CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 402Evaluation of Teaching PracticesTeacher Education and AssessmentsSchool Choice and Performance

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating Teacher Evaluation

Open access
Darling-Hammond, Linda, Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey, Haertel, Edward, Rothstein, Jesse·2012·Phi Delta Kappan
DOI 10.1177/003172171209300603
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Popular modes of evaluating teachers are fraught with inaccuracies and inconsistencies, but the field has identified better approaches.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/003172171209300603

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Amrein-Beardsley A., The SAS education value-added assessment system (EVAAS): Its intended and unintended effects in a major urban school system.
  2. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation., 2010, Learning about teaching: Initial findings from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project.
  3. Braun H., 2005, Using student progress to evaluate teachers: A primer on value-added models.
  4. Briggs D., 2011, Due diligence and the evaluation of teachers: A review of the value-added analysis underlying the effectiveness rankings of Los Angeles Unified School District teachers by the
  5. Darling-Hammond L., 2005, Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do.
  6. Milanowski A., 2004, The relationship between standards-based teacher evaluation scores and student achievement.
  7. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future., 1996, What matters most: Teaching for America's future.
  8. National Research Council, Board on Testing and Assessment., 2008, Assessing accomplished teaching: Advanced-level certification programs.
  9. National Research Council, Board on Testing and Assessment., 2009, Letter report to the U.S. Department of Education
  10. Newton X., 2010, Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 18
  11. Packard R., 1991, Final quantitative assessment of the Arizona career ladder pilot-test project.
  12. Rothstein J., 2007, CEPS Working Paper No. 159
  13. Rothstein J., 2011, Review of ‘Learning about teaching: Initial findings from the Measures of Effective Teaching Project.’
  14. Sass T., 2008, The stability of value-added measures of teacher quality and implications for teacher compensation policy
  15. Solmon L., 2007, The effectiveness of the Teacher Advancement Program
  16. Springer M., 2010, Teacher pay for performance: Experimental evidence from the Project on Incentives in Teaching
  17. Wilson M., 2011, Investigating the validity of portfolio assessments of beginning teachers: Relationships with student achievement and tests of teacher knowledge.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Darling-Hammond, L., Amrein-Beardsley, A., Haertel, E., & Rothstein, J.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
ORCID
Rothstein, Jesse
Venue
Phi Delta Kappan
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2012-03
Volume
93
Issue
6
Pages
8-15
ISSN
  • 0031-7217 (ISSN-L)
  • 1940-6487
DOI
10.1177/003172171209300603
OpenAlex
W334502450
Cited by
402
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 4
FWCI
169.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Phi Delta Kappan (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • ScholarWorks - GVSU (Grand Valley State University) (submittedVersion)
  • Colleagues
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Education
  • Northern Arizona University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
Keywords
teacher evaluation, teacher assessment, assessment accuracy, assessment consistency

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.

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