Home⇛Asia Pacific Journal of Management and Sustainable Development⇛vol. 12 no. 2 Part 1 (2024)

Performance Management and Evaluation Systems among Science Teachers in Chinese Private Middle Schools

Shang Qingbo

Discipline: human resource management

 

Abstract:

This paper is devoted to the in-depth analysis and evaluation of the performance management and evaluation system of middle school teachers, aiming at building a comprehensive and effective improvement strategy framework. The core purpose of this strategic framework is to promote the professional development of teachers and enhance their teaching capabilities, thereby significantly improving the quality of education in schools. In the process of achieving these objectives, special attention is paid to identifying and resolving problems and deficiencies in the existing performance management and evaluation system, including but not limited to key issues such as inconsistent evaluation criteria, lack of feedback mechanisms, and improper incentive measures. It will also explore how to better meet the growth needs of teachers in their careers and how to provide teachers with appropriate professional recognition through performance management systems. Through in-depth research and understanding of these key issues, it is expected to formulate fair and transparent evaluation standards, establish timely and constructive feedback mechanisms, and design an incentive system that can truly stimulate teachers' inner motivation. The improvement strategy will integrate a variety of research methods, including questionnaires, in-depth interviews and case studies, and strive to collect data from multiple perspectives to ensure the comprehensiveness and accuracy of research results. At the same time, we will actively refer to the advanced performance management theory and practice cases at home and abroad, combined with the actual situation of middle school education in our country, and put forward feasible optimization suggestions.



References:

  1. Stronge, James H. Qualities of effective teachers. Ascd, 2018.
  2. Pulakos, E. D. (2009). Performance management: A new approach for driving business results. John Wiley & Sons.
  3. Bourne, M., Franco-Santos, M., Micheli, P., & Pavlov, A. (2018). Performance measurement and management: a system of systems perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 56(8), 2788-2799.
  4. Park, J. H., Cooc, N., & Lee, K. H. (2023). Relationships between teacher influence in managerial and instruction-related decision-making, job satisfaction, and professional commitment: A multivariate multilevel model. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 51(1), 116-137.
  5. Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of management journal, 50(2), 327-347.
  6. Sarkar, A. (2016). Is it time to do away with annual performance appraisal system? Benefits and challenges ahead. Human Resource Management International Digest, 24(3), 7-10.
  7. Wu, Z.Y.,Yong, Y., Liu, J. (2022). A review of Personalized learning recommendations. Journal of Frontiers of Computer Science & Technology,  Vol 16, Issue 1, 21
  8. Ingersoll, R., & Merrill, E. (2013). Seven trends: The transformation of the teaching force.
  9. Cushman, P. (2015). Let's hear it from the males: Issues facing male primary school teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(3), 227-240.
  10. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. P. (2016). Understanding the burnout experience: Recent research and its implications for psychiatry. World Psychiatry,   15(2), 103-111.
  11. Zhang, S.(2019). Research on optimizing the performance management system of junior high school teachers . Shandong Normal University.
  12. Peter. D. (2019). Management Control Theory. Volume 12. Sage
  13. Park J.,& Cooc N，Lee K. (2020). Relationships between teacher influence  in managerial and instruction-related decision-making，job satisfaction,and professional commitment：A ultivariate multilevel model. Educational Management Administration &Leadership (11)1-22.
  14. Zhu, P. (2017). Research on problems and countermeasures in enterprise  performance management -- Taking Enterprise A as an example.   Chongqing University.
  15. National Research Council. (2014). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. National Academies Press.
  16. Wing, J. M. (2016). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
  17. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2017). Taking  Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. National Academies Press. 30-35.
  18. Guskey, T. R. (2020). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381-391.
  19. Wen,F.(2015).The construction strategy of teacher Professional development  Community. Volume 35 , Issue 17, 34-36.
  20. Wu, Z.Y.,Yong, Y., Liu, J. (2022). A review of Personalized learning recommendations. Journal of Frontiers of Computer Science & Technology, Vol 16, Issue 1, 21
  21. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1-44.
  22. Fullan, M.(2020).The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
  23. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2017). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research.10(2), 99-109.
  24. Noddings, N. (2015). The Challenge to Care in Schools: An Alternative Approach to Education.
  25. Earl, L. M. (2013). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic