1 / 53

Teacher and Principal Evaluation

Teacher and Principal Evaluation. March 13, 2012. Effective Evaluation Systems. Clear, rigorous expectations Evaluations should be based on clear standards of instructional excellence that prioritize student learning Multiple measures

joy
Télécharger la présentation

Teacher and Principal Evaluation

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. Teacher and Principal Evaluation March 13, 2012

  2. Effective Evaluation Systems • Clear, rigorous expectations • Evaluations should be based on clear standards of instructional excellence that prioritize student learning • Multiple measures • Evaluations should consider multiple measures of performance, primarily the teachers’ and administrators’ impact on student academic growth

  3. Effective Evaluation Systems • Multiple Ratings • Evaluations should employ four to five rating levels to describe differences in teacher effectiveness • Regular Feedback • Evaluations should encourage frequent observations and constructive critical feedback • Significance • Evaluation outcomes must matter, evaluation data should be a major factor in employment of teachers

  4. Effective Evaluation Systems • Should provide teachers and principals with feedback that helps them grow • Should give schools the information needed to build strong instructional programs • Should hold teachers and leaders accountable for keeping students on track to graduate college ready or ready for work

  5. High Quality Matters • Having a high quality teachers and principals can substantially offset or even eliminate the disadvantage of low socio-economic background • The effect of increases in teacher quality swamps the impact of any other educational investment such as reductions in class size

  6. Guiding Principals • All students can master academically rigorous material • The primary responsibility of teachers and principals is to ensure that students learn • Teachers and principals contribute to student learning in ways that can be observed and measured • Evaluation should form the basis of teacher and principal development

  7. Guiding Principals • The principal’s most important job is helping teachers become and stay highly effective • Evaluations should be considered in the hiring, tenure, compensation, and retention

  8. Performance Education Advisory Council (PEAC) • A multi-stakeholder workgroup that has representatives from unions, state department, regional centers and local school districts • Instituted in 2010 • Charge was to provide framework for teacher and principal evaluation • Agreement February 6, 2012

  9. Weights in Evaluation Models

  10. CT Leadership Standards – 10-5-11 Draft • 1: Vision, Mission, and Goals: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by guiding the development and implementation of a shared vision of learning, a strong organizational mission, and high expectations for student performance. • 2: Teaching and Learning: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by monitoring and continuously improving teaching and learning. • 3: Organizational Systems and Safety: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by managing organizational systems and resources for a safe, high-performing learning environment. • 4: Families and Stakeholders: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by collaborating with families and stakeholders to respond to diverse community interests and needs and to mobilize community resources. • 5: Ethics and Integrity: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by being ethical and acting with integrity. • 6: The Education System:Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students and advocate for their students, faculty and staff needs by influencing systems of political, social, economic, legal, and cultural contexts affecting education.

  11. Student Learning (45%) • Half of the student learning element based on the state test • Recommended Additional Guidelines: • For state test portion of student learning, weight growth measures more heavily than attainment • For locally developed measures, establish approved set of options for districts to choose • Recommended Guidance from State: • Provide guidance to districts to include non-test measures of student graduation or grade progression for secondary schools not demonstrating high graduation rates • Provide guidance around using local measures to extend grade levels and subjects covered as possible

  12. Other Guidelines • State model developed as default, with rigorous process for local opt-out • Will provide # and duration of formal vs. informal observations • Pre and post conference specifics • Detailed observation rubrics • 4 rating levels - exemplary, proficient, developing and below standard • High Quality observations of performance and practice • Rated against a standards-based rubric • Useful and timely feedback • Evaluators must receive training and demonstrate proficiency on how to provide quality feedback

  13. Additional Components • Evaluations that provide useful feedback and results linked to professional development • High quality professional development • Multiple student learning indicators • Fair, valid, reliable and useful • Safeguards for student, teacher and school characteristics, attendance and mobility • Guidelines for parent, peer, community or staff surveys • A statewide committee (like PEAC) that meets regularly to provide implementation guidance • Pilot process or staggered implementation

  14. Draft Timeline: Winter-Summer 2012 State model adopted by state board Working groups begin developing state models and implementation plans   Districts apply for voluntary pilot program Training for all evaluators State board adopts coreguidelines for district systems

  15. Draft Timeline: Fall 2012-Fall 2013 February - Working groups convene and begin developing state models & implementation plans through June Districts not participating in pilot plan and develop local systems Additional state training for evaluators Districts plans are submitted to CSDE for review/approval Voluntarypilot program begins Full-scale statewide implementation starts

  16. State Funding for Evaluation and Training • 2.5 million to start new teacher and principal evaluations • 5 million to open a principal’s academy at the University of CT school of education

  17. Norwalk Public Schools Teacher Evaluation and Professional Development Plan • Developed in collaboration with administrators and teachers • Based on work of Charlotte Danielson and the Connecticut’s Common Core of Teaching (1999) • Plan is to be reviewed annually • Training for evaluators and teachers

  18. Norwalk Public Schools Teacher Evaluation and Professional Development Plan • Teacher practice • Must know their content • Organize the learning environment in a manner which demonstrates respect of self and others • Students actively engaged in the process of learning • Understand and use good pedagogical knowledge • Work on their own professional development • Participate in developing a culture of trust, respect and collaboration

  19. Administrators’ Responsibilities in the Evaluation Process • Provide strong instructional leadership • Foster and support an environment that encourages outstanding performance • Engage and encourage teachers to examine their work • Provide resources to enable teachers to master their craft • Build and nurture a culture of trust, respect and collaborative dialogue

  20. Danielson Model Each domain contains a series of components and elements that provide a basis for focused observation and assessment I. Planning and Preparation II. The Classroom Environment III. Instruction IV. Professional Responsibilities

  21. Levels of Performance • Unsatisfactory • Teacher does not yet appear to understand the concepts of the underlying the component • Basic • Understands the concepts underlying component, but implementation is sporadic • Proficient • Clearly understands the concepts underlying the concepts and implements them well • Distinguished • Master teacher and makes a contribution to the field both inside an d outside of the school

  22. Observation Process • Success of each component is dependent on a common understanding and language about good instructional practice • Effective observation and evaluation results in meaningful professional development leading to improved student achievement • Minimum of 25 minutes and occur approximately 2 days after the pre-observation conference • Pre-observation conference determines the focus of the observation • Post observation conference occurs no more than 5 days after the observation • Written observation be completed within 20 days of the observation

  23. Schedule of Formal Observations • Non-Tenured Teacher • 3 formal observations completed by November 1, December 15 and February 15 • Tenured Teacher • 2 formal observations completed by February 1 and May first • Evaluators are encouraged to drop in classroom routinely to observe teachers’ work. 3 minimum drop-in visits each semester. Reference of the informal drop-ins in the evaluation must be discussed with the teacher.

  24. Examples of Documentation Used • Written formal observations • Lesson plans • Instructional units • Evidence of student learning through student work • Measures of academic performance • Teacher’s professional activities in the school • Examples of communication with parents • Teacher’s written self assessment

  25. Differentiated Evaluation

  26. Self Directed Professional Growth • Teachers who have distinguished themselves by outstanding professional performance and a significant record of effecting student growth • Create a model of teacher autonomy where teaches monitor, analyze, and evaluate their own classroom and professional practice • Take responsibility in their own professional growth

  27. Distinguished • Assessed in 2 of the 4 domains as distinguished • No component on Domain 2 (The Classroom Environment) and Domain 3 (Instruction) may be assessed below proficient • No more than one component in Domains 1 (Planning and Preparation) and 4 (Professional Responsibilities) may be assessed at the Basic level

  28. Parameters of Self-Directed Professional Growth Activities • Projects submitted are substantive and comprehensive • Plans can be multi-year, but require annual analysis and assessment • Plans must tie to standards • Innovation and creativity is supported • Examples – instructional units, curriculum development, action research, case studies, study groups, immersion in content area, peer coaching

  29. Focused Assistance • Assistance in a specific area of performance • Evaluator meets with the teacher to identify the specific area of improvement • HR Officer and NFT President are informed about the focused assistance • Evaluator develop a plan to improve performance • Cycle of classroom observations • Resources to be used • Meetings to review progress • Time frame for cycle • Assistance from a Collegial Collaborator can support the teacher • At the end of the assistance – teacher moves back to regular cycle of placed on intervention

  30. Intervention Process • A tenured teacher who is evaluated as “Basic” in 2 or more domains in the annual assessment, and intensive process of intervention is in place • A teacher whose performance during the school year has been documented to be “Basic” in 2 or more domains (After focused assistance) • Superintendent review

  31. Intervention Process • Inform the Human Resource (HR) Officer and Assistant Superintendent • Meeting with central office staff, teacher and NFT representation • Evaluator develops a specific plan of improvement • Minimum of 2 observations (one each semester) • Unannounced and announced observations • Completion of self reflection form • Monthly meetings with evaluator, HR Officer, central office staff, teacher and representatives from NFT • Identify a distinguished teacher who can be a resource • Conclusion of a reasonable period (6 months to a year, a termination of progress is made and a recommendation is made to go back to the regular cycle or termination

  32. NPS Administrator Leader Evaluation and Professional Growth Plan • Developed in collaboration with administrators and executive staff • Focused on student learning • Describes the process and goal of school leaders’ evaluation process • Emphasis on self-reflection and best practices and action toward specific goals • Administrators are central to developing high expectations of success and excellence • Focus on Instructional Leadership • Based on Connecticut Standards for School Leaders and Administrators’ Evaluation Model • Annual evaluation

  33. Connecticut Standards for School Leaders • The educated process-develop a common vision • The learning process-knowledge of current research • The teaching process-understands teaching and learning • Diverse perspectives-understands the role of education in a diverse community • School goals-engages in establishment of school goals • School culture-fosters collaboration • Student standards and assessment-establishes rigorous standards • School improvement-works to improve the quality of teaching and learning • Professional development-professional development based on school needs • Integration of staff evaluation, professional development and school improvement-integrates human capital strategies to improve teaching and learning • Organization, resources and school policies-works with staff to use resources effectively • School-community relations-collaborates with staff and community

  34. Relationship between Connecticut Standards and Evaluation Growth Model

  35. Relationship between Connecticut Standards and Evaluation Growth Model

  36. Connecticut Code of Professional Responsibility for School Administrators • Responsibility to student • Responsibility to the student’s family • Responsibility to the community • Responsibility to the profession and staff

  37. Components of System • School/Program Growth Plans • Administrator Leader Induction • Responsibility of HR Officer • Mentoring • Training • Professional Growth and Development • Accountability Process • Meet the Standards for School Leaders • Meeting the CT Code of Professional Responsibility for School Administrators • Meeting performance requirements related to job description • Adhering to district policies • Positively affecting student learning through development of school improvement plan • Reflecting on Student Improvement Goals

  38. The Purpose of Evaluation • Assess the administrator competencies • Identify the administrator’s strengths • Identify areas in need of growth or improvement • Assess the administrator's efforts to grow professionally • Help determine contract renewal or granting of tenure

  39. Data to be Used in the Summative Evaluation Document • Student work • Surveys • Student assessment results • Program/materials that support student learning • School observations and visits

  40. Overview of Accountability • Observations and visits at any time • Conferences – minimum of 2

  41. Overview of Accountability

  42. Corrective Assistance Program for Tenured Administrators • Evaluator identifies specific behaviors, benchmarks and a timeline for improvement • Supervisor notifies the administrator and NASA in writing • Development of Action Plan • Lists specific concerns, expectations that will be used for an improvement timeline (one year) • List of resources and supports and schedule of conferences • Evaluation to document progress or lack of process • Recommendation to go back to the evaluation cycle or dismissal • Administrator has appeal rights to the superintendent

  43. Montgomery County Teacher Professional Growth System • Six clear standards based on the NBPST • Training for evaluator and teachers that created a common language for what good teaching is about • Skillful Teacher • Observation and Analysis of Teaching • A professional growth cycle that integrates formal evaluation and a multi-year process of continued professional growth • Formal evaluation with a narrative assessments that provide qualitative feedback

  44. Teacher Professional Growth System • Non-Tenured teachers • Annual Formal Evaluation • Tenured Teachers • Multi-year evaluation cycle • Professional Development Plan • Special Evaluation at any time

  45. Teacher Professional Growth System • Observation – minimum 30 minutes • At least one formal must be announced and a pre-observation conference is required • Most observation conference held within 3 days of the formal observation • Post observation report is completed after the post observation conference • Ratings – Meets standard and Below standard

  46. Teacher Professional Growth System

  47. Sources of Data • Samples of student work, tests, assignments and feedback • Unit plans • Communication to parents • Publications • Professional Development Plans • Student results • Local and state exams • Attendance discipline referrals • AP or SAT tests • Student and parent surveys

  48. Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) • A Peer Assistance and Review Program that has consulting teachers who provide instructional support to novice teachers and veteran teachers who are performing below standard • PAR Panel comprised of 6 principals and 6 teachers • Nominated by unions and appointed by the superintendent • Reviews all cases and makes recommendations about returning to PGS or termination

  49. Montgomery County A & S Professional Growth System • Six clear standards based on the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards • Support for novice administrators and underperforming administrators • Training for evaluator and teachers that created a common language for what good teaching is about • A professional growth cycle that integrates formal evaluation and a multi-year process of continued professional growth • Formal evaluation with a narrative assessments that provide qualitative feedback

  50. Evaluation Process • First and second year as a principal • First year after a change of level • Fifth year • Ninth year • Every fifth and ninth year • Annual Review process in non-evaluation year • Special evaluation at anytime

More Related