In order to meet the needs of both evaluators and evaluatees, this writer says, evaluation programs must be developed that are both flexible and structured. He offers some basic premises for guiding teacher evaluation on the following pages.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barsalou, J.M.; Killinger, J.E.; and Thompson, J.E. "Student Evaluation of Staff in Secondary Schools." NASSP Bulletin, January 1974.
2.
Berger, E. "The Evaluation of Teachers." NASSP Bulletin, May 1974.
3.
Burdin, J. L., ed. "Research on Teacher Effects ." Journal of Teacher Education27 (1976): 1-66.
4.
Bushman, J.H. "Are Teachers Playing 'Statue' in the Classroom?" NASSP Bulletin, December 1974.
5.
Carlson, R., and Mable, T. "Evaluating the Teacher-Adviser." NASSP Bulletin, September 1976.
6.
Dunkin, M.J., and Biddle, B.J.The Study of Teaching. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1974.
7.
Eckard, P.J., and McElhinney, J.J. "Teacher Evaluation and Educational Accountability ." Educational Leadership34 (1977): 613-618.
8.
Goens, G.A., and Lange, R.W. "Supervision as Self-Management." NASSP Bulletin, December 1975.
9.
Griffith, F.A Handbook for the Observation of Teaching and Learning. Midland, Mich.: Pendell Publishing, 1973.
10.
Hall, W.J., Jr. "Involving Teachers in Their Evaluation." NASSP Bulletin , December 1973.
