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on Education, Honolulu.

Stormont, M., & Reinke, W. M. (2013). Implementing Tier 2 social behavioral interventions: Current issues, challenges, and promising approaches.Journal of Applied School Psychology, 29(2)121–125.

Sutherland, K., Wehby, J., & Copeland, S. (2000). Effect on varying rates of behavior-specific praise on the on-task behavior of students with EBD.Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(1)2–8.

Sweigart, C. A., Landrum, T. J., & Pennington, R. C (2015). The effect of real-time visual performance feedback on teacher feedback: A preliminary investigation. Education and Treatment of Children, 38(4), 429–450.

Van Houten, R. (1980). Learning through feedback.New York, NY: Human Science Press.

Vernon-Feagans, L., Kainz, K., Amendum, S., Ginsberg, M., Wood, T., & Bock, A. (2012). Targeted reading intervention: A coaching model to help classroom teachers with struggling readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35(2)102–114.

Vernon-Faegans, L., Kainz, K., Hedrick, A., Ginsberg, M., Amendum, S. (2013). Live webcam coaching to help early elementary classroom teachers provide effective literacy instruction for struggling readers: The Targeted Reading Intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4)1175–1187.

Ysseldyke, J. E., Algozzine, B.., & Thurlow, M. L. (2000). Critical issues in special education(3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

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(Issues and Answers Report, REL 2007–No. 033). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/REL_2007033.pdf

 

Overview: Formal Teacher Evaluation

The purpose of this overview is to provide information about the role of formal teacher evaluation, the research that examines the practice, and its impact on student outcomes.Although conclusions about the impact of teacher evaluation on student achievement are mixed (Stecher et al., 2018; Taylor & Tyler, 2012a, 2012b), ideally collecting and using information about teacher practice can advance the conversation about quality instruction and teaching potential.

Aragon, S. (2018). Teacher evaluations: What is the issue and why does it matter? Policy snapshot.Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Retrieved from https://www.ecs.org/wp-content/uploads/Teacher_Evaluations.pdf

Atkinson, A., Burgess, S., Croxon, B., Gregg, P., Propper, C., Slater, H., & Wilson, D. (2008). Evaluating the impact of performance-related pay for teachers in England. Labour Economics, 16(3)251–261. doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2008.10.003

Baker, E. L., Barton, P. E., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H. F., Linn, R. L., Ravitch, D., …Shepard, L. A. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers(Briefing Paper 278). Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

Blumenthal, R. (2016, January 13). Houston ties teachers’ pay to test scores. The New York Times.Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/13/us/houston-ties-teachers-pay-to-test-scores.html

Chambers, J., Brodziak de los Reyes, I., & O’Neil, C. (2013). How much are districts spending to implement teacher evaluation systems: Case studies of Hillsborough County Public Schools, Memphis City Schools, and Pittsburgh Public Schools.Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/working_papers/WR900/WR989/RAND_WR989.pdf

Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockhoff, J. E. (2011). The long-term impacts of teachers: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood(Working Paper 17699). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from https://standardizedtests.procon.org/sourcefiles/the-long-term-impacts-of-teachers-teacher-value-added-and-student-outcomes-in-adulthood.pdf

Corcoran, S. P. (2010). Can teachers be evaluated by their students’ test scores? Should they be? The use of value-added measures for teacher effectiveness in policy and practice. Providence, RI: Annenburg Institute for School Reform at Brown University.

Danielson, C. (1996, 2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching (1st and 2nd eds).Alexandria, VA: ASCD.   

Danielson, C. (2010). Evaluations that help teachers learn. Educational Leadership, 68(4), 35–39.

Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A. E., & Pease, S. R. (1983). Teacher evaluation in the organizational context: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 53(3),285–328. doi: 10.3102/00346543053003285

David, J. L. (2010). What research says about using value-added measures to evaluate teachers. Educational Leadership, 67(8), 81–82. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational_leadership/may10/vol67/num08/Using_Value-Added_Measures_to_Evaluate_Teachers.aspx

DuFour, R., & Mattos, M. (2013). How do principals really improve schools? Education Leadership, 70(7), 34–40.

Fink, S., & Markholt, A. (2011). Leading for instructional improvement: How successful leaders develop teaching and learning expertise.Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Fryer, R. G. (2011).Teacher incentives and student achievement: Evidence from New York City schools(Working Paper 16850). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16850.pdf

Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED521228

Goe, L., Holdheide, L., & Miller, T. (2011). A practical guide to designing comprehensive teacher evaluation systems: A tool to assist in the development of teacher evaluation systems.Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED520828.pdf

Goldhaber, D., & Hansen, M. (2008). Is this just a bad class? Assessing the stability of measured teacher performance(Working Paper 2008-5). Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education, University of Washington.

Gordon, R., Kaine, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2006). Identifying effective teachers using performance on the job(Hamilton Project Discussion Paper). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.

Griffith, D., & McDougald, V. (2016). Undue process: Why bad teachers in twenty-five diverse districts rarely get fired.Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Retrieved from https://edexcellence.net/publications/undue-process

Hanushek, E. A. (1971). Teacher characteristics and gains in student achievement: Estimation using micro-data. American Economic Review, 61(2), 280–288.

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

Hazi, H. M., & Arredondo Rucinski, D. (2009). Teacher evaluation as a policy target for improved student learning: A fifty-state review of statute and regulatory action since NCLB. Education Policy Analysis Archive, 17(5).

Hill, H., & Grossman, P. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2),371–384. doi.org/10.17763/haer.83.2.d11511403715u376

Kane, T. J., & Staigler, D. O. (2008). Estimating teacher impacts on student achievement: An experimental evaluation (Working Paper 14607). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Kane, T. J., & Staigler, D. O. (2012). Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains.Seattle, WA: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011). Identifying effective classroom practices using achievement data. Journal of Human Resources, 46(3), 587–613.

Lash, A., Tran, L., & Huang, M. (2016). Examining the validity of ratings from a classroom observation instrument for use in a district’s teacher evaluation system(REL 2016-135). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory West.

Marzano, R. J., Frontier, T., & Livingston, D. (2011). Effective supervision: Supporting the art and science of teaching. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005).School leadership that works: From research to results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

McCullough, M., English, B., Angus, M. H., & Gill, B. (2015). Alternative student growth measures for teacher evaluation: Implementation experiences of early-adopting districts (REL 2015-093). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sci­ences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic.

McDougald, V., Griffith, D., Pennington, K., & Mead, S. (2016). What is the purpose of teacher evaluation today? A conversation between Bellwether and Fordham. Retrieved from https://edexcellence.net/articles/what-is-the-purpose-of-teacher-evaluation-today-a-conversation-between-bellwether-and

Milanowski, A. T., (2011, April). Validity research on teacher evaluation systems based on the framework for teaching.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved fromhttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED520519.pdf

The New Teacher Project. (2010). Teacher Evaluation 2.0.New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from: https://tntp.org/assets/documents/Teacher-Evaluation-Oct10F.pdf

Pennington, K., & Mead, S. (2016). For good measure? Teacher evaluation policy in the ESSA era.Washington, DC: Bellwether Education Partners. Retrieved from https://bellwethereducation.org/publication/good-measure-teacher-evaluation-policy-essa-era

Peterson, K. D. (2000). Teacher evaluation: A comprehensive guide to new directions and practices(2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Pink, D. H. (2011). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us.New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

RAND Education. (2012).Teachers matter: Understanding teachers’ impact on student achievement, Santa Monica, Calif.: Author. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/pubs/corporate_pubs/CP693z1-2012-09.html

Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American Economic Review, 94(2), 247–252.

Rothstein, J. (2010). Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking, decay, and student achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1),175–214.

Sawchuk, S. (2015, September 3). Teacher evaluation: An issue overview. Education Week.Retrieved from: www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/teacher-performance-evaluation-issue-overview.html

Shinkfield, A. J., & Stufflebeam, D. L. (1995). Teacher evaluation: Guide to professional practice.New York, NY: Springer.

Springer, M. G., Ballou, D., Hamilton, L., Le, V., Lockwood, J. R., McCaffrey, D. F., …Stecher B.M. (2010).Teacher pay for performance: Experimental evidence from the project on incentives in teaching (POINT).Nashville, TN: National Center on Performance Incentives at Vanderbilt University.

Stecher, B. M., Holtzman, D. J., Garet, M. S., Hamilton, L. S., Engberg, J., Steiner, E. D., …Chambers, J. (2018). Improving teaching effectiveness: Final report: The intensive partnerships for effective teaching through 2015–2016.Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

Steele, J. L., Hamilton, L. S., & Stecher, B. M. (2010). Incorporating student performance measures into teacher evaluation systems.Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from: https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR917.html

Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012a). Can teacher evaluation improve teaching? Evidence of systematic growth in the effectiveness of mid-career teachers. Education Next, 12(4), 79–84. Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/can-teacher-evaluation-improve-teaching/

Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012b). The effect of evaluation on teacher performance. American Economic Review, 102(7), 3628–3651.

Toch, T., & Rothman, R. (2008). Rush to judgment: Teacher evaluation in public education.Washington, DC: Education Sector. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED502120 

Weisburg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on the difference in teacher effectiveness. New York, NY: The New Teacher Project. Retrieved from https://tntp.org/assets/documents/TheWidgetEffect_execsummary_2nd_ed.pdf

Pay for Percentile

This paper proposes an incentive scheme for educators that links compensation to the ranks of their students within comparison sets. Under certain conditions, this scheme induces teachers to allocate socially optimal levels of effort. Moreover, because this scheme employs only ordinal information, it allows education authorities to employ completely new assessments at each testing date without ever having to equate various assessments. This removes incentives for teachers to teach to a particular assessment form and eliminates opportunities to influence reward pay by corrupting assessment scales.

Barlevy, G., & Neal, D. (2012). Pay for percentile. The American Economic Review, 102(5), 1805-1831.

Enhancing Adherence to a Problem Solving Model for Middle-School Pre-Referral Teams: A Performance Feedback and Checklist Approach

This study looks at the use of performance feedback and checklists to improve middle-school teams problem solving.

Bartels, S. M., & Mortenson, B. P. (2006). Enhancing adherence to a problem-solving model for middle-school pre-referral teams: A performance feedback and checklist approach. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 22(1), 109-123.

Do Principals Know Good Teaching When They See It?

This article examines the effectiveness and related issues of current methods of principal evaluation of teachers.

Burns M. (2011). Do Principals Know Good Teaching When They See It?. Educational policy, 19(1), 155-180.

The Long-Term Impacts Of Teachers: Teacher Value-Added And Student Outcomes In Adulthood

This paper examines the issue of efficacy of value-added measures in evaluating teachers. This question is important in understanding whether value-added analysis provides unbiased estimates of teachers’ impact on student achievement and whether these teachers improve long-term student outcomes.

Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2011). The long-term impacts of teachers: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood (No. w17699). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Effects of immediate performance feedback on implementation of behavior support plans, 2005

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of feedback on treatment integrity for implementing behavior support plans.

Codding, R. S., Feinberg, A. B., Dunn, E. K., & Pace, G. M. (2005). Effects of immediate performance feedback on implementation of behavior support plans. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38(2), 205-219.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Teacher Preparation Programs for Support and Accountability. Research & Policy Brief

This brief explores research that points to the opportunities and the challenges that evaluating teacher preparation programs differently presents.

Coggshall, J. G., Bivona, L., & Reschly, D. J. (2012). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Teacher Preparation Programs for Support and Accountability. Research & Policy Brief. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED543773

Teacher Observation. Education Endowment Foundation

Research strongly suggests that feedback obtained through direct observations of performance can be a powerful tool for improving teacher’s skills. This study examines a peer teacher observation method used in England. The study found no evidence that Teacher Observation improved student language and math scores.

 

Education Endowment Foundation (2017). Teacher Observation. Education Endowment Foundation. Retrieved https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/projects-and-evaluation/projects/teacher-observation/.

 

 

Leading for Instructional Improvement: How Successful Leaders Develop Teaching and Learning Expertise

This book shows how principals and other school leaders can develop the skills necessary for teachers to deliver high quality instruction by introducing principals to a five-part model of effective instruction.

Fink, S., & Markholt, A. (2011). Leading for instructional improvement: How successful leaders develop teaching and learning expertise. John Wiley & Sons.

Effective Instructional Time Use for School Leaders: Longitudinal Evidence from Observations of Principals

This study examines principals’ time spent on instructional functions. The results show that the traditional walk-through has little impact, but principals provide coaching, evaluation, and focus on educational programs can make a difference.

Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013). Effective Instructional Time Use for School Leaders: Longitudinal Evidence from Observations of Principals. Educational Researcher, 42(8), 433-444.

The Power of Feedback

This paper provides a conceptual analysis of feedback and reviews the evidence related to its impact on learning and achievement.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.

Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems

This article discusses the current focus on using teacher observation instruments as part of new teacher evaluation systems being considered and implemented by states and districts. They argue that if these teacher observation instruments are to achieve the goal of supporting teachers in improving instructional practice, they must be subject-specific, involve content experts in the process of observation, and provide information that is both accurate and useful for teachers. They discuss the instruments themselves, raters and system design, and timing of and feedback from the observations.

Hill, H., & Grossman, P. (2013). Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 371-384.

Can Principals Identify Effective Teachers? Evidence on Subjective Performance Evaluation in Education

This paper examines how well principals can distinguish between more and less effective teachers. To put principal evaluations in context, we compare them with the traditional determinants of teacher compensation-education and experience-as well as value-added measures of teacher effectiveness.

Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2008). Can principals identify effective teachers? Evidence on subjective performance evaluation in education. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(1), 101-136.

Promoting Educator Effectiveness: The Effects of Two Key Strategies

The National Center for Education Evaluation, a division of the Institute of Education Sciences has released a new research brief that evaluated two strategies for improving educator effectiveness as measured by improvements in student outcomes.  The two strategies evaluated were performance feedback to educators about several dimensions of their performance for a period of two years and a pay-for-performance system that was in place for four years.  In the performance feedback project teachers were given feedback four times per year on their classroom practices and principals received feedback two times per year.  The impact on student outcomes were small. The pay-for-performance study teachers were eligible for performance bonuses based on their ratings across multiple dimensions of their performance.  The students in the pay-for-performance schools outperformed the students in the control group schools in both math and reading. The overall benefit of the gains by the students in the pay-for-performance schools was estimated to be 3-4 weeks.  Again, this is a relatively small impact. It was noted that the quality of implementation may have reduced the impact of the two projects.

National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences (March 2018).  Promoting Educator Effectiveness: The Effects of Two Key Strategies.

The Nonnegotiable Attributes of Effective Feedback

This paper highlight the important of effective feedback to help educators grow and allow students to improve. . This paper identify a definition of effective feedback and the key attributes of effective feedback.

Schimmer, T. (2018). The Nonnegotiable Attributes of Effective Feedback. Retrieved from https://fs24.formsite.com/edweek/form509/fill?7=EDWEEKBOX

Peer and Upward Appraisals: A Comparison of their Benefits and Problems
This study reports on the positive and negative outcomes that employees associate with peer and upward appraisals used for administrative or developmental purposes. Results are discussed for their implications for future research and for the design of 360-degree performance appraisal systems.
Bettenhausen, K. L., & Fedor, D. B. (1997). Peer and Upward Appraisals A Comparison of their Benefits and Problems. Group & Organization Management, 22(2), 236-263.
Who leaves, Teacher attrition and student achievement
The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between student achievement and teacher attrition using value-added modeling for teachers in New York City.
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2007). Who leaves, Teacher attrition and student achievement (Research Report). Albany, NY: Teacher Policy Research.
Measuring the Impacts of Teachers II: Teacher Value-Added and Student Outcomes in Adulthood
This paper examines the issue of the efficacy of valued-added measures in evaluating the effectiveness of teachers and long term impact on student’s lives.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (in press II). Measuring the impact of teachers II: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. American Economic Review.
Are public schools really losing their “best”?: Assessing the career transitions of teachers and their implication for the quality of the teacher workforce
The purpose of this paper is to examine attrition and mobility of teachers using teacher value-added measures for early-career teachers in North Carolina public schools from 1996 to 2002. The results suggest the best teachers remain in teaching and stay in high socioeconomic Status and high performing schools.
Goldhaber, D., Gross, B., & Player, D. (2007). Are public schools really losing their “best”?: Assessing the career transitions of teachers and their implication for the quality of the teacher workforce. Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research (Working Paper 12). Washington, D.C. Urban Institute. H
Are Principals Good at Identifying Effective Teachers? A Comparison of Teachers’ Principal Ratings and Residual Gain on Standardized Tests
This study tries to answer the question: Are principals good at identifying effective teachers? It looks at the relation between principals' identification of effective teachers and student scores from the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP), a computer-adaptive test for reading, mathematics, and language usage.
Gray, J. J. (2010). Are Principals Good at Identifying Effective Teachers? A Comparison of Teachers' Principal Ratings and Residual Gain on Standardized Tests.
Supporting Principals in Implementing Teacher Evaluation Systems
With so much emphasis being placed on improving teacher performance, The National Association of Elementary School Principals and the National Association of Secondary School Principals have developed recommendations to support principals more effectively evaluate teachers.
Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013). Effective Instructional Time Use for School Leaders: Longitudinal Evidence from Observations of Principals. Educational Researcher, 42(8), 433-444.
Why public schools lose teachers
This paper examines the issue of teacher attrition and the factors that motivate teachers leaving schools. The results indicate that teacher mobility is much more strongly related to characteristics of the student population (race and lower socioeconomic status) and achievement. The study finds salary plays a much smaller role in these decisions.
Hanushek, E., Kain, J., & Rivkin, S. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326-354.
Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis
This paper investigates organizational characteristics and conditions in schools that drive staffing problems and teacher turnover.
Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534.
Why Schools Have Difficulty Staffing Their Classrooms with Qualified Teachers
This is taken from the testimony of Richard Ingersoll in front the Pennsylvania legislature on the issues of school turnover.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2013). Why Schools Have Difficulty Staffing Their Classrooms with Qualified Teachers. Retrieved October 3, 2014
American Statistical Association’s Recent Position Statement on Value-Added Models (VAMs): Five Points of Contention
These commentaries critiques the work that links teacher value-added models to students’ long-run outcomes.
Interpretation, T. M. Q. Chetty et al. on the American Statistical Association’s Recent Position Statement on Value-Added Models (VAMs): Five Points of Contention.
Do Principals Fire the Worst Teachers?
This paper examines how principals make decisions regarding teacher dismissal. In 2004, the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) and Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) gave principals great flexibility to dismiss probationary teachers for any reason. The study estimates the relative weight that school administrators place on a variety of teacher characteristics and finds evidence that principals do consider teacher absences and value-added measures, along with several demographic characteristics, in determining which teachers to dismiss.
Jacob, B. A. (2010). Do principals fire the worst teachers? (No. w15715). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Toward effective supervision: An operant analysis and comparison of managers at work, 1986
This study finds that performance monitoring is the factor that separated good mangers from ineffective managers.
Komaki, J. L. (1986). Toward effective supervision: An operant analysis and comparison of managers at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 270.
TITLE
SYNOPSIS
Data Quality Campaign
This nonprofit organization promotes the systematic and outcome driven use of data at all levels of education
New Teacher Center
The New Teacher Center provides research, policy analyses, training and support for improving new teacher support and induction.
Back to Top