School-Level Politics and Professional Development: Traps in Evaluating the Quality of Practicing Teachers

Abstract

Teacher supervision and evaluation are fundamental responsibilities of the principal. Yet principals and teachers find their supervisory interactions to be difficult and unsatisfying experiences. This article explores the micropolitical context in which supervision and evaluation take place. Highlighting specific examples in New York City, the article argues that the environment in which teacher-principal interactions occur is shaped by union contracts, state and district personnel policies, and precedents set by local experiences with teacher dismissals. These historical and structural factors and others converge to create three traps of supervision.

The appraisal of teachers' performance and its impact on the mutuality of principal-teacher emotions

“…Much thought, research and practice have been invested to devise valid tools and gain reliable outcomes (Shinkfield and Stufflebeam 1995;Gullickson and Howard 2009). Despite widespread use in Western countries, appraisal practices remain problematic due to rating mistakes and unfair judgement (Kozlowski et al 1998), contamination through political and personal considerations (Cooper et al 2005), and difficulties in investigating misconduct of employees (Remington 2002). Identifying poor performance is even more complicated: teachers' denial of difficulties; possible lack of information, sometimes intentionally hidden by inspectors and principals; manoeuvres and occasional deceptions used to postpone the principal's actions, and a difficult organisational climate and regulations that may tie the principal's hands.…”

The Effect of a Primary School Teachers' Trade Union on the Formation and Realisation of Policy in Greece: The Case of Teacher Evaluation Policy

“…The influence of trade unionism on everyday activity has been ascertained internationally to the extent that it is considered that 'collective action is to a large extent predictable' (Cooper et al, 2005, p. 114; see also Macmillan, 2000;Whiddett & Hollyforde, 2003). In fact, the role of teachers' unions is considered to be very powerful and influences important issues which concern training and evaluation, and the replacement of unsuitable teachers.…”

Disparity of Principal Accountability

“…The evaluation process must be a collaborative effort between both the principal and the teacher where strengths and weaknesses are identified to enhance teacher improvement and student achievement. Teaching is difficult and is never perfected (Danielson, 2008); therefore, teachers should view the observation and evaluation process as a growth opportunity, not as a contractual obligation or a way to satisfy state and local codes (Cooper et al, 2005).…”