Teacher Performance Evaluation: A Review of Best Foreign Practices

The paper provides a review of modern foreign systems of evaluating teaching skills and teacher performance. It is argued that the evaluation of professional activities in teachers becomes an effective tool of performance improvement only in the context of professional growth and continuing education. The paper outlines the typology of teacher evaluation forms according to the aims and tasks; normative grounds; tools employed; subject of evaluation. The following key international studies on effective teacher evaluation methods are analysed: ETC (2008), The Sutton Trust (2013), MET (2009-2013).The paper describes the best practices in teacher performance assessment for future teachers (graduates of teacher training programmes) developed within EdTPA, PPAT, TAA, MCTE.Also, the paper addresses the issue of teacher certification on the basis of professional standards such as NBPTS (1987) and APST (2013).Finally, some recommendations are given on how to evaluate teacher performance in the context of the establishment of the national system of teacher growth in the Russian Federation.

1. Lyakh Yu.A.Aprobatsiya modeli urovnevoi otsenki kompetentsii uchitelei v kontekste natsional'noi sistemy uchitel'skogo rosta [Elektronnyi resurs][Testing the model of the level assessment of teachers' competences in the context of the national system of teacher growth].Akademiya APK i PPRO [ Academy APK and PPRO].Moscow: Federal'noe gosudarstvennoe avtonomnoe obrazovatel'noe uchrezhdenie dopolnitel'nogo professional'nogo obrazovaniya «Akademiya povysheniya kvalifikatsii i professional'noi perepodgotovki rabotnikov obrazovaniya», 2017.8 p.URL: http://www.apkpro.ru/doc/presentation_4.pdf (Accessed: 08.12.2017).
2. Stanchenko S.V.Itogi Vserossiiskogo issledovaniya kompetentsii uchitelei matematiki [Elektronnyi resurs] [Results of the All-Russian study of the competencies of teachers of mathematics].FIRO [ FIRO].Moscow: Federal'noe gosudarstvennoe avtonomnoe uchrezhdenie «Federal'nyi institut razvitiya obrazovaniya», 2016.11 p.URL: http://www.firo.ru/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ Stanchenko.pdf (Accessed: 08.12.2017).
3. Mihaly K.et al.A Composite Estimator of Effective Teaching.Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation RAND Corporation, 2013.51 p.
4. Bracey G.W.Value-Added Assessment Findings: Poor Kids Get Poor Teachers.Phi Delta Kappan, 2004.Vol.86, no.4, p.331—333.
5. Certification of Highly Accomplished and Lead Teachers in Australia.Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL).Melbourne VIC: AITSL, 2012.28 p.
6. Coe R.What makes great teaching?: Review of the Underpinning Research.Coe R.(eds.).London: The Sutton Trust, 2014.57 p.
7. Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments [Electronic resource]: First Results from TALIS / OECD.Paris: OECD publishing, 2009.310 p.Available at: http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/43023606.pdf (Accessed: 08.12.2017).
8. Danielson, Ch.The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument / Charlotte Danielson.Princeton, NJ: The Danielson Group, 2011.104 p.
9. Darling-Hammond L.Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness: How Teacher Performance Assessments Can Measure and Improve Teaching.Linda Darling- Hammond.Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2010.36 p.
10. Darling-Hammond L.Evaluating Teacher Evaluation.Phi Delta Kappan, 2012.Vol.93, no.6, p. 8—16.
11. Ensuring Fair and Reliable Measures of Effective Teaching: Culminating Findings from MET Three-Year Long Study: Policy and Practitioner Brief: MET project.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.Philadelphia, PA: Consortium of Policy Research in Education, 2001.28 p.
12. Kimball S.M.et al.Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Evaluation and Student Assessment Results in Washoe County.Peabody Journal of Education, 2004.Vol.79, no.4, pp.54—78.
13. Gallagher H.A.Vaughn Elementary’s Innovative Teacher Evaluation System: Are Teacher Evaluation Scores Related to Growth In Student Achievement? Peabody Journal of Education, 2004.Vol.79, no.4, pp. 79—107.
14. Goe L.Approaches to Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness: a Research Synthesis.Goe L.(eds.).Washington, DC: ETS, 2008.108 p.
15. Kyriakides L.Drawing from Teacher Effectiveness Research and Research into Teacher Interpersonal Behaviour to Establish a Teacher Evaluation System: a Study on the Use of Student Ratings to Evaluate Teacher Behaviour.The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 2005.Vol.40, no.2, pp.44—66.
16. Learning about teaching: Initial Findings from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project: Policy Brief: MET project.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2010.7 p.
17. Louden W.Standardised Assessment of Initial Teacher Education: Environmental Scan and Case Studies: a Paper Prepared for the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.Melbourne VIC: AITSL, 2015.50 p.
18. Measuring Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Surveys: an Exploratory Study.Rowan B.et.al.Philadelphia, PA: Consortium of Policy Research in Education, 2001.20 p.
19. Milanowski A.The Relationship Between Teacher Performance Evaluation Scores and Student Achievement: Evidence from Cincinnati.Peabody Journal of Education.2004.Vol.79, no.4, pp.33— 53.
20. Peterson K.D.Student Surveys for School Teacher Evaluation.Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 2000.Vol.14, no.2, pp.135—153.
21. Teacher Evaluation: a Conceptual Framework and Examples of Country Practices.OECD.Paris: OECD, 2009.37 p.
22. Teachers for the 21st Century: Using Evaluation to Improve Teaching.OECD.Paris: OECD publishing, 2013.124 p.
23. Validation of Student, Principal and Self-Ratings in 360 Feedback® for Teacher Evaluation.Wilkerson D.J.et al.Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 2000.Vol.14, no 2, pp.179—192.
24. Ingvarson L.Conceptualising and evaluating teacher quality: substantive and methodological issues [Electronic resource].Australian Journal of Education, 2008.Vol.52, no.1, pp.5—35.Available at: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/000494410805200102 (Accessed: 08.12.2017).