Identifying Effective Teachers Policy
Washington requires annual performance evaluations for all teachers, with comprehensive evaluations every four years. In the years when a comprehensive summative evaluation is not required, teachers rated proficient or higher in the previous school year are only required to complete a focused evaluation, which includes an assessment of one of the eight criteria (see "Evaluation of Effectiveness" analysis and recommendations) for a performance rating plus professional growth activities. However, any teacher on a focused evaluation must include student growth as an element.
Any teacher who receives an unsatisfactory or basic comprehensive summative evaluation rating is subject to a comprehensive evaluation the following year.
All teachers must be observed at least twice each school year. New teachers must be observed during the first 90 days of the school year. During the third year of provisional status, teachers must be observed at least three times. Written feedback is provided after each observation.
As a result of Washington’s strong frequency of evaluations policies, no recommendations are provided.
Washington was helpful in providing NCTQ with facts that enhanced this analysis.
Annual evaluations
are standard practice in most professional jobs.
Although there has been much progress on this front
recently, about half of the states still do not mandate annual evaluations of
teachers who have reached permanent or tenured status. The lack of regular
evaluations is unique to the teaching profession and does little to advance the
notion that teachers are professionals.
Further, teacher evaluations are too often treated as mere
formalities rather than as important tools for rewarding good teachers, helping
average teachers improve and holding weak teachers accountable for poor
performance. State policy should reflect the importance of evaluations so that
teachers and principals alike take their consequences seriously.
Evaluations are
especially important for new teachers.
Individuals new to a profession frequently have reduced
responsibilities coupled with increased oversight. As competencies are
demonstrated, new responsibilities are added and supervision decreases. Such is
seldom the case for new teachers, who generally have the same classroom
responsibilities as veteran teachers, including responsibility for the academic
progress of their students, but may receive limited feedback on their
performance. In the absence of good metrics for determining who will be an
effective teacher before he or she begins to teach, it is critical that schools
and districts closely monitor the performance of new teachers.
The state should specifically require that districts observe
new teachers early in the school year. This policy would help ensure that new
teachers get the support they need early and that supervisors know from the
beginning of the school year which new teachers (and which students) may be at
risk. Subsequent observations provide important data about the teacher's
ability to improve. Data from evaluations from the teacher's early years of
teaching can then be used as part of the performance-based evidence to make a
decision about tenure.
Frequency of Evaluations: Supporting Research
For
the frequency of evaluations in government and private industry, see survey
results from Hudson Employment Index's report: "Pay and Performance in
America: 2005 Compensation and Benefits Report" Hudson Group (2005).
For
research emphasizing the importance of evaluation and observations for new
teachers in predicting future success and providing support for teachers see,
D. Staiger and J. Rockoff, "Searching for Effective Teachers with Imperfect Information." Journal of Economic Perspectives. Volume 24, No. 3, Summer 2010, pp. 97-118.