Rodriguezesc/draftproject name


Teacher Evaluation Approaches

edit

Teacher evaluation is a process used to measure teacher effectiveness based on students learning and success. Evaluations of teachers over the years have changed. In earlier years, teacher evaluations were based on personal characteristics of the teacher, however, starting in the early 1950s until the 1980s, teacher evaluations took a shift and started to focus on teachers’ teaching, observed through students’ outcomes [1]. After the 1980’s, teacher evaluations were measured based on increased professional development, accountability, and school improvement [1].

Teacher evaluation has taken numerous approaches that observed teacher practices. Measures of Effective Teaching (MET), Danielson’s Framework Model, Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS), and the Value added Model (VAM) are all evaluation tools that aim to measure student achievement using teacher evaluation.  MET evaluates teacher effectiveness through five measures: students’ gains in standardized testing, recorded classroom sessions and teacher reflections afterwards, teachers’ knowledge in the pedagogical content, students views of the classroom and instruction of the teacher, and the teachers own views on their working conditions and the support of the school [2].

While the MET approach uses five measures to evaluate teacher effectiveness, the Danielson Framework model evaluates teachers using four domains: planning and preparation, classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibilities [3]. In this framework of evaluation, teachers are evaluated through a rubric that contains these four domains. They can either be ranked or measured as unsatisfactory, basic, proficient, or distinguished. In this rubric, teachers are being evaluated through critical attributes and examples when being observed.

The CLASS approach, by Robert Pianta, evaluates teachers based on their interaction with students. To do this, the CLASS model evaluates teachers’ interactions using three domains: emotional support, classroom organization, and instructional support [4]. It should be noted that this approach is much more flexible, as the domains used within the approach vary based on students’ grade levels.

Finally, the VAM approach uses students’ test score gains to reflect teachers’ effectiveness. Unlike the other approaches that evaluate particular characteristics or style of teaching for teacher evaluations, VAM does not directly evaluate the teacher. Although many of the approaches for teacher evaluations are debated, VAM is said to be inconsistent in its approach due to variation in classes, years, or test since its effectiveness measures are not based on teachers [5]. However, it said that VAM measures are retroactively effective due to teacher practices that influence learning of students [5].

  1. ^ a b Ellett, Chad D.; & Teddlie, C (2003). "Teacher Evaluation, Teacher Effectiveness and School Effectiveness : Perspective from the USA". Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education. 17 (1): 101-128.
  2. ^ "Working with Teachers to Develop Fair and Reliable Measures of Effective Teaching". MET Project: 1-12. 2010.
  3. ^ Danielson, Charlotte (2013). The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument (2013 ed.). Charlotte Danielson. pp. 4–59.
  4. ^ "The CLASS Protocol for Classroom Observations". The MET Project: 1-4. 2010.
  5. ^ a b Darling-Hammond, Linda; Amrein-Beardsley, A.; Haertel, E.; Rothstein, Jesse (2012). "Evaluating Teacher Evaluation". Phi Delta Kappan.