Can Principals Promote Teacher Development as Evaluators? A Case Study of Principals’ Views and Experiences
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: New teacher evaluation systems have expanded the role of principals as instructional leaders, but little is known about principals’ ability to promote teacher development through the evaluation process. We conducted a case study of principals’ perspectives on evaluation and their experiences implementing observation and feedback cycles to better understand whether principals feel as though they are able to promote teacher development as evaluators. Research Method: We conducted interviews with a stratified random sample of 24 principals in an urban district that recently implemented major reforms to its teacher evaluation system. We analyzed these interviews by drafting thematic summaries, coding interview transcripts, creating data-analytic matrices, and writing analytic memos. Findings: We found that the evaluation reforms provided a common framework and language that helped facilitate principals’ feedback conversations with teachers. However, we also found that tasking principals with primary responsibility for conducting evaluations resulted in a variety of unintended consequences which undercut the quality of evaluation feedback they provided. We analyze five broad solutions to these challenges: strategically targeting evaluations, reducing operational responsibilities, providing principal training, hiring instructional coaches, and developing peer evaluation systems. Implications: The quality of feedback teachers receive through the evaluation process depends critically on the time and training evaluators have to provide individualized and actionable feedback. Districts that task principals with primary responsibility for conducting observation and feedback cycles must attend to the many implementation challenges associated with this approach in order for next-generation evaluation systems to successfully promote teacher development.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
3 of 25 cited sources checked · 2 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
- Findingown data
The rubric language was easy for principals and teachers to understand.
“The language used on the rubric was easy for principals and teachers to understand.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
All interviewed principals identified meaningful improvements of the current evaluation system over the former system.
“all principals cited meaningful ways in which the current system was an improvement over the former system.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
For most principals, the common framework of prioritized practices and exemplary practice provided helpful structure for feedback conversations.
“For most principals, the common framework about what professional practices the district prioritized and what exemplary practice looked like provided helpful structure for their feedback conversations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Nearly 70% of principals reported the new evaluation rubric was an important positive improvement.
“Nearly 70% of our sample reported that the new evaluation rubric was an important, and positive, improvement to the new evaluation system.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
All but eight principals cited increased teacher involvement in evaluation as an important change.
“all but eight principals cited the increased involvement of teachers in the evaluation process as an important change.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Expectations for post-observation meetings created opportunities for productive dialogue about performance.
“Expectations for conducting post-observation meetings with teachers also created opportunities for teachers to engage in a productive dialogue about their performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Fourteen principals felt the shift to regular evaluations on a detailed rubric had begun to change the gotcha culture around evaluation.
“Fourteen principals felt that transitioning from a system of infrequent evaluations with a focus on low-performing teachers to a system where all teachers were evaluated regularly on a detailed rubric had begun to shift the “gotcha” culture around evaluation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
The shift from binary ratings to a four-level rubric helped principals give more specific feedback.
“The transition from binary ratings to a rubric with four performance levels also helped principals to provide more specific feedback as part of the evaluation process.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Lack of content expertise led many secondary principals to narrow their evaluation focus to general instructional practices and strategies.
“Lack of content expertise led many secondary principals to narrow the focus of their evaluation to general instructional practices and strategies.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Implementation approaches differed substantially even among principals who shared improving instruction as their primary goal.
“Implementation approaches differed substantially even among the majority of principals who viewed improving teachers’ instructional practices as their primary goal of the evaluation process.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Principals faced various challenges implementing the new evaluation system and promoting teacher development.
“Principals experienced a variety of challenges in their efforts to implement the new evaluation system and promote teacher development.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Principals held a range of perspectives about the primary purposes and value of teacher evaluation.
“We found a range of perspectives among principals about the primary purposes and value of teacher evaluation systems.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Only three interviewed principals described telling teachers they needed improvement as a challenge.
“Only three principals we spoke with described how telling teachers that they needed to improve was a challenge for them.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Some principals avoided using feedback conversations to push teachers on growth areas because they feared damaging relational trust.
“Some principals shied away from using feedback conversations to push teachers on their growth areas for fear of jeopardizing this relational trust.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Eight principals reported focusing on pedagogy rather than content.
“Eight principals told us how they focused on pedagogy rather than content.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Over 75% of interviewed principals viewed teacher evaluation as a system that should focus on helping teachers improve practice.
“Among the principals we spoke with, the vast majority, over 75%, viewed teacher evaluation as a system that should focus on helping teachers improve their practice.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Nearly 90% of the sample mentioned limited time for giving teachers feedback.
“Nearly 90% of our sample mentioned the limited time available for giving teachers feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Elementary principals typically described the challenge of providing feedback in terms of grade levels.
“Elementary school principals typically characterized this challenge in terms of grade levels.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Several principals of larger schools distributed evaluation responsibilities but still struggled to achieve a ratio of one evaluator per twelve teachers.
“Several principals of larger schools took this approach but still struggled to achieve a ratio of one evaluator per every 12 teachers.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Even with training on the new observation instrument, principals had difficulty differentiating among teachers, especially at the upper and lower ends of the rating scale.
“Even with training on how to use the new classroom observation instrument, principals experienced real challenges differentiating among teachers, particularly at the upper and lower ends of the rating scale.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Nearly all principals (88%) expressed concerns about increased demands of the new evaluation system.
“Nearly all principals, 88%, expressed real concerns about the increased demands of the new evaluation system.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Several principals saw operational responsibilities as directly limiting their evaluation practices.
“Several principals saw these operational responsibilities as directly limiting their evaluation practices.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Nine of twenty-four interviewed principals believed the district's limited training harmed implementation, especially in differentiating levels.
“Nine out of the 24 principals we interviewed felt the limited training provided by the district was detrimental to implementation, particularly in differentiating levels.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Interviews suggested some principals may have avoided difficult conversations about weaknesses and instead reinforced things going well.
“Our interviews also suggested that some principals may have avoided difficult conversations with teachers about their weaknesses and, instead, focused on reinforcing the things that were going well in the classroom.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The interviewed principals' self-reports accurately represent their views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Some teachers rated Proficient still focused on why they were not Exemplary rather than on steps to become Exemplary.
“Even some teachers who were rated as Proficient were still fixated on why they were not rated as Exemplary rather than on the things they could do to become Exemplary.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
For middle and high school principals, evaluating teachers across different subject areas was a challenge.
“For middle school and high school principals, evaluating teachers across different subject areas presented a challenge.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
Principals had to navigate a dual role as supervisor and instructional coach.
“The focus of the evaluation process on improving teachers’ practice meant principals also had to navigate a dual role as supervisor and instructional coach.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In the studied district, evaluator training focused on familiarizing principals with the rubric and procedural requirements and calibrating them as reliable and accurate raters.
“In the district we studied, evaluator training was focused on familiarizing principals with the expansive rubric and procedural requirements, and calibrating principals to be reliable and accurate raters.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
When principals evaluated teachers in subjects or grades they had not taught, they felt less comfortable and confident in evaluating instruction accurately or providing meaningful support.
“When they evaluated teachers in subjects and grades they had not taught, principals felt less comfortable and confident in their abilities to evaluate instruction accurately or provide meaningful support.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Principals commonly described instances when their instructional leadership investments were undercut by unexpected operational issues or constrained by other building responsibilities.
“Principals commonly described instances when their investments in instructional leadership were undercut by unexpected operational issues or constrained by their other building responsibilities.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In at least one instance, distributing evaluation responsibilities created challenges because teachers felt not all administrators applied the same standards.
“In at least one instance, it also created challenges when teachers felt that not all administrators were applying the same standards in the evaluation process.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Nineteen of the twenty-four interviewed principals expressed concern about their ability to give meaningful feedback to teachers across all disciplines and levels.
“Nineteen of the twenty-four principals we spoke with expressed concerns about their ability to provide meaningful feedback to teachers in all disciplines and levels.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Rating teachers lower than principals felt was fair often derailed efforts to focus conversations on professional improvement.
“Rating teachers lower than they felt was fair often derailed efforts to focus the conversation on professional improvement.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Adding at least two observation and feedback cycles for every teacher to principals' existing responsibilities prevented many principals from dedicating time needed for frequent and in-depth feedback.
“In the district we studied, adding at least two observation and feedback cycles for every teacher to principals’ existing responsibilities prevented many principals from dedicating the time necessary to support teachers’ with frequent and in-depth feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Principals often used their own teaching experience as a main source of ideas for supporting teachers.
“Principals often relied on their own teaching experiences as a primary source of ideas for supporting teachers.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Over half of interviewed principals proposed targeted training and coaching for principals.
“A third common proposal we heard from over half of the principals we interviewed was to provide targeted training and coaching for principals.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Several principals were concerned they could not provide frequent feedback necessary for professional growth because of the number of teachers they evaluated.
“Several principals expressed concerns that they were unable to provide the frequent feedback necessary for supporting teachers’ professional growth because of the sheer number of teachers they were required to evaluate.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
- Findingown data
Differentiating among teachers who had long been told they were satisfactory led feedback conversations to focus on the summative rating rather than continued professional growth.
“Differentiating among teachers who had been told they were satisfactory for many years led to feedback conversations that became focused on the summative evaluation rating itself rather than areas for continued professional growth.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Principals recognized they were being asked to develop and deliver feedback in a way that was new and more demanding than many had experience with.
“Principals recognized that they were being asked to develop and deliver feedback in a way that was new and more demanding than many had experience with.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
The district's focus on compliance caused principals to prioritize written feedback over in-person conversations.
“Finally, the district’s focus on compliance caused principals to prioritize written feedback over in-person conversations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Differing perceptions about the purpose of evaluation among principals, teachers, and the district sometimes weakened the trust and buy-in needed for meaningful instructional improvement conversations.
“Differing perceptions about the purpose of evaluation among principals, teachers, and the district sometimes undercut the trust and buy-in required for meaningful conversations about instructional improvement.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Many principals said expanded demands to observe all teachers multiple times constrained the quality and depth of feedback they could provide.
“Many principals also described how the expanded demands to observe all teachers multiple times constrained the quality and depth of feedback they could provide.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Pushing all teachers to recognize and address their own improvement areas after many years of satisfactory ratings made conversations challenging.
“Pushing all teachers to recognize and address their own areas for improvement after being rated satisfactory for many years made for challenging conversations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Expectations to give detailed feedback outside principals' grade-level and content-area expertise led to a focus on content-free pedagogical practices.
“Expectations to provide detailed feedback to teachers outside of principals’ grade-level and content-area expertise resulted in a focus on content-free pedagogical practices.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Principals described various challenges in implementing observation and feedback cycles that limited their ability to promote teacher development.
“Principals described a variety of challenges associated with implementing observation and feedback cycles that limited their ability to promote teacher development.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
The expanded role of principals as evaluators produced a variety of unintended consequences.
“However, the expanded role of principals as evaluators resulted in a variety of unintended consequences.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The principals framed peer observation as a way to improve instruction outside the evaluation process.
“The principals we spoke with framed peer observation as a method for improving instruction outside of the evaluation process.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given
The studied district had not yet incorporated student standardized test scores into its evaluation system.
“The district we studied had not yet incorporated measures based on students’ standardized test scores into its evaluation system.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In the large urban district studied, teacher evaluation reforms provided a common framework and language that helped principals assess and discuss teachers' professional practice.
“In the large urban district we studied, reforms to the teacher evaluation system provided a common framework and language that aided principals in assessing and discussing teachers’ professional practice.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The new evaluation system created a formalized process promoting teacher reflection and goal setting, which are central to the theory of action for evaluation-based professional development.
“The new evaluation system created a formalized process that promoted teacher reflection and goal setting, which are central to the theory of action for promoting professional development through evaluation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Three key reforms increased the likelihood that principals could use evaluation to support teacher development.
“Three key reforms enhanced the likelihood that principals could use the evaluation process to support teacher develop.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductown data
The student populations in participating principals' schools closely matched the distribution of student characteristics across all district schools.
“The student populations in the schools where participating principals worked ranged widely and closely mirrored the distribution of student body characteristics across all schools in the district.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
The district's evaluation reforms provided a strong framework for assessing and discussing teachers' professional practice.
“The reforms to the teacher evaluation system in the district provided a strong framework for assessing and discussing teachers’ professional practice.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Evaluation system structures such as the rubric directly shaped how principals conducted feedback cycles.
“The evaluation system structures, such as the rubric, directly shaped how principals executed feedback cycles.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Principals used the evaluation process to pursue goals that were not always aligned with the district's stated intent.
“Principals leveraged the evaluation process to achieve a range of goals that were not always aligned or consistent with the district’s stated intent.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Differences in implementation suggest teachers' evaluation experiences varied considerably across schools.
“These differences in implementation suggest the teachers’ experiences with the evaluation process varied considerably across schools”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Coaching models require substantial financial investments to sustain the high frequency of coaching cycles found most effective.
“However, coaching models require substantial financial investments to sustain the high frequency of coaching cycles found to be most effective (Authors, in press).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Authors, in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
These changes facilitated principals' efforts to promote staff growth.
“These changes facilitated principals’ efforts to promote growth among their staff.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The district's close monitoring of written evaluations created a strong incentive for principals to favor formal one-way communication over more productive two-way dialogue about instructional improvement.
“By closely monitoring the written evaluations, the district created a strong incentive for principals to prioritize formal one-way communication over a more productive two-way dialogue about instructional improvement.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Variability in evaluators' ability to identify strengths and weaknesses and communicate feedback had important consequences for the quality of post-observation conversations.
“This variability in evaluators’ abilities to identify areas of weakness or strength and communicate their feedback had important consequences for the quality of post-observation conversations with teachers.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Observation and feedback cycles are most effective when frequent, in-depth, and sustained over long periods.
“This finding is particular concerning given clear evidence that observation and feedback cycles are most effective when they are frequent, in-depth, and sustained over long periods of time (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon, 2001; Yoon, Duncan, Lee, Scarloss, & Shapley, 2007).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon, 2001 source
- cites Yoon, Duncan, Lee, Scarloss, & Shapley, 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning
These implementation challenges led to unintended consequences that limited the effectiveness of feedback teachers received.
“These challenges led to unintended consequences which limited the effectiveness of the feedback teachers’ received in several important ways.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The contrasting examples show that principals' differing perspectives and individual goals, rather than district intentions, determined how evaluation was implemented in schools.
“The juxtaposition of two examples helps to illustrate how principals’ differing perspectives and individual goals, rather than the district’s intentions, determined how evaluation was implemented in schools.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Research shows that dedicating more time to instructional leadership may not be sufficient to promote teacher development and student achievement.
“Maximizing principals’ time management skills and ability to distribute tasks can help them meet the increased demands for their instructional leadership, but research shows that dedicating more time to instructional leadership may not be sufficient to promote teacher development and student achievement (Grissom et al., 2013).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Grissom et al., 2013 source
- Interpretationreasoning
Even high-quality training focused on the feedback process is unlikely to change practices of principals focused on removing ineffective teachers or to address a lack of content knowledge.
“Even high-quality training focused on the feedback process is unlikely to change the practices of principals that are focused on removing ineffective teachers or to address a lack of content knowledge.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Challenges in providing feedback could be greater for administrators with no classroom teaching experience.
“These challenges could be even greater for administrators who had no classroom teaching experience.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Principals did not always use all possible mechanisms through which evaluation might promote professional growth.
“and that principals did not always leverage all possible mechanisms through which evaluation might promote professional growth.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Placing full responsibility for observing and coaching teachers on principals and administrative teams produced unintended consequences that undercut evaluation's potential to promote growth.
“However, we heard time and again that placing the full responsibility of observing and coaching teachers on principals and their administrative teams resulted in a variety of unintended consequences that undercut the potential to promote growth through the evaluation process.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Different perspectives on evaluation led to very different approaches to implementing the new system.
“These different perspectives led to very different approaches to implementing the new evaluation system.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Restructuring principals' roles to focus less on operations management could substantially expand their capacity to provide evaluation feedback.
“Restructuring principals’ roles to focus less on operations management could serve to substantially expand their capacity to provide evaluation feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Evaluation demands limited the frequency and quality of feedback teachers received.
“The demands on principals and their administrative teams to conduct extensive evaluations for all teachers limited the frequency and quality of feedback teachers’ received.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Differing views led principals to interpret their evaluation role differently.
“These differing views led principals to interpret their role in the evaluation process quite differently.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Several charter school networks, including Uncommon Schools and Success Academy Public Schools, have adopted formal co-leadership models with instructional leadership and operations management positions.
“Several charter school networks such as Uncommon Schools and Success Academy Public Schools have adopted formal co-leadership models with instructional leadership and operations management positions (Frumkin, 2003).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Frumkin, 2003
- Interpretationown data
The responsibility of submitting written evaluation feedback online shifted principals' focus away from in-person feedback conversations.
“The responsibility of submitting written evaluation feedback on-line that became part of a teacher’s permanent record also caused principals to shift their focus away from in-person feedback conversations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Relying on principals as central evaluators resulted in a range of implementation challenges.
“However, relying on principals to evaluate teachers as a central part of the new system resulted in a range of implementation challenges.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
No amount of preparation and training will resolve challenges related to principals' lack of experience with some subjects and grades or their time constraints.
“However, no amount of preparation and training will resolve the challenges related to principals’ lack of experience with some subjects and grades or their time constraints.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
The absence of evaluator training programs focused on the feedback process is a major implementation barrier.
“The absence of evaluator training programs focused on the feedback process is a major implementation barrier (Herlihy et al., 2014).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Herlihy et al., 2014 source
- Study design and conductreasoning
These differences limit the generalizability of the findings across contexts.
“These differences limit the generalizability of our findings across different contexts.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
These unintended consequences show that implementation determines whether an evaluation system succeeds in promoting teacher development.
“These unintended consequences illustrate that how an evaluation system is implemented ultimately determines whether it will be successful at promoting teacher development.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Peer Assistance and Review is an example of how districts can enable expert teachers to conduct rigorous observations and provide detailed feedback supporting professional growth.
“Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) is one of several examples of how districts can enable expert teachers to conduct rigorous observations and provide detailed feedback that supports professional growth.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Study design and conductown data
The small sample of twenty-four principals limited the ability to analyze potential differences across school contexts in how successfully principals supported teacher development through evaluation.
“Lastly, our small sample of 24 principals limited our ability to analyze potential differences across school contexts in the degree to which principals were successful at supporting teacher development through evaluation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Dozens of districts have adopted peer evaluation systems where expert teachers formally evaluate their peers.
“Dozens of districts have also adopted peer evaluation systems where expert teachers assume formal responsibility for evaluating their peers (Papay & Johnson, 2012).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Papay & Johnson, 2012 source
- Study design and conductown data
The study captured a snapshot of principals' experiences in one district at a single point in time.
“Our study captured a snapshot of principals’ experiences in one district at a single point in time.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
These changes provided necessary structures and more fertile contexts for principals to promote staff growth as evaluators.
“These changes provided necessary structures and more fertile contexts for principals to promote growth among their staff as evaluators.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Without a dedicated financial commitment to coaching, this approach might replace principals' time constraints with the high cost of individualized coaching.
“Without a dedicated financial commitment to coaching, this approach might simply replace one implementation constraint (principals’ time constrains) with another (the high cost of individualized coaching).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 35
- May combine two claims. 22
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationA growing body of research suggests instructional and content coaches can improve teachers' practice through sustained observation and feedback cycles.
“A growing body of research suggests that instructional and content coaches can improve teachers’ practice through sustained observation and feedback cycles (e.g. Allen et al., 2011; Authors, in press).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites Allen et al., 2011 source
The Abstract describes a year of coaching in which consultants repeatedly review classroom videos and give teachers feedback, and reports improvements in teacher-student interactions. It calls the approach content-independent, however, so Allen et al. support the point about instructional coaching but not the claim about content coaching. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites Authors, in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationNarrowing feedback scope may have increased principals' confidence but did not address teachers' need to develop core content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge.
“Although narrowing the scope of feedback may have improved principal’s confidence, it failed to address teachers’ need to develop both their core content knowledge and their pedagogical content knowledge, which have been shown to be central elements of effective instruction particularly in math (Wayne & Youngs, 2003; Hill et al., 2008).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationNew evidence documents the potential of pairing highly effective teachers with less effective colleagues on specific areas of instructional improvement.
“For example, new evidence documents the potential of pairing highly effect teachers to work with their less effective colleagues on specific areas of instructional improvement (Papay, Taylor, Tyler & Laski, 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites Papay, Taylor, Tyler & Laski, 2016 source
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataPrincipals believed rubric-based ratings of observable practices helped teachers understand feedback and made evaluation seem less subjective.
“These principals felt that ratings based on observable teacher practices catalogued on the rubric elements helped teachers understand why they received certain feedback, making the evaluation process seem less subjective.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataPrincipals perceived this cultural change as beginning to increase teachers' willingness to engage in observation and feedback.
“Principals perceived this change as beginning to increase teachers’ willingness to engage with them in the observation and feedback process.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' reports about teachers' attitudes and reactions accurately represent teachers' actual attitudes.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Findingown dataFive principals described the current evaluation process as still very formal and teachers as edgy and paranoid, despite their own growth focus.
“However, five principals characterized the current evaluation process as “still very formal” and teachers as being “a little bit edgy” and “still very paranoid” even though these principals all described their evaluation efforts as focused on professional growth.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataAt the time, principals had received no training on managing time to complete observations or on conducting productive feedback conversations.
“At the time, principals had not received any training on how to manage their time to complete all observations or how to engage in productive feedback conversations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataPrincipals had to learn a critical human component of evaluation on their own.
“In addition to assigning accurate ratings, there was a critical “human component,” as one principal described it, that they had to learn on their own.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataPrincipals were expected to know how to teach adults as well as children.
“A high school principal with previous experience as a non-profit manager explained how principals were now expected to know how to teach adults as well as children.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Findingown dataFour administrators used evaluation to support most teachers' improvement but also emphasized dismissing ineffective educators.
“However, four of the administrators we spoke with explained that they used the evaluation system to support the vast majority of teachers to improve their practice, but also highlighted the importance of dismissing teachers who were ineffective educators.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataSeveral principals saw a need for content-expert coaches to supplement the general instructional feedback principals could provide.
“Several principals saw the need for coaches who were content experts to supplement the general instructional feedback they could provide.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataTwo principals suggested they could not work with more than about a dozen teachers at a time and still make a real difference in practice.
“Two different principals suggested they could not work with more than a dozen teachers at a time and be expected to make any real difference in teachers’ practices.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataOne veteran principal found the new evaluation system's demands prevented him from spending much time coaching, so he hired full-time instructional coaches.
“One veteran principal we spoke with found that the demands of the new evaluation system meant that he “could not spend a lot of time coaching.” He described how instead, he hired full-time instructional coaches to work closely with his teachers.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataThose principals suggested many more of their peers would avoid difficult conversations.
“However, these principals suggested that many more of their peers would “shy away from difficult conversations.””
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataPrincipals' views on evaluation's purpose did not always align with the district's articulated purpose or with how principals thought teachers perceived the system.
“We also found that principals’ views on what the evaluation system should be used for did not always align with how the district articulated the purpose of the system or how principals felt teachers perceived the system.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataFor principals who moved directly from classroom teaching into administration, learning on the job was the only option.
“For principals who transitioned into administration directly from the classroom, the only option was “learning when you get into the job,” as one principal explained.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataWhile some principals treated these situations as opportunities to discuss practice enhancement, not all were prepared to navigate such conversations.
“While some principals saw these situations as opportunities to talk about how teachers could further enhance their practice, not all principals were prepared to navigate these conversations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Findingown dataAdministrators without teaching experience lacked an instructional lens and gave different evaluation responses than other team members.
“These administrators lack of an “instructional lens” meant they gave “very different evaluation responses” than other member of her team.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataMany of these principals emphasized the value of giving teachers opportunities to observe and learn from peers.
“Many of these principals emphasized the value of providing teachers with opportunities to observe and learn from their peers.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataPrincipals described teacher buy-in and investment in the improvement process as essential to its success.
“They described how teacher buy-in and investment in the improvement process were essential to its success.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataTwelve interviewed principals suggested peer observation and feedback systems held more promise for professional growth than relying on principals for evaluation feedback.
“Twelve principals we spoke with suggested that peer observation and feedback systems held more promise for promoting professional growth than relying on principals to provide evaluation feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataPrincipals perceived that teachers were becoming more involved in evaluation and that the culture around evaluation was beginning to shift toward professional growth.
“Principals’ perceived that teachers were becoming more involved in the evaluation process and that the culture around evaluation was beginning to shift towards a focus on professional growth.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataAs the district intended, teachers became more involved and the evaluation culture began focusing on professional growth.
“As intended by the district, teachers were becoming more involved and the culture around evaluation was beginning to focus on professional growth.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The district's messaging accurately reflects the district's actual intent for the evaluation system.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitationUse of a semi-structured interview protocol ensured common topics and reduced interviewer effects and bias.
“We used a semi-structured protocol (see Appendix A) to ensure that each interview touched upon a common set of topics and reduced interviewer effects and bias (Patton, 2001).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Patton, 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown dataThe authors' trial coding and peer review calibrated the coding approach and revealed that some initial codes were too narrow.
“Each author then conducted a trial coding process with two transcripts, reviewed the other’s initial coding, and debriefed about coding discrepancies and common themes that were not included in our initial set of codes. This peer-review process served to calibrate our coding approach and revealed how some of our original codes were too narrowly focused.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductown dataThe interviewed principals' demographic and school characteristics did not differ significantly from those of non-interviewed district principals, supporting that the sample is broadly representative of the district.
“We find no statistically significant differences across any measures, strong evidence that our sample is broadly representative of the district as a whole.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown dataThe analysis searched for disconfirming evidence and counterexamples after organizing evidence into analytic memos.
“Once the evidence on each theme was organized into an extended analytic memo, we returned to the interview transcripts to search for disconfirming evidence and counterexamples.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningTeachers were recognized for expertise and actively engaged in evaluation, which may have increased their ownership and professional growth.
“Teachers were recognized for their expertise and actively engaged in the evaluation process, which may have led them to take more ownership of the evaluation process and promote professional growth.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Premiseown dataSupporting teacher professional growth through evaluation required principals to rate teachers accurately and have direct conversations about what and how a teacher needed to improve.
“The process of evaluating teachers in a way that supported their professional growth required principals to rate teachers accurately and have direct conversations about what and how a teacher needed to improve.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Accurate evaluation ratings are critical for any evaluation system and are a necessary precursor for productive conversations with teachers about professional improvement.
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationEvaluations of SAM programs found principals gained nearly an hour a day to focus on instruction but had small to no effects on student achievement.
“Evaluations of SAM programs found that principals gained nearly an hour a day to focus on instruction (Turnball et al., 2009), but small to no effects on student achievement (Turnball, White, and Arcaira, 2010).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Turnball et al., 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites Turnball, White, and Arcaira, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
InterpretationreasoningOnly high-quality training on conducting observation and feedback cycles would address principals' limited expertise.
“Only high-quality training on how to conduct observation and feedback cycles would address principals’ limited expertise.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningTeachers may perceive evaluations as a process for collecting evidence to justify dismissals and may be unwilling to openly recognize weaknesses and engage in improvement.
“Teachers may perceive evaluations as a process for collecting evidence to justify dismissals and be unwilling to openly recognize their weakness and engage in the improvement process.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningThese choices affected teachers' evaluation experiences and may affect district-wide culture change.
“These choices affected the evaluation experience of teachers in their schools, and may even impact the degree to which the culture around teacher evaluation changes in the district as a whole.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationreasoningMoving toward more task specialization among administrators is promising given increasing demands on principals to be expert instructional leaders and the core importance of operations management.
“Moving towards more task specialization among administrators is promising given the increasing demands on principals to be expert instructional leaders and the core importance of operations management.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationreasoningA system where coaches work across schools would allow districts to better match teachers to experts in their particular area of need.
“A system where coaches work across schools would allow districts to better match teachers to experts in their particular area in need of improvement.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationreasoningRequiring all teachers to participate equally in a rigorous evaluation process signals that the process is not exclusively focused on dismissal.
“Requiring all teachers to participate equally in a rigorous evaluation process sends a strong signal that the process is not exclusively focused on dismissal.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationcitationContent experts would be well prepared to rate and provide feedback using content-specific observation rubrics such as MQI or PLATO.
“Content experts would also be well prepared to rate and provide teachers feedback based on content-specific observation rubrics such as the MQI or the PLATO (Kane et al., 2014).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Kane et al., 2014
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationLittle is known about the content and efficacy of training programs for principals.
“Providing better training to principals is an intuitive solution, but little is known about the content and efficacy of such training programs (Peterson, 2002).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Peterson, 2002 source
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataPrincipals' own perspectives on evaluation directly shaped their implementation and teachers' experience of evaluation.
“Principals’ own perspectives on evaluation directly shaped how they chose to implement the evaluation system, and ultimately, how teachers experienced the evaluation process.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationDecades of research by Bryk and colleagues demonstrated the key role of relational trust between administrators and teachers in improvement processes.
“Decades of research by Anthony Bryk and his colleagues (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu, & Easton, 2010) have demonstrated the key role of relational trust between administrators and teachers engaged in improvement processes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Bryk & Schneider, 2002
- cites Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu, & Easton, 2010
May combine two claims.
Premiseown dataThe current evaluation system required principals to accurately differentiate teachers on a four-point scale, support ratings with low-inference evidence, communicate ratings effectively, and prescribe specific actionable feedback.
“Principals were required to accurately differentiate teachers on a four point scale, support their ratings with low-inference evidence, communicate these ratings effectively, and prescribe specific, actionable feedback for teachers on how to improve.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
PremisecitationPAR can increase teachers' impact on student achievement and can be cost effective, but requires effective labor-management cooperation.
“PAR can increase teachers’ impact on students achievement (Taylor & Tyler, 2012) and can be cost effective (Papay & Johnson, 2012), but requires effective labor-management cooperation as Hillsborough County Public School’s decision to scrap its established peer evaluation system illustrates (Sokol, 2015).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).
Interpretationnone givenThe remaking of teacher evaluation systems across U.S. public schools has the potential to promote teacher improvement on a large scale.
“The remaking of teacher evaluation systems across U.S. public schools has the potential to promote teacher improvement on a large scale.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningFindings highlight an increasing need to develop principals' skills as evaluators and instructional leaders in graduate training and certification programs.
“Our findings also highlight the increasing need to develop principals’ skills as evaluators and instructional leaders as part of their graduate training and certification programs.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Premisenone givenPrincipals were responsible for assigning overall evaluation ratings, whereas in most states summative ratings are calculated from a weighted sum of multiple performance measures.
“Furthermore, principals were responsible for assigning overall evaluation ratings whereas in most states summative ratings are calculated from a weighted sum of multiple performance measures.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningAn effective training and support program for evaluators could help them manage time better and maximize the impact of their evaluation feedback.
“An effective training and support program for evaluators could help them to better manage their time and maximize the impact of their evaluation feedback.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningDelivering on this promise will depend largely on how reforms are implemented on the ground by administrators and educators.
“Delivering on this promise will depend, in large part, on how these reforms are implemented on the ground by administrators and educators.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationLiterature on distributed leadership provides examples of how principals could empower staff to take on instructional leadership and development responsibilities.
“The literature on distributed leadership provides examples of how principal could empower their staff to assume responsibilities for instructional leadership and development (Camburn, Rowan, & Taylor, 2003; Leithwood et al., 2007; Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checkedClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationnone givenPrincipals' perspectives will vary depending on the design of evaluation systems in their districts and the specific stage of implementation.
“Principals’ perspectives will vary depending on the design of the evaluation systems adopted in their districts and the specific stage of implementation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
Principals' interview responses accurately reflect their actual views and experiences.
“These interviews gave principals the opportunity to share their perspectives about teacher evaluation as well as their experiences implementing the districts’ former and current evaluation systems.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The first year of district-wide implementation is a sufficient period for principals to report stable views and experiences of the new evaluation system.
“the summer after the first year the new evaluation system was implemented district-wide.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Principals' reports about teachers' attitudes and reactions accurately represent teachers' actual attitudes.
“Principals perceived this change as beginning to increase teachers’ willingness to engage with them in the observation and feedback process.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The district's messaging accurately reflects the district's actual intent for the evaluation system.
“This common viewpoint was aligned with the district’s messaging of the primary purpose of the new evaluation system.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The interviewed principals' self-reports accurately represent their views and experiences.
“Our interviews also suggested that some principals may have avoided difficult conversations with teachers about their weaknesses and, instead, focused on reinforcing the things that were going well in the classroom.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Accurate evaluation ratings are critical for any evaluation system and are a necessary precursor for productive conversations with teachers about professional improvement.
“Accurate evaluation ratings are critical for any evaluation system, but are also a necessary precursor for engaging in a productive conversation with teachers about professional improvement.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Evaluator-staffing categories account for only 23 of 24 schools
MinorThe three school groups described by their number of evaluators total 23, although the study says the sample included 24 principals, each assigned to a school. One school is unaccounted for in this breakdown.
Reported 24 · recomputed 23
“At nine of the smallest schools in our sample, principals were the only evaluators. Principals at nine other medium-sized schools had one or two other administrators who also conducted evaluations, while the five largest middle and high schools had 3 to 9 additional evaluators.”
Cites
Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook
(1994) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0272-4944(05)80231-2 · Cited by 48,420 · cited 1× · see citing works
“We coded interview transcripts for central concepts (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) using a hybrid approach to developing codes (Miles & Huberman, 1994).”
Qualitative research and evaluation methods
Patton, M. Q. (1980) · Cited by 35,637 · see citing works
Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques.
Ellis, C., Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2074814 · Cited by 29,279 · see citing works
(1996) · Cited by 11,584 · see citing works
What Makes Professional Development Effective? Results From a National Sample of Teachers
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312038004915 · Cited by 5,047 · see citing works
Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00584.x · Cited by 4,501 · see citing works
Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x08321509 · Cited by 2,549 · see citing works
The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student Achievement: Evidence from Panel Data
Rockoff, J. E. (2004) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/0002828041302244 · Cited by 2,432 · cited 2× · see citing works
“These reforms were motivated in large part by research documenting that teachers have large effects on student learning (Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2005; Rockoff, 2004), and that existing evaluation systems were perfunctory and narrowly focused on compliance (Tucker, 1997; Weisberg et al.”
Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach
Pitman, M. A. (1998) · Anthropology & Education Quarterly · doi:10.1525/aeq.1998.29.4.499 · Cited by 2,404 · see citing works
(2002) · Cited by 2,212 · see citing works
Investigating School Leadership Practice: A Distributed Perspective
Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x030003023 · Cited by 1,690 · see citing works
Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching
Danielson, C. (1996) · Cited by 1,576 · see citing works
Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review
Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (2003) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543073001089 · Cited by 1,282 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…may have improved principal’s confidence, it failed to address teachers’ need to develop both their core content knowledge and their pedagogical content knowledge, which have been shown to be central elements of effective instruction particularly in math (Hill et al., 2008; Wayne & Youngs, 2003).”
Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W., Scarloss, B. A., & Shapley, K. L. (2007) · Cited by 1,274 · see citing works
Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago
McPartland, J. M. (2011) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.1177/0094306110391764b · Cited by 1,032 · see citing works
Hill, H. C., Blunk, M. L., Charalambous, C. Y., Lewis, J. M., Phelps, G. C., Sleep, L., & Ball, D. L. (2008) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1080/07370000802177235 · Cited by 996 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…may have improved principal’s confidence, it failed to address teachers’ need to develop both their core content knowledge and their pedagogical content knowledge, which have been shown to be central elements of effective instruction particularly in math (Hill et al., 2008; Wayne & Youngs, 2003).”
(2010) · Cited by 990 · see citing works
Johnson, S. M., Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2012) · Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1177/016146811211401004 · Cited by 822 · see citing works
Self-citationEducational Leadership and Student Achievement: The Elusive Search for an Association
Witziers, B., Bosker, R., & Krüger, M. L. (2003) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x03253411 · Cited by 810 · see citing works
Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (1998) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w6691 · Cited by 797 · see citing works
The Influence of School Administrators on Teacher Retention Decisions
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Ing, M., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2011) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831210380788 · Cited by 710 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The quality of principal leadership as measured by teacher surveys is a strong predictor of teacher turnover and student achievement across schools (Boyd et al., 2011; Johnson, Kraft, & Papay, 2012; Kraft, Marinell, & Yee, 2015; Ladd, 2011).”
How does leadership affect student achievement? Results from a national US survey
Seashore-Louis, K., Dretzke, B., & Wahlstrom, K. (2010) · School Effectiveness and School Improvement · doi:10.1080/09243453.2010.486586 · Cited by 652 · see citing works
How Principals and Peers Influence Teaching and Learning
Supovitz, J. A., Sirinides, P. M., & May, H. (2009) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1094670509353043 · Cited by 648 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Principals’ roles have expanded to encompass a direct role in shaping student learning (SL) via instructional leadership (Robinson, Lloyd, & Rowe, 2008; Supovitz et al., 2010).”
School Context, Principal Leadership, and Student Reading Achievement
Hallinger, P., Bickman, L., & Davis, K. (1996) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/461843 · Cited by 620 · see citing works
Teacher Evaluation to Enhance Professional Practice
Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000) · Cited by 591 · see citing works
An Interaction-Based Approach to Enhancing Secondary School Instruction and Student Achievement
Allen, J. P., Pianta, R. C., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., & Lun, J. (2011) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1207998 · Cited by 590 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A growing body of research suggests that instructional and content coaches can improve teachers’ practice through sustained observation and feedback cycles (e.g., Allen et al., 2011; Blazar & Kraft, 2015).”
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management
Walton, J. R., Stearns, J. M., & Crespy, C. T. (2006) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.1002/(issn)1520-6688 · Cited by 577 · see citing works
(2009) · Issue Lab (Candid) · Cited by 552 · see citing works
Linking Leadership to Student Learning
Leithwood, K. A., & Seashore-Louis, K. (2011) · Cited by 510 · see citing works
Distributing Leadership to Make Schools Smarter: Taking the Ego Out of the System
Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Strauss, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007) · Leadership and Policy in Schools · doi:10.1080/15700760601091267 · Cited by 485 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The literature on distributed leadership provides examples of how principals could empower their staff to assume responsibilities for instructional leadership and development (Camburn, Rowan, & Taylor, 2003; Leithwood et al., 2007; Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001).”
Instructional Program Coherence: What It Is and Why It Should Guide School Improvement Policy
Newmann, F. M., Smith, B., Allensworth, E. M., & Bryk, A. S. (2001) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737023004297 · Cited by 453 · see citing works
Ladd, H. F. (2011) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373711398128 · Cited by 445 · see citing works
Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2014) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373713519496 · Cited by 433 · cited 2× · see citing works
“The literature largely supports this assumption, documenting both teachers’ willingness (Kennedy, 2005) and ability (Kraft & Papay, 2014) to improve their practice over time.”
Self-citationHandbook of Research in Education Finance and Policy
Ladd, H. F. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203788684 · Cited by 422 · see citing works
The Effect of Evaluation on Teacher Performance
Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.102.7.3628 · Cited by 405 · see citing works
Principal's Time Use and School Effectiveness
Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010) · American Journal of Education · doi:10.1086/653625 · Cited by 395 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Horng, Klasik, and Loeb (2010) found that principals spent less than 6% of their time observing, coaching, and evaluating teachers and only 7% developing and delivering instructional programming.”
Camburn, E., Rowan, B., & Taylor, J. E. (2003) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737025004347 · Cited by 395 · see citing works
The Influence of Principal Leadership on Classroom Instruction and Student Learning
Sebastian, J. L., & Allensworth, E. M. (2012) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x11436273 · Cited by 361 · see citing works
(2013) · Cited by 345 · see citing works
Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x13510020 · Cited by 332 · cited 3× · see citing works
“Maximizing principals’ time management skills and ability to distribute tasks can help them meet the increased demands for their instructional leadership, but research shows that dedicating more time to instructional leadership may not be sufficient to promote teacher development and student achievement (Grissom et al…”
InfluentialSchool Organizational Contexts, Teacher Turnover, and Student Achievement
Kraft, M. A., Marinell, W. H., & Yee, D. (2016) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831216667478 · Cited by 329 · cited 1× · see citing works
“They play a key role in developing a school-wide culture of high expectations for students which is directly linked to student achievement (Kraft et al., 2015).”
Self-citationNew Directions in Education Policy Implementation: Confronting Complexity
Honig, M. I. (2006) · doi:10.1515/9780791481431 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
New directions in education policy implementation : confronting complexity
Honig, M. I. (2006) · Cited by 303 · see citing works
Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago
Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (2009) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226078014.001.0001 · Cited by 299 · see citing works
The Professional Development of Principals: Innovations and Opportunities
Peterson, K. (2002) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x02382006 · Cited by 276 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Providing better training to principals is an intuitive solution, but little is known about the content and efficacy of such training programs (Peterson, 2002).”
A Validity Argument Approach to Evaluating Teacher Value-Added Scores
Hill, H. C., Kapitula, L. R., & Umland, K. L. (2010) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831210387916 · Cited by 276 · see citing works
Inside teaching: how classroom life undermines reform
(2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-2333 · Cited by 273 · see citing works
The Scope of Principal Efforts to Improve Instruction
May, H., & Supovitz, J. A. (2011) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x10383411 · Cited by 224 · see citing works
Kennedy, M. M. (2005) · Harvard University Press eBooks · doi:10.4159/9780674039513 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
(2014) · Cited by 207 · see citing works
Mcguinn, P. J. (2011) · Educational Policy · doi:10.1177/0895904811425911 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Instructional Leadership: A Research-Based Guide to Learning in Schools
Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (2008) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 196 · see citing works
Steinberg, M. P., & Donaldson, M. L. (2016) · Education Finance and Policy · doi:10.1162/edfp_a_00186 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
Evaluating Teaching: A Guide to Current Thinking and Best Practice
Stronge, J. H. (2005) · Cited by 163 · see citing works
Refocusing the Debate: Assessing the Purposes and Tools of Teacher Evaluation
Papay, J. (2012) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.82.1.v40p0833345w6384 · Cited by 155 · cited 2× · see citing works
“The quality of principal leadership as measured by teacher surveys is a strong predictor of teacher turnover and student achievement across schools (Boyd et al., 2011; Johnson, Kraft, & Papay, 2012; Kraft, Marinell, & Yee, 2015; Ladd, 2011).”
Papay, J. P., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Laski, M. E. (2020) · American Economic Journal: Economic Policy · doi:10.1257/pol.20170709 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Papay, J., Taylor, E., Tyler, J., & Laski, M. (2016) · doi:10.3386/w21986 · Cited by 148
Kraft, M. A., Papay, J. P., Johnson, S. M., Charner‐Laird, M., Ng, M., & Reinhorn, S. K. (2015) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x15607617 · Cited by 112 · cited 1× · see citing works
“They play a key role in developing a school-wide culture of high expectations for students which is directly linked to student achievement (Kraft et al., 2015).”
Self-citationSteinberg, M. P., & Sartain, L. (2015) · Education Finance and Policy · doi:10.1162/edfp_a_00173 · Cited by 111 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Steinberg and Sartain (2015) exploit CPS’s randomized rollout of a new pilot evaluation system to estimate the causal effect of evaluation on student achievement.”
Creating a New Teaching Profession
Goldhaber, D. D., & Hannaway, J. (2009) · Cited by 111 · see citing works
Herlihy, C., Karger, E., Pollard, C., Hill, H. C., Kraft, M. A., Williams, M., & Howard, S. (2014) · Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education · doi:10.1177/016146811411600108 · Cited by 103 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Based on their analysis of interviews with state education officials and evaluation system documents from 17 states, Herlihy et al. (2014) concluded that most new evaluation systems appeared to default to the past approach where principals served as the sole evaluator.”
InfluentialSelf-citationSchool administration in a changing education sector: the US experience
Spillane, J. P., & Kenney, A. W. (2012) · Journal of Educational Administration · doi:10.1108/09578231211249817 · Cited by 97 · cited 2× · see citing works
“This is particularly true in the decentralized U.S. education system where local practice is often decoupled from central policy (Spillane & Kenney, 2012).”
Principals’ Approaches to Cultivating Teacher Effectiveness
Donaldson, M. L. (2013) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x13485961 · Cited by 94 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Other studies further suggest that principals face substantial capacity constraints (Donaldson, 2012, 2013).”
Simon, C. A. (1999) · Administration & Society · doi:10.1177/00953999922019229 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Exploring Mechanisms of Effective Teacher Coaching
Blazar, D., & Kraft, M. A. (2015) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373715579487 · Cited by 90 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A growing body of research suggests that instructional and content coaches can improve teachers’ practice through sustained observation and feedback cycles (e.g., Allen et al., 2011; Blazar & Kraft, 2015).”
Self-citationTucker, P. D. (1997) · Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education · doi:10.1023/a:1007962302463 · Cited by 78 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Evaluation systems did not differentiate among teachers, were rarely used to inform personnel decisions, and failed to provide meaningful feedback to teachers (Toch & Rothman, 2008; Tucker, 1997; Weisberg et al., 2009).”
(2013) · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Educational administration, policy, and reform : research and measurement
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2004) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Evaluation in the Wild: A Distributed Cognition Perspective on Teacher Assessment
Halverson, R. R., & Clifford, M. A. (2006) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x05285986 · Cited by 54 · cited 1× · see citing works
“If principals view new evaluation reform initiatives as underresourced or unrealistic, they may respond by “satisficing”—focusing on compliance rather than high-quality implementation (Halverson & Clifford, 2006).”
Rush to Judgment: Teacher Evaluation in Public Education. Education Sector Reports.
Toch, T., & Rothman, R. (2008) · Cited by 52 · see citing works
The dysfunctional marriage of formative and summative teacher evaluation
(1988) · Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education · doi:10.1007/bf00123822 · Cited by 50 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Over a quarter century ago, Popham (1988) wrote about the “dysfunctional marriage” of formative and summative teacher evaluations.”
Papay, J. P., & Johnson, S. M. (2011) · Educational Policy · doi:10.1177/0895904811417584 · Cited by 46 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Peer Assistance and Review can increase teachers’ impact on students achievement (Taylor & Tyler, 2012) and can be cost-effective (Papay & Johnson, 2012), but requires effective labor-management cooperation as Hillsborough County Public School’s decision to scrap its established peer evaluation…”
Teachers' Perspectives on Evaluation Reform.
Donaldson, M. L. (2012) · Center for American Progress · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Sartain, L., Stoelinga, S. R., & Brown, E. R. (2011) · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Teacher Evaluation for Accountability and Development
Donaldson, M. L., & Papay, J. P. (2014) · doi:10.4324/9780203788684-18 · Cited by 33 · cited 2× · see citing works
“In a number of states, including the one in which our study takes place, principals are given full responsibility for determining teachers’ overall summative evaluation ratings (Donaldson & Papay, 2014; Steinberg & Donaldson, in press).”
Improving Teaching through Observation and Feedback
Lavigne, A. L., & Good, T. L. (2015) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315777030 · Cited by 16 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Investments in personnel training and protocols for supporting professional development through the evaluation process have been far more limited (Lavigne & Good, 2015).”
Weisberg, D. F., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., et al. (2009) · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Curtis, R., & Wiener, R. (2012) · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Improving Teaching through Observation and Feedback: Beyond State and Federal Mandates
Lavigne, A. L., & Good, T. L. (2015) · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Evaluation of the School Administration Manager Project.
Turnbull, B. J., Haslam, M. B., Arcaira, E. R., et al. (2009) · Cited by 9 · see citing works
(2003) · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Lacireno‐Paquet, N., Morgan, C. L., & Mello, D. (2014) · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Implementing Teacher Evaluation Systems
Halverson, R., Kelley, C. J., & Kimball, S. M. (2004) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/978-1-60752-498-420251007 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Leadership and Student Learning: What Works and How
Leithwood, K. (2011) · Leadership and Learning · doi:10.4135/9781446288931.n4
Stronge, J. (2006) · doi:10.4135/9781412990202
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Donaldson M. L., 2010, Supporting effective teaching through teacher evaluation: A study of teacher evaluation in five charter schools
- Kane T. J., 2012, Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains
- Kraft M. A., Educational Policy
- Lacireno-Paquet N., 2014, How states use student learning objectives in teacher evaluation systems: A review of statewide websites
- Sartain L., 2011, Rethinking teacher evaluation: Lessons learned from observations, principal-teacher conferences, and district implementation
- Steinberg M. P., Education Finance and Policy
- Thomas E., 2010, Newsweek, 155, 24
- Turnball B. J., 2010, Achievement trends in schools with school administration managers (SAMs)
- Waters T., 2003, Balanced leadership: What 30 years of research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kraft, M. A., Blazar, D., & Hogan, D. (2018) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654318759268 · Cited by 1,202 · see citing works
Self-citationLiebowitz, D. D., & Porter, L. (2019) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654319866133 · Cited by 320 · see citing works
“…and assistant principals, to which we refer hereafter collectively as “principals”) are responsible for a dizzying set of responsibilities (e.g., Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Spillane & Hunt, 2010; Spillane & Lee, 2014), which range from ensuring that hallways are clear of disruption, family…”
BackgroundKraft, M. A., & Gilmour, A. F. (2017) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x17718797 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
“There are no formal incentives in place for receiving an exemplary rating, similar to systems in many other states and districts (Steinberg & Donaldson, 2016; see Kraft & Gilmour, 2016, for a more detailed description of the evaluation system).”
BackgroundSelf-citationOECD (2019) · OECD reviews of school resources · doi:10.1787/b7aaf050-en · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Demszky, D., Liu, J., Hill, H., Jurafsky, D., & Piech, C. (2023) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737231169270 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
“First, generating formative feedback tends to be resource-intensive (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
Donaldson, M. L., & Woulfin, S. L. (2018) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373718784205 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
“For example, Kraft and Gilmour (2016) found that some principals took a more directive approach in providing explicit, “actionable” feedback to teachers while others prioritized teachers’ self-reflection by asking open-ended questions.”
BackgroundInfluentialNeumerski, C. M., Grissom, J. A., Goldring, E. B., Drake, T. A., Rubin, M., Cannata, M. A., & Schuermann, P. J. (2018) · The Elementary School Journal · doi:10.1086/700597 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
“…rubrics based on evidence about effective instructional practice aims to address these concerns, although evaluation systems in many states still fail to adequately differentiate between high- and low-performing teachers (Grissom & Loeb, 2011; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Weisberg et al., 2009).”
BackgroundTeacher accountability reforms and the supply and quality of new teachers
Kraft, M. A., Brunner, E. J., Dougherty, S. M., & Schwegman, D. (2020) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104212 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationUsing Teacher Effectiveness Data for Information-Rich Hiring
Cannata, M. A., Rubin, M., Goldring, E. B., Grissom, J. A., Neumerski, C. M., Drake, T. A., & Schuermann, P. J. (2016) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x16681629 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
“The data available in new teacher evaluation systems, and the common language provided by the evaluations themselves, have the potential to improve teacher performance (Donaldson & Papay, 2014; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundSupporting Special Education Teacher Induction Through High-Leverage Practices
Billingsley, B. S., Bettini, E. A., & Jones, N. D. (2019) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/0741932518816826 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
“It is likely that these reforms are beginning to change the nature of interactions between teachers and principals (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016); in particular, administrators are increasingly relying on scores drawn from observations to guide teachers’ improvement efforts and to make human capital…”
BackgroundThe Significance of Principal Management on Teacher Performance and Quality of Learning
Rostini, D., Syam, R. Z. A., & Achmad, W. (2022) · AL-ISHLAH Jurnal Pendidikan · doi:10.35445/alishlah.v14i2.1721 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Reinhorn, S. K., Johnson, S. M., & Simon, N. S. (2017) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373717690605 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
“…substantially affected by sensemaking, including administrators’ beliefs about the purpose of evaluation and its potential to improve instruction (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Reinhorn & Johnson, 2014), the capacity and commitment of evaluators to provide accurate assessments and useful feedback…”
BackgroundInfluentialExploring the effect of supportive teacher evaluation experiences on U.S. teachers’ job satisfaction
Ford, T. G., Urick, A., & Wilson, A. (2018) · Education Policy Analysis Archives · doi:10.14507/epaa.26.3559 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
“…based on the standards of good teaching supports instructional improvement by establishing the clear expectations necessary to motivate change (Kelly, Ang, Chong, & Hu, 2008) and by providing a common language for evaluators and teachers to discuss instructional feedback (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundInfluentialClassroom observation systems in context: A case for the validation of observation systems
Liu, S., Bell, C. A., Jones, N. D., & McCaffrey, D. F. (2019) · Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-018-09291-3 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Trapped between accountability and professional learning? School leaders and teacher evaluation
Lillejord, S., & Børte, K. (2019) · Professional Development in Education · doi:10.1080/19415257.2019.1585384 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
“Are, for instance, policy assumptions tested, can they (realistically) be implemented and are prerequisites, such as professional competence and a well-functioning educational infrastructure in place for implementation to succeed? Kraft and Gilmour (2016) specifically mention unintended consequences of relying on prin…”
BackgroundInfluentialTeacher evaluation as data use: what recent research suggests
Firestone, W. A., & Donaldson, M. L. (2019) · Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-019-09300-z · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Kraft, M. A., & Christian, A. (2021) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312211024603 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Self-citationÖzdemir, N. (2020) · Journal of Educational Administration · doi:10.1108/jea-10-2019-0189 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Buonomo, I., Fiorilli, C., Romano, L., & Benevene, P. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17238745 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Improving instructional practice through peer observation and feedback: A review of the literature
Ridge, B. L., & Lavigne, A. L. (2020) · Education Policy Analysis Archives · doi:10.14507/epaa.28.5023 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
“Perhaps this is because even under the best conditions when principals were prepared and had the skills to do teacher evaluation well, they lacked time (Donaldson & Woulfin, 2018; Goldring et al., 2015; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Lavigne & Chamberlain, 2017; Stecher et al., 2018)2.”
BackgroundPaufler, N. A. (2018) · International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership · doi:10.22230/ijepl.2018v13n8a813 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Maktoum, S. B. A., & Kaabi, A. M. A. (2024) · Cogent Education · doi:10.1080/2331186x.2023.2287931 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
“Principals who primarily viewed the evaluation process as an accountability tool tend to invest minimal time in providing constructive feedback (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
InfluentialSchool administrators’ direct and indirect influences on middle school math teachers’ turnover
Redding, C., Booker, L. N., Smith, T. M., & Desimone, L. M. (2019) · Journal of Educational Administration · doi:10.1108/jea-10-2018-0190 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
The Coverage of Classroom Management in Teacher Evaluation Rubrics
Gilmour, A. F., Majeika, C. E., Sheaffer, A. W., & Wehby, J. H. (2018) · Teacher Education and Special Education The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/0888406418781918 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
“Other researchers (Hill & Grossman, 2013; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016) point out that the challenges of implementing evaluation could be partially due to vague language.”
BackgroundSelf-citationHarding, J. F., Connors, M. C., Friedman‐Krauss, A. H., Aikens, N. L., Malone, L. M., & Tarullo, L. B. (2019) · American Journal of Community Psychology · doi:10.1002/ajcp.12327 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Drake, T. A. (2020) · Journal of Research on Leadership Education · doi:10.1177/1942775120941549 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“…the relatively low frequency with which the interns engaged in teacher coaching seems to suggest that interns were not viewed by their principals and/or teachers as credible coaches, a leadership activity that requires training, trust, and respect (Bryk & Schneider, 2002; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundBellibaş, M. Ş. (2022) · International Journal of Educational Management · doi:10.1108/ijem-02-2022-0086 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
What matters to teachers if evaluation is meant to help them improve?
Liu, Y., Visone, J. D., Mongillo, M. B., & Lisi, P. L. (2019) · Studies In Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.01.006 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Talk of Calling: Novice School Principals Narrating Destiny, Duty, and Fulfillment in Work
Swen, C. P. (2019) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x19840387 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“Principals’ role as 182 Educational Administration Quarterly 56(2) instructional leader has been expanded, requiring observation of and feedback to teachers (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundCohen, J., Loeb, S., Miller, L. C., & Wyckoff, J. (2019) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/0162373719893338 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“The promise of teacher evaluation systems has led to their wide adoption, but the implementation and impact of these policies has been uneven (Burch & Spillane, 2005; Coburn, 2016; Donaldson & Woulfin, 2018; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Marsh et al., 2017).”
BackgroundResultFuller, E. J., Hollingworth, L., & Pendola, A. (2017) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x17711481 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
“Kraft and Gilmour (2016) note that instructional leadership is defined in numerous ways, but is generally considered to include, “staff development, curriculum development and coherence, student assessment and analysis, and evaluation and individualized feedback” (p. 716).”
BackgroundChoi, S. (2023) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x231189196 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
OECD Reviews of School Resources
(2015) · OECD reviews of school resources · doi:10.1787/24133841 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Maintaining the Frame: Using Frame Analysis to Explain Teacher Evaluation Policy Implementation
Lane, J. L. (2019) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831219848689 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
“These studies also highlight the primacy of the developmental focus, although maintaining this focus is likely to require some compromise of evaluation reforms’ accountability demands (Donaldson & Mavrogordato, 2018; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Mintrop et al., 2018).”
BackgroundInfluentialHunter, S. B., & Springer, M. G. (2022) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737211062913 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
“…the burdens of higher observational loads on evaluators, it seems that evaluators may cope with higher loads by reducing time spent in preand post-conferences, potentially undermining the developmental goals of increasing observations (Hunter & Rodriguez, 2021; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Rigby, 2015).”
BackgroundMassouti, A., Shaya, N., & Qareiny, S. M. A. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Research Open · doi:10.1016/j.ijedro.2024.100372 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Teacher Evaluation Feedback and Instructional Practice Self-Efficacy in Secondary School Teachers
Smith, E. C., Starratt, G. K., McCrink, C. L., & Whitford, H. (2020) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x19888568 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Teacher evaluation policy as perceived by school principals: the case of Flanders (Belgium)
Tuytens, M., & Devos, G. (2017) · Teachers and Teaching · doi:10.1080/13540602.2017.1397508 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
“Kraft and Gilmour (2016) state that we still have insufficient knowledge about how school principals deal with new teacher evaluation policies.”
BackgroundPrincipals and teacher evaluation
Donaldson, M. L., & Mavrogordato, M. (2018) · Journal of Educational Administration · doi:10.1108/jea-08-2017-0100 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Rethinking teacher evaluation using human, social, and material capital
Donaldson, M. L., & Firestone, W. A. (2021) · Journal of Educational Change · doi:10.1007/s10833-020-09405-z · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Enacting the Rubric: Teacher Improvements in Windows of High-Stakes Observation
Phipps, A., & Wiseman, E. A. (2019) · Education Finance and Policy · doi:10.1162/edfp_a_00295 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Ámbitos de aplicación del Coaching educativo: una revisión bibliográfica del periodo 2013-17
Loredo, E. R., Sierra-Arizmendiarrieta, B., & Montero, C. R. (2019) · Educatio Siglo XXI · doi:10.6018/educatio.387091 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Paufler, N. A., King, K. M., & Ping, Z. (2020) · Studies In Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100873 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Edwards, D. B., DeMatthews, D. E., Spear, A. M., et al. (2020) · Compare A Journal of Comparative and International Education · doi:10.1080/03057925.2020.1717927 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Charalambous, C. Y., Kyriakides, E., Kyriakidēs, L., et al. (2019) · School Effectiveness and School Improvement · doi:10.1080/09243453.2019.1618877 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“…then the study findings question the approach of having secondary school principals who are experts in particular subject matters conduct observations across subject areas (cf. Kraft & Gilmour, 2016) – let alone to provide these teachers with feedback that will help them improve their practice.”
ResultTeacher evaluation as a wicked policy problem
Lillejord, S., Elstad, E., & Kavli, H. (2018) · Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice · doi:10.1080/0969594x.2018.1429388 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“In theory, therefore, the purpose of teacher evaluation is twofold: to serve as a professional development process and as a quality assurance mechanism (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundInfluentialShaping Professional Development of Educators: The Role of School Leaders
MacLeod, L. M. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-15-6667-7_10 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Principals’ instructional leadership under statewide teacher evaluation reform
Lochmiller, C. R., & Mancinelli, J. L. (2019) · International Journal of Educational Management · doi:10.1108/ijem-06-2017-0151 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Lowenhaupt, R. J., & McNeill, K. L. (2018) · Leadership and Policy in Schools · doi:10.1080/15700763.2018.1453937 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
“Principals are now asked to conduct frequent formal and informal classroom visits to view typical teaching in action and gather evidence to provide ongoing feedback for teachers to improve their instruction (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Marshall, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialPRINCIPALS’ ROLE IN MANAGING TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT THROUGH A TRAINING NEEDS ANALYSIS
Ngema, M., & Lekhetho, M. (2019) · Problems of Education in the 21st Century · doi:10.33225/pec/19.77.758 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
“Principals play a central role in the professional growth of teachers, and this, in turn, influence student outcomes positively (Brown & Militello, 2016; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundHunter, S. B. (2020) · AERA Open · doi:10.1177/2332858420929276 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
Principal Engagement in the Professional Development Process
Koonce, M. J., Pijanowski, J. C., Bengtson, E., & Lasater, K. (2019) · NASSP Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0192636519871614 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“The farther the development needs of the school are from the personal experience of the principal, the less confident principals feel (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundThe Rhetoric of Teacher Evaluation: New York City Teachers’ Responses to Performance Labels
Pallas, A. M. (2021) · Educational Policy · doi:10.1177/08959048211049432 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“Designs of this sort are not automatic; teacher evaluation is often described as a “wicked problem” (Lillejord et al., 2018), precisely because of its competing purposes of professional development and quality assurance (Herlihy et al., 2014; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundPaufler, N. A., & Clark, C. (2019) · Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-019-09292-w · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“For example, principals reportedly struggle to provide the type of feedback required in a new evaluation system (Kraft and Gilmour 2016).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialStrategies for Assessing Classroom Teaching: Examining Administrator Thinking as Validity Evidence
Bell, C. A., Jones, N. D., Qi, Y., et al. (2018) · Educational Assessment · doi:10.1080/10627197.2018.1513788 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“For example, Kraft and Gilmour (2016) found that administrators assigned higher ratings than the administrator felt were deserved to deal with complex leadership issues such as giving beginning teachers a little more time to develop before assigning a low rating or using slightly higher ratings to…”
BackgroundCarroll, K. M., Patrick, S. K., & Goldring, E. B. (2021) · American Journal of Education · doi:10.1086/715002 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Lavigne, A. L. (2018) · Educational Management Administration & Leadership · doi:10.1177/1741143218807491 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“%) principals feel they understood how to apply new teacher evaluation models (Kowalski and Dolph, 2015) and that these new models offer common language that enhance their ability to provide effective feedback to teachers (Kraft and Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundSchool Leader Perceptions: Coaching Tool and Process
Damore, S. J., & Rieckhoff, B. S. (2019) · Journal of Research on Leadership Education · doi:10.1177/1942775119868258 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“They face the same challenges as the principal when assuming the role of supervisor and evaluator (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Williamson, 2012).”
BackgroundSchool principals acting as middle leaders implementing new teacher evaluation systems
Reid, D. (2018) · School Leadership and Management · doi:10.1080/13632434.2018.1508013 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“For example, teachers hope new evaluation systems will be used to support their © 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group CONTACT David B. Reid david.reid@shu.edu practice and help them develop as professionals (Kraft and Gilmour 2016).”
BackgroundKelly, S., Guner, G., Hunkins, N., & D’Mello, S. K. (2024) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-024-00417-x · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“…Humphry & Heldsinger, 2014; Liu et al., 2019; McCaffrey et al., 2015); dramatic differences in reliability depending on rater training (Kelly et al., 2020a, b); a tendency for the vast majority of ratings to cluster in the middle of the rating scale (Kelly et al., 2020a, b; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
Trust within teaching staff and mutual learning among teachers
Brücknerová, K., & Novotný, P. (2017) · Studia paedagogica · doi:10.5817/sp2017-2-5 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
“Kraft and Gilmour (2016) showed that when there were a large number of teachers in a school, it was very difficult to implement instructional leadership at the required depth for all teachers.”
BackgroundHunter, S. B., & Rodríguez, L. A. (2021) · Journal of Educational Administration · doi:10.1108/jea-07-2020-0165 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Kellermann, C., Nachbauer, M., Gaertner, H., & Thiel, F. (2022) · School Effectiveness and School Improvement · doi:10.1080/09243453.2022.2075018 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
“The lack of feedback effects in some studies may be due to the low quality of feedback, which has been criticised by both school leaders and teachers (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Milanowski & Heneman, 2001; Wieczorek et al., 2019).”
BackgroundInfluentialMeaning of work in a group of school principals: the role of organizational variables
Buonomo, I., Benevene, P., & Fiorilli, C. (2020) · Journal of Workplace Learning · doi:10.1108/jwl-12-2019-0146 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Administrators' Uses of Teacher Observation Protocol in Different Rating Contexts
Qi, Y., Bell, C. A., Jones, N. D., et al. (2018) · ETS Research Report Series · doi:10.1002/ets2.12205 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“Research on the quality of practice-based observation systems has been slower to develop, although recent work is beginning to supply needed insight (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Steinberg & Sartain, 2015; Whitehurst, Chingos, & Lindquist, 2014).1 Although the consequences associated with using…”
BackgroundWhat information do principals consider when evaluating teachers?
Reid, D. (2019) · School Leadership and Management · doi:10.1080/13632434.2019.1576167 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“This phenomenon is not unique to this study, as principals have intimate relationships with the teachers they are charged with evaluating, it is difficult for principals to evaluate teachers completely objectively (Papay and Johnson 2012; Kraft and Gilmour 2016).”
BackgroundPrincipals' Perspectives of a Race to the Top-Style Teacher Evaluation System
Wieczorek, D., Clark, B. L., & Theoharis, G. (2018) · Journal of School Leadership · doi:10.1177/105268461802800501 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“There is a smaller body of emerging research that has investigated principals’ interpretation and implementation of RTTT instructional supervision and evaluation practices (Goldring et al., 2015; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Derrington & Campbell, 2018).”
BackgroundMethodHow might rubric-based observations better support teacher learning and development?
White, M., & Maher, B. L. (2024) · Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00131881.2024.2304542 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
“…positive relationships with teachers, promoting commitment to the observations, increasing teachers’ receptivity to feedback and/or supporting a positive working climate (Bell et al. 2015; Donaldson and Woulfin 2018; Halverson, Kelley, and Kimball 2004; Kraft and Gilmour 2016; Shaked 2018).”
BackgroundPrincipals may inflate teacher evaluation scores to achieve important goals
Jones, E. A., Bergin, C. C., & Murphy, B. C. (2021) · Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-021-09366-8 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
High-leverage teacher evaluation practices for instructional improvement
Hunter, S. B. (2022) · Educational Management Administration & Leadership · doi:10.1177/17411432221112995 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“That accurate scoring (a) and longer conferences (f) represent high-leverage evaluation practices is consistent with prior work (Jawahar, 2010; Kraft and Gilmour, 2016); however, empirical research linking practices (b) – (e) to teacher and student outcomes is less common (Donaldson, 2021).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialTeaching Quality: An Unexamined Element of Special Education Teacher Turnover
Gilmour, A. F. (2024) · Journal of Education Human Resources · doi:10.3138/jehr-2022-0018 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citationA Thirty State Analysis of Teacher Supervision and Evaluation Systems in the ESSA Era
Mette, I. M., Aguilar, I., & Wieczorek, D. (2020) · Journal of Educational Supervision · doi:10.31045/jes.3.2.7 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“…other hand, how individual school leaders have been interpreting evaluation policies and implementing them using their own discretion is also another facet of TSES development that is important to understand as part of what is also happening at the local level (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Reid, 2017).”
BackgroundSartain, L., & Morris, W. T. (2024) · AERA Open · doi:10.1177/23328584231221539 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“…are very time-consuming for evaluators (typically school administrators) to implement because of the high numbers of required observations and the associated emphasis on data collection and documentation (Goldring et al., 2015; Hill & Grossman, 2013; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Sartain et al., 2011).”
Tatik, T., Nguyen, H. T. M., & Loughland, T. (2025) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2025.105013 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Gilmour, A. F., & Jones, N. D. (2020) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x20935039 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citationReid, D. (2017) · Educational Management Administration & Leadership · doi:10.1177/1741143217739362 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Gholaminejad, R. (2020) · International Journal of Leadership in Education · doi:10.1080/13603124.2020.1740795 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“Historically, according to Kraft and Gilmour (2016), supervisory observation has rarely served either of the two-fold aims of professional development and quality assurance, as it was unable to ‘differentiate among teachers’, ‘inform personnel decisions’, or ‘provide meaningful feedback to…”
Background“Tearing Down the Wall”: Making Sense of Teacher Leaders as Instructional Coaches and Evaluators
Comstock, M., & Margolis, J. (2020) · Journal of School Leadership · doi:10.1177/1052684620969932 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“…variation in implementation of evaluation systems across schools (Reinhorn et al., 2017) and highlight the importance of examining how principals (as primary evaluators) put evaluation policies in practice (see, for instance, Kimball & Milanowski, 2009; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Sartain et al., 2011).”
BackgroundClinical Supervision Model to Improve the Quality of Learning in Elementary School
Babo, R., & Syamsuddin, A. (2022) · Jurnal Ilmiah Sekolah Dasar · doi:10.23887/jisd.v6i1.41303 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“Regarding the implementation of supervision by the principal, it has no effect on the teaching skills of teachers because this activity is only a supplement to administration (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Palavan et al., 2016).”
BackgroundLiebowitz, D. D. (2021) · Labour Economics · doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2021.102024 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Principals’ Priorities, Teacher Evaluation, and Instructional Leadership
Donaldson, M. L., Mavrogordato, M., Youngs, P. A., et al. (2024) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x241273903 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“Yet, like others, we found that few principals report implementing it in ways that might actually improve instruction (Hunter & Rodriguez, 2021; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
InfluentialFord, T. G., & Lavigne, A. L. (2023) · Educational Policy · doi:10.1177/08959048221103796 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“This is compounded by the fact that principals oftentimes observe and provide feedback to teachers in content areas outside of their area of expertise (Cherasaro et al., 2016) which results in principals providing feedback almost entirely focused on pedagogy (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundInfluentialSkolledarskap i Sverige: en forskningsöversikt 2014–2018
Norqvist, L., & Isling, P. P. (2020) · Nordic Studies in Education · doi:10.23865/nse.v40.2230 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Principal evaluation in the United States: A national review of state statutes and regulations
Nielsen, S. R., & Lavigne, A. L. (2020) · Education Policy Analysis Archives · doi:10.14507/epaa.28.5097 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“…2015), principal and teacher perceptions and practices (e.g., Derrington & Campbell, 2017; Flores & Derrington, 2017; Goldring et al., 2015; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Lavigne & Chamberlain, 2017; Lavigne & Olson, 2019), as well as unintended consequences (e.g., Ford et al., 2018; Lavigne,…”
BackgroundLavigne, A. L., & Olson, A. (2019) · Leadership and Policy in Schools · doi:10.1080/15700763.2019.1637899 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Hunter, S. B., & Ege, A. (2021) · Educational Administration Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0013161x211003134 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
“Relative to the expectations set forth by these new systems, researchers found that administrators conducted fewer observations of shorter duration and held brief postobservation conferences (Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundInfluentialInstructional Supervision in an Era of High‐Stakes Accountability
Fusarelli, L. D., & Fusarelli, B. C. (2018) · doi:10.1002/9781119128304.ch6 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Teachers’ Views on the Conduct of Class Observation: The Philippine DepEd Setting
Torres, M. V., Zerrudo, A. P., Labad, V. S., & Gabales, B. (2024) · International Journal of Instruction · doi:10.29333/iji.2024.17325a · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Teachers’ perceptions of how principals use new teacher evaluation systems
Reid, D. (2020) · Teachers and Teaching · doi:10.1080/13540602.2020.1740199 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Stosich, E. L., Hatch, T., Hill, K., et al. (2021) · Education Policy Analysis Archives · doi:10.14507/epaa.29.5990 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“…learning related to teacher evaluation could help to facilitate social connections among administrators in different roles and could support administrators’ in developing a common language and approach for supporting teachers’ practice (Coburn & Russell, 2008; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Liou, 2016).”
Critical Perspectives on Teaching, Learning and Leadership
(2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-15-6667-7 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Leadership for socially-just supervision in K-12 schools in the context of the United States
Çevik, S., YILDIRIM, S. G., & Zepeda, S. J. (2020) · Multicultural Education Review · doi:10.1080/2005615x.2020.1842671 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Rafiq, S., Qaisar, S., & Butt, I. H. (2022) · Gomal University Journal of Research · doi:10.51380/gujr-38-02-08 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Hunter, S. B., & Redding, C. (2022) · Educational Policy · doi:10.1177/08959048221087201 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
“While ICs and TPOs informally observe teachers and provide them with feedback for improvement, TPOs also observe teachers formally for summative evaluation purposes, similar to the role typically played by school administrators (Hunter & Rodriguez, 2019; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016).”
BackgroundFlamand, P., Tuytens, M., Vekeman, E., & Devos, G. (2024) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2024.104543 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
U.S. Principals' Interpretation and Implementation of Teacher Evaluation Policies
Reid, D. (2017) · The Qualitative Report · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2017.2721 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
The role of ego threat in professional growth: Fulfilling the ethical intentions of the SEED Model
Gregory, J. L., & Mebane, K. A. (2018) · Educational Practice and Theory · doi:10.7459/ept/40.1.02 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
School Leadership in the United States: Evolving Responsibilities in Times of Change
Lowenhaupt, R. J. (2021) · Educational governance research · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-74497-7_10 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Mayger, L. K., & Provinzano, K. (2022) · Education Policy Analysis Archives · doi:10.14507/epaa.30.6983 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“School principals, however, prefer to use teacher evaluation as a tool for professional development (Derrington & Campbell, 2018; Kraft & Gilmour, 2016; Neumerski et al., 2018; Paufler & Sloat, 2020).”
BackgroundInfluentialCan Video Technology Improve Teacher Evaluations? An Experimental Study
Kane, T. J., Blazar, D., Gehlbach, H., et al. (2019) · Education Finance and Policy · doi:10.1162/edfp_a_00289 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“…and practitioners have raised concerns about conflating coaching interventions, which are purposefully low-stakes and non-evaluative, with official teacher evaluation, which could carry consequences for the teachers’ employment, earnings, or daily work relationships (Kraft and Gilmour 2016).”
Background
- Authors
- Kraft, M. A., & Gilmour, A. F.
- Affiliations
- Brown University (US)
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kraft, Matthew A.
- Venue
- Educational Administration Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-07-07
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 711-753
- ISSN
- 0013-161X (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3519
- PMC
- PMC5513173
- OpenAlex
- W2414507369
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 85
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 103.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Educational Administration Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P2CHD041020)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › School Leadership and Teacher Performance
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
- Keywords
- teacher evaluation, principals, instructional leadership, teacher professional development, assessment reform, principal training, instructional coaches, peer assessment, urban districts
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-09-28.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-09-28.
Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
