1 / 24

TEAM Evaluation Model Overview

TEAM Evaluation Model Overview. Zachary Rossley, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Data and Research Division, Tennessee Department of Education. Evaluation closely links with Common Core. We aim to be the fastest improving state in the country by 2015. Tennessee.

elijah-england
Télécharger la présentation

TEAM Evaluation Model Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TEAM Evaluation Model Overview Zachary Rossley, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Data and Research Division, Tennessee Department of Education

  2. Evaluation closely links with Common Core

  3. We aim to be the fastest improving state in the country by 2015 Tennessee We will measure our success by our progress on NAEP, ACT, and PARCC

  4. And we will continue to close achievement gaps as we grow overall achievement Growth for all students, every year and Faster growth for those students who are furthest behind

  5. Tennessee’s students are struggling to compete with their peers in other states 2011 NAEP data

  6. However, we have seen continued growth on TCAP 3-8 Achievement results over the past two years

  7. Origin of the TEAM rubric TDOE partnered with NIET to adapt their rubric for use in Tennessee. The NIET rubric is based on research and best practices from multiple sources. In addition to the research from Charlotte Danielson and other prominent researchers, NIET reviewed instructional guidelines and standards developed by numerous national and state teacher standards organizations. From this information they developed a comprehensive set of standards for teacher evaluation and development. The work reviewed included guidelines and standards developed by: • The Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) • The National Board for Professional Teacher Standards • Massachusetts' Principles for Effective Teaching • California's Standards for the Teaching Profession • Connecticut's Beginning Educator Support Program, and • The New Teacher Center's Developmental Continuum of Teacher Abilities.

  8. Components of Evaluation: Tested Grades and Subjects • Qualitative includes: • Observations in planning, environment, and instruction • Professionalism rubric • Quantitative includes: • Growth measure • TVAAS or comparable measure • Achievement measure • Goal set by teacher and evaluator

  9. Components of Evaluation:Non-tested Grades and Subjects • Qualitative includes: • Observations in planning, environment, and instruction • Professionalism rubric • Quantitative includes: • Growth measure • TVAAS or comparable measure • Achievement measure • Goal set by teacher and evaluator

  10. Rubrics • General Educator • Library Media Specialist • School Services Personnel • School Audiologist PreK-12 • School Counselor PreK-12 • School Social Worker PreK-12 • School Psychologist PreK-12 • Speech/Language Therapist • May be used at the discretion of LEA for other educators who do not have direct instructional contact with students, such as instructional coaches who work with teachers.

  11. Domains

  12. Planning Domain

  13. Environment Domain

  14. Instruction Domain

  15. Professionalism Domain

  16. Evaluation Process • Initial Coaching Conversation • Required for teachers who received an overall effectiveness rating or individual growth score of 1 in the previous year • Pre-Conference • Classroom Visit • Post-Conference • Professionalism Scoring • Summative Conference Repeat as needed depending on number of required observations

  17. Suggested Pacing

  18. Observation Guidance Documents • Educator groups convened by TDOE to provide additional information for evaluators to inform evaluation using SSP rubric • Observation guidance documents were created for the following educator groups:

  19. Growth Measure Overview • State law currently requires value-added (or a comparable growth measure) to count as 35% of the total evaluation score. • For teachers in state tested grades/subjects, the 35% growth component is their individual TVAAS score. • For fine arts teachers in districts that have opted-in to this model, this will be their portfolio score. • For teachers without an individual growth measure, this will be a school-, district-, or state-wide TVAAS scorethat comprises 25%. • Additional measures for non-tested grades/subjects are in development.

  20. 15% Achievement Measure • The 15% measure based on a yearly goal set by the educator and his/her evaluator that is measured by current year data. • To make the 15% meaningful, the evaluator and educator work together to identify a measure. • Evaluator’s decision takes precedent over the educator’s if there is a disagreement. • The selection and goal-setting process involves determining which measure most closely aligns to the educator’s job responsibilities and the school’s goals.

  21. Key Changes From Year 1 • Targeted support for schools • Differentiated observations based on performance • Including special education students in individual growth scores • Reducing the weight of growth for non-tested teachers • More choices for individual growth scores

  22. Key Changes Upcoming • More rigorous evaluator training and certification process • Mild revisions to teacher evaluation rubric • Administrator evaluation process fixes • Administrator evaluation rubric revision underway

  23. Top Five Lessons Learned • Principal time demands are real • High-quality evaluation demands highly skilled observers • Balance pressure points with strong supports • Data is KING • Best practice is best practice at every level: implement, get feedback, study and improve

  24. Resources E-mail: • Questions: Team.Questions@tn.gov • Feedback:Luke.kohlmoos@tn.gov Websites: • CODE Data System: https://code-education.com/tennesseebpc/ • NIET Best Practices Portal: Portal with hours of video and professional development resources. www.nietbestpractices.org • TEAM website: www.team-tn.org • Weekly TEAM Updates

More Related