FEEDBACK MECHANISMS OF SCHOOL HEADS ON TEACHER PERFORMANCE
Abstract
The use of performance feedback in the workplace has gained popularity over the years, yet school heads have been challenged in providing it to teachers. In the initial interview, they shared that evaluation results can impact teachers’ motivation, and that feedback should be done carefully. However, they failed to clearly articulate a specific mechanism that had been applied in this vital role. Also, no studies have provided clear detail on the feedback mechanism used by school heads in the past. For this reason, a study explored the feedback mechanisms employed by school heads in conveying the performance evaluation results to teachers. This study employed a narrative inquiry, and interviews were conducted with five school heads and five teachers who were chosen purposively for this research. Responses were recorded using a voice recorder. These responses were transcribed and analyzed using thematic narrative analysis. Based on transcripts, the study identified six emergent themes, such as conversational (one-on-one), relational, reflective, technical, reinforcing, and properly situated mechanisms in conveying performance evaluation results to teachers. Thus, a new feedback mechanism framework was developed.
Article visualizations:
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
ACT Government, n.d. The art of feedback: giving, seeking and receiving feedback. https://bit.ly/2weeBBz
Almada M, 2010. The Importance of Teacher Evaluation. https://bit.ly/2Gyx6DY
Archer J, Cantrell S, Holtzman S L, Joe J N, Tocci C M, Wood J, 2016. Better Feedback, for Better Teaching: A Practical Guide to Improving Classroom Observations. Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Brand.
Austin J, 2010. Teacher Evaluation. The Education Journal, 2, 43-47.
Bennett K, 2011. Teacher Evaluation. https://bit.ly/2tgaccM
Braun H, 2010. The Role of Teacher Evaluation. The Teacher’s Journal, 2, 68-75.
Brownlow M B, 2018. The Role of the Formal Observation in Promoting Reflective Practice. Dissertation 305. National Louis University. https://bit.ly/3aEDIwp
Coulombe G, 2011. Why Teacher Evaluations are Important to Both Successful and Unsuccessful Students. https://bit.ly/2TI8z3j
Cleaver S, Detrich R, States J, 2019. Overview of Performance Feedback. The Wing Institute. https://bit.ly/37qRIII
Coe R, Aloisi C, Higgins S, Lee E M, 2014. What makes great teaching? Review of the Underpinning Research. Center for Monitoring and Evaluation, Durham University, The Sutton Trust.
Cohen J, Goldhaber D, 2016. Building a More Complete Understanding of Teacher Evaluation Using Classroom Observations. Educational Researcher, 45(6), 378–387. https://bit.ly/2VtKpgs DOI: 10.3102/0013189X16659442
Concordia University-Portland, 2012. Classroom Observation Feedback: What Teachers Should Expect. https://bit.ly/2wJSQdu
Cruz A, 2013. DepED Concerns Relevant to RPMS and LIS. https://bit.ly/2TJFpR6
Danielson C, 2011. Evaluation that Help Teachers Learn. www.edugauge.contents.search.danielson-charlotte.pdf
Darling-Hammond L, 2014. One piece of the whole: Teacher evaluation as part of a comprehensive system for teaching. American Educator, 38(1), 4–13, 44.
Dobbelaer M J, Prins F, van Dongen D, 2013. The impact of feedback training for inspectors. European Journal of Training and Development, 37 (1), 86-104. https://bit.ly/3cdfbjz
Dorety K M, Jacobs S, 2015. State of the states 2015: Evaluating teaching, leading and learning. National Council on Teacher Quality.
Education First, 2015. Giving the Teachers the Feedback and Support They Deserve: Five Essential Practices.
Feeney E J, 2007. Quality feedback: The essential ingredient for teacher success. The Clearing House, 80 (4). 191-197.
Finnegan S, 2016. Teacher and Principal Perceptions of a New Evaluation Program for Teachers (A Dissertation). The College of William and Mary in Virginia.
Garet M S, Wayne A J, Brown S, Rickles J, Song M, Manzeske D, Ali M, 2017. The Impact of Providing Performance Feedback to Teachers and Principals (NCEE 2018-4001). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee.
Hanushek E A, 2011. The economic value of higher teacher quality. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 466–479.
Hattie J, 2009. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Hemmeter M L, Snyder P, Kinder K, Artman K, 2011. Impact of performance feedback delivered via electronic mail on preschool teachers’ use of descriptive praise. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(1), 96–109.
Hill H, Charalambos Y, Kraft M, 2012. When rater reliability is not enough: Teacher observation systems and a case for the generalizability study.
Holmes C, 2013. Objective of an Effective Teacher Evaluation. https://bit.ly/2WULg8s
Jimenez J, 2014. Perceptions and Feedbacks of Teachers on RPMS Implementation. https://bit.ly/2SFvChH.
Kelly S, 2014. A Case Study Examining Teacher Response to Principal Feedback of Classroom Observation. Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership for Learning Dissertations. Paper 1. http://smo.do/zXoLK9.
Kimball S, Milanowski A, 2009. Examining teacher evaluation validity and leadership decision making within a standards-based evaluation system. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(1), 34-70.
Marzano R, 2012. Two Purposes of Teacher Evaluation. https://bit.ly/2BtyUen
Myung J, Martinez K, 2013. Strategies for Enhancing the Impact of Post-Observation Feedback for Teachers. A Brief. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. https://bit.ly/2TBlOoI.
Oliva M, Mathers C, Laine S, 2009. Effective evaluation. Principal Leadership, 9 (7) 17-21.
Olivo F H, 2012. Objectives of Results-based Performance Management System. https://bit.ly/2GASCbl.
Park S, Takahashi S, White T, 2014. Developing an Effective Feedback System: A 90 Day Cycle Report. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Poertner S, Miller K M, 1996. The Art of Giving and Receiving Feedback. Coastal Training Technologies.
RAND Corporation, 2018. How do teachers perceive feedback and evaluation system: A Policy Brief.
Riesman C K, 2008. Concluding Comments. In Andrews M, Squire C, Tamboukou M, Eds. 2008. Doing Narrative Research. Sage Publications.
Riessman C K, 2008. Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. CA, USA: SAGE Publications.
Riesman C K, 2000. Analysis of Personal Narratives. Boston University.
Riesman C K, 1993. Narrative Analysis. Sage Publications.
Scheeler M C, Ruhl K L, McAfee J K, 2004. Providing Performance Feedback to Teachers: A Review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27(3), 59-70. https://bit.ly/2tfR9m7
Southern Regional Education Board, 2017. Feedback on Teaching: A Fresh Look. shorturl.at/pAIJV.
Stronge J H, 2010. Evaluating what good teachers do: Eight research-based standards for assessing teacher excellence. Eye on Education.
Sweigart C A, 2015. The effects of real-time visual performance feedback on teacher feedback. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2082. ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. https://bit.ly/2MLzWbg
Taylor E S, Tyler J H, 2012. The effect of evaluation on teacher performance. American Economic Review, 102(7), 3628-51.
Westley A, 2011. The Benefits of Effective and Quality Teacher Evaluation Systems for Teachers and Learners. https://bit.ly/32zAh7j.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.3020
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2020 Grethel Jean D. Congcong, Manuel E. Caingcoy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2015-2023. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
