Is Effective Teacher Evaluation Sustainable? Evidence from District of Columbia Public Schools

IF 1.7 3区 教育学 Q2 ECONOMICS Education Finance and Policy Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1162/edfp_a_00303
T. Dee, Jessalynn K. James, J. Wyckoff
{"title":"Is Effective Teacher Evaluation Sustainable? Evidence from District of Columbia Public Schools","authors":"T. Dee, Jessalynn K. James, J. Wyckoff","doi":"10.1162/edfp_a_00303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ten years ago, many policy makers viewed the reform of teacher evaluation as a highly promising mechanism to improve teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Recently, that enthusiasm has dimmed as the available evidence suggests the subsequent reforms had a mixed record of implementation and efficacy. Even in districts where there was evidence of efficacy, the early promise of teacher evaluation may not be sustainable as these systems mature and change. This study examines the evolving design of IMPACT, the teacher evaluation system in the District of Columbia Public Schools. We describe the recent changes to IMPACT, which include higher performance standards for lower-performing teachers and a reduced emphasis on value-added test scores. Descriptive evidence on the dynamics of teacher retention and performance under this redesigned system indicates that lower-performing teachers are particularly likely to either leave or improve. Corresponding causal evidence similarly indicates that imminent dismissal threats for persistently low-performing teachers increased both teacher attrition and the performance of returning teachers. These findings suggest that teacher evaluation can provide a sustained mechanism for improving the quality of teaching.","PeriodicalId":46870,"journal":{"name":"Education Finance and Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":"1-34"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education Finance and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Ten years ago, many policy makers viewed the reform of teacher evaluation as a highly promising mechanism to improve teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Recently, that enthusiasm has dimmed as the available evidence suggests the subsequent reforms had a mixed record of implementation and efficacy. Even in districts where there was evidence of efficacy, the early promise of teacher evaluation may not be sustainable as these systems mature and change. This study examines the evolving design of IMPACT, the teacher evaluation system in the District of Columbia Public Schools. We describe the recent changes to IMPACT, which include higher performance standards for lower-performing teachers and a reduced emphasis on value-added test scores. Descriptive evidence on the dynamics of teacher retention and performance under this redesigned system indicates that lower-performing teachers are particularly likely to either leave or improve. Corresponding causal evidence similarly indicates that imminent dismissal threats for persistently low-performing teachers increased both teacher attrition and the performance of returning teachers. These findings suggest that teacher evaluation can provide a sustained mechanism for improving the quality of teaching.
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
有效的教师评价可持续吗?来自哥伦比亚公立学校的证据
十年前,许多政策制定者认为教师评价改革是一种非常有前途的机制,可以提高教师的效率和学生的成绩。最近,这种热情有所减弱,因为现有证据表明,随后的改革在实施和效果方面好坏参半。即使在有证据表明效果的地区,随着这些系统的成熟和变化,早期对教师评估的承诺也可能无法持续。本研究考察了哥伦比亚特区公立学校教师评估系统IMPACT的演变设计。我们描述了IMPACT最近的变化,其中包括对表现较差的教师提出更高的绩效标准,并减少了对增值考试成绩的重视。在这个重新设计的系统下,关于教师保留和绩效动态的描述性证据表明,表现较差的教师特别有可能离开或改进。相应的因果证据同样表明,对于持续表现不佳的教师,即将被解雇的威胁增加了教师的流失和回归教师的表现。这些研究结果表明,教师评价可以为提高教学质量提供一个持续的机制。
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
46
期刊最新文献
Making the (Letter) Grade: The Incentive Effects of Mandatory Pass/Fail Courses How Well Do Professional Reference Ratings Predict Teacher Performance? The Academic and Behavioral Impacts of an Autism Health Insurance Mandate: Evidence from Massachusetts A Bridge to Graduation: Post-Secondary Effects of an Alternative Pathway for Students Who Fail High School Exit Exams At What Cost? Is Technical Education Worth the Investment?
×
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