Over the last decade, teacher evaluation has moved onto center stage in efforts to strengthen schooling. In this article, we address the question of whether focusing on this administrative process is likely to accomplish what reformers hope. We answer that question by examining the available evidence, both direct and indirect. We deepen the empirical narrative that emerges there by highlighting workplace norms and conditions of work in schools.
BakerE. L.BartonP. E.Darling-HammondL.HaertelE.LaddH. F.LinnR. L.ShepardL. A. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers (EPI Briefing Paper 278). Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
2.
BlaseJ.KirbyP. (2009). Bringing out the best in teachers: What effective principals do. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
3.
BormanG. D. (2005). National efforts to bring reform to scale in high-poverty schools: Outcomes and implications. Review of Research in Education, 29, 1–27.
4.
BossertS.DwyerD.RowanB.LeeG. (1982). The instructional management role of the principal. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 34–64.
5.
BrykA.SebringP.AllensworthE.LuppescuS.EastonJ. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
6.
CastetterW. B. (1976). The personnel function in educational administration. New York, NY: Macmillan.
7.
ClotfelterC. T.LaddH. F.VigdorJ. (2005). Who teaches whom? Race and the distribution of novice teachers. Economics of Education Review, 24, 377–392.
8.
CrosnoeR. (2011). Fitting in, standing out: Navigating the social challenges of high school to get an education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9.
CrumK. S.ShermanW. H. (2008). Facilitating high achievement: High school principals’ reflections on their successful leadership practices. Journal of Educational Administration, 46, 562–580.
10.
CurryM. (2008). Critical friends groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in teacher professional communities aimed at instructional improvement and school reform. Teachers College Record, 110, 733–774.
11.
DanielsonC. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
GoldsteinJ. (2004). Making sense of distributed leadership: The case of peer assistance and review. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 173–197.
16.
GrubbW. N.FlessaJ. J. (2006). “A job too big for one”: Multiple principals and other nontraditional approaches to school leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42, 518–550.
17.
HamiltonL. S.StecherB. M.RussellJ. L.MarshJ. A.MilesJ. (2008). Accountability and teaching practices: School-level actions and teacher responses. In FullerB.HenneM. K.HannumE. (Eds.), Strong states, weak schools: The benefits and dilemmas of centralized accountability (Research in the Sociology of Education, Vol. 16, pp. 31–66). St. Louis, MO: Emerald Group.
18.
HarrisD. N.HerringtonC. D. (2006). Accountability, standards, and the growing achievement gap: Lessons from the past half century. American Journal of Education, 112, 209–238.
19.
HattieJ. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
20.
HermanR.StringfieldS. (1997). Ten promising programs for educating all children: Evidence of impact. Arlington, VA: Education Research Service.
21.
KimballS.MilanowskiA. T. (2009). Examining teacher evaluation validity and leadership decision making within a standards-based evaluation system. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45, 34–70.
22.
KimballS. M.WhiteB.MilanowskiA. T.BormanG. (2004). Examining the relationship between teacher evaluation and student assessment results in Washoe County. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 54–78.
23.
LachatM. A.SmithS. (2005). Practices that support data use in urban high schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 10, 333–349.
24.
LeithwoodK.JantziD. (2005). A review of transformational school leadership research 1996-2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4, 177–199.
25.
LeithwoodK.HarrisA.StraussT. (2010). Leading school turnaround: How successful leaders transform low-performing schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
26.
LewisA. (2008). Add it up: Using research to improve education and minority students. Washington, DC: Poverty and Race Research Action Council.
27.
LiphamJ. (1964). Organizational character of education: Administrative behavior. Review of Educational Research, 34, 435–454.
28.
LortieD. (1975). School-teacher: A sociology study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
29.
LouisK. S.DretzkeB.WahlstromK. (2010). How does leadership affect student achievement? Results from a national US survey. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21, 315–336.
MayH.SupovitzJ. A. (2011). The scope of principal efforts to improve instruction. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 332–352.
32.
McCaffreyD. L.SassT. R.LockwoodJ. R.MihalyK. (2009). The intertemporal variability of teacher effect estimates. Education Finance and Policy, 4, 572–606.
33.
MessickS. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23, 13–23.
34.
MeyerJ. W.RowanB. (1975, August). Notes on the structure of educational organizations: Revised version. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco.
35.
MilanowskiA. (2004). The relationship between teacher performance evaluation scores and student achievement: Evidence from Cincinnati. Peabody Journal of Education, 79(4), 33–53.
36.
MurphyJ. (1990). Principal instructional leadership. In LottoL. S.ThurstonP. W. (Eds.), Advances in educational administration: Changing perspectives on the school. (Volume 1, Part B). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
37.
MurphyJ. (1991). Restructuring schools: Capturing and assessing the phenomena. New York: Teachers College Press.
38.
MurphyJ. (2010). The educator’s handbook for understanding and closing achievement gaps. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
39.
MurphyJ. (2012). Homeschooling in America. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
40.
PowellDouglas R. (1991). How schools support families: Critical policy tensions. Elementary School Journal, 91, 307–319.
41.
PrintyS. M. (2008). Leadership for teacher learning: A community of practice perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 187–226.
42.
ReyesP.ScribnerJ.ScribnerA. (1999). Lessons from high-performing Hispanic schools: Creating learning communities. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
43.
RivkinS. G.HanushekE. A.KainJ. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73, 417–58.
44.
RockoffJ.SperoniC. (2010). Subjective and objective evaluations of teacher effectiveness. American Economic Review, 100: 261–266.
45.
RothsteinJ. (2009, January). Student sorting and bias in value added estimation: Selection on observables and unobservables (NBER Working Paper, 14666). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w14666
46.
SandersW.AshtonJ.WrightS. (2005). Comparison of the Effects of NBPTS-certified teachers with other teachers on the rate of student academic progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education and National Science Foundation.
47.
SandersW.RiversJ. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
48.
SebastianJ.AllensworthE. (2012). The influence of principal leadership on classroom instruction and student learning: A study of mediated pathways to learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48, 626–663.
49.
SeidelT.ShavelsonR. J. (2007). Teaching effectiveness research in the past decade: The role of theory and research design in disentangling meta-analysis research. Review of Educational Research, 77, 454–499.
50.
SupovitzJ. (2008). Instructional influence in American high schools. In ManginM. M.StoelingaS. R. (Eds.), Effective teacher leadership: Using research to inform and reform (pp. 144–162). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
51.
SupovitzJ. A.KleinV. (2003). Mapping a course for improved student learning: How innovative schools systematically use student performance data to guide improvement. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
52.
SupovitzJ.SirinidesP.MayH. (2009). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 31–56.
53.
TaylorE. S.TylerJ. H. (2011, March). The effect of evaluation on performance: Evidence from longitudinal student achievement data of mid-career teachers (NBER Working Paper, No. 16877). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
54.
TeddlieC.ReynoldsD. (2000). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. New York, NY: Falmer Press.
55.
ThompsonVictor. (1961). Modern organization. New York, NY: Knopf.
56.
WahlstromK. L.LouisK. S. (2008). How teachers experience principal leadership: The roles of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared responsibility. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 458–495.
57.
WeisL. (1990). Working class without work: High school students in a de-industrializing economy. New York, NY: Routledge.
58.
WengerE. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7, 225–246.
59.
WitziersB.BoskerR. J.KrugerM. L. (2003). Educational leadership and student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 398–425.
60.
WrightS.HornS.SandersP. (1997). Classroom context effects on student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 57–67.
