1. Measuring Teacher Effectiveness: Challenges and Opportunities
Laura Goe, Ph.D.
Research Scientist, ETS, and Principal Investigator for the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality
National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) Education Fund
NALEO Audio Conference  April 10, 2012

2. Laura Goe, Ph.D. Former teacher in rural & urban schools
Special education (7th & 8th grade, Tunica, MS)
Language arts (7th grade, Memphis, TN)
Graduate of UC Berkeley’s Policy, Organizations, Measurement & Evaluation doctoral program
Principal Investigator for the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality
Research Scientist in the Performance Research Group at ETS 2

3. The National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality
A federally-funded partnership whose mission is to help states carry out the teacher quality mandates of ESEA
Vanderbilt University
Learning Point Associates, an affiliate of American Institutes for Research
Educational Testing Service

4. Today’s presentation available online
To download a copy of this presentation go to
Go to Publications and Presentations page
Today’s presentation is at the bottom of the page

5. The goal of teacher evaluation
The ultimate goal of all teacher evaluation should be…
TO IMPROVE TEACHING AND LEARNING
Introduction and discuss why we focus on teacher evaluation

6. Questions to be considered
What is teacher effectiveness and why should we measure it?
How do you measure teacher effectiveness?
What are strengths and cautions to keep in mind when using these measures?

7. Differentiating among teachers
“It is nearly impossible to discover and act on performance differences among teachers when documented records show them all to be the same.” (Glazerman et al., 2011, pg 1)

8. Trends in teacher evaluation
The policy imperative to change teacher evaluation has outstripped the research
Though we don’t yet know which model and combination of measures will identify effective teachers, many states and districts feel compelled to move forward at a rapid pace
Inclusion of student achievement growth data represents an important “culture shift” in evaluation
Communication and teacher/administrator participation and buy-in are crucial to ensure change
The implementation challenges are considerable
We are models exist for states and districts to adopt or adapt
Many districts have limited capacity to implement comprehensive systems, and states have limited resources to help them

9. It’s an equity issue
Value-added research shows that teachers vary greatly in their contributions to student achievement (Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2005).
The Widget Effect report (Weisberg et al., 2009) found that 90% of teachers were rated “good” or better in districts where students were failing at high levels

10. A simple definition of teacher effectiveness
Anderson (1991) stated that “… an effective teacher is one who quite consistently achieves goals which either directly or indirectly focus on the learning of their students” (p. 18).

11. Race to the Top definition of effective & highly effective teacher
Effective teacher: students achieve acceptable rates (e.g., at least one grade level in an academic year) of student growth (as defined in this notice). States, LEAs, or schools must include multiple measures, provided that teacher effectiveness is evaluated, in significant part, by student growth (as defined in this notice). Supplemental measures may include, for example, multiple observation-based assessments of teacher performance. (pg 7) Highly effective teacher students achieve high rates (e.g., one and one-half grade levels in an academic year) of student growth (as defined in this notice).

12. Race to the Top definition of student growth
Student growth means the change in student achievement (as defined in this notice) for an individual student between two or more points in time. A State may also include other measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms. (pg 11) 12

13. Goe, Bell, & Little (2008) definition of teacher effectiveness
Have high expectations for all students and help students learn, as measured by value-added or alternative measures.
Contribute to positive academic, attitudinal, and social outcomes for students, such as regular attendance, on-time promotion to the next grade, on-time graduation, self-efficacy, and cooperative behavior.
Use diverse resources to plan and structure engaging learning opportunities; monitor student progress formatively, adapting instruction as needed; and evaluate learning using multiple sources of evidence.
Contribute to the development of classrooms and schools that value diversity and civic-mindedness.
Collaborate with other teachers, administrators, parents, and education professionals to ensure student success, particularly the success of students with special needs and those at high risk for failure.

14. Measures and models: Definitions
Measures are the instruments, assessments, protocols, rubrics, and tools that are used in determining teacher effectiveness
Models are the state or district systems of teacher evaluation including all of the inputs and decision points (measures, instruments, processes, training, and scoring, etc.) that result in determinations about individual teachers’ effectiveness

15. Multiple measures of teacher effectiveness
Evidence of growth in student learning and competency
Standardized tests, pre/post tests in untested subjects
Student performance (art, music, etc.)
Curriculum-based tests given in a standardized manner
Classroom-based tests such as DIBELS
Evidence of instructional quality
Classroom observations
Lesson plans, assignments, and student work
Student surveys such as Harvard’s Tripod
Electronic portfolios/evidence binders
Evidence of professional responsibility
Administrator/supervisor reports, parent surveys
Teacher reflection and self-reports, records of contributions

16. Teacher observations: strengths and weaknesses
Great for teacher professional growth
If observation is followed by opportunity to discuss results
If support is provided for those who need it
Helps evaluator (principals or others) understand teachers’ needs across school or across district
Weaknesses
Essential to have alignment between teaching standards and observation instrument
Resource intensive (personnel time, training, calibrating)
Validity of observation results may vary with who is doing them, depending on how well trained and calibrated they are

17. Example: University of Virginia’s CLASS observation tool
Emotional Support
Classroom Organization
Instructional Support
Pre-K
and
K-3
Positive Climate
Negative Climate
Teacher Sensitivity
Regard for Student (Adolescent) Perspectives
Behavior Management
Productivity
Instructional Learning Formats
Concept Development
Quality of Feedback
Language Modeling
Upper Elementary/
Secondary
Content Understanding
Analysis and Problem Solving
Refer to page 2 in the CLASS manual
The CLASS is organized according to 3 broad areas or domains of classroom quality:
Emotional Support
Classroom Organization, and
Instructional Support
Within each domain, there are multiple dimensions that contribute to the overall measured quality. 17

18. Example: Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation includes comprehensive understanding of the content to be taught, knowledge of the students’ backgrounds, and designing instruction and assessment.
Domain 3: Instruction is concerned with the teacher’s skill in engaging students in learning the content, and includes the wide range of instructional strategies that enable students to learn.
Domain 2: The Classroom Environment addresses the teacher’s skill in establishing an environment conducive to learning, including both the physical and interpersonal aspects of the environment.
Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities addresses a teacher’s additional professional responsibilities, including self-assessment and reflection, communication with parents, participating in ongoing professional development, and contributing to the school and district environment.

19. Validity of classroom observations is highly dependent on training
A teacher should get the same score no matter who observes him
This requires that all observers be trained on the instruments and processes
Occasional “calibrating” should be done; more often if there are discrepancies or new observers
Who the evaluators are matters less than the fact that they are trained to recognize evidence and score it consistently
Teachers should also be trained on the observation forms and processes so they can participate actively and fully in the process

20. Risk management vs. one-size-fits-all in teacher observations
Conducting high-quality observations is a resource-intensive process
A more efficient use of resources is for teachers who have not yet demonstrated competence to be on a more intensive observation schedule
New teachers
Teachers who have changed teaching assignments or schools
Other measures are less resource intensive and can be used routinely (surveys, student outcomes, portfolios)

21. Reliability results when using different combinations of raters and lessons
Figure 2. Errors and Imprecision: the reliability of different combinations of raters and lessons. From Hill et al., 2012 (see references list). Used with permission of author.

22. Formal vs. informal observations
Formal observations are likely to be
Announced and scheduled in advance according to a pre-determined yearly schedule
Include pre- and post-conferences with review of lesson plans and artifacts
Last an entire class period
Result in a set of scores on multiple indicators
Informal observations are likely to be
Unannounced, drop-in
Last less than an entire class period
Result in informal verbal or written feedback to the teacher, perhaps on only one indicator

23. Questions to ask about observations
How many observations per year?
Vary by new vs. experience?
Vary by demonstrated competence?
Combination of formal and informal?
Who should conduct the observations?
Will multiple observers be required?
How will they be trained?
Workshops? Online (video-based)?
Will they need to be certified?

24. Value-added models Many variations on value-added models
TVAAS (Sander’s original model) typically uses 3+ years of prior test scores to predict the next score for a student
Used since the 1990’s for teachers in Tennessee, but not for high-stakes evaluation purposes
Most states and districts that currently use VAMs use the Sanders’ model, also called EVAAS
There are other models that use less student data to make predictions
Considerable variation in “controls” used HB 24 24

25. Growth vs. Proficiency Models
End of Year
Start of School Year
Achievement
Proficient
Teacher B: “Failure” on Ach. Levels
Teacher A: “Success” on Ach. Levels
In terms of growth, Teachers A and B are performing equally
Slide courtesy of Doug Harris, Ph.D, University of Wisconsin-Madison

26. Growth vs. Proficiency Models (2)
End of Year
Start of School Year
Achievement
Proficient
Teacher A
Teacher B
A teacher with low-proficiency students can still be high in terms of GROWTH (and vice versa)
Slide courtesy of Doug Harris, Ph.D, University of Wisconsin-Madison

27. Colorado Growth Model Colorado Growth model
Focuses on “growth to proficiency”
Measures students against “academic peers”
Also called criterion‐referenced growth‐to‐standard models
The student growth percentile is “descriptive” whereas value-added seeks to determine the contribution of a school or teacher to student achievement (Betebenner 2008)

28. Colorado Growth Model
Slide courtesy of Damian Betebenner at

29. What value-added and growth models cannot tell you
Value-added and growth models are really measuring classroom, not teacher, effects
Value-added models can’t tell you why a particular teacher’s students are scoring higher than expected
Maybe the teacher is focusing instruction narrowly on test content
Or maybe the teacher is offering a rich, engaging curriculum that fosters deep student learning.
How the teacher is achieving results matters!

30. Recommendation from NBPTS Task Force (Linn et al., 2011)
Recommendation 2: Employ measures of student learning explicitly aligned with the elements of curriculum for which the teachers are responsible. This recommendation emphasizes the importance of ensuring that teachers are evaluated for what they are teaching.

31. School-wide VAM illustration

32. Measuring teachers’ contributions to student learning growth: A summary of current models
Description
Student learning objectives
Teachers assess students at beginning of year and set objectives then assesses again at end of year; principal or designee works with teacher, determines success
Subject & grade alike team models (“Ask a Teacher”)
Teachers meet in grade-specific and/or subject-specific teams to consider and agree on appropriate measures that they will all use to determine their individual contributions to student learning growth
Content Collaboratives
Content experts (external) identify measures and groups of content teachers consider the measures from the perspective of classroom use; may not include pre- and post measures
Pre-and post-tests model
Identify or create pre- and post-tests for every grade and subject
School-wide value-added
Teachers in tested subjects & grades receive their own value-added score; all other teachers get the school-wide average

33. Tripod Survey domains Harvard’s Tripod Survey – the 7 C’s
Caring about students (nurturing productive relationships);
Controlling behavior (promoting cooperation and peer support);
Clarifying ideas and lessons (making success seem feasible);
Challenging students to work hard and think hard (pressing for effort and rigor);
Captivating students (making learning interesting and relevant);
Conferring (eliciting students’ feedback and respecting their ideas);
Consolidating (connecting and integrating ideas to support learning)

34. Tripod Survey results
Control is the strongest correlate of value added gains
However, it is important to keep in mind that a good teacher achieves control by being good on the other dimensions
English & Spanish, paper or online versions at three levels: k-2, 3-5, 6-12
For more info:

35. Why you should keep (and provide support to) the less effective teachers
With the right instructional strategies and guidance, motivated teachers can improve practice and student outcomes
The teachers you hire to replace your less effective teachers are not necessarily going to be more effective
You may not be able to find better replacements!
You may not be any to find any replacements!
The replacements you find may not stay

36. Measures that help teachers grow
Measures which include protocols and processes that teachers can examine and comprehend
Measures that are directly and explicitly aligned with teaching standards
Measures that motivate teachers to examine their own practice against specific standards
Measures that allow teachers to participate in or co-construct the evaluation (such as portfolios)
Measures that give teachers opportunities to discuss the results for formative purposes with evaluators, administrators, teacher learning communities, mentors, coaches, etc.
Measures that are aligned with and used to inform professional growth and development offerings

37. Evaluating Teacher Preparation Programs (TPPs)
Evaluate teacher performance (including student outcomes)
Use results as a measure of TPP success (for evaluation purposes)
Use results to improve TPP curriculum and instruction
K-12 Teaching and learning improves as a result of changes made by TPPs

38. Meeting the “standards”
It’s possible to be meeting accreditation standards (NCATE, TEAC) but still not be preparing fully effective teachers
If TPPs are not adequately preparing teachers for the contexts and communities which they serve, their effectiveness may be hampered

39. Final thoughts The limitations: The opportunities:
There are no perfect measures
There are no perfect models
Changing the culture of evaluation is hard work
The opportunities:
Evidence can be used to trigger support for struggling teachers and acknowledge effective ones
Multiple sources of evidence can provide powerful information to improve teaching and learning
Evidence is more valid than “judgment” and provides better information for teachers to improve practice

40. References
Anderson, L. (1991). Increasing teacher effectiveness. Paris: UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning. Glazerman, S., D. Goldhaber, et al. (2011). Passing muster: Evaluating evaluation systems. Washington, DC, Brown Center on Education Policy at Brookings. Goe, L., C. Bell, et al. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis, Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality: Hill, H. C., Charalambous, C. Y., & Kraft, M. A. (2012). When rater reliability is not enough: Teacher observation systems and a case for the generalizability study. Educational Researcher, 41(2), Linn, R., Bond, L., Darling-Hammond, L., Harris, D., Hess, F., & Shulman, L. (2011). Student learning, student achievement: How do teachers measure up? Arlington, VA: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. Race to the Top Application Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. Brooklyn, NY: The New Teacher Project.

41. Questions?

42. Laura Goe, Ph.D.
National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality
1000 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, D.C