CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION No longer is the matter of teacher performance evaluation a question of whether or not it should be done. The question now is how best to evaluate teacher performance and what should be evaluated (6, 7, 78, 108). All teachers are evaluated. Regardless of how formal the evaluation system is, what evidence is collected and analyzed, or how often formal reports are written, teachers are evaluated and evaluated often. They are evaluated by students, parents, other teachers, administrators, super visors, and the public. The question is not whether teachers should be evaluated, since this cannot be avoided, but rather how systematic the evaluation should be in order to be most effective (6). Teacher performance evaluation has evolved from teacher supervision. Gwynn reports three major factors that have operated since the turn of the twentieth century to give rise to the value of supervision, viz., changes in ideas of how children learn, major advances in methods of teaching, and a tremendous growth in the amount and variety of textbooks and teaching materials. In a comparison of the concepts of supervision, circa 1920, Gwynn reviewed reports by Cubberley (1916), Wagner (1921), Burton (1922), and Scott (1924). Wagner and Burton listed rating of teachers as a task of supervision and Cubberley listed reporting oh skill and success of teachers (52). As the school accountability movement has grown, there has been a movement to tie teacher evaluation to pupil outcomes. Berliner (5) states a belief that the heart of performance and competency-based teacher education, evaluation, and accountability programs is the