Presentation on theme: "Florida Professional Development System Evaluation Protocol School Learning Session."— Presentation transcript:
Florida Professional Development System Evaluation Protocol School Learning Session
Session Objectives Ensure understanding of requirements and purpose for the Duval County Public Schools Protocol Site visit. Provide information and resources to assist with preparation at the school and educator level.
Purpose Florida Statute 1012.98 School Community Professional Development The Professional Development System Evaluation Protocol is based on a set of standards that describes the characteristics and components of a quality professional development system that meets the requirements of Florida’s laws.
Florida Professional Development Evaluation Protocols 3 LEVELS 1.0 Educator Level 2.0 School Level 3.0 District Level 4 STRANDS PlanningLearningImplementingEvaluating
Strand: Planning20062008 2.1.1 School Needs Assessment3.73.6* 2.1.2 Reviewing Professional Development Plans2.13.3 2.1.3 Reviewing Annual Performance Appraisal Data2.73.2* 2.1.4 Coordinating with School Improvement Plan3.63.6* 2.1.5 Generating a School-wide Professional Development System3.23.3* 2.1.6 Content3.8 2.1.7 Learning Communities2.53.2 Strand: Delivery 2.2.1 Relevance of Professional Development3.63.8 2.2.2 Learning Strategies3.13.4* 2.2.3 Sustained Training3.13.1* 2.2.4 Use of Technology3.23.6* 2.2.5 Time Resources3.53.8 2.2.6 Dollar Resources3.33.2 2.2.7 Coordinated Records3.53.7* Strand: Follow-Up 2.3.1 Transfer to Students3.13.4 2.3.2 Coaching and Mentoring2.63.2* 2.3.3 Web-based Resources and Assistance1.82.6 Strand: Evaluation 2.4.1 Implementing the System2.83.0* 2.4.2 Transfer to the Classroom2.63.0* 2.4.3 Evaluation Methods2.92.9* 2.4.4 Use of Results2.42.6* 2.4.5 Expenditures2.11.2 Note: * indicates a significant difference of.5 pts. or greater across different levels (E. M, H), especially at the middle school level. November 2008 FL DOE Site Visit Results: PD System Evaluation Protocol School Level
Strand: Planning20062008 1.1.1 Individual Needs Assessment2.73.3* 1.1.2 Administrator Review2.23 1.1.3 Priority of Needs2.63.2* 1.1.4 Individual Professional Development Plan1.82.7* 1.1.5 Content2.73.4* 1.1.6 Learning Communities1.92.8 Strand: Delivery 1.2.1 Relevance of Professional Development2.53.5* 1.2.2 Learning Strategies3.13.4* 1.2.3 Sustained Training2.83.2* 1.2.4 Use of Technology3.1 3.4* 1.2.5 Time Resources3.43.6 1.2.6 Coordinated Records3.63.4 Strand: Follow-Up 1.3.1 Transfer to Students3.1 3.5* 1.3.2 Coaching and Mentoring2.32.6* 1.3.3 Web-based Resources and Assistance1.72.8 Strand: Evaluation 1.4.1 Implementing the Plan2.12.7* 1.4.2 Student Changes2.43.2* 1.4.3 Evaluation Methods2.23.0* 1.4.4 Action Research11.1 1.4.5 Use of Results1.92.5* Note: * indicates difference in scores across levels, especially at the middle school level. November 2008 FL DOE Site Visit Results: PD System Evaluation Protocol Educator Level
Protocol Review Tools DOE Protocol Site Visit Guide Technology and Web-based Resource List Learning Communities Protocol Standards Evaluation Protocol Standards PLC Agenda/Plan School and Educator-level Checklists Educator Interview Tips Site Visit Timeline "If I had six hours to chop down a tree, I'd spend the first four hours sharpening the axe". Abraham Lincoln
Individual Professional Development Plan (IPDP) 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3; 2.1.2 The educator IPDP is a continuous improvement plan. Documents, questions, and probes regarding the development, implementation and results, as they relate to changes in educator practice and student achievement, will be discussed. 2011-12 and 2012-13 IPDPs, student data, and professional learning records for these two years should be readily available. Principals and educators should be prepared to address the following: process used in the development of the IPDP process for reviewing disaggregated student data and identification of student groups relationship of the educator IPDP to the school improvement plan (SIP) individual meetings with a school administrator to discuss the IPDP how much of IPDP was implemented consideration of the results from the IPDP in planning next year’s IPDPs and professional learning goals (end of year review)
Professional Learning Communities (PLC) 1.2.1 2.2.1 Learning communities are groups of faculty who meet regularly to study more effective learning and teaching practices in order to achieve the identified learning goal of the group. PLCs will include: identified learning goal for the group of educators measured using achievement data new learning for educators Educators in effective PLCs analyze data develop lesson plans examine student work assess effectiveness of instruction, and identify needs for professional learning An ‘expert voice’ is critical to effective PLCs. This ‘expert voice’ may be a coach, administrator, teacher leader, or a body of research the PLC is using.
Learning Communities: 1.2.1 2.2.1 Text Rendering Protocol Please read the Rationale and Elaboration for the Learning Communities Standard 1.2.1. or 2.2.1 Underline sentences, phrases, and words that you think are of key importance. Next Steps Each person will share a sentence, phrase, and word from the document that he/she thinks is particularly significant. Discuss what you heard and how it relates to your experience with PLC work. Share new insights regarding learning communities.
Learning Communities: 1.2.1 2.2.1 You are the Evaluator Read and discuss your PLC scenarios Use the rating rubric to assess PLC implementation Based on your group’s understanding of the Learning Communities standard, discuss and defend your rating. Evaluator Questions: Educator-Describe how your school organizes educators into professional learning communities. School leader-Describe structures of support in place for these groups.
Rubric Scale (1 pt) Unacceptable—little or no evidence that the district is implementing the standard (2 pts) Marginal—inconsistent evidence (observed in a few faculty or schools, few components of the standard) (3 pts) Good—considerable evidence (observed in many faculty or schools, many components of the standards) (4 pts) Excellent—pervasive evidence (almost all faculty and schools, almost all components of the standard)
Evaluation Jigsaw Read the rationale and elaboration for your assigned standard. Discuss key points and new learning. Collaborate to answer the evaluation questions and probes. 1.4.1 Implementing the Plan 1.4.2. Changes in Educator Practice 1.4.3. Changes in Students 1.4.4. Evaluation Methods 1.4.5. Use of Results
You Be the Judge Form a triad at your table. Select an interviewer, a teacher, and a person who will implement the rating rubric. Teacher: Identify a significant professional learning opportunity in which you have participated this year. Interviewer: Conduct an interview with the teacher using the Educator Level Checklist Evaluating Strand questions 1.4.1. through 1.4.5. Rater: Note “look-fors” during the interview. Debrief and share findings Team: Collaborate to identify suggestions that will assist school leadership and teachers in communicating their work.
Timeline District March 21: Webinar (leadership teams) April 1-5: Selected Schools Notified April 25: Webinar Q & A May 1-3: Selected Teachers Notified May 13-17: Site Visit School March 12 and on-going: PDFs share preparation information/resources with school leadership team March 21 & April 25: Participate in Webinars as needed May 1-10: PDFs assist selected teachers and leadership team IPDPs PLCs Professional Learning
Task and Transfer at Your School How to use the FDOE Site Visit Protocol Standards Guide Standards Review Questions Information and Documentation Needed Individualized Notes
Questions Web-based Resources Florida's Professional Development Evaluation System Protocol Website http://www.teachinflorida.com/ProfessionalDevelopm ent/ProtocolStandards/tabid/66/Default.aspx DCPS Professional Development Website http://www.duvalschools.org/static/aboutdcps/depart ments/prodev/
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.