Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

2012-13 ORIENTATION PRESENTED BY DR. DAVID PEAK ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATORS (NON-SCHOOL BASED) EVALUATION.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "2012-13 ORIENTATION PRESENTED BY DR. DAVID PEAK ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATORS (NON-SCHOOL BASED) EVALUATION."— Presentation transcript:

1 2012-13 ORIENTATION PRESENTED BY DR. DAVID PEAK ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATORS (NON-SCHOOL BASED) EVALUATION

2 OVERVIEW OF ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION N+1 Communication Model Foundational Assumptions Beliefs Administrator Performance Standards Goal Setting/Dialogue Process Data Sources Summative Evaluation

3 N + 1 * COMMUNICATION SYSTEM The system requires decisions to be made at the point of most impact while delineating how input will be gathered. Assume that the decision point in the district (school) is identified as “N”. The communication system that then surrounds the decision point is as follows: Look “up” in the district (department/school) for rationale and support. Look “down” in the district (department/school) for feasibility and commitment. Look sideways interior to the district (department/school) for impact and acceptance. Look sideways exterior to the district (department/school) for impact and acceptance. * Developed by Dr. Ted Rogers, Assistant Superintendent in Adams #12 School District in 1972 Guiding question for administrators… How do I know when it’s important to contact my supervisor regarding a situation? If a situation is high-stakes, political or systemic! 3

4 GRAPHIC PICTURE OF N + 1 WITH GUIDING QUESTIONS 4 Rationale and Support Is this district, school, department…responsible for this activity? Is this consistent with the Board of Education mission? Is this consistent with the Board of Education belief statements? Is this consistent with the site plan? Is this consistent with my goals for the year? Impact and Acceptance Outside the District, School, Department Is there input from all stakeholder groups? How was the information gathered and what groups are represented? Who needs to know about this? How will this impact others in the district, schools, departments? How will this impact the community? Impact and Acceptance Inside the District, School, Department Is this in the best interest of students? How will this benefit students? How will this lead to increased student achievement? How will this impact my district, school, department? How will this impact my colleagues? Feasibility and Commitment Is this the best use of district, school, department funds? Is this the best use of time? Is this activity cost effective? How was this determined and what will it cost to implement? Will there be a cost savings? Will there be a work impact on current staff? 1 + 1 + N + 1 + 1

5 FOUNDATIONAL ASSUMPTIONS Administrators are committed to the highest possible standards for themselves and their teams/departments. Administrators influence the direction of their teams/departments. The evidence to support evaluation is a joint responsibility between the administrator and supervisor. The system requires that the administrator and supervisor jointly assume responsibility for making the evaluation process authentic. The conversation with the supervisor is just as important to the administrator as the formal written evaluation. Ongoing rich conversations between administrator and supervisor are open, honest and respectful. 5

6 BELIEFS The relationship between supervisor and administrator is important; trust is foundational. The evaluation process is growth-oriented, should improve professional skills and enhance administrators’ performance. The process is individualized so as to challenge the administrator and results in a meaningful experience for both the administrator and supervisor. Time is valued and respected. When something is high stakes, systemic or political, there are “no surprises” between the administrator and the supervisor. District change is promoted and district goals are achieved through administrator leadership fostered by the relationship between the administrator and supervisor. 6

7 ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE STANDARD I. I. Leadership A.Communicates a clear vision for school or unit of effectiveness B.Demonstrates decision-making which is thoughtful and appropriate C.Displays effective planning and organization D.Develops and maintains a positive and productive climate 7

8 ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE STANDARD II. II. Supervision A.Utilizes various supervision approaches B.Makes fair, professional, credible evaluations following state and district policy C.Fosters a supportive relationship focused upon continual growth 8

9 ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE STANDARD III. III. Communication A.Promotes effective communication B.Demonstrates knowledge and application of communication skills C.Demonstrates/utilizes the N+1 model 9

10 ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE STANDARD IV. IV. Basic Job Description A.Performs job responsibilities in a professional and effective manner with student welfare as the primary focus B.Displays professional and technical knowledge 10

11 ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE STANDARD V. V. Personal Qualities A.Demonstrates flexibility and adaptability B.Models honesty and integrity C.Demonstrates care and concern for self and others 11

12 GOAL SETTING/DIALOGUE PROCESS Step One: The administrator and supervisor shall meet prior to the end of September to review the performance standards and to formulate appropriate goal(s). The goal(s) will be written by the administrator in terms of an action plan. The number of goals will be determined by the administrator with supervisor endorsement. The performance standards shall serve as a basis for discussion between the administrator and supervisor to assist in determining goals and on-going professional development. Because supervision is not an event, but a process of dialogue, the administrator and supervisor will set a schedule at the goal-setting meeting for on-going times for conversation and support. They will also discuss the data sources to be used during the year. 12

13 GOAL SETTING/DIALOGUE PROCESS Step Two: Prior to the end of 1st semester, the administrator and supervisor shall meet to review the progress toward the accomplishment of goal(s). Step Three: Prior to the end of year evaluation, the administrator will present to the supervisor any specific written data sources discussed the previous fall. 13

14 DATA SOURCES Since it is intended that the evaluation process be flexible and individualized, at the goal setting meeting the administrator and supervisor will discuss and determine the data sources, which may include: Administrator self-assessment at the beginning and end of academic year Administrator portfolio development Administrator survey of staff and peers based on performance standards Peer coaching and summary dialogue among administrator, peer coach and supervisor Supervisor observation of administrator’s activities Team/department assessment data Unsolicited input from others Other as specified The supervisor has the responsibility for stating the data sources used in the formal written evaluation. 14

15 SUMMATIVE EVALUATION There will be an end of year summative evaluation written by the supervisor each academic year. The evaluation shall be discussed and signed by the evaluator and the administrator, each to receive a copy of the report. The signature by the administrator shall not be construed to indicate agreement with information contained in the evaluation. Evaluators are encouraged to discuss strengths and weaknesses of administrator’s performance throughout the year. 15


Download ppt "2012-13 ORIENTATION PRESENTED BY DR. DAVID PEAK ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATORS (NON-SCHOOL BASED) EVALUATION."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google