School Organisation, Vol. 15. No.

2, 1995

109

An Evaluation of Teacher Appraisal in Schools within One Local Education Authority

CHRIS KYRIACOU
University of York, Department of Educational Studies, Heslington, York YO1 5DD, UK

This paper reports the evaluation of teacher appraisal in schools within one local education authority. The study is based on interviews conducted with 40 teachers during the period November 1993 to March 1994. These interviews paint a positive picture of teacher appraisal. The overwhelming majority of the teachers interviewed felt they had been well trained to take part in the appraisal process, and that their experience of appraisal had been positive and valuable. In general, their comments indicated that they were well satis ed with the processes and procedures that took place regarding the conduct of appraisal. At the same time, several teachers did remark on the time-consuming nature of appraisal, and wondered whether the bene ts of appraisal justi ed the costs involved.
ABST RAC T

Over the last few years local education authorities (LEAs) throughout England and W ales have been introducing schemes of teacher appraisal in their primary, secondary and special schools. As part of this introduction, a number of authorities have carried out studies evaluating aspects of their scheme in order to judge how well it is operating and what type of changes can be made to improve practice. Unfortunately, few such reports reach the public domain, even though they contain much information about the current state of play regarding teacher appraisal in schools. In 1993 I was invited to conduct an evaluation of teacher appraisal in one LEA as part of that LEA s monitoring of its appraisal scheme. What follows is a copy of the report. By publishing this report in full, in the form actually presented to the LEA, this paper offers an example of one such report. Its ndings are very much in line with the more anecdotal evidence about the current operation of teacher appraisal in schools. Overall, it supports the view that most schemes of teacher appraisal adopted have emphasised a professional development model and have generally been well received by those who have been appraised. In particular, this study supports the view that one of the main sources of satisfaction for those teachers who had been appraised was their feeling that their work for the school was formally recognised and acknowledged. However, concerns about its time-consuming nature and cost were also expressed. These concerns must clearly be addressed
0260-1362/95/020109-08 1995 Journals Oxford Ltd

110

C. Kyriacou

if regular and effective teacher appraisal, which is felt to be of bene t to the teacher appraised and to the school, is to become a positive and established feature of schools in future years. The Report Introduction This evaluation forms part of a number of different ways in which the LEA is monitoring the operation of teacher appraisal within the county with a view to evaluating its success to date and in seeking to make further improvements to its operation. The main focus of this evaluation was to get a sense of whether classroom teachers who have been through the appraisal process feel they have bene ted from this, and in particular whether they feel it has had any impact on their actual classroom practice. In order to look at this, however, it was also important to collect data concerning the general context of how the appraisal process has been operating. Method of Collecting Data Interviews were carried out at 10 primary schools, nine secondary schools and one special school during the period from November 1993 to March 1994. These schools were selected to represent a cross-section of schools within the LEA drawn from a list of schools where it was known that appraisals have been conducted. Two mem bers of staff were interviewed at each of the schools visited. The interviews were conducted using a standardised interview schedule. Findings Background Information In total, 40 members of staff were interviewed: 20 primary (6 male, 14 female), 18 secondary (10 male, 8 female) and two special school teachers (1 male, 1 female). All were classroom teachers. Fifteen of the appraisals had been carried out by the headteacher, and 13 by the deputy head. In small schools (primary and special), it is almost inevitable that the appraiser will be the head or deputy, whilst in larger (secondary) schools the vast majority of appraisals were conducted by staff other than the head or deputy. About half of the appraisees said the person who conducted their appraisal was allocated to them, but they were given the opportunity to express a negative preference beforehand. About a quarter of the appraisees said they were simply allocated an appraiser without further consultation, and the nal quarter said they were allowed to make a choice from a list of possible appraisers. In the vast majority of cases, the appraiser was their `line manager or someone else senior to them in the hierarchy, whilst in only a few cases did appraisees say their appraiser was of equal status. About two-thirds of the teachers reported that they had been appraised in the period since Easter 1993.

Teacher Appraisal Training

111

Just over four- fths of those interviewed had been offered training, and all these had accepted it. The most comm on form of training was two twilight/evening sessions or a 1-day session, although a few reported more. Almost everyone who attended training sessions felt the training had been suf cient and did not feel there was other training or information they would have liked prior to their appraisal. Only one teacher reported that her training (three evening sessions) had been a waste of time, largely because it covered what she already knew and could read in the appraisal booklet. Those who had not had any formal training experiences indicated they would have liked some as this would have made them more aware of the processes and principles involved. Overall, training appears to have been highly successful and well received.

School Development Plan About two-thirds of those interviewed said they were made aware of how their appraisal was set in the context of the school s development plan. However, for some of the teachers, this was simply at the level of knowing that appraisal was timetabled and budgeted for within the development plan rather than a more sophisticated linkage in terms of how appraisal can play a part in re ning or extending a teacher s role within the context of the school development priorities over the coming years. The issue of how an individual s appraisal can usefully be set in the context of a school s development priorities may be an area where the potential bene ts of appraisal can be developed further.

Use of the LEA Handbook on Appraisal All the appraisees reported having seen the handbook and almost all said they had used it. The appraisees were asked about the usefulness of the guidance in the handbook regarding self-appraisal, classroom observation, the interview, setting targets, and the follow-up (review meeting). A large majority of the comments in each of these ve sections were favourable. A number of teachers commented that the guidance had been useful to them directly, whilst some felt that the main usefulness had been as guidance for the appraiser and in ensuring that processes and procedures were followed consistently across the school and across the county. A number also commented that the training sessions had covered these areas very well. More speci cally the guidance on self-appraisal was felt by the vast majority to provide a useful focus that helped teachers to review and re ect. Only ve teachers were overtly critical, either because they felt they already knew their strengths and weaknesses or because the check-list seem ed to be overlong and threatening. With regard to classroom observation a majority of the teachers felt the guidance had provided a good framework and structure, and was particularly useful in giving ideas and helping to focus on speci c tasks to be looked at. Some teachers, however,

112

C. Kyriacou

commented that they negotiated classroom observation with their appraiser with no overt reference to the handbook. The guidance on interviews was felt by the vast majority to be helpful, particularly in setting the format and agenda, offering constructive guidelines and making clear the structure and procedures. The teachers views about the guidance on targets was also favourable. The most frequent comm ent made was that it helped to make targets realistic. The guidance also provided a useful framework for negotiation. Only one teacher said he felt more guidance on targets would be useful. However, a few teachers said that they left the guidance here for the appraiser to look at and did not pay much attention to it themselves. Finally the teachers comm ents on the guidance for the follow-u p (review meeting) indicated that this was also felt to be helpful, and that the timetable provided structure. A large number of teachers, however, had only recently been appraised and did not comment on this except to say that they intended to look at this guidance prior to their review meeting. Only one teacher felt this guidance lacked suf cient detail. The Classroom Observation About two-thirds of the teachers were observed teaching twice, and the remaining teachers once. Only one teacher reported not having been observed teaching. The vast majority of the teachers said they had found the classroom observation and subsequent discussion very useful. Most mentioned the experience as being very positive, af rming, and a valuable opportunity to get useful feedback from a colleague. Several commented that the appraiser was able to see things they were not aware of, and some mentioned that the use of a speci c focus for observation had been very helpful. One teacher mentioned that it was useful for her appraiser (the head) to be made aware of the lack of resources available. Only three teachers explicitly felt the process had not been useful. About two- fths of the teachers felt the process had led to changes in their classroom practice. The most frequently mentioned change by far was in better meeting the needs of less able pupils, although in a few cases the needs of more able pupils were also mentioned. The changes mentioned included asking more openended questions, using a better mix of activities, better organisation of resources, better allocation of time for activities, better pacing of lessons, better handling of transitions between activities, and budgeting more time within lessons to observe individual pupils. In addition, some teachers also mentioned the need for better planning of lessons and for better records of pupils assessed work. One teacher mentioned that the style of teaching he adopted in a lesson that had been observed was commented on favourably by his appraiser, and as a result he has now adopted that style more often. Another teacher said she had become complacent about her teaching, and that the appraisal had energised her to make more effort. Those who reported making no changes overwhelmingly referred to the fact that the appraisal had not identi ed any need for change. In effect, the appraisal had

Teacher Appraisal

113

af rmed their current classroom practice. One teacher, however, said she has been prevented from making a desirable change because the resources to allow this were not available. Another teacher said his appraiser had suggested some changes he did not agree with and had therefore not changed his practice. A large majority of teachers expressed satisfaction with the process of classroom observation. Some commented on the particular usefulness of having a general and then a speci c focus for the observation. Only a handful of teachers had any critical comments to make concerning possible improvements. Two teachers pointed to the need for the appraiser to be a subject specialist in the area they were observing. In a small school or a special school this could be a problem. Two teachers felt that two observations were not enough to get a fair picture of someone s teaching. One teacher pointed out that in a small primary school, arranging a time for a colleague to be free to carry out a classroom observation had been very dif cult. Collection of Information from Others About four- fths of the teachers said they had information givers as part of the appraisal process. In almost all cases these information givers were other members of staff, although there were some examples given of other information givers. One secondary school teacher cited the head of a secondary schools support centre; one primary school teacher cited pupils from her previous and her current class; and another primary school teacher cited a junior, non-teaching assistant. Almost all these teachers reported that the information given was useful. The most frequent comment made was that it enhanced the quality of feedback the appraiser was able to give. Some teachers commented that it was reassuring and helpful to get feedback from a range of colleagues, and some mentioned that it allowed the teacher s wider role and responsibilities to be explored more fully. Almost all the teachers said they would use information givers next time, although a handful quali ed this by saying yes only if it were appropriate to the focus of the appraisal. Only two teachers explicitly said they would not use information givers next time. The Appraisal Interview Almost half of the teachers said their appraisal interview had lasted about an hour, whilst a similar number reported interviews lasting between an hour and a half and 3 hours. Only a handful of teachers reported interviews lasting less than an hour (the shortest being 25 minutes). Almost all the teachers said they had found the interview useful. The most frequent comments made were that it allowed the teacher to talk about, review and re ect on their work, and to receive helpful and supportive advice and guidance. Some teachers commented that it was useful to be able to focus on particular aspects of their work. Only one teacher felt the interview had been `not especially useful. All teachers reported that targets had been set, almost all reporting two or three targets, with a few teachers citing four or ve targets. About one-third of the teachers said the targets had been set by themselves then agreed by the appraisers, whilst almost two-thirds of the teachers said that the

114

C. Kyriacou

targets had been negotiated with the appraiser. Only two teachers explicitly reported that the targets had been initiated or proposed by the appraiser. In terms of whether the targets had been achieved, there was a mixed picture here, depending on whether the targets were short term or long term, but in almost every case the answers were either yes, or ongoing, or in the process of being achieved. In only two cases were targets explicitly not going to be achieved. One teacher said that he was `not going to be able to complete a targeted course because of a lack of county funding , and in another case the teacher said the resource implications of a targeted change could not be met. The Appraisal Statement In all cases but one, the teachers saw a draft of the statement before being given the completed copy to sign. In a few cases this meant that some slight changes were made before the nal version was signed. Almost all teachers reported being satis ed with their statement. Only two teachers reported any quali cation to this. One said `not totally and that despite some changes she felt that some comments in the statement were misinterpretations. Another teacher felt that the statement did not give a full picture of his work. The vast majority of the teachers said the headteacher had read the appraisal statement, although a few said they assumed so but had not had any feedback con rming this. Only in two cases did teachers say probably not, one referring to a head who was absent for a long period and another to a change of headteacher. Shortcomings The teachers were asked what aspects of their appraisal they felt were unsatisfactory. About a quarter of them had no critical comments to make about their appraisal, and indeed some commented here that the whole process had worked very well in their case. Amongst the shortcomings noted by the rest, the most frequent concern by far was that the whole process had been very time-consuming. On the one hand, some pointed out that free periods and time after school had been used up by both appraisee and appraiser when they could usefully have been doing other things, and in this context some mentioned the need for more supply cover to be made available. On the other hand, however, several teachers who made use of supply cover complained that they felt too much teaching time with pupils had been lost that was dif cult to make up. In both cases, the prime concern was that pupils may have suffered as a result of the time spent on appraisal. Some teachers comm ented that the action plans developed to meet some targets had led to frustration when it became clear that the resources needed in time and/or money were not forthcoming. A number of teachers made comments indicating that they were sensitive to any instances where the quality of their appraisal interview had been less than satisfactory. For example, teachers were critical of instances where the coverage had not been suf ciently wide (e.g. one teacher mentioned her professional development had not been discussed), or where the meeting was interrupted (e.g. by

Teacher Appraisal

115

the school secretary) or curtailed (e.g. because the appraiser had to be somewhere else) or the appraiser seem ed to be rushed or less than enthusiastic about the value of the appraisal process, or the discussion had not been detailed enough. On the one hand, some pointed out that the process had lasted for too long (one teacher said it had taken a whole term) and that it was sometimes held up for long periods, particularly by report writing. On the other hand, some others said it had been crammed in very quickly during part of the term when they were busy and that this meant they had not been able to get the most bene t out of the process. Some felt that there had been too long a gap between their training and when they were appraised. There were also some concerns about procedures, in particular the dif culty of making a negative preference regarding the choice of appraiser, and the problems of nding a mutually convenient time for the classroom observations. Three teachers also mentioned that the whole process had seem ed very threatening, although once it was over, in all three cases they felt it had not been nearly as stressful as they had expected. In addition, there was also evidence here that many of the teachers had learnt things that would help them manage their next appraisal. For example, one teacher felt he would cite fewer information givers, another that she would strike a better balance between classroom practice and other aspects of her work, and another that she would x fewer targets. Bene ts The teachers were asked to comment on the aspects of their appraisal that they felt were particularly bene cial to them. Numerous bene ts were mentioned here. There were two particularly large groupings of comments. The rst dealt with the usefulness of receiving feedback from others. Many teachers comm ented that such feedback had in large measure been positive and reassuring, had indicated that their work in the school was appreciated and valued by others, and had given a boost to their con dence. A number here speci cally mentioned the usefulness of the feedback from information givers, and the opportunity it provided to see yourself as other colleagues see you, and to make a more objective review of your work. The second large category of comments concerned the feeling that it was useful speci cally and formally to have time set aside to allow you to re ect, to take a fresh look at yourself, and to talk with someone else about your ideas and concerns. In this respect the value of the appraisal interview was frequently mentioned, although a few teachers speci cally mentioned that the self-appraisal phase and the classroom observation phases had been of particular bene t to them. Other comm ents made by the teachers included the fact that appraisal had been helpful in helping them prioritise, and in particular that setting targets had energised them into making efforts to meet these targets, and that when targets had been achieved this also had led to some feeling of satisfaction. Som e other comments dealt with the usefulness of the appraisal in helping teachers to consider their career and personal development. Som e mentioned here that it was helpful to know that a professional development system was in place, and also that one could draw on the

116

C. Kyriacou

help and support of colleagues in the school for further advice. In addition, two teachers said it was useful in making the head aware of their need for more resources. Finally, the female teachers were also asked to comment on whether their appraisal had helped to promote equal opportunities for them. The female teachers remarks here indicated that they felt that this question was not particularly relevant inasmuch as they felt they already had equal opportunities. Other Comments In the nal part of the interview, teachers were asked if they would like to make any further comments about the LEA scheme of appraisal, and in particular make any suggestions for change. About two-thirds of the teachers took this opportunity to make further comments. Most of these comm ents reiterated the feeling that the appraisal process had been positive and valuable, and that the LEA had successfully introduced a `user-friendly system . Some teachers felt appraisal was there to be grabbed and made use of, and that it was important for the appraisee and appraiser to work together to get the most bene t out of it. A few teachers commented that they liked the personal development aspect of appraisal, and strongly felt that appraisal should not become linked to pay or decisions about staf ng, although one teacher expressed the view that appraisal should be linked to performance-related pay if the government makes extra nances available for this. There were also a number of critical comments and observations made. The largest category dealt with the time-consuming and costly nature of the appraisal process, and some teachers wondered whether it justi ed this cost. At the same time, some teachers felt that it was very important that the appraisal process be better resourced, particularly in relation to the resourcing of action plans. Som e teachers felt that it would be helpful if the general level of staf ng in schools could be enhanced to allow more time for appraisal without using supply cover for lessons. Indeed, here and earlier in the interviews, several teachers expressed concern over being away from their classes in order to take part in the appraisal process. Some teachers felt that the system of expressing a negative preference for their appraiser did not really work, particularly in small schools, and could put relationships at risk. Finally, a few teachers mentioned the need for better training of appraisers, particularly regarding classroom observation.