New York
LondonBeijing
Effects of Annual Professional Performance Review on Teacher Efficacy, Instructional Practices, and Professional Development

Effects of Annual Professional Performance Review on Teacher Efficacy, Instructional Practices, and Professional Development

Erica Murphy-Jessen (Huntington Union Free School District, USA)
Copyright: © 2018 |Pages: 28
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-3616-1.ch011
OnDemand:
(Individual Chapters)
Available
$37.50
Current Special Offers
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of new Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) legislation on professional development, instructional practices, and teacher efficacy. Additionally, teacher perceptions of the impact of new APPR standards on the disability classification rate in their school districts were examined. A mixed-method survey was conducted comparing two Average Needs, public school districts, in New York. Although similar student demographics were reported, the disability classification rate in District 1 was above the state the average and District 2 below the state average. The results of this study revealed that the implementation of APPR legislation significantly affected teacher's perceptions of professional development, instructional practices, and teacher efficacy. Professional development proved to be of high importance for all teachers in both districts. However, there was little consensus about the effects of APPR on the disability classification rates.
Chapter Preview
Top

Background

In 2002, The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law called for higher accountability system-wide. NCLB attempted to improve student learning by holding teachers and building principals accountable for student test scores. Students’ success would be measured using high-stakes standardized testing and a goal was set that all students would achieve 100% mastery in English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics by 2014 thereby closing the achievement gap (nysed.gov; Hirsh, 2005, p.38). Following this legislation, pressure and anxiety heightened among many educators, as public school districts attempted to raise students’ test scores, meet annual yearly progress (AYP) standards, and avoid punishment by the state (Meier et al., 2004). NCLB also emphasized the importance of educating students with disabilities in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) to the greatest extent possible with their non-disabled peers. According to the Least Restrictive Environment Policy Paper, posted on www.p12.nysed.gov (1998), “students with and without disabilities need to learn to interact and develop interdependent relationships so that, as adults, they can successfully participate in a society that values full participation in the economic, political, social, cultural and educational mainstream of American society” (Section III, para. 1).

Complete Chapter List

Search this Book:
Reset