How middle school special and general educators make sense of and respond to changes in teacher evaluation policy

Abstract

In this multiple case study, we apply sensemaking theory to examine and compare how middle school special and general educators perceive and respond to teacher evaluation reform, including formal classroom observations, informal walkthroughs, and student growth measures. Our findings reveal that special educators experience conflict between the policy’s main elements and their understandings of how to effectively teach students with disabilities. Furthermore, special and general educators held contrasting beliefs regarding the appropriateness of evaluation. Our findings illustrate the importance of acknowledging differences in special and general educators’ roles and responsibilities and encourage policymakers to reconsider uniform teacher evaluation policies.

Surfacing Principals’ Beliefs About Instruction for Students With Disabilities: A Qualitative Analysis

“…Add to this that principals use observations for more than just communicating about the effectiveness of their teachers’ instruction; they use the evaluation process to manage relationships with their teachers as supervisees, a dynamic shown to shape how principals’ approach the work of evaluation (Bell et al, 2018). Finally, given the demands of teacher evaluation in an already expanded administrative role (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016), it is likely that principals have little time to explore how SETs’ instruction responds to students’ individual needs (Brownell & Jones, 2015), a crucial part of evaluating SETs’ instruction (Braun & Youngs, 2020). This limited time likely affects their evaluation of instruction, particularly their assessment of what constitutes rigorous, challenging work in FFT.…”

“…Yet, due to their limited training, experience, and knowledge regarding special education (Stark et al, 2020), principals’ work as instructional leaders may ignore or be misaligned with prevailing knowledge regarding effective instructional practice in the field of special education (Brownell & Jones, 2015). Furthermore, as Braun and Youngs (2020) found in a multiple-case study comparing special and general educators’ perspectives on teacher evaluation, their vision may be inconsistent with the goals and beliefs of the SETs in their charge or the aim of the context in which a SET is working. Findings underscored that SETs believed administrators’ feedback was misaligned with their roles and the needs of their students.…”