District stressors and teacher evaluation ratings

Abstract

Purpose Federal and state policymakers in the USA have sought to better differentiate the performance of K-12 teachers by enacting more rigorous evaluation policies. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether these policies are working as intended and explore whether district stressors such as funding, enrollment, and governance are associated with outcomes. Design/methodology/approach The authors examined teacher evaluation ratings from 687 districts in Michigan to identify the relationship between district stressors and two outcomes of interest to policymakers: frequency of high ratings and variation of ratings within districts. A qualitative index of variation was used to measure variation of the categorical rating variable. Findings About 97 percent of teachers in Michigan are rated effective or highly effective, and variation measures indicate overwhelming use of only two ratings. Charter school districts have fewer teachers rated highly than traditional districts, and districts with higher fund balances have more teachers rated highly. Districts with increasing fund balances have higher variation. Practical implications The findings suggest that district stressors presumably unrelated to teacher performance may influence teacher evaluation ratings. State teacher evaluation reforms that give districts considerable discretion in designing their teacher evaluation models may not be sufficient for differentiating the performance of teachers. Originality/value This research is important as policymakers refine state systems of support for teacher evaluation and provides new evidence that current enactment of teacher evaluation reform may be limiting the value of evaluation ratings for use in personnel decisions.

Untitled

“…Reforms of state pedagogical assessment that provide districts with significant freedom of action in developing teacher assessment models might be insufficient for teachers' work differentiation. Researchers from European universities arrived at similar conclusions [17,18].…”

Principals as Human Capital Managers: A Literature Review

“…Recursive and reflective evaluation processes are valued by teachers who recognize how they can increase their performance and contribute to professional growth (Lenhoff et al, 2017). A recent study by Tabak (2020) sought to understand the impact of teacher evaluation on job satisfaction and perceptions of personal value in the school setting.…”

“…Regardless of their future goals and aspirations, the main goal of the evaluation is to act as a tool for professional growth, dedication, and a sense of purpose in the school community. (Lenhoff et al, 2017).…”

“…Thus, retention becomes an issue that can overwhelm a school administrator if no procedures are in place to encourage staff to remain employed (Metcalfe & Perez, 2020). Engaging these staff in school climate surveys and professional learning opportunities to ensure they recognize their value to the school community are strategies utilized by successful principals to garner loyalty from their non-certificated staff and create continuity in their school communities (Lenhoff et al, 2017). While these may be recognized as successful strategies, the question remains whether academic institutions are training aspiring principals to employ these strategies.…”