Accueil
| Titre : | Teacher evaluation for accountability and growth: Should policy treat them as complements or substitutes? (2021) |
| Auteurs : | David D. Liebowitz |
| Type de document : | Article : texte imprimé |
| Dans : | Labour economics (vol. 71, August 2021) |
| Article en page(s) : | Article 102024 |
| Langues: | Anglais |
| Catégories : |
Thésaurus CEREQ ENSEIGNANT ; EVALUATION DU PERSONNEL ; RENDEMENT DE L'EDUCATION ; POLITIQUE DE L'EDUCATION ; PRATIQUE DE GRH ; SAVOIR PROFESSIONNEL ; ECONOMETRIE ; MODELISATION ; ETATS UNIS |
| Résumé : | U.S. state and local policy frameworks treat teacher evaluation as balancing two aims: accountability and skill development. I develop a model of teacher effectiveness and detail the conditions that determine joint-aim appraisal systems’ contribution to teacher productivity. I then simulate the long-term effects of a set of teacher evaluation policies. Policies that treat evaluation for accountability and evaluation for growth as substitutes outperform those that treat them as complements. I conclude that an optimal teacher evaluation policy would impose accountability on teachers performing below a defined level and above which teachers would be subject to no accountability pressure but would receive intensive instructional supports. |
| Document Céreq : | Non |
| En ligne : | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2021.102024 |
