The Implementation and Impacts of Educator Performance Measure Information

-

A set of teacher and principal performance measures provided some information to identify educators most in need of support. The measures’ performance information also led to some positive impacts on educator and student outcomes, according to the results of a study published today (December 19).

The study, sponsored by the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, examined the implementation of three performance measures over two years—observations of teachers’ classroom practices; value-added measures of teacher performance; and a 360-degree survey assessment of principals’ leadership practices. The study investigated the impacts of feedback from these measures on teacher classroom practices, principal leadership, and student achievement.

A group of elementary and middle schools in eight school districts were randomly assigned to either a treatment group that implemented all three of the study’s performance measures or a control group that did not. In treatment schools, the study’s performance measures were generally implemented without formal stakes attached; for example, they were not used by the study districts for staffing decisions such as tenure or continued employment. A total of 127 schools participated in the study.

Key findings include:

• The study’s performance measures were generally implemented as planned. For instance, in both study years, teachers and principals received multiple rounds of ratings and feedback on their practices.

• The study’s measures provided some information to identify educators who needed support, but provided limited information to indicate the areas of practice educators most needed to improve. For instance, classroom observation overall ratings averaged over the year showed performance differences between teachers. However, ratings on more detailed aspects of teaching were less helpful in identifying areas for individual teacher improvement.

• As intended, educators in treatment schools received more frequent feedback with ratings than did those in control schools. In both study years, treatment teachers reported receiving more feedback sessions on their classroom practice with ratings and a written narrative justification than did control teachers. Similarly, in both study years, treatment principals reported receiving more instances of oral feedback with ratings on their leadership than did control principals.

• Feedback from the study’s measures had some positive impacts on teachers’ classroom practice, principals’ leadership, and student achievement. This included impacts on teachers’ classroom practice on one of two observation measures, on the two measures of principal leadership examined and on students’ achievement in mathematics in Year 1, amounting to about four weeks of learning. In Year 2, the impact on mathematics achievement was similar in magnitude but not statistically significant. The intervention did not have an impact on reading/English language arts achievement in either study year.