Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policy
Impact of Student Growth: Oklahoma does not require measures of student growth in its teacher evaluation system. In 2016, state law removed the mandated value-added measures (VAM) from teacher evaluation systems and made quantitative evaluation tools optional for districts.
State's Role in Evaluation System: Oklahoma requires that all teachers are evaluated using the Oklahoma Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Evaluation System (TLE).
Require instructional effectiveness to be a determinative criterion of any teacher evaluation.
Oklahoma should require that objective measures of student growth be included in a teacher's evaluation rating, and that such measures play a profound role in a teacher's overall evaluation rating. Specifically, a teacher should not be able to earn an overall rating of effective if he or she is less-than-effective at increasing student growth.
Oklahoma asserted that its evaluation system must include review and discussion of student test scores in observation conversation/feedback. This discussion will potentially target student performance for an educator's professional growth goal.
7A: Measures of Student Growth
Many factors should be considered in formally evaluating a teacher; however, nothing is more important than effectiveness in the classroom. Value-added models are an important tool for measuring student achievement and school effectiveness.[1] These models have the ability to measure individual students' learning gains, controlling for students' previous knowledge and background characteristics. While some research suggests value-added models are subject to bias and statistical limitations,[2] rich data and strong controls can eliminate error and bias.[3] In the area of teacher quality, examining student growth offers a fairer and potentially more meaningful way to evaluate a teacher's effectiveness than other methods schools use.
Unfortunately, districts have used many evaluation instruments, including some mandated by states, which are structured so that teachers can earn a satisfactory rating without any evidence that they are sufficiently advancing student learning in the classroom.[4] Teacher evaluation instruments should include factors that combine both human judgment and objective measures of student learning.[5]