This research project was designed to obtain data on factors that influence whether state level Legislative policies affect the changes in practice at which they are directed. Specifically, the study examined a teacher evaluation short form option created in 1985, the original intent of the policy, and the resultant changes in practice. It examined the situations in which the option was utilized, and whether current practice reflected research on effective practices. Phone interviews were conducted to identify legislative intent and to develop study questions and forced choice items. Systematic sampling techniques were used to distribute surveys to principals in every sixth public school building in the state. The survey collected data on seven areas: respondent and school demographics, use of the option, effects of the option, changes in practice with the policy, perceptions of effective evaluation, and satisfaction with summative and formative evaluation. While 79.5% of teachers were eligible for evaluation with the short form, 19.6% were evaluated with it. Fifty-one percent of the administrators chose the option to save time. Forty-six percent did not know what effect the policy had been, while 40% perceived the policy to have had little or no effect. Since 1985 half of the principals had changed practice, 66% reported spending more time on teacher evaluation, and 60% report their current practices to be more stringent. Ten and a half percent report having changed practice as a result of the state policy. There was a correlation between staff size and option use. While the option did save time for summative evaluation, many reported spending additional time in formative evaluation. Use of the option was restricted by district level policy and by collective bargaining agreement. The decision not to use the option with eligible teachers was often based on utilization of informal data collection outside the classroom setting. Use of the short evaluation option does save administrator time, is effective for summative evaluation but is not effective for formative evaluation. Formative evaluation options need to be increased. Current policy only addresses summative evaluation directly. Current summative evaluation only provides for ratings of satisfactory and unsatisfactory. The study does indeed demonstrate that administrative practice does change to some degree as a result of policy, but does not necessarily result in the legislative intent of that policy.

No description available.

xiii, 302 p. : ill. A print copy of this thesis is available through the UO Libraries. Search the library catalog for the location and call number. / This study examines the role of narrative in racial integration politics in the Seattle Public Schools between 1954 and 1991. In 1978, the Seattle School District in coalition with civic actors implemented a mandatory student assignment desegregation policy, "The Seattle Plan," without a court order. A decade later, another similar coalition of actors came together to shift desegregation policy towards a "controlled choice" method of student movement. In 1991, with the support of the newly elected Democratic mayor, the foundation of desegregation was dismantled. In Seattle, the shifts in desegregation conflicts can be explained as the transposition of certain arrangements of ideas into policy and the concurrent shift in the arrangement produced by new alignments of actors able to find enough common ground to coalesce and make policy. This dissertation explores the complexity of ideas about racial equality and the oftentimes-surprising arrangements actors created. I analyze the way elected, elite, and non-elite actors at the local level talked about, interpreted, and re-interpreted questions of racial segregation, equality, and the role of the public schools and explore the amalgamations of ideas about race and schools that explain the unique development of policy in Seattle with a way to account for change relying on micro-political developments. I examine the discursive arrangements generated within these conflicts, the coalitions built around these ideas, and how the ideas were implemented as policy. I analyze a broad range of archival materials, newspaper accounts, and interviews with actors who were involved in these events. / Committee in charge: Gerald Berk, Chairperson, Political Science; Julie Novkov, Member, Political Science; Joseph Lowndes, Member, Political Science; James Mohr, Outside Member, History