Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
    • Supplementary Material
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Request JHR at your library
  • Alerts
  • Free Issue
  • Special Issue
  • Other Publications
    • UWP

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Human Resources
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Human Resources

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
    • Supplementary Material
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Request JHR at your library
  • Alerts
  • Free Issue
  • Special Issue
  • Follow uwp on Twitter
  • Follow JHR on Bluesky
Research ArticleArticles

Teachers’ Labor Market Responses to Performance Evaluation Reform: Experimental Evidence from Chicago Public Schools

Lauren Sartain and Matthew P. Steinberg
Journal of Human Resources, August 2016, 51 (3) 615-655; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.51.3.0514-6390R1
Lauren Sartain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew P. Steinberg
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

References

  1. ↵
    1. Aaronson Daniel,
    2. Barrow Lisa,
    3. Sander William
    . 2007. “Teachers and Student Achievement in the Chicago Public High Schools.” Journal of Labor Economics 25(1):95–135.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  2. ↵
    1. Allensworth Elaine,
    2. Ponisciak Stephen,
    3. Mazzeo Christopher
    . 2009. “The Schools Teachers Leave: Teacher Mobility in Chicago Public Schools.” Consortium on Chicago School Research Report, University of Chicago.
  3. ↵
    1. Baker Al
    . 2014. “Lawsuit Challenges New York’s Teacher Tenure Laws.” New York Times, July 4, p. A14.
  4. ↵
    1. Chetty Raj,
    2. Friedman John N.,
    3. Rockoff Jonah E
    . 2014. “Measuring the Impacts of Teachers II: Teacher Value-Added and Student Outcomes in Adulthood.” The American Economic Review 104(9):2633–79.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. Clotfelter Charles T.,
    2. Ladd Helen F.,
    3. Vigdor Jacob L
    . 2007. “Teacher Credentials and Student Achievement: Longitudinal Analysis with Student Fixed Effects.” Economics of Education Review 26(6):673–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Darling-Hammond Linda,
    2. Sykes Gary
    . 2003. “Wanted, a National Teacher Supply Policy for Education: The Right Way to Meet the ‘Highly Qualified Teacher’ Challenge.” Education Policy Analysis Archives 11(33).
  7. ↵
    1. Dee Thomas,
    2. Wyckoff James
    . 2013. “Incentives, Selection, and Teacher Performance: Evidence from IMPACT.” NBER Working Paper 19529.
  8. ↵
    1. Feng Li,
    2. Sass Tim R
    . 2012. “Teacher Quality and Teacher Mobility.” Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Research Paper Series Number 12-08, Georgia State University.
  9. ↵
    1. Garrett Rachel,
    2. Steinberg Matthew P
    . 2015. “Examining Teacher Effectiveness Using Classroom Observation Scores: Evidence from the Randomization of Teachers to Students.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 37(2):224–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  10. ↵
    1. Goldhaber Dan
    . 2002. “The Mystery of Good Teaching.” Education Next 2(1):50–55.
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Goldhaber Dan
    . 2007. “Everyone’s Doing It, But What Does Teacher Testing Tell Us About Teacher Effectiveness?” Journal of Human Resources 42(4):765–94.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Goldhaber Dan,
    2. Brewer Dominic J
    . 2000. “Does Teacher Certification Matter? High School Teacher Certification Status and Student Achievement.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 22(2):129–45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  13. ↵
    1. Hanushek Eric A.,
    2. Kain John F.,
    3. Rivkin Steven G
    . 2004. “Why Public Schools Lose Teachers.” Journal of Human Resources 39(2):326–54.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Harris Douglas N.,
    2. Sass Tim R
    . 2011. “Teacher Training, Teacher Quality and Student Achievement.” Journal of Public Economics 95(7):798–812.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  15. ↵
    1. Imazeki Jennifer
    . 2005. “Teacher Salaries and Teacher Attrition.” Economics of Education Review 24(4):431–49.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  16. ↵
    1. Ingersoll Richard M
    . 2001. “Teacher Turnover and Teacher Shortages: An Organizational Analysis.” American Educational Research Journal 38(3):499–534.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  17. ↵
    1. Jackson C. Kirabo
    . 2013. “Match Quality, Worker Productivity, and Worker Mobility: Direct Evidence from Teachers.” Review of Economics and Statistics 95(4):1096–116.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. ↵
    1. Jacob Brian A
    . 2011. “Do Principals Fire the Worst Teachers?” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 33(4):403–34.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    1. Johnson Susan Moore,
    2. Kraft Matthew A.,
    3. Papay John P
    . 2012. “How Context Matters in High-Need Schools: The Effects of Teachers’ Working Conditions on Their Professional Satisfaction and Their Students’ Achievement.” Teachers College Record 114(1):1–39.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  20. ↵
    1. Kane Thomas J.,
    2. Rockoff Jonah E.,
    3. Staiger Douglas O
    . 2008. “What Does Certification Tell Us About Teacher Effectiveness? Evidence from New York City.” Economics of Education Review 27(6):615–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  21. ↵
    1. Kane Thomas J.,
    2. Taylor Eric S.,
    3. Tyler John H.,
    4. Wooten Amy L
    . 2011. “Identifying Effective Classroom Practices Using Student Achievement Data.” Journal of Human Resources 46(3):587–613.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    1. Keigher Ashley,
    2. Cross Freddie
    . 2010. “Teacher Attrition and Mobility: Results from the 2008–09 Teacher Follow-Up Survey.” National Center for Education Statistics 2010-353, U.S. Department of Education.
  23. ↵
    1. Ladd Helen F
    . 2011. “Teachers’ Perceptions of Their Working Conditions: How Predictive of Planned and Actual Teacher Movement?” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 33(3):235–61.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  24. ↵
    1. The New Teacher Project
    . 2007. “Hiring, Assignment, and Transfer in Chicago Public Schools.” Report from The New Teacher Project.
  25. ↵
    1. Prince Cynthia D.,
    2. Schuermann Patrick J.,
    3. Guthrie James W.,
    4. Witham Peter J.,
    5. Milanowski Anthony T.,
    6. Thorn Christopher A
    . 2009. “The Other 69 Percent: Fairly Rewarding the Performance of Teachers of Nontested Subjects and Grades; Guide to Implementation: Resources for Applied Practice.” Center for Education Compensation Reform, revised edition. Rockville, Md.: Westat.
  26. ↵
    1. Rivkin Steven G.,
    2. Hanushek Eric A.,
    3. Kain John F
    . 2005. “Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement.” Econometrica 73(2):417–58.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    1. Rockoff Jonah E
    . 2004. “The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student Achievement: Evidence from Panel Data.” American Economic Review 94(2):247–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  28. ↵
    1. Sartain Lauren,
    2. Stoelinga Sara R.,
    3. Brown Eric R
    . 2011. “Rethinking Teacher Evaluation in Chicago: Lessons Learned from Classroom Observations, Principal–Teacher Conferences, and District Implementation.” Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago Research Report.
  29. ↵
    1. Steinberg Matthew P.,
    2. Donaldson Morgaen L
    . 2014. “The New Educational Accountability: Understanding the Landscape of Teacher Evaluation in the Post-NCLB Era.” Working paper.
  30. ↵
    1. Steinberg Matthew P.,
    2. Sartain Lauren
    . 2015. “Does Teacher Evaluation Improve School Performance? Experimental Evidence from Chicago’s Excellence in Teaching Project.” Education Finance and Policy 10(4):535–72.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  31. ↵
    1. Taylor Eric S.,
    2. Tyler John H
    . 2012. “The Effect of Evaluation on Teacher Performance.” The American Economic Review 102(7):3628–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. ↵
    1. Weisberg Daniel,
    2. Sexton Susan,
    3. Mulhern Jennifer,
    4. Keeling David,
    5. Schunck Joan,
    6. Palcisco Ann,
    7. Morgan Kelli
    . 2009. “The Widget Effect: Our National Failure to Acknowledge and Act on Differences in Teacher Effectiveness.” Report for The New Teacher Project.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Human Resources: 51 (3)
Journal of Human Resources
Vol. 51, Issue 3
1 Aug 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Human Resources.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Teachers’ Labor Market Responses to Performance Evaluation Reform: Experimental Evidence from Chicago Public Schools
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Human Resources
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Human Resources web site.
Citation Tools
Teachers’ Labor Market Responses to Performance Evaluation Reform: Experimental Evidence from Chicago Public Schools
Lauren Sartain, Matthew P. Steinberg
Journal of Human Resources Aug 2016, 51 (3) 615-655; DOI: 10.3368/jhr.51.3.0514-6390R1

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Teachers’ Labor Market Responses to Performance Evaluation Reform: Experimental Evidence from Chicago Public Schools
Lauren Sartain, Matthew P. Steinberg
Journal of Human Resources Aug 2016, 51 (3) 615-655; DOI: 10.3368/jhr.51.3.0514-6390R1
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • I. Introduction
    • II. Teacher Evaluation, Turnover, and the Chicago Context
    • III. Data
    • IV. Empirical Strategy
    • V. Results: The Impact of Teacher Evaluation on Turnover
    • VI. Teacher Labor Market Dynamics in the Context of Evaluation Reform
    • VII. Do Specific Teacher Practices Shape Labor Market Decisions?
    • VIII. Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Theres Always Room for Improvement: The Persistent Benefits of a Large-Scale Teacher Evaluation System
  • Do Male Workers Prefer Male Leaders?: An Analysis of Principals Effects on Teacher Retention
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Understanding the Educational Attainment Polygenic Index and its Interactions with SES in Determining Health in Young Adulthood
  • Unexpected colonial returns
  • Non-College Occupations, Workplace Routinization, and Female College Enrollment
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

UW Press logo

© 2025 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

Powered by HighWire