The Role of “Informational Significance” in Shaping Louisiana Elementary Teachers’ Use of High-Stakes Teacher Evaluation Data for Instructional Decision-Making

Exploring the effect of supportive teacher evaluation experiences on U.S. teachers’ job satisfaction

“…Hallinger, Heck, and Murphy (2014) assert that faith in the transformative potential of teacher evaluation as a tool for school improvement has far outstripped the empirical evidence of its effectiveness. These scholars, as well as others, continue to emphasize the importance of making the process (and products) of teacher evaluation supportive of teachers' learning and development as practitioners (Delvaux et al, 2013;Ford et al, 2016;Hallinger et al, 2014;TNTP, 2010;Tuytens & Devos, 2011). Of course, being able to render a summative judgment about a teacher's effectiveness provides information useful for determining a general evaluation of effectiveness, but to affirm and activate teachers' motivation toward improvement, we submit that these systems must also be able to yield actionable knowledge for teachers as well as provide an appropriate support structure as teachers work to make meaningful changes to their practice (Ford et al, 2016).…”

“…Though the evidence on performance or "merit" based pay is mixed, several recent experimental evaluation studies revealed limited, if any, change in student achievement, teacher motivation, attitudes, or instructional practice over time (Marsh et al, 2011;Springer et al, 2012;Yuan et al, 2013). Furthermore, recent scholarship has revealed some unintended consequences of current U.S. teacher evaluation policy, such as: lack of support and/or guidance in the use of teacher evaluation results (Amrein-Beardsley & Collins, 2012;Ford et al, 2017); lack of validity and/or reliability (either real or perceived) of evaluation results (Darling-Hammond et al, 2012;Ford et al, 2016;Jiang, Sporte, & Luppescu, 2015;Longo-Schmid, 2016;Reddy et al, 2017); and evidence of increase in adverse affective states for teachers subjected to high-stakes evaluation, such as high stress and anxiety as well as decreased job satisfaction, professional commitment, and turnover (Ford et al, 2017;Hewitt, 2015;Holloway & Brass, 2017;Ingersoll et al, 2016;Jiang et al, 2015).…”

“…Recommendations for teacher evaluation practice which is supportive of teachers' growth and development can be traced back to the first teacher evaluation movement in the U.S. in the 1980s, but have resurfaced as a result of recent policy developments (The New Teacher Project [TNTP], 2010; Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern, & Keeling, 2009). First, teacher evaluation should be systematic and frequent and should yield useful, meaningful information about a teacher's practice as well as critical feedback on what to improve (Delvaux et al, 2013;Ford et al, 2016;TNTP, 2010;Tuytens & Devos, 2011). The SDT concept of functional significance states that the effects of external events on human motivation hinge on the psychological meaning they have for the recipient (Ryan & Weinstein, 2009).…”

“…An evaluation approach based on the standards of good teaching supports instructional improvement by establishing the clear expectations necessary to motivate change (Kelly, Ang, Chong, & Hu, 2008) and by providing a common language for evaluators and teachers to discuss instructional feedback (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016). Clear standards can also facilitate perceptions of the evaluation as valid and fair, and this can drive use of information from their evaluation to make changes in practice (Delvaux et al, 2013;Ford et al, 2016;Lavigne, 2014). Perceptions of the validity, fairness, and usefulness of the evaluation process are a strong determinant of teacher satisfaction with the teacher evaluation process (Delvaux et al, 2013).…”

“…While the causes for these sharp changes in teacher well-being are not localized to one source, the increased demands placed on U.S. teachers due to accountability have likely exacerbated the problem (Hargreaves, 2010). Increased pressure to conform to outside expectations for their work has made it difficult for teachers to pursue the psychic rewards that attracted them to teaching in the first place (Ford, Van Sickle, Clark, Fazio-Brunson, & Schween, 2017;Ford, Van Sickle, & Fazio-Brunson, 2016;Hargreaves, 2003Hargreaves, , 2010Ingersoll, 2003). Furthermore, lack of support to match increased pressure is damaging to teachers' perceptions of self-efficacy and autonomy (Lavigne, 2014)-key sources of teacher satisfaction and intrinsic motivation for improvement (Firestone, 2014;Ingersoll, 2003;Lortie, 1975;Niemiec & Ryan, 2009;Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2011Sylvia & Hutchinson, 1985).…”