Act 82 of 2012 established new standards for Pennsylvania's teacher evaluation system, including the incorporation of student performance measures in ratings decisions. Since 2009, approximately 35 states have amended teacher evaluation systems, with student achievement playing an increasingly prominent role. This count includes neighboring states--such as New Jersey, New York, and Ohio--which base between 40 and 50 percent of teacher effectiveness ratings on student achievement. Changes to teacher evaluation policy have been motivated in large part by U.S. Department of Education's priorities, including the issuance of waivers from certain "No Child Left Behind" requirements. States receiving a waiver, including Pennsylvania, are required to "develop and implement teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that include student achievement growth as a factor." The nonpartisan Center on Education Policy reported that ten states amended their plans for a new teacher evaluation system due to the waiver policy alone.v Likewise, the Race to the Top (RTTT) competition emphasized teacher and principal evaluation systems based on student achievement. This policy brief provides a closer look at Pennsylvania's new teacher evaluation system and the efforts of the Pittsburgh Public Schools--the state's second-largest district and an early adopter of revised evaluation standards--to implement reforms. It concludes with implications for state policymakers, district leaders, and education stakeholders.

In acknowledgement of research related to the deficits of traditional teacher evaluation systems, the Pennsylvania Department of Education developed the Educator Effectiveness System (EES) as a comprehensive multiple measures teacher evaluation system (MMTES) requiring building administrators to evaluate teachers using evidence-based observations and a variety of measures indicating teacher contributions to student achievement (Pennsylvania Department of Education, 2014). The purpose of this qualitative research study was to examine the perceptions of building level administrators related to the impact of the implementation of Pennsylvania's EES on their supervision and evaluation of teachers. Qualitative data in the form of survey responses and personal interviews were collected from participating building administrators throughout 15 public school districts in southcentral Pennsylvania to determine the impact of evidence-based observations, the impact of using SLO, PVAAS and SPP data as measures of teacher effectiveness, and the need for additional supports and professional development for administrators working within the EES. The analysis of the data collected during this study indicated building administrators believed Pennsylvania's EES has helped them become more overall effective supervisors and evaluators, mainly due to positive impacts of using evidence-based observation methods. Building administrators reported positive and negative impacts of the use of SLO, PVAAS, and SPP data as measures of teacher effectiveness. Additional time to complete tasks associated with the EES and training related to the use of student growth and achievement data were identified as needed supports.

Two decades of research have documented what now is common knowledge: no in-school factor matters more to students' educational experiences and outcomes than the effectiveness of their teacher. As a result, the national airspace is increasingly crowded with proposed reforms and initiatives designed to boost teacher performance, including new evaluation systems and increased accountability. This activity was crystallized by the U.S. Department of Education's 2010 Race to the Top competition, which emphasized the development of evaluation systems that involve measures of student growth. PACER's goal is to inform state education policy discussions using rigorous, objective research. This issue brief presents a summary of research and emerging practices in other states and districts designed to provide state lawmakers, legislative staff, State Board of Education members, Department of Education officials, and other key stakeholders information they need to ensure the effectiveness of their reform efforts. The roughly two dozen works cited include newspaper coverage; government documents (e.g., federal agency guidance); research syntheses from non-partisan sources such as the Consortium for Policy Research in Education and the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality; original research by Research for Action (RFA) scholars; and rigorous, peer-reviewed works from some of the nation's most respected education researchers. A list of works cited and notes is provided.

The Pennsylvania Educator Effectiveness System strives to place an effective teacher in every classroom. This evaluation system incorporates the use of value-added growth measures, not only at the teacher level, but also at the building level. These building level scores are included in every teacher's yearly evaluation. This study sought to determine if a relationship existed between the value-added scores and collective teacher efficacy; the faculty's collective belief that they have the capabilities to make an educational difference for their students. 120 middle school teachers from southwestern Pennsylvania were surveyed using the Collective Teacher Beliefs Scale. The study found that a relationship did not exist between the value-added scores and collective teacher efficacy. Additionally, the relationship between value-added scores and several other variables was examined. The socio-economic status of the building was found to serve as a moderator for collective teacher efficacy. Finally, this study provides administrators with examples of how to boost collective teacher efficacy and in turn improve teacher effectiveness.

Recent state and national reforms in teacher supervision and evaluation have been implemented to increase student achievement and to improve instructional practices. This qualitative study examines the perceptions of elementary teachers in three suburban Pennsylvania school districts regarding the current teacher evaluation system, also known as the Pennsylvania Educator Effectiveness program, implemented in their district, as well as a new model of teacher supervision connected to Danielson’s Framework for Teaching standards. To fully evaluate this new system from the teachers’ perspective, this study incorporates a qualitative approach that relies on anonymous survey data and provides insights on strengths and limitations of the current evaluation process. The study includes a teacher questionnaire (n = 45) conducted online via Survey Monkey. This research uncovers evidence which supports the idea that the Framework for Teaching has a positive effect on instructional strategies, especially on student engagement and assessment strategies. The research conducted to answer two guiding research questions formulated by the author sheds light on the observation and subsequent feedback process, and provokes discussion about the strengths and areas for improvement to supervisors and administrators as they implement the Pennsylvania Educator Effectiveness system.

This study examined the impact of the Pennsylvania Educator Effectiveness System on instructional leadership. Thirty-eight teachers from four elementary schools within a single southeastern Pennsylvania school district participated in the study. Data collection instruments included an online survey, open-ended response questions, and teacher interviews. The qualitative study data revealed that the majority of teachers believed the Pennsylvania Educator Effectiveness System was an unfair model that failed to effectively reflect teacher job performance. Furthermore, data analysis revealed that the majority of teachers did not believe the value-added model positively impacted teacher effectiveness. Lastly, the researcher also found that the Pennsylvania Educator Effectiveness System had little positive impact on improving instructional leadership practices.

The chief goal of the present study was to identify teachers' perceptions of the teacher effectiveness system in Pennsylvania. The purpose of this descriptive study was to investigate teachers' perceptions of the usefulness and effectiveness of the teacher evaluation process in southeastern Pennsylvania to determine if policymakers should consider making changes to the system. To support the decision-making process, it was necessary to obtain information from teachers about whether they believe the system is useful and effective. The researcher used an explanatory, sequential, mixed-methods research design. The qualitative design employed was a phenomenological approach, which is meant to explore the culture of a group of individuals. The methodology fit the researcher's mindset on the approach of the study. The researcher focused on individual teachers' perceptions and experiences within a public school district in Southeastern. The primary population and sample for participation in this study were teachers and teaching specialists. The responses identified common themes among teachers and teaching specialists. The study used a cross-sectional survey and face-to-face interviews. Because the researcher used the explanatory, sequential, mixed-methods model, the quantitative data preceded the qualitative data and established the framework for the creation of the interview questions. Surveys and interviews were then analyzed to find common topics and themes within the data. Based on the findings and results of the study, it was concluded that teachers perceive the teacher effectiveness system to be of good quality with strong components. However, changes could be made to the system's implementation to improve or enhance instructional practices within the classroom. Further study is required to determine how improvements could be made to the Teacher Evaluation System in Pennsylvania.