The Case for Expanding Standards for Teacher Evaluation to Include an Instructional Supervision Perspective

Abstract

Despite the concerns of scholars in the field of instructional supervision, teacher evaluations continue to emphasize bureaucratic accountability and standardization. This article presents an argument for extending the Joint Committee on Standards_ Personnel Evaluation Standards to include standards related to the practice of supervision. The proposed standards call for differentiated procedures, collaborative identification of teachers_ professional development goals, multiple sources of data, emphasis on formative evaluation processes, consideration of both teachers_ personal development goals and school/program improvement goals, and the formalization of formative evaluation processes to achieve clear and shared understanding of their purpose and goals. These standards would align teacher evaluation with aspects of instructional supervision namely,clarification and shared understanding of the process and purpose of evaluations, interpretation of teaching performance in the context of teachers_ classrooms and professional values, and deliberation with teachers about how evaluation evidence depicts and informs their work.

Teacher perceptions about observation conferences: what do teachers think about their formative supervision in one US school district?

“…Because the state required school districts to use student achievement data in teacher evaluations, school districts devoted considerable time and resources in deciding how to fairly implement this mandate (Wyoming Department of Education Rules and Regulations 2011). However, teacher evaluation is typically an episodic event that does little to change teachers' practice and improve instruction (Derrington 2011;Holland 2005). Rather, teacher evaluation should be designed so that multiple measures of effectiveness are considered and include information collected by principals and peer review (Hinchey 2010).…”

“…Researchers argue policy-makers and many educators view teacher supervision and evaluation as the same despite each being distinct processes with different outcomes (Holland 2005;Milanowski 2005;Nolan and Hoover 2008). Teacher supervision is concerned with improving teachers' practice through professional development while evaluation's convergence is rating teachers' job performance to determine their employment status (Holland and Garman 2001).…”

Student teachers’ views of practicums (teacher training placements) in Turkish and English contexts: a comparative study

“…For example, some researchers emphasise the importance of collaboration between student teachers and mentors (Akcan and Tatar, 2010), others emphasise the use of questioning of student teachers at a deep level by mentors (Jyrhama, 2001) and still others emphasise the professional knowledge that mentors bring to feedback situations with student teachers (Parker-Katz and Bay, 2008). Some student teachers welcome feedback as essential for developing their skills and identities as teachers, but others find it difficult to resolve the tension between the developmental and assessment purposes of observation and feedback (Brandt, 2008;Holland, 2005).…”

Dialectics of development: teacher identity formation in the interplay of ideal ego and ego ideal

“…Such is the currency of this language, that, in contemporary education policy discourses, learning to teach is largely conceived in terms of meeting the requirements mapped out in such frameworks of teacher professional standards, which are intended to serve both performance and developmental purposes (OECD, 2005;Holland, 2005;Stronge, 2010). That is, they are designed to provide an explicit language within which to discuss teaching practice and against which to evaluate its achievement, whilst also serving a 'curricular' function, establishing the contours of what should be taught in teacher education programs and providing a map for ongoing professional learning and development (Moore, 2004).…”