Research

Purpose of the Study

This study explores how principals’ feedback during teacher evaluations can influence teachers’ instructional practices. Using data from the Network for Educator Effectiveness (NEE), the researchers sought to examine how various feedback characteristics impact teaching quality. The study specifically focuses on two key instructional practices measured via student surveys: Cognitive Engagement (CE) and Problem Solving and Critical Thinking (PCT). These teaching practices are regarded as crucial indicators of high-quality instruction, impacting student learning and cognitive development.

The Research

The researchers used data from the 2017-2019 school years across two samples. The Cognitive Engagement sample included 1,010 teachers from 81 schools, and the Problem Solving and Critical Thinking sample included 1,214 teachers from 103 schools. Together, these samples represented more than 90,000 student surveys, which assessed the quality of instruction for each teacher based on their ability to engage students cognitively and promote critical thinking.

The feedback characteristics examined in the study were drawn from teacher responses to five survey items that captured the quality and nature of feedback they received from their principals. These items assessed whether the feedback was:

1. Face-to-face and immediate
2. Specific regarding ways to improve teaching
3. Useful and relevant regarding ways to improve teaching
4. Specific regarding teaching strengths
5. Useful and relevant regarding teaching strengths

The study employed hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to account for the nested structure of the data (teachers nested within schools). Two-level models were used, with student survey outcomes (CE and PCT) as the dependent variables. The analysis controlled for several covariances, including prior year teaching effectiveness (measured by student surveys), years of teaching experience, grade level taught, and whether the teacher taught a subject tested by state standardized exams (e.g., ELA, mathematics, science).

Findings

The findings of this study offer important insights into how feedback characteristics shape teaching practices, particularly through their effect on Cognitive Engagement (CE) and Problem Solving and Critical Thinking (PCT).

1. 1. Strength-Based Feedback: Feedback that focused on the teacher’s strengths had the most significant and consistent positive impact on both instructional practices. Teachers who received specific, strength-focused feedback were more likely to improve their teaching practices. In the Cognitive Engagement sample, strength-based feedback had a positive association with instructional quality (β = 0.12), leading to more effective strategies for engaging students in meaningful learning activities. In the Problem Solving and Critical Thinking sample, strength-focused feedback had an even larger positive effect (β = 0.15), indicating that highlighting strengths plays a key role in fostering instructional improvement for more complex teaching practices.
   2. Feedback on Areas for Improvement: While feedback on areas for improvement was less impactful overall, it was significantly associated with improvement in Problem Solving and Critical Thinking (β = 0.10). This suggests that when it comes to more advanced and challenging teaching practices, such as promoting critical thinking, specific and actionable feedback on areas where teachers can improve is critical. However, for Cognitive Engagement, feedback focused on improvement was not found to have a significant effect, indicating that simpler instructional practices may not benefit as much from corrective feedback.
   3. Face-to-Face and Immediate Feedback: Surprisingly, the study found that face-to-face and immediate feedback did not significantly predict improvements in either CE or PCT. This contrasts with prior research that emphasizes the importance of immediacy and direct communication in feedback delivery. In the context of NEE, where multiple feedback sessions occur throughout the year, the format and timing of feedback may be less critical than the content. These findings suggest that school leaders may not need to prioritize immediacy or face-to-face interactions, offering greater flexibility in how feedback is delivered.

Theoretical Implications

This study builds on psychological theories of feedback, such as goal-setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990) and expectancy-value theory (Eccles et al., 1983), which emphasize the role of feedback in motivating behavior change and improving performance. The results align with the idea that positive reinforcement through strength-based feedback is more readily accepted by teachers, making it easier for them to internalize and act upon. Teachers who received feedback on their strengths felt recognized and respected by their school leaders, which in turn motivated them to refine and expand upon these strengths in the classroom.

The differential effects of feedback on Cognitive Engagement and Problem Solving and Critical Thinking provide further evidence that feedback effectiveness may vary depending on the complexity of the teaching practice. While strengths-based feedback works well across both instructional practices, feedback on areas for improvement appears to be more effective for more advanced practices, such as critical thinking, where specific and actionable guidance is essential for growth.

Practical Implications

This research has significant implications for school leaders and administrators seeking to improve the effectiveness of their teacher evaluation systems. The study suggests specific, strength-based feedback is a powerful tool for enhancing instructional quality. School leaders should prioritize feedback that highlights what teachers are doing well, as this fosters a sense of recognition and respect, which is key to motivating teachers to continue improving their practice. At the same time, for more advanced instructional practices like critical thinking, principals should provide detailed, actionable feedback on areas for improvement to support teachers in navigating more complex teaching practices.

Additionally, the finding that face-to-face and immediate feedback is not critical for improving instructional quality offers school leaders flexibility in how they deliver feedback. This could reduce the time and logistical constraints associated with scheduling in-person feedback sessions, allowing principals to focus more on the content and quality of feedback.

Reflection

The findings of this study advance the understanding of what makes feedback effective in teacher evaluations. By focusing on specific, strength-based feedback, school leaders can more effectively support teachers in improving their instructional practices. Additionally, feedback on areas for improvement is crucial for helping teachers tackle complex teaching practices like Problem Solving and Critical Thinking. The study emphasizes the importance of tailoring feedback to the instructional practice in question and highlights the need for further research on the nuances of feedback in educational settings.