Volume 3 - Issue 1 - DBU Journal for K-12 Educational Research - Page 14

12 The research questions that framed this current study were the following: Research Question 1 (RQ1) Do teachers perceive the T-TESS rubrics as valid descriptors of effective teaching? Research Question 2 (RQ2) Do teachers perceive the T-TESS ratings as reliable measures of effective teaching? Research Question 3 (RQ3) Do teachers perceive the feedback given from evaluators using the T-TESS rubrics as effective in influencing teaching practice? Research Question 4 (RQ4) What are teachers’ overall perceptions of the purpose of T-TESS? Research Question 5 (RQ5) How do teachers report using T-TESS to improve instructional practice? Research Question 6 (RQ6) What are teachers’ perceptions of the use of student growth measures in the T-TESS teacher evaluation system? Literature Overview Use of T-TESS to inform instructional practice and improve student learning rests on the perceptions and resulting actions of teachers. Perceptions of the face and social validity of the competency-based observation rubrics and inclusion of student growth measures may influence the willingness of teachers to engage in the system with the intent to change practice (Cohen & Goldhaber, 2016; Hargreaves, 2005; Herlihy et al., 2014; Hampton, 2016; Holmes, 2016; Minnici, 2014; Papay, 2012; Reddy et al., 2017). The ability of the evaluation system to produce reliable ratings across evaluators and observations is dependent upon the design of the system and the competency of the evaluators (Minnici, 2014; Nordin, 2014; Papay, 2012; Strong, Gargani, & Hacifazlioglu, 2011; Weisberg et al., 2009). Expanding the number of raters and the frequency of observations may, with purposeful training, increase the reliability of ratings for all teachers, including those teaching specialized groups of students (Cohen & Goldhaber, 2016; Herlihy et al., 2014; Hill, Charalambos, & Kraft, 2012; Hill & Grossman, 2013; Jones & Brownell, 2014; Jones, Buzick, & Turkan, 2013; Milanowski, 2011; Weisberg et al., 2009). Perception of the usefulness of feedback to inform professional learning and guide change in instructional practice may be dependent upon systemic functionality factors. These factors may influence a teachers’ approach to use of data for its intended purpose, limited application, or deliberate abandonment of use. Systemic functionality may also limit the ability of the district to construct personalized professional learning stemming from evaluation data (Ikemoto & Marsh, 2007; Nordin, 2014; Stecker et al., 2018). The history of teacher evaluation in Texas demonstrated a pattern of optimism and positive perception in the initial stages of implementation. However, problems with systemic functionality, perceived gaps in fidelity to system design, and distrust in the ability of the system to accomplish the goal of improved teaching quality over time resulted in the growth of negative perception and attitude on the part of teachers (Davis, 2013; Davis-Frost, 2000; Ettema, Sengupta, & Kress, 2014; Rigsby, 2014; TEA, 1991). Teacher evaluation systems are complex, and successful use of such systems to improve teaching quality is dependent upon the participation of both teachers and school leaders in continuous improvement efforts. If such continuous improvement efforts are ignored, it is likely that teachers will develop increasingly negative perceptions of T-TESS and the earlier pattern of teacher evaluation in Texas will be replicated (Heneman & Milanowski, 2003; Papay, 2012; Minnici, 2014; Stecker et al., 2018). Findings The basic convergent mixed-methodology of the current study established the concurrent collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative analysis of survey responses indicated that teachers perceived the T-TESS rubric to be a valid description of effective teaching (validity index Scale M = 22.94, SD = 4.28). Teachers also believed that T-TESS evaluators had the ability to provide reliable ratings and coaching; however, nearly half of the participants did not have enough information to determine if rating reliability was equal between evaluators and across campuses (reliability index Scale M = 14.36, SD = 2.98). Teachers perceived that T-TESS provided quality feedback that was useful for changing their instructional practices (feedback index Scale M = 21.75, SD = 5.16). Survey responses indicated that some teachers misunderstood the general purpose for T-TESS, believing that T-TESS was used primarily for human resource decisions (purpose index Scale M = 13.46, SD = 2.46). Taken all together, the independent variables of years of teaching experience, teaching a tested subject, number of observations, Julia M. Hyman, Ed.D.