Examining the justification for current evaluation policy reveals that such policy rests on two assumptions related to the impact on the work of teachers: (1) evaluations are necessary because teachers need to be rated, sanctioned, or rewarded in order to be motivated to improve their practice; and (2) evaluations yield information that is useful for teachers to improve practice. Both assumptions have driven policy changes over time and carry implications for teacher classroom practice. This mixed methods study examines how a state-wide standardized evaluation policy utilized in North Carolina affects the work of high school teachers in a single school district under varying school and individual conditions. Specifically, this study focuses on teachers who offer perspectives from varying combinations of the following school-level variables: status at a high or low evaluation condition school and status at a high or low evaluation effectiveness school, and the following individual variables: status as a Mathematics or English teacher, years of experience, and licensure level. This dissertation tests the previously-stated assumptions about teacher evaluation and teacher work in a North Carolina school system in a to answer the following research questions: (1) What, if any, role do reported school evaluation conditions and school evaluation status play in shaping teacher motivation, experiences with feedback, and work decisions related to teacher evaluation? (2) What individual-teacher level factors are associated with differences in teacher motivation, experiences with feedback, and work decisions related to teacher evaluation? Analysis of the whole sample demonstrated that teachers did not find evaluation to motivate performance or to provide useful feedback. Though quantitative differences between school locations were not found, there were qualitative differences in how evaluation was related to practice across sites. Differences were also found in the evaluation-practice relationship between teachers of different licensure levels and different levels of experience where those in the lower designation perceived a greater impact of evaluation policy. Finally, differences between the subject areas of Math and English were identified, but may have been influenced by the capacity of observers and specifically, a lack of subject area alignment between the observer and the classroom in English, such alignment was present for some of the Math teachers in the study. Therefore, it is important to examine the context of evaluation, particularly the capacity of the administration that conducts evaluation. The results of this study suggest that the characteristics and capacity of an observer do matter in how the observation protocol is interpreted and implemented. Additionally, the evaluation climate and culture, or evaluation scenario of a school, may also influence the ways in which teachers find evaluation motivating and how teachers approach feedback from evaluation. The results of this study provide insight into the relationship between teacher evaluation and classroom practice, an area that has previously been under researched despite the impact other high-stakes accountability policies have had on teaching practices and the teaching workforce. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]