A Historical Perspective on Teacher Evaluation

In this Teachers College Record article, Thomas Good (University of Arizona) reviews recent research on effective teaching practices and finds that it largely duplicates the findings of similar research in the 1980s. This is good news in that it shows there is a consistent knowledge base about what works in the classroom – identifiable teaching practices that are associated with good student achievement (they include classroom management, teacher expectations, clarity, and effective use of time). 

But the bad news is that the research hasn’t made further gains or convinced the American public, most of whom believe teaching is easy and is the most important factor in student achievement (not true, says Good – there are lots of other factors). In addition, the knowledge base hasn’t been effectively taught to new generations of teachers. He is also concerned that there hasn’t been enough attention to student attainment in areas not covered by standardized tests – creativity, adaptability, pro-social dispositions, and problem finding. 

Good goes on to comment on current efforts to improve teacher evaluation. Research on effective classroom practices has great potential for improving student learning by giving teachers feedback, says Good, if:

• Observers are well trained;
• They make enough classroom observations to get a representative sense of daily reality;
• The body of knowledge about good teaching is not used as a checklist of isolated behaviors but is “placed in a system of instruction that emphasizes the integration of variables.” 
• Observers can interpret and synthesize the data they collect.
• Observers “provide feedback in ways that are both informative and encourage teachers to consider using the information.”

Good is critical of the way some states and districts are approaching teacher evaluation. The use of test scores is obviously problematic because of the volatility of data from year to year, he says. But even observational data are unreliable if instructional variables are used in isolation. “For example,” he says, “many observational systems call for the demonstration of high expectations. However… expectations can be too high or too low, and the issue is for teachers to demonstrate appropriate expectations. How then does a classroom observer know and code if expectations are appropriate for individual students and for the class as a whole?” For example, alerting an individual student (“Johnny, pay attention to how I write this equation”) could be coded positively by an observer, when in fact the teacher was demonstrating low expectations for this inattentive student. 

Another example: two important aspects of classroom management are alerting and accountability – for example, “Work for 15 minutes and then we’ll check your seatwork” and then checking the work in 15 minutes. If a teacher does the first without the second, students will conclude that they don’t need to pay attention to the teacher’s instructions. Alerting without accountability is bad classroom management, as is accountability without alerting. But Good has seen observational checklists that include one without the other, which means they can’t provide teachers with meaningful information on how to improve classroom management. 

“Unfortunately,” says Good, “at present, the use of observational systems associated with Race to the Top accountability appears in most instances to be an accounting of teaching performance only in terms of the presence or absence of individual variables. This usage is not an accurate reflection of the knowledge base, in my opinion, and in many cases will result in inappropriate conclusions about teacher performance and student learning.” 

Good gives a brief endorsement to the idea of student survey data as helpful feedback to teachers. He cites the five Tripod survey items included in the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) study that were most closely associated with teachers’ positive impact on student achievement:

• Students in this class treat the teacher with respect. (All questions were rated by students on a 5-point agree/disagree scale)
• My classmates behave the way my teacher wants them to behave.
• Our class stays busy and doesn’t waste time.
• In this class, we learn a lot every day.
• In this class, we learn to correct our mistakes.

The MET study presented student feedback as if it were a new idea, but Good mentions a 1975 study he and two colleagues conducted on student perceptions of their teachers.

“What Do We Know About How Teachers Influence Student Performance on Standardized Tests And Why Do We Know So Little About Other Student Outcomes?” by Thomas Good in Teachers College Record, January 2014 (Vol. 116, #1, p. 1-41), http://bit.ly/1bGudHS

From the Marshall Memo #522