Implementation Process for South Dakota Administrators Using the Charlotte Danielson Teacher Evaluation

摘要

As a response to accountability and pressure from the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, the South Dakota Department of Education informed school administrators of a state-wide transformation of the way districts measure teacher effectiveness in their schools. In 2011, The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument (Danielson, 2002) was recommended by the South Dakota Department of Education (DOE) as the evaluation tool to partially meet requirements of the state's new teacher effectiveness model. The change process implementation goal, recommended by the South Dakota DOE, was outlined in two phases. This research discovered the implementation process for South Dakota administrators using the Danielson teacher evaluation model. Understanding the implementation process is essential, as this evaluation controls a significant portion of the teacher effectiveness rating for South Dakota teachers and the results will establish the administrator role in the teacher evaluation implementation process. There is no research regarding the process that South Dakota school administrators used while implementing the framework in their districts. To understand the process, the following central research questions were used as a guide for this study: (a) How have school administrators implemented the Danielson's teacher evaluation model? (b) What lessons have school administrators learned implementing the Danielson's teacher evaluation model? The target population for this study was South Dakota school administrators who had experience evaluating with The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument. There were seven administrators who participated in this basic qualitative study. Participants were audiotaped using a semi-structured interview process with predetermined questions. Data was analyzed using open coding and was organized in the online program NVivo 11. The results of the study indicated that the participants in this study implemented Danielson's framework in a similar way. Administrator and staff training were a priority for the participants. In addition, participants concentrated on selecting the domains/components used in evaluations to focus training efforts. Training in districts were diverse, as not all districts had resources readily available and district preference was also factor. A common lesson learned by participants included a goal to design a clear implementation plan that integrated shared leadership participation with administrators and teachers.