Retaining Effective Teachers Policy
Texas requires that teachers receive written feedback in the form of a summative annual appraisal report. In addition, unless waived by the teacher, a summative conference is held focusing on the contents of the summative report and other available data sources. The state also specifies that professional development activities for teachers with unsatisfactory evaluations must be aligned with findings from teacher evaluations. However, Texas does not require that teachers who receive less than effective rating be
placed on professional improvement plans.
Texas is currently piloting a new evaluation system, called T-TESS, which will require postobservation conferences as well as end-of-year conferences that address "the teacher's areas of reinforcement and refinement for that school year, the teacher's progress toward accomplishing goals and following through with his or her professional development plan, and a time to establish goals and a professional development plan for the following school year." It is not clear at this point whether T-TESS will require improvement plans.
Ensure that professional development is aligned with findings from teachers' evaluations.
While Texas has taken steps to ensure that teachers with unsatisfactory evaluations receive coordinated professional development based on these findings, the state should strengthen this policy by requiring that all teachers receive professional development that is aligned with their evaluation results.
Ensure that teachers receiving less than effective ratings are placed on
a professional improvement plan.
Texas should adopt a policy requiring that teachers who receive
even one
less than effective evaluation be placed on structured improvement plans.
Even though the state requires coordinated professional development for
teachers with unsatisfactory ratings, Texas should strengthen this
policy by requiring that the plans define specific action steps
necessary to address deficiencies and describe how and when progress
will
be measured.
Texas asserted that under T-TESS, the new evaluation system, all teachers will establish practice improvement goals aligned with appraisal results and develop a professional development plan to attain those goals.
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.