Teacher evaluation for accountability and growth: Should policy treat them as complements or substitutes?

David D. Liebowitz

Labour Economics, 2021, vol. 71, issue C

Abstract: U.S. state and local policy frameworks treat teacher evaluation as balancing two aims: accountability and skill development. I develop a model of teacher effectiveness and detail the conditions that determine joint-aim appraisal systems’ contribution to teacher productivity. I then simulate the long-term effects of a set of teacher evaluation policies. Policies that treat evaluation for accountability and evaluation for growth as substitutes outperform those that treat them as complements. I conclude that an optimal teacher evaluation policy would impose accountability on teachers performing below a defined level and above which teachers would be subject to no accountability pressure but would receive intensive instructional supports.

Keywords: Education policy; Teacher evaluation; Labor contracts; Personnel management; Simulation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I21 I28 J24 J41 J45 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927537121000592
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:labeco:v:71:y:2021:i:c:s0927537121000592

DOI: 10.1016/j.labeco.2021.102024

Access Statistics for this article

Labour Economics is currently edited by A. Ichino

More articles in Labour Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().