Teacher Effectiveness & Evaluation

Tags: Instructional Programs;

Target Population: Preschool, Elementary, Middle, High School, Post-Secondary

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• How should special educators (those who work with ELLs, students with disabilities, etc.) be evaluated?
• How should the current evaluation system be altered to accommodate these teachers?
• When crediting teachers for student learning (employing a value-added evaluation system or other growth measure), how should the individual contributions of teachers acting in a co-teaching or consultant role be determined?
• How can the contributions to student achievement be accurately measured for teachers instructing special populations for which alternative standards and/or assessments are used?
• Are the key features of teacher effectiveness different for specialized personnel, such as special education teachers and ELL specialists, and should those unique features lead to additional or different content on observation protocols, student growth assessments, or alternative instruments?
• When rating special education teachers and ELL specialists using an observation protocol or alternative instrument, what special training, if any, do evaluators need?

Findings:

• Most teacher evaluation systems are still local though state involvement is increasing
• 15 states have no requirements for preparation programs to prepare teachers for working with ELLs
• Standards that promote practices that support the education of students with disabilities and ELLs are strengthening
• Most state and district level current evaluation systems don't allow for a modified evaluation process special education teachers and that most contractual agreements also don't allow for modification of evaluation

Policy Recommendations:

• Include special education and ELL administrators and teachers when revamping/designing evaluation frameworks
• Identify a common framework that defines effective teaching for all teachers. Where appropriate, include differentiated criteria/expectations for special education teachers and ELL specialists
• Integrate evidence-based practices for students with disabilities and ELLs into evaluation models
• Establish a culture of collaboration, trust, and empowerment in which clear expectations of performance are explicitly stated and expected.
• In addition to-or, in some situations, in the absence of-appropriate standardized assessment data, incorporate other concrete evidence of teacher's contributions to student learning into the teacher evaluation system
• Improve data quality
• Ensure that the evaluation framework can identify and provide the professional development needs of special educators and ELL specialists and detect improvements in practice resulting from sustained, job-embedded professional development
• Establish evaluator training that includes explicit training on the specific teacher effectiveness measures used with special educators establishing a model in which peer-to-peer observations or evaluators are matched to a specific discipline
• Offer a checklist or rubric that offers selection criteria for evaluation models and includes specific standards for special educators and ELL specialists
• Support research in determining means to construct and validate value-added scores for teachers working with students on alternative standards
• Consider modifying existing statutes and/or policy to allow for modifications in the evaluation of special educators and ELL specialists
• Collaborate with teacher preparation programs to ensure that evidence-based practices are incorporated into teacher preparation coursework and professional development activities

• Read the Full Report

Croft, A., Goe, L., Holdheide, L.R., & Reschly, D.J. (2010, July). "Challenges in Evaluating Special Education Teachers and English Language Learner Specialists." National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved August 2, 2010 from: http://www.tqsource.org/publications/July2010Brief.pdf

Tags: Books and Other Reading Materials; Instructional Programs; Intervention; Placement; Rights, Students;

Target Population: All

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• What are the demographics of LEP and LEP students with disabilities?
• What kind of instructional services do LEP and LEP with disabilities receive, and how do they align with statewide standards?
• What are the outcomes of LEP and LEP with disabilities?

Findings:

• In 2001–02, LEP comprised 8.4 % of the student population, with the majority in lower elementary grades.
• Spanish is the most common native language of LEP by far.
• Although the largest portion of the LEP student population is enrolled within only a few districts, there are many districts across the U.S. serving small numbers of LEP students.
• Instructional services for LEP vary greatly, especially in the areas of extent of services provided, and extent of use of native language, and for Sp–Ed LEP–services provided outside vs. inside the classroom.
• There has been a shift in the past 10 years in LEP instructional services toward services provided in English.
• There has been a dramatic increase (350%) in the number of teachers who work with at least one LEP student from '92–'02.
• 6/10 teachers who worked with three or more LEP students reported a median of four hours of relevant in–service training.
• District coordinators reported that the instruction LEP and Sp–Ed LEP students received was less aligned with State standards than that of non–LEP students.
• Many school districts and schools had considerable difficulty in providing a count of SpEd–MEP students.
• Fewer LEP students were in special education than the entire student population as a whole. (9.2& vs. 13.5%)
• Compared to LEP students, SpEd–MEP students are less likely to receive LEP instructional services, and more likely to receive instruction in English.
• Instructional services for Spanish–language SpEd–MEP students differed from services received by SpEd–MEP students from other language backgrounds.

Policy Recommendations:

• As mainstream classes become more diverse, in ethnicity, English proficiency, and instruction, teachers and aides face new challenges, which should be answered with additional training.
• Districts should keep better records on LEP and former LEPs, and consider both when analyzing student outcomes.
• Schools need to determine as early as possible if students' difficulties stem from second language learning or from a disability, and provide support accordingly.
• Further efforts are needed to define effective instruction for SpEd–MEP students, and to promote increased collaboration across the LEP and special education programs in providing SpEd–MEP services.

• Read the Full Report

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). To assure the free appropriate public education of all children with disabilities: Twenty-fourth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Act. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Zehler, A. M., Fleischman, H. L., Hopstock, P. J., Pendzick, M. L., & Stephenson, T. G. (2003). Descriptive study of services to LEP students and LEP students with disabilities (No. 4 Special topic report: findings on special education LEP students). Development Associates, Inc.: Arlington, VA.

Tags: Curriculum; Fluency; Instructional Programs; Intervention; Language Proficiency; Struggling Readers;

• Read the full report

Short, D., & Fitzsimmons, S. (2007). Double the Work: Challenges and solutions to acquiring language and academic literacy for adolescent English language learners– A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.

Tags: Instructional Programs;

Target Population: Preschool, Elementary, Middle, High School, and Post-Secondary Schools. Educators and prospective educators.

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• Why should states work to ensure that every student has an effective teacher? What does that mean?
• What is the federal role in that process?
• What can the states to work toward ensuring every student has access to an effective teacher?

Findings:

Report authors identify the following strategies for ensuring teacher effectiveness:

• Analyze and report on the distribution of teachers between schools using value-added estimates and other measures.
• Design a model evaluation system for measuring teacher effectiveness and improving teacher performance.
• Support programs that offer financial incentives to effective teachers in high poverty schools.
• Provide funding and models for recruitment and preparation programs that are specifically targeted to high needs schools.
• Provide an induction and mentoring program for new teachers in high-poverty schools.
• Require schools to report their budgets by actual expenditures, rather than positions.

Policy Recommendations:

At the state level, report authors encourage state officials to:

• identify more stable sources of funding for teacher effectiveness initiatives in the long-term
• take note of the other states' programs and share ideas
• monitor the programs currently implemented in each county to ensure the correct distribution of effective teachers.

• Read the Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
John Neurohr, Deputy Press Secretary 202-481-8182, jneurohr@americanprogress.org

Chait, Robin. (2009). Ensuring Effective Teachers for All Students. Washington, D.C. Center for American Progress.

Target Population: Elementary School

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• In what ways do principals create asset–based, collaborative, and inclusive learning opportunities and services for ELLs?
• What do varying approaches of these services and the leadership necessary look like in practice?

Findings:

• The first principal led her school to adopt a dual certification approach, where the staff engaged in professional development around ELL. They combined federal, state, and local resources to eliminate pullout ELL programs and reduce class size so elementary teachers would take sole responsibility for building community and instructing ELL and all students.
• The second principal led his school to adopt a coteaching approach where teams of general education and English as a second language (ESL) teachers planned as a team and cotaught all students. They eliminated pullout ELL services and focused on community building, professional development, and collaboration.
• Student achievement at both schools, and in particular the achievement of ELL students, greatly improved, as did the connection with ELL families. The cross–case analysis provides a comparison between the cases of inclusive ESL reform.

Policy Recommendations:
The authors propose implications for school leaders that build on the literature, social justice leadership, and the work of the principals, staffs, and communities at the schools from the case studies described here.

• Read the Full Report

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
This article requires a subscription to Educational Administration Quarterly.

Theoharis, G., O'Toole, J. (2011). "Leading Inclusive ELL: Social Justice Leadership for English Language Learners." Journal of Leadership for Effective & Equitable Organizations. http://eaq.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/03/10/0013161X11401616.abstract?rss=1

Tags: Curriculum; Instructional Programs; Language Proficiency; Latino ELL Students;

Target Population: Elementary, Middle, High School

Research Questions the Report Poses: "Why do California elementary schools serving similar proportions of low-income, Spanish speaking EL students differ by over 250 points on California's new EL Academic Performance Index score? What school practices can help explain this API gap?"

Findings:

• One practice strongly correlated with a higher EL-API among our sample of elementary schools was the extensive use of student assessment data by the district and the principal in an effort to improve instruction and student learning.
• EL-API performance was higher in schools where principals reported that a larger proportion of their teaching staff had qualities such as a demonstrated ability to raise student achievement, strong content knowledge, and others.
• Higher EL-API was correlated with schools in which teachers reported most strongly that there is school-wide instructional consistency within grades, curricular alignment from grade-to-grade, and that instruction is based upon state academic standards.
• A shared culture within the school regarding the value of improving student achievement and a sense of shared responsibility for it seems to distinguish the higher performing schools in our sample based on EL—APIs.
• A school's outreach to parents, encouragement of teacher collaboration, and enforcement of positive student behaviors (like attendance and tolerance) have long been recognized as important contributors to the student and professional culture at a school.

Policy Recommendations:

• California should "stay the course with its reforms" to make sure that "curriculum programs and state standards tests are well aligned with the state's academic standards."
• School districts need to provide "better assessment and other data on their students in easy-to-access formats"
• Hire more administrators to try to adjust the highest-in-the-nation pupil-to-administrator ratio in the country
• Professional development needs to provided to ensure that teachers have the resources they need to effectively combat the challenges that educating ELL students provides

• Read more about this report
• Download full report (1.1MB PDF)*

To order a hard copy of the report, contact:
n/a

Williams, T., Hakuta, K., Haertel, E., et al. (2007). Similar English Learner Students, Different Results: Why Do Some Schools Do Better? A follow-up analysis, based on a large-scale survey of California elementary schools serving low-income and EL students. Mountain View, CA: EdSource.

Tags: Bilingual Instruction; Differentiated Instruction; Language of Instruction; Placement;

Target Population: Elementary School

Research Questions the Report Poses:

• What are the key elements of successful bilingual schools?
• How do these six high–achieving bilingual schools implement those strategies?

Findings:
Among the features of effective schools and effective programs for English learner found in these six schools were:

• The bilingual programs were a school-wide effort.
• Teachers collaborated and team–taught, particularly for ELD instruction.
• Staff demonstrated extensive language and cultural competence.
• Staff displayed overall support for language and cultural diversity.
• Staff demonstrated a focus on the individual student and differentiated instruction.
• The school culture emphasized consistent monitoring of students' progress and teaching to rigorous academic standards.
• Staff articulated rigorous expectations of staff and students.
• Consistent leadership supported and benefited programs and instruction.
• Staff demonstrated a focus on consistent, coherent program design.

Policy Recommendations:

• Rather than debate the best approach for all English learners, we should improve schools by employing the most effective practices, whether using only English or with some form of bilingual instruction.
• Staff should identify areas of strength already in place at their own school, and then decide which paradigm features schools might improve their school.
• Additional research should be conducted, making use of the tools developed by the five–year Proposition 227 study to identify other successful schools with large proportions of English learners. Additional documentation of successful schools can counterbalance the impact of state and federal accountability systems that more often emphasize the schools that fail to perform to standards.

• Read the Full Report

Gold, N. (2006) Successful Bilingual Schools: Six Effective Programs in California. San Diego, CA: San Diego County Office of Education.