23 SES 14 B, Accountability Policies’ Enactments : Comparative perspectives - Mediations Part 2
Symposium continued from 23 SES 12 B
In line with accountability policies and increasing use of assessment tools which produce ‘data’ on school quality, teacher evaluation is seen by many governments as an important mean to enhance student performance (Murphy et al., 2013). Some scholars even say it has become a part of the global “edu-business (Ball et al., 2012). Out of 28 countries surveyed in the OECD review (Nusche et al., 2013), 22 reported having national- or state-level policy frameworks for teacher evaluation. In the six remaining countries, practices to provide feedback on teachers’ work are designed and implemented locally. Several studies of models, procedures and practices of teacher evaluation have been conducted internationally. Although the USA and England are characterized as forerunners, there are many examples of other countries (e.g. Chile and Portugal) adapting similar models. This paper presents a review of international research on teaching evaluation conducted over the last two decades. The aim is to categorize and position existing literature on teaching evaluation to identify the use of different measures as part of assessing teachers’ work, the functions of teacher evaluation practices as well as intended and unintended consequences. Preliminary results demonstrate how formal policies of teacher evaluation are enacted which rely on the use of student achievement data. Especially in the US, federal initiatives, such as Race to the Top (see Lavigne & Chamberlain, 2017), national non-profit enterprises (e.g. The New Teacher Project [TNTP]), Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) (research projects funded by the Gates Foundation) as well as other initiatives have resulted in value-added models which attempt to estimate the relative effect of particular teacher and/or school contributions on student test scores or models which aim to combine different measures, such as student achievement and classroom observations. Such models seem to be dominated by performative accountability which makes it difficult to promote reflective and inquiry-based approaches to developing teaching practices, even if this is stated as an explicit purpose. Questions can be raised about the links between teacher evaluation policies and research and the extent to which empirical evidence is considered when promoting or implementing new models of teacher evaluation (Hallinger et al., 2014; Skedsmo & Huber, 2017). In certain ways, the policy logic supporting and driving teacher evaluation seem to be stronger than the empirical evidence of positive results.
Ball, S., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy. Policy enactments in secondary schools. Oxon: Routledge. Lavigne, A. L., & Chamberlain, R. W. (2017). Teacher evaluation in Illinois: school leaders’ perceptions and practices. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29(2), 179-209. doi: 10.1007/s11092-016-9250-0 Murphy, J., Hallinger, P. & Heck, R.H. (2013). Leading via Teacher Evaluation: The Case of the Missing Clothes? Educational Researcher, 42(6), 349-354. Nusche, D., Radinger, T., Santiago, P., & Shewbridge, C. (2013). Synergies for Better Learning. An international Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment: OECD Publishing. Skedsmo, G. & Huber, S.G. (2018): Teacher evaluation: the need for valid measures and increased teacher involvement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 30(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-018-9273-9
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.