{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011554621848739496, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.85251798561151, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Accountability or authenticity? The alignment of professional development and teacher evaluation

Abstract The alignment of professional development and teacher evaluation has been a growing concern in teacher professional development practices. The issue of how teacher evaluation can help authentic professional development is important in that teachers only learn what is real, useful and valuable to them. Based on our reflections on current professional development in Taiwan, this article challenges the dominant evaluation-led approach to professional development, in which much attention and energy of policy-makers and educators is devoted to establishing extensive programmes and standards that might not be relevant to teachers’ concerns. We draw upon Habermas’ notion of system and lifeworld to sense-make and to theorise why it can be difficult for teachers to engage the entirety of their personhood with a policy agenda of pursuing system integration and efficiency whereby teachers’ learning actions become strategic. We argue for considering teacher development from an alternative, lifeworld perspective in which teachers and teachers’ subjectivities in striving to achieve what matters and makes sense to them are placed centre stage. Although the evaluation mechanism plays a role in avoiding the devolution of professional development into mere subjectivism, it is reductive to treat teacher professional development not only as distinct but also as requiring evaluation items and overlooking the importance of maintaining teacher development as a tacit, authentic process of knowing. We finally juxtapose the two approaches and their contrasting characteristics and describe implications for planning teacher professional development so that policy-makers and educators can reflect on their mindsets and implementation and modify their programme planning and strategies accordingly.