Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the extent of implementation of the innovative 1995-2000 United Federation of Teachers–New York City contract agreement on annual performance reviews of teachers and to identify the factors that impeded or facilitated implementation. Surveys were sent to a stratified sample of faculty members in 7 New York City public elementary, middle, and high schools. Interviews were conducted with self-selected staff members from the 7 schools. Findings indicate that the Teacher Performance Review option is being implemented in few schools. Among the factors identified as impeding the implementation of the performance review initiative is a lack of adequate training at all levels. Despite the contract component and a detailed plan of implementation and support, a lack of investment in performance review on the part of professional staff persists. Administrators and faculty alike view the agreement as an evaluative experience rather than an opportunity for growth.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bryk, A. , Sebring, P. , Kerbow, D. , Rollow, S. , & Easton, J. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Cuban, L. (1984). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American education. New York: Longman.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1985). Valuing teachers: The making of a profession. Teachers College Record, 87, 41-56.

Datnow, A. (2000). Power and politics in the adoption of school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(4), 357-374.

Dunlap, D. M. , & Goldman, P. (1991). Rethinking power in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(1), 5-29.

Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Cambridge, MA: Albert Shanker Institute.

Fernandez, J. (1990). A new strategy for public education. CSA Education Review, p. 26-26.

Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London: Falmer.

Glanz, J. (1992). School-based management and the advent of teacher empowerment: One administrator’s view of reform. Record in Educational Administration and Supervision, 12(2), 40-45.

10.

Hatch, T. (2001). It takes capacity to build capacity. Education Week, 20(22), pp. 44-44, 47-47.

11.

Johnson, S. M. (1990). Teachers at work: Achieving success in our schools. New York: Basic Books.

12.

Oakes, J. , Welner, K. , Yonezawn, S. , & Allen, R. (1998). Norms and politics of equity-minded change. In A. Hargreaves , A. Lieverman , M. Fullan , & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International handbook of educational change (pp. 952-973). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.

13.

Ravitch, D. (2000). The great school wars: The history of New York City public schools (Rev. ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

14.

Rosenholtz, S. J. (1986). Organizational conditions of teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2(2), 91-104.

15.

Strauss, A. , & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

16.

Sullivan, S. (2000, November). A balancing act: Implementing a peer coaching program in a complex, conflicted environment. Paper presented at the meeting of the Council of Professors of Instructional Supervision, Austin, TX.

17.

Tyack, D. , & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

18.

UFT Teacher Center . (1993). Teaching for the 21st century. (Available from UFT Teacher Center, 48 East 21st Street, New York, NY)

19.

Weick, K. (1983). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. In T. V. Baldridge & T. Deal (Eds.), The dynamics of organizational change in education (pp. 15-38). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

Good Intentions,Questionable Results

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References