Results in Brief:

Study of Emerging Teacher Evaluation Systems

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development

Policy and Program Studies Service

November 2016

Comprehensive teacher evaluation systems are a core element of current state and local strategies to support improved teaching 

and learning in elementary and secondary education in the United States. The Study of Emerging Teacher Evaluation Systems 

provides descriptive information on the design and early implementation of teacher evaluation systems in eight school districts 

located in Austin, TX; Chattanooga (Hamilton County), TN; Colorado Springs (Harrison School District 2), CO; Tampa (Hillsborough 

County), FL; Pittsburgh, PA; Plattsburgh, NY; Leonardtown (St. Mary’s County), MD; and Washington, DC. It is intended to provide 

lessons that inform the work of states and school districts in designing and implementing their own teacher evaluation and support

activities, and to inform future research on the effects of teacher evaluation systems on teacher professional practice and student 

performance.

Study Questions 

1. What key priorities and measures informed the design of

the new teacher evaluation systems?

2. What steps did the districts take prior to full

implementation to test the system and prepare teachers

and staff to implement it?

3. How did the districts structure and conduct the

classroom observation component of their teacher

evaluation systems?

4. How did the districts analyze student performance and

other data to evaluate teacher performance?

5. How did the districts use, or plan to use, teacher

evaluation results to make personnel decisions? To what

extent were professional development and career

advancement decisions tied to evaluation results?

6. What administrative structures did districts use to

support their new teacher evaluation systems?

7. What are the perceived early effects of the teacher

evaluation systems on the professional practices of

teachers, principals and district administrators?

Study Design and Limitations

This descriptive study relied on interviews and focus groups 

with district administrators, principals, teachers, and 

community members in eight case study districts. These 

districts were selected because their teacher evaluation 

systems relied on multiple measures of teacher performance, 

including classroom observations and measures of student 

performance; distinguished among teachers at various levels 

of proficiency and effectiveness; included a formative 

component that provided timely feedback to teachers; and 

used, or planned to use, evaluation results to inform

decisions about teacher professional development, 

retention, tenure, and other personnel decisions. 

Key study limitations include: (1) reliance on data collected 

from a purposively selected group of districts, thus limiting 

the range of potential successes and challenges districts 

might experience in designing and implementing complex 

teacher evaluation systems; (2) responses that may not 

represent the full range of views among district and school 

staff; and (3) a point-in-time review (i.e., from late 2012 to 

early 2013) of evaluation systems that will likely evolve. 

Highlights

• Teachers and central office staff generally agreed that the

foremost goal of the teacher evaluation system was to

improve instruction.

• Teacher and principal input during the design and/or pilot

test phase strongly influenced decisions regarding system

modifications in six districts, according to district

administrators.

• Classroom observations varied in frequency, duration, and

degree of formality in all eight districts. In addition,

principals reported challenges in finding time to conduct

teacher observations.

• Six districts used multiple approaches for measuring

teacher impact on student performance, including

individual and/or school-level value-added models.

• Districts used teacher evaluation results for a range of

purposes, including targeted professional development and

support, career ladders and performance pay, and in some

instances, redeployment or release of teachers identified as

ineffective.

• The majority of districts created relatively simple,

streamlined structures to administer their teacher

evaluation systems.

• Teachers reported that they believed that the classroom

observations and feedback helped them become better

teachers.
Designing an Evaluation System 

Many choices and tasks influence the design of a 

comprehensive teacher evaluation system that relies on 

multiple measures of performance to assess teacher 

effectiveness. Determining district purposes for developing 

the new teacher evaluation system was often the first step in 

the design process.

Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching was the 

exclusive basis for the design of observation rubrics in half of 

the districts included in the study. 

All eight districts used a range of assessments to measure

teachers’ influence on their students’ performance. In addition 

to the state assessment, all districts used locally developed 

and/or standardized assessments (e.g., DIBELS, PSAT, AP, and 

IB).

To account for the many types of assessments and data 

sources used to measure teacher impact on student 

performance, seven districts assigned separate weights to 

each type of student assessment included in their evaluation 

system. 

Early Implementation 

The early implementation phase — pilot testing the system, 

introducing it to teachers, and training classroom observers — 

varied across the eight districts, yet may have been a critical 

juncture in determining the successful transition to a new, 

comprehensive teacher evaluation system.

Three of the eight districts did not pilot test their teacher 

evaluation systems before implementing them. 

Administrators in these districts explained that holding

teachers accountable as early as possible was important for 

achieving real, measurable change in teaching and learning. 

Each of the eight districts used one or more strategies to 

introduce teachers to the new evaluation system, including 

distributing written materials, creating online resources, or 

using school-based teams of evaluation experts.

Conducting Classroom Observations 

Districts’ approaches to conducting classroom observations 

varied with respect to the types of observers used, and the 

frequency, duration, and degree of formality of the 

observations.

The frequency of classroom observations was wide-ranging 

across the eight districts, from two annual observations for 

experienced teachers in one district to 18 observations for 

new teachers in another. 

Three districts used peer observers, in addition to principals,

to conduct classroom observations. Administrators in these 

districts explained that peer observers were intended to offer 

an unbiased, objective opinion of a teacher’s performance. 

Using Student Performance and Other

Data

Districts used varied and changing strategies in their

evaluation systems to measure teacher impact on student

performance. Seven districts used student learning objectives

among their methods for measuring teacher impact on 

student performance. 

In four districts, some teachers who participated in focus

groups or individual interviews criticized the use of student

performance data to evaluate their performance, expressing

concerns that the tests do not fully capture students’ actual

growth or are not aligned with the school curriculum.

Using Teacher Evaluation Results

Seven districts had defined, or begun to define, the results

they would apply to teacher evaluation scores, including

compensation, professional development, and other

personnel decisions. 

All eight districts used similar rating systems for classifying a

teacher’s overall performance.

Six districts used or planned to use teacher evaluation scores 

to redeploy or release low-performing teachers but narrowly 

defined the circumstances under which this could happen. 

Three districts linked — or planned to link — teacher

evaluation scores to a career ladder, which sometimes

included performance pay.

Administering Evaluation Systems

Despite the complexity of the teacher evaluation systems, six

of the eight districts created modest administrative structures

with, on average, five staff administering their teacher

evaluation systems. 

Four districts worked with outside contractors to create data 

management systems for their teacher evaluation data, and 

two districts worked with contractors to train their classroom 

observers. 

Hiring peer observers was among the most expensive features 

of the teacher evaluation systems in three districts that took 

this approach. 

Perceived System Effects 

Respondents at all levels reported perceiving positive effects 

of their new teacher evaluation systems, notably that 

observations and feedback had helped teachers improve their 

professional practice, even in the partially implementing 

districts. 

Principals in six districts reported that the teacher evaluation 

system had caused them to want to be better instructional 

leaders.