View in EDS

Evaluating Teachers: Opportunities and Best Practices. re:VISION No. 04, Part 2

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Evaluating Teachers: Opportunities and Best Practices. re:VISION No. 04, Part 2
Language: English
Authors: Jackson, Stephen, Remer, Casey, Hunt Institute
Source: Hunt Institute. 2014.
Availability: Hunt Institute. 1000 Park Forty Plaza Suite 280, Durham, NC 27713. Tel: 919-425-4160; Fax: 919-425-4175; e-mail: info@hunt-institute.org; Web site: http://hunt-institute.org
Peer Reviewed: N
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2014
Intended Audience: Policymakers
Document Type: Reports - Descriptive
Descriptors: Best Practices, Teacher Evaluation, Educational Opportunities, Teacher Qualifications, Teacher Effectiveness, Academic Achievement, Outcome Measures, Context Effect, Evaluation Methods, Achievement Gains, Achievement Rating, Behavioral Objectives, Portfolio Assessment, Student Projects, Classroom Observation Techniques, Student Surveys, Systems Development, Database Management Systems, Teacher Competency Testing, Educational Legislation, Federal Legislation, Federal Programs, Federal Aid
Geographic Terms: Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Washington, Wisconsin
Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers: No Child Left Behind Act 2001, Race to the Top
Abstract: Until recently, states focused on ensuring the presence of a "highly qualified teacher" in every classroom. Under the 2001 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), this title described a teacher holding at least a bachelor's degree and the appropriate state license and demonstrating subject matter competency. Research has shown that these "input" measures do little to explain differences in student performance. Thus, in recent years, the conversation has shifted to a focus on "outputs"--how effective a teacher is at improving student achievement. Knowing how well, or how poorly, educators are performing is critical to drive improvement strategies for individual teachers, schools, districts, and states and to inform accountability systems. High-quality teacher evaluation data can also be used to inform policies across the education system, including measuring the effectiveness of teacher preparation programs, informing performance-based compensation, ensuring students have equal access to highly effective teachers, and identifying professional development needs. The need for quality data on teacher performance is clear, and the reform of teacher evaluation systems must be considered in the context of other activities designed to improve educator effectiveness. This issue of re:VISION, part of a special series on teacher effectiveness, examines the evolution of teacher evaluation systems and the most commonly used evaluation measures, and offers considerations for policymakers who are examining teacher evaluation in their states. A glossary of common student achievement measures is provided. [For Part 1 of this series, see ED559385; for Part 3, see ED559381; for Part 4, see ED559388; and for Part 5, see ED559391.]
Abstractor: ERIC
Number of References: 36
Entry Date: 2015
Accession Number: ED559387
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
CustomLinks:
  – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED559387
    Name: ERIC Full Text
    Category: fullText
    Text: Full Text from ERIC
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: ED559387
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Report
PubTypeId: report
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Evaluating Teachers: Opportunities and Best Practices. re:VISION No. 04, Part 2
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jackson%2C+Stephen%22">Jackson, Stephen</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Remer%2C+Casey%22">Remer, Casey</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hunt+Institute%22">Hunt Institute</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Hunt+Institute%22"><i>Hunt Institute</i></searchLink>. 2014.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Hunt Institute. 1000 Park Forty Plaza Suite 280, Durham, NC 27713. Tel: 919-425-4160; Fax: 919-425-4175; e-mail: info@hunt-institute.org; Web site: http://hunt-institute.org
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: N
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 12
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2014
– Name: Audience
  Label: Intended Audience
  Group: Audnce
  Data: Policymakers
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Best+Practices%22">Best Practices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Evaluation%22">Teacher Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Opportunities%22">Educational Opportunities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Qualifications%22">Teacher Qualifications</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Effectiveness%22">Teacher Effectiveness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Achievement%22">Academic Achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Outcome+Measures%22">Outcome Measures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Context+Effect%22">Context Effect</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Achievement+Gains%22">Achievement Gains</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Achievement+Rating%22">Achievement Rating</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Behavioral+Objectives%22">Behavioral Objectives</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Portfolio+Assessment%22">Portfolio Assessment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Projects%22">Student Projects</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classroom+Observation+Techniques%22">Classroom Observation Techniques</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Surveys%22">Student Surveys</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Systems+Development%22">Systems Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Database+Management+Systems%22">Database Management Systems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Competency+Testing%22">Teacher Competency Testing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Legislation%22">Educational Legislation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Federal+Legislation%22">Federal Legislation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Federal+Programs%22">Federal Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Federal+Aid%22">Federal Aid</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Colorado%22">Colorado</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Connecticut%22">Connecticut</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Florida%22">Florida</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Georgia%22">Georgia</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Kentucky%22">Kentucky</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Louisiana%22">Louisiana</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Massachusetts%22">Massachusetts</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Michigan%22">Michigan</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22New+Jersey%22">New Jersey</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22New+York%22">New York</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22North+Carolina%22">North Carolina</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Oregon%22">Oregon</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Rhode+Island%22">Rhode Island</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Tennessee%22">Tennessee</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Washington%22">Washington</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Wisconsin%22">Wisconsin</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22No+Child+Left+Behind+Act+2001%22">No Child Left Behind Act 2001</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Race+to+the+Top%22">Race to the Top</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Until recently, states focused on ensuring the presence of a "highly qualified teacher" in every classroom. Under the 2001 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB), this title described a teacher holding at least a bachelor's degree and the appropriate state license and demonstrating subject matter competency. Research has shown that these "input" measures do little to explain differences in student performance. Thus, in recent years, the conversation has shifted to a focus on "outputs"--how effective a teacher is at improving student achievement. Knowing how well, or how poorly, educators are performing is critical to drive improvement strategies for individual teachers, schools, districts, and states and to inform accountability systems. High-quality teacher evaluation data can also be used to inform policies across the education system, including measuring the effectiveness of teacher preparation programs, informing performance-based compensation, ensuring students have equal access to highly effective teachers, and identifying professional development needs. The need for quality data on teacher performance is clear, and the reform of teacher evaluation systems must be considered in the context of other activities designed to improve educator effectiveness. This issue of re:VISION, part of a special series on teacher effectiveness, examines the evolution of teacher evaluation systems and the most commonly used evaluation measures, and offers considerations for policymakers who are examining teacher evaluation in their states. A glossary of common student achievement measures is provided. [For Part 1 of this series, see ED559385; for Part 3, see ED559381; for Part 4, see ED559388; and for Part 5, see ED559391.]
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: ERIC
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 36
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2015
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: ED559387
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED559387
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Best Practices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Opportunities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Qualifications
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Effectiveness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Achievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Outcome Measures
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Context Effect
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Achievement Gains
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Achievement Rating
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Behavioral Objectives
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Portfolio Assessment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Projects
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Classroom Observation Techniques
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Surveys
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Systems Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Database Management Systems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Competency Testing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Legislation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Federal Legislation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Federal Programs
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Federal Aid
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Colorado
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Connecticut
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Florida
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Georgia
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Kentucky
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Louisiana
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Massachusetts
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Michigan
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: New Jersey
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: New York
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: North Carolina
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Oregon
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Rhode Island
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Tennessee
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Washington
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Wisconsin
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: No Child Left Behind Act 2001
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Race to the Top
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Evaluating Teachers: Opportunities and Best Practices. re:VISION No. 04, Part 2
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hunt Institute
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jackson, Stephen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Remer, Casey
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2014
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Hunt Institute
              Type: main
ResultId 1