Cited by 155Teacher Education and AssessmentsSchool Choice and PerformanceEducational Assessment and Improvement

Refocusing the Debate: Assessing the Purposes and Tools of Teacher Evaluation

Papay, John·2012·Harvard Educational Review

Abstract

In this article, John Papay argues that teacher evaluation tools should be assessed not only on their ability to measure teacher performance accurately, but also on how well they inform and support ongoing teacher development. He looks at two major approaches to teacher evaluation reform: value-added measures and standards-based evaluations. Papay analyzes these two approaches both as measurement tools and as professional development tools, illuminating the advantages, drawbacks, and untapped potential of each. In the process, attention is refocused towards a broader conception of the purpose of teacher evaluation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.17763/haer.82.1.v40p0833345w6384

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • 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).”
  • PAR 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).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Papay, J.
Affiliations
Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Papay, John
Venue
Harvard Educational Review
Published
2012-04-01
Volume
82
Issue
1
Pages
123-141
ISSN
  • 0017-8055 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-5045
OpenAlex
W62887084
Cited by
155
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 1
FWCI
43.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Harvard Educational Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Assessments
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Educational Assessment and Improvement
Keywords
teacher evaluation, value-added measures, standards-based evaluation, teacher performance measurement, teacher professional development, assessment reform

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