Effective Evaluation Systems
School systems are engaged in the most important work of our time: the education of our
children. The foundation of a great school system consists of a strong leadership team,
effective teachers, and high expectations. These effective schools and districts clearly
define what great teaching looks like, provide support for growing teacher capacity, and
continuously improve.
One key lever for growing a highly effective teaching corps is a rigorous, accurate, and
fair evaluation system. But as districts wrestle with increased accountability and accept
the need to change, many are discovering just how anemic the teacher evaluation system
has become. Many teacher evaluation systems include neither a rigorous assessment of
the quality of instruction nor student achievement results.
Teacher and principal evaluation systems across America are largely perfunctory. A
2009 report about teacher effectiveness by the New Teacher Project revealed that less
than one percent of all teachers are rated “unsatisfactory” on their evaluations.1 In the
last few years, several states and districts have put in place new teacher evaluations only
to obtain similar results – inflated evaluations with no discernable improvement in the
quality of instruction.
A different way
Colorado has led the way in reforming teacher and principal evaluations. Senate Bill 191
is legislation on teacher and principal effectiveness. Effective school-level instructional
leaders are central to making instruction – and concomitantly, student achievement – the
focus of reform. However, many principals find it difficult to exercise instructional
leadership.
Miles Consulting uses a wealth of expertise and experience to assist schools, districts,
and individual educators in implementing systemic change that translates into results for
even the most impacted districts. Based on the work of educational leaders Mike Miles
and Dr. Shirley Miles, teachers and administrators in over 50 school districts in three
states have worked more effectively to raise student academic proficiency. While our
main focus has been to provide training and professional development in teacher and
principal evaluations, to include conducting observations and walkthroughs, we also
provide training in curriculum alignment, action planning, and organizational
1
Daniel Weisberg, Susan Sexton, Jennifer Mulhern, David Keeling, The Widget Effect, Our National Failure to
Acknowledge and Act on Differences in Teacher Effectiveness (Brooklyn, N.Y.: The New Teacher Project, 2009), p.
6. The reader can find this report at The New Teacher Project website at www.tntp.org.
MILES, APRIL 2015
1
effectiveness. We can provide school districts with models, templates, rubrics, and other
resources that will help guide their work.
For the past five years, the Harrison School District in Colorado Springs has managed to
implement what some analysts believe to be the most rigorous teacher evaluation system
in the nation. The growth in student achievement has been significant and is a direct
result of the improvement in the quality of instruction.
And at the time of this writing, the Dallas Independent School District, with 160,000
students and 10,400 teachers, is nearing the end of its first year of the most rigorous
teacher evaluation system of any large urban school district. The evaluation systems in
both Harrison and Dallas are based on the intellectual property and work of current
Dallas Superintendent Mike Miles, who is an associate of Miles Consulting.
These systems include unique design elements that ensure rigor, accuracy, and fairness.
An overview of these design elements follows.
Unique design elements
Differentiated evaluation ratings
Most evaluation systems are not differentiated enough to be helpful or to discern
variations in effectiveness. Our model includes nine levels of effectiveness.
District Review (DTR)
Principal Review
Unsat
Progressing
I
II
MILES, APRIL 2015
I
Proficient
II
III
Exemplary
I
II
Master
2
Target distribution
The key to a rigorous teacher evaluation
system is to minimize subjectivity and
control for inflation. Without a target
distribution, ratings would gravitate to the
higher end of proficiency without a
concomitant increase in achievement.
Districts can adjust the distribution
depending on local circumstances. The
example to the right is being used in
Harrison and Dallas.
Multiple performance and achievement metrics
The model uses multiple performance and
achievement metrics to assess teacher effectiveness.
In Dallas, most teachers’ evaluations are tied to
classroom performance (50%), student achievement
results (35%), and student surveys (15%). There are
also multiple metrics that describe student
achievement. These pie charts or “achievement
templates” differ for various grade levels and subjects.
In Dallas, over fifty templates are used to assess
teachers.
Growth metrics
One of the biggest challenges with regard to using student achievement results in teacher
evaluations is trying to assess the effectiveness of a teacher whose students start off
academically behind other students. Many states have value added or longitudinal
growth metrics to account for these starting differences. Such growth metrics exist in
Harrison and Dallas. Additionally, both districts use an academic peer group metric that
is easy to understand and is normed with only students in the District. It can also include
students in the region, county, or state.
MILES, APRIL 2015
3
Students are place in one of five peer groups based on their past academic performance.
The achievement results of a student are only compared with the students in his peer
group or quintile. Students scoring above the average for their academic peer group can
be said to outperform their peers. The more effective teacher has more students scoring
above the average of their peer group.
lowest
quintile
second
quintile
middle
quintile
fourth
quintile
highest
quintile
Different categories of teachers
What happens when a teacher doesn’t teach in a “core” area? How do you make the
evaluation system equally rigorous regardless of the subject or grade level? Besides
using tailored achievement templates, the model also places teachers in one of four
categories, depending upon the availability of common assessments and other differences
in content matter or the age of the students.
In this way, 99% of all teachers in Dallas are evaluated under this system. And since the
target distribution is applied to each category, each teacher experiences the same degree
of rigor regardless of category.
Category A
MILES, APRIL 2015
Category B
Category C
Category D
4
Distinguished Teacher Review (DTR)
To ensure strong calibration across the
entire district and to lessen the effects
of subjective measures, our model
requires those teachers seeking higher
evaluation ratings (Proficient II,
Proficient III, and Exemplary) to
undergo a district-level review. The
review includes a classroom observation conducted by an independent team of
instructional coaches and campus leaders. A central office team also assesses and awards
points for the teacher’s leadership, contributions to the profession, and lifelong learning.
While this takes the highest levels of the evaluation out of the hands of the principal, the
model supports district-wide calibration and clarity around what it takes to be a
distinguished teacher.
Campus leader certification
As long as classroom performance and
the quality of instruction is tied to
The difference between a culture of
teacher evaluation – as it should – then
accountability and a climate of fear is
the effectiveness of the principal or
the support the organization provides
evaluator will significantly affect the
to those who are trying to meet higher
fairness and accuracy of the teacher’s
evaluation. At a minimum, campus
expectations.
leaders and supervisors should be
“certified” to evaluate teachers fairly,
accurately, and rigorously. In Dallas,
such certification ensures campus leaders, instructional coaches, and principal
supervisors are all similarly calibrated and can accurately assess various levels of
performance.
More important, principals and campus-level evaluators must be developed into
instructional leaders and coached to provide effective feedback to teachers and help
teachers improve the quality of instruction. Our model ensures evaluators have the
necessary skills to support and coach teachers.
MILES, APRIL 2015
5
A more effective teacher
In the end, an effective evaluation system has to help improve the academic proficiency
of the students and grow student achievement outcomes. A rigorous evaluation system
will also enable teachers and administrators to improve the quality of instruction and, if
based on a continuous improvement model, lead to a culture of high expectations and
support.
Based on our experience, a fair, accurate, and rigorous evaluation system will:
 Allow campus and district leaders to differentiate professional development,
targeting the right resources and training to the right levels of proficiency.
 Articulate what the organization values most and help teachers and staff work
towards achieving goals associated with those values.
 Provide teachers with specific and actionable feedback on how to improve.
 Increase the capacity of the teaching corps.
 Expand leadership density, encourage collaboration, and support lifelong learning.
 Includes rubrics that distinguish among levels of performance.
 Incorporates evidence from observations and multiple sources of evidence
collected throughout the year.
 Build a culture of high achievement combined with high support.
MILES, APRIL 2015
6