Linking Student Outcomes to School Administrator Discretion in the Implementation of Teacher Observations

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Administration Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-04-02 DOI:10.1177/0013161X211003134
Seth B. Hunter, April Ege
{"title":"Linking Student Outcomes to School Administrator Discretion in the Implementation of Teacher Observations","authors":"Seth B. Hunter, April Ege","doi":"10.1177/0013161X211003134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Many studies have explored school administrator discretion in the implementation of teacher evaluation and observation systems. However, we are unaware of any studies that quantitatively link discretionary administrator behaviors to student outcomes. The purpose of this study was to (a) explore the determinants of observations arising from administrator discretion and (b) explore the extent to which “discretionary observations” were associated with average student achievement scores and disciplinary offenses. Method: We applied multilevel modeling to 3 years of teacher panel data from more than 80% of Tennessee school districts. Findings: Observable characteristics, differences between schools each year, and teacher traits explain more than 80% of the variation in discretionary observations; teacher prior-year observation and composite effectiveness scores were the strongest predictors. No evidence suggested that average student achievement scores or behavior suffered among teachers who received fewer observations than assigned by policy. Average student achievement scores rose among teachers receiving supplementary observations compared with the years when they received the policy-prescribed number. Implications for Research and Practice: Quantitative research can substantially control for discretionary observations using multilevel modeling. Observers might be encouraged to not observe high-performing teachers more than what is prescribed by policy. Observers seemingly deviate from observation policy in ways that do not increase office referrals and may improve student achievement.","PeriodicalId":48091,"journal":{"name":"Educational Administration Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0013161X211003134","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Administration Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211003134","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose: Many studies have explored school administrator discretion in the implementation of teacher evaluation and observation systems. However, we are unaware of any studies that quantitatively link discretionary administrator behaviors to student outcomes. The purpose of this study was to (a) explore the determinants of observations arising from administrator discretion and (b) explore the extent to which “discretionary observations” were associated with average student achievement scores and disciplinary offenses. Method: We applied multilevel modeling to 3 years of teacher panel data from more than 80% of Tennessee school districts. Findings: Observable characteristics, differences between schools each year, and teacher traits explain more than 80% of the variation in discretionary observations; teacher prior-year observation and composite effectiveness scores were the strongest predictors. No evidence suggested that average student achievement scores or behavior suffered among teachers who received fewer observations than assigned by policy. Average student achievement scores rose among teachers receiving supplementary observations compared with the years when they received the policy-prescribed number. Implications for Research and Practice: Quantitative research can substantially control for discretionary observations using multilevel modeling. Observers might be encouraged to not observe high-performing teachers more than what is prescribed by policy. Observers seemingly deviate from observation policy in ways that do not increase office referrals and may improve student achievement.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将学生成绩与学校管理者在实施教师意见时的自由裁量权联系起来
目的:许多研究探讨了学校管理者在实施教师评估和观察系统时的自由裁量权。然而,我们不知道有任何研究将自主管理者的行为与学生的成绩定量联系起来。本研究的目的是(a)探讨管理员自由裁量权产生的观察结果的决定因素,以及(b)探讨“自由裁量观察结果”与学生平均成绩和违纪行为的关联程度。方法:我们对来自田纳西州80%以上学区的3年教师小组数据进行了多级建模。研究结果:可观察的特征、每年学校之间的差异和教师特征解释了80%以上的自由裁量观察的差异;教师前一年的观察和综合有效性得分是最有力的预测因素。没有证据表明,在接受的观察少于政策规定的教师中,学生的平均成绩或行为受到了影响。与收到政策规定数字的年份相比,接受补充观察的教师的平均学生成绩得分有所上升。对研究和实践的启示:定量研究可以使用多层次建模来实质上控制自由裁量的观察。可以鼓励观察员不要对表现优异的教师进行超出政策规定的观察。观察者似乎偏离了观察政策,不会增加办公室推荐,也可能提高学生成绩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Administration Quarterly
Educational Administration Quarterly EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: Educational Administration Quarterly presents prominent empirical and conceptual articles focused on timely and critical leadership and policy issues of educational organizations. As an editorial team, we embrace traditional and emergent research paradigms, methods, and issues. We particularly promote the publication of rigorous and relevant scholarly work that enhances linkages among and utility for educational policy, practice, and research arenas.
期刊最新文献
“Fighting an Uphill Battle”: The Pursuit of Equity Through the Every Student Succeeds Act in North Carolina Preparing Early Education Leaders: An Analysis of UCEA Principal Preparation Programs Assessing the Psychometric Qualities of the Data-Informed School Leadership Survey Conflict, Competition, and Collaboration in Co-Located Schools: School Leaders Navigating Structural Distrust Responding to Crisis: A Multiple Case Study of District Approaches for Supporting Student Learning in the COVID-19 Pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1