ABSTRACT
Ensuring teachers have accessible and responsive professional development (PD) implicitly clarifies role expectations and promotes the role assessment process. More recent evaluation systems rely on multiple measures of teacher performance and are accompanied by PD supports and incentives. Reliability issues are compounded by problems with fidelity. Time pressures sometimes mean that observations start late or are cut short, forcing observers to focus on certain elements of the rubric. The climate of inquiry and experimentation cultivated by a strong PD program should be an element of a larger culture of praxis. Research suggests that teacher evaluation is often inaccurate because of poorly designed metrics. In addition to designing performance standards and indicators, determining evaluation timelines and processes, principals also play a vital role after evaluations. Not unlike IEPs, a professional improvement plan should target specific standards and specify the timeline for reaching proficiency.
