Skip to main content
Log in

The use of rating scales in teacher evaluation: Concerns and recommendations

  • Published:
Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Acheson, K., & Gall, M. (1987). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers (2nd ed.), New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anastasi, A. (1982). Psychological testing. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, G. (1973). The assessment of learning environments: A manual for the learning environment inventory and my class inventory (2nd ed.), Halifax, Nova Scotia: Altantic Institute for Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, B., Cascio, W., & O'Connor, E. (1974). Magnitude estimations of expressions of frequency and amount. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 313–320.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Berk, R. (Ed.) (1986). Performance assessment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. (1987). Simple views of effective teaching and a simple theory of classroom instruction. In D. Berliner & B. Rosenshine (Eds.), Talks to teachers. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanz, R., & Ghiselli, E. (1972). The mixed standard scale: A new rating system. Personnel Psychology, 25, 185–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, D. (1973). Selection and evaluation of teachers. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borman, W. (1986). Behavior-based rating scales. In R. Berk (Ed.), Performance assessment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brophy, J. (1988). Research on teacher effects: Uses and abuses. The Elementary School Journal, 89, 3–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, W. (1981). Ubiquitous halo. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 218–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, G., Jurs, S., Wening, J., & Wiersma, W. (1982). The analysis and interpretation of student teacher observation data use for measuring teacher competencies. Paper read at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

  • Dickson, G. & Wiersma, W. (1980). Research and evaluation in teacher education: A concern for competent, effective teachers, Toledo, OH: The University of Toledo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duke, D. & Stiggins, R. (1986). Five keys to growth through teacher evaluation. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evertson, C., & Holley, F. (1981) Classroom observation. In J. Millman (Ed.), Handbook of teacher evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, T., Brophy, J. (4th ed.), (1987). Looking in classrooms, New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. (1984). Knowing, teaching, and supervising. In P. Hosford (Ed.). Using what we know about teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, M. (1988). Create rather than await your fate in teacher evaluation. In S. Stanley & J. Popham (Eds.), Teacher evaluation: Six prescriptions for success. Alexandria, VA: Association for Suprevision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyman, R. (1986). School administrator's faculty supervision handbook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, R. (1986). Numerical rating scales. In R Berk (Ed.), Performance assessment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kafry, D., Jacobs, R., & Zedeck, S. (1979). Discriminability in multidimensional performance evaluations. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 187–192.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G., Fay, C., & Saari, L. (1979). The development of behavioral observation scales for appraising the performance of forement. Personnel Psychology, 32, 299–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latham, G., & Wexley, K. (1981). Increasing productivity through performance appraisal. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGreal, T. (1983). Successful teacher evaluation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGreal, T. (1988a). Evaluation for enhancing instruction: Linking teacher evaluation with staff development. In S. Stanley & J. Popham (Eds.), Teacher evaluation: Six prescriptions for success. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGreal, T. (1988b). Verbal and written feedback: An important component of successful teacher evaluation systems. SAANYS Journal, 19, 9–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manatt, R., & Peterson, D. (1988). Effects of bias and reliability on performance evaluation of teachers. SAANYS Journal, 19, 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medley, D., Coker, H., & Soar, R. (1984). Measurement-based evaluation of teacher performance. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merchant, J. (1988). Teacher appraisal: The Texas experience. SAANYS Journal, 19, 13–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan, B., & Cascio, W. (1986). Technical and legal standards. In R. Berk (Ed.), Performance assessment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, L., Schmitz, C., & Boatright, B. (1986). The effects of halo and leniency on cooperating teacher reports using Likert-type rating scales. Journal of Educational Research. 79, 151–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popham, J. (1988). Judgement-based teacher evaluation. In S. Stanley & J. Popham (Eds.), Teacher evaluation: Six prescriptions for success. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A., & Brophy, J. (1988). Synthesis of research on good teaching: Insights from the work of the Institute for Research on Teaching. Educational Leadership, 45, 74–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenshine, B. (1987). Explicit teaching. In D. Berliner & B. Rosenshine (Eds.), Talks to teachers. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1988). A union of insufficiencies: Strategies for teacher assessment in a period of educational reform. Educational Leadership. 46, 36–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P., & Kendall, L. (1963). Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47, 149–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R. (1986). Teacher evaluation: Accountability and growth systems, different purposes. NASSP Bulletin, 70, 51–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R., & Bridgeford, N. (1985). Performance assessment for teacher development. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 7, 85–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiggins, R., & Duke, D. (1988). The case for commitment to teacher growth: Research on teacher evaluation. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strike, K., & Bull, B. (1981). Fairness and the legal context of teacher evaluation. In J. Millman (Ed.), Handbook of teacher evaluation, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweeny, J., & Manatt, R. (1984). A team approach to supervising the marginal teacher: Educational Leadership, 41, 25–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, A., & Knoop, H. (1982). Self, teacher, and faculty assessments of student teaching performance. Journal of Educational Research. 75, 175–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise, A., Darling-Hammond, L., McLaughlin, M., & Bernstein, H. (1984). Teacher evaluation: A study of effective practices. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McGreal, T.L. The use of rating scales in teacher evaluation: Concerns and recommendations. J Pers Eval Educ 4, 41–58 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00177129

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00177129

Keywords

Navigation