Trellis Blog
Best Teacher Evaluation Tools 2026 a Practical Comparison
By Trellis Team
If you're comparing teacher evaluation software, you've probably noticed that most comparison lists treat every tool as if it solves the same problem. They don't. There are two fundamentally different categories of teacher evaluation tools, and understanding the distinction will save you from buying the wrong thing.
Category 1: Evaluation Process Management. These tools digitize the logistics — scheduling observations, routing evaluation forms, tracking completion, ensuring compliance. Think of them as workflow tools that make the administrative side of evaluations more efficient.
Category 2: Feedback Enhancement. These tools improve the output — the actual feedback teachers receive. They help administrators write better, more personalized evaluations in less time. This is a newer category enabled by AI.
Most schools need something from both categories. This guide compares the leading options honestly, so you can figure out what fits your situation.
Table of Contents
- Quick Comparison Table
- Category 1: Evaluation Process Management Tools
- Category 2: Feedback Enhancement Tools
- Feature Comparison Matrix
- Which Do You Need?
- FAQ
Quick Comparison Table
| Tool | Category | Best For | Starting Price | Key Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frontline Education | Process | Large districts needing all-in-one HR | Custom | Deep HR ecosystem integration |
| Vector Evaluations+ | Process | Complex multi-framework districts | Custom | Comprehensive compliance tracking |
| iObservation | Process | Marzano-aligned schools | Custom | Deep Marzano framework integration |
| Classroom Mosaic | Process | Schools prioritizing video observation | ~$6/teacher/month | Video annotation and coaching |
| Education Advanced | Process | Mid-size districts seeking flexibility | ~$3-5/teacher/month | Customizable evaluation workflows |
| Trellis | Feedback | Schools prioritizing feedback quality | $4/teacher/month | AI-powered personalized feedback in minutes |
Category 1: Evaluation Process Management Tools
Frontline Education
What it does well: Frontline offers the most comprehensive HR suite in K-12 education. Their evaluation module connects to hiring, professional development, absence management, and employee records. If your district wants one vendor for everything HR-related, Frontline is the default choice for good reason.
Best for: Large districts (5,000+ students) that want evaluation data integrated with their broader HR systems. The value proposition increases the more Frontline modules you use.
Considerations: The evaluation module can feel like an add-on to the broader platform rather than a purpose-built evaluation tool. Administrators sometimes report that the interface prioritizes compliance data over usability for the actual feedback-writing process. Custom pricing means you'll need to go through a sales process to understand costs.
Framework support: Danielson, Marzano, state-specific frameworks, and custom rubrics.
Vector Evaluations+ (formerly MyLearningPlan)
What it does well: Vector is strong on compliance tracking and workflow management, particularly for districts that need to manage multiple evaluation frameworks simultaneously (for example, different frameworks for teachers vs. administrators, or for tenured vs. non-tenured staff). Their reporting tools help district leaders track evaluation completion and identify trends.
Best for: Districts with complex evaluation requirements — multiple bargaining units, different frameworks for different employee types, or state-mandated reporting needs.
Considerations: The learning curve can be steep. Some administrators describe the setup process as time-intensive, and the interface can feel dense. Like Frontline, Vector focuses on managing the evaluation process rather than improving feedback quality.
Framework support: Multiple frameworks simultaneously, custom rubrics, state-specific requirements.
iObservation
What it does well: If your school or district uses the Marzano framework, iObservation is the most deeply integrated tool available. It's built around Marzano's teacher evaluation model, with element-level alignment that goes beyond surface-level rubric mapping. The tool helps observers identify evidence aligned to specific Marzano elements during the observation itself.
Best for: Schools and districts committed to the Marzano framework who want the evaluation tool to reinforce and deepen that commitment.
Considerations: The deep Marzano alignment is a double-edged sword — if you switch frameworks or use a hybrid approach, iObservation may feel constraining. Schools using Danielson or custom frameworks should look elsewhere.
Framework support: Marzano (primary), with some customization available.
Classroom Mosaic
What it does well: Classroom Mosaic differentiates itself through video observation capabilities. Administrators can record classroom visits (or teachers can self-record), annotate specific moments, and share clips as part of the feedback process. This is particularly valuable for coaching-oriented evaluation cultures where showing is more powerful than telling.
Best for: Schools with a strong coaching culture that want to use video as part of the observation and feedback process. Also useful for remote or multi-site observation scenarios.
Considerations: Video observation adds complexity — technology setup, storage, privacy policies, teacher comfort levels. The tool is less robust for formal compliance tracking compared to Frontline or Vector. Works better as a coaching complement than as a standalone evaluation system.
Framework support: Danielson, Marzano, and custom frameworks.
Education Advanced (Evaluation module)
What it does well: Education Advanced offers a flexible evaluation platform within a broader suite that includes scheduling, collaboration tools, and professional learning management. Their customization options are strong — schools can build evaluation workflows that match their specific needs without being locked into a rigid structure.
Best for: Mid-size districts that want more flexibility than the larger platforms offer, with good integration between evaluation and professional learning.
Considerations: The interface can feel dated compared to newer tools. While the content they produce (like their "50 Teacher Feedback Examples" articles) shows they understand the space, the tool itself is more focused on workflow than feedback quality.
Framework support: Danielson, Marzano, custom frameworks.
Category 2: Feedback Enhancement Tools
Trellis
What it does: Trellis approaches teacher evaluation from a fundamentally different angle. Instead of managing the evaluation process, it transforms the evaluation output — the feedback teachers actually receive. Administrators input their raw observation notes (typed or audio-recorded), and Trellis produces structured, personalized, framework-aligned feedback in about 15 minutes instead of 1-2 hours.
Key capabilities:
- AI-powered feedback generation from raw observation notes, with three tiers of enhancement (Clean & Format, Enhance & Structure, Full Analysis)
- Longitudinal teacher profiles — each observation builds on prior ones, tracking strengths, growth areas, and goals across the year
- Framework alignment — Danielson, Marzano, or custom frameworks, applied naturally rather than as a checklist
- Audio input — record your observations and Trellis transcribes and transforms them into written feedback
- Elli AI assistant — query your observation data conversationally ("Which teachers are showing growth in questioning?")
- Human-in-the-loop — every piece of feedback is reviewed and approved by the administrator before reaching a teacher
Best for: Administrators who feel the bottleneck isn't scheduling or compliance but the quality and efficiency of the feedback they write. Schools and networks that want evaluation to feel more like coaching. CMOs that need consistent feedback quality across multiple sites.
Considerations: Trellis is a newer platform (piloted across 4 sites, ~300 teachers). It does not manage evaluation scheduling, form routing, or compliance tracking — you'll need a process management tool for those functions. Think of Trellis as complementary to tools like Frontline or Vector, not a replacement.
Pricing: GROW plan at $1,500/admin/year, SITE plan at $4,500/school/year, or custom DISTRICT pricing at $60-80/teacher.
Privacy: FERPA compliant, TrustEd Apps certified, does not train AI on customer data.
Feature Comparison Matrix
| Feature | Frontline | Vector | iObservation | Classroom Mosaic | Ed Advanced | Trellis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observation scheduling | Yes | Yes | Yes | Limited | Yes | No |
| Compliance tracking | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Limited | Moderate | No |
| Form routing/workflow | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Limited | Strong | No |
| Feedback writing assistance | No | No | No | No | No | Yes |
| AI-powered feedback | No | No | No | No | No | Yes |
| Longitudinal teacher profiles | Limited | Limited | Moderate | Limited | Limited | Yes |
| Audio observation input | No | No | No | Video | No | Yes |
| Framework alignment | Yes | Yes | Deep (Marzano) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Video observation | No | No | No | Yes | No | No |
| HR system integration | Yes | Moderate | No | No | Moderate | No |
| Multi-site consistency | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Limited | Moderate | Yes |
| Reporting/analytics | Strong | Strong | Moderate | Limited | Moderate | Moderate |
| Time to write feedback | No change | No change | No change | No change | No change | ~85% reduction |
Which Do You Need?
The honest answer: probably both categories.
If your primary pain is compliance and workflow — observations aren't getting scheduled, forms aren't getting routed, you can't pull completion reports for the board — you need a process management tool. Frontline and Vector are the established leaders here.
If your primary pain is feedback quality and time — you're spending hours writing evaluations that end up generic, teachers file their feedback and forget it, you wish evaluations felt more like coaching — you need a feedback enhancement tool. That's where Trellis operates.
If you're a charter management organization struggling with inconsistent feedback quality across schools, the combination is particularly powerful: use a process tool for compliance at the network level, and Trellis for feedback quality and consistency.
If you're a private school with a small team and shorter decision cycles, Trellis alone may cover your needs — especially if your evaluation process is currently informal (Google Docs, Word documents) and your primary goal is better feedback, not complex compliance management.
The tools in Category 1 and Category 2 are genuinely complementary. Using Trellis doesn't mean abandoning your Frontline investment — it means making the feedback that flows through Frontline actually worth reading.
See how Trellis compares with a demo →
FAQ
Can I use Trellis with Frontline or Vector?
Yes. Trellis produces feedback that you can copy into any evaluation form or platform. You'd use Trellis to write the feedback and your process management tool to store and track it. Several pilot users already do this with their existing evaluation systems.
Which teacher evaluation tool has the best return on investment?
It depends on where your time is being spent. If administrators lose hours to scheduling and compliance management, a process tool saves that time. If administrators lose hours to writing feedback (which is more common), a feedback enhancement tool like Trellis saves that time. Calculate where your hours go and invest there first.
Do I need teacher evaluation software if I'm a small school?
Small schools often have simpler compliance needs, so a full process management platform may be more than you need. But the feedback quality challenge is universal — whether you're evaluating 10 teachers or 100, writing specific, growth-oriented feedback takes time. A tool like Trellis can make a meaningful difference even for a single administrator.
How do teachers feel about AI-assisted evaluation?
In pilot programs, teachers have responded positively to the quality of feedback, regardless of how it was produced. One pilot teacher reported: "First time in 10 years that an evaluation helped me see exactly how to improve my practice." The key is transparency — teachers should know AI assists the process, and they should see that the administrator reviews everything before delivery.