Databases on State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies

Content

Comprehensive Comparison
Compare 3 states across all components.
Single Topic Comparison
Compare multiple states on a single topic area.
State Roles

State Roles

Traditionally the purview of districts, control over teacher and principal evaluation policy is increasingly shifting to the state level; there is wide variation, however, in what role states adopt and what degree of flexibility is left to districts in designing and implementing new evaluation systems. The State Roles page provides a brief narrative describing the distribution of control over teacher evaluation policy in each state. To allow for easy comparison, each state is categorized according to one of three hypothetical models representing low, moderate, or high levels of state control over both teacher and principal evaluation policy.

To view a short narrative on each state, click the state’s name below each model description. To compare narratives on two or more states, select State Roles.

District Evaluation System With Required Parameters (Low)

  • State provides guidance to districts and plays only a small role in design and implementation of the evaluation system at the local level.
  • Guidance is general: requires LEAs to include certain components (observations, professional responsibilities, measures of student learning) but allows LEAs wide latitude in selecting or creating those components.
  • Provides screening or approval to ensure compliance with state regulations on frequency, training, grievance procedures, etc.

District Systems:

Alaska

Alabama

Arizona

California

Florida

Iowa

Idaho

Kentucky

Maryland

Maine

Minnesota

Missouri

Montana

North Dakota

Nebraska

New Hampshire

New York

Utah

Virginia

Vermont

Washington

West Virginia

Wyoming

Elective State-Level Evaluation System (Moderate)

  • State strictly interprets some aspects of federal and state legislation but allows flexibility in other aspects.
  • State may mandate use of student growth measures, models, and weights while leaving observation, protocols, or additional measures up to LEAs
  • State may offer a model framework with an observation instrument but allow distraict to choose alternative models and instruments if the meet state criteria.

Elective State-Level Systems:

Arkansas

Colorado

Connecticut

Georgia

Illinois

Indiana

Kansas

Massachusetts

Michigan

New Jersey

New Mexico

Ohio

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Dakota

Texas

Wisconsin

State-Level Evaluation System (High)

  • State provides strict interpretation of federal and state legislation.
  • State prescribes the requirements for the evaluation model(s).
  • State determines components, measures, frequency, and types of evaluators.
  • All districts must implement the state designed model with little flexibility.

State-Level Systems:

District of Columbia

Delaware

Hawaii

Louisiana

Mississippi

North Carolina

Nevada

Oklahoma

South Carolina

Tennessee