Korea is a particularly interesting example where three different appraisal processes have been established with clearly distinct functions: (i) appraisal for professional development, (ii) appraisal for performance management, which feeds into decisions about promotions, and (Hi) a performance-based incentive system which is connected to special rewards for teachers taking on specific roles and responsibilities (Kim et al., Across the countries participating in the OECD Review, most teacher appraisal approaches aim to use results for both formative and summative purposes. Combining both the developmental and accountability functions into a single teacher appraisal process raises a range of challenges. When the appraisal is oriented towards the improvement of practice within schools, teachers are typically open to reveal their weaknesses, in the expectation that conveying that information will lead to more effective decisions on developmental needs and training. However, when teachers are confronted with high-stakes consequences of appraisal on their career and salary, the inclination to reveal weak aspects of performance is reduced, i.e. the developmental function may be jeopardised (Santiago and Benavides, 2009).