Supporting Effective Teaching in Tennessee:
Listening and Gathering Feedback on Tennessee’s Teacher Evaluations
Recommendation 3
Address challenges with the current quantitative and qualitative measures of teacher effectiveness.
Many of the issues that have arisen are not due to problems with the First to the Top plan for teacher evaluation,
but rather from the remaining gaps in the development and implementation of the multiple measures that form
the backbone of the evaluation system. We recommend these gaps in the quantitative measure, and some
missing elements in the qualitative measure, be addressed as soon as possible. For example, we recommend the
state offer teachers in non-tested grades and subjects (who do not yet have individual student growth, or valueadded, data) the option of temporarily increasing the weighting of the qualitative portion of the evaluation.
Recommendation 4
Support school and district leaders in becoming strong instructional leaders capable of assessing and
developing effective teaching – and hold them accountable for doing so. The initial work of implementation
has focused on evaluating and developing the performance of teachers. For the full impact of this work to be
sustained, it must be combined with a similar effort for school and district leaders.
Recommendation 5
Re-engage educators in those districts where implementation of the teacher evaluation system has
faltered during the first year of work. Initial implementation of the teacher evaluation system in some districts has been less effective than in others. In districts with more room for improvement, many school and
district leaders do not yet believe in the value of the teacher evaluation system, have not made implementation
one of their top priorities, and/or may not have the skills and experience needed to drive implementation. As a
result, the re is especially high dissatisfaction among teachers and low confidence that the evaluation system will
help improve their practice and ultimately their students’ learning.
Recommendation 6
Integrate the ongoing implementation of the teacher evaluation system and the Common Core State
Standards so that they work together to improve student outcomes. We recommend the State Board and
Department of Education ensure that all of the approved evaluation models are refined to reflect the shifts in
instruction that will be required by the Common Core State Standards and the Partnership for Assessment of
Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) assessments.
Recommendation 7
Drive continuous improvement of the teacher evaluation system at the state, district, and school levels.
Leaders and educators must commit to improving the teacher evaluation system on an ongoing basis to maximize its impact on student achievement.
SCORE has not been a disinterested observer of the teacher evaluation system. In SCORE’s 2009 Roadmap to Success
plan, SCORE recommended that Tennessee “develop, pilot, and roll out a statewide teacher effectiveness measure based
on multiple measures including student achievement gains and potentially principal evaluations, peer review, and parent
and student surveys.” After conducting this feedback process, we believe that Tennessee’s teacher evaluation policy is
critical to fostering and supporting effective teaching in Tennessee and to improving student achievement. The system that
Tennessee is implementing is improving the quality of teaching in the classroom and is supporting effective instruction in
many districts. As refinements continue to be made and the system is fully implemented with fidelity, it will fully realize
its potential to serve as a powerful platform for supporting inspired, high-quality instruction across the state and, therefore,
gains in student achievement and growth. Tennessee cannot and should not return to the old system or step back from
implementation of the new system.
The following pages lay out in greater detail SCORE’s teacher evaluation feedback process and the inputs SCORE
received, the successes and challenges voiced about the evaluation system, and recommendations for consideration to
continue improving the evaluation system moving forward.
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY