2944 Math Sciences Bldg, Box 951521 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521 www.interactions.gseis.ucla.edu 310.825.2812 interactions@gseis.ucla.

edu

Call for Submissions: Special Issue on Teacher Evaluation Research, Policy and Practice Worldwide, discourse on teacher evaluation is fervent. The World Bank, OECD and numerous international foundations and national governments have increased funding of teacher evaluation research and capacity-building. In the United States, teacher evaluation and assessment systems are undergoing substantial reforms in response to the standards-based education reform movement, No Child Left Behind, and Race to the Top. School administrators and educators are under increasing pressure to demonstrate teacher effectiveness in relation to students educational outcomes (particularly measured by standardized tests) and the stakes for teachers can be extremely highevaluation systems might determine a teachers future salary, promotion, or dismissal. The hope is that improved evaluation systems will provide needed information on how to better train teachers, create educational policies appropriate to the needs and responsibilities of educators, and result in an effective teacher for every student. Yet, despite the proliferation of teacher evaluation research, the ideal methods of measurement are still passionately debated as are the ways in which the use of certain measures will transform educational policy and schooling long-term (Darling-Hammond et al. 2012, Partnerships for Global Learning 2013, Rebora 2010, Taut et al. 2012). Numerous practical and philosophical questions abound in building consensus around the details of a teacher evaluation system. Teacher evaluation also raises concerns about the appropriate and fair use of teacher information, and who can access evaluation data, as highlighted in the recent legal rulings regarding the LA Times desire to publish teachers value-added ratings. Issues regarding the future use of evaluation data and whether data routinely collected for one evaluative purpose can be employed for another purpose in the future present moral and human resource dilemmas. Moreover, data access, privacy and information reuse present critical measurement complexities to researchers and policymakers as teachers can be less likely to provide accurate data if they perceive their honesty being used unfairly against them. Furthermore, a spate of recent teacher-testing scandals in the U.S. (e.g. Atlanta and Memphis) also point to the pressure teachers have to perform well on testing tied to evaluation and the more general issue of incentives to cheat or alter data within evaluation and assessment systems. Finally, progressive and critical educators believe education systems are the foundation not just for economic security but for informed citizenship because schooling ideally provides the knowledge and skills required for democratic engagement and reflection upon ones participation in society. In teacher evaluation systems, the conceptualization of education and the role of the teacher is also a substantial matter. Some evaluation systems have been accused of narrowly assessing the breadth of what teachers do and of prioritizing only some outcomes of the educational process, while ignoring others (Baeder 2012, Danielson 2001, Mathers et al. 2008). This special issue of InterActions seeks to feature research that examines current and future directions of teacher evaluation in the United States and throughout the world, including diverse perspectives on measurement and the implementation of evaluation systems. Possible research topics and questions may include:

Different teacher evaluation approaches long-term impact on teaching and learning Teacher dataits collection, storage, use and privacy issues Measurement dilemmas, complexities, and innovations in teacher evaluation Teacher evaluations relationship to the reform of education systems Standardized testing and its use within teacher evaluation Politics of teacher evaluation and teacher evaluations impact on education discourse Design and implementation considerations involved in teacher evaluation, pertaining to the scope, costs, and expertise needed and/or the capacity for systematic change Philosophy of teaching and education reflected in teacher evaluations

InterActions seeks to include a range of submissions, including (but not limited to) research articles, literature reviews, book reviews, exhibition reviews, featured commentaries, and position pieces. Submissions should incorporate critical perspectives that aim to bridge multiple discourses around the theme of the issue. All submissions will be subject to double-blind peer-review and authors are expected to adhere to the deadlines to ensure the timely publication of the special issue. Timeline: - Deadline for Submissions: October 4, 2013 - Tentative deadline for peer reviews of submitted manuscripts: November 1, 2013 - Submission deadline for manuscript revisions: December 6, 2013 - Publication for the Special Issue on Teacher Evaluation: January 2014 Please submit manuscripts on or before October 4, 2013 to InterActions eScholarship portal: http://escholarship.org/uc/gseis_interactions. InterActions uses American Psychological Association, Sixth Edition as its publication style guide. For more on submission guidelines for authors visit: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/search?entity=gseis_interactions;view=submissionguidelines Any questions or inquiries about the special issue may be directed to: - Special Section Editor, Melissa Goodnight: melissa.goodnight@gmail.com - Guest Editor, Kevin Schaaf: kevin.schaaf@gmail.com - InterActions Editorial board: interactions@gseis.ucla.edu InterActions is a peer-reviewed online journal committed to the promotion of interdisciplinary and critical scholarship. Edited by students in the UCLA Graduate School of Education and Information Studies, the journal brings together senior and emerging scholars, activists, and professionals whose work covers a broad range of theory and practice. InterActions is published twice yearly with funding provided by the UCLA Graduate Students Association and the UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies. For more information, please visit http://escholarship.org/uc/gseis_interactions. References Baeder, J. (2012). Oversimplification abounds in teacher evaluation discussion. Education Week. Retrieved from: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/on_performance/2012/09/ oversimplification_abounds_in_teacher_evaluation_discussion.html?qs=teacher+evaluationsa Danielson, C. (2001). New trends in teacher evaluation. Educational leadership, 58(5), 12-15. Darling-Hammond, L., Amrein-Beardsley, A.., Haertel, E., & Rothstein, J. (2012). Evaluating teacher evaluation. Education Week. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/03/01/ kappan_hammond.html Mathers, C., Olivia, M., & Lane, S. (2008). Improving instruction through effective teacher evaluation: options for states and districts. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://www.betterhighschools.org/MidwestSIG/documents/Handout_February2008Brief.pdf

Partnerships for a Global Education. (2013). Teacher evaluation: An international perspective. 2013 International Summit on the Teaching Profession. Retrieved from http://asiasociety.org/education/ learning-world/teacher-evaluation-international-perspective Rebora, A. (2010). Teacher group prescribes evaluation overhaul. Education Week. Retrieved from http:// www.edweek.org/tm/articles/2010/06/22/act_evaluation.html. Taut, S., Santelices, M., & Stetcher., B. (2012). Validation of a national teacher assessment and improvement system. Educational Assessment, 17(4), 163-199.