High-stakes teacher evaluations (HSTEs) in public education influence millions of students and teachers across the U.S. Currently, there is a dearth of published quantitative research that shows the relation of HSTEs to teacher job satisfaction. The purpose of this quasiexperimental quantitative study was to determine if implementation of HSTEs in state of Hawaiʻi as part of the U.S. Department of Education's Race to the Top program initiative was related to teacher job satisfaction in public schools over time. A repeated measures analyses was conducted using archived teacher job satisfaction data from over 200 public schools in Hawaiʻi from 2009 to 2014, including data collected from 2 years before until 2 years after implementation of HSTEs. The theoretical framework used for the study was grounded in Herzberg's 2-factor theory of motivation. It was hypothesized that the implementation of HSTEs may have affected extrinsic hygiene factors such as wages, supervisory practices, and organizational policy relative to intrinsic motivational factors such as work achievement, recognition, and personal growth of teachers working in schools implementing the federal initiative. The most significant study finding was that both overall satisfaction and satisfaction with student achievement increased during the 2011-2012 implementation year and then fell below pre-implementation levels in the 2 years subsequent to implementation of HSTEs. This finding is discussed in the context of an increase in pay for public school teachers in Hawai'i during the post-implementation period. The results of this research may promote positive social change by highlighting the need for a focus on potential unintended consequences (i.e., possible negative effects on teacher job satisfaction) of federal education policies associated with HSTE systems.

Much attention in recent years has gone to the evaluation of teacher effectiveness, and some scholars have developed conceptual models to evaluate the effectiveness. The purpose of this study was to compare three teacher evaluation models – the Texas Professional Development Appraisal System (PDAS), the teacher index model (TI), and the value-added model (VAM) – to determine teacher effectiveness using student demographic and longitudinal academic data. Predictive data from students included economic disadvantage status, ethnicity, gender, participation in special education, limited English proficiency, and performance on Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS). Data serving as dependent variables were scores from Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT®) verbal/critical reasoning and mathematics. These data came from 1,714 students who were 9.7% Hispanic, 9.2% African American, and 81.2% White. The models were tested for 64 English language arts teachers and 109 mathematics teachers, using student examination scores from the SAT® verbal/critical reasoning and mathematics. The data were aligned for specific faculty members and the students whom they taught during the year of the study. The results of the study indicated that the TI and VAM explained approximately 42% of the variance in college entrance exam scores from the SAT® verbal/critical reasoning and mathematics (R2 = 0.418) across mathematics and English language arts teachers, whereas the TI model explained approximately 40% of the variance in the SAT® scores (R2 = 0.402). The difference, however, in the R-squared values between the VAM and the TI model was not statistically significant (t (169) = 1.84, p > 0.05), suggesting that both models provided similar results. The least effective model used to predict student success on college entrance exams was the PDAS, which is a state-adopted model currently in use in over 1,000 school districts in Texas, The teacher PDAS scores explained approximately 36% of the variance in student success on the SAT® (R2 = 0.359). The study provides school leadership with information about alternative methods of evaluating teacher effectiveness without difficult formulas or high costs associated with hiring statisticians. In addition, results indicate that the models vary significantly in the extent to which they can predict which teachers are most effective in preparing students for college. This study also emphasizes the critical need to provide teacher evaluations that align with student achievement on college entrance exams.

Teacher evaluation has the ability to greatly support increased student achievement. However, existing literature on the topic finds evaluations are not meeting the intended purpose. Since principals are responsible for the implementation of the process at their school site, their perceptions of current processes is of value if evaluations are to be of value. Therefore, this study investigated K-12 principals' perceptions of teacher evaluation practices in an urban northern California school district. Data were collected through the administration of a survey. Of the 79 surveys distributed to school principals, 52 were completed and returned. Upon receiving the surveys, frequencies, percentages, means, and dependent sample t-tests were employed to analyze the data. The inductive analysis approach was used to code open-ended responses. The results illustrate that principals find formative and summative evaluation approaches are more effective for non-tenured teachers. However, they find the evaluation process is more supportive of tenured teachers when only formative approaches are applied. Principals find the process time intensive and lacking a clear purpose. Additional barriers ranged from teacher unions, to a lack of district support and inconsistency of implementation among principals. Principals seek reform in teacher evaluations where all parties find the process meaningful despite tenure status. Furthermore, principals seek a more comprehensive process that includes both formative and summative approaches. It is recommended that further research be conducted on the impact of time, school structures that support principals as coaches and evaluators, and how credentialing programs and districts provide training to principals in evaluation processes and barriers.