Download
1 / 22
220 likes | 353 Vues
Document Review. Rating Levels. Proficient is the performance standard and is the expected level of performance. Standard 1: Professional Knowledge Evidence: Certificate of completion for professional development, agenda of professional development led by
E N D
Rating Levels Proficient is the performance standard and is the expected level of performance.
Standard 1: Professional Knowledge • Evidence: Certificate of completion for professional • development, agenda of professional development led by • teacher, article written for a state teachers’ organization, • samples of the teacher’s innovative instructional • approaches developed for the classroom, and the teacher’s • reflection journal for the year.
Conclusions: It is apparent to the evaluator that the • teacher addresses appropriate curriculum, pedagogy, and • student developmental needs. During the formal • observations, the teacher facilitated higher-level thinking, • linked content to both past and future learning, and • demonstrated high expectations for all students. • Additionally, the teacher both participated and led division • professional development. The preponderance of • evidence leads the evaluator to assign a rating of • Exemplary for Standard 1.
Standard 2: Instructional Planning • Evidence: Analysis of a classroom assessment; • differentiation in lesson planning and practice; data • driven curriculum revision work; and the course • syllabi.
Conclusions: The teacher’s lessons were coherent, • sequenced, and aligned with established curriculum • and long-term instructional plans. His lesson planning • reflected an understanding of student needs. • Strategies were planned to enhance critical and • creative thinking. More differentiation of content and • process would most likely support mastery learning for • all students. The preponderance of evidence leads the • evaluator to assign a rating of Proficient for • Standard 2.
Standard 3: Instructional Delivery • Evidence: Class handouts and student work samples; • formal observation(s); and annotated photographs of • class activities
Conclusions: During both observations the teacher • Fostered critical and creative thinking and allowed for • differing views that were supported with evidence. The • teacher used many and varied instructional • strategies/activities to include direct instruction, • applying prior knowledge, and think-pair-share. • Students received feedback from the teacher and gave • feedback to one another. One area for growth would • be the amount of instructional time used to introduce • and explain both lessons. Excessive time was used for • explanation; thereby, decreasing the instructional time • needed for effective delivery. The preponderance of • evidence leads the evaluator to assign a rating of • Proficient for Standard 3.
Standard 4: Assessment of and for Student • Learning • Evidence: Analysis of classroom assessment; writing • rubric; and samples of both summative and formative • assessments.
Conclusions: The teacher used formative and summative • assessments for diagnostic, formative, and summative • purposes. The teacher’s grading practices report final • mastery in relationship to content goals and objectives. • His assessments were appropriate for the • developmental level of the students. The preponderance • of evidence leads the evaluator to assign a rating of • Proficient for Standard 4.
Standard 5: Learning Environment • Evidence: Classroom rules and positive reinforcement • plan; student survey summary; schedule of daily • classroom routines; formal observations and • walkthroughs.
Conclusions: The teacher created a supportive, caring, • and engaging learning environment. There were clear • expectations. Students were engaged and could work • independently. The classroom was configured to • support multiple learning contexts (i.e., whole group, • small groups, and individual learning). The • preponderance of evidence leads the evaluator to • assign a rating of Proficient for Standard 5.
Standard 6: Professionalism • Evidence:Record of participation in extracurricular • activities; examples of collaborative work with peers; • evidence of communication with parents; copy of • classroom newsletters; parent communication log.
Conclusions: The teacher is professional in speech, • actions, and demeanor. He communicates effectively • with students, parents, and colleagues. He is a role • model for others, continually participating in • professional development, leading a department, and • creating division-level curriculum that benefits • teachers and students alike. The preponderance of • evidence leads the evaluator to assign a rating of • Exemplary for Standard 6.
Standard 7: Student Academic Progress How do we synthesize multiple measures of student academic progress to rate a teacher on Standard 7: Student Academic Progress?
Putting It All together: How to Synthesize Multiple Data Sources for a Rating on Standard 7 Teachers for Whom Student Growth Percentile Data Are Neither Available nor Appropriate • Review data from student achievement goal setting. • Review data from at least a second source such as a second goal or other measures of student academic progress. • Assign a performance level rating based on the preponderance of evidence (using data-informed professional judgment).
Putting It All together: How to Synthesize Multiple Data Sources for a Rating on Standard 7 Teachers for Whom Student Growth Percentile Data Are Available and Appropriate • Follow the guidelines related to using student growth percentiles in teacher performance evaluation. According to this guidance, a rating may not always be possible to determine due to missing data. However, a range of appropriate ratings can be determined. • Review data from student achievement goal setting and determine a rating based on decision rules established. • Review data from student growth percentiles and from student achievement goal setting and make a determination based on the preponderance of evidence (using data-informed professional judgment) as to a final rating on Standard 7: Student Academic Progress.
Standard 7: Student Academic Progress • Evidence: Student achievement goal setting document • – revised at mid-term and end of year.
Conclusions: The teacher’s work resulted in • appropriate student academic progress in the target • areas. The teacher documents achievement of student • academic progress goals and provides evidence of • students’ progress throughout the year, monitors • learning, and makes the adjustments to instruction as • needed to meet achievement goals. The • preponderance of evidence leads the evaluator to • assign a rating of Proficient for Standard 7.
