Abstract
Teacher appraisal is never an easy task, especially of teachers experiencing difficulties and failures. Nevertheless it is a requirement for good management, in our schools no less than our corporations. Forty elementary school principals in Israel described the informal methods they use to appraise teachers who are performing poorly. Most considered traits such as sensitivity to children and their needs as well as motivation, rather than professional standards or pupil achievement, as the main criteria in judging poor or outstanding teaching. Due to the sensitive nature of the issue, and the desire to avoid misjudgment and painful conflict, the principals took several precautions: they used several different formal and informal methods of appraisal; they relied on various information sources and sometimes they preferred to delay drawing final conclusions until a crisis or external complaint occurred. The discussion situates the current findings with other research on the obstacles to identifying, evaluating and providing feed back to poor-performing teachers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Balser, D. B., & Stern, R. N. (1999). Resistance and cooperation: a response to conflict over job performance. Human Relations, 52(1), 1029–1053.
Banfield, S. R., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, J. C. (2006). The effect of teacher misbehaviors on teacher credibility and affect for the teacher. Communication Education, 55(1), 63–78.
Barber, L. W. (1990). Self-assessment. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), The new handbook of teacher evaluation. London: Sage.
Bennett, N. (1995). Managing professional teachers: Middle management in primary and secondary schools. London: Chapman.
Berry, L. M. (1998). Psychology at work (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
Bridges, E. M. (1986). The incompetent teacher: The challenge and the response, (rev.). London: Falmer.
Bridges, E. M. (1990). Evaluation for tenure and dismissal. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), The new handbook of teacher evaluation. London: Sage.
Bridges, E. M. (1992). The incompetent teacher: Managerial response (rev.). London: Falmer.
Bullock, A. (1988). Meeting teachers management needs. Ely: Francis.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education (4th ed.). London: Routledge.
Danielson, C. (2001). New trends in teacher evaluation. Educational Leadership, 58, 12–15.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1990). Teacher evaluation in transition: emerging roles and evolving methods. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), The new handbook of teacher evaluation. London: Sage Publications.
Dawson, T. C., & Billingsley, K. L. (2000). Unsatisfactory performance: How California K-12 education system protects mediocrity and how teacher quality can be improved. San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy.
Dwyer, C. A. (1995). Criteria for performance-based teacher assessment: Validity, standards, and issues. In A. J. Shinkfield & D. Stufflebeam (Eds.), Teacher evaluation: Guide to effective practice. Boston: KAP.
Dyer, K. M. (2001). The power of 360-degree feedback. Educational Leadership, 58, 35–38.
Dyer, K. M., & Carothers, J. (2000). The initiative principal: A guide to leadership. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
Eden, D. (1998). Who supervises the teachers’ work? Hidden inspection in school. Iunim Bachinuch, 24(3), 34–52. Hebrew.
Educational Research Service (ERS). (1988). Teacher evaluation: Practices and procedures. Arlington: Author.
Fidler, B., & Atton, T. (1999). Poorly performing staff in schools and how to manage them. London: Routledge.
Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 31(4), 123–154.
Friedman, I. (1990). Normative behavior of the teacher and the principal. In I. Friedman (Ed.), Autonomy in education. Jerusalem: Szold Institute. Hebrew.
Fuhr, D. L. (1993). Managing mediocrity in the classroom. School Administrator, 50(4), 26–29.
Howard, B. B., & McColskey, W. H. (2001). Evaluating experienced teachers. Educational Leadership, 58, 48–51.
Kremer-Hayon, L. (1993). Teacher self-evaluation: A tool for professional development. In L. Kremer-Hayon, H. C. Vonk & R. Fessler (Eds.), Teacher professional development: A multiple perspective approach (pp. 217–240). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1121–1134.
Lavely, C., et al. (1992). Actual incidence of incompetent teachers. Educational Research Quarterly, 15(2), 4–11.
McGreal, T. L. (1990). The use of rating scales in teacher evaluation: concerns and recommendations. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 4(1), 41–58.
Middlewood, D., & Cardno, C. (2001). The significance of teacher performance and its appraisal. In D. Middlewood & C. Cardno (Eds.), Managing teacher appraisal and performance (pp. 1–16). London: Rutledge Flamer.
Ministry of Education (MoE). (2001). The general director circular. 64/4(2). Hebrew.
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. New York: Collins.
Nevo, D. (1987). Various aspects in clarifying the meaning of evaluative action—the case of the matriculation examinations. Megamot, 30(2), 93–101. Hebrew.
Nevo, D. (1997). School-based evaluation: Advantages and shortcomings of internal evaluation. In E. Paldi (Ed.), Education and the challenges of time (pp. 274–283). Ramot: Tel Aviv University Press.
Oakley, K. (1998). The performance assessment system: a portfolio assessment model for evaluating beginning teachers. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11(2), 323–341.
Painter, B. (2001). Using teaching portfolios. Educational Leadership, 58, 31–34.
Perry, C. M., & Rog, J. A. (1992). Preservice and inservice teachers’ beliefs about effective teaching and the sources of those beliefs. Teacher Education Quarterly, 19(1), 49–59.
Peterson, K. D., Wahlquist, C., Esparaza Brown, J., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2003). Parent surveys for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 17(4), 317–331.
Qin, Z. (2007). Teacher misbehaviors as learning demotivators in college classrooms: a cross-cultural investigation in China, Germany, Japan, and the United States. Communication Education, 55(1), 63–78.
Sawyer, L. (2001). Revamping a teacher evaluation system. Educational Leadership, 58, 44–47.
Teven, J. J. (2001). The relationships among teacher characteristics and perceived caring. Communication Education, 50(2), 159–170.
Tucker, P. (1997). Lake Woebegon: where all teachers are competent (or have we come to terms with the problem of incompetent teachers?). Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 103–126.
Wise, C. (2000). Monitoring the role of academic managers in schools. Educational Management & Administration, 29(3), 333–341.
Wragg, E. C., Haynes, G. S., Wragg, C. M., & Chamberlin, R. P. (1999). Managing incompetent teachers, leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001235.htm.
Wragg, E. C., Haynes, G. S., Wragg, C. M., & Chamberlin, R. P. (2000). Failing teachers?. London: Routledge.
Yariv, E. (2004). Challenging teachers: what difficulties do they pose to their principals. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 32(2), 165–184.
Yariv, E., & Coleman, M. (2005). Managing challenging teachers. International Journal of Educational Management, 19(4), 330–336.
Zimbardo, P. (1977). Shyness: What it is? What to do about it? (p. 218). Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yariv, E. Principals’ informal methods for appraising poor-performing teachers. Educ Asse Eval Acc 21, 283–298 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-009-9081-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-009-9081-3