"It's Not a Gotcha": Interpreting Teacher Evaluation Policy in Rural School District

Jane F. Gilles


This multi-case study explored how local policy actors in rural school districts interpreted new teacher evaluation policies and how state-level policy actors influenced local policy responses. In the first phase of the study, teachers and administrators in four rural school districts in two U.S. states were interviewed about new state teacher evaluation policies and their own local efforts to meet policy demands, while the study’s second phase investigated the work of state-level policy actors. Shedding light on the realities of tackling reform mandates in rural schools, the study finds that teacher evaluation policy efforts are challenged by the tension between the formative and summative purposes of teacher evaluation, that teacher evaluation policies allowing local control in system design require a significant commitment at the local level, that local actors rely on and value the work of policy intermediaries, and that interpreting teacher evaluation policy and planning for implementation can be particularly challenging in small rural school districts.


teacher evaluation; school reform; school policy; qualitative


American Institutes for Research. (2016). Center on Great Teachers & Leaders: Databases on state teacher and principal evaluation policies. Retrieved from http://resource.tqsource.org/stateevaldb/

Arnold, M. L., Newman, J. H., Gaddy, B. B., & Dean, C. B. (2005). A look at the condition of rural education research: Setting a direction for future research. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 20(6). Retrieved from http://jrre.psu.edu

Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011a). Policy actors: Doing policy work in schools. Discourse, 32(4), 625-639. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2011.601565

Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011b). Policy subjects and policy actors in schools: Some necessary but insufficient analyses. Discourse, 32(4), 611-624. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2011.601564

Barrett, N., Cowen, J., Toma, E. & Troske, S. (2015). Working with what they have: Professional development as a reform strategy in rural schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 30(10), 1-18. Retrieved from http://jrre.psu.edu

Battelle for Kids (2016). Generating opportunity and prosperity: The promise of rural education collaboratives. Retrieved from

Summer 2017 21


Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (Third ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

Budge, K. M. (2010). Why shouldn’t rural kids have it all? Place-conscious leadership in an era of extralocal reform policy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 18(1). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu

Coburn, C. E. (2005). The role of nonsystem actors in the relationship between policy and practice: The case of reading instruction in California. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(1), 23-52. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org

Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A. E., & Pease, S. R. (1983). Teacher evaluation in the organizational context: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 53(3), 285-328. doi:10.3102/00346543053003285

DeBray, E., Scott, J., Lubienski, C. & Jabbar, H. (2014). Intermediary organizations in charter school policy coalitions: Evidence from New Orleans. Educational Policy, 28(2), 175-206. doi: 10.1177/0895904813514132

Elazar, D. J. (1970). Cities of the prairie. New York: Basic Books.

Feldvebel, A. M. (1980). Teacher evaluation: Ingredients of a credible model. The Clearing House, 53(9), 415-420. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org

Felton, E. (2017, January 9). More states mull changes to teacher evaluation systems. Education Week. Bethesda, MD: Editorial Projects in Education. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/teacherbeat/2017/01/states_mull_changes_to_evaluations.html

Fowler, F. C. (2009). Policy studies for educational leaders (Third ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Hamann, E. T., & Lane, B. (2004). The roles of state departments of education as policy intermediaries: Two cases. Educational Policy, 18(3), 426-455. doi: 10.1177/0895904804265021

Hewitt, K. K. (2016, March 21). Reading the tea leaves: ESSA and the use of test scores in teacher evaluation. The Brown Center Chalkboard. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/brown-center-chalkboard

Hill, H. C. (2000). Implementation networks: Non-state resources for getting policy done (Order No. 9963803). Available from Dissertations & Theses @ CIC Institutions; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (304607894).

Honig, M. I. (2004). The new middle management: Intermediary organizations in education policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(1), 65-87.

Jiang, J. Y., Sporte, S. E., & Luppescu, S. (2015). Teacher perspectives on evaluation reform: Chicago’s REACH students. Educational Researcher, 44(2), 105-116. doi:10.3102/0013189X15575517

Johnson, J., Showalter, D., Klein, R. & Lester, C. (2014). Why rural matters 2013-2014: The condition of rural education in the 50 states. Washington, DC: The Rural School and Community Trust. Retrieved from http://www.ruraledu.org

Johnson, L. D., Mitchel, A. L. & Rotherham, A. J. (2014). Federal education policy in rural America. Boise, ID: Rural Opportunities Consortium of Idaho. Retrieved from http://www.rociidaho.org/federal-education-policy-in-rural-america

Levinson, B. A., Sutton, M., & Winstead, T. (2009). Education policy as a practice of power: Theoretical tools, ethnographic methods, democratic options. Educational Policy, 23(6), 767-795.

Louis, K. S., Gordon, M., Meath, J., & Thomas, E. (2009). The roots of difference in state educational policy. In B. C. Fusarelli & B. Cooper (Eds.), The rising state: How state power is transforming our nation’s schools (pp. 153-176). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K. L. & Anderson, S. E. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Retrieved from http://conservancy.umn.edu

Louis, K. S., Thomas, E., & Anderson, S. (2010). How do states influence leadership in small districts? Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9(3), 328-366. doi:10.1080/15700761003731518

Summer 2017 22

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Millman, J. (1981). Chapter 1: Introduction. In J. Millman (Ed.), Handbook of teacher evaluation (pp. 12-13). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Minnici, A. (2014). The mind shift in teacher evaluation: Where we stand – and where we need to go. American Educator, 38(1), 22-26.

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (2014). Missouri comprehensive data system. Retrieved from http://mcds.dese.mo.gov

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (2015). Educator Growth Toolbox. Retrieved from https://dese.mo.gov/educator-quality/educator-growth-toolbox

National Center for Education Statistics (2016). Digest of education statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/

Oregon Department of Education. (2014a). Oregon framework for teacher and administrator evaluation and support systems. Salem, OR: Oregon Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3637

Oregon Department of Education. (2014b). Report card. Retrieved from http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=116

Popham, W. J. (2013). Evaluating America’s teachers: Mission possible?. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Preston, J. P., Jakubiec, B. A., & Kooymans, R. (2013). Common Challenges Faced by Rural Principals: A Review of the Literature. Rural Educator, 35(1). Retrieved from http://nrea.net

Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case selection techniques in case study research: A menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294-308. doi:10.1177/1065912907313077

Sinnema, C. E., & Robinson, V. M. (2007). The leadership of teaching and learning:Implications for teacher evaluation. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(4), 319-343. doi:10.1080/15700760701431603

Sojourner, A. J., Mykerezi, E., & West, K. L. (2014). Teacher pay reform and productivity: Panel data evidence from adoptions of Q-Comp in Minnesota. Journal of Human Resources, 49(4), 945-981. Retrieved from http://jhr.uwpress.org

Stern, M. (2013). Bad teacher: What Race to the Top learned from the "race to the bottom". Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 11(3), 194-229. Retrieved from http://www.jceps.com

Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012). The effect of evaluation on teacher performance. American Economic Review, 102(7), 3628-3651. doi:10.1257/aer.102.7.3628

U.S. Department of Education. (2015). ED data express. Retrieved from http://eddataexpress.ed.gov

World Media Group, LLC. (2016). USA.com. Retrieved from http://www.usa.com

Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (Fifth ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

Full Text: PDF


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Publication of the National Rural Education Association - http://www.nrea.net

Report problems or questions about to the website to jshedd@library.msstate.edu