Teacher Evaluation Through the Eyes of the Principal: How Individual and School Contexts Shape Perceptions of Practice

References

• Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Scribner, J. P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369–387. doi:10.3102/0013189X07308739
   Google Scholar
• Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A., Lund, J., Hamre, B., & Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of effective teaching in secondary school classrooms: Predicting student achievement with the CLASS-S. School Psychology Review, 42, 76–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Statistical Association. (2014). ASA statement on using value-added models for educational assessment. Retrieved from http://www.amstat.org/ASA/Science-Policy-and-Advocacy/home.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Barley, Z. A., & Beesley, A. D. (2007). Rural school success: What can we learn? Journal of Research in Rural Education, 22(1), 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, C. A., Gitomer, D. H., & McCaffrey, D. F. (2012). An argument approach to observation protocol validity. Educational Assessment, 17(2–3), 62–87. doi:10.1080/10627197.2012.715014
   Google Scholar
• Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2012). Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. Retrieved from http://www.metproject.org/downloads/MET_Gathering_Feedback_Practioner_Brief.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2013). Ensuring fair and reliable measures of effective teaching: Culminating findings from the MET project’s three-year study. Retrieved from http://www.metproject.org/downloads/MET_Ensuring_Fair_and_Reliable_Measures_Practitioner_Brief.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Blazar, D., Braslow, D., Charalambous, C. Y., & Hill, H. C. (2017). Attending to general and mathematics-specific dimensions of teaching: Exploring factors across two observation instruments. Educational Assessment, 22(2), 71–94. doi:10.1080/10627197.2017.1309274
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Booher-Jennings, J. (2005). “Below the Bubble: ‘Educational Triage’ and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 231–268. doi:10.3102/00028312042002231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callahan, K., & Sadeghi, L. (2015). Teacher perceptions of the value of teacher evaluation: New Jersey’s ACHIEVE NJ. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 10(21), 46–59.
   Google Scholar
• Cannata, M., Rubin, M., Goldring, E., Grissom, J. A., Neumerski, C. M., Drake, T. A., & Schuermann, P. (2017). Using teacher effectiveness data for information-rich hiring. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(2), 180–222. doi:10.1177/0013161X16681629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carnegie Knowledge Network. (n.d.). Knowledge briefs. Retrieved from http://www.carnegieknowledgenetwork.org/knowledge-briefs
   Google Scholar
• Chaney, J., & DeGannaro, A. (2005). Where everybody knows your name. Principal Leadership, 6(3), 22–26.
   Google Scholar
• Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Vigdor, J. L., & Diaz, R. A. (2004). Do school accountability systems make it more difficult for low-performing schools to attract and retain high-quality teachers? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(2), 251–271. doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6688
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coburn, C. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12. doi:10.3102/0013189X032006003
   Google Scholar
• Daresh, J. C. (1986). Support for beginning principals: First hurdles are the highest. Theory into Practice, 25(3), 168–173. doi:10.1080/00405848609543220
   Google Scholar
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Inequality and the right to learn: Access to qualified teachers in California’s public schools. Teachers College Record, 106(10), 1936–1966. doi:10.1111/tcre.2004.106.issue-10
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day, C., & Bakioğlu, A. (1996). Development and disenchantment in the professional lives of headteachers. In I. Goodson & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers’ professional lives (pp. 123–139). London, England: The Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Derrington, M. L., & Campbell, J. W. (2015). Implementing new teacher evaluation systems: Principals’ concerns and supervisor support. Journal of Educational Change, 16, 305–326. doi:10.1007/s10833-015-9244-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derrington, M. L., & Campbell, J. W. (2018). Teacher evaluation policy tools: Principals’ selective use in instructional leadership. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 17(4), 568–590. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2017.1326143
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeYoung, A. J. (1995). Bridging multiple worlds: The school superintendent as a change agent in rural and poor school districts. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 11(3), 187–197.
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, J. B., & Cooper, K. (2007). The uses of testing data in urban elementary schools: Some lessons from Chicago. In P. A. Moss (Ed.), Evidence and decision making (pp. 241–263). Malden, MA: National Society for the Study of Education.
   Google Scholar
• District of Columbia Public Schools. (2016). IMPACT of Columbia public schools. Retrieved from http://dcps.dc.gov/page/impact-overview
   Google Scholar
• Dodson, R. L. (2015). Kentucky principal perceptions of the state’s new teacher evaluation system: A survey analysis. Educational Research Quarterly, 39(2), 53–74.
   Google Scholar
• Donaldson, M. L., Cobb, C. D., LeChasseur, K., Gabriel, R., Gonzales, R., Woulfin, S., & Makuch, A. (2014). An evaluation of the pilot implementation of connecticut’s system for educator effectiveness and development. Retrieved from www.connecticutseed.org/wp-content/…/Neag_Final_SEED_Report_1-1-2014.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Donaldson, M. L., & Woulfin, S. (2018). From tinkering to going “rouge”: How principals use agency when enacting new teacher evaluation systems. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(4), 531–556. doi:10.3102/0162373718784205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Early, P., & Weindling, D. (2004). Understanding school leadership. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Farkas, S., Johnson, J., & Duffet, A. (2003). Rolling up their sleeves: Superintendents and principals talk about what’s needed to fix public schools. New York, NY: Public Agenda.
   Google Scholar
• Flores, M. A., & Derrington, M. L. (2017). School principals’ views of teacher evaluation policy: Lessons learned from two empirical studies. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(4), 416–431. doi:10.1080/13603124.2015.1094144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frase, L. E., & Streshley, W. (1994). Lack of accuracy, feedback, and commitment in teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 1, 47–57. doi:10.1007/BF00972709
   Google Scholar
• Gardiner, M. E., & Enomoto, E. K. (2006). Urban school principals and their role as multicultural leaders. Urban Education, 41(6), 560–584. doi:10.1177/0042085906294504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garet, M. S., Wayne, A. J., Brown, S., Rickles, J., Manzeske, D., & Ali, M. (2017). The impact of providing performance feedback to teachers and principals. Washington, D.C.: Report prepared for the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Goldring, E. B., Grissom, J. A., Rubin, M., Neumerski, C. M., Cannata, M., Drake, T., & Schuermann, P. (2015). Make room value added: Principals’ human capital decisions and the emergence of teacher observation data. Educational Researcher, 44(2), 96–104. doi:10.3102/0013189X15575031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, R. L. (2010). The four dimensions of principal leadership: A framework for leading 21st century schools. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2011). Triangulating principal effectiveness: How perspectives of parents, teachers, and assistant principals identify the central importance of managerial skills. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 1091–1123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013). Effective instructional time use for school leaders: Longitudinal evidence from observations of principals. Educational Researcher, 42, 433–444. doi:10.3102/0013189X13510020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Mitani, H. (2015). Principal time management skills: Explaining patterns in principals’ time use, job stress, and perceived effectiveness. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(6), 773–793. doi:10.1108/JEA-09-2014-0117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grissom, J. A., Rubin, M., Neumerski, C. M., Cannata, M., Drake, T. A., Goldring, E., & Schuermann, P. (2017). Central office supports for data-driven talent management decisions: Evidence from the implementation of new systems for measuring teacher effectiveness. Educational Researcher, 46(1), 21–32. doi:10.3102/0013189X17694164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grissom, J. A., & Youngs, P. (Eds.). (2016). Improving teacher evaluation systems: Making the most of multiple measures. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grossman, P., Cohen, J., Ronfeldt, M., & Brown, L. (2014). The test matters: The relationship between classroom observation scores and teacher value-added on multiple types of assessments. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 293–303. doi:10.3102/0013189X14544542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125–142. doi:10.1108/09578231111116699
   Google Scholar
• Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review of the empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5–44. doi:10.1177/0013161X96032001002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halverson, R., Kelley, C., & Kimball, S. (2004). Implementing teacher evaluation systems: How principals make sense of complex artifacts to shape instructional practice. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Educational administration, policy, and reform: Research and management (pp. 153–188). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, D. N. (2009). Would accountability based on teacher value added be smart policy? An examination of the statistical properties and policy alternatives. Education Finance and Policy, 4(4), 319–350. doi:10.1162/edfp.2009.4.4.319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herlihy, C., Karger, E., Pollard, C., Hill, H. C., Kraft, M. A., Williams, M., & Howard, S. (2014). State and local efforts to increase the validity and reliability of scores from teacher evaluation systems. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez, R., Roberts, M., & Menchaca, V. (2012). Redesigning a principal preparation program: A continuous improvement model. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 7(3), 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Hess, F. M., & Kelley, A. P. (2007). Learning to lead: What gets taught in principal preparation programs. Teachers College Record, 109(1), 221–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, H. C., Blunk, M., Charalambous, C., Lewis, J., Phelps, G. C., Sleep, L., & Ball, D. L. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 430–511. doi:10.1080/07370000802177235
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, H. C., Kapitula, L., & Umland, K. (2011). A validity argument approach to evaluating teacher value-added scores. American Educational Research Journal, 48(3), 794–831. doi:10.3102/0002831210387916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, K. (2009). A historical analysis of desegregation and racism in a racially polarized region: Implications for the historical construct, a diversity problem, and transforming teacher education toward culturally relevant pedagogy. Urban Education, 44(1), 106–139. doi:10.1177/0042085907311841
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horng, E., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal’s time use and school effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 116(4), 491–523. doi:10.1086/653625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard, G. (2007). As diversity grows, so must we. Educational Leadership, 64(6), 16–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hvidston, D. J., Range, B. G., McKim, C. A., & Mette, I. M. (2015). The views of novice and late career principals concerning instructional and organizational leadership within their evaluation. Planning and Changing, 46(1/2), 10946 Ch.
   Google Scholar
• Illinois Report Cards. (2013). eReport card public site. Retrieved from http://webprod.isbe.net/ereportcard/publicsite/getsearchcriteria.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Jacob, B. A. (2007). The Challenges Of Staffing Urban Schools with Effective Teachers. The Future Of Children, 17(1), 129–153. doi:10.1353/foc.2007.0005
   Google Scholar
• Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2008). Principals as agents: Subjective performance measurement in education. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(1), 101–136. doi:10.1086/522974
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobsen, R., Snyder, J. W., & Saultz, A. (2014). Informing or shaping public opinion? The influence of school accountability data format on public perceptions of school quality. American Journal of Education, 121, 1–27. doi:10.1086/678136
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011). Identifying effective classroom practices using student achievement data. Journal of Human Resources, 46(3), 587–613..
   Google Scholar
• Kersten, T. A., & Israel, M. S. (2005). Teacher evaluation: Principals’ insights and suggestions for improvement. Planning and Changing, 36(1–2), 47–67.
   Google Scholar
• Khattri, N., Riley, K. W., & Kane, M. B. (1997). Students at risk in poor, rural areas: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 13(2), 17–24.
   Google Scholar
• Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. (2010). Effects of teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741–756. doi:10.1037/a0019237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kmetz, J., & Willower, D. (1982). Elementary school principals’ work behavior. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(4), 62–78. doi:10.1177/0013161X82018004006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalski, T. J., & Dolph, D. A. (2015). Principal dispositions regarding the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System. AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice, 11(4), 3–20.
   Google Scholar
• Kraft, M. A., & Gilmour, A. F. (2016). Can principals promote teacher development as evaluators? A case study of principals’ views and experiences. Educational Administration Quarterly. doi:10.1177/0013161X16653445
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamkin, M. L. (2006). Challenges and changes faced by rural superintendents. The Rural Educator, 28(1), 17–24.
   Google Scholar
• Lavigne, A. L. (2014). Exploring the implications of high-stakes teacher evaluation on schools,teachers, and students. Teachers College Record, 116(1).
   Google Scholar
• Lavigne, A. L. (2018). Examining individual- and school-level predictors of principal adaptation to teacher evaluation reform in the United States: A two-year perspective. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership. Advance online publication https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143218807491
   Google Scholar
• Lavigne, A. L., & Chamberlain, R. (2017). Teacher evaluation in Illinois: School leaders’ perceptions and practices. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29(2), 179–209. doi:10.1007/s11092-016-9250-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavigne, A. L., & Good, T. L. (2015). Improving teaching through observation and feedback: Going beyond state and federal mandates. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lavigne, A. L., & Good, T. L. (2019). Enhancing teacher education, development, and evaluation: Lessons learned from educational reform. New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315630892
   Google Scholar
• Le Fevre, D. M., & Robinson, V. (2015). The interpersonal challenges of instructional leadership: Principals’ effectiveness in conversations about performance issues. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(1), 58–95. doi:10.1177/0013161X13518218
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Whalstrom, K. (2004). Review of research: How leadership influences student learning. New York, NY: Wallace Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. New York, NY: Teachers College, The Education Schools Project.
   Google Scholar
• Licklider, B. L., & Niska, J. M. (1993). Improving supervision of cooperative learning: A new approach to staff development for principals. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 6(4), 367–378. doi:10.1007/BF00122136
   Google Scholar
• Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Walhlstrom, K. L., Anderson, S. E., Michlin, M., & Moore, S. (2010). Investigating the links to improved learning: Final report of research findings. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement.
   Google Scholar
• MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1, 130–149. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh, J. A., Bush-Mecenas, S., Strunk, K. O., Lincove, J. A., & Huguet, A. (2017). Evaluating teachers in the big easy: How context shapes policy responses in New Orleans. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(4), 539–570. doi:10.3102/0162373717698221
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, W. J., & Willower, D. J. (1981). The managerial behavior of high school principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 17(1), 69–90. doi:10.1177/0013161X8101700105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Master, B. (2014). Staffing for success linking teacher evaluation and school personnel management in practice. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36(2), 207–227. doi:10.3102/0162373713506552
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCaffrey, D. F., Koretz, D., Lockwood, J. R., & Hamilton, L. S. (2004). Evaluating value-added models for teacher accountability. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG158.html
   Google Scholar
• Measures of Effective Teaching Project. (2013). Learning about teaching: Initial findings from the measures of effective teaching project. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Medley, D. M., & Coker, H. (1987). The accuracy of principals’ judgments of teacher performance. Journal of Educational Research, 80, 242–247. doi:10.1080/00220671.1987.10885759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michigan Assessment Consortium. (2016). Assessment literacy standards for building administrators. Retrieved from http://www.michiganassessmentconsortium.org/als/standards-for-building-administrators
   Google Scholar
• Milanowski, A. T., & Heneman, H. G., III. (2001). Assessment of teacher reactions to a standards-based teacher evaluation system: A pilot study. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15(3), 193–212. doi:10.1023/A:1012752725765
   Google Scholar
• Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2015). Formative classroom walkthroughs: How principals and teachers collaborate to raise student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
   Google Scholar
• National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2001). Leading learning communities: Standards for what principals should know and be able to do. Alexandria, VA: Author. Retrieved from www.naesp.org/llc.pdf
   Google Scholar
• National Association of Secondary School Principals. (2001). NASSP Background [Online]. Retrieved from www.principals.org/about_us/02-01.html
   Google Scholar
• National Council on Teacher Quality. (2017). Running in place: How new teacher evaluations fail to live up to the promises. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/Final_Evaluation_Paper
   Google Scholar
• National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (2015). Professional standards for educational leaders (formerly known as ISLLC). Retrieved from http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2015/ProfessionalStandardsforEducational Leaders2015forNPBEAFINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Nulty, D. D. (2008). The adequacy of response rates to online surveys: What can be done?. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(3), 301–314. doi:10.1080/02602930701293231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oplatka, I. (2001). Types of difficulties in the induction stage: Retrospective voices of women principals. Planning and Changing, 31(1/2), 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Oplatka, I. (2004). The principal’s career stage: An absent element in leadership perspectives. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 7(1), 43–55. doi:10.1080/1360312032000154540
   Google Scholar
• Oplatka, I. (2007). The school principal in late career: An explorative inquiry into career issues and experiences in the pre-retirement working years. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6, 345–369. doi:10.1080/15700760701431520
   Google Scholar
• Oplatka, I. (2012). Towards a conceptualization of the early career stage of principalship: current research, idiosyncrasies and future directions. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 15(2), 129–159. doi:10.1080/13603124.2011.640943
   Google Scholar
• Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in self-efficacy research. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 1–49). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
   Google Scholar
• Parkay, F. W., & Rhodes, J. Stress and the beginning principal. (1992). In F. W. Parkay and G. Hall (Eds.), Becoming a principal: The challenges of beginning leadership (pp. 103–122). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Peske, H. G., & Haycock, K. (2006). Teaching inequality: How poor and minority students are shortchanged on teacher quality. Washington, DC: Education Trust.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, K. D. (1987). Use of standardized tests in teacher evaluation for career ladder systems. Educational Measurement: Issues And Practice, 6(1), 19–22. doi:10.1111/emip.1987.6.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Polikoff, M. A. S. (2015). The stability of observational and student survey measures of teaching effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 121, 183–212. doi:10.1086/679390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polikoff, M. S., & Porter, A. C. (2014). Instructional alignment as a measure of teaching quality. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Retrieved from http://epa.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/11/0162373714531851.full.pdf+html
   Google Scholar
• Range, B. G., Scherz, S., Holt, C. R., & Young, S. (2011). Supervision and evaluation: The Wyoming perspective. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 23, 243–265. doi:10.1007/s11092-011-9123-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhorn, S. K., Johnson, S. M., & Simon, N. S. (2017). Investing in development: Six high-performing high-poverty schools implement the Massachusetts teacher evaluation policy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(3), 383–406. doi:10.3102/0162373717690605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhode Island Department of Education. (2013). Rhode Island educator evaluations: Improving teaching and learning (Year one report). Retrieved from http://www.ride.ri.gov/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/Teachers-and-Administrators-Excellent-Educators/Educator-Evaluation/Education-Eval-Main-Page/2013_Evaluation_Data_External_Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rigby, J. G. (2015). Principals’ sensemaking and enactment of teacher evaluation. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(3), 374–392. doi:10.1108/JEA-04-2014-0051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlechty, P. (2011). The threat of accountabalism. Educational Leadership, 69(1), 80–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schochet, P. Z., & Chiang, H. S. (2012). What are error rates for classifying teacher and school performance using value-added models?. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 38, 142–171. doi:10.3102/1076998611432174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seal, K. R., & Harmon, H. L. (1995). Realities of rural school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(2), 119–124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stecher, B. M., Holtzman, D. J., Garet, M. S., Hamilton, L. S., Engberg, J., & Chambers, J. (2018). Improving teaching effectiveness. Final report. The intensive partnerships for effective teaching through 2015–2016. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR2200/RR2242/RAND_RR2242.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Strong, M. (2011). The highly qualified teacher: What is teacher quality and how do we measure it?. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Styron, R. A., & LeMire, S. D. (2009). Principal preparation programs: Perceptions of high school principals. Journal of College Teacher and Learning, 6(6), 51–61.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012). The effect of evaluation on teacher performance. American Economic Review, 102(7), 3628–3651. doi:10.1257/aer.102.7.3628
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Truscott, D. M., & Truscott, S. D. (2005). Differing circumstances, shared challenges: Finding common ground between urban and rural schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(2), 123–130. doi:10.1177/003172170508700208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2004). Principals sense of efficacy: Assessing a promising construct. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(5), 573–585. doi:10.1108/09578230410554070
   Google Scholar
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 944–956. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Race to the Top guidance and frequently asked questions. Washington, DC. Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/faq.pdf
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Race to the Top fund. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS). (2012). Public school principal data file, 2011–12. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Vasquez Heilig, J., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Accountability Texas-style: The progress and learning of urban minority students in a high-stakes testing context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 75–110. doi:10.3102/0162373708317689
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weindling, D. (1999). Stages of headship. In T. Bush, L. Bell, R. Bolam, R. Glatter, & P. Ribbons (Eds.), Educational management: Redefining theory, policy, practice (pp. 90 901). London, England: Paul Chapman Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on difference in teacher effectiveness. Brooklyn, NY: The New Teachers Project. Retrieved from http://widgeteffect.org/downloads/TheWidgetEffect.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigators. Science Education, 92(5), 941–967. doi:10.1002/sce.20259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Spero, R. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 343–356. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, S., Range, B. G., Hvidston, D., & Mette, I. M. (2015). Teacher evaluation reform: Principals’ beliefs about newly adopted teacher evaluation systems. Planning & Changing, 46(2), 158–174.
   Google Scholar
• Zepeda, S. J. (2012). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts (3rd ed.). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education. doi:10.4324/9781315855523
   Google Scholar