Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Constructing Teacher Effectiveness in Policymaking Conversations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Discursive Perspectives on Education Policy and Implementation

Abstract

State teacher evaluation policies codify definitions of what it means to teach, what teachers are expected to do, and which ways of teaching and learning are to be encouraged or resisted by articulating a set of values for classroom teaching and student learning. By identifying tools and approaches for the measurement of teaching quality, such policies inscribe particular definitions of teacher effectiveness—a construct that has often been debated and reconstituted over the history of research and evaluation in US public schools. In this chapter, I analyze transcripts from the Teacher Evaluation Advisory Committee meetings in Tennessee, an influential case of teacher evaluation policymaking within which the discourses of evaluation and effectiveness policies can be examined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 19.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 27.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amrein-Beardsley, A. (2008). Methodological concerns about the Education Value-Added Assessment System (EVAAS). Educational Researcher, 37(2), 65–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amrein-Beardsley, A. (2012). Value-added measures in education: The best of the alternatives is simply not good enough. Teachers College Record. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=16648

  • Amrein-Beardsley, A. (2014). Rethinking value-added models in education critical perspectives on test and assessment-based accountability. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Collins, C. (2012). The SAS Education Value-Added Assessment System (SAS® EVAAS®) in the Houston Independent School District (HISD): Intended and unintended consequences. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20(12). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1096

  • Anderson, J. (2013). Curious grade for teachers: Nearly all pass. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/education/curious-grade-for-teachers-nearly-all-pass.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

  • Anfara, V., Brown, K., & Mangione, T. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 28–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antaki, C. (2007). Mental health practitioners’ use of idiomatic expressions in summarising clients’ accounts. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 527–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, E., Barton, P., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H., Linn, R., et al. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, B., Oluwole, J., Greene, P. (2013). The legal consequences of mandating high stakes decisions based on low quality information: Teacher evaluation in the race-to-the-top era. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21. Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1298

  • Barge, J. (2012). Overview to the 2012 TKES/LKES pilot evaluation report. Atlanta: Georgia Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (1991). Ideology, rhetoric and opinion. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (1988). Ideological dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, D., & Domingue, B. (2011). Due diligence and the evaluation of teachers: A review of the value-added analysis underlying the effectiveness rankings of Los Angeles Unified School District teachers by the Los Angeles times. Boulder: National Education Policy Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). The politics of teacher education and the curse of complexity. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(3), 181–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connors, C. (2013). Commentary on two classroom observation systems: Moving toward a shared understanding of effective teaching. School Psychology Quarterly, 28(4), 342–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39, 124–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croft, M., & Buddin, R. (2014). Will courts shape value-added measurement for teacher evaluation? ACT Working Paper Series. Retrieved from https://forms.act.org/research/papers/pdf/WP-2014-2.pdf

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (1990). Teacher evaluation in transition: Emerging roles and evolving methods. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), The new handbook of teacher evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teachers (pp. 17–34). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for Theory of Social Behavior, 20(1), 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty, K., & Jacobs, S. (2013). State of the states 2013: Connect the dots using evaluation of teacher effectiveness to inform policy. New York: National Council on Teacher Quality.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, M., Cobb, C., LeChasseur, K., Gabriel, R., Gonzalez, R., Woulfin, S., & Makuch, A. (2014). An evaluation of the pilot implementation of Connecticut’s system for educator evaluation and development: Final report. Storrs: UConn Center for Education Policy Analysis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P., & Holt, E. (1988). Complainable matters: The use of idiomatic expressions in making complaints. Social Problems, 35, 398–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, A. (2012, September 22). The Tennessee story. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arne-duncan/the-tennessee-story_b_1695467.html

  • Edley, N. (2001). Analysing masculinity: Interpretive repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. Yates (Eds.), Discourse as data: A guide for analysis (pp. 189–228). London: Sage/The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive psychology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firestone, W. A. (2014). Teacher evaluation policy and conflicting theories of motivation. Educational Researcher, 43(2), 100–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, R., & Lester, J. N. (2013a). The romance quest of education reform: A discourse analysis of the LA times’ reports on value-added measurement teacher effectiveness. Teacher’s College Record, 115(12), 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, R., & Lester, J. N. (2013b). Sentinels of trust: The discursive construction of value-added measurement in policy conversations. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 20(9). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1165

  • Gabriel, R., & Paulus, T. (2014). Committees and controversy: Consultants in the construction of education policy. Educational Policy. Retrieved from http://epx.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/08/22/0895904814531650.abstract

  • Garrison, J. (2014, May 20). US education secretary Arne Duncan lauds Tennessee amid reform pushback. The Tennessean. Retrieved from http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/education/2014/05/20/us-educationsecretary-arne-duncan-visits-nashville-today/9322449/

  • Goe, L. (2013, March 14). Teacher and principal evaluation webinar. Edweek. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/marketplace/webinars/webinars.html

  • Goe, L., Biggers, K., & Croft, A. (2012). Linking teacher evaluation to professional development: Focusing on improving teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED532775.pdf

  • Hanushek, E. (2012). Valuing teachers: How much is a good teacher worth. Education Next, 11(3), 40–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heitin, L. (2012). Take it from Tennessee: Lessons on teacher evaluation. Edweek. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/teaching_now/2012/11/take_it_from_tennessee_lessons_on_teacher_evaluation.html?intc=es

  • Horn, J., & Wilburn, S. (2013). The mismeasure of education. Cary: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irizarry, J. G., & Donaldson, M. L. (2012). Teach for América: The latinization of U.S. schools and the critical shortage of Latina/o teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 49(1), 155–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, B. (2007). The challenges of staffing urban schools with effective teachers. The Future of Children, 17(1), 129–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, T., & Staiger, D. (2012). Gathering feedback for teaching combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. Retrieved from http://k12education.gatesfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/MET_Gathering_Feedback_for_Teaching_Summary1.pdf

  • Keesler, V., & Howe, C. (2012). Understanding educator evaluations in Michigan. Lansing: Michigan Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R., Frontier, T., & Livingston, D. (2012). Effective supervision: Supporting the art and science of great teaching. Alexandria: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCaffery, D., Lockwood, J., Mariano, L., & Steodji, C. (2005). Challenges for value-added assessment of teacher effects. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pomerantz, A. (1986). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies, 9(2), 219–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric, and social construction. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2008). Discursive constructionism. In J. Holstein (Ed.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 275–293). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabinowitz, W., & Travers, R. (1953). Problems of defining and assessing teacher effectiveness. Educational Theory, 3(3), 212–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W. (2009). The Brown legacy and the O’Connor challenge: Transforming schools in the images of children’s potential. Educational Researcher, 38, 169–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, J., & Wetherell, M. (2003). The discursive climate of singleness: The consequences for women’s negotiation of a single identity. Feminism and Psychology, 13, 489–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinke, C. R. (2011). Career trajectories of urban teachers: A continuum of perspectives, participation, and plans shaping retention in the educational system. Urban Education, 46(4), 639–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, J. (2012). Review of learning about teaching. Denver: National Education Policy Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawchuk, S. (2013). What will new evaluation systems cost? EdWeek. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2013/04/What_will_new_evaluation.html

  • Stokoe, E., Hepburn, A., & Antaki, C. (2012). Beware the ‘Loughborough School’ of social psychology? Interaction and the politics of intervention. Journal of Social Psychology, 51(3), 41–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, V. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/05/10/judge-calls-evaluation-of-n-y-teacher-arbitrary-and-capricious-in-case-against-new-u-s-secretary-of-education/

  • Tennessee Department of Education. (2012). Teacher evaluation in Tennessee: A report on year 1 implementation. Retrieved from http://www.tn.gov/education/doc/yr_1_tchr_eval_rpt.pdf

  • Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect. New York: The New Teacher Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: Conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue. Discourse and Society, 9(3), 387–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA

    Rachael E. Gabriel

Authors
  1. Rachael E. Gabriel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Jessica Nina Lester

  2. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Chad R. Lochmiller

  3. University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA

    Rachael E. Gabriel

Appendices

Appendix 1

Map of Iterations/Levels of Analysis (to be read from bottom-up) (Anfara et al. 2002)

Final Iteration/Level of Analysis Applied to Data Set

  • IR of a “real situation”

    • Anecdotes and stories

    • Hypothetical scenarios

    • Extreme case formulations

  • IR of “calling a spade a spade”

    • Teaching

    • Student achievement

    • Teacher quality

    • Positioning

    • Dilemmas

  • Measurement

    • VAM—reliance

    • VAM—challenges

    • Student test scores—reliance

    • Student test scores—challenges

    • Teachers of untested subjects

    • Selection of rubrics

    • Selection of assessments

Second Iteration/Level of Analysis Applied to Data Set

  • Constructions of effectiveness

    • Anecdotes and stories

    • Hypothetical scenarios

    • Extreme case formulations

    • Teaching

    • Student achievement

    • Teacher quality

  • Decision-making

    • Agenda-setting

    • Purpose statements

    • Conflict/disagreement

    • Positioning

    • Hedging

    • Turn-taking

    • Consultant’s role/prerogative

  • Measuring effectiveness

    • Observation rubrics

    • Teachers without TVAAS

    • Problems with TVAAS

    • Reliance on TVAAS

    • Problems with test scores

    • Reliance on test scores

First Iteration/Level of Analysis Applied to Data Set

  • “Other” 50% measures of teacher effectiveness

  • Value-added measurement (general)

  • TVAAS (specific)—Tennessee value-added assessment system

  • Effectiveness

  • Quality

  • Conflict/disagreement

  • Good/bad teaching/teacher

  • Decision-making

  • Ratings & levels

  • Statistics & research

  • Committee purpose & scope

Appendix 2

Transcription Symbols

…speech continues or is excerpted from a longer statement

=interruption=

(.) pause of less than one second

(#) pause of # of seconds

(…) unclear speech

[ ] overlapping speech

[researcher insertion]

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gabriel, R.E. (2017). Constructing Teacher Effectiveness in Policymaking Conversations. In: Lester, J., Lochmiller, C., Gabriel, R. (eds) Discursive Perspectives on Education Policy and Implementation. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58984-8_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58984-8_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58983-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58984-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation