All professions have some sort of evaluation process and teachers are no different. The problem with teacher evaluations was for so long teachers were told their were either effective or not with no real feedback on how to improve. By 2016, schools are required to adapt a new teacher evaluation system in hopes of helping maintain and foster excellent and effective teachers through the legislation of Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) and Senate Bill 7. There are many ways states are going about this but there is a common thread, teachers want to be evaluated accurately and fairly.

Teachers are evaluated for two basic purposes: to ensure teacher quality and to promote professional development. An evaluation system is set up so principals is a school district can prove support the fact that they have good, high quality (or the opposite) teachers in their school. Using an evaluation framework allows administrators to evaluate all teachers the same way and for teachers to know what they are working towards to get a high mark. Professional development is a hugh aspect of the education field. Teaching practices are constantly changing and new ideas are always on the forefront. Schools want their teachers knowledgeable of all the current research and best practices relating to what they are teaching. Evaluations allow for more specific professional development based on what a teacher's strengths and weaknesses are.

Why are there laws about teacher evaluation? Mainily because public schools are public institutions. Public schools get money from the government so the public has a right to understand what types of teachers are teaching their children. Starting in 2000, President George W. Bush passed No Child Left Behind and created more assessment in schools. President Barak Obama created "Race to the Top" in 2009 which was a contest for states to receive more funding towards education using teacher quality and assessment data. Everything in between and since has led to politicians and the public expecting quite a bit from teachers. Now we need to make sure we truly have the best candidates teaching children today and we do that through evaluations.

The Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) (Senate Bill 315; Public Act 96-0861) was passed by the Illinois General Assembly and signed by the Governor in January 2010. In summary, PERA requires, among other things, that:

• Upon the implementation date applicable to a school district or other covered entity, performance evaluations of the principals/assistant principals and teachers of that school district or other covered entity must include data and indicators of student growth as a “significant factor”.
• By September 1, 2012, principals, assistant principals, teachers in contractual continued service (i.e., tenured teachers) and probationary teachers (i.e., nontenured teachers) be evaluated using a four rating category system (Excellent, Proficient, Needs Improvement, and Unsatisfactory).
• Anyone undertaking an evaluation after September 1, 2012 must first complete a pre-qualification program provided or approved by the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE).

Meanwhile, from late 2010 through April 2011, education stakeholders negotiated an education reform bill that stemmed in part from PERA. The bill was Senate Bill 7 and was signed into law by the Governor on June 13, 2011. Senate Bill 7 addresses, among other things:

• A standard upon which the State Superintendent may initiate certificate/license action against an educator for incompetency;
• Requirements for the filling of new and vacant positions;
• Acquisition of tenure;
• Reductions in force/layoffs and recall rights;
• The system for the dismissal of tenured teachers;
• Required school board member training; and,
• Processes related to collective bargaining and the right to strike. (ISBE)

In Illinois, student achievement data will consist of 50% of a teacher’s evaluation from Type I, Type II, and Type III assessment data with observation and teacher and student feedback making up the other 50%. In the table below are definitions of the assessment types according to PERA.

An example of the Type I assessment is the PARCC test being administered fully this spring for the first time. Type II assessments are district wide assessments, usually from the curriculum or relating to the curriculum. Type III is teacher-developed or curricular program designed assessments relating to the curriculum and Common Core State Standards.

Before new evaluation systems were required by law there were some problems evaluators and teachers faced.

What was wrong?

• Outmoded evaluative criteria, usually in the form of checklists.
• Simplistic evaluative comments, such as "needs improvement," "satisfactory," and "outstanding" without any consistency as to what those words mean. Many teachers end up being rated at the highest level on every item, with no guidance as to where they might focus their improvement efforts.
• The same procedures for both novice teachers and career professionals— no differentiation that reflects veteran teachers' experience and expertise.
• Lack of consistency among evaluators; a teacher might be rated at the highest level by one administrator and much lower by another. This makes it much easier to attain tenure in some schools than in others, a violation of a fundamental principle of equity.
• One-way, top-down communication. Evaluation is a process that's "done to" teachers, and it often feels punitive, like a "gotcha." (Danielson)

The new evaluation frameworks adopted or developed by school districts are hoping to fix some of the isses.

What will be changing?

• A consistent definition of excellent teaching shared among all staff.
• Trained evaluators who can intrepret teaching practices as to where they fit in the framework
• Collaboration in the system with the use of teacher reflection so teachers get a voice in their evaluation
• More observation of novice teachers
• Adding student achievement data to the overall performace label of all teachers and administrators

With the help of The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which strives to improve education in the United States and around the world, the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project was born in 2009.

The MET project's goal was to build and test measures of effective teaching to find out how evaluation methods could best be used to tell teachers more about the skills that make them most effective and to help districts identify and develop great teaching. (MET Project)

This project discovered that teacher evaluation systems needed to consist of multiple measures including the main components of observations, student achievement data, and student survey. The assessment data aspect of teacher evaluation is the area that has teachers most concerned. Can assessment truly predict how effective a teacher is? That is the question many are asking and won’t be known until this new system has taken effect.

The one area that can predict teacher effectiveness is student surveys. Hearing directly from the student how they perceive a teacher can be really telling.

In fact, a recent study by the Gates Foundation found that a high-quality researched-based student survey can accurately measure a teacher’s future effectiveness and can enhance the accuracy of an evaluation system when combined with measures of student achievement and classroom observations. (Center for Public Education)

School districts are working with teachers, principals, and superintendents to adopt a system for evaluations. Each school district in the state will be responsible for developing their own forms for teachers and evaluators to use.One of these systems is the Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument by Charlotte Danielson.

Charlotte Danielson, a former economist, is an internationally-recognized expert in the area of teacher effectiveness, specializing in the design of teacher evaluation systems that both ensuring teacher quality and promote professional learning. Her Framework for Teaching has become the most widely used definition of teaching in the United States, and has been adopted as the single model, or one of several approved models, in over 20 states. (Danielson Group)

Her framework consists of four domains.

• Domain 1 is titled Planning and Preparation and evaluates teachers on their knowledge of curriculum, standards, and students.
  
• Domain 2 is The Classroom Environment and evaluates on creating a community of learners, student behavior and expectations, and the physical space of the classroom.
  
• Domain 3 is Instruction and consists of instruction techniques of the teacher. The final domain,
  
• Domain 4, is Professional Responsibilities and evaluates the teacher on professional development, communication to parents, record keeping, and professional behavior within the school building and district.

The 2011 version of the framework was updated as a part of the MET project to help have more consistent judgment of teacher practice and not have evaluator bias. The language of the rubric allows for more consistent evaluator data and provides examples of what each performance level looks like. Through the Danielson Framework a teacher can be ranked as Unsatisfactory, Basic, Proficient, or Distinguished in 22 areas of the four domains.

The framework is mostly used for teacher observation. According to PERA, all teachers will need to be observed at least twice a year. Non-tenured and under performing teachers need to be evaluated at least three times a year. These observations need to be both formal and informal “pop-ins” to get a true sense of a teacher in her classroom.

The state of Illinois has given many school districts an extention on the start date of implementing their new evaluation system. This is giving evaluators time to be skillfully trained in the new system a district adopts. This also allows schools to give their new systems a "test run" before the full roll out. Many schools are piloting using student achievement data in their evaluation process this school year to see how this realisticially works in the classroom. 

Evaluation is not going anywhere. It is important to make sure high quality teachers are in schools. My hope is whatever evaluation system a school district chooses is fair and accurately used for every memebr of the staff. We all strive to be excellent teachers and, hopefully, evaluators will see that.