An analysis of the quality and effectiveness of teachers' job improvement targets

Abstract

<p>The major purpose of this study was to analyze job improvement targets (JITs) written for, by, or with teachers and the elements of the target and/or process of its development that affect a teacher's commitment to accomplish the target. Attention was focused on (1) the teacher summative evaluation report, (2) the quality of the target, (3) the teachers' perceptions of the target, and (4) the teachers' commitment to accomplishing the target;Subjects were 246 teachers evaluated in the School Improvement Model (SIM) project during the 1981-82 school year. This project was conducted by the Research Institute for Studies in Education at Iowa State University. Teacher evaluators in 32 school buildings, from five school organizations in Iowa and Minnesota, supplied the data for this investigation;Findings. Teacher evaluators in medium-sized schools (2,001-15,000 students) write higher quality JITs than those in smaller and larger sized school organizations. However, even teacher JITs from medium-sized school organizations are poorly written. Teacher JITs do not vary in quality by subject area, grade levels taught by teachers, or who is involved in their development. Teacher JITs are not written to the lowest marked areas of performance on summative evaluation reports;JITs should be challenging, of course, but it appears that if they are set beyond a teacher's perception of their capabilities, their commitment to completing it is decreased;The teachers' perception of the JIT's ability to help them become more effective is significantly related to the process involved in the development of the JIT. Equal participation of the teacher and administrator in the development process received the highest rating by the teachers, followed closely by the teacher-dominated/administrator-influenced process. It appears that the teachers' perception of the JIT's ability to help them become a more effective teacher is closely associated with the amount of teacher input allowed and administrator interest and guidance shown during the development process.</p>