Promoting success for all students is the driving force to develop and implement sound teacher evaluation systems. As Stronge suggests, “the two most frequently cited purposes of personnel evaluation are accountability and performance improvement” (1997, p. 3). As a result, “researchers are conceiving of teacher evaluation as a mechanism for improving teaching and learning” (Danielson and McGreal, 2000). On the other hand, others affirm that “the trend in teacher evaluation is toward more self-evaluation and expanding one's teaching repertoire” (Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1999, p. 8). However, teachers' voices relative to emerging teacher evaluation trends are missing. Thus, this study explored teachers' perceptions about the support for professional development available to them, the perceived potential benefits of a learner-centered teacher evaluation system to enhance their professional growth, and pitfalls. Only elementary school teachers participated in the study. The researcher analyzed teachers' written responses to open-ended questions, and generated categories by emerging themes to determine teachers' perceptions.
Findings of the study suggest that teachers receive support from both campus level and central office level. Teachers also believe that a learner-centered teacher evaluation fosters walk-through observations, opportunities for professional growth, feedback, learner-centered dialogue, a holistic perspective, and teacher self-evaluation. On the other hand, findings suggest that teachers question the labels for each level of performance, and are concerned that the system might be somewhat subjective. Finally, suggestions are made to conduct additional studies to further illuminate teachers' voices associated with teacher evaluation and development at other school levels, and to expand our understanding of emerging teacher evaluation formats which aim at student success.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Abelson, R.P. (1979). Differences Between Belief and Knowledge Systems. Cognitive Science, 3, 355–366.
Austin Independent School District. (1997). Professional Development System for Teacher Appraisal. Austin, TX: AISD.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (1999). New Goals for Teacher Evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 41(2), pp. 4–8.
Blase, J., & Blase J. (1999). Principals' Instructional Leadership and Teacher Development: Teachers' Perspectives. Education Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 349–378.
Bogdan, R.C., & Bilken, S.K. (1992). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Method. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Carnegie Task Force on Teaching as a Profession. (1986). A Nation Prepared: Teachers for the Twenty-First Century. New York: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy
Cavazos, J.M. (1999). The Instructional Leadership of High School Principals in Successful Hispanic Majority High Schools. Unpublished Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Claudet, J.G. (1999). An Interpretive Analysis of Educator Change Processes in Response to a Program Innovation: Implications for Personnel Evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 13(1), 47–69.
Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. (2000). Teacher Evaluation to Enhance Professional Practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A.E., & Pease, S.R. (1983). Teacher Evaluation in the Organization Context: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 53(3), 285–328.
Del Schalock, H., Schalock, M.D., Cowart, B., & Myton, D. (1993) Extending Teacher Assessment Beyond Knowledge and Skills: An Emerging Focus on Teacher Accomplishments. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 7(2), 105–133.
Frase, L.E., & Streshly, W. (1994) Lack of Accuracy, Feedback, and Commitment in Teacher Evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 8(1), 47–57.
Fullan, M. (1991). The New Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gardner, D.L. (1993) Assessment Systems in Florida Designed to Link Teacher Performance Assessment, Professional Development, and School Improvement. Journal of Evaluation in Education, 7(3), 207–216.
Gay, L.R., & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational Research: Copetencies for Analysis and Application. Columbus, OH: Merril.
Glickman, C.D., Gordon, S.P., & Ross-Gordon, J.M. (1998). Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental Approach. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Grosch, M.A. (1999) School-Based Management: How Superintendents Balance Shared Decision-Making and Ultimate Responsibility for Student Outcomes. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Harris, M.B., & Ovando, M.N. (1993) Teachers' Perceptions of the Post-Observation Conference: Implications for Formative Evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 7(4), 301–310.
Iwanicki, E.F. (2001). Focusing Teacher Evaluations on Student Learning. Educational Leadership Journal, 58(5), 57–59.
Kuzel, A.J.(1992). Sampling in Qualitative Inquiry. In B.F. Crabtree & W.L. Miler (Eds), Doing Qualitative Research (pp. 31–44). Research Methods for Primary Care Series, Vol. 3. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (1995). Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Miami-Dade County Public Schools (2001). PACES Home Page, (On-line). Available: http://paces.dade.k12.-fl.us/
McGreal, T.L. (1988). Evaluation for Enhancing Instruction: Linking Teacher Education and Staff Development. In S. Stanley, & W.J. Paphan, (Eds) Teacher Evaluation: Six Prescriptions for Success. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Marek, S. (1999). The Role of the Principal in Achieving and Sustaining Academic Success in High-Poverty Elementary Schools. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
Ovando, M.N. (1994). Effects of Site-Based Management on the Instructional Program. Journal of School Leadership, 4(3), 311–329.
Ovando, M.N. (1995) Enhancing Teaching and Learning through Collaborative Supervision. People in Education, 3(2), 144–155.
Ovando, M.N., & Harris, M.B. (1997). A Guide for the Survey of Support Services. Region I: Education Service Center, Edinburgh, Texas.
Patton, M.Q. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Stinggins, R.J., & Duke, D.L. (1988). The Case for Commitment to Teachers Growth: Research and Teacher Evaluation. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Stronge, J.H. (1997). Evaluating Teaching: A Guide to Current Thinking and Best Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
Stufflebeam, D.L. (1988). The Personnel Evaluation Standards: How to Assess Systems for Evaluating Educators. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Texas Education Agency. (1997). Manual for the Professional Development and Appraisal System. Austin, TX: TEA.
The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1988). The Personnel Evaluation Standards: How to Assess Systems for Evaluating Educators. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
White, P. (1992). Teacher Empowerment Under “ideal” School-Site Autonomy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(1), 69–82.
Zepeda, S.J., & Ponticell, J.A. (1998). At Cross-Purposes: What Teachers Need, Want, and Get From Supervision. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 14(1), 68–87.
About this article
Cite this article
Ovando, M.N. Teachers' Perceptions of a Learner-Centered Teacher Evaluation System. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 15, 213–231 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012704809835