This report on Teacher Evaluation in Chile forms part of the OECD Review on Evaluation and Assessment Frameworks for Improving School Outcomes (see Annex A for further details). The purpose of the Review is to explore how systems of evaluation and assessment can be used to improve the quality, equity and efficiency of school education. The Review looks at the various components of assessment and evaluation frameworks that countries use with the objective of improving student outcomes.

The market-oriented education reforms of the 1980s entailed the decentralisation of public school management responsibilities to municipalities and the introduction of a nationwide voucher programme. The latter has led a great number of private schools to enter the school system with a growing share of the student population (59.1% in 2011). Student learning outcomes in Chile are considerably below the OECD average. However, trend analyses of PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) results have shown some encouraging improvement in student learning outcomes. Research has also shown that student results differ considerably across the socio-economic background of students and the type of school attended. In this context, the government accords great importance to teacher policy and teacher evaluation within the general education improvement agenda. Chile has developed a national framework defining standards for the teaching profession, the Good Teaching Framework (GTF), as of 2003. It also established the teacher performance evaluation system (also referred to as Docentemás) within the municipal school sector in 2003. This system is complemented by a range of reward programmes which involve some type of evaluation: the Programme for the Variable Individual Performance Allowance (municipal sector only) (AVDI); the Programme for the Accreditation of Pedagogical Excellence Allowance (covering the entire subsidised school sector) (AEP); and the National System for Performance Evaluation (SNED), which provides group rewards for teaching bodies of given publicly subsidised schools. While Chile has made remarkable progress in implementing teacher evaluation and developing an evaluation culture among the teaching workforce, challenges remain in ensuring the coherence of the teacher evaluation framework, in adjusting instruments to better link them to the standards of practice and in strengthening improvement-oriented evaluation practices. The following priorities were identified for the development of teacher evaluation policies in Chile.

The market-oriented education reforms of the 1980s entailed the decentralisation of public school management responsibilities to municipalities and the introduction of a nationwide voucher programme. The former involved the transfer of the administration and infrastructure of all the country’s public primary and secondary schools to municipalities. The latter is characterised by a per student public subsidy for schools which are part of the voucher system (municipal and the majority of private schools) and parents’ free choice of schools. The introduction of the voucher programme has led a great number of private schools to enter the school system with a growing share of the student population (59.1% in 2011, with 51.8% of students enrolled in private schools which are part of the voucher programme). Attendance of different school types greatly depends on family income levels. Students from the most disadvantaged families attend municipal schools in largest numbers even if from 1990 they have increasingly attended subsidised private schools. Student learning outcomes in Chile are considerably below the OECD average but there has been considerable progress in the last decade. In 2009, achievement levels of Chilean students in the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) were at the far end within the OECD area in the assessed areas of reading literacy, mathematics and science. However, Chile performed above any other Latin American country which took part in PISA (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Panama, Peru and Uruguay) in all assessed areas except mathematics (where its performance is similar to that of Mexico and Uruguay). Trend analyses of PISA results have also shown some encouraging improvement in student learning outcomes. In addition, research shows that student results differ considerably across the socioeconomic background of students and the type of school attended.

Teacher evaluation develops in a context of considerable national policy attention to improving teacher quality. This is reflected in significant initiatives in the following areas: attracting the best secondary education graduates to initial teacher education; improving the quality of initial teacher education; developing teaching and school leadership standards; creating a teacher career structure; and improving retention by rewarding quality teachers and school leaders. As a result, the government accords great importance to teacher evaluation within the general education improvement agenda. Chile has developed a national framework defining standards for the teaching profession, the Good Teaching Framework, as of 2003. It also established the teacher performance evaluation system (also referred to as Docentemás) within the municipal school sector in 2003 following a tripartite agreement between the Ministry of Education, the Chilean Association of Municipalities and the Teachers’ Association (Colegio de Profesores). This system is complemented by a range of reward programmes which involve some type of evaluation: the Programme for the Variable Individual Performance Allowance (municipal sector only) (AVDI); the Programme for the Accreditation of Pedagogical Excellence Allowance (covering the entire subsidised school sector) (AEP); and the National System for Performance Evaluation (SNED), which provides group rewards for teaching bodies of given publicly subsidised schools. In addition to these formal programmes, private schools (both subsidised and non-subsidised) autonomously organise their own performance teacher evaluation systems and any school is free to organise extra internal systems of teacher evaluation.

Teacher evaluation is recognised as an important policy lever to improve student learning. This is reflected in the substantial work on teaching standards, the very comprehensive approach to teacher evaluation in municipal schools and the multitude of reward programmes in the subsidised school sector. However, while the intended original objective of Docentemás was to conceive teacher evaluation as a formative process, teacher evaluation, as implemented, is presently perceived mostly as an instrument to hold municipal teachers accountable. Also, the teacher evaluation framework remains incomplete. A major gap is that it is not publicly guaranteed that all teachers in the school system undergo a formal process of performance evaluation since teachers in the private school sector (over 50% of Chilean teachers) are not required to undergo a Docentemás evaluation and teacher evaluation procedures in private schools are not validated by public education authorities. Also, there is no formal teacher evaluation which focuses on teacher development and feedback for the improvement of practices. Teachers are generally open to external feedback but few opportunities are available and teacher evaluation generates little professional dialogue. The creation of the Quality of Education Agency is an excellent development to complete and integrate the overall evaluation and assessment framework. However, the conception of the Agency’s activities as it starts its operations emphasises the accountability function of evaluation. Another challenge is that formal teacher evaluation processes require little engagement from local agents. In particular, school leaders play a relatively small role, making little use of the results of Docentemás to coach their teachers and inform their school development plans.

There is a clear definition in Chile of what constitutes good teaching, as described in the Good Teaching Framework (GTF). Moreover, there are clear statements as to what constitutes levels of performance on the standards. As implemented, however, the GTF faces some challenges. For example, it displays poor alignment between some of the criteria and the descriptors supposedly intended to illustrate them. At the same time, the understanding of the GTF is not well disseminated throughout the system. A strength of Docentemás, as designed, is the rich combination of various sources of evidence of teaching practice (self-evaluation, planning documents, video of a class, a peer interview and a third-party assessment) as well as the existence of different evaluators (teacher, peers, school leaders, and portfolio markers). However, self-evaluation is a poor instrument, there is room to strengthen the peer interview, the third-party evaluation might not be effective and a number of adjustments can be made to the teacher performance portfolio.

At the central level, teacher evaluation relies on the competencies of several agencies that co-operate regularly so as to assure the quality of the process. While the Ministry of Education holds the political and management responsibility for teacher evaluation, the technical co-ordination of the process is exercised by a dedicated unit within the Ministry (CPEIP), which in turn is required to receive independent scientific advice from universities with expertise in the area. In particular, the close association with the Docentemás team, located at the Measurement Centre of the Catholic University of Chile, ensures that the system is based on scientific advice as well as national and international research evidence. There is a perception that the Docentemás system is run with strong technical capacity. Also, the management of public schools by the municipalities offers the potential for closer monitoring of teacher evaluation practices than a centralised system would allow while also providing opportunities to recognise local realities and constraints. However, it appears that there are large variations in the extent to which municipalities have the capacity to fulfil their roles in teacher evaluation effectively. A positive development has been the considerable attention given to school leadership. However, a range of concerns remain about whether school leaders have the competencies necessary to lead the effective implementation of teacher evaluation at the school level. One of the strengths of the Docentemás teacher evaluation approach is the high involvement of practising teachers as evaluators in two main roles: as markers of teacher portfolios; and as peer evaluators who conduct peer interviews and participate in the Municipality Evaluation Commissions. For both roles, intensive preparation processes have been set up to build the capacity of those selected. However, there are a number of areas where there is room for improvement of teachers’ evaluation competencies (e.g. capacity of teachers to undertake effective self-evaluation; teachers’ limited understanding of the Docentemás system). Another concern is that there is little trust in the competencies of portfolio markers among evaluated teachers.

There appears to be little culture of professional development in Chile. Even though the importance of professional development is recognised at the policy level, its provision appears fragmented and not systematically linked to teacher evaluation. There is insufficient use of formal teacher evaluation to identify teacher professional development needs which respond to school-wide needs. A strength is that teacher evaluation fulfils the important function of recognising and celebrating the work of effective teachers. This is accomplished, in particular, through AEP and the AVDI, which mostly consist of monetary rewards for excellence in teaching. These are part of a larger set of salary allowances that, in addition to the basic salary, form the teacher incentive programme. They result in a rather complex and fragmented system of incentives for teachers. Another challenge is that, presently, there is no career path for teachers in the municipal sector. There are no career steps in teacher development (e.g. beginning; classroom teacher; experienced teacher), which would permit a better match between teacher competence and skills and the tasks to be performed at schools. This is likely to undermine the potentially powerful links between teacher evaluation, professional development and career development.