Traditional teacher evaluation procedures involve the school leader providing feedback in a summative form to the classroom teacher (Tuytens & Devos, 2011). The function of the administrator to be both supervisor and evaluator is a contrasting role. There are four main purposes of teacher evaluation: improvement, accountability, staff development, and personnel decisions (Darling-Hammond, Wise, & Pease, 1983; Tuytens & Devos, 2011). Administrators are already constrained for time and resources. Therefore, fulfilling all four purposes through the current evaluation process in California is becoming increasingly difficult.
Using peers in the evaluation process is an alternative evaluation method being explored across the country, specifically in the form of Peer Assistance and Review (PAR; Goldstein, 2004; Matula, 2011; Weems & Rogers, 2010). The problem this research addressed was the efficacy of teacher evaluation systems and how evaluative practice can be improved from the perspectives of principals and Consulting Teachers (CTs) with experience in the PAR program.
The study found principals and CTs had mixed reactions regarding the inclusion of PAR as a multiple measure for teacher evaluation. All participants' perceptions of the role of the CT included the common language of supporter, helper, coach, and mentor, which matched the PAR documents from each district. The data showed that subjectivity, fear, and lack of time, negatively impacted the traditional teacher evaluation process and that involving peers in the process could be beneficial.
|School:||California State University, Fullerton|
|School Location:||United States -- California|
|Source:||DAI-A 76/06(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Educational evaluation, Higher Education Administration, Educational leadership|
|Keywords:||Alternative Evaluation, Multiple Measures, PAR, Peer Assistance Review, Peer Coaching, Teacher Evaluation|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be