MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W190993362 · doi:10.15760/etd.1218

The Effectiveness of a Teacher Evaluation Process as Perceived by Teachers and Building-level Administrators

2000· report· en· W190993362 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Halstead

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Environments and Student Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate analysis of variancePerceptionPsychologyMathematics educationPopulationData collectionMedical educationMedicineMathematicsStatisticsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions held by building administrators and teachers of the evaluation system being used in the Vancouver (Wash.) School District. Through the administration of separate questionnaires for building administrators and teachers, research was conducted to determine if significant differences existed among groups of teachers, among groups of building-level administrators, and among building-level administrators and teachers. The population of the study consisted of 235 randomly selected teachers from kindergarten through high school and 29 building-level administrators. Two different questionnaires were administered, one to teachers and one to building administrators, to determine the sample's perceptions of the current evaluation system being used in the Vancouver School District. Results of the questionnaires were examined based upon the categories of evaluator quality: comfort with evaluator; frequency of classroom visitations; evaluation procedural points; and utilization of evaluation results. Data within the building administrator group were examined through Chi Square, as also were comparative data between the building administrator and teacher groups. Data within the teacher group were examined both through Chi Square and through MANOVA and ANOVA statistical analysis. The results of the study indicated that teacher grade level may have a significant impact upon a teacher's perception of the evaluation process, but gender, age and teaching experience may not significantly impact teacher perceptions. The data further showed that grade level may not be significant in building administrator perceptions. In regards to comparing teacher and building administrator perceptions, it was found that these two groups may have different perceptions of a teacher evaluation system and process. Recommendations for improvements in the evaluation system for the school district are included. These same recommendations may also be appropriate for other school districts as well. Other districts are encouraged to review their evaluation process in a similar manner to determine its perceived effectiveness by the practitioners that use it.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.381 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducational Environments and Student OutcomesFrench-language works237,207