SUPPORTING	STATEMENT B:

REQUEST	FOR	CLEARANCE	OF	INFORMATION	

COLLECTION	FORMS	FOR

“IMPACTS	OF	A	DETAILED	CHECKLIST	ON	

FORMATIVE	FEEDBACK	TO	TEACHERS”

October 2014

Submitted to: Submitted by:

U.S. Department of Education SEDL

Institute of Education Sciences 4700 Mueller Blvd.

555 New Jersey Ave. NW, Rm. 308 Austin, TX 78723

Washington, DC 20208 Phone: (800) 476-6861

4700 Mueller Blvd. Austin, TX 78723

800-476-6861

www.relsouthwest.org

This publication was prepared for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) under contract ED-IES-12-C-00012 by 

Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest, administered by SEDL. The content of the publication does not 

necessarily reflect the views or policies of IES or the U.S. Department of Education, nor does mention of trade names, 

commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. government. The publication is in the public 

domain. Authorization to reproduce in whole or in part for educational purposes is granted.
Contents

Study Background........................................................................................................................... 4

Impact Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 6

Implementation Fidelity Research Questions.............................................................................. 6

Exploratory Research Questions ................................................................................................. 6

1. Respondent Universe and Sampling Methods............................................................................ 8

Degree of Accuracy Needed........................................................................................................ 9

2. Description of Procedures for the Collection of Information ..................................................... 9

Data Collection for Principal and Teacher Recruitment ........................................................... 10

Data Sources.............................................................................................................................. 11

Principal Baseline and Follow-up Survey.............................................................................. 12

Teacher Baseline and Follow-up Survey ............................................................................... 13

3. Description of Procedures for Maximizing Response Rates .................................................... 17

4. Description of Tests, Procedures, and Methods........................................................................ 18

5. Individuals Consulted on Statistical Aspects of the Design and Key Staff.............................. 19

References..................................................................................................................................... 20

APPENDIX A – Teacher and Principal Survey Instruments........................................................ 21

Spring 2015 School Leader Survey............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Spring 2016 School Leader Survey............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Spring 2015 Teacher Survey ......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Spring 2016 Teacher Survey ......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

APPENDIX B – Principal and Teacher Recruitment Materials................................................... 87

Wave 1 Principal Recruitment Script– SPRING 2015.............................................................. 87

Wave 1 Teacher Recruitment Script– – SPRING 2015 .............Error! Bookmark not defined.

Wave 2 Principal Recruitment Script– – SPRING 2016............Error! Bookmark not defined.

Wave 2 Teacher Recruitment Script– – SPRING 2015 .............Error! Bookmark not defined.

Wave 1 Principal Recruitment Script Follow-up .......................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Wave 1 Teacher Recruitment Script Follow-up .........................Error! Bookmark not defined.

APPENDIX C – Secondary Data Elements................................................................................ 103
Teacher and School Administrative Data Variables List ........................................................ 103

NM TEACH Reflect Data Variables List...................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Principal and Teacher Contact Information................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4

Study	Background

The U.S. Department of Education (ED) requests clearance for the recruitment materials and 

data collection protocols under the OMB generic clearance agreement (OMB Number [IES to 

complete]) for activities related to the Regional Educational Laboratory Program (REL). ED, in 

consultation with SEDL, is planning a clustered randomized evaluation in New Mexico to test 

the effectiveness of materials intended to improve the feedback that principals provide in one-onone conferences to their teachers about their classroom instruction. The study includes an impact 

analysis and an implementation analysis. 

New Mexico Public Education Department (NM PED) staff have identified the topic of principal 

feedback to teachers as an area where New Mexico needs assistance. In particular, NM PED 

staff have received comments that principals do not feel adequately prepared to provide teachers 

with feedback about their instructional practices. The NM PED has committed to ensure that 

every student has equitable access to an effective principal and teacher every day they are in 

school. Although NM PED recognizes that the conferences are likely an area in the overall 

evaluation system in need of improvement, it has limited resources and time to focus on the postobservation conference step in the evaluation cycle. Therefore, any potential interventions to 

address this issue must be easy to implement and require few resources. 

This impact study will examine whether an enhanced feedback guide (Conversation Protocol), 

relative to business-as-usual guidance to principals and teachers, achieves the following:

1. improves the structure and content of the principal-teacher feedback conversation, 

2. improves perceptions that the feedback delivered to teachers is useful 

3. better targets guidance to teachers’ regarding professional development that is tied to their 

formal classroom observation scores

4. improves quality of teacher instruction as measured by subsequent formal observation ratings 

on the state’s tool, called NM TEACH, and 

5. increases student achievement and state standardized tests.

To examine these outcomes, ED’s contractor will invite all public school principals of charter 

and non-charter schools in the state to participate in the study. Blocking by school district, a 

randomly selected half of principals who agree to participate (along with teachers in their school 

who also agree to participate in the study) will be assigned to the treatment group. The remaining 

half of principals (along with teachers in their school who also agree to participate in the study)

will be assigned to the control group. 

In summary, the study will compare principals and teachers in the treatment and control 
5

conditions, which are detailed in Table 1. 

Table 1. Treatment and Control Conditions

Treatment 

group

Control 

group

Principals

NM PED-sponsored professional development for principals 

offered during the summer, of which 1.5-2 hours were 

devoted to feedback to teachers. Training conducted in 

regional in-person professional development sessions led by

the state’s contractor, Southern Regional Education Board 

(SREB). All principals in the state are required to participate 

as a part of their job requirement.

 

List of documents to bring to each feedback conversation 

Receipt of Conversation Protocol, which includes 24-item 

checklist to use during each feedback conversation. 

-



Link to a 5-minute video in which principal testifies about 

her experience using the checklist.



Business-as-usual guide to remind principals about “5 stages 

of feedback” described in NM PED-sponsored principal 

professional development to use for feedback conversations

-



Teachers

Business-as-usual guide: A document the includes a 

reminder to teachers about their right to feedback within 10 

calendar days of formal observation under the NM TEACH 

Educator Effectiveness System, and a link to the NM PED 

provided FAQ on teacher evaluation 

(http://ped.state.nm.us/ped/NMTeach_FAQ.html)



List of documents to bring to each feedback conversation 

24-item checklist to use during each feedback conversation

-



5-minute video in which teacher testifies about her 

experience using the checklist



ED’s contractor will request that the treatment group principals and control group principals do 
6

three things: (1) disseminate the relevant guide (and a link to the video, where relevant) to all 

school leaders and to all teachers in his/her building, (2) use the guide and view the video, where 

relevant (along with all other schools leaders in the building who observe teachers) with 100% of 

the teachers that they formally observe during school year 2015-2016, and (3) complete a 

baseline survey in fall 2015 and a follow-up survey in spring 2016. ED’s contractor will request 

treatment group teachers and control group teachers to do two things: (1) use the guide they

received from ED’s contractor (and view the video, where relevant) in the feedback 

conversations they have with their school leader(s), and (2) complete a baseline survey in fall 

2015 and a follow-up survey in spring 2016.

Impact	Research	Questions

The evaluation will examine the impact of providing a post-classroom observation feedback 

checklist and a video to principals and teachers on principal, teacher, and student outcomes. To 

do so, this evaluation will use a cluster RCT design with random assignment at the school level 

to address the following impact and implementation questions. 

Does provision of the feedback checklist and video\relative to the business as usual guidance: 

1) improve the content and structure of post-observation conference according to principals and 

teachers? 

2) improve principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of the utility of post-observation conference? 

3) increase the amount of time it takes to complete the post-observation conference?

4) cause principals to recommend and teachers to take professional development that is aligned 

to needs identified in the formal observations? 

5) improve the quality of teachers’ subsequent instructional practices as measured by principals’ 

formal classroom observation scores?

Implementation	Fidelity	Research	Questions

ED’s contractor will also examine the implementation of the Feedback Checklist relative to the 

business-as-usual guidance by analyzing responses to survey questions regarding the type of 

guidance used. The implementation portion of the study will address the following research 

questions:

6) How extensively do principals and teachers in the treatment and control groups report using 

the form of guidance they were assigned? 

7) How extensively do principals and teachers in the treatment and control groups report using 

the form of guidance they were not assigned (i.e. cross-overs)?

Exploratory	Research	Questions

ED’s contractor will also perform exploratory analyses examining the association of the 
7

enhanced feedback protocol on subgroups of teachers and principals. In addition, we will also 

examine whether provision of the treatment guide improves subsequent student performance on 

state standardized tests. Although the design of the study allows for causal analysis of these 

questions, for reasons of limited sample size within New Mexico and limited time for the 

treatment or control condition to influence behavior and student achievement, we will likely have 

insufficient statistical power to detect differences. Nevertheless, these questions have high policy

relevance for NM PED, so we include them to provide insights for follow-on studies and for NM 

PED’s improvement of subsequent iterations of NM TEACH observations and feedback. The

exploratory research questions are:

8) Does the provision of the checklist to principals and teachers increase student achievement 

relative to business-as-usual guidance regarding feedback? 

9) Is there suggestive evidence that the effects of providing the checklist varies according to the 

following subgroups of principals and to the following subgroups of teachers:

a) extensive users of the checklist – i.e., teachers who have received three versus two 

formal observations and principals who have used the checklist in schools that have a 

greater than average number of teachers within the given district

b) personal beliefs and attitudes about NMTEACH evaluation system

c) accountability pressure (as measured by prior year’s school accountability grade)

d) those principals who have received training on the NMTEACH Observation Rubric

e) those who work in schools that teachers rate as collaborative and supportive

f) those with greater qualifications, including more years of experience and certification 

type

g) those who teach core subjects versus non-core subjects

h) those who work in elementary versus middle or high schools

i) teachers in the top and bottom quartile of the NM TEACH summative effectiveness 

score distribution

j) principals in the top and bottom quartile of the NM TEACH School Leader 

effectiveness score distribution

Beyond subgroup analyses, ED’s contractor will also gather information about the perceptions 

users have of the treatment checklist and the control guide.

10) What are principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of the checklist and videos versus business-asusual feedback guidance? For example, do they report that it is easy to use, burdensome, 

formulaic, lengthy, useful for creation of professional development plans, and helpful in 

causing teachers to commit to instructional changes? 
8

11) What are the main reasons why principals report not using the form of guidance they

received? checklist or the business-as-usual guidance? 

OMB approval is being requested for a multimode data collection and analysis of principal, 

teacher, and student outcomes in public schools in New Mexico. The project consists of data 

collection from NM PED and participating principals and teachers who work in New Mexico 

public schools. Specifically, in this OMB clearance package, ED is requesting clearance for the 

following data collection approaches:

 Recruitment materials for participating principals and teachers

 Extant administrative records data collections from NM PED

 Two waves of web-based surveys of principals and teachers in treatment and control schools.

ED believes that the data collections for which clearance is being requested represent the bare 

minimum necessary to assess the impact and implementation of the Conversation Protocol.

The remainder of Part B addresses the following: respondent universe and sampling methods;

description of procedures for maximizing response rates; description of tests, procedures and 

methods; and contact information for statistical consultants and key staff.

1.	Respondent	Universe	and	Sampling	Methods

This section describes the respondent universe and sampling methods for recruitment. To 

understand the impact of providing guidance to principals and teachers regarding feedback 

sessions with teachers following formal classroom observations, ED’s contractor will implement 

a randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluation. The recruitment strategy will focus on both New 

Mexico public school principals and New Mexico public school teachers. ED’s contractor will 

conduct recruitment in a top-down approach, with principal recruitment preceding teacher 

recruitment. First, ED’s contractor will send out an introductory email, and then invite via email 

all principals in public schools governed by the New Mexico Public Education Department (NM 

PED) to participate in a research study. As of the school year 2012–2013, there were 855 school 

principals across the elementary, middle, and high school levels.

1

There are no additional 

inclusion criteria for principals recruited into the study. We anticipate that after three rounds of 

recruitment follow-up to nonresponding principals, about 510 principals will consent to 

participate in the study.

 

1 While the precise number of schools may shift minimally by the time the principal recruitment takes place in

August 2015, this change is not expected to impact our statistical power calculations.
9

Next, in schools where principals consent to participate in the study, ED’s contractor will 

randomly select up to 10 teachers to participate in the study. In schools with less than 10 

teachers, all teachers will be invited to participate. In schools where more than 10 teachers work, 

ED’s contractor will sample 10 using simple random sampling to invite them to participate.

Across New Mexico, there are approximately 21,500 FTE public school teachers according to 

Common Core of Data. We anticipate that after three rounds of recruitment to nonresponding 

teachers, about 5,130 teachers will consent to participate in the study.

Degree	of	Accuracy	Needed

The power analyses to estimate the minimum detectable effect size (MDES) were conducted 

using the Optimal Design software package, version 3.01 (Spybrook, Bloom, Congdon, Hill, 

Martínez, and Raudenbush, 2011), with interpolation of results as necessary to account for the 

non-constant number of schools per district. ED’s contractor drew from prior studies using 

student achievement and principal and teacher survey data to predict participation rates and the

anticipated correlations of the covariates with the outcomes of interest. 

The study will examine continuous principal and teacher outcomes, binary teacher and principal 

outcomes, and continuous student outcomes. We anticipate that our principal sample will be 

sufficient to detect minimum effect sizes between 0.12 and 0.21 standard deviations for 

continuous outcomes with 80% power and a 5% Type I error rate, under reasonable assumptions 

for participation, attrition, and baseline correlation. In addition, the sample of students in these 

schools with participating principals will be sufficient to detect minimum effect sizes of between 

0.09 and 0.14 standard deviations for individual grade level student outcomes, again with 80% 

power and a 5% Type I error rate, under reasonable assumptions for participation, attrition, and 

baseline correlation. The sample of teachers and principals will be sufficient to detect minimum 

effect sizes of between 0.11 and 0.18 standard deviations for continuous outcomes, and 0.15 and 

0.24 standard deviations for binary outcomes with 80% power and a 5% Type I error rate, under 

reasonable assumptions for participation, attrition, and baseline correlation. 

2.	Description	of	Procedures	for	the	Collection of	Information

ED’s contractor, REL Southwest, will manage data collection and ensure quality and timeliness. 

ED’s contractor proposes to collect both primary and secondary data. The primary data will 

consist of a Web-based baseline and follow-up survey for principals and teachers (for four total 

survey instruments). The draft recruitment texts for study participation are included in Appendix 

B, and the survey instruments (along with the consent language) for data collection are included 

in Appendix A. The secondary data consists of formal observation scores by school leaders of 
10

teacher practice as well as principal, teacher and school characteristics and student achievement 

scores collected by NM PED. The data request of extant data from the NM PED is included in 

Appendix C. The content of Appendix A, B, and C are also included in Statement A of this OMB 

package.

Data	Collection	for	Principal	and	Teacher	Recruitment

ED’s contractor will contact all principals in public schools governed by the New Mexico Public 

Education Department (NM PED) to invite them to participate in the study. Recruitment will be 

facilitated by clear materials and communication about the nature of the study and the 

requirements for participation, including complying with random assignment.

The following sections describe more fully each step in the recruitment process:

(1) Obtain principal and teacher email addresses from NM PED.

Starting in January 2015, NM PED will provide to ED’s contractor their existing file of principal 

and teacher email addresses for all those who worked in school year 2014-2015. This list will be 

cleaned in February and March 2015 in advance of recruitment in April 2015. ED’s contractor

will also obtain from NM PED the official start and end day of each NM school district’s school 

year.

(2) Recruit principals and administer baseline principal survey.

NM PED will send an introductory email to all principals in the first week of April 2015 (or after 

OMB approval if this occurs after April 2015), describing REL SW, explaining the study, and 

endorsing the study and encouraging principals to participate. REL SW will then send a followup email to principals (up to three times to non-respondents) – first week of May, third week of 

May and first week of June—seeking their participation in the study and issuing a link and 

password to the baseline principal survey. We will also mail the recruitment letter to the 

principal’s school up to two times. If a principal has not responded to any of the three emails or 

two letters, they will be considered to be out of the study. The principal recruitment email is 

included in Appendix A.

(3) Recruit teachers and administer baseline teacher survey (two weeks after step 2).

During April-May 2015 while the teacher and principal rosters are being cleaned provided by 

NM PED, ED’s contractor will randomly select up to 10 teachers who are teaching in the 2014-

15 school year in a given school to be invited to participate in the study using simple random 

sampling. At schools with fewer than 10 teachers, all teachers will be selected for recruitment. 

After the principal in the schools has consented to participate in the study, the introductory study

recruitment email will be sent to teachers in the school in the third week of April, asking them to 
11

participate in the study. Up to three emails will be issued until the close of the school year, and 

up to two letters will be sent to the schools, at which point non-respondents will be excluded 

from the study. The recruitment email will include a link and password to the baseline teacher 

survey. The teacher recruitment emails is included in Appendix B.

(4) Conduct random assignment of principals. 

Once the window has closed for study recruitment in early summer 2015, ED’s contractor will 

randomly assign 50% of participating principals to the treatment group according to the 

following blocked random selection procedures. Using data from NM PED about 2014-2015 

school characteristics, ED’s contractor will randomize participating schools within each district, 

stratifying schools according to school level (elementary, middle and high school). Prior to 

randomization, ED’s contractor will also examine the distributions of school size and 

racial/ethnic composition (high and low percent Hispanic and Native American) among 

participating schools to determine if any further advantage may be gained by stratifying on these 

characteristics as well.2In cases where only a single school from a district is participating, ED’s 

contractor will combine multiple districts and randomize within matched districts. 

Randomization will occur in the first week of August 2015. By definition, teachers and students 

whose principals who are in the treatment group will belong to the treatment group.3

Data	Sources	

ED’s contractor will collect both primary and secondary data to understand the impact of 

providing the Conversation Checklist to principals and teachers relative to the business-as-usual 

control guide. The primary data will consist of two baseline surveys in spring 2015 (one to 

teachers and one to principals) and follow-up surveys in spring 2016. The secondary data 

consists of (a) formal observation scores by school leaders of teachers’ classrooms throughout 

the 2014-15 and 2015-2016 school year; (b) principal, teacher and school characteristics. Table 2

provides a summary table of the data collection, including the data sources, data elements, and 

timeline. The following section describes the data types in more detail.

Table 2 – Data Sources, Data Elements and Timeline for Data Collection

Data Source Type of Data Timeline for Data Collection

 

2 Given that all non-charter principals in the state will be recruited for the study, stratification is not necessary to 

produce a representative sample. Randomizing within district optimizes power. Among small districts, stratifying by 

school level guards against treatment and control schools being confined to mutually exclusive school levels within 

a district. Given the homogeneity of within-district school composition, ED’s Contractor does not expect further 

stratification by size or race/ethnicity to be advantageous, but will allow for that option if it reduces the potential for 

imbalances in treatment assignment on these school characteristics across the participating schools. 

3

If a principal moves away from the school, we will assign the new principal to the same group as the previous 

principal, and send them the relevant guide. The regression analyses will control for teacher and principal mobility. 
12

Data Source Type of Data Timeline for Data Collection

Principals Baseline survey April 15, 2015 – June 15, 2015

Follow-up survey April 15, 2016 – June 15, 2016

Teachers Baseline survey April 30, 2015 – June 1, 2015

Follow-up survey April 15, 2016 – June 1, 2016

NM PED Principal and Teacher 

Contact Information

April 1, 2015, July 1, 2015, April 1, 

2016

Student-level achievement 

data

June 2015, June 2016

School Report Card Grades July 2015, July 2016

School administrative data January 2015, December 2015, 

December 2016

NM TEACH observation 

rubric scores from 

REFLECT for 2014-15

June 2015

NM TEACH observation 

rubric scores from 

REFLECT for 2015-16

November 2015, February 2016, 

June 2016, December 2016

ED’s contractor will collect two waves of survey data from both principals and teachers. To 

increase the precision of the treatment effect estimates, ED’s contractor has designed the baseline 

(wave 1) and post-treatment (wave 2) survey to contain identical items within respondent type. 

This is to allow us to include baseline responses as a predictor within our regression models for 

each correlative outcome of interest. The only exception to this rule is in wave 2 surveys where 

ED’s contractor added a battery of questions for treatment group respondents and for control 

group respondents to understand their use (or not) and perceptions of the Conversation Checklist. 

Principal	Baseline	and	Follow-up	Survey

The baseline and follow-up principal survey instruments contains eight sections that cover the 

following topics (see Attachment B for the full survey instrument):

 Your Position and Job Responsibilities: type of school leader, years of experience as 

school leader

 Your Perceptions of the Quality Effectiveness of Your School’s Teaching Staff This

Year: subjective rating of the quality of teachers

 Your Practices When Observing Teachers This Year (SY 2014-2015) for Evaluation 

Purposes: number of teachers observed formally, length of post-observation conference, 

frequency of informal observations, practices and perceptions of the post-observation 
13

conference, (the follow-up survey includes questions about whether the treatment and 

control guides were received, used, frequency of use, and perceptions about the guide)

 Professional Development Offered to Teachers This Year (SY 2014-2015): type of 

professional development offered, quality of professional development, alignment of 

professional development options with NM TEACH Observation Rubric

 Training You Received About NM TEACH to Date: types of training received, including 

observation rubric, software, interpreting ratings, providing feedback, utility of training

 Your Personal Views of NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System: subjective rating 

of evaluation system

 Teacher Retention and Improvement: number of teachers who have left the school, 

reason for dismissal

 Optional Comments from You: comments on the observation rubric, professional 

development available, and training on teacher evaluation system.

Teacher	Baseline and	Follow-up	Survey

The baseline and follow-up teacher survey instruments contains seven sections that cover the 

following topics (see Attachment B for the survey instrument):

 Your Position and Job Responsibilities: type of teacher, teaching arrangement, grades 

taught, years of experience

 Your Experiences This Year (SY 2014-2015) of Formal Observations for Evaluation 

Purposes: number of formal observations, length of post-observation conference, 

practices and perceptions of the post-observation conference, ratings on two of the four 

domains in the observation rubric, self-rating on two of four domains in the observation 

rubric (the follow-up survey includes questions about whether the treatment and control 

guides were received, used, frequency of use, and perceptions about the guide)

 Professional Development You Received This Year (SY 2014-2015): type of professional 

development taken, quality of professional development, availability of and support for 

professional development

 Your Perceptions of the Quality Effectiveness of Your School’s Leadership Last Year: 

subjective rating of the quality of school leadership

 Your Personal Views of NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System: subjective rating 

of evaluation system

 Your NM TEACH Summative Evaluation Score Rating: overall rating, feedback received 

from principal after overall rating

 Optional Comments from You: comments on the observation rubric, professional 

development available, and evaluation system.
14

All student-level information will be collected through extant data from NM PED. To reduce 

burden on survey respondents, all respondent and school characteristics will be collected from 

NM PED’s secondary data sources. ED’s contractor will provide a list of requested data fields to 

NM PED prior to the first data collection request. NM PED will also provide school report card 

grades for schools years 2014-2015 (baseline) and 2015-2016 (outcome).4In addition, NM PED 

will provide ED’s contractor with classroom observation-level scores from the NM TEACH 

Observation rubric. Appendix C contains a list of the data elements that will be obtained from 

NM PED.

The impact and exploratory analysis measures will be constructed from survey questions and 

administrative data sources, as described in Table 3. Th e following items are outcome measures 

derived from principal and teacher surveys:

 Good Practices Index: this index is a measure of whether the practices that are 

recommended in the Conversation Checklist are implemented in the feedback conference. 

There will be one index for principals, and one for teachers of good practices. We 

anticipate that in each index, the items will include whether the conversation included at 

least one practice that the teacher does well, identified at least one challenge, prioritized 

next steps, ended on a positive note, and mutually developed next steps. 

 Feedback Conversation Perceptions Index: We anticipate that this index will be 

derived from the extent to which principals agree with statements regarding the feedback 

conference, , the principal gave specific feedback, the principal gave actionable feedback, 

the teacher had an equal chance to speak during the conversation, the principal or teacher 

feels positive about the feedback provided, the principal or teacher experienced a high 

level of conflict during the feedback conference, and the principal found it difficult to 

provide criticism. 

 PD is tailored to needs identified in formal classroom observation: this measure will 

be based on a survey question that asks the teacher whether they were recommended to 

take PD as a result of a rating in each of the five Domain 2 and five Domain 3 items of 

the NM TEACH Observation Rubric.

 Fraction of targeted professional development that was recommended by the 

principal and taken by the teacher: This outcome measure will be based on teacher 

survey responses about taking professional development that was recommended. Of all of 

the recommended PD, we anticipate estimating the fraction that was taken by the teacher 

in the 2015-2016 school year (including PD taken in person and online). 

 

4

School grades are computed on a continuous scale from 1 to 100, and are publicly reported annually. 
15

Table 3. Impact and Exploratory Analysis Outcome Variable, Research Question, 

and Data Source Mapping

Outcome Research 

Question

Data source

Impact outcomes

Good Practices Index 

(measure of post-observation 

feedback conference content 

and structure)

RQ1 & 

RQ9

principal survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q12b, Q12c, Q12d, Q12e, 

Q12f, Q12g, Q12h, Q12j, Q12m, Q12n, Q12o, 

Q12u

- Wave 2 survey: Q12b, Q12c, Q12d, Q12e, 

Q12f, Q12g, Q12h, Q12j, Q12m, Q12n, Q12o, 

Q12u

teacher survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q11b, Q11c, Q11d, Q11e, 

Q11f, Q11g, Q11h, Q11j Q11p, Q11q, Q11s, 

Q11w - Wave 2 survey: Q11b, Q11c, Q11d, 

Q11e, Q11f, Q11g, Q11h, Q11j Q11p, Q11q, 

Q11s, Q11w

Feedback Conversation 

Perceptions Index (measure 

of the perceived quality of 

feedback)

RQ2 & 

RQ9

principal survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q12a, Q12k, Q12l, Q12p, 

Q12q, Q12r, Q12s, Q12t

- Wave 2 Survey: Q12a, Q12k, Q12l, Q12p, 

Q12q, Q12r, Q12s, Q12t

teacher survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q11a, Q11i, Q11k, Q11l, 

Q11m, Q11n, Q11o, Q11r, Q11t, Q11u

- Wave 2 survey: Q11a, Q11i, Q11k, Q11l, 

Q11m, Q11n, Q11o, Q11r, Q11t, Q11u

Average number of minutes it 

takes to complete the postobservation conference

RQ3 & 

RQ9

Principal survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q10

- Wave 2 survey: Q10

Teacher Survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q9

- Wave 2 survey: Q9

PD is tailored to needs 

identified in formal 

classroom observation 

RQ4 & 

RQ9

teacher survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q12, Q14

- Wave 2 survey: Q15

Fraction of targeted 

Professional development 

that was recommended by the 

RQ4 & 

RQ9

teacher survey

- Wave 1 survey: Q13

- Wave 2 survey: Q15
16

Outcome Research 

Question

Data source

principal and taken by the 

teacher 

Domain level Observation 

Rubric score

RQ5 & 

RQ9

REFLECT

Observation proficiency level RQ5 & 

RQ9

REFLECT

Exploratory questions

School-level student 

achievement scores

RQ8 NM PED Administrative Data

Effects by subgroup RQ9 Teacher Survey

- wave 1: Q1 – Q7; Q16 – Q22

- wave 2: Q1 – Q7; Q17 – Q24

principal wave 1 & 2: Q1 - Q6; Q15 - Q22 

NM PED Administrative Data

Note: REFLECT is the system designed by Teachscape for NM PED that stores observation rubric scores and observation

narratives

For cases where multiple survey items are the source of the outcome measure, we will 

conduct exploratory factor analyses to generate an index of the given construct. For each 

construct, we anticipate testing whether the survey items measure the latent variable described in 

Table 3. The precise number of items retained in each scale will depend on each item’s factor 

loading. As an initial step, we will a scree plot to visually display the Eigenvalues, and we 

anticipate retaining factors for which the minimum Eigenvalue is greater than or equal to one. 

However, we will not apply a strict test, and may, for substantive reasons, retain factors with 

Eigenvalues of less than one or drop factors with Eigenvalues of greater than one. We will then 

use oblique rotation and varimax rotation to determine which items load most highly onto which 

of the retained factors. We intend to retain only factors for which we have an underlying theory

or hypothesis for the apparent latent variable measured by a factor, and we will derive our 

theories from the theory of action about the Conversation Checklist. Namely, we will test if the 

feedback checklist, as intended, makes conversations seem more mutual (rather than from 

principals to teachers), make feedback more specific, and lead to actionable next steps. 

Operationally, we will generate the scales by averaging the respondent-level sums of item-level 

responses derived from the relevant survey items. A coefficient Alpha of 0.70 or greater is 

generally considered an acceptable level of internal consistency within a given factor, with lower 

values indicating a potential lack of adequate reliability.

Meanwhle, the following are the outcome measures that are collected from NM PED from the 

REFLECT teacher observation rubric system or from administrative data:
17

 NMTEACH Observation rubric scores: These are item level measures from the 

REFLECT system on each of the four domains of the NM TEACH Observation tool, and 

proficiency levels associated with the item level measures. We will examine changes to 

the Domain-level scores and proficiency ratings from the prior year as well as changes 

over the course of the year when the Checklist is available. 

 Student achievement on tests. We will estimate whether the treatment raises average 

school-wide achievement on standardized tests. We will do this by modelling studentlevel achievement data hierarchically to account for the clustering of students in schools 

and to estimate the effect of the guide on average student achievement according to 

whether students are in treatment or control group schools. The school-level student 

achievement will include separately modeled math, ELA, and science PARCC scores. 

We will examine the difference in student achievement between students who have 

teachers that are using and not using the Conversation Checklist in the feedback 

conference, controlling for prior achievement scores and relevant student and school 

covariates. We will examine differences overall at the school level, with sub-analyses by 

grade. 

 School report card data. Additionally, the academic component of the school report 

card measure will be used as a complimentary impact measure for student achievement 

observed at the school level. NM PED will provide the continuous scale academic 

composite measure currently in use in the state comprising 90 percent of the final school 

report card grade. 

3.	Description	of	Procedures	for	Maximizing Response	Rates

ED is committed to obtaining complete data for this evaluation. A large share of the impact 

analysis question for the evaluation relies heavily on administrative data. ED’s contractor

anticipates a 95-percent response rate from NM PED on student, teacher and principal measures

in the administrative data, as well as teacher observation scores. A key to achieving complete 

administrative data is tracking the data components from NM PED with e-mail and telephone 

contact to the appropriate parties to resolve issues of missing or delayed data files. ED’s 

contractor has a strong working relationship with representatives from NM PED. All 

administrative data files will be reviewed for consistency and completeness. If a data file has too 

many missing values or if an instrument in the implementation study has too few items 

completed to be counted as a response, ED’s contractor will seek to obtain more complete 

responses by e-mail or phone.

Based on its prior experience with administering surveys to principals and teachers in a variety
18

of schools, districts, and states, ED’s contractor expects the response rate for the baseline survey

to be at 85 percent for those principals and teachers who consent to participate in the study. We 

will contact non-responding principals and teachers up to four times to encourage participation.

Three follow-up email reminders will be sent to individual respondents in the event that 

responses are not obtained for Web-based surveys. Finally, as a fourth and fifth contact attempt 

we will send a reminder letter to their school (twice), after which point we will deem the person 

a non-respondent and exclude them from the study.

In addition, a number of steps will be taken to maximize response rates. For example, sampled 

respondents will receive advance communications explaining the study, introducing the REL 

Southwest, provide an assurance of confidentiality, and encourage them to participate as a way to 

help NM PED refine and improve NM TEACH. Respondents also will be given a contact number 

to reach ED’s contractor with questions. Finally, respondents will receive an incentive for 

participating in the study:

 $25 gift card for principal for completing the baseline survey, and $25 gift card for

completing the follow-up survey

 $25 gift card for teachers for completing the baseline survey, and $25 gift card for

completing the follow-up survey

Finally, ED’s contractor will consider the most recent statistical literature and work with IES to 

determine the most appropriate method for handling missing data. They will use appropriate 

analytic methods to account for missing data, and consider options such as complete case 

analyses with regression adjustment, maximum likelihood methods, non-response weights, or 

fitting the models specified above in a Bayesian hierarchical framework. Upon obtaining the 

data, ED’s contractor will examine the extent of missing data overall and by treatment group.

4.	Description	of	Tests, Procedures, and	Methods

To measure the impact of the Conversation Checklist on the structure and content of the 

feedback conference, the quality of the feedback provided by principals and received by

teachers, the professional development that is recommended by principals and completed by

teachers, ED’s contractor will administer principal and teacher surveys. The survey items have 

been reviewed by RAND colleagues who were formerly employed as teachers and colleagues 

with content expertise. ED’s contractor has also conducted cognitive interviews of two retired 

New Mexico teachers and five retired principals by asking the participants to complete the 

survey and comment on the clarity of the questions, whether the questions assess the intended 

constructs, whether the tone of the questions is appropriate for the audience, and whether the 

length of the survey is suitable. During 1.5-2 hour phone calls, ED’s contractor solicited detailed 
19

feedback on the clarity, tone, and wording of these documents. With each participant, we mailed 

them hard copy materials several days in advance of our scheduled call, asking them to complete 

the survey and read the materials prior to the call. After the call, ED’s contractor asked 

participants to return the hard copies with comments on them in a pre-paid return envelope.

Based on the feedback from the pilot test, ED’s contractor has refined and clarified the survey

questions and made clarifications and refinements to the feedback protocol. For example, ED’s 

contractor learned that tenure is a term not widely understood and agreed upon in New Mexico, 

and that it set by the state rather than districts. ED’s contractor has therefore dropped some of the 

tenure questions on the survey. ED’s contractor also changed some words that sounded negative 

or punitive in tone about teachers to retired principals, and ensured that the list of documents 

participants in the treatment checklist are accurate and described in ways that principals and 

teachers would understand.

5.	Individuals	Consulted	on	Statistical	Aspects	of	the	Design	and	Key	Staff

ED’s contractor consulted Lou Mariano, Senior Statistician and director of the Statistics Unit at 

RAND Corporation concerning the methodology, study design, and data collection 

approach/burden.

The following individuals were consulted on the statistical, data collection, and analytic aspects 

of the principal feedback evaluation study through REL Southwest’s Technical Working Group 

(TWG):

Dan Goldhaber, Ph.D.

Director, CALDER (National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research)

Vice President, American Institutes for Research (AIR) 

Director, Center for Education Data & Research (CEDR), University of Washington Bothell

Co-Editor, Education Finance and Policy

3876 Bridge Way N,Suite 201

Seattle, WA 98103

Ph: 206-547-1562

Fax: 206-547-1641

E-mail: dgoldhab@uw.edu

Geoffrey Borman, Ph.D.

Professor of Education, University of Wisconsin—Madison

Deputy Director of the University of Wisconsin's Predoctoral Interdisciplinary Research 
20

Training Program

Senior Researcher, Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

348 Education Building

1000 Bascom Mall

Madison, WI 53706-1326

Ph: 608-263-3688

Fax: 608-265-3135

E-mail: gborman@education.wisc.edu

Johannes M.(Hans) Bos, Ph.D.

Vice President and Program Director, International Development, Evaluation, and Research 

(IDER) Program

American Institutes for Research

2800 Campus Drive, Suite 200

San Mateo, CA 94403

Ph: 650-843-8100

Fax: 650-843-8200

E-mail: jbos@air.org

W. Steven Barnett, Ph.D.

Board of Governors Professor and Director of the National Institute for Early Education 

Research

Rutgers University

73 Easton Avenue

New Brunswick, NJ 08901

Ph: 848-932-4350 x23132

Fax: 732-932-4360

E-mail: sbarnett@nieer.org

References

Raudenbush, S.W., Spybrook, J., Congdon, R., Liu, X , & Martinez, A., Bloom, H., & Hill, C. 

(2011). Optimal Design Software Plus Empirical Evidence (Version 3.0) [Software]. 

www.wtgrantfoundation.org. 
21

APPENDIX A	– Teacher	and	Principal	Survey	Instruments

Spring	2015	School	Leader	Survey

[[Version: On-line administration. Wave 1.]] 

Understanding	Your	Participation	in	the	Study

Welcome to the spring 2015 survey for school leaders about the feedback you give to teachers’ 

regarding their instruction as a part of the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System. 

Study Purpose. With funding from the federal Department of Education as a part of the 

Southwest Regional Educational Lab, this study is intended to learn about the feedback 

principals give to teachers under the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System, and teachers’ 

perceptions of that feedback. For more information about the study, please see {REL Southwest 

website}. In {month, year} REL Southwest researchers asked all New Mexico’s public school 

principals to participate in a study about evaluation feedback to teachers. Results will be used 

to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding how to improve the 

NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System training for principals and teachers.

Survey Purpose. This survey is intended to gather information on the provision of feedback to 

teachers after formal observations by school leaders. REL Southwest researchers will ask study 

participants to fill out an on-line, 30-minute survey once in spring 2015 and again in spring 

2016. Survey results will not be used to evaluate you, other teachers, or school leaders. 

Procedures. Online completion of the survey should take approximately 30 minutes. By using 

your personal survey link provided in the invitation email, you will be able to complete the 

survey in multiple sessions; responses will be saved as you enter them. However, once you click 

“submit” at the very end of the survey, you will no longer be able to return.

Confidentiality. REL Southwest will keep all survey responses confidential and will only use 

them for the purpose of the study. Our reports will contain summaries, and responses will 

never be presented in any way that would permit readers to identify you or your school. No 

one at your school, district, or the state will have access to survey responses that include 

respondents’ names, school names, or other information that could potentially be used to 

identify individuals or schools.

Participants. At the same time that we are emailing you, REL Southwest is also inviting all New 

Mexico public school school-based principals to participate in this study. Up to 10 teachers per 

school are also being surveyed. 
22

Benefits. Your completion of this survey gives you the opportunity to reflect on and share your 

perspective about the teacher evaluation system. You will be providing valuable information 

that may help New Mexico Public Education Department improve the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System. 

Compensation. Within two weeks of completion of this online survey, you will receive via email 

a link to your $25 online gift card for completing the survey. We will provide another $25 

online gift card upon completion of the spring 2016 survey to each participant.

Risks. The risks associated with your participation in this study are minimal. 

Voluntary Participation. Your participation in this survey is completely voluntary. You can 

decide not to participate or to discontinue your participation at any time. A few survey 

questions, marked with a red asterisk, are required for routing to later questions.

Questions? If you have any questions about this survey or the study as a whole, please feel free 

to call us toll-free at {XXX}. You can also contact {XX}, the survey coordinator, at {email} or by 

phone at {XX}. If you have concerns or questions about your rights as a participant, contact the 

REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for the protection of project participants): {email}, 

toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.

[Required question] Informed Consent. By clicking the box below, you are indicating that you 

have read and understood the information provided to you about your participation in this 

survey.

 I have read and understood the information and choose to participate.

Thank you very much for your help in this important study!

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Using	This	Survey

Here are some tips that may help you navigate and complete this survey.

Returning to previous pages. Be sure to use the survey “go back to previous page” button at 

the bottom of the page. Do not use your browser’s back button—it will not work.

Returning to the survey itself. If you would like to complete the survey in multiple sessions—or 
23

if you accidentally get disconnected from the survey—you can return to your previous 

responses by clicking on the link that was in your invitation email. This will take you to where 

you left off (through the last full page you completed). You can keep returning until you click on 

the “submit” button on the final page of the survey.

Saving your responses. Your responses on any given survey page are saved when you click on 

either button at the bottom of the page (“save and go to next page” or “go back to previous 

page”). 

Adding optional comments. Toward the bottom of each survey page is a space where you can 

write in any comments you may have pertaining to the questions on the page. This is 

completely optional.

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Position	and	Job	Responsibilities

[q1]Which of the following best describes your position as a school leader this school year 

(2014-2015)? 

 If you are not a school leader, you may have received this survey in error. Please reply to 

the invitation email or call {XXX}.

 principal 

 vice principal/assistant principal

 director

 dean

 other: _______________________

[q2x]Including this school year (2014-2015), how many years have you been a school 

administrator? (Fill in each box.)

 “School administrator” includes principal, assistant principal, and other equivalent titles.

[q2xa]Years as a school administrator in your current school

[q2xb]Years as a school administrator in your current district 

(including current school)

[q2xc]Years as a school administrator, total, in any location 

(including other districts and current district)
24

[q3]In addition to your administrative responsibilities, do you currently (2014-2015) have 

official teaching responsibilities (that is, formally instruct K-12 students as the teacher of record 

in one or more classes)?

 Yes

 No

[q4]Do you play a role in filling teaching positions at your school (for example, recruiting, 

interviewing, and/or hiring)? 

 Yes

 No

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Perceptions	of	the	Quality	of	Your	School’s	Teaching	Staff	This	Year

[q5] Indicate your level of agreement with the following statement: “Overall, I was satisfied 

with the quality of the whole teaching staff in my school this year (2014-2015).”

[insert slider graphic here. tick marks for disagree strongly, disagree somewhat, agree 

somewhat, agree strongly] 

[q6x] Use the slider to answer each item below. During this school year (2014-2015), how 

many teachers in your school...

None or 

almost 

none A few About half Most

All or nearly 

all

[q6a] Are highly effective 

instructional leaders.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q6b] Are struggling and/or 

ineffective instructional leaders. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q6c] Had a good grasp of the 

subject matter they teach

[insert slider graphic here]

[q6d] Engaged in collaborative 

conversations about teaching and 

learning on a weekly or biweekly 

basis 

[insert slider graphic here]
25

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	Practices	When	Observing	Teachers	This	Year	(SY	2014-2015)	for	Evaluation	

Purposes	

[q7] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, please estimate the number of teachers 

you will formally evaluate yourself using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link}. 

[enter number here that ranges from 0 – 50] 

[q8] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, how many other school leaders besides 

yourself will formally evaluate teachers using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link}? 

[enter number here that ranges from 0 – 5] 

[q9] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, how often did you personally formally 

observe teachers in your school building using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link}? 

[q8] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, how often did you personally formally 

observe teachers in your school building using the New Mexico Observation Rubric {link}? 

 I or another school leader formally observed (for 15+ minutes using the NM TEACH

Observation Rubric) all teachers 3 or more times.

 I or another school leader formally observed (for 15+ minutes using the NM TEACH

Observation Rubric) all teacher 2 times. 

 I or another school leader formally observed (for 15+ minutes using the NM TEACH

Observation Rubric) some teachers 2 times and other teachers 3 times or more.

 Other: ________________________________

[q10] Use the slider to estimate how long post-observation conferences typically took you 

during school year 2014-2015. Think only of conferences after formal observations; do not 

include informal feedback from classroom walk-throughs. 

[insert slider graphic here. Tick marks for 0 minutes to 60 minutes with 10 minute intervals]

[q11] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, how frequently did you provide 

informal feedback about teaching and learning to individual teachers—e.g. walk-throughs, 

wows and wonders. 
26

 At least once a week. 

 At least once a month.

 At least once per semester.

 Other: ___________________

 Optional comment here:

[q12x] Thinking about all your formal observations from school year 2014-2015, use the slider 

to indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements about your postformal observation conferences with teachers. 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q12a] The feedback session itself, separate 

from professional development I may have 

recommended, helped teachers improve 

instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12b] In each conference, the teacher 

brought documents to the conference,

documents such as the lesson plan, PDP.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12c] In each conference, I brought 

documents to conference such as the 

teacher’s report card and the most recent 

PDP.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12d] In each conference, I identified at 

least one positive practice that the teacher 

does well.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12e] In each conference, I identified at 

least one challenge facing the teacher.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12f] In each conference, I used my scores

on the NM TEACH Observation Rubric for that 

teacher to determine which instructional 

practices to praise or critique with the 

teacher.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12g] In each conference, I used my scores

on the NM TEACH Observation Rubric for that 

teacher to determine what professional 

development to recommend to the teacher. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12h] In each conference, I ended the [insert slider graphic here]
27

conference on a positive note.

[q12i]Each conference followed a predictable 

format.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12j] In each conference, the teacher and I 

mutually developed next steps for their

instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12k] In each conference provided specific

feedback to teachers about their 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12l] In each conference I provided 

actionable feedback to teachers about their 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12m] In each conference, teachers 

committed to specific set of next steps to 

improve their instruction. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12n] In each conference, I spoke for 

almost all of the time during the conference.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12o] There was a high level of 

collaboration in feedback conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12p] There was a high level of conflict in 

feedback conferences. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12q] It was hard to provide negative 

feedback to teachers about their 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12r] The large majority of teachers seemed 

to trust and accept my feedback.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12s] I feel positive about the feedback I 

gave teachers in conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12t] I enjoyed most of the post-observation 

feedback conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12u] I provided all teachers I reviewed with 

a written or online summary of the 

observation with my comments on it. 

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------
28

Professional	Development	Offered	to Teachers	This	Year	(2014-2015)

The questions in this section ask about professional development for teachers.

 Professional development includes (but is not limited to) workshops, inservices, 

coaching/mentoring, collaborative planning/study, institutes, professional conferences, 

online courses, self-directed learning, and so forth.

[q13x] Use the slider to rate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the professional development experiences of teachers at your school this 

year (2014-2015, including summer 2014).

 Consider professional development offered by the district and other external 

sources as well as professional development offered by the school.

The professional development options for teachers this year....

Don’t know Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q13a] Were mostly developed by

school leaders or teachers at my

school.

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q13b] Were mostly job-embedded 

rather than one-time only sessions.  [insert slider graphic here]

[q13c]Were varied and numerous 

enough to allow me to customize my

PD recommendations to teachers 

based on their performance on specific 

domains of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric.{link}

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q13d]Helped teachers improve on 

elements measured by the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric. 

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q13e]Helped teachers improve 

other elements of the NM TEACH 

evaluation besides the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric (e.g., student 

achievement or “other” multiple 

measure).

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q13f]Were well aligned with the 

Common Core State Standards and/or  [insert slider graphic here]
29

curriculum based on these standards.

[q13g]Have been convenient enough 

to promote teachers’ participation.  [insert slider graphic here]

[q13h]Were sufficiently resourced 

(for example, substitute coverage, 

funding to cover expenses, stipends) 

to allow teachers to participate in the 

professional development they need 

to do their jobs successfully.

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q13i]District-provided professional 

development offerings (workshops, 

inservices, online courses, etc.) have 

enough slots and availability to 

accommodate all teachers who wish 

or need to participate. 

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q13j]Teachers have had easy access 

to a catalog of professional 

development opportunities aligned 

with the NM TEACH Observation 

Rubric.

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q14x] Thinking about the professional development that teachers at your school have 

participated in this year (2014-2015, including summer 2014), use the slider to indicate how 

useful do think each of the following has been for improving teacher effectiveness.

Not 

Applicable 

Not at all 

useful

Slightly 

useful

Moderately 

useful Very useful

[q14a]Workshops or inservices for 

teachers at your school only 

(typically on-site)

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q14b]Workshops, inservices, 

institutes, or conferences organized 

by your district for teachers from 

multiple schools

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q14c]Online professional 

development offered by or through 

your district

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q14d]District- or state-sponsored 

induction program, mentoring, or  [insert slider graphic here]
30

other professional development 

activities for new or beginning 

teachers

[q14e]Instructional coaching 

(provided by school-based coaches 

or district coaches)

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q14f]Professional development 

led by me or a school leader such as 

study groups or school-wide staff 

meetings

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q14g]School-based teacher 

collaboration (grade-level or 

subject-area teams, professional 

learning communities, study groups, 

etc.)

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q14h]Videos of sample lessons  [insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Training	You	Received	About	NM	TEACH	to	Date

[q15x]What types of training have you received to date regarding the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness system? (Check all that apply.)

 [q15a][exclusive option]No professional development received

 [q15b]Information on the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness system(overall purpose, 

specific components, consequences for teachers, relationship to professional 

development, and so forth)

 [q15c]How to use the NM TEACH Observation Rubric

 [q15d]How to provide feedback to individual teachers after formal classroom 

observations 

 [q15e]How to enter scores from NM TEACH Observation Rubric into Reflect, the 

Teachscape software

 [q15f]How to use Reflect, the Teachscape software 

 [q15g]How to interpret a teachers’ NM TEACH Summative Evaluation Score

 [q15h]How to give NM TEACH Observation Rubric ratings consistent with those given 

by other raters
31

 [q15i]How to understand and make use of NM TEACH Summative Evaluation Score to 

help improve teaching at my school

 [q15j]How to direct teachers to professional development based on their NM TEACH 

Summative Evaluation Score

 [q15k]Other:

[q16] [if 15b-k ==yes] Who sponsored the training you attended about NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness system? Mark as many as apply.

 State Public Education Department 

 My school district

 Other: __________________

 Don’t know 

[q17] [if 15b-k ==yes] In total, how many minutes of training did you receive this year (2014-

2015, including summer 2014) about how to provide feedback to teachers.

 0 minutes

 15 minutes

 30 minutes

 60 minutes

 120 minutes

 240 minutes

 Other:

[q18] [if 15d==yes] Thinking about the training on how to conduct post-observation 

conferences with teachers, indicate how useful you think the training was. 

 Not at all useful

 Slightly useful

 Moderately useful

 Very useful

[q19] I understand how the overall teacher ratings work in the NM teacher evaluation system 

(NM TEACH).

 Disagree strongly

 Disagree somewhat

 Agree somewhat

 Agree Strongly
32

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	Personal	Views	of	NM	TEACH	Educator	Effectiveness	System

[q20x]Indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about 

the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System from the school year 2014-2015. 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q20a]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System does a good job distinguishing 

effective from ineffective teachers.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20b]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System is fair to all teachers, regardless of 

their personal characteristics or those of the 

students they teach.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20c]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System ignores important aspects of teacher 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20d]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System requires so much of my time that it 

interferes with other important activities.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20e]I have a clear idea of what the NM 

TEACH Educator Effectiveness System views 

as “good instruction.”

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20f]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System has helped me pinpoint specific things 

I can do to help improve my teachers’ 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20g]In the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System, teachers who do not 

score “Effective” or better often leave 

teaching voluntarily.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q21x]Indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about 

the NM TEACH Observation Rubric. 
33

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q21a]The 6 elements of Domain 1 (Planning 

and Preparation) of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric {link} are a useful way to 

measure the quality of teachers’ instructional 

practices. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q21b] The 5 elements of Domain 2 (Creating 

an Environment for Learning) of the NM 

TEACH Observation Rubric {link} are a useful 

way to measure the quality of teachers’ 

instructional practices.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q21c]The 5 elements of Domain 3 (Teaching 

for Learning) of the NM TEACH Observation 

Rubric {link} are a useful way to measure the 

quality of teachers’ instructional practices.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q21d] The 4 elements of Domain 4 

(Professionalism) of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric {link} are a useful way to 

measure the quality of teachers’ instructional 

practices.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q21e] Using the NM TEACH Observation 

Rubric {link} helps me to provide constructive, 

specific feedback to teachers to improve their 

instruction. 

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Teacher	Retention	and	Improvement

.

[q22x]Over the past year (since approximately May 1, 2014), how many teachers at your 

school...

None (0 1 teacher 2 teachers 3 teachers More than Don’t 
34

teachers) 3 teachers know

[q22a] Moved from effective to 

highly effective on the NM TEACH

Summative Evaluation.

     

[q22b]Were put on an 

professional growth plan or 

entered probationary status 

     

[q22c] Were dismissed (that is, 

had their district employment as a 

teacher terminated) due to 

receiving a low effectiveness rating 

on the NM TEACH Summative 

Evaluation 

     

[q22d]Left teaching voluntarily

after receiving a low effectiveness 

rating on the NM TEACH

Summative Evaluation 

     

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Optional	Comments	from	You

The following four questions are optional if you have any feedback you wish to share.

[q23] Do you have any comments about the NM TEACH Observation Rubric? 

[q24] Do you have any comments about professional development available to teachers in 

your district?

[q25] Do you have any comments about training either your district or NM PED have offered 

about the NM TEACH teacher evaluation system?
35

[q26] Do you have any feedback about this survey? 

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Thank	You!

Thank you so much for your time to complete this survey. 

Within the next 2 weeks, you will receive an email message with instructions about how to 

claim your gift card. This email message will come from {iCard (services@icardgiftcard.com)} 

and will be sent to the same email address at which you received the survey invitation, unless 

you indicate otherwise here:

 Yes, please send my gift card information to the same email address to which you sent 

the survey invitation.

 Please send my gift card information to a different email address, which I am providing 

here: _______________

 No, I do not wish to receive a gift card email from {iCard}.

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Thanks	Again

You have completed the survey and may now close it.
36

Spring	2016	School	Leader	Survey

[[Version: On-line administration. Wave 2.]] 

Understanding	Your	Participation	in	the	Study

Welcome to the spring 2016 survey for school leaders about the feedback you give to teachers’ 

regarding their instruction as a part of the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System. This is a 

follow-on to our fall 2015 survey to learn about the feedback you have provided to teachers 

this school year.

Study Purpose. With funding from the federal Department of Education as a part of the 

Southwest Regional Educational Lab, this study is intended to learn about the feedback 

principals give to teachers under the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System, and teachers’ 

perceptions of that feedback. For more information about the study, please see {REL Southwest 

website}. In {month, year} REL Southwest researchers asked all New Mexico’s public school 

principals to participate in a study about evaluation feedback to teachers. Results will be used 

to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding how to improve the 

NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System training for principals and teachers.

Survey Purpose. This survey is intended to gather information on the provision of feedback 

after formal observations by school leaders to teachers about their performance. Survey results 

will not be used to evaluate you, other teachers, or school leaders. 

Procedures. Online completion of the survey should take approximately 30 minutes. By using 

your personal survey link provided in the invitation email, you will be able to complete the 

survey in multiple sessions; responses will be saved as you enter them. However, once you click 

“submit” at the very end of the survey, you will no longer be able to return.

Confidentiality. REL Southwest will keep all survey responses confidential and will only use 

them for the purpose of the study. Our reports will contain summaries, and responses will 

never be presented in any way that would permit readers to identify you or your school. No 

one at your school, district, or the state will have access to survey responses that include 

respondents’ names, school names, or other information that could potentially be used to 

identify individuals or schools.

Participants. REL Southwest originally invited all New Mexico public school school-based 

principals to participate in this study. Only those principals who completed surveys in spring 

2015 are being sent this survey now in spring 2016. 

Benefits. Your completion of this survey gives you the opportunity to reflect on and share your 

perspective about the teacher evaluation system. You will be providing valuable information 
37

that may help New Mexico Public Education Department improve the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System.

Compensation. Within two weeks of completion of the online survey, you will receive via email 

a link to your $25 online gift card for completing the survey.

Risks. The risks associated with your participation in this study are minimal. 

Voluntary Participation. Your participation in this survey is completely voluntary. You can 

decide not to participate or to discontinue your participation at any time. A few survey 

questions, marked with a red asterisk, are required for routing to later questions.

Questions? If you have any questions about this survey or the study as a whole, please feel free 

to call us toll-free at {XXX}. You can also contact {XX}, the survey coordinator, at {email} or by 

phone at {XX}. If you have concerns or questions about your rights as a participant, contact the 

REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for the protection of project participants): {email}, 

toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.

[Required question] Informed Consent. By clicking the box below, you are indicating that you 

have read and understood the information provided to you about your participation in this 

survey.

 I have read and understood the information and choose to participate. 

Thank you very much for your help in this important study!

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Using	This	Survey

Here are some tips that may help you navigate and complete this survey.

Returning to previous pages. Be sure to use the survey “go back to previous page” button at 

the bottom of the page. Do not use your browser’s back button—it will not work.

Returning to the survey itself. If you would like to complete the survey in multiple sessions—or 

if you accidentally get disconnected from the survey—you can return to your previous 

responses by clicking on the link that was in your invitation email. This will take you to where 

you left off (through the last full page you completed). You can keep returning until you click on 

the “submit” button on the final page of the survey.
38

Saving your responses. Your responses on any given survey page are saved when you click on 

either button at the bottom of the page (“save and go to next page” or “go back to previous 

page”). 

Adding optional comments. Toward the bottom of each survey page is a space where you can 

write in any comments you may have pertaining to the questions on the page. This is 

completely optional.

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Position	and	Job	Responsibilities

We would like to update our information about your position.

[q1] Which of the following best describes your position as a school leader this school year 

(2015-2016)? 

 If you are not a school leader, you may have received this survey in error. Please reply to 

the invitation email or call {XXX}.

 principal 

 vice principal/assistant principal

 director

 dean

 other: _______________________

[q2x]Including this school year (2015-2016), how many years have you been a school 

administrator? (Fill in each box.)

 “School administrator” includes principal, assistant principal, and other equivalent titles.

[q2xa]Years as a school administrator in your current school

[q2xb]Years as a school administrator in your current district 

(including current school)

[q2xc]Years as a school administrator, total, in any location 

(including other districts and current district)

[q3]In addition to your administrative responsibilities, do you currently (2015-2016) have 

official teaching responsibilities (that is, formally instruct K-12 students as the teacher of record 

in one or more classes)?
39

 Yes

 No

[q4]Do you play a role in filling teaching positions at your school (for example, recruiting,

interviewing, and/or hiring)? 

 Yes

 No

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Perceptions	of	the	Quality	of	Your	School’s	Teaching	Staff	This	Year

[q5] Use the slider to indicate your level of agreement with the following statement: “Overall, 

I was satisfied with the quality of the whole teaching staff in my school this year (2015-2016).”

[insert slider graphic here. Tick marks at disagree strongly, disagree somewhat, agree 

somewhat, agree strongly.]

[q6x] Use the slider to answer the following items. During this school year (2015-2016), how 

many teachers in your school... 

None or 

almost 

none A few About half Most

All or nearly 

all

[q6a] Are highly effective 

instructional leaders.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q6b] Are struggling and/or 

ineffective instructional leaders. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q6c] Had a good grasp of the 

subject matter they teach

[insert slider graphic here]

[q6d] Engaged in collaborative

conversations about teaching and 

learning on a weekly or biweekly 

basis

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------
40

Your	Practices	When	Observing	Teachers	This	Year	(SY	2015-2016)	for	Evaluation	

Purposes	

[q7] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, please estimate the number of teachers 

you will formally evaluate yourself using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link}. 

[enter number here that ranges from 0 – 50] 

[q8] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, how many other school leaders besides 

yourself will formally evaluate teachers using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link}? 

[enter number here that ranges from 0 – 5] 

[q9] Thinking about the entire school year 2015-2016, how often did you personally formally 

observe teachers in your school building using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link}? 

 I or another school leader formally observed (for 15+ minutes using the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric) all teachers 3 or more times.

 I or another school leader formally observed (for 15+ minutes using the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric) all teacher 2 times. 

 I or another school leader formally observed (for 15+ minutes using the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric) some teachers 2 times and other teachers 3 times or more.

 Other: ________________________________

[q10] Estimate how long post-observation conferences typically took you during school year 

2014-2015. Think only of conferences after formal observations; do not include informal 

feedback from classroom walk-throughs. 

[insert slider graphic here. Tick marks for 0 minutes to 60 minutes with 10 minute intervals

[q11] Thinking about the entire school year 2014-2015, how frequently did you provide 

informal feedback about teaching and learning to individual teachers—e.g. walk-throughs, 

wows and wonders. 

 At least once a week. 

 At least once a month.

 At least once per semester.

 Other: ___________________

 Optional comment here:
41

[q12x] Thinking about all your formal observations from school year 2015-2016 using the NM 

TEACH Observation Rubric, use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with the 

following statements about your post- formal observation conferences with teachers. 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q12a] The feedback session itself, separate 

from professional development I may have 

recommended, helped teachers improve 

instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12b] In each conference, the teacher 

brought documents to the conference,

documents such as the lesson plan, PDP.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12c] In each conference, I brought 

documents to conference such as the 

teacher’s report card and the most recent 

PDP.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12d] In each conference, I identified at 

least one positive practice that the teacher 

does well.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12e] In each conference, I identified at 

least one challenge facing the teacher.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12f] In each conference, I used my scores

on the NM TEACH Observation Rubric for that 

teacher to determine which instructional 

practices to praise or criticize with the 

teacher.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12g] In each conference, I used my scores

on the NM TEACH Observation Rubric for that 

teacher to determine what professional 

development to recommend to the teacher. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12h] In each conference, I ended the 

conference on a positive note.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12i]Each conference followed a predictable 

format.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12j] In each conference, the teacher and I 

mutually developed next steps for their 

instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]
42

[q12k] In each conference I provided specific

feedback to teachers about their 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12l] In each conference I provided 

actionable feedback to teachers about their 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12m] In each conference, teachers 

committed to specific set of next steps to 

improve their instruction. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12n] In each conference, I spoke for

almost all of the time during the conference. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12o] There was a high level of 

collaboration in feedback conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12p] There was a high level of conflict in 

feedback conferences. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12q] It was hard to provide negative 

feedback to teachers about their 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12r] The large majority of teachers seemed 

to trust and accept my feedback.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12s] I feel positive about the feedback I 

gave teachers in conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12t] I enjoyed most of the post-observation 

feedback conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12u] I provided all teachers I reviewed with 

a written or online summary of the 

observation with my comments on it. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q13a] Have you ever received the “Checklist for New Mexico Principals’ Provision of 

Feedback to Teachers” , a guide to conducting formal feedback sessions? The first page of the 

Conversation Checklist looks like this: 
43

 Yes

 No

[q13b] Have you ever used the “Checklist for New Mexico Principals’ Provision of Feedback to 

Teachers” when conducting the formal feedback conference in the 2015-2016 school year? 

 Yes

 No

[q13c] [If q11b = yes)] With how many of your teachers, if any, have you used the 

“Conversation Checklist”?

 None

 A few 

 About half

 Most

 All or nearly all 

[q13d] [If treatment=1| (if treatment = 0 & q13a = yes)] Did you view the testimonial 

video that was distributed along with the Conversation Checklist?

 Yes
44

 No

 I don’t know

[q13e] Have you ever received the “Guidance for New Mexico Principals’ About Provision of 

Feedback to Teachers” document? It looks like this: 

 Yes

 No

[q13f] If q13e = yes)] With how many of your teachers, if any, have you used the advice 

included in the “Recommended Practices” document?

 None

 A few 

 About half

 Most

 All or nearly all



[q13g][If q13c = none] Please select all of the reasons you have not used the Conversation 

Checklist.

 [q13ga]I have never seen the Conversation Checklist. 

 [q13gb]I haven’t yet used the Conversation Checklist, but I plan to. 
45

 [q13gc]I got the Conversation Checklist too late for me to use in teacher conferences.

 [q13gd]The Conversation Checklist looks burdensome—e.g., too long, too hard. 

 [q13ge]I don’t need it; I already have a way of holding feedback conversations with 

teachers that works well.

 [q13gf]I’ve read the Conversation Checklist and am using some concepts, but I’m not 

following the checklist.

 [q13gg]Other: ______________________________________________________

[q13h][If q13c ~= all & q13c ~= none] Which type of teachers did you use the 

“Conversation Checklist” with? Select all that apply.

 [q13ha] Only highly effective teachers

 [q13h b] Only satisfactory teachers

 [q13h c] Only struggling teachers

 [q13h d] Only new teachers

 [q13h e] Only experienced teachers

 [q13h h] Other: _________________________________________________________

[q14a] [if 13C ~= none] Use the slider to estimate how long post-observation conferences 

typically took you during school year 2015-2016 when you used the “Conversation Checklist.” 

Think only of conferences after formal observations; do not include informal feedback from 

classroom walk-throughs. 

[insert slider graphic here. Tick marks for 0 minutes, 15 min, 30 min., 45 min., 60 min, 75 min, 

90 min]

[q14b] [if q13f~= none] Use the slider to estimate how long post-observation conferences 

typically took you during school year 2015-2016 after you reviewed the “Guidance for New 

Mexico Principals’ About Provision of Feedback to Teachers”. Think only of conferences after 

formal observations; do not include informal feedback from classroom walk-throughs. 

[insert slider graphic here. Tick marks for 0 minutes, 15 min, 30 min., 45 min., 60 min, 75 min, 

90 min]

[q15x] If 13C ~= none ] Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with the 

following statements about your opinions about the Conversation Checklist this year (school 

year 2015-2016). 
46

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q15a] The Conversation Checklist is easy to 

use.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15b] The Conversation Checklist takes too 

much time to use.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15c] The Conversation Checklist makes the 

feedback conversation feel formulaic. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15d] The Conversation Checklist provided 

me and teachers a helpful structure for 

feedback. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15e] I provided more critical feedback to 

teachers than I had in prior conferences where 

I didn’t use the Conversation Checklist.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15f] The Conversation Checklist helps 

teachers commit to specific set of next steps

to improve their instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15g] I use the Conversation Checklist as the 

basis to create teachers’ professional 

development plans (PDPs).

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15h] I use the Conversation Checklist as the 

basis to create professional growth plans

(PGPs) for struggling teachers. 

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Professional	Development	Offered	to Teachers	This	Year	(2015-2016)

The questions in this section ask about professional development for teachers.

 Professional development includes (but is not limited to) workshops, inservices, 

coaching/mentoring, collaborative planning/study, institutes, professional conferences, 

online courses, self-directed learning, and so forth.

[q16x] Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the professional development experiences of teachers at your school this 

year (2015-2016, including summer 2015).

 Consider professional development offered by the district and other external 

sources as well as professional development offered by the school.
47

The professional development options for teachers this year....

Don’t know Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q16a] Were mostly developed by

school leaders or teachers at my

school.

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q16b] Were mostly job-embedded 

rather than one-time only sessions.  [insert slider graphic here]

[q16c]Were varied and numerous 

enough to allow me to customize my

PD recommendations to teachers 

based on their performance on specific 

domains of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric.{link}

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q16d]Helped teachers improve on 

elements measured by the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric. 

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q16e]Helped teachers improve 

other elements of the NM TEACH 

evaluation besides the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric (e.g., student 

achievement or “other” multiple 

measure).

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q16f]Were well aligned with the 

Common Core State Standards and/or 

curriculum based on these standards.

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q16g]Have been convenient enough 

to promote teachers’ participation.  [insert slider graphic here]

[q16h]Were sufficiently resourced 

(for example, substitute coverage, 

funding to cover expenses, stipends) 

to allow teachers to participate in the 

professional development they need 

to do their jobs successfully.

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q16i]District-provided professional 

development offerings (workshops, 

inservices, online courses, etc.) have 

enough slots and availability to 

 [insert slider graphic here]
48

accommodate all teachers who wish 

or need to participate. 

[q16j]Teachers have had easy access 

to a catalog of professional 

development opportunities aligned 

with the NM TEACH Observation 

Rubric.

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q17x] Thinking about the professional development that teachers at your school have 

participated in this year (2015-2016, including summer 2015), use the slider to indicate how 

useful you think each of the following has been for improving teacher effectiveness.

Not 

Applicable 

Not at all 

useful

Slightly 

useful

Moderately 

useful Very useful

[q17a]Workshops or inservices for 

teachers at your school only 

(typically on-site)

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q17b]Workshops, inservices, 

institutes, or conferences organized 

by your district for teachers from 

multiple schools

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q17c]Online professional 

development offered by or through 

your district

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q17d]District- or state-sponsored 

induction program, mentoring, or 

other professional development 

activities for new or beginning 

teachers

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q17e]Instructional coaching 

(provided by school-based coaches 

or district coaches)

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q17f]Professional development 

led by me or a school leader such as 

study groups or school-wide staff 

meetings

 [insert slider graphic here]

[q17g]School-based teacher 

collaboration (grade-level or 

subject-area teams, professional 

 [insert slider graphic here]
49

learning communities, study groups, 

etc.)

[q17h]Videos of sample lessons  [insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Training	You	Received	About	NM	TEACH	to	Date

[q18x]What types of professional development have you received to date regarding the 

teacher evaluation system, NM TEACH? (Check all that apply.)

 [q18a][exclusive option]No professional development received

 [q18b]Information on the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness system(overall purpose, 

specific components, consequences for teachers, relationship to professional 

development, and so forth)

 [q18c]How to use the NM TEACH Observation Rubric

 [q18d]How to provide feedback to individual teachers after formal classroom 

observations 

 [q18e]How to enter scores from NM TEACH Observation Rubric into Reflect, the 

Teachscape software

 [q18f]How to use Reflect, the Teachscape software 

 [q18g]How to interpret a teachers’ NM TEACH Summative Evaluation Score

 [q18h]How to give NM TEACH Observation Rubric ratings consistent with those given 

by other raters

 [q18i]How to understand and make use of NM TEACH Summative Evaluation Score to 

help improve teaching at my school

 [q18j]How to direct teachers to professional development based on their NM TEACH 

Summative Evaluation Score

 [q18k]Other:

[q19] [if 18b-k ==yes] Who sponsored the training you attended about NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness system? Mark as many as apply.

 State Public Education Department 

 My school district

 Other: __________________

 Don’t know 

[q20] [if 18b-k ==yes] In total, how many minutes of training did you receive this year (2014-
50

2015, including summer 2014) about how to provide feedback to teachers.

 0 minutes

 15 minutes

 30 minutes

 60 minutes

 120 minutes

 240 minutes

 Other: 

[q21] [if 18d==yes] Thinking about the training on how to conduct post-observation 

conferences with teachers, use the slider to indicate how useful you think the training was. 

Not at all useful Slightly useful Moderately useful Very useful

[insert slider graphic here]

[q22x] Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about your understanding of NM TEACH.

Disagree 

strongly

Disagree 

somewhat

Agree 

somewhat

Agree 

strongly

[q22a]I understand how the overall teacher 

ratings work in the NM teacher evaluation 

system (NM TEACH). 

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	Personal	Views	of	NM	TEACH	

[q23x]Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the teacher effectiveness ratings that became available in school year 2015-

2016. 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q23a]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System does a good job distinguishing 

[insert slider graphic here]
51

effective from ineffective teachers.

[q23b]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System is fair to all teachers, regardless of 

their personal characteristics or those of the 

students they teach.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q23c]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System ignores important aspects of teacher 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q23d]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System requires so much of my time that it 

interferes with other important activities.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q23e]I have a clear idea of what the NM 

TEACH Educator Effectiveness System views as 

“good instruction.”

[insert slider graphic here]

[q23g]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System has helped me pinpoint specific things 

I can do to help improve my teachers’ 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q23h]In the current NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System, teachers who do poorly 

on their evaluation often leave teaching 

voluntarily.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q24x]Use the slider to rate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the NM TEACH Observation Rubric. 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q24a]The 6 elements of Domain 1 (Planning 

and Preparation) of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric {link} are a useful way to 

measure the quality of teachers’ instructional 

practices. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q24b] The 5 elements of Domain 2 (Creating 

an Environment for Learning) of the NM 

TEACH Observation Rubric {link} are a useful 

way to measure the quality of teachers’ 

instructional practices.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q24c]The 5 elements of Domain 3 (Teaching [insert slider graphic here]
52

for Learning) of the NM TEACH Observation 

Rubric {link} are a useful way to measure the 

quality of teachers’ instructional practices.

[q24d] The 4 elements of Domain 4 

(Professionalism) of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric {link}are a useful way to 

measure the quality of teachers’ instructional 

practices.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q24e] Using the NM TEACH Observation 

Rubric {link} helps me to provide constructive, 

specific feedback to teachers to improve their 

instruction. 

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Teacher	Retention	and	Improvement

[q25x]Over the past year (since approximately May 1, 2015), how many teachers at your 

school...

None 

(0 

teachers)

1 

teacher

2 

teachers

3 

teachers

More 

than 3 

teachers

Don’t 

know

[q25a] Moved from effective to 

highly effective on the NM 

TEACH Summative Evaluation.

     

[q25b]Were put on an 

professional growth plan or 

entered probationary status 

     

[q25c] Were dismissed (that is, 

had their district employment as a 

teacher terminated) due to 

receiving a low effectiveness rating 

on the NM TEACH Summative 

Evaluation

     

[q25d]Left teaching voluntarily 

after receiving a low effectiveness 

rating on the NM TEACH

Summative Evaluation

     
53

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Optional	Comments	from	You

The following four questions are optional if you have any feedback you wish to share.

[q26] [if treatment = 1] Do you have any suggestions to help us improve the PrincipalTeacher Post-Observation Conversation Checklist?

[q27] Do you have any comments about professional development available to teachers in 

your district?

[q28] Do you have any comments about the NM TEACH Observation Rubric? 

[q29] Do you have any comments about training either your district or NM PED have offered 

about the NM TEACH teacher evaluation system?

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Thank	You!

Thank you so much for your time to complete this survey. 

Within the next 2 weeks, you will receive an email message with instructions about how to 

claim your gift card. This email message will come from {iCard (services@icardgiftcard.com)} 

and will be sent to the same email address at which you received the survey invitation, unless 

you indicate otherwise here:

 Yes, please send my gift card information to the same email address to which you sent the 

survey invitation.

 Please send my gift card information to a different email address, which I am providing 

here: _______________

 No, I do not wish to receive a gift card email from {iCard}.

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------
54

Thanks	Again

You have completed the survey and may now close it.
55

Spring	2015	Teacher	Survey

[[Version: Teachers. On-line administration. Wave 1.]]

Understanding	Your	Participation	in	the	Study

Welcome to the spring 2015 survey for school leaders about the feedback you give to teachers’ 

regarding their instruction as a part of the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System. 

Study Purpose. With funding from the federal Department of Education as a part of the 

Southwest Regional Educational Lab, this study is intended to learn about the feedback 

principals give to teachers under the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System, and teachers’ 

perceptions of that feedback. For more information about the study, please see {REL Southwest 

website}. In {month, year} REL Southwest researchers asked all New Mexico’s public school 

principals to participate in a study about evaluation feedback to teachers. Results will be used 

to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding how to improve the 

NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System training for principals and teachers.

Survey Purpose. This survey is intended to gather information on the provision of feedback to 

teachers after formal observations by school leaders. REL Southwest researchers will link your 

survey responses to basic employment information, such as race, ethnicity and years of 

experience that REL Southwest researchers will obtain from NM PED. Survey results will not be 

used to evaluate you, other teachers, or school leaders. REL Southwest researchers will ask 

study participants to fill out an on-line, 30-minute survey once in spring 2015 and again in 

spring 2016.

Procedures. Online completion of the survey should take approximately 30 minutes. By using 

your personal survey link provided in the invitation email, you will be able to complete the 

survey in multiple sessions; responses will be saved as you enter them. However, once you click 

“submit” at the very end of the survey, you will no longer be able to return.

Confidentiality. REL Southwest will keep all survey responses confidential and will only use 

them for the purpose of the study. Our reports will contain summaries, and responses will 

never be presented in any way that would permit readers to identify you or your school. No 

one at your school, district, or the state will have access to survey responses that include 

respondents’ names, school names, or other information that could potentially be used to 

identify individuals or schools.

Participants In each of the participating New Mexico public schools, REL Southwest has invited 

the principal to participate in this study Up to 10 teachers in your school were selected at 

random to be surveyed. 
56

Benefits. Your completion of this survey gives you the opportunity to reflect on and share your 

perspective about the teacher evaluation system. You will be providing valuable information 

that may help New Mexico Public Education Department improve the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System. 

Compensation. Within two weeks of completion of this online survey, you will receive via email 

a link to your $25 online gift card for completing the survey. We will provide another $25 

online gift card upon completion of the spring 2016 survey to each participant.

Risks. The risks associated with your participation in this study are minimal. 

Voluntary Participation. Your participation in this survey is completely voluntary. You can 

decide not to participate or to discontinue your participation at any time. A few survey 

questions, marked with a red asterisk, are required for routing to later questions.

Questions? If you have any questions about this survey or the study as a whole, please feel free 

to call us toll-free at {XXX}. You can also contact {XX}, the survey coordinator, at {email} or by 

phone at {XX}. If you have concerns or questions about your rights as a participant, contact the 

REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for the protection of project participants): {email}, 

toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.

[Required question] Informed Consent. By clicking the box below, you are indicating that you 

have read and understood the information provided to you about your participation in this 

survey.

 I have read and understood the information and choose to participate.. 

Thank you very much for your help in this important study!

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Using	This	Survey

Here are some tips that may help you navigate and complete this survey.

Returning to previous pages. Be sure to use the survey “go back to previous page” button at 

the bottom of the page. Do not use your browser’s back button—it will not work.

Returning to the survey itself. If you would like to complete the survey in multiple sessions—or 

if you accidentally get disconnected from the survey—you can return to your previous 
57

responses by clicking on the link that was in your invitation email. This will take you to where 

you left off (through the last full page you completed). You can keep returning until you click on 

the “submit” button on the final page of the survey.

Saving your responses. Your responses on any given survey page are saved when you click on 

either button at the bottom of the page (“save and go to next page” or “go back to previous 

page”). 

Adding optional comments. Toward the bottom of each survey page is a space where you can 

write in any comments you may have pertaining to the questions on the page. This is 

completely optional.

----------------------------------------[INTERNAL CODES]-----------------------------------------------

[[Treatment code (treatment): REL Southwest will pre-identify via an internal code that will not 

be listed on the survey whether teacher respondent works at a school that belongs to the 

treatment group or the control group. treatment = 1 indicates teacher is in the treatment 

group. treatment = 0 = control group. Unless otherwise noted, survey questions will appear for 

both groups of teachers.]]

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Position	and	Job	Responsibilities

[required] [q1] Which of the following best describes your current position as a teacher of K12 students? (Check one.)

 If you are not a teacher of K-12 students, or do not have teaching responsibilities in 

2014-2015, you have received this survey in error. Please let us know by replying to 

the invitation email or by calling {number}.

 Regular education teacher

 Special education teacher

 Other kind of teacher: ___________________________________

[q2x] What subject area(s) are you currently teaching ? (Check all that apply.)

 [q2a] English/language arts/reading/writing

 [q2b] Mathematics

 [q2d] Science

 [q2d] Social Studies
58

 [q2e] Foreign language(s)

 [q2f] Visual or performing arts (art, music, etc.)

 [q2g] Physical education/health education

 [q2h] Career/technical education

 [q2i] Other subject area(s): [include fill-in box]

[q3] Which one of the following three groups of teachers do you belong to? These groups are 

defined by New Mexico’s teacher evaluation system, NM TEACH. 

 Group A: tested subject, tested grade

 Group B: grade 3 – 12 subject not linkable to NM’s standard based assessments

 Group C: grade K-2 teacher

[q4]Which of the following best describes your current teaching arrangement? (Check one.)

 I teach a single group of students all or most of the day in multiple subject areas. 

(Traditional elementary arrangement; sometimes called “self-contained.”)

 I teach several classes of different students during the day in a particular subject (for 

example, math) or perhaps two subjects (for example, you teach some math classes and 

some science classes). (Traditional secondary arrangement; sometimes called “subjectspecific” or “departmentalized”; at elementary level, sometimes called “subject matter 

specialist.” Also typical arrangement for physical education, art, music, etc.)

 I mainly teach selected students released from (or in) their regular classes in specific 

skills or to address specific needs (for example, special education, reading, English as a 

second language, gifted and talented.) (Sometimes called “pull out”, “resource,” or 

“push in” instruction.)

 I am one of two or more teachers who are jointly responsible for teaching the same 

subject(s) to a group of students (for example, in the same classroom), all or most of the 

time and/or in a majority of classes. (Sometimes called “co-teaching” or “job share.”)

 Other (please describe): _______________________________________

[q5] Including this school year (2014-2015), how many years have you been teaching, total,

regardless of location?

Total years teaching: [fill in number: must be whole number less than 60]

[q6] Including this school year (2014-2015), how many years have you been teaching in your 

current school?
59

Years in current school: [fill in number: must be whole number less than 60]

[q7] Which of the following best describes your current position as a teacher of K-12 students? 

(Check all that apply)

 Spanish bilingual teacher

 Native American bilingual teacher

 Other bilingual teacher: ___________________________________

 Not a bilingual teacher

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Experiences	This	Year	(SY	2014-2015)	of	Formal	Observations	for	Evaluation	

Purposes	

[* required question] [q8] Thinking back over this whole school year 2014-2015, how many 

times were you formally observed by a school leader? School leader is defined as a principal, 

assistant principal, dean, or coach charged with authority to conduct formal observations of 

20+ minutes using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link to rubric}. 

 3 or more times

 2 times

 1 time

 0 times

 Other: ________________________________

[q9] [If q8 = 1, 2, or 3+ times] Use the slider to estimate how long the post-observation 

conferences typically took. Think only of conferences after formal observations; do not include 

informal feedback you might have received from classroom walk-throughs. 

[insert slider graphic here. Tick marks for 0 min, 15 min, 30 min, 45 min, 60 min, 75 min, 90 

min.]

[q10] How frequently did you receive informal feedback this year from a school leader—for 

example, “wow or wonder” statements after brief walk-throughs. 

 At least once a week 
60

 At least once a month

 At least once per semester or trimester

 Never

 Other: ___________________

[q11x] [If q8 = 1, 2, or 3+ times] Use the slider to indicate the extent to which you agree or 

disagree with the following statements about all of the conferences you had with a school 

leader following his or her formal observation(s) of your class this year (school year 2014-

2015). 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q11a] The feedback session itself, separate

from professional development I may have 

been recommended to take, helped me 

improve my instruction.

[q11b] In each conference, I brought 

documents to the conference, documents 

such as the lesson plan, and PDP.

[insert slider here]

[q11c] In each conference, the school leader

brought documents to conference, such as my 

summative score and the most recent PDP.

[insert slider here]

[q11d]In each conference the school leader 

identified at least one positive practice that I 

do well.

[insert slider here]

[q11e] In each conference the school leader 

identified at least one challenge facing me. 

[insert slider here]

[q11f]In each conference, the school leader 

used my scores on the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric to determine which 

instructional practices to praise or critique.

[insert slider here]

[q11g] In each conference, the school leader 

used my scores on the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric to determine what 

professional development to recommend to 

the teacher.

[insert slider here]
61

[q11h] In each conference, the school leader

ended the conference on a positive note.

[insert slider here]

[q11i]Each conference followed a predictable 

format.

[insert slider here]

[q11j]In each conference ,y school leader and 

I mutually developed next steps for my 

instruction.

[insert slider here]

[q11k]I walked away with a clear 

understanding of my school leader’s 

feedback.

[insert slider here]

[q11l]My school leader listened to what I had 

to say during the conferences.

[insert slider here]

[q11m]The observations were done to me, 

rather than for me. 

[insert slider here]

[q11n]I received specific feedback about my 

performance. 

[insert slider here]

[q11o] I received actionable feedback about 

my performance.

[insert slider here]

[q11p]During the conferences, I committed 

to a specific set of next steps to improve my 

instruction. 

[insert slider here]

[q11q] ] In each conference, the school 

leader spoke for almost all of the time. 

[insert slider here]

[q11r] There was a high level of conflict in 

the conference. 

[insert slider here]

[q11s] In each conference I obtained 

recommendations for professional 

development tailored to my specific needs.

[insert slider here]

[q11t] I trusted and accepted the feedback I 

received. 

[insert slider here]

[q11u]I feel positive about the feedback I got 

during the conferences. 

[insert slider here]

[q11v] I enjoyed most of the postobservation feedback conferences.

[q11w] I was always provided with a written 

or online summary of the observation and my 

[insert slider graphic here]
62

school leader’s comments on it. 

[q12x] Please indicate whether you were ever rated this school year by your school leader as 

needing to improve upon or else excelling in the following observation items from NM TEACH, 

whether you received a recommendation to take up professional development (PD), and how you 

rate yourself on the item. Mark all that apply.

NM TEACH 

Observation Item

I was rated at 

least once as 

excelling on 

this item

I was rated at 

least once as 

needing to 

improve on 

this item

I was 

recommended 

to take PD 

because of 

this item

I don’t 

know how 

I was rated

How would 

you rate 

yourself 

this school 

year on this 

item? 

2A: Creating an 

environment of respect 

and rapport

[Ineffective, 

Minimally

Effective, 

Effective,

Highly 

Effective, 

Exemplary

I don’t 

know]

2B: Organizing 

Physical Space

2C: Establishing a 

culture for learning

2D: Managing 

classroom 

procedures

2E: Managing Student 

Behavior

3A: Communicating 

with Students

3B: Using questioning 

and discussion 

techniques

3C: Engaging students 

in learning

3D: Assessment in 
63

Instruction

3E: Demonstrating 

flexibility and 

responsiveness

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Professional	Development	You	Received	This	Year	(SY	2014-2015)

The questions on this page ask about all of the professional development you have participated 

in during the 2014-2015 school year, including summer 2014.

 Professional development includes (but is not limited to) workshops, inservices, 

coaching/mentoring, collaborative planning/study, courses, institutes, professional 

conferences, self-directed learning, and so forth.

 Consider mandatory/required professional development as well as voluntary 

professional development.

[q13x] Please indicate all of the topics below that one or more school leader recommend you 

take. In addition, please also include which topics were covered in professional development 

you actually participated in this year (2014-2015, including summer 2014), and topics that you 

would have liked to have participated in professional development, but it was not available to 

you. Select as many topics as apply.

A	school	

leader	

recommen

ded	I	take	

this	PD

I	took	the	

PD	online

I	received	

the	PD	in	

person

h

t

[q13a] Classroom management   

[q13b] Professionalism and communication in the classroom   

[q13c] Special education and inclusion   

[q13d] Standards-based lesson plans   

[q13e] Common Core Standards   

[q13f] Assessment (includes continuous assessment, portfolio 

assessment, Common Core aligned assessments)   

[q13g] Data-driven instruction   

[q13h] Early childhood   
64

[q13i] Instructional strategies or content in the content area(s) you 

teach—e.g., Mathematics; or Literacy PD   

[q13j] Response to Intervention   

[q13k] Teachscape Reflect training   

[q13l] Other NM TEACH training   

[q13m] Sheltering Instruction for Language development   

[q13n] Language Acquisition Design   

[q13o] Scaffolding instruction   

[q13p] Other: _______________________________   

[q13q] Other: _______________________________   

[q13r] Other: _______________________________   

[q14x] Thinking about the professional development you have participated in this year (2014-

2015, including summer 2014), use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with 

each of the following statements. 

My professional development experiences this year...

Disagree	

Strongly

Disagree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Strongly

[q14a] Were mostly developed by school 

leaders or teachers at my school.

[insert slider here]

[q14b] Were mostly job-embedded rather 

than one-time only sessions.

[insert slider here]

[q14a] Were varied and numerous enough to 

allow the school leader to customize PD 

recommendations based on my performance on 

specific domains of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric.{link}

[insert slider here]

[q14b] Have been useful for helping me 

improve the achievement of my students

[insert slider here]

[q14c]Have been useful for improving my 

instruction

[insert slider here]

[q14d]Have taken more time than they were 

worth

[insert slider here]

[q14e]Have been well aligned with the [insert slider here]
65

Common Core State Standards and/or 

curriculum based on these standards

[q15x]Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the support you have received related to your professional development 

experiences this year (SY 2014-2015, including summer 2014). 

Disagree	

Strongly

Disagree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Strongly

[q15a] I had easy access to a list of the 

possible professional development courses or 

offerings I could take. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q15c]My school leader(s) has encouraged 

and supported my participation in professional 

development.

[insert slider here]

[q15d]Sufficient resources (for example, 

substitute coverage, funding to cover 

expenses, stipends) have been available to 

allow me to participate in the professional 

development I need to teach effectively.

[insert slider here]

[q15e]I have had sufficient flexibility in my 

schedule to pursue the professional 

development opportunities recommended for 

me.

[insert slider here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	Perceptions	of	the	Quality	of	Your	School’s	Leadership	Last	Year

[q16] Rate your level of agreement with the following statement: “Overall, I was satisfied with 

the quality of my school’s leaders (principals, assistant principals, deans, department chairs) 

this year (school year 2014-2015).”

 Disagree strongly

 Disagree somewhat

 Agree somewhat

 Agree strongly 
66

[q17x] Thinking about this year (2014-2015), use the slider to indicate how much you agree or 

disagree with the following statements. “The school leaders who conduct formal observations 

of my classroom ... 

Disagree	

Strongly

Disagree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Strongly

[q17a] Understand the subject 

matter content that I teach.

[insert slider here]

[q17b] Understand what skills are 

needed for teachers to foster 

meaningful student learning. 

[insert slider here]

[q17c] Foster an atmosphere of 

trust and mutual respect in my 

school.

[insert slider here]

[q17d] Understand the 3 rating 

components of the NM TEACH 

Summative Evaluation Report

(student achievement, observations, 

multiple measures). 

[insert slider here]

[q17e] Help to improve my 

teaching. 

[insert slider here]

[q17f] Are instructional leaders. [insert slider here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	Personal	Views	of	NM	TEACH	Educator	Effectiveness	System

[q18x]Use the slider to rate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System from school year 2014-2015. 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q18a]The NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System does a good job 

distinguishing effective from ineffective 

teachers.

[insert slider here]

[q18b]The NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System is fair to all teachers, 

[insert slider here]
67

regardless of their personal characteristics or 

those of the students they teach.

[q18c]The NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness 

System ignores important aspects of teacher 

performance.

[insert slider here]

[q18d]The NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System has helped me pinpoint 

specific things I can do to help improve my 

performance.

[insert slider here]

[q18e] I understand how the overall teacher 

ratings work in the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System.

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	NM	TEACH	Summative	Evaluation	Score	

[q19]Do you know what your level of Educator Effectiveness (Ineffective, Minimally Effective, 

Effective, Highly Effective, Exemplary) was for the school year 2014-2015? 

 Yes

 No

[q20] [if q19=yes] How did you learn your level of Educator Effectiveness for the school year 

2014-2015? Select all that apply.

 I received it via email from New Mexico Public Education Department

 I logged into my teacher portal online

 A school leader told me 

 I received it via my mailbox at school 

 Other: ______________________

 Other: ______________________

 I don’t recall

[q21] [if q19=yes] Did a school leader ever discuss with you how to improve your Educator 

Effectiveness score? 
68

 Yes, we had a conference

 Yes, in passing

 No

 I don’t recall 

[q22] [if q19=yes] Did a school leader ever discuss with you how to interpret your student 

achievement growth score? 

 Yes, we had a conference

 Yes, in passing

 No

 Not Applicable

 I don’t recall 

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Optional	Comments	from	You

The following four questions are optional if you have any feedback you wish to share. If you do 

not, proceed to the next and final page.

[q23] Do you have any comments about the NM TEACH Observation Rubric? 

[q24] Do you have any comments about professional development available to teachers in 

your district?

[q25] Do you have any comments about the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System?

[q26] Do you have any feedback about this survey? 

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Thank	You!
69

Thank you so much for your time to complete this survey. 

Within the next 2 weeks, you will receive an email message with instructions about how to 

claim your gift card. This email message will come from {iCard (services@icardgiftcard.com)} 

and will be sent to the same email address at which you received the survey invitation, unless 

you indicate otherwise here:

 Yes, please send my gift card information to the same email address to which you sent the 

survey invitation.

 Please send my gift card information to a different email address, which I am providing 

here: _______________

 No, I do not wish to receive a gift card email from {iCard}.

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Thanks	Again

You have completed the survey and may now close it.
70

Spring	2016	Teacher	Survey

[[Version: Teachers. On-line administration. Wave 2.]]

Understanding	Your	Participation	in	the	Study

Welcome to the spring 2016 survey for teachers about feedback you receive about your 

instruction as a part of the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System. This is a follow-on to our 

spring 2015 survey to learn about the feedback you received from your school leaders last year.

Study Purpose. With funding from the federal Department of Education as a part of the 

Southwest Regional Educational Lab, this study is intended to learn about the feedback 

principals give to teachers under the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System, and teachers’ 

perceptions of that feedback For more information about the study, please see {REL Southwest 

website}. In {month, year} REL Southwest researchers asked all New Mexico’s public school 

principals to participate in a study about evaluation feedback to teachers. Results will be used 

to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding how to improve the 

NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System training for principals and teachers.

Survey Purpose. This survey is intended to gather information on the provision of feedback 

after formal observations by school leaders to teachers about their performance. REL 

Southwest researchers will link your survey responses to basic employment information, such 

as race, ethnicity and years of experience that REL Southwest researchers will obtain from NM 

PED. Survey results will not be used to evaluate you, other teachers, or school leaders. 

Procedures. Online completion of the survey should take approximately 30 minutes. By using 

your personal survey link provided in the invitation email, you will be able to complete the 

survey in multiple sessions; responses will be saved as you enter them. However, once you click 

“submit” at the very end of the survey, you will no longer be able to return.

Confidentiality. REL Southwest will keep all survey responses confidential and will only use 

them for the purpose of the study. Our reports will contain summaries, and responses will 

never be presented in any way that would permit readers to identify you or your school. No 

one at your school, district, or the state will have access to survey responses that include 

respondents’ names, school names, or other information that could potentially be used to 

identify individuals or schools.

Participants. In each of the participating New Mexico public schools, REL Southwest has 

invited the principal to participate in this study. Up to 10 teachers in your school were selected at 

random to be surveyed. Only those teachers who completed surveys in spring 2015 are being 

sent this survey now in spring 2016.
71

Benefits. Your completion of this survey gives you the opportunity to reflect on and share your 

perspective about the teacher evaluation system. You will be providing valuable information 

that may help New Mexico Public Education Department improve the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System. 

Compensation. Within two weeks of completion of the online survey, you will receive via email 

a link to your $25 online gift card for completing the survey.

Risks. The risks associated with your participation in this study are minimal. 

Voluntary Participation. Your participation in this survey is completely voluntary. You can 

decide not to participate or to discontinue your participation at any time. A few survey 

questions, marked with a red asterisk, are required for routing to later questions.

Questions? If you have any questions about this survey or the study as a whole, please feel free 

to call us toll-free at {XXX}. You can also contact {XX}, the survey coordinator, at {email} or by 

phone at {XX}. If you have concerns or questions about your rights as a participant, contact the 

REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for the protection of project participants): {email}, 

toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.

[Required question] Informed Consent. By clicking the box below, you are indicating that you 

have read and understood the information provided to you about your participation in this 

survey.

 I have read and understood the information and choose to participate. 

Thank you very much for your help in this important study!

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Using	This	Survey

Here are some tips that may help you navigate and complete this survey.

Returning to previous pages. Be sure to use the survey “go back to previous page” button at 

the bottom of the page. Do not use your browser’s back button—it will not work.

Returning to the survey itself. If you would like to complete the survey in multiple sessions—or 

if you accidentally get disconnected from the survey—you can return to your previous 

responses by clicking on the link that was in your invitation email. This will take you to where 

you left off (through the last full page you completed). You can keep returning until you click on 
72

the “submit” button on the final page of the survey.

Saving your responses. Your responses on any given survey page are saved when you click on 

either button at the bottom of the page (“save and go to next page” or “go back to previous 

page”). 

Adding optional comments. Toward the bottom of each survey page is a space where you can 

write in any comments you may have pertaining to the questions on the page. This is 

completely optional.

----------------------------------------[INTERNAL CODES]-----------------------------------------------

Treatment code (treatment): REL Southwest will pre-identify via an internal code that will not 

be listed on the survey whether teacher respondent works at a school that belongs to the 

treatment group or the control group. treatment = 1 indicates teacher is in the treatment 

group. treatment = 0 = control group. Unless otherwise noted, survey questions will appear for 

both groups of teachers.

Prior respondent code: REL Southwest will pre-identify those respondents who, from the same 

email address, completed the corresponding item in wave 1 spring 2015 survey. For these 

respondents, prior = 1. 

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Position	and	Job	Responsibilities

We would like to update our information about your position.

[q1] Which of the following best describes your current position as a teacher of K-12 students? 

(Check one.)

 If you are not a teacher of K-12 students, or do not have teaching responsibilities in 

2015-2016, you have received this survey in error. Please let us know by replying to 

the invitation email or by calling {number}.

 Regular education teacher

 Special education teacher

 Other kind of teacher: ___________________________________

[q2x] What subject area(s) are you currently teaching? (Check all that apply.)

 [q2a] English/language arts/reading/writing
73

 [q2b] Mathematics

 [q2d] Science

 [q2d] Social Studies

 [q2e] Foreign language(s)

 [q2f] Visual or performing arts (art, music, etc.)

 [q2g] Physical education/health education

 [q2h] Career/technical education

 [q2i] Other subject area(s): [include fill-in box]

[q3] Which one of the following three groups of teachers do you belong to? These groups are 

defined by New Mexico’s teacher evaluation system, NM TEACH. 

 Group A: tested subject, tested grade

 Group B: grade 3 – 12 subject not linkable to NM’s standard based assessments

 Group C: grade K-2 teacher

[q4]Which of the following best describes your current teaching arrangement? (Check one.)

 I teach a single group of students all or most of the day in multiple subject areas. 

(Traditional elementary arrangement; sometimes called “self-contained.”)

 I teach several classes of different students during the day in a particular subject (for 

example, math) or perhaps two subjects (for example, you teach some math classes and 

some science classes). (Traditional secondary arrangement; sometimes called “subjectspecific” or “departmentalized”; at elementary level, sometimes called “subject matter 

specialist.” Also typical arrangement for physical education, art, music, etc.)

 I mainly teach selected students released from (or in) their regular classes in specific 

skills or to address specific needs (for example, special education, reading, English as a 

second language, gifted and talented.) (Sometimes called “pull out”, “resource,” or 

“push in” instruction.)

 I am one of two or more teachers who are jointly responsible for teaching the same 

subject(s) to a group of students (for example, in the same classroom), all or most of the 

time and/or in a majority of classes. (Sometimes called “co-teaching” or “job share.”)

 Other (please describe): _______________________________________

[q5] [if prior q5 blank] Including this school year (2015-2016), how many years have you 

been teaching, total, regardless of location?

Total years teaching: [fill in number: must be whole number less than 60]
74

[q6] [if prior q6 blank] Including this school year (2015-2016), how many years have you 

been teaching in your current school?

Years in current school: [fill in number: must be whole number less than 60]

[q7] Which of the following best describes your current position as a teacher of K-12 students? 

(Check all that apply)

 Spanish bilingual teacher

 Native American bilingual teacher

 Other bilingual teacher: ___________________________________

 Not a bilingual teacher

----------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]-----------------------------------------------

Your	Experiences	This	Year	(SY	2015-2016)	of	Formal	Observations	for	Evaluation	

Purposes	

[* required question ] [q8] Thinking back over this whole school year 2015-2016, how many 

times were you formally observed by a school leader? School leader is defined as a principal, 

assistant principal, dean, or coach charged with authority to conduct formal observations of 

20+ minutes using the NM TEACH Observation Rubric {link to rubric}. 

 3 or more times

 2 times

 1 time

 0 times



[q9] [If q8 = 1, 2, or 3+ times] Use the slider to estimate how long the formal postobservation conferences typically took? Think only of conferences after formal observations; do 

not include informal feedback you might have received from classroom walk-throughs. 

[insert slider graphic here. tick marks for 0 min, 15 min, 30 min, 45 min, 60 min, 75 min, 90 min]
75

[q10] How frequently did you receive informal feedback this year from a school leader—for 

example, “wow or wonder” statements after brief walk-throughs. 

 At least once a week 

 At least once a month

 At least once per semester or trimester

 Never

 Other: ___________________

[q11x] [If q8 = 1, 2, or 3+ times] Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree 

with the following statements about all of the conferences you had with a school leader 

following his or her formal observation(s) of your class this year (school year 2015-2016). 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q11a] The feedback session itself, separate

from professional development I may have 

been recommended to take, helped me 

improve my instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11b] In each conference, I brought 

documents to the conference, documents 

such as the lesson plan, and PDP.

[insert slider here]

[q11c] In each conference, the school leader

brought documents to conference, such as my 

summative score and the most recent PDP.

[insert slider here]

[q11d] In each conference the school leader 

identified at least one positive practice that I 

do well.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11e]In each conference the school leader 

identified at least one challenge facing me. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11f]In each conference, the school leader 

used my scores on the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric to determine which 

instructional practices to praise or critique.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11g] In each conference, the school leader 

used my scores on the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric to determine what 

[insert slider graphic here]
76

professional development to recommend to 

the teacher.

[q11h] In each conference, the school leader

ended the conference on a positive note.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11i]Each conference followed a predictable 

format.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11j]In each conference, my school leader 

and I mutually developed next steps for my 

instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]

.

[q11k]I walked away with a clear 

understanding of my school leader’s 

feedback.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11l]My school leader listened to what I had 

to say during the conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11m]The observations were done to me, 

rather than for me. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11n]I received specific feedback about my 

performance. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11o] I received actionable feedback about 

my performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11p]During the conferences, I committed 

to a specific set of next steps to improve my 

instruction. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11q] ] In each conference, the school 

leader spoke for almost all of the time.

[insert slider here]

[q11r] There was a high level of conflict in 

the conference. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11s In each conference I obtained 

recommendations for professional 

development tailored to my specific needs.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11t] I trusted and accepted the feedback I 

received. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11u]I feel positive about the feedback I got 

during the conferences. 

[insert slider graphic here]
77

[q11v] I enjoyed most of the postobservation feedback conferences.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q11w] I was always provided with a written 

or online summary of the observation and my 

school leader’s comments on it. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q12x] Please indicate whether you were ever rated this school year by your school leader as 

needing to improve upon or else excelling in the following observation items from NM TEACH, 

whether you received a recommendation to take up professional development (PD), and how you 

rate yourself on the item. Mark all that apply.

NM TEACH 

Observation Item

I was rated at 

least once as 

excelling on 

this item

I was rated at 

least once as 

needing to 

improve on 

this item

I was 

recommended 

to take PD 

because of 

this item

I don’t 

know how 

I was rated

How would 

you rate 

yourself 

this school 

year on this 

item? 

2A: Creating an 

environment of respect 

and rapport

[Ineffective, 

Minimally

Effective, 

Effective, 

Highly 

Effective, 

Exemplary

I don’t 

know]

2B: Organizing 

Physical Space

2C: Establishing a 

culture for learning

2D: Managing 

classroom 

procedures

2E: Managing Student 

Behavior

3A: Communicating 

with Students

3B: Using questioning 
78

and discussion 

techniques

3C: Engaging students 

in learning

3D: Assessment in 

Instruction

3E: Demonstrating 

flexibility and 

responsiveness

[q13a][if treatment=1 & q8 > 0] 

Have you ever received the “Checklist for New Mexico Principals’ Provision of Feedback to 

Teachers” , a guide to conducting formal feedback sessions? The first page of the Conversation 

Checklist looks like this: 

 Yes

 No

[q13b][if q8 > 0]Has your school leader ever used the “Checklist for New Mexico Principals’ 

Provision of Feedback to Teachers” when conducting the formal feedback conference in the 

2015-2016 school year? 

 Yes

 No
79

[q13c] [If q13b = yes)] For how many of your feedback sessions did your school leader(s) use 

the “Conversation Checklist”?

 3 or more observations

 2 observations

 1 observation

 None of the observations

 I don’t know

[q13d [If 13a = yes)] Did you view the testimonial video that was distributed along with the 

Conversation Checklist?

 Yes

 No

 I don’t know

[q13e][] During the formal feedback sessions, has a school leader ever used the “Guidance for 

New Mexico Principals’ About Provision of Feedback to Teachers” to guide any of your formal 

feedback sessions during the 2015-2016 school year? The first page of the Conversation 

Checklist looks like this: 

 Yes

 No
80

[q14x] If 13b=yes] Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with the 

following statements about your opinions about the Conversation Checklist this year (school 

year 2015-2016). 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q14a] The Conversation Checklist was easy 

to use.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q14b] The Conversation Checklist took too 

much time to use.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q14c] The Conversation Checklist made the 

feedback conversation feel formulaic. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q14d] The Conversation Checklist provided 

me and my school leader(s) a helpful 

structure for feedback. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q14e] I received more critical feedback

when my school leader used the Conversation 

Checklist than in prior conferences when 

he/she didn’t use the Protocol. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q14f] The Conversation Checklist helped me 

commit to specific set of next steps to 

improve my instruction.

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Professional	Development	You	Received	This	Year	(SY	2015-2016)

The questions on this page ask about all of the professional development (PD) you have 

participated in during the 2015-2016 school year. Don’t include any professional development 

you may have participated in prior to your first formal observation this school year. 

 Professional development includes (but is not limited to) workshops, inservices, 

coaching/mentoring, collaborative planning/study, courses, institutes, professional 

conferences, self-directed learning, and so forth.

 Consider mandatory/required professional development as well as voluntary 

professional development.

[q15x] Please indicate all of the topics below that one or more school leader recommend you 
81

take. In addition, please also include which topics were covered in professional development 

you actually participated in this year (2015-2016). Select as many topics as apply.

A	school	

leader	

recommen

ded	I	take	

this	PD

I	took	the	

PD	online

I	received	

the	PD	in	

person

h

t

[q15a] Classroom management   

[q15b] Professionalism and communication in the classroom   

[q15c] Special education and inclusion   

[q15d] Standards-based lesson plans   

[q15e] Common Core Standards   

[q15f] Assessment (includes continuous assessment, portfolio 

assessment, Common Core aligned assessments)   

[q15g] Data-driven instruction   

[q15h] Early childhood   

[q15i] Instructional strategies or content in the content area(s) you 

teach—e.g., Mathematics; or Literacy PD   

[q15j] Response to Intervention   

[q15k] Teachscape Reflect training   

[q15l] Other NM TEACH training   

[q15m] Sheltering Instruction for Language development   

[q15n] Language Acquisition Design   

[q15o] Scaffolding instruction   

[q15m] Other: _______________________________   

[q15n] Other: _______________________________   

[q15o] Other: _______________________________   

[q16x] Thinking about the professional development you have participated in this year (2015-

2016, including summer 2015), use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with 

each of the following statements. 
82

My professional development experiences this year...

Disagree	

Strongly

Disagree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Strongly

[q14a] Were mostly developed by school 

leaders or teachers at my school. [insert slider graphic here]

[q14b] Were mostly job-embedded rather 

than one-time only sessions. [insert slider graphic here]

[q16a] Were varied and numerous enough to 

allow the school leader to customize PD 

recommendations based on my performance on 

specific domains of the NM TEACH 

Observation Rubric.{link}

[insert slider graphic here]

[q16b] Have been useful for helping me 

improve the achievement of my students

[insert slider graphic here]

[q16c]Have been useful for improving my 

instruction

[insert slider graphic here]

[q16d]Have taken more time than they were 

worth

[insert slider graphic here]

[q16e]Have been well aligned with the 

Common Core State Standards and/or 

curriculum based on these standards

[insert slider graphic here]

[q17x]Use the slider to indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the support you have received related to your professional development 

experiences this year (SY 2015-2016, including summer 2015). 

Disagree	

Strongly

Disagree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Strongly

[q17a] I had easy access to a list of the 

possible professional development courses or 

offerings I could take. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q17b]My school leader(s) has encouraged 

and supported my participation in professional 

development.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q17c]Sufficient resources (for example, 

substitute coverage, funding to cover 

expenses, stipends) have been available to 

allow me to participate in the professional 

[insert slider graphic here]
83

development I need to teach effectively.

[q17d]I have had sufficient flexibility in my 

schedule to pursue the professional 

development opportunities recommended for 

me.

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	Perceptions	of	the	Quality	of	Your	School’s	Leadership

[q18] Rate your level of agreement with the following statement: “Overall, I was satisfied with 

the quality of my school’s leaders (principals, assistant principals, deans, department chairs) 

this year (school year 2015-2016).”

 Disagree strongly

 Disagree somewhat

 Agree somewhat

 Agree strongly 

[q19x] Thinking about this year (2015-2016), use the slider to indicate how much you agree or 

disagree with the following statements. “The school leaders who conduct formal observations 

of my classroom ... 

Disagree	

Strongly

Disagree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Somewhat

Agree	

Strongly

[q19a] Understand the subject 

matter content that I teach.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q19b] Understand what skills are 

needed for teachers to foster 

meaningful student learning. 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q19c] Foster an atmosphere of 

trust and mutual respect in my 

school.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q19d] Understand the 3 rating 

components of the NM Teach

Summative Evaluation Report

(student achievement, observations, 

multiple measures). 

[insert slider graphic here]

[q19e] Help to improve my [insert slider graphic here]
84

teaching. 

[q19f] Are instructional leaders. [insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	Personal	Views	of	NM	TEACH	Educator	Effectiveness	System

[q20x]Use the slider to rate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following 

statements about the NM TEACH Educator Effectiveness System from school year 2015-2016. 

Disagree 

Strongly

Disagree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Somewhat

Agree 

Strongly

[q20a]The NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System does a good job 

distinguishing effective from ineffective 

teachers.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20b]The NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System is fair to all teachers, 

regardless of their personal characteristics or 

those of the students they teach.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20c]The NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System has helped me pinpoint 

specific things I can do to help improve my 

performance.

[insert slider graphic here]

[q20d] I understand how the overall teacher 

ratings work in the NM TEACH Educator 

Effectiveness System.

[insert slider graphic here]

-----------------------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]----------------------------------

Your	NM	TEACH	Rating	Summative	Evaluation	

[q21]Do you know what your level of Educator Effectiveness (Ineffective, Minimally Effective, 

Effective, Highly Effective, Exemplary) was for the school year 2015-2016? 

 Yes

 No

[q22] [if q21=yes] How did you learn your level of Educator Effectiveness for the school year 
85

2015-2016? Select all that apply.

 I received it via email from New Mexico Public Education Department

 I logged into my teacher portal online

 A school leader told me 

 I received it via my mailbox at school 

 Other: ______________________

 Other: ______________________

 I don’t recall

[q23] [if q21=yes] Did a school leader ever discuss with you how to improve your Educator 

Effectiveness score? 

 Yes, we had a conference

 Yes, in passing

 No

 I don’t recall 

[q24] [if q21=yes] Did a school leader ever discuss with you how to interpret your student 

achievement growth score? 

 Yes, we had a conference

 Yes, in passing

 No

 Not Applicable

 I don’t recall 

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Optional	Comments	from	You

The following four questions are optional if you have any feedback you wish to share. If you do 

not, proceed to the next and final page.
86

[q25] [if 13a=yes] Do you have any suggestions to help us improve the Checklist for New 

Mexico Principals’ Provision of Feedback to Teachers?

[q26] Do you have any comments about professional development available to teachers in 

your district?

[q27] Do you have any comments about the NM TEACH Observation Rubric? 

[q28] Do you have any comments about the NM TEACH teacher evaluation system?

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Thank	You!

Thank you so much for your time to complete this survey. 

Within the next 2 weeks, you will receive an email message with instructions about how to 

claim your gift card. This email message will come from {iCard (services@icardgiftcard.com)} 

and will be sent to the same email address at which you received the survey invitation, unless 

you indicate otherwise here:

 Yes, please send my gift card information to the same email address to which you sent the 

survey invitation.

 Please send my gift card information to a different email address, which I am providing 

here: _______________

 No, I do not wish to receive a gift card email from {iCard}.

---------------------------------------[NEW SURVEY PAGE]---------------------------------------------

Thanks	Again

You have completed the survey and may now close it.
87

APPENDIX B – Principal	and	Teacher	Recruitment	Materials

Wave	1	Principal	Recruitment	Script– SPRING	2015

Subject: Invitation to take $25 survey to provide feedback on the NM TEACH teacher evaluation 

process (and receive $25)

title first_name_ppal last_name_ppal

School_name

full_district_name

Dear title last_name_ppal,

The Regional Education Lab Southwest (REL Southwest) is studying principals’ feedback to 

teachers in an effort to improve the teacher evaluation process. Will you please be part of the 

study? 

Participation involves three things:

1. Complete a 30-minute online survey now using the link below (and receive $25).

2. Receive a short guide about providing effective feedback to teachers for your use 

throughout the 2015-2016 school year. You and your teachers will be assigned at random 

to one of two types of guidance.

3. Complete a second 30-minute online survey in spring 2016 (and receive an additional 

$25). 

All New Mexico public school principals are invited to participate in the study.

REL Southwest researchers will keep your survey answers confidential. The survey will not 

be used to evaluate you or your school. Only researchers from the REL Southwest will view your 

answers, and all answers will be aggregated before being included in the public report. The 

survey will give you an opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation process, and the

results will help NM PED refine NM TEACH, and hopefully help other states improve their 

teacher evaluation systems. 

Click this link to read your rights as a research subject and to take the survey. 

https://survey.rand.org/research/hosting/ced/

Login Code: [MMIC code here]

If you prefer that we use a different email address for you, please send your request to the survey 

coordinator, [MMIC staff person here].

Below are some answers to frequently asked questions. If you have any additional questions 

about the survey, please feel free to contact me at [MMIC survey coordinator email address 
88

here], tel. [MMIC survey coordinator # here]. 

Sincerely,

[MMIC survey coordinator name]

Survey Coordinator

Southwest REL researcher

Frequently Asked Questions

How was I selected for this study? We are asking all New Mexico public school principals to 

complete the survey. 

What do I get for completing the surveys? You will receive a $25 gift card for completing each 

survey. You’ll be able to choose your gift card from more than 200 merchants. To see the full 

list of merchants, go to http://www.icardgiftcard.com/gift-cards/.

What is the purpose of the survey and how will the results be used? The Southwest Regional 

Educational Lab is conducting this study to learn about the feedback principals give to teachers 

under NM TEACH, and teachers’ perceptions of that feedback. The study is funded by the U.S. 

Department of Education. For more information about the study, visit {REL Southwest website}. 

Results will be used to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding 

how to improve NM TEACH training for principals and teachers.

Who is conducting the study? Southwest REL researchers are conducting this study, including 

the survey. The researchers are from the RAND Corporation, which is an independent, 

nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization.

Who will get the study results? Only Southwest REL researchers will see your answers to 

survey questions. The survey results will be summarized across all survey respondents, and 

Southwest REL will present summaries of results to NM PED and to the federal Department of 

Education. We adhere to strict codes of confidentiality and will NEVER release individual 

responses in any way that could identify respondents.

Am I required to complete the survey? No, the survey is voluntary. However, we strongly 

encourage you to participate. The survey is an opportunity to share your views of NM TEACH 

and to describe the post-observation feedback process. 

How do I complete the survey? You complete the survey online, accessing it from a link shown 

above. This is your own individual link, so please do not share it with anyone or alter it.
89

Who can I contact if I have more questions or concerns? If you have general questions, you can 

contact [first and last name of survey coordinator]. [He/She] is available by email ([survey email 

account]@rand.org) or by phone (1-866-MMIC- – toll-free). If you have concerns or questions 

about your rights as a participant, contact the REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for 

the protection of project participants): {email}, toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.
90

Wave	1	Teacher	Recruitment	Script– – SPRING	2015

Subject: Invitation to takesurvey to provide feedback about the NM TEACH teacher evaluation 

process (and receive $25)

title first_name_teacher last_name_teacher

School_name

full_district_name

Dear title last_name_teacher,

The Regional Education Lab Southwest (REL Southwest) is studying the quality of the feedback 

you receive after formal observations that are a part of NM TEACH. Will you please be part of 

the study? 

Your participation involves three things:

1. Complete a 30-minute online survey using the link below (and receive $25).

2. Receive a short document about effective feedback sessions between you and your school 

leader for your use throughout the 2015-2016 school year. You and your principal will be 

assigned at random to one of two types of guidance.

3. Complete a second 30-minute online survey in spring 2016 (and receive an additional 

$25). 

REL Southwest has first invited all New Mexico public school principals to participate in the 

study. Then in all schools where principals agree to participate, REL Southwest is inviting up to 

10 teachers to participate. You are one of only 10 teachers selected by REL Southwest to 

participate. Since you were randomly selected, we can’t replace you with any other teacher. 

Thus, your participation is very important. Principals who agree to participate are assigned at 

random to receive one of two types of guidance about effective feedback to teachers. Teachers 

who participate in the study receive the same guidance as their principals.

REL Southwest researchers will keep your survey answers confidential. The survey will not 

be used to evaluate you or your school. Only researchers from the REL Southwest will view 

your answers, and all answers will be aggregated before being included in the public report. The 

survey will give you an opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation process, and the

results will help NM PED refine NM TEACH, and hopefully help other states improve their 

teacher evaluation systems. 

Click this link to read your rights as a research subject and to take the survey. 
91

https://survey.rand.org/research/hosting/ced/

Login Code: [MMIC code here]

If you prefer that we use a different email address for you, please send your request to the survey 

coordinator, [MMIC staff person here].

Below are some answers to frequently asked questions. If you have any additional questions 

about the survey, please feel free to contact me at [MMIC survey coordinator email address 

here], tel. [MMIC survey coordinator # here]. 

Sincerely,

[MMIC survey coordinator name]

Survey Coordinator

Southwest REL researcher

Frequently Asked Questions

How was I selected for this survey? We are asking up to 10 teachers to participate in each 

school where a principal has agreed to participate in the study. 

What do I get for participating in the study? You will receive a $25 gift card for completing 

each of two surveys. You’ll be able to choose your gift card from more than 200 merchants. To 

see the full list of merchants, go to http://www.icardgiftcard.com/gift-cards/.

What is the purpose of the study and how will the results be used? The Southwest Regional 

Educational Lab is conducting this study to learn about the feedback principals give to teachers 

under NM TEACH, and teachers’ perceptions of that feedback. The study is funded by the U.S. 

Department of Education. For more information about the study, visit {REL Southwest website}. 

Results will be used to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding 

how to improve NM TEACH training for principals and teachers.

Who is conducting the study? Southwest REL researchers are conducting this study, including 

the survey. The researchers are from the RAND Corporation, which is an independent, 

nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization.

Who will get the survey results? Only Southwest REL researchers will see your answers to the 

surveys. The survey results will be summarized across all survey respondents, and Southwest 

REL will present summaries of results to NM PED and to the federal Department of Education. 

We adhere to strict codes of confidentiality and will NEVER release individual responses in any 

way that could identify respondents.
92

Am I required to complete the survey? No, the survey is voluntary. However, we strongly 

encourage you to participate. The survey is an opportunity to share your views of NM TEACH 

and to describe the post-observation feedback process. 

How do I complete the survey? You complete the survey online, accessing it from a link shown 

above. This is your own individual link, so please do not share it with anyone or alter it.

Who can I contact if I have more questions or concerns? If you have general questions, you can 

contact [first and last name of survey coordinator]. [He/She] is available by email ([survey email 

account]@rand.org) or by phone (1-866-MMIC- – toll-free). If you have concerns or questions 

about your rights as a participant, contact the REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for 

the protection of project participants): {email}, toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.
93

Wave	2	Principal	Recruitment	Script– – SPRING	2016

Subject: Invitation to take final $25 survey to improve the NM TEACH teacher evaluation 

process

title first_name_ppal last_name_ppal

School_name

full_district_name

Dear title last_name_ppal,

Thank you for participating in the Regional Education Lab Southwest (REL Southwest) study of 

New Mexico principals’ feedback to teachers! You completed our spring 2015 survey. See your 

responses here. We are now inviting you to complete the second and final principal survey.

As a reminder, all New Mexico public school principals were invited to participate in the study, 

which is supported by both the New Mexico Public Education Department and your school 

district. (To see the letter of support from NM PED and districts, visit {REL Southwest 

website}.)

Click this link to read your rights as a research subject and complete the spring 2016 

survey. 

https://survey.rand.org/research/hosting/ced/

Login Code: [MMIC code here]

REL Southwest researchers will keep your survey answers confidential. The survey will not 

be used to evaluate you or your school. Only researchers from the REL Southwest will view 

your answers, and all answers will be aggregated before being included in the public report. The 

survey results will help NM PED refine NM TEACH, and hopefully help other states improve 

their teacher evaluation systems. 

If you prefer that we use a different email address for you, please send your request to the survey 

coordinator, [MMIC staff person here].

Below are some answers to frequently asked questions. If you have any additional questions 

about the survey, please feel free to contact me at [MMIC survey coordinator email address 

here], tel. [MMIC survey coordinator # here]. 

Sincerely,

[MMIC survey coordinator name]

Survey Coordinator

Southwest REL researcher
94

Frequently Asked Questions

How was I selected for this survey? We are asking all public school principals who completed 

the spring 2015 survey (for $25) to also complete the 2016 survey (for another $25). 

What do I get for completing the survey? You will receive a $25 gift card for completing the 

survey. You’ll be able to choose your gift card from more than 200 merchants. To see the full 

list of merchants, go to http://www.icardgiftcard.com/gift-cards/.

What is the purpose of the survey and how will the results be used? The Southwest Regional 

Educational Lab is conducting this study to learn about the feedback principals give to teachers 

under NM TEACH, and teachers’ perceptions of that feedback. The study is funded by the U.S. 

Department of Education. For more information about the study, visit {REL Southwest website}. 

Results will be used to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding 

how to improve NM TEACH training for principals and teachers.

Who is conducting the survey? Southwest REL researchers are conducting this survey. The 

researchers are from the RAND Corporation, which is an independent, nonprofit, nonpartisan 

research organization.

Who will get the survey results? Only Southwest REL researchers will see individual results. The 

survey results will be summarized across all survey respondents, and Southwest REL will 

present summaries of results to NM PED and to the federal Department of Education. We adhere 

to strict codes of confidentiality and will NEVER release individual responses in any way that 

could identify respondents.

Am I required to complete the survey? No, the survey is voluntary. However, we strongly 

encourage you to participate. The survey is an opportunity to share your views of NM TEACH 

and to describe the post-observation feedback process. 

How do I complete the survey? You complete the survey online, accessing it from a link shown 

above. This is your own individual link, so please do not share it with anyone or alter it.

Who can I contact if I have more questions or concerns? If you have general questions, you can 

contact [first and last name of survey coordinator]. [He/She] is available by email ([survey email 

account]@rand.org) or by phone (1-866-MMIC- – toll-free). If you have concerns or questions 

about your rights as a participant, contact the REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for 

the protection of project participants): {email}, toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.
95

Wave	2	Teacher	Recruitment	Script– – SPRING	2015

Subject: Invitation to take final $25 survey to improve the NMTEACH teacher evaluation process

title first_name_teacher last_name_teacher

School_name

full_district_name

Dear title last_name_teacher,

Thank you for participating in the Regional Education Lab Southwest (REL Southwest) study of 

New Mexico principals’ feedback to teachers! You completed our spring 2015 survey. See your 

responses here. We are now inviting you to complete the second and final teacher survey.

As a reminder, all New Mexico public school principals were invited to participate in the study, 

which is supported by both the New Mexico Public Education Department and your school 

district. (To see the letter of support from NM PED and districts, visit {REL Southwest 

website}.)

Click this link to read your rights as a research subject and complete the spring 2016 

survey. 

https://survey.rand.org/research/hosting/ced/

Login Code: [MMIC code here]

REL Southwest researchers will keep your survey answers confidential. The survey will not 

be used to evaluate you or your school. Only researchers from the REL Southwest will view 

your answers, and all answers will be aggregated before being included in the public report. The 

survey results will help NM PED refine NM TEACH, and hopefully help other states improve 

their teacher evaluation systems. 

If you prefer that we use a different email address for you, please send your request to the survey 

coordinator, [MMIC staff person here].

Below are some answers to frequently asked questions. If you have any additional questions 

about the survey, please feel free to contact me at [MMIC survey coordinator email address 

here], tel. [MMIC survey coordinator # here]. 

Sincerely,

[MMIC survey coordinator name]

Survey Coordinator

Southwest REL researcher

Frequently Asked Questions
96

How was I selected for this survey? We are asking all teachers who completed the spring 2015 

survey (for $25) to take the spring 2016 survey (for another $25). We invited up to 10 teachers 

to take the 2015 survey in each school where a principal has agreed to participate in the study. 

What do I get for completing the survey? You will receive a $25 gift card for completing the 

survey. You’ll be able to choose your gift card from more than 200 merchants. To see the full 

list of merchants, go to http://www.icardgiftcard.com/gift-cards/.

What is the purpose of the survey and how will the results be used? The Southwest Regional 

Educational Lab is conducting this study to learn about the feedback principals give to teachers 

under NM TEACH, and teachers’ perceptions of that feedback. The study is funded by the U.S. 

Department of Education. For more information about the study, visit {REL Southwest website}. 

Results will be used to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding 

how to improve NM TEACH training for principals and teachers.

Who is conducting the survey? Southwest REL researchers are conducting this survey. The 

researchers are from the RAND Corporation, which is an independent, nonprofit, nonpartisan 

research organization.

Who will get the survey results? Only Southwest REL researchers will see individual results. The 

survey results will be summarized across all survey respondents, and Southwest REL will 

present summaries of results to NM PED and to the federal Department of Education. We adhere 

to strict codes of confidentiality and will NEVER release individual responses in any way that 

could identify respondents.

Am I required to complete the survey? No, the survey is voluntary. However, we strongly 

encourage you to participate. The survey is an opportunity to share your views of NM TEACH 

and to describe the post-observation feedback process. 

How do I complete the survey? You complete the survey online, accessing it from a link shown 

above. This is your own individual link, so please do not share it with anyone or alter it.

Who can I contact if I have more questions or concerns? If you have general questions, you can 

contact [first and last name of survey coordinator]. [He/She] is available by email ([survey email 

account]@rand.org) or by phone (1-866-MMIC- – toll-free). If you have concerns or questions 

about your rights as a participant, contact the REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for 

the protection of project participants): {email}, toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.
97

Wave	1	Principal	Recruitment	Script– SPRING	2015

Subject: Reminder: Invitation to take survey to provide feedback on the NM TEACH teacher 

evaluation process (and receive $25)

title first_name_ppal last_name_ppal

School_name

full_district_name

Dear title last_name_ppal,

Recently you received an email asking you to be a part of a study under The Regional Education 

Lab Southwest (REL Southwest) on principals’ feedback to teachers. Will you please be part of 

the study? 

Participation involves three things:

1. Receive a short guide about providing effective feedback to teachers for your use 

throughout the 2015-2016 school year. You and your teachers will be assigned at random 

to one of two types of guidance.

2. Complete a 30-minute online survey now using the link below (and receive $25).

3. Complete a second 30-minute online survey in spring 2016 (and receive an additional 

$25). 

All New Mexico public school principals are invited to participate in the study.

REL Southwest researchers will keep your survey answers confidential. The survey will not 

be used to evaluate you or your school. Only researchers from the REL Southwest will view your 

answers, and all answers will be aggregated before being included in the public report. The 

survey will give you an opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation process, and the

results will help NM PED refine NM TEACH, and hopefully help other states improve their 

teacher evaluation systems. 

Click this link to read your rights as a research subject and to take the survey. 

https://survey.rand.org/research/hosting/ced/

Login Code: [MMIC code here]

If you prefer that we use a different email address for you, please send your request to the survey 

coordinator, [MMIC staff person here].

Below are some answers to frequently asked questions. If you have any additional questions 

about the survey, please feel free to contact me at [MMIC survey coordinator email address 

here], tel. [MMIC survey coordinator # here]. 

Sincerely,
98

[MMIC survey coordinator name]

Survey Coordinator

Southwest REL researcher

Frequently Asked Questions

How was I selected for this study? We are asking all New Mexico public school principals to 

complete the survey. 

What do I get for completing the surveys? You will receive a $25 gift card for completing each 

survey. You’ll be able to choose your gift card from more than 200 merchants. To see the full 

list of merchants, go to http://www.icardgiftcard.com/gift-cards/.

What is the purpose of the survey and how will the results be used? The Southwest Regional 

Educational Lab is conducting this study to learn about the feedback principals give to teachers 

under NM TEACH, and teachers’ perceptions of that feedback. The study is funded by the U.S. 

Department of Education. For more information about the study, visit {REL Southwest website}. 

Results will be used to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding 

how to improve NM TEACH training for principals and teachers.

Who is conducting the study? Southwest REL researchers are conducting this study, including 

the survey. The researchers are from the RAND Corporation, which is an independent, 

nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization.

Who will get the study results? Only Southwest REL researchers will see your answers to 

survey questions. The survey results will be summarized across all survey respondents, and 

Southwest REL will present summaries of results to NM PED and to the federal Department of 

Education. We adhere to strict codes of confidentiality and will NEVER release individual 

responses in any way that could identify respondents.

Am I required to complete the survey? No, the survey is voluntary. However, we strongly 

encourage you to participate. The survey is an opportunity to share your views of NM TEACH 

and to describe the post-observation feedback process. 

How do I complete the survey? You complete the survey online, accessing it from a link shown 

above. This is your own individual link, so please do not share it with anyone or alter it.

Who can I contact if I have more questions or concerns? If you have general questions, you can 
99

contact [first and last name of survey coordinator]. [He/She] is available by email ([survey email 

account]@rand.org) or by phone (1-866-MMIC- – toll-free). If you have concerns or questions 

about your rights as a participant, contact the REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for 

the protection of project participants): {email}, toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.
100

Wave	1	Teacher	Recruitment	Script– – SPRING	2015

Subject: Reminder: Invitation to take survey to provide feedback about the NM TEACH teacher 

evaluation process (and receive $25)

title first_name_teacher last_name_teacher

School_name

full_district_name

Dear title last_name_teacher,

Recently you received an email asking you to be a part of a study under The Regional Education 

Lab Southwest (REL Southwest) on the quality of the feedback you receive after formal 

observations that are a part of NM TEACH. Will you please be part of the study? 

Your participation involves three things:

1. Complete a 30-minute online survey using the link below (and receive $25).

2. Receive a short document about effective feedback sessions between you and your school 

leader for your use throughout the 2015-2016 school year. You and your principal will be 

assigned at random to one of two types of guidance.

3. Complete a second 30-minute online survey in spring 2016 (and receive an additional 

$25). 

REL Southwest has first invited all New Mexico public school principals to participate in the 

study. Then in all schools where principals agree to participate, REL Southwest is inviting up to 

10 teachers to participate. You are one of only 10 teachers selected by REL Southwest to 

participate. Since you were randomly selected, we can’t replace you with any other teacher. 

Thus, your participation is very important. Principals who agree to participate are assigned at 

random to receive one of two types of guidance about effective feedback to teachers. Teachers 

who participate in the study receive the same guidance as their principals.

REL Southwest researchers will keep your survey answers confidential. The survey will not 

be used to evaluate you or your school. Only researchers from the REL Southwest will view 

your answers, and all answers will be aggregated before being included in the public report. The 

survey will give you an opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation process, and the

results will help NM PED refine NM TEACH, and hopefully help other states improve their 

teacher evaluation systems. 

Click this link to read your rights as a research subject and to take the survey. 

https://survey.rand.org/research/hosting/ced/
101

Login Code: [MMIC code here]

If you prefer that we use a different email address for you, please send your request to the survey 

coordinator, [MMIC staff person here].

Below are some answers to frequently asked questions. If you have any additional questions 

about the survey, please feel free to contact me at [MMIC survey coordinator email address 

here], tel. [MMIC survey coordinator # here]. 

Sincerely,

[MMIC survey coordinator name]

Survey Coordinator

Southwest REL researcher

Frequently Asked Questions

How was I selected for this survey? We are asking up to 10 teachers to participate in each 

school where a principal has agreed to participate in the study. 

What do I get for participating in the study? You will receive a $25 gift card for completing 

each of two surveys. You’ll be able to choose your gift card from more than 200 merchants. To 

see the full list of merchants, go to http://www.icardgiftcard.com/gift-cards/.

What is the purpose of the study and how will the results be used? The Southwest Regional 

Educational Lab is conducting this study to learn about the feedback principals give to teachers 

under NM TEACH, and teachers’ perceptions of that feedback. The study is funded by the U.S. 

Department of Education. For more information about the study, visit {REL Southwest website}. 

Results will be used to provide New Mexico Public Education Department feedback regarding 

how to improve NM TEACH training for principals and teachers.

Who is conducting the study? Southwest REL researchers are conducting this study, including 

the survey. The researchers are from the RAND Corporation, which is an independent, 

nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization.

Who will get the survey results? Only Southwest REL researchers will see your answers to the 

surveys. The survey results will be summarized across all survey respondents, and Southwest 

REL will present summaries of results to NM PED and to the federal Department of Education. 

We adhere to strict codes of confidentiality and will NEVER release individual responses in any 

way that could identify respondents.
102

Am I required to complete the survey? No, the survey is voluntary. However, we strongly 

encourage you to participate. The survey is an opportunity to share your views of NM TEACH 

and to describe the post-observation feedback process. 

How do I complete the survey? You complete the survey online, accessing it from a link shown 

above. This is your own individual link, so please do not share it with anyone or alter it.

Who can I contact if I have more questions or concerns? If you have general questions, you can 

contact [first and last name of survey coordinator]. [He/She] is available by email ([survey email 

account]@rand.org) or by phone (1-866-MMIC- – toll-free). If you have concerns or questions 

about your rights as a participant, contact the REL Southwest at SEDL (which is responsible for 

the protection of project participants): {email}, toll free at {XX}, or c/o IRB, {address}.
103

APPENDIX C – Secondary	Data	Elements

Student, teacher and principal administrative data variables

Below we list the names of the files and variables we will be requesting from NM PED on 

students, teachers and principals as a part of the analysis. The information is based on the Student 

Teacher Accountability Reporting System (STARS) Volume 1 User Guide, 2014-15. STARS is a comprehensive 

student, staff, and course information system that provides a standard data set for each student served by New 

Mexico’s 3Y/4Y – Grade 12 public education system. STARS uses the eScholar data warehouse which integrates 

detail student, staff, and course information via a standard set of templates that provide a consistent format for 

loading data from various student information systems used in public school districts or charter schools. For each 

data requested we list the Domain name, Template Name, and variable name and a variable description. 

Staff Domain, Staff Assignment Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Staff ID Masked Staff ID fixed across years and locations

Assignment Code PED defined assignment or position codes.

School Year Date School Year

Location Code PED defined three character location code of school

Assignment Date Report Date

Percentage of Time Assigned The portion of the staff member’s time that is allocated 

to the assignment.

Staff Domain, Staff Development Fact Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Staff ID Masked Staff ID fixed across years and locations

Activity Code Professional Development Activity Code

Activity Start Date Professional Development Activity Start Date

Staff Domain, Staff Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Staff ID Masked Staff ID fixed across years and locations

Gender Code Gender of Staff Member

Ethnic Code Ethnicity Code of Staff Member

Teaching of Principal Years of Experience The number of years that the staff member has been 

employed by any school district in any state as a 

TEACHER or PRINCIPAL (includes current district).

Teaching of Principal Years of Experience in District The number of years that the staff member has been 

employed by the current school district as a TEACHER 

or PRINCIPAL.

Highest Degree Earned Highest degree earned by the staff member.

Staff Qualification Status Staff Qualification Status such as Certified or Substitute 

teacher
104

Hispanic Indicator Indicator of whether the staff member is of Hispanic 

ethnicity

Tribal Affiliation The primary New Mexico Tribe or Pueblo with which 

the staff member is affiliated or enrolled

Student Domain, Student Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Student ID State issued student identification number.

Alternate Student ID District's local student identifier.

Location Code PED defined three character location code of school

School Year Date School Year

Current Grade Level Student current grade level

Birthdate Student date of birth.

Gender Code Gender code of Student

Ethnic Code Ethnicity Code of Student

Hispanic Indicator Indicator of whether the student is of Hispanic 

ethnicity

Economic Status Student participation in free or reduced lunch program.

Economic Disadvantaged Status Code Identifies the type of Direct Cert the student is receiving, 

e.g. SNAP, TANF, Homeless.

Special Education Student is IEP Y/N

Level of Integration Amount of special education service.

Repeating Last Year If student is in grades K-12, Y/N for retained or failed to 

be promoted following the completion of the past school 

year

Gifted Participation Code Indication of whether the student is Gifted

Migrant Status Indicator of migratory status

English Proficiency Code Current or former ELL student.

Assessment Domain, Assessment Fact Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Student ID State issued student identification number.

Test Description Description of type of test

Assessment School Year Date School Year

Item Description Code Item description code

Test Date Date of Assessment

Location Code PED defined three character location code.

Score Score of administered test.

Scoring Model The Measurement used to determine the outcomes the 

respective assessment
105

Attendance Domain, Student Daily Attendance Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Student ID State issued student identification number.

Location Code PED defined three character location code.

Attendance Date Report date of student unexcused absence.

Attendance Code Provide the Attendance Code that indicates the 

unexcused absence status for the date.

Attendance Domain, Student Summary Attendance Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Student ID State issued student identification number.

Location Code PED defined three character location code.

School Year Date School Year

Period Start Date Attendance period start date.

Period End Date Attendance period end date.

Days Present Provide the total number of days within the Reporting 

Period that the student was marked as Present at the 

location.

Days Enrolled Provide the total number of days within the Reporting 

Period that the student was counted as Enrolled at the 

location.

Course and Grades Domain, Course Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Location Code PED defined three character location code.

School Year Date School Year

Course Name Course Name

Semester Indicator of reporting period

Course Code PED-defined 8 character course code offered by the 

school.

Course and Grades Domain, Course Instructor Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Location Code PED defined three character location code.

School Year Date School Year

Primary Instructor ID State issued student identification number.

Course Name Course Name

Semester Indicator of reporting period

Course Code PED-defined 8 character course code offered by the 
106

school.

Section Code Class section number assigned by school district to 

identify distinct classes.

Snapshot Date Field indicating the report date. See valid values.

Special Course Indicator Indicator for honors, gifted, special education, etc.

Course and Grades Domain, Student Course Enrollment Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Location Code PED defined three character location code.

School Year Date School Year

Enrollment Period Reporting date

Student ID State issued student identification number.

Section Code Class section number assigned by school district to 

identify district classes.

Course Code PED-defined 8 character course code offered by the 

school.

Enrollment Domain, School Enrollment Template

Field Name Description

District Code PED defined three character district code. 

Location Code PED defined three character location code.

School Year Date School Year

Student ID State issued student identification number.

Enrollment Date The actual date the mobility transaction occurred.

Enrollment Code Code identifying the type of mobility transaction.

Enroll Change Code Provide a code that indicates the student enrollment was 

a result of SCHOOL CHOICE.
107

NM TEACH Reflect Data

Below we list the variables we will be requesting from NM PED from the Teachscape 

operated REFLECT teacher evaluation data system. 

 Staff ID that is consistent across school years and data sources

 Teacher Evaluation Group (A, B, or C)

 Graduated Consideration Tag

 District ID

 School year

 School NCES ID

 Masked Evaluator ID

 Observation number

 Observation date

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation component - Observation Element name

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation component - Observation Element Score (Level of 

Performance)

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation component - Student Achievement measure name

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation component - Student achievement measure score

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation component - Multiple measure name

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation component - Multiple measure score

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation overall score

 NM TEACH Summative evaluation effectiveness rating
108

Principal and Teacher contact information

File 1 – Principal contact information

 Principal Last Name

 Principal First Name

 Principal Middle Name or initial

 Principal Maiden Name

 Principal primary email address

 Principal secondary email address

 School Name

 School year

 School NCES ID

File 2 – Teacher contact information

 Teacher Last Name

 Teacher First Name

 Teacher Middle Name or initial

 Teacher Maiden name

 Teacher primary email address

 Teacher secondary email address

 School Name

 School year

 School NCES ID