An Analysis of Critical Issues in Korean Teacher Evaluation Systems
Korea has used three different teacher evaluation systems since the 1960s: teacher performance rating, teacher performance-based pay and teacher evaluation for professional development. A number of studies have focused on an analysis of each evaluation system in terms of its advent, development, advantages and disadvantages, but these studies have been
critically limited in that they have focused only on the partial integration of the three current teacher evaluation systems, without addressing the problems embedded in each of them. The present study provides a systematic analysis of the three current Korean teacher evaluation systems based on a sound analytical framework and proposes appropriate directions for designing an effective and efficient system. It is found that the three systems share commonalities in terms of stakeholders, evaluators, scope, criteria and methods, further supporting the rationale for developing a single comprehensive teacher evaluation system in Korea. Finally, several steps to establish a comprehensive teacher evaluation system based on the analysis results are suggested.
Clayton, C. (2013). Understanding current reforms to evaluate teachers: A literature review on teacher evaluation across the career span. Retrieved 16. 5. 2015 from http://scholar.google.co.kr/scholar?q=Understanding+current+reforms+to+evaluate+teachers%3A+A+literature+review+on+teacher+evaluation+across+the+career+span&btnG=&hl=ko&as_sdt=0%2C5.
Coolahan, J., Santiago, P., Phair, R., & Ninomiya, A. (2004). Attracting, developing, and retaining effective teachers–country note: Korea. Paris: OECD Education and Training Policy Division.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2013). Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. New York: Teachers College Press.
Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). Theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public
elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 109(4), 877–896.
GreatKids (n.d.). What makes a great teacher? Retrieved 16. 7. 2015 from http://www.greatschools.org/gk/articles/what-makes-a-great-teacher/.
Isoré, M. (2009). Teacher evaluation: Current practices in OECD countries and a literature review. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 23, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/223283631428.
Jackson, C. K., & Bruegmann, E. (2009). Teaching students and teaching each other: The importance of peer learning for teachers. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Jeon, J. S. (2009). Alternative exploring of improvement and unification for the multi policy of teachers’ evaluation system. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 26(2), 387–410.
Jeon, J. S., Cho, D. S., Shin, S. M., & Kim, S. Y. (2008). Utilization of the results from the teacher evaluation for professional development. The Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology
Kang, Y. W., & Kim, J. H. (2004). Directions of the performance rating for the professional development of teachers. Korean Policy Sciences Review, 8(1), 149–174.
Kim, H., & Joo, Y. (2014). A discriminant analysis of the effect of teacher evaluation system for professional development and performance appraisal system on rating of performance-based pay system. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 31(3), 59–80.
Kim, K. T., Park, K. Y., & Joo, Y. H. (2009). A political analysis of teacher evaluation policy streams in Korea. The Journal of Politics of Education, 16(1), 35–61.
Kim, K., Jung, M., Jeon, J., Shin, S., & Kang, S. (2010). A study on how to re-establish teacher evaluation system. Korean Educational Development Institute Research Report RR 2010–10.
Lee, J. H. (2006). The study of limit factors embedded in the decision-making process of merit pay: Based on the path dependency of new institutionalism. Journal of Educational Studies, 37(1), 77–100.
Lee, J. S., Yoon, Y. J., Kwak, C. K., & Lee, J. W. (2014). New public administration 2.0. Seoul: Daeyoung Co.
Lee, Y. S. (2006). Development trends of teacher evaluation system in foreign countries. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 23(1), 98–145.
McCaffrey, D. F., Koretz, D., Lockwood, J. R., & Hamilton, L. S. (2005). Evaluating value-added models for teacher accountability. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Ministry of Education (2015). Public hearing on the improvement of teacher evaluation system (press release) Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development (2005). Public hearing on the improvement of teacher evaluation system (press release).
Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development (2006). Policy initiative on the teacher evaluation for professional development (press release).
Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2001). The implementation plan of performancebased pay system for educational public officials (press release).
Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2010). Guidelines on the performance-based payment for educational public officials (press release).
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (2005). Induction into learning communities. Washington, D. C.: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.
Park, C. H. (2010). A study of performance-based pay system development in the history of public administrative perspective: Focused on the system of performance-based pay for teachers. Korea Public Administration History Review, 27(12), 55–79.
Park, J., Choi, J., & Choi, C. (2009). Exploration of the applicability of the new teacher evaluation or the teacher performance rating. Educational Research, 29(1), 103–122.
Strong, J. H., & Tucker, P. D. (2012). Handbook on teacher evaluation: Assessing and improving performance. Moorabbin, VIC: Hawker Brownlow Education.
Toch, T., & Rothman, R. (2008). Rush to judgment: Teacher evaluation in public education. ERIC Document No: ED502120.
In order to ensure both the widest dissemination and protection of material published in CEPS Journal, we ask Authors to transfer to the Publisher (Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana) the rights of copyright in the Articles they contribute. This enables the Publisher to ensure protection against infringement.