Teacher evaluation is a hot topic. We know that the quality of the teachers is at the core of learning, but how do we know those teachers are competent. This research by Joseph Murphy, Philip Hallinger and Ronald H. Heck takes a critical look at teacher evaluation e.g. in a very specific form: “a new generation of teacher evaluation models is emerging, one that incorporates measures of growth in student achievement as a criterion of teacher effectiveness”. But is teacher evaluation a good candidate to power school improvement?

From the conclusion:

The evidence that we reviewed from multiple perspectives leads us to suggest caution in this area. Relatedly, it merits notice that teacher evaluation has been reinvented numerous times across the last century. During that time, we have witnessed a major shift from traits and characteristics of teachers to goals. We have seen the evolution from high inference judgments to objective-driven evaluations. Additionally, one does not need to be too old to remember how clinical approaches to supervision and evaluation were to sweep the old understanding of teacher evaluation aside in favor of revolutionary new perspectives that would create more effective schools. Our investigations tell us that we should be cautious in accepting claims about the ability of teacher evaluation to power significant school improvement simply because it is equipped with a fourth (“new” views of effective teaching) or fifth (student test scores) generation engine.

Actually, there are some better things to focus on:

Equally important, there is a robust body of empirical work that informs us that if school improvement is the goal, school leaders would be advised to spend their time and energy in areas other than teacher evaluation. Many leader initiatives can positively impact student achievement even if instructional quality remains unchanged, i.e., through actions that substitute for and/or enhance teaching (Supovitz, Sirinides, & May, 2009; Witziers, Bosker, & Kruger, 2003). Work here includes establishing a powerful sense of vision, with strong academic mission and challenging organizational goals and expectations (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2005); enhancing student opportunity to learn (Harris & Herrington, 2006); developing and using data systems to inform and monitor decisions (Lachat & Smith, 2005); creating personalized learning environments in which all youngsters are cared for, participate in, and have ownership of the school (Crosnoe, 2011); developing a school culture conducive to learning (Sebastian & Allensworth, 2012); and providing alignment and cohesiveness to all school actions (Bryk, Sebring, & Allensworth, 2010)

Abstract of the research that can be read here:

Over the last decade, teacher evaluation has moved onto center stage in efforts to strengthen schooling. In this article, we address the question of whether focusing on this administrative process is likely to accomplish what reformers hope. We answer that question by examining the available evidence, both direct and indirect. We deepen the empirical narrative that emerges there by highlighting workplace norms and conditions of work in schools.