Dr. V.K.Maheshwari, M.A(Socio, Phil) B.Se. M. Ed, Ph.D

Former Principal, K.L.D.A.V.(P.G) College, Roorkee, India

Evaluation is a systematic planned inquiry undertaken in order to enable decision-makers to make judgments concerning the worth of an educational policy,or  project and to achieve certain aims and purposes. Evaluation can be a costly waste of time and effort, but when done efficiently, vigorously and with the intention of improving educational provision, it is likely to be worthwhile, for the new knowledge gained can be fed back into the system to improve what goes on in the name of education.

Teaching is an art. When a group evaluates art in a museum, the ratings and criteria can vary widely. The same is true when trying to effectively evaluate a teacher. While some things are quite straight forward and necessary, other intangibles can make a teacher more successful than their peers. Instead of trying to cram square pegged teachers into the round holes of the evaluation format, perhaps it is time to re-invent the evaluation format to include a broader interpretation of what good teaching might include.


INDIA’S National policy on Education (1986) states, “A system of teacher evaluation-open, participative and data-based-will be created and reasonable opportunities of promotion to higher grades provides. Norms of accountability will be laid down with incentives for good performance and distinctive for     non- performance”

The host of educational problems besetting schools today, such as pupil wastage in terms of drop-outs, and the low standard of education, all point directly or indirectly to the  instructional atmosphere in the  educational organizations. Often school enrolments fluctuate from year to year; many factors may account for this. It might be difficult for a head to explain such a phenomenon, let alone suggest solutions, unless some evaluation is conducted and the findings disseminated.

But before this can be done, we need reliable and objective data Through regular monitoring, evaluation and reporting we will know much better where we are and thus be able to decide what changes are needed to bring about improvement.

Teacher evaluations are often designed to serve two purposes: to measure teacher competence and to foster professional development and growth. A teacher evaluation system will give teachers useful feedback on classroom needs, and will provide the opportunity to learn new teaching techniques, so to make changes in their classrooms accordingly Thus the purpose of teacher evaluation in bringing about change for betterment is now widely recognized and accepted. The main aim of the evaluation is continuous improvement of the educational scenario. These evaluations are designed primarily to help an individual to become fully aware of the strengths and   short-comings. He should get feed- back in such a way that he finds it both insightful and helpful. There are at least four benefits of having an objective and systematic scheme of evaluation of individuals in an institution, namely, giving them feed back about their strengths and potentialities, developing sense of accountability motivating them to excel and developing a scheme of improvement of instructional Programme. The following are the specific purposes of teacher evaluation:

-                     Helping faculty to improve their performance.

-                     Making decisions about confirmation or extension of probation and promotion.

-                     Identifying the expertise of the faculty for deputation of conferences seminars, workshops and summer institutes and assignment of co-curricular activities.

-                     Conducting action research on the factors related to faculty performance.

The goal of the individuals must be compatible with the institutional goals if this system is to operate rationally and, therefore, there should be open and frequent discussions with entire faculty about “why evaluate”


Normally the teacher evaluation is of two types

1. Formative Evaluation

Evaluation that is used for the purpose of self-improvement is defined as “formative evaluation”. The teacher collects student and peer perceptions of teaching effectiveness solely for the purposes of modifying and enhancing teaching strategies.

2. Summative Evaluation

Evaluation for the purpose of making personnel decisions and for enhancing teaching effectiveness is defined as “summative evaluation”. Administrators evaluate data from students, peers, and the teacher in order to make informed decisions regarding reappointment, promotion and tenure,


Evaluation involves making judgments about achievement in terms of set goals, but before you can pass judgment, you must pin-point an area of activity which you seek to evaluate and then seek information about it. Based on the information you have collected, you are then in a position to pass judgment on the quality of the activity, or the particular situation in relation to the criteria set.

Any or all of the following techniques may be used to gather information:

Observation of classes: This is a technique to evaluate the effectiveness of teachers and the overall teaching/learning environment in terms of physical facilities, for example, chalkboard, classroom seating arrangements, etc. We can also use this technique to check the pupils’ stationery/textbooks and the teachers’ classroom control.

Systematic reporting: This technique involves written reports or diaries on a daily or weekly basis written by pupils or teachers on, for example: chronic latecomers or absenteeism from school; the incidence of various acts of indiscipline in the school; or the quality of the co-curricular activities, etc

Questionnaires or checklists: These can be used by the head to obtain from pupils or teachers an assessment of various aspects of school life, for example: the standard of work of some specific teachers; the success of some innovations introduced to the school. It is particularly important not to try to evaluate too much at one time; instead focus on a relatively discrete and manageable topic.

Interviews: This is a technique whereby data and information is collected from pupils or staff through a face-to-face interview focusing on a specific issue.

Peer evaluation: Evaluation often seems to imply someone more senior evaluating the work of someone junior. Peer evaluation involves co-workers (heads, teachers or pupils) using the techniques described above to help each other.

Student evaluation ;the students are in a  central position to judge the success of  the teacher in the classroom. They are the main source of information about the accomplishment of important educational goals.

Discussion groups: This technique recognizes the views of different groups, such as teachers in different departments, school prefects, the various clubs and societies, in their evaluation of different aspects of school life.


Here again, the co-operation between the principal and the faculty in devising a means for assessing the behaviors is essential. In addition to teaching effectiveness, innovativeness, the personal qualities, inter-personal relations with colleagues, the extent of institutional service, community or extension work and professional growth are also evaluated. Research has revealed some dimensions to differentiate between ‘best’ and ‘worst’ teachers. The following components of goal teaching were established by Hildebrandt, (1971):

1-         The first is the command of the subject. It is scholarship complex with learning/ specialization. Its component is ‘Analytic/Synthetic.

2-         The second component is the quality of presentation – ability to make one self clear. This component is called ‘Organization/ Clarity’.

3-         The third component is rapport with the class and skill of controlling group interaction. This component is called ‘Instructor– Group Interaction’.

4-         The fourth component is one –to – one response. It can happen out side the class – room if the learner responds individually to the faculty. This we call ‘Instructor – Individual Student Interaction’.

5-         The fifth component is the flair and enthusiasm that awaken interest and stimulate response. He has a distinguished style, a sense of humor and      self – confidence. We call this component ‘Dynamism / Enthusiasm’.


The following are the general indicators for teacher evaluation.

Quality of teaching:- Communication Power, Style,  Techniques and Class management etc.

Examination results: - Number   of    failures ,first  division holders  comparative performance in terms of first    second, third and failures with that of the last years.

Students attendance:-reflecting their attitude towards teacher’s                       performance.

Promoting Library Interest:- Giving reference of books Journals in the class, recommending books, journals for reading.

Relationship with students Helpfulness, encouragement, sincerity in dealing.

Academic growth Update with latest development in subject Acquisition of additional qualifications. Membership of professional societies.  Books reviewed.

Innovativeness Try new teaching ideas. Develop special teaching materials. Shows effort for upgrading the quality of teaching.

Extension Developing contacts with parents and community    member effort for inculcating school-community relations.  Contribution to social services in national calamities.

Co-curricular Activities Participation in organizing school functions, student   Welfare activities, counseling centre, games hobbies etc.


How to use evaluation so that incentives and distinctive are related with the performance/ non- performance?. To achieve these goals, evaluators must first set specific procedures and standards. The standards should

* relate to important teaching skills,

* be as objective as possible

* be linked to the teacher’s professional development.

Some procedures evaluators can use are to:

* Observe classroom activities. This is by far the most common form of data collection for evaluation. The goal of class observations is to obtain a representative sample of a teacher’s performance in the classroom. . Observations can be formal and planned or informal and unannounced. .

* Review lesson plans and classroom records. Lesson plans can reflect how well a teacher has thought through instructional goals. Looking at classroom records, such as tests and assignments, can indicate how well a teacher has linked lesson plans, instruction, and testing.

* Expand the number of people involved in the evaluations. Peer and student evaluations, if schools administer them properly, can also benefit teachers.

Evaluation is a systematic process through which certain decisions are arrived at based on a number of collected facts about the object to be evaluated. Now if teacher is the object, who can be in a better position to evaluate him, but the persons, with whom he is interacting, representing his immediate environment. There are four recognized sources of evaluation. The self. head, peer and , students


Self-evaluation is often considered as the best mode of evaluation. Each faculty member completes a Performa about his expected performance at the beginning of the academic session and then at the close of the session, he fills up another Performa showing actual performance. Another procedure instrument that is being completed by his peers or students discrepancies can thus be noted on the one hand, between his/her own rating and the ratings he desires of himself/ herself, and on the other hand between his own rating and ratings of others. This procedure is useful for personal growth as well as for instructional development.

Often, rating techniques are applied for this purpose which mainly focuses upon the following areas:

General- Classroom management and discipline.

Subject- Presentation and teaching skills, working habits.

Competence- Dependability and record keeping.

Personal Characteristics - Punctuality, tact, voice, co-operation, sense of humor

initiative and personal fitness.

Human Relation-    Human relations with students, other faculty members  principal and the community.

Professional Growth- Professional conduct, research and publication.

The multiplicity of instruments and sources for collecting data on the side increases the validity of teacher evaluation program . The results need to be reported in an appropriate, accurate and timely manner to determine its usefulness.

One of the first decisions is to be made is whether the data are to be tabulated and summarized or simply returned in their original form. If data is returned as it is the teachers tend to concentrate either on the negative/positive feedback with little attention paid to the representativeness of that feedback. How accurately and meaningfully the results are interpreted and used depend on the type of information provided to the teachers. Some of the researchers have revealed a definite positive response bias, which can be counteracted by the use of comparative data resulting in a  more accurate and meaningful interpretation. Qualitative judgments can also be provided to the teacher by identifying mean intervals in the comparative data, which can be defined as representing levels of excellence or needed improvement by depending on where the particular teacher in question stands relatively in various aspects of performance areas.



In all the hierarchical and bureaucratic organizations it is the superior or the boss who evaluates the subordinates. The evaluation is based on information’s collected from other sources as well. Principal’s role comprises direct observation and personal source of evaluative evidence. He should shift, analyze and integrate the information from other sources- teachers, students, parents. It may include number and levels and kinds of classes taught, number of students, out of class activities related to teaching, ability to shape new courses, course out lines and tests materials used in classroom teaching, attendance, teaching style and publications.

The following considerations can be helpful for evaluating teacher performance by head of the institution;

  • Knowledge of Content
  • Knowledge of Age Group
  • Clarity of Goals
  • Balance of Resources for Teaching Goals
  • Resources for Students
  • Learning Activities
  • Materials & Resources
  • Instructional Groups
  • Lesson and Unit Structure
  • Criteria and Standards Assessment
  • Matches Goals
  • Assessment Used for Planning



The following observation schedule  can be quite helpful for evaluating teacher performance by any head of the institution;

Criteria Status 



1 Relationship with other academic staff Excellent -  Good  Fair   Poor


2 Relationship with administrative staff – Excellent -  Good  Fair   Poor


3 Relationship with pupils Excellent  – Good  Fair   Poor


4 Superior-subordinate relationship – Excellent   Good  Fair   Poor


5 Oriented to the goals of the school  -Excellent   Good  Fair   Poor

6 Acceptance of responsibility – Excellent   Good  Fair   Poor


7 Allocation of time Excellent -  Good  Fair   Poor


8 Communication skills Excellent -  Good  Fair   Poor


9 Ability to motivate others Excellent  – Good  Fair   Poor


10 Participation in co-curricular activities Excellent – Good  Fair   Poor


The judgment about teaching requires, among other things, a thorough knowledge of the discipline i.e. the substance of teaching, what is taught, its accuracy, currency, sophistication, depth and the level of learning it fosters. Faculty peers are qualified to judge the substance of teaching as it has two distinctive requirements – their knowledge of the discipline being taught provides the background against which comparison can occur and their long training in the evaluation of evidence enables them to weigh what is revealed.

They can be reliable source of information about teaching materials, syllabi coverage and course content. They can also be a source of information about research, scholarly publications and professional activities. However, once it is accepted as a means of improving instruction, peer evaluation can be conducted on either a formal or informal basis

Evaluation by peers should have broader coverage dealing with questions like; what is the quality of the material used in teaching? What kind of intellectual tasks were set by the teacher for the students and how did the students perform/ How this instructional goals? To what extent is the teacher striving for excellence in teaching etc.?



For reviews of teaching, the peer reviewers may be colleagues of any rank mutually agreed upon by the faculty member and the department head or academic administrator, . The peer reviewers may be selected from inside or outside the department. In small departments or in highly specialized disciplines, it may be difficult to find colleagues who can provide the required insights within the same department.

The development of an instrument(s) for documenting peer evaluations of teaching effectiveness is a departmental responsibility. However, the instrument used in the evaluation must contain the general requirements specified below.

- The instrument must address the wide range of strategies, media and materials used in achieving learning objectives.

- The instrument must include categories such as instructor organization, instructional strategies, choice of content, mastery of content, presentation skills, instructional materials and/or media, interaction with students and additional items appropriate for laboratory, clinic, studio or field settings.

- The instrument must include a section for comments and other observations relevant to the discipline or type of class. Examples of peer evaluation instruments, including some for distance education courses, may be found in references listed in related information above.


If peers are in an advantageous position to assess the substance of teaching, the students are in a better if not the best position to judge how successful is the teacher in the classroom. They are the main source of information about the accomplishment of important educational goals, such as the development of motivation for continued learning and areas of rapport, degrees of communication and the existence of problems between instructors and students. This information can help teacher as well as educational researchers describe and define the learning environment more correctly and objectively than they could through other types of measurements.

When deciding on the content of the items, one should determine which elements of the course, of the instruction, and of the learning are to be addressed. Questions constructed for the course area should address its organization, structure objectives, difficulty, pace relevance, content usefulness etc. Questions constructed for the instruction area should address instructor characteristics, instructor skill clarity of presentation, instructor rapport, method of presentation, student interaction etc. Finally questions constructed for the learning areas should address students satisfaction, student perceived competency, student desire to study etc.

The following Performa can be used for Teacher evaluation by students.

Teacher’s name: ________________________

Your name:____________________________

The number rating stands for the following: 1 = rarely 2 = sometimes 3 = most of the time.

Circle the answer that fits with your experience of this teacher for each item.

1 Teacher is prepared for class. 123

2 Teacher knows his/her subject. 123

3 Teacher is organized and neat. Properly dressed 123

4 Teacher manages the time well Teacher plans class time and assignments that help students to problem solve and think critically. 123

5  Teacher is flexible in accommodating for individual student needs. 123

6.Teacher has clear classroom procedures so students don’t waste time. 1 2 3

7 Teacher grades fairly. 123

8 Teacher is clear in giving directions and on explaining what is Expected  on assignments and tests. 123

9 Teacher returns homework in a timely manner.  Gives good feedback on homework and projects123

10 Teacher provides activities that make subject matter meaningful. Teacher is creative in developing activities and lessons. 123

11 Teacher encourages students to speak up and be active in the classroom learning123

12 How well does the teacher model the core values through how he/she behaves with students and with other staff persons123

13Teacher follows through on what he/she says.You can count on the teacher’s     word. 123

14Teacher’s words and actions match.  I trust this teacher.123

15 Teacher listens and understands students’ point of view; he/she

may not agree, but students feel understood. 123

16 Teacher respects the opinions and decisions of students. 123

17 Teacher is willing to accept responsibility for his/her own mistakes.123

18Teacher is willing to learn from students.123

19Teacher is sensitive to the needs of students. Teacher helps you when you ask for help.  123

20Teacher is fun to be with. 123

21 Teacher likes and respects students.123

22 Teacher tries to model what teacher expects of students. 123

23 Teacher is consistent and fair in discipline Teacher is fair and firm in discipline without being too strict. 123

What is one thing that your teacher does well?

What is one thing that you can suggest to help this teacher improve?


A post-observation conference can give teachers feedback on their strengths and weaknesses. Evaluators must remember to:

* deliver the feedback in a positive and considerate way;

* offer ideas and suggest changes that make sense to the teacher;

* maintain a level of formality necessary to achieve the goals of the evaluation;

After identifying the instructional strengths and weaknesses, teachers can use the information to plan an improvement strategy and the administration.


Teacher evaluation, in fact, should be continuous process in schools and possibly may form a basis for  rewards and punishments in the broadest sense of the expression. Closure of probation period, confirmation, appointment to selection grade, promotion, permission to cross the efficiency bar, deputation to in-service courses/workshops/seminars, entrusting additional responsibilities etc may be linked to teacher evaluation provided teachers willingly accept it and co-operate with the programmer of teacher-evaluation. Its main purpose is, however to discriminate with a view to initiating staff development programme, the better teachers from the average ones and the latter from the below average.

Teachers view evaluation with mixed emotions. Some are unalterably hostile to it, others are disillusioned with existence practices, and many feel uncertain and often threatened about rating procedures that are administratively conceived designed and implemented. They feel that, at least, rating is a neutral process and at worst is probably detrimental to the individual’s welfare, especially if their primary purpose is to categories competencies into scaled classification

Experienced teachers often state that evaluations are not productive. Some of this dissatisfaction is based on experiences which can be avoided:

* Teachers not having any input into the evaluation criteria. . This leads teachers to distrust the evaluation process and to question the validity of the results it produces.

* Evaluators not spending enough time on the evaluation. Teachers complain that the principal, or whoever is conducting the evaluation, does not have the time to gather quality information and provide useful feedback. .

* Evaluators not being well trained  Even worse, many have had little or no recent experience in the classroom. The criteria for evaluations are often vague, subjective, and inconsistent. This robs the evaluator of the credibility needed to carry out an effective evaluation.

* Results of evaluations not being used to further teacher development. For many teachers, the evaluation process can be a dead end. The results do not figure into salary increases

AFTER ANALYSING THE POSITIVE AND NEGATVE DIMENSIONS the question arises, why it is that successful evaluation procedure are difficult to achieve. Much of the difficulty arises when the purpose of evaluation process is not clear or when the process is nothing more than an inspection for rating purpose. Difficulty also stems from an uncertainty about the focal point of assessment, should the focus be on individual as a person or on the results of his efforts. Evaluators may not be skilled and perceptive in making observations and judgments may be inconclusive and superficial.

But improved performance is achieved in several ways: self endeavor, helpful supervision, a stimulating learning environment, optimum quantities of learning materials and a supportive climate. Systematic evaluation is only one means of stimulating improvement.

It is well, however, to remember the individuality of expecting that a composite design of evaluation will satisfy every human need and all the requirements of all school system. Variations in the size and complexity of school systems, different leadership styles of principals and varying needs of individual teachers require flexibility in applying evaluation procedures.

The initial step-in evaluation is the identification of matters on which emphasis should be placed to enable the individual to be more effective as a result of the evaluation. Diagnosis of these needs is an endeavor shaped by both the person being appraised and the evaluator, but ideas on can also come from clients: students and parents.

Once needs are identified, it becomes possible to decide how best to respond to them. Response options may range from in formal, unstructured endeavor to the forming of very specific performance objectives and plans of action to attain them. The implementation of a plan of action takes place during the span of time in which evaluation occurs and consists of the interactions between those involved in the process. Included are observations, feedback, interim and check up conferences.

If the purpose of an evaluation is absolutely clear it is more likely that the correct information will be gathered to enable conclusions to be drawn and recommendations made as a basis for decision-making. It is therefore very important that after an evaluation is done one or more meetings between the evaluation team and the rest of the staff are held, during which the findings can be discussed

The assessment of results should also be a co-operative endeavor. Both the evaluate and the evaluator assess the extent to which objectives have been attained. Effectiveness of overall performance in major areas of responsibility is assessed by the evaluator. The possibilities for improvement are greater if evaluation is a regular, required process, follow-through is conscientious and consistent, and results are forthrightly assessed. Evaluation actually should be regarded as diagnostic process, enabling individuals and their evaluators to focus an appropriate objective which, if accomplished, will produce better and more effective services. Evaluation is a means, not an end. It can and should produce feedback that can be used to alter programmed techniques and strategies.

Teacher evaluations can be a positive experience for both the teacher and the evaluator. The challenge for evaluators is to make the evaluation process a meaningful experience, not simply an empty exercise


  1. Dressel Paul D., “Handbook of Academic Evaluation Francisco: 2006.
  2. Lacey C., “Issues in Evaluation and Accountability”, London:Mathuen, 2001.
  3. Robertson, W.E., “Educational Accountability through Evaluation”, New Jersey: Educational Technology, 1996.
  4. Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govt. of India, National Policy on Education, 1986.
  5. Willey, M.M., “Self-study Manual for Indian Universities and Colleges,” New Delhi, Ford Foundation, 1968.
  6. .Galluzzo, Gary R. (1987) “Assessment of Teaching Skills of
  7. Lawrence M. Rudner, Ed. U.S. Department ofEducation, Washington, D.C., ED 284 867.
  8. Stiggins, Richard J.; Bridgeford, Nancy J. (Spring 1985)
  9. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. vol. 7, no. 1


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.