Year-averaged classroom observation scores provided reliable information to distinguish overall teacher performance (reliabilities .53–.61 and .70–.77), but dimension-level differences had limited reliability (.35–.43 and .18–.30)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2–r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2020: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Overall classroom observation scores averaged over the year had Year 2 reliabilities of .53 to .61 and .70 to .77 for the two rubrics. → Garet 2017 q3 i? Differences in teachers' observation ratings across dimensions had limited reliability even when averaged over the year, with Year 2 reliabilities of .35 to .43 and .18 to .30. → Garet 2017 (2)

Evidence¶

Garet 2017¶

Garet, M.S., Wayne, A.J., Brown, S., Rickles, J., Song, M., and Manzeske, D. (2017). The Impact of Providing Performance Feedback to Teachers and Principals (NCEE 2018-4001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Reliability analysis of the study's two classroom observation rubrics, reported in the executive summary; year-averaged overall scores showed reliabilities of ".53 to .61 and .70 to .77" for the two rubrics, with similar Year 1 reliabilities.

"scores averaged over the year provided some reliable information to distinguish teacher performance (with Year 2 reliabilities of .53 to .61 and .70 to .77 for the two observation rubrics used)."

Garet 2017 (2)¶

Garet, M.S., Wayne, A.J., Brown, S., Rickles, J., Song, M., and Manzeske, D. (2017). The Impact of Providing Performance Feedback to Teachers and Principals (NCEE 2018-4001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee

q3 · i? · causal · r3

The same reliability analysis found dimension-level score differences had limited reliability for identifying areas for improvement, with Year 2 reliabilities of ".35 to .43 and .18 to .30"; observation score reliabilities were similar in Year 1.

"Differences in teachers' observation ratings across dimensions, however, had limited reliability to identify areas for improvement, even when averaged over the year (with Year 2 reliabilities of .35 to .43 and .18 to .30 for the two observation rubrics)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A two-year performance feedback intervention improved teachers' classroom practice on one of two observation rubrics (50th to 57th percentile) but had no impact on practice as measured by the other rubric — related
• Year-averaged classroom observation scores provided only modest reliability for identifying teachers needing support, and dimension-level differences were too unreliable to signal specific areas for improvement — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)