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.

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.

This study examined teachers' and administrators' perceptions of Danielson's Framework for Teaching supervisory process. Three suburban public school districts in southeastern Pennsylvania were the focus of this study. Teachers (48) and administrators (24) were questioned through online questionnaires with Likert-type scale statements, open-ended questions, and individual interviews. The research instruments enabled the researcher to focus on the following topics: (a) the benefits of Danielson's Framework for Teaching, (b) the impact of Danielson's Framework for Teaching, and (c) improvements that can be made to Danielson's Framework for Teaching. The findings of this study indicated that Danielson's Framework for Teaching is a supervisory process that encourages academic achievement and professional growth. Teachers and administrators reported being much more comfortable with this supervisory process when compared to those that were used previously. In addition, participants indicated the Framework provides for common language and objective components, which allow for professional discussion focused on student achievement and professional growth. An area of concern that was revealed in the study is the substantial time commitment required for the Framework to be implemented with fidelity in all schools with all professional staff. The Pennsylvania Department of Education piloted the new teacher evaluation system called the Teacher Effectiveness Project over three years starting with the 2010-2011 school year. Beginning with the 2013-2014 school year, the four domains indicated in Danielson's Framework for Teaching supervisory process account for 50% of each teacher's evaluation in the new system. With Danielson's Framework for Teaching being such a new process, teachers and administrators must understand the most recent research in this area to increase its effectiveness on student achievement and professional growth. However, further research is still needed in Pennsylvania to identify the Framework's strengths and weaknesses over time.

What's wrong with today's teacher-evaluation systems-and how to improve them Unsound teacher evaluation practices lead to misinformed decisions regarding strategies for student learning, resulting in negative effects to students. Education measurement and evaluation expert W. James Popham critiques what is wrong with many existing teacher-evaluation systems and offers an alternate system that respects the professionalism and dignity of teachers. Popham argues that, because teaching is a very situation- specific profession, the use of any paint-by-numbers, one- size-fits-all teacher evaluation system is patently absurd. Rather, the only defensible approach to teacher evaluation is to base it on collegial judgment, that is, on the evaluative conclusions of experienced teachers who have been specifically trained and formally certified to carry out this function. This book discusses: Key strengths and weaknesses of prominent teacher-evaluation evidence How to improve a flawed teacher-evaluation program The merits of a teacher evaluation program based on "evidence-governed collegial judgment

In this important book, education expert Kim Marshall shows how to break away from the typical and often ineffective evaluation approaches in which principals use infrequent classroom visits or rely on standardized test scores to assess a teacher's performance. Marshall proposes a broader framework for supervision and evaluation that enlists teachers in improving the performance of all students. Emphasizing trust-building and teamwork, Marshall's innovative, four-part framework shifts the focus from periodically evaluating teaching to continuously analyzing learning. This book offers school principals a guide for implementing Marshall's framework and shows how to make frequent, informal classroom visits followed by candid feedback to each teacher; work with teacher teams to plan thoughtful curriculum units rather than focusing on individual lessons; get teachers as teams involved in low-stakes analysis of interim assessment results to fine-tune their teaching and help struggling students; and use compact rubrics for summative teacher evaluation. This vital resource also includes extensive tools and advice for managing time as well as ideas for using supervision and evaluation practices to foster teacher professional development.