Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Conewago Valley School District Teacher Evaluation Tool Training 2013-14 1. Please sit at your “building” table. 2. Complete a nameplate – first name only.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Conewago Valley School District Teacher Evaluation Tool Training 2013-14 1. Please sit at your “building” table. 2. Complete a nameplate – first name only."— Presentation transcript:

1 Conewago Valley School District Teacher Evaluation Tool Training Please sit at your “building” table. 2. Complete a nameplate – first name only. 3. Review materials in the folder

2 CVSD Teacher Evaluation Tool Training

3 Training Goals 1) Gain an understanding of the NEW Teacher Evaluation system. 2) Review the content of the Danielson Framework and its role in teacher growth. 3) Develop an Understanding of the Clinical Observation Framework

4 Teacher Effectiveness Project Goal  To develop a teacher effectiveness model that will reform the way we evaluate teachers as well as the critical components of teacher training and teacher professional growth

5 Multi-Measure Teacher Effectiveness  Developed in collaboration with Charlotte Danielson  Phase 3 Implementation  Tool to be used with all professional staff except “Specialists”; Guidance, School Psychologists, Nurses, etc.  District Requirements:  50% of staff must be trained in new model  10% of staff must use the tool

6

7 Observation/Evidence (50%) Based on Danielson’s Domains Planning & Preparation Classroom Environment Instruction Professional Responsibilities PDE-Adapted Rubric Focus of Phase III Educator Effectiveness Implementation

8 Multiple Measures of Student Achievement (50%) 15% - Building Level Data 15% - Teacher Specific Data 20% - Elective Data

9 Building Level Data (15%) Will include: PSSA Achievement PVAAS Growth Graduation Rate Promotion Rate Attendance AP Course Participation SAT/PSAT Will be multiple measures NOT multiple uses of same data

10 Teacher Specific Data (15%) Will include: PVAAS Growth for teachers who teach content that is tested on the PSSA’s and Keystone Exams 3 year average will be used to determine – 2013 PSSA and Keystone scores will be the baseline

11 Elective Data/SLOs (20%) Will include: District Designed Measures and Examinations Nationally Recognized Standardized Tests Industry Certification Examinations Student Projects Pursuant to Local Requirements Student Portfolios Pursuant to Local Requirements Will NOT be PSSA data. Districts will create but MUST be reviewed and approved by PDE. “Models” approved by PDE will be uploaded to SAS for use by all districts

12 Additional Information State forms/process are encouraged but NOT mandated. District tools/process MUST focus on Danielson Framework and be approved by PDE Additional rubrics/process being developed for “specialists” and administrators ( targeted for January 2013)

13 A Framework for Teaching: The Research: The Research: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Praxis III Teaching Performance Assessments State Teaching Standards

14 5 “Rules” for Teacher Evaluation 1. Defensible definition of teaching 2. Differentiation of evaluative processes 3. Evidence-driven process 4. The role of teacher learning 5. Transparency

15 Planning & PreparationThe Classroom Environment Professional ResponsibilitiesInstruction Complete the sentence Educator Effectiveness is… List 2-3 key words that characterize the domain

16 Defensible definition of teaching Wisdom of Practice : Collecting our thinking about good teaching

17 Wisdom of Practice What are the qualities of teaching most tightly tied to student learning?

18 The Domains 1. Planning and Preparation 2. The Classroom Environment 3. Instruction 4. Professional Responsibilities

19 A Framework for Teaching: Components of Professional Practice Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Domain 3: Instruction Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Setting Instructional Outcomes Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Designing Coherent Instruction Designing Student Assessments Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Establishing a Culture for Learning Managing Classroom Procedures Managing Student Behavior Organizing Physical Space Communicating with Students Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Engaging Students in Learning Using Assessment in Instruction Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness Reflecting on Teaching Maintaining Accurate Records Communicating with Families Participating in a Professional Community Growing and Developing Professionally Showing Professionalism

20 Matching Scenarios

21 Framework Focus

22 22 Framework Features  Generic: applies to all grade levels, content areas  Not a checklist  Not prescriptive: tells the “what” of teaching, not “how”  Comprehensive: not just what we can see  Inclusive: Novice to Master teacher

23 Why Evaluate Professional Practice?  Quality Assurance  Professional Learning

24 Benefits of a Supervision/Evaluation Framework  Common Language  Similarity of vision for teaching that improves teaching: the qualities of the distinguished level  Greater validity and reliability potential for teacher evaluation  Changes in novice thinking  Opportunities for collaboration

25 Uses of a Framework Self-Assessment Reflection Peer Coaching Teacher Evaluation Mentoring and Induction Professional Growth Plans

26 5 “Rules” for Educator Evaluation/Supervision 1. Defensible definition of teaching 2. Differentiation of evaluative processes 3. Evidence-driven process 4. The role of teacher learning 5. Transparency

27 Rule # 1 Start with a defensible definition of good teaching that is studied, and understood, by all stakeholders

28 A Framework for Teaching: Components of Professional Practice Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Reflecting on Teaching Maintaining Accurate Records Communicating with Families Participating in a Professional Community Growing and Developing Professionally Showing Professionalism Domain 3: Instruction Communicating with Students Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Engaging Students in Learning Using Assessment in Instruction Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Setting Instructional Outcomes Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Designing Coherent Instruction Designing Student Assessments Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Establishing a Culture for Learning Managing Classroom Procedures Managing Student Behavior Organizing Physical Space Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Reflecting on Teaching Maintaining Accurate Records Communicating with Families Participating in a Professional Community Growing and Developing Professionally Showing Professionalism Domain 3: Instruction Communicating with Students Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Engaging Students in Learning Using Assessment in Instruction Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Setting Instructional Outcomes Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Designing Coherent Instruction Designing Student Assessments Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Establishing a Culture for Learning Managing Classroom Procedures Managing Student Behavior Organizing Physical Space

29

30 30 Levels of Performance  Failing: Potential for harm  Needs Improvement: Inconsistent, novice  Proficient: Consistent, competent  Distinguished: Unusually excellent, no one “lives” here permanently in all components

31 5 “Rules” for Educator Evaluation/Supervision 1. Defensible definition of teaching 2. Differentiation of evaluative processes 3. Evidence-driven process 4. The role of teacher learning 5. Transparency

32 Rule # 2 Differentiate the processes of evaluation for novices, experienced teachers, and teachers at risk

33 Differentiated Evaluation Novice/Untenured Very close observation and assessment Experienced/Tenured Presumption of professionalism At-Risk Not punitive Formal and informal observation of teaching is key + teacher interviews + artifacts Structured process 1/3yr. Other years: informals + teacher interviews+ professional goal-setting Intensive, extensive team-based support based on persistent unsatisfactory performance in one or more components 2 – 4 formal times per year; multiple informal observations Professional Goal- Setting: Choose from a list of rigorous, approved activities Clear goals, outcomes, evidence and timelines anchor No self-directed activitiesActivities produce evidence which is then evaluated Designed for the teacher who can, and wishes, to improve

34 Overarching Question Who does the thinking? Therefore, who does the learning and growing?

35 5 “Rules” for Educator Evaluation/Supervision 1. Defensible definition of teaching 2. Differentiation of evaluative processes 3. Evidence-driven process 4. The role of teacher learning 5. Transparency

36 Rule # 3 Let evidence, not opinion, anchor the process

37 Evidence or Opinion? 1. The teacher’s lesson plan was well done. 2. The teacher said that the South should have won the Civil War. 3. The table groups were arranged in 2 x 2 pods. 4. The materials and supplies were appropriate for the lesson

38 Evidence or Opinion? 5. Wait time was insufficient for student thinking. 6.The teacher stated that students have learned to add 2-digit numbers in preparation for today’s lesson. 7.Six students, questioned randomly, did not know the day’s learning goals

39 Evidence Evidence is a factua l reporting of events. It may include teacher and student actions and behaviors. It may also include artifacts prepared by the teacher, students or others. It is not clouded with personal opinion or biases. It is selected using professional judgment by the observer and/or the teacher

40 Observation-based Assessment: ProcessEvidence Observation-based Assessment: Process and Evidence 1. Pre-Observation: D1, D4 2. Observation: D1, D2, D3 3.Post-Teaching: D1, D2, D3, D4 4.Collaborative Assessment: D1, D2, D3, D4 Standard Lesson Plan with components of D1 Standard Evidence Collection Doc, shared w/teacher Teacher Self-Assessment: Rubrics and addition/correction of evidence Evaluator Rubric and Teacher Self-Assessment Rubric: Teacher leads

41 The Card Sort Use a sticky note Identify: ◦ Domain ◦ Component ◦ Element Share with table mates as instructed; reach consensus

42 Rewrite Select one scenario at your table Determine tentative Level of Proficiency Rewrite at higher & lower levels using rubric characteristics

43 43 Levels of Performance Conclusions  Failing: Potential for harm  Needs Improvement: Inconsistent, novice  Proficient: Consistent, competent  Distinguished: Unusually excellent, no one “lives” here permanently in all components

44 Teacher Effectiveness Steps  Pre-Observation Conference  Observation  Post-Observation Conference  Walkthrough

45 Step # 1: Pre-Observation (Focused on Domains 1 & 4)  Teacher completes Step #1: Lesson Plan in advance and sends to evaluator two days in advance of planning conference  Evidence is added to the lesson plan document that emerges from the pre-observation conference.  T and E meet to discuss the upcoming lesson framed around the following : Question Stems :  1a. What is the content being taught? What prerequisite for learning is required?  1b. Tell me about the composition of your class. How will you modify this lesson for groups or individual students?  1c. What do you want students to learn during this lesson?  1d. What resources were considered for this lesson and rejected? Why? What resources will be used? Why?  1e. List very briefly the steps of the lesson.  1f. How will you measure the goals articulated in 1c? What does success look like? Before

46 Step # 2: Observation (Focused on Domains 1,2, & 3)  E arrives 5 minutes prior to beginning of lesson to ‘walk the walls’ (D2)  Types of Observation Evidence:  Scripting of Educator or Student comments  Descriptions of Educator and Student behaviors  Numeric information  Environment Remember :  Collect evidence from Students – “What are you learning?; Is what you’re doing hard in a good way?  Non-negotiable - Record observation on standard form  Optional – May use T-charts, seating charts, or similar templates to record relative numeric data (tally marks)  Evaluator does NOT retype observation During

47 Walk-through Evidence Domain1: Content and Pedagogy, Knowledge of Students, Selecting Outcomes, Knowledge of Resources, Coherent Instruction, Designing Assessment Domain 4: Reflection, Recordkeeping, Family Communication, Professional Community, Growing and Developing Professionally, Professionalism Domain 2: Respect and Rapport, Culture for Learning, Managing Procedures, Managing Student Behavior, Organizing Physical Space Domain 3: Communication, Questioning, Engagement, Assessment, Flexibility

48 Rubrics Educating is a performance. Performances are measured using rubrics

49 Failing... Needs Improvement... Proficient... Distinguished...

50 Performance Levels: Key Words 1. Review the components from the Framework for Teaching for the assigned Domain. Scan the language used to describe each Level of Performance (LoP). 2. What key words would you use to characterize or describe each level? 3. Synthesize your thinking as a group and choose two key words that represent each level. Write the two key words on the designated chartpaper

51 Performance Levels: Key Words FailingNeeds Improvement ProficientDistinguished

52 Performance Levels: Key Words FailingNeeds Improvement ProficientDistinguished Unsafe Lack of Unaware Harmful Unclear Poor Unsuitable None

53 Performance Levels: Key Words FailingNeeds Improvement ProficientDistinguished Unsafe Lack of Unaware Harmful Unclear Poor Unsuitable None Partial Generally Inconsistently Attempts Awareness Moderate Minimal Some Levels of cognition and constructivist learning increase

54 Performance Levels: Key Words FailingNeeds Improvement ProficientDistinguished Unsafe Lack of Unaware Harmful Unclear Poor Unsuitable None Partial Generally Inconsistently Attempts Awareness Moderate Minimal Some Consistent Frequent Successful Appropriate Clear Positive Smooth Most Levels of cognition and constructivist learning increase

55 Performance Levels: Key Words FailingNeeds Improvement ProficientDistinguished Unsafe Lack of Unaware Harmful Unclear Poor Unsuitable None Partial Generally Inconsistently Attempts Awareness Moderate Minimal Some Consistent Frequent Successful Appropriate Clear Positive Smooth Most Seamless Solid Subtle Skillful Preventative Leadership STUDENTS Always Levels of cognition and constructivist learning increase

56 Using the Levels of Performance What are some ways teachers can use the levels of performance to promote their learning and growth?  Lesson planning  Self assessment  Developing professional learning goals  Reflecting on teaching and learning  Talking about teaching

57 Step # 3: Preparing for the Post-Conference (Focused on Domains 1,2, 3, & 4)  Educator and Evaluator do not need to meet during Step #3.  With prerequisite training, the Educator can engage in Step #3 independently or with the support of a coach.  Evaluator provides Educator with completed observation form from Step #2.  Teacher is provided with an opportunity to add evidence to the observation form that may have been overlooked by Evaluator  Teacher returns the observation form to Evaluator with their additions  Teacher completes the self-assessment rubric (he/she may highlight phrases in multiple levels of the same component) and returns back to Evaluator prior to the post-teaching conference  Evaluator highlights or checks ONLY the areas on the self-assessment with which he/she agrees After

58 A Collaborative Process Who Collects/Provides Evidence? Both teacher and evaluator Evaluation is not done TO you; it is done WITH you and FOR you

59 Remember… Teachers get a copy of the evidence immediately following the lesson. Teachers may add to the evidence. Teachers use the evidence to complete a self-assessment. Teachers assess the lesson by highlighting the appropriate rubric phrases. Teachers provide this self-assessment TO THE OBSERVER IN ADVANCE OF THE POST TEACHING CONFERENCE. The observer reviews the teacher’s evidence prior to the post. The observer highlights, on his/her rubric the COMPONENTS OF AGREEMENT ONLY prior to the post. The observer LEAVES BLANK the components of difference prior to the post

60 Step # 4: Post-Teaching Collaborative Assessment (Focused on Domains 1,2, 3, & 4)  Teacher meets with Evaluator to reflect on lesson - Evidence not required for each D4 component for this one lesson  Evaluator notes components of agreement and then invites teacher to take the lead in discussing the other components.  Components are collaboratively rated. Evaluator is the “rater of record” in the event of non-agreement. Evidence is the basis. Conversation Stems:  Comment on the evidence for...  Let’s look at the rubric for...  Tell me more about ….  What’s the backstory for...  Let’s look at the language that was highlighted here…talk about the evidence for that in this lesson After

61 The Purpose of the Post  To discuss the components of difference (not yet marked by observer)  To elicit any evidence that still remains to be added about the lesson  To arrive at an assessment on the rubric for components of difference

62 5 “Rules” for Educator Supervision/Evaluation 1. Defensible definition of teaching 2. Differentiation of evaluative processes 3. Evidence-driven process 4. The role of teacher learning 5. Transparency

63 Rule # 4 Conduct evaluations in such a way that they produce teacher learning

64 Overarching Question Who does the thinking? Therefore, who does the learning and growing?

65 Professional Learning “ Learning is done by the learner; it is mental WORK.” - Charlotte Danielson Who does the mental work in your evaluation process? (Overarching Question)

66 The Nature of Professional Learning: Mental Work for Teachers  Reflection on practice  Collaboration  Self-assessment  Self-directed inquiry (action research)  Feedback based upon evidence

67 “Narrative-Free” Evaluation The rubric contains the narrative Select the language that matches the evidence The teacher participates in language selection The highlighter is the tool A summative domain statement is optional

68 5 “Rules” for Educator Supervision/Evaluation 1. Defensible definition of teaching 2. Differentiation of evaluative processes 3. Evidence-driven process 4. The role of teacher learning 5. Transparency

69 Rule # 5: Transparency Teachers must learn the rubrics and the process

70 Communication is two-way, not one way. Notification is NOT Communication


Download ppt "Conewago Valley School District Teacher Evaluation Tool Training 2013-14 1. Please sit at your “building” table. 2. Complete a nameplate – first name only."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google