The Views of Greek Educators on Evaluation Techniques: The Case of Model Experimental Schools
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58421/gehu.v2i1.63Keywords:
Εvaluation, Εvaluation Techniques, Interview, Portfolio, School Director, School CounselorAbstract
The term "evaluation of the educational work" and, respectively, of the teachers was established in our country during the post-colonial period. The following questions particularly concerned both the educational community and the state in general: "How are or should the results of the evaluation be used?", "Can all aspects of the work produced at the school unit level and the effects of teachers on their students be objectively measured and evaluated?", "How can the subjective element be reduced in the procedure of teacher evaluation?", "Is it possible to apply uniform evaluation criteria to schools that operate in heterogeneous socio-economic, cultural, or geographical environments?", "What is the role of the teachers and the Management of each school and school counselor as well as other actors of the school community (students, parents, other staff)?"
The answer to the above questions comes through the research carried out on 405 teachers in Greece and highlights various philosophical, political, and pedagogical dimensions concerning the purpose of Evaluation, the bodies, forms, techniques, and evaluation criteria.
Downloads
References
A. J. Shinkfield and D. L. Stufflebeam, Teacher Evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1996.
M. Scriven, “Teacher Selection,” in The new handbook of teacher Evaluation Assessing elementary and secondary school teachers, J. Millman and L. Darling- Hammond, Eds. California: Corwin press, INC, 1990, p. 76.
J. H. Stronge, “Improving Schools Through Teacher Evaluation,” in Εvaluating Teaching A Guide to Current Thinking and Best Practise, J. H. Stronge, Ed. California: Corwin Press, Inc, 1997, p. 1.
C. Danielson, Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching. Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), 2007.
OECD, Education at a Glance 2013. OECD, 2013.
W. A. Firestone, “Teacher Evaluation Policy and Conflicting Theories of Motivation,” Educ. Res., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 100–107, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.3102/0013189X14521864.
P. D. Tucker and K. P. Kindred, “Legal Considerations in Designing Teacher Evaluation Systems,” in Evaluating Teaching, A Guide to Current Thinking and Best practice, J. H. Stronge, Ed. California: Corwin Press, INC, 1997, p. 85.
M. Kassotakis, Evaluation of school units and teachers of primary and secondary education. Athens: Grigoris, 2018.
K. Wolf, C. Lichetenstein, and C. Stevenson, “Portfolios ih Teacher Evaluation,” in Evaluating Teaching, A Guide to current thinking and Best Practice, J. Stronge, Ed. California: Corwin Press, INC, 1997, p. 198.
C. Mosely, “The value of professional teaching portfolios to prospective employers : School administrators’ views,” Prof. Educ., vol. 27, no. 1–2, pp. 58–72, 2005.
S. Tas and L. Cengizhan, “Teacher portfolios are on stage for professional development: A qualitative case study,” Sos. Bilim. Araştırma Derg., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–14, 2016, [Online]. Available: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ssrj/240518.
J. I. Gelfer, Y. Xu, and P. G. Perkins, “Developing Portfolios to Evaluate Teacher Performance in Early Childhood Education,” Early Child. Educ. J., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 127–132, Oct. 2004, doi: 10.1007/s10643-004-1079-3.
Τ. Bird, “The schoolteacher’s portfolio: an essay on possibilities,” in The New Handbook of Teacher Evaluation. Assessing Elementary and Secondary Schoolteachers, J. Millman and L. Darling, Eds. California: Corwin press, INC, 1990, pp. 241–256.
M. Scriven, “A unified theory approach to teacher evaluation,” Stud. Educ. Eval., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 111–129, Jan. 1995, doi: 10.1016/0191-491X(95)00009-J.
M. Kassotakis, “Career Counselling and Guidance in Greece,” in Career Guidance and Livelihood Planning across the Mediterranean, 2017, pp. 303–322.
X. Mai, “The Application of Formative Evaluation Strategies in College English Classroom from the Perspective of Teacher Questioning,” Open J. Mod. Linguist., vol. 11, no. 06, pp. 873–882, 2021, doi: 10.4236/ojml.2021.116067.
K. Schildkamp, F. M. van der Kleij, M. C. Heitink, W. B. Kippers, and B. P. Veldkamp, “Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice,” Int. J. Educ. Res., vol. 103, p. 101602, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602.
R. Barnett, New relationships between research scholarship and teaching. New York, NY: The society for research into higher education & Open University Press, 2005.
J. H. Stronge and P. D. Tucker, Handbook On Teacher Evaluation: Assessing And Improving Performance. Eye On Education, 2003.
OECD, Education at a Glance 2014. OECD, 2014.
H. Deveci, A. F. Ersoy, and A. Ersoy, “The Views of Prospective Elementary School Teachers on the Use of Portfolio Assessment in Teacher Education,” Kuram ve Uygulamada Egit. Bilim., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 193–199, 2006.
L. Darling-Hammond, A. Amrein-Beardsley, E. Haertel, and J. Rothstein, “Evaluating Teacher Evaluation,” Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 93, no. 6, pp. 8–15, Mar. 2012, doi: 10.1177/003172171209300603.
L. Cohen, L. Manion, and K. Morrison, Educational research methodology. Athens: Metaichmio, 2008.
G. D. Borich, Effective Teaching Methods: Research Based Practice. Austin: University of Texas, 2007.
K. Marshall, Rethinking Teacher Supervision and Evaluation: How to Work Smart, Build Collaboration, and Close the Achievement Gap, 2nd ed. Jossey-Bass, 2013.
S. Kvale, “Dominance Through Interviews and Dialogues,” Qual. Inq., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 480–500, Jun. 2006, doi: 10.1177/1077800406286235.
M. Patton, Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage Publications, 1990.
B. J. Lansing, G. Ginsburg, and K. Braaten, An Inrestigasion of Response Error. Urbana, Illinois: Bureau of Economic and Business Research, 1961.
D. Silverman, Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. London: SAGE Publications, 1993.
P. Anastasia and B. Antonios, “Teachers ’ Appraisal in Model Experimental Schools,” vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 349–360, 2022, doi: 10.15341/jmer(2155-7993)/05.12.2022/003.
J. H. McMillan and S. Schumacher, Research in Education: A Conceptual Introduction. New Jersey: Longman, 2001.
P. Mayring, “Qualitative Content Analysis,” Forum Qual. Sozialforsch. / Forum Qual. Soc. Res., vol. 1, no. 2, 2000, doi: 10.17169/fqs-1.2.1089.
N. Kyriazi, Sociological research: Critical Evaluation of Methods and Techniques. Athens: Pedio, 2011.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of General Education and Humanities
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
sidebar
Contact Us
Visitor Statistics
| Information |
>> For Authors
>> For Readers
>> For Librarians
| Visitor Statistics |
| Member of |
| Indexing |
| Keywords |
Student Creativity Experimental Method ARIAS Structuralism Literature Conceptions Phenomenography Student learning Academic Writing linguistic Motivation Reciprocal teaching Effectiveness Mathematical concept Guided Note Taking Students' understanding Education TVET misconceptions Van Hiele Motivational factors Shadow education Private tutoring CRI interviews curriculum Evaluation Translation and Transcription Communication scientific Bilingual Motivation Mathematics
GEHU is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
| Publisher |
Address:
Jl. Gagak N0.105, Bandung,
Indonesia 40133
E-mail:
journalgehu@gmail.com
| in collaboration with |
| Recommended Tools |
| ISSN Barcode |
