Skip to Content
Skip to Content

Measures of Performance

Learn more about how Tennessee is performing on Measures of Performance in the Teacher Evaluation policy area.
Go to a policy lever Measures of Performance Observations and Feedback Professional Growth and Support
Select a state Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Tennessee's Performance

Ungraded
NCTQ evaluates whether states are effectively using this policy lever by examining whether their teacher evaluation system incorporates measures of student growth, permits student surveys, and requires annual observations. Explore the key actions below to learn more about how Tennessee is implementing Measures of Performance policies.

Why does this matter?

Research has shown that it takes multiple sources of information to provide a fair and accurate understanding of a teacher’s performance, and that evaluations based on multiple measures are more likely to be reliable and predictive.1 Common elements of an evaluation using multiple measures might include formal observations; measures of students’ academic growth, including on state assessments; and student survey data.

Why does Tennessee stand out?

For over a decade, Tennessee has been a model for states implementing statewide educator evaluation systems. The Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model ((TEAM) combines observations and data to promote ongoing conversations about classroom instruction, with the ultimate goal of improving student performance. TEAM uses multiple measures, including observations, student growth data, and a student achievement measure. The number of required observations ranges from three to seven times per year, depending on the teacher’s prior performance. In addition to these required measures, Tennessee also allows the use of student surveys in teacher evaluations.

To ensure effective implementation and a focus on continuous improvement, Tennessee invested in significant training and certification for evaluators. The state also actively sought and incorporated feedback from school leaders and teachers to continually refine and improve the TEAM system over time.

What are the key actions Tennessee
should take?

  • Key Resources

    State of the States 2022: Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies

    Explore NCTQ’s comprehensive analysis of state teacher and principal evaluation policies.

    Rural teacher evaluation system shows promising results for students struggling in math

    Learn more about how evaluation systems can improve outcomes in rural areas.

    How are districts observing and providing feedback to teachers?

    Dive into an analysis of evaluation policies in 148 districts nationwide.

    Seven ways to make improving teacher evaluation worth the work

    Discover strategies to ensure evaluation systems maximize their impact.

    References
    1. Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011). Identifying effective classroom practices using student achievement data. Journal of Human Resources, 46(3), 587-613; Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012); Cantrell, S. & Kane, T. J. (2013). Ensuring Fair and Reliable Measures of Effective Teaching: Culminating Findings from the MET Project’s Three-Year Study. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Policy and Practice Brief, Measures of Effective Teaching project.
    2. Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011). Identifying effective classroom practices using student achievement data. Journal of Human Resources, 46(3), 587-613; Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012); Cantrell, S. & Kane, T. J. (2013). Ensuring Fair and Reliable Measures of Effective Teaching: Culminating Findings from the MET Project’s Three-Year Study. Seattle, WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Policy and Practice Brief, Measures of Effective Teaching project.
    3. Holston, S. (2020, November 9). Evaluating teachers during the pandemic. National Council on Teacher Quality. https://www.nctq.org/blog/Evaluating-teachers-during-the-pandemic; Nittler, K. & Saenz-Armstrong, P. (2020, May 1). Teacher evaluations and support during COVID-19 closures. National Council on Teacher Quality. https://www.nctq.org/blog/Teacher-evaluations-and-support-during-COVID–19-closures.
    4. Kane, T. J., Taylor, E. S., Tyler, J. H., & Wooten, A. L. (2011); Marsh, J. A., Bush-Mecenas, S., Strunk, K. O., Lincove, J. A. & Huguet, A. (2017). Evaluating Teachers in the Big Easy: How Organizational Context Shapes Policy Responses in New Orleans. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(4), 539–570; Stecher, B. M., Garet, M. S., Hamilton, L. S., Steiner, E. D., Robyn A., Poirier, J., Holtzman, D. J., Fulbeck, E. S., Chambers, J., & Brodziak de los Reyes, I. (2016). Improving Teaching Effectiveness: Implementation: The Intensive Partnerships for Effective Teaching Through 2013–2014. RAND Corporation. Retrieved from: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1295.html; Strunk, K. O., Weinstein, T. L., & Makkonen, R. (2014). Sorting Out the Signal: Do Multiple Measures of Teachers’ Effectiveness Provide Consistent Information to Teachers and Principals? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(100), As of May 11, 2018: http://www.redalyc.org/html/2750/275031898100; Taylor, E. S. & Tyler, J. H. (2012).
    5. Tuma, A. P., Hamilton, L. S., & Tsai, T. (2018). How Do Teachers Perceive Feedback and Evaluation Systems?: Findings from the American Teacher Panel. RAND Corporation. Retrieved from: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB10023.html.