Administrators' ratings of teacher performance and perceptions of ratings on the North Carolina performance appraisal system

• Main Author: Myers, Virginia Stone
• Other Authors: Educational Administration
• Format: Others
• Language: en_US
• Published: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 2015
• Subjects: LD5655.V856 1989.M937; Teachers > Rating of > North Carolina; Performance
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10919/54254

The purpose of this study was to examine school administrators' observations, ratings, and perceptions of rating scores on the North Carolina Teacher Performance Appraisal Instrument. The process of evaluating teaching behaviors and reaching agreement on the ratings was also addressed. Attention was directed to three research questions: Do administrators rate teaching performance consistently using the six-point rating scale of the North Carolina Teacher Performance Appraisal Instrument? How do administrators perceive the ratings on the performance appraisal instrument? Do administrators have confidence in their ratings of teaching performance? A teacher evaluation workshop was conducted with building level principals and central office administrators in a small school system in North Carolina. Administrators viewed videotaped teaching episodes and rated five observable teaching behaviors included on the North Carolina Teacher Performance Appraisal Instrument. Individual and group consensus ratings were made. Participants were interviewed following the workshop to record perceptions of the ratings and the evaluation process. Findings in this study revealed that administrators rated within an acceptable limit for the five observable teaching behaviors. There was closer agreement on the teaching behaviors which were rated below standard than on those rated satisfactory and above. Differences in the perceptions of what a particular rating means were evident. Discriminating among the four ratings which were at Standard or higher was more difficult than deciding if a teaching behavior was acceptable or unacceptable. Administrators willingly changed ratings to reach agreement with other raters, indicating little confidence in their own ratings. === Ed. D.