Retaining Effective Teachers Policy
California requires that teachers receive copies of their evaluations "not later than 30 days before the last school day scheduled on the school calendar." Before the last day of school, a meeting must be held between the teacher and the evaluator to discuss the evaluation.
The state does not specify that professional development activities must be aligned with findings from teacher evaluations. Further, placement of teachers with an unsatsfactory rating in a "program designed to improve appropriate areas of performance" is optional.
Ensure that professional development is aligned with findings from teachers' evaluations.
Professional development that is not informed by evaluation results may be of little value to teachers' professional growth and the aim of increasing their effectiveness in the classroom. California should ensure that districts utilize teacher evaluation results in determining professional development needs and activities.
Ensure that teachers receiving less than effective ratings are placed on a professional improvement plan.
While districts have the option of developing improvement plans for ineffective teachers, California should adopt a policy requiring that teachers who receive even one less than effective evaluation rating be placed on structured improvement plans. These plans should focus on performance areas that directly connect to student learning and should identify noted deficiencies, define specific action steps necessary to address these deficiencies and describe how and when progress will be measured.
The California Department of Education declined to respond to NCTQ's analysis citing ongoing litigation related to the state's teacher effectiveness policies.
Professional
development should be connected to needs identified through teacher
evaluations.
The goal of teacher evaluation systems should be not just to
identify highly effective teachers and those who underperform but to help all
teachers improve. Even highly effective
teachers may have areas where they can continue to grow and develop their
knowledge and skills. Rigorous evaluations should provide actionable feedback
on teachers' strengths and weaknesses that can form the basis of professional
development activities. Too often
professional development is random rather than targeted to the identified needs
of individual teachers. Failure to make
the connection between evaluations and professional development squanders the
likelihood that professional development will be meaningful.
Many states are only explicit about tying professional
development plans to evaluation results if the evaluation results are bad. Good evaluations with meaningful feedback
should be useful to all teachers, and if done right should help design
professional development plans for all teachers—not just those who receive poor
ratings.
Professional Development: Supporting Research
For
evidence of the benefits of feedback from evaluation systems, and the potential
for professional development surrounding that feedback, see T. Kane, E. Taylor, J. Tyler, and A. Wooten, "Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness." Education
Next, Volume 11, No. 3, Summer 2011; E. Taylor and J. Tyler, "The Effect of Evaluation on Performance: Evidence from Longitudinal Student Achievement Data of Mid-Career Teachers," NBER Working Paper No. 16877, March 2011.
Much
professional development, particularly those that are not aligned to specific
feedback from teacher evaluations, has been found to be ineffective. For evidence see M. Garet, A. Wayne, F. Stancavage, J. Taylor, M. Eaton, K.
Walters, M. Song, S. Brown, S. Hurlburt, P. Zhu, S. Sepanik, F. Doolittle, and E. Warner, "Middle School Mathematics Professional Development Impact Study: Findings After the Second Year of Implementation." Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, May 2011, NCEE 2011-4024.
For
additional evidence regarding best practices for professional development, see K. Neville and C. Robinson, "The Delivery, Financing, and Assessment of Professional Development in Education: Pre-Service Preparation and In-Service Training" The Finance Project, 2003.