evaluation of teacher appraisal in a school

7/29/2019 Evaluation of Teacher Appraisal in a School

1/8

School Organisation, Vol. 15. No. 2, 1995

An Evaluation of Teacher

Appraisal in Schools within OneLocal Education Authority

CHRIS KYRIACOUUniversity of York, Department of Educational Studies, Heslington, York YO1 5DD,

UK

ABSTRACT This paper reports the evaluation of teacher appraisal in schools within one local

education authority. The study is based on interviews conducted with 40 teachers during the

period Novem ber 1993 to M arch 1994 . Th ese in terview s pai nt a posi tiv e picture of tea cher

appraisal. The overwhelming majority of the teachers interviewed felt they had been well trained

to take part in the appraisal process, and that their experience of appraisal had been positive

and valuable. In general, their comments indicated that they were well satised with the

pro ces ses and procedu res tha t took pla ce reg arding the cond uct of appra isa l. At the sam e time,

several teachers did remark on the time-consuming nature of appraisal, and wondered whether

the benets of appraisal justied the costs involved.

Over the last few years local education authorities (LEAs) throughout England

and Wales have been introducing schemes of teacher appraisal in their primary,

secondary and special schools. As part of this introduction, a number of authorities

have carried out studies evaluating aspects of their scheme in order to judge how

well it is operating and what type of changes can be made to improve practice.

Unfortunately, few such reports reach the public domain, even though they contain

much information about the current state of play regarding teacher appraisal inschools. In 1993 I was invited to conduct an evaluation of teacher appraisal in one

LEA as part of that LEAs monitoring of its appraisal scheme. What follows is a copy

of the report. By publishing this report in full, in the form actually presented to the

LEA, this paper offers an example of one such report. Its ndings are very much in

line with the more anecdotal evidence about the current operation of teacher

appraisal in schools. Overall, it supports the view that most schemes of teacher

appraisal adopted have emphasised a professional development model and have

generally been well received by those who have been appraised. In particular, this

study supports the view that one of the main sources of satisfaction for thoseteachers who had been appraised was their feeling that their work for the school was

formally recognised and acknowledged. However, concerns about its time-consum-

ing nature and cost were also expressed. These concerns must clearly be addressed

10 9

0260-1362/95/020109-08 1995 Journals Oxford Ltd


2/8

11 0 C. Kyriacou

if regular and effective teacher appraisal, which is felt to be of benet to the teacher

appraised and to the school, is to become a positive and established feature of

schools in future years.

The Report

Introduction

This evaluation forms part of a number of different ways in which the LEA is

monitoring the operation of teacher appraisal within the county with a view to

evaluating its success to date and in seeking to make further improvements to its

operation. The main focus of this evaluation was to get a sense of whether classroom

teachers who have been through the appraisal process feel they have beneted from

this, and in particular whether they feel it has had any impact on their actual

classroom practice. In order to look at this, however, it was also important to collectdata concerning the general context of how the appraisal process has been operating.

Method of Collecting Data

Interviews were carried out at 10 primary schools, nine secondary schools and one

special school during the period from November 1993 to March 1994. These

schools were selected to represent a cross-section of schools within the LEA drawn

from a list of schools where it was known that appraisals have been conducted. Two

members of staff were interviewed at each of the schools visited. The interviews wereconducted using a standardised interview schedule.

Findings

Background Information

In total, 40 members of staff were interviewed: 20 primary (6 male, 14 female), 18

secondary (10 male, 8 female) and two special school teachers (1 male, 1 female).

All were classroom teachers.

Fifteen of the appraisals had been carried out by the headteacher, and 13 by thedeputy head. In small schools (primary and special), it is almost inevitable that the

appraiser will be the head or deputy, whilst in larger (secondary) schools the vast

majority of appraisals were conducted by staff other than the head or deputy.

About half of the appraisees said the person who conducted their appraisal was

allocated to them, but they were given the opportunity to express a negative

preference beforehand. About a quarter of the appraisees said they were simply

allocated an appraiser without further consultation, and the nal quarter said they

were allowed to make a choice from a list of possible appraisers. In the vast majority

of cases, the appraiser was their `line manager or someone else senior to them in thehierarchy, whilst in only a few cases did appraisees say their appraiser was of equal

status. About two-thirds of the teachers reported that they had been appraised in the

period since Easter 1993.


3/8

Teacher Appraisal 11 1

Training

Just ov er four-fths of those interv iew ed ha d been offered training, an d all these had

accepted it. The most common form of training was two twilight/evening sessions or

a 1-day session, although a few reported more. Almost everyone who attended

training sessions felt the training had been sufcient and did not feel there was other

training or information they would have liked prior to their appraisal. Only one

teacher reported that her training (three evening sessions) had been a waste of time,

largely because it covered what she already knew and could read in the appraisal

booklet. Those who had not had any formal training experiences indicated they

would have liked some as this would have made them more aware of the processes

and principles involved. Overall, training appears to have been highly successful and

well received.

School Development Plan

About two-thirds of those interviewed said they were made aware of how their

appraisal was set in the context of the schools development plan. However, for some

of the teachers, this was simply at the level of knowing that appraisal was timetabled

and budgeted for within the development plan rather than a more sophisticated

linkage in terms of how appraisal can play a part in rening or extending a teachers

role within the context of the school development priorities over the coming years.

The issue of how an individuals appraisal can usefully be set in the context of a

schools development priorities may be an area where the potential benets ofappraisal can be developed further.

Use of the LEA Handbook on Appraisal

All the appraisees reported having seen the handbook and almost all said they

had used it. The appraisees were asked about the usefulness of the guidance

in the handbook regarding self-appraisal, classroom observation, the interview,

setting targets, and the follow-up (review meeting). A large majority of the

comments in each of these ve sections were favourable. A number of teacherscommented that the guidance had been useful to them directly, whilst some felt that

the main usefulness had been as guidance for the appraiser and in ensuring that

processes and procedures were followed consistently across the school and across

the county. A number also commented that the training sessions had covered these

areas very well.

More specically the guidance on self-appraisal was felt by the vast majority to

provide a useful focus that helped teachers to review and reect. Only ve teachers

were overtly critical, either because they felt they already knew their strengths and

weaknesses or because the check-list seemed to be overlong and threatening.With regard to classroom observation a majority of the teachers felt the guidance

had provided a good framework and structure, and was particularly useful in giving

ideas and helping to focus on specic tasks to be looked at. Some teachers, however,


4/8

11 2 C. Kyriacou

commented that they negotiated classroom observation with their appraiser with no

overt reference to the handbook.

The guidance on interviews was felt by the vast majority to be helpful, particu-

larly in setting the format and agenda, offering constructive guidelines and making

clear the structure and procedures.The teachers views about the guidance on targets was also favourable. The most

frequent comment made was that it helped to make targets realistic. The guidance

also provided a useful framework for negotiation. Only one teacher said he felt more

guidance on targets would be useful. However, a few teachers said that they left the

guidance here for the appraiser to look at and did not pay much attention to it

themselves.

Finally the teachers comments on the guidance for the follow-up (review

meeting) indicated that this was also felt to be helpful, and that the timetable

provided structure. A large number of teachers, h owever, had only recently been

appraised and did not comment on this except to say that they intended to look at

this guidance prior to their review meeting. Only one teacher felt this guidance

lacked sufcient detail.

The Classroom Observation

About two-thirds of the teachers were observed teaching twice, and the remaining

teachers once. Only one teacher reported not having been observed teaching. The

vast majority of the teachers said they had found the classroom observation and

subsequent discussion very useful. M ost mentioned the experience as being very

positive, afrming, and a valuable opportunity to get useful feedback from a

colleague. Several commented that the appraiser was able to see things they were not

aware of, and some mentioned that the use of a specic focus for observation had

been very helpful. One teacher mentioned that it was useful for her appraiser (the

head) to be made aware of the lack of resources available. Only three teachers

explicitly felt the process had not been useful.

About two-fths of the teachers felt the process had led to changes in their

classroom practice. The most frequently mentioned change by far was in better

meeting the needs of less able pupils, although in a few cases the needs of more ablepupils were also mentioned. The changes mentioned included asking more open-

ended questions, using a better mix of activities, better organisation of resources,

better allocation of time for activities, better pacing of lessons, better handling of

transitions between activities, and budgeting more time within lessons to observe

individual pupils. In addition, some teachers also mentioned the need for better

planning of lessons and for better records of pupils assessed work. One teacher

mentioned that the style of teaching he adopted in a lesson that had been observed

was commented on favourably by his appraiser, and as a result he has now adopted

that style more often. Another teacher said she had become complacent about herteaching, and that the appraisal had energised her to make more effort.

Those who reported m aking no changes overwhelmingly referred to the fact

that the appraisal had not identied any need for change. In effect, the appraisal had


5/8


afrmed their current classroom practice. One teacher, however, said she has been

prevented from making a desirable change because the resources to allow this were

not available. Another teacher said his appraiser had suggested some changes he did

not agree with and had therefore not changed his practice.

A large majority of teachers expressed satisfaction with the process of classroomobservation. Some commented on the particular usefulness of having a general and

then a specic focus for the observation. Only a handful of teachers had any critical

comments to make concerning possible improvements. Two teachers pointed to the

need for the appraiser to be a subject specialist in the area they were observing. In

a small school or a special school this could be a problem. Two teachers felt that two

observations were not enough to get a fair picture of someones teaching. One

teacher pointed out that in a small primary school, arranging a time for a colleague

to be free to carry out a classroom observation had been very difcult.

Collection of In formation from Others

About four-fths of the teachers said they had information givers as part of the

appraisal process. In almost all cases these information givers were other members

of staff, although there were some examples given of other information givers. One

secondary school teacher cited the head of a secondary schools support centre; one

primary school teacher cited pupils from her previous and her current class; and

another primary school teacher cited a junior, non-teaching assistant. Almost all

these teachers reported that the information given was useful. The most frequent

comment made was that it enhanced the quality of feedback the appraiser was able

to give. Some teachers commented that it was reassuring and helpful to get feedback

from a range of colleagues, and some mentioned that it allowed the teachers wider

role and responsibilities to be explored more fully. Almost all the teachers said they

would use information givers next time, although a handful qualied this by saying

yes only if it were appropriate to the focus of the appraisal. Only two teachers

explicitly said they would not use information givers next time.

The Appraisal Interview

Almost half of the teachers said their appraisal interview had lasted about an hour,

whilst a similar number reported interviews lasting between an hour and a half and

3 hours. Only a handful of teachers reported interviews lasting less than an hour (the

shortest being 25 minutes). Almost all the teachers said they had found the interview

useful. The most frequent comments made were that it allowed the teacher to talk

about, review and reect on their work, and to receive helpful and supportive advice

and guidance. Some teachers commented that it was useful to be able to focus on

particular aspects of their work. Only one teacher felt the interview had been `not

especially useful. All teachers reported t hat targets had been set, almost all reportingtwo or three targets, with a few teachers citing four or ve targets.

About one-third of the teachers said the targets had been set by themselves then

agreed by the appraisers, whilst almost two-thirds of the teachers said that the


6/8

11 4 C. Kyriacou

targets had b een negotiated with the appr aiser. Only two teachers explicitly reported

that the targets had been initiated or proposed by the appraiser. In terms of whether

the targets had been achieved, there was a mixed picture here, depending on

whether the targets were short term or long term, but in almost every case the

answers were either yes, or ongoing, or in the process of being achieved. In only twocases were targets explicitly not going to be achieved. One teacher said that he was

`not going to be able to complete a targeted course because of a lack of county

funding, and in another case the teacher said the resource implications of a targeted

change could not be met.

The Appraisal Statement

In all cases but one, the teachers saw a draft of the statement before being given the

completed copy to sign. In a few cases this meant that some slight changes were

made before the nal version was signed. Almost all teachers reported being satised

with their statement. Only two teachers reported any qualication to this. One said

`not totally and that despite some changes she felt that some comments in the

statement were misinterpretations. Another teacher felt that the statement did not

give a full picture of his work. The vast majority of the teachers said the headteacher

had read the appraisal statement, although a few said they assumed so but had not

had any feedback conrming this. Only in two cases did teachers say probably not,

one referring to a head who was absent for a long period and another to a change

of headteacher.

Shortcomings

The teachers were asked what aspects of their appraisal they felt were unsatisfactory.

About a quarter of them had no critical comments to make about their appraisal,

and indeed some commented here that the whole process had worked very well in

their case. Amongst the shortcomings noted by the rest, the most frequent concern

by far w as that the whole process had been very time-consuming. On the one hand,

some pointed out that free periods and time after school had been used up by both

appraisee and appraiser when they could usefully have been doing other things, andin this context some mentioned the need for more supply cover to be made available.

On the other hand, however, several teachers who made use of supply cover

complained that they felt too much teaching time with pupils had been lost that was

difcult to make up. In both cases, the prime concern was that pupils may have

suffered as a result of the time spent on appraisal.

Some teachers commented that the action plans developed to meet some targets

had led to frustration when it became clear that the resources needed in time and/or

money were not forthcoming. A number of teachers made comments indicating that

they were sensitive to any instances wh ere the q uality of their appraisal interview hadbeen less than satisfactory. For example, teachers were critical of instances where the

coverage had not been sufciently wide (e.g. one teacher mentioned her professional

development had not been discussed), or where the meeting was interrupted (e.g. by


7/8


the school secretary) or curtailed (e.g. because the appraiser had to be somewhere

else) or the appraiser seemed to be rushed or less than enthusiastic about the value

of the appraisal process, or the discussion had not been detailed enough.

On the one hand, some pointed out that the process had lasted for too long (one

teacher said it had taken a whole term) and that it was sometimes held up for longperiods, particularly by report writing. On the other hand, some others said it had

been crammed in very quickly during part of the term when they were busy and that

this meant they had not been able to get the most benet out of the process. Some

felt that there had been too long a gap between their training and when they were

appraised.

There were also some concerns about procedures, in particular the difculty of

making a negative preference regarding the choice of appraiser, and the problems of

nding a mutually convenient time for the classroom observations. Three teachers

also mentioned that the whole process had seemed very threatening, although once

it was over, in all three cases they felt it had not been nearly as stressful as they had

expected. In addition, there was also evidence here that many of the teachers had

learnt things that would help them manage their next appraisal. For example, one

teacher felt he would cite fewer information givers, another that she would strike a

better balance between classroom practice and other aspects of her work, and

another that she would x fewer targets.

Benets

The teachers were asked to comment on the aspects of their appraisal that they felt

were particularly benecial to them. Num erous benets were mentioned here. There

were two particularly large groupings of comments. The rst dealt with the useful-

ness of receiving feedback from others. Many teachers commented that such

feedback had in large measure been positive and reassuring, had indicated that their

work in the school was appreciated and valued by others, and had given a boost to

their condence. A number here specically mentioned the usefulness of the

feedback from information givers, and the opportunity it provided to see yourself as

other colleagues see you, and to make a more objective review of your work. The

second large category of comments concerned the feeling that it was usefulspecically and formally to have time set aside to allow you to reect, to take a fresh

look at yourself, and to talk with someone else about your ideas and concerns. In this

respect the value of the appraisal interview was frequently mentioned, although a

few teachers specically mentioned that the self-appraisal phase and the classroom

observation phases had been of particular benet to them.

Other comments made by the teachers included the fact that appraisal had been

helpful in helping them prioritise, and in p articular that setting targets had energised

them into making efforts to meet these targets, and that when targets had been

achieved this also had led to some feeling of satisfaction. Some other commentsdealt with the usefulness of the appraisal in helping teachers to consider their career

and personal development. Some mentioned here that it was helpful to know that a

professional development system was in place, and also that one could draw on the


8/8

11 6 C. Kyriacou

help and support of colleagues in the school for further advice. In addition, two

te ach ers sa id it was u se fu l in m akin g the h ea d aware of the ir n ee d for m ore

resources.

Finally, the female teachers were also asked to comment on whether their

appraisal had helped to promote equal opportunities for them. The female teachersremarks here indicated that they felt that this question was not particularly relevant

inasmuch as they felt they already had equal opportunities.

Other Comments

In the nal part of the interview, teachers w ere asked if they would like to make any

further comments about the LEA scheme of appraisal, and in particular make any

suggestions for change. About two-thirds of the teachers took this opportunity to

make further comments. Most of these comments reiterated the feeling that the

appraisal process had been positive and valuable, and that the LEA had successfully

introduced a `user-friendly system. Some teachers felt appraisal w as there to be

grabbed and made use of, and that it w as important for the appraisee and appraiser

to work together to get the most benet out of it. A few teachers commented that

they liked the personal development aspect of appraisal, and strongly felt that

appraisal should not become linked to pay or decisions about stafng, although one

teacher expressed the view that appraisal should be linked to performance-related

pay if the government makes extra nances available for this.

There were also a number of critical comments and observations made. The

largest category dealt with the time-consuming and costly nature of the appraisal

process, and some teachers wondered whether it justied this cost. At the same time,

some teachers felt that it was very important that the appraisal process be better

resourced, particularly in relation to the resourcing of action plans. Some teachers

felt that it would be helpful if the general level of stafng in schools could be

enhanced to allow more time for appraisal without using supply cover for lessons.

Indeed, here and earlier in the interviews, several teachers expressed concern over

being away from their classes in order to take part in the appraisal process. Some

teachers felt that the system of expressing a negative preference for their appraiser

did not really work, particularly in small schools, and could put relationships at risk.Finally, a few teachers mentioned the need for better training of appraisers, particu-

larly regarding classroom observation.

evaluation of teacher appraisal in a school

Documents