Presentation on theme: "Pilot Alternative Teacher Evaluation 2006-07. Development of the Pilot The evaluation was developed in cooperation with the Aurora Education Association."— Presentation transcript:
Development of the Pilot The evaluation was developed in cooperation with the Aurora Education Association Members of the workgroup Sue Clark – Facilitator Dianne Dugan – Principal Tony Van Gytenbeek – Asst. Supt., HR Dennis Hamann – Consultant, Instruction Curtis Holmes – Teacher Brenna Isaacs – AEA President Cathy Wildman – Teacher
Concept The alternative teacher evaluation is: A flexible interactive process in which the teacher –Selects an evaluation team –Determines the criteria for evaluation in collaboration with that team An online process
Who is eligible? At the following schools: Elementary schools (8) Century Dalton Fulton Kenton Laredo Park Lane Quest Vassar Middle Schools (4) Columbia Mrachek South West High Schools (4) Aurora Central Gateway Rangeview William Smith Non-probationary teachers on evaluation cycle whos previous evaluation meets or exceeds standards
What is the process? The following slides explain the steps in this flow chart
Request & Evaluation Team Teachers may request alternative evaluation within three weeks of beginning of school year If the supervisor agrees: Teacher selects an evaluation team Including an evaluator of record who must be an APS licensed administrator
How is the evaluation plan developed? Within the first quarter the teacher in collaboration with the evaluation team will determine Evaluation criteria What evidence will demonstrate meeting standards How evidence will be collected A timeline for collection of evidence and feedback
Evaluation Criteria The person being evaluated and the chosen evaluator(s) review the four standards and proficiency indicators At least one indicator for each standard will be selected These selections may be changed during the review process by mutual agreement between the person being evaluated and the chosen evaluator(s).
Standard A - Teaching and Student Learning The teacher is committed to students and their learning The teacher knows the subjects he/she teaches and how to teach those subjects to students. Indicators: 1. Demonstrates a thorough knowledge of students as individual learners and evaluates assessment data for each student by identifying what the student can do, needs to learn next, and what the teacher will do about it. 2. Plans high, worthwhile and attainable goals and objectives, selecting rich, thought-provoking and appropriate resources, and identifying what the learning looks and sounds like. 3. Implements learning experiences that are connected to content learning goals and sequences and structures instruction so students attain the goals. 4. Generates varied formal and informal evidence to regularly evaluate and improve student learning
Standard B - Learning Environment The teacher manages and monitors student learning. The teacher develops an environment where individuals are encouraged, respected, and challenged intellectually, academically, and socially. Indicators: 1. Develops a classroom where students demonstrate self- confidence and responsibility for high standards of learning. 2. Ensures that tasks and resources support student growth and proficiency. 3. Creates a safe, secure learning environment where on-going feedback, praise and positive reinforcement result in high levels of student engagement and learning. 4. Recognizes individual differences in his/her students and models and teaches accordingly.
Standard C - Professional Development The teacher thinks systematically about his/her practice and learns from experience. The teacher commits to improving his/her professional practice in order to improve student learning. Indicators: 1. Demonstrates growth in instructional knowledge and skills. 2. Engages in active, collaborative reflection to improve professional competence. 3. Takes an active role in school-based professional development. 4. Stays current with research and, when appropriate, incorporates new findings into his/her practice. 5. Regularly analyzes, evaluates, reflects on, and strengthens the effectiveness and quality of his/her practice.
Standard D – Professionalism The teacher is a contributing member of the learning community. Indicators: 1. Clearly and consistently reaches out to parents and other interested adults as valued partners in the childs education. 2. Seeks leadership opportunities and shares responsibility to promote school improvement. 3. Contributes to the effectiveness of the school by working collaboratively with other professionals.
Evidence, Format & Timeline The person being evaluated and the chosen evaluator(s) will: Mutually define evidence appropriate to each proficiency indicator selected Determine methods for collection of evidence to support proficiency indicator(s) –How collected –What format –Where stored Agree on the format and time line for collection of evidence and feedback
Evaluators The person being evaluated and the chosen evaluator(s) will: mutually identify evaluator(s) for each indicator selected including at least one person employed as a licensed administrator within the Aurora Public Schools
Planning Sheet A planning sheet will be printed containing: Indicators Evidence Format Timeline Evaluator(s). The person being evaluated will acquire signature of immediate supervisor approving the use of the pilot evaluation Copies of the signed planning sheet will be distributed to the person being evaluated, selected evaluator of record, all other evaluators and immediate supervisor.
Evidence Teacher and evaluators collect evidence: In specified format According to timeline Examples: Teacher reflection on how evidence collected indicates proficiency on standard –What teaching strategies worked well –Next steps Test scores Observation notes Student products Etc.
Evaluation Evaluator(s): Develop written analysis of evidence collected for each indicator Score each standard according to analysis of evidence collected for indicators in that area –Meets Standard –Growth Needed
Goals The employee and the evaluator of record mutually develop written goals
Comments Employee develops written reflection on the evaluation Content Process Selected evaluator of record develops written summary of the review Content Process
Signatures Interested parties sign off on evaluation Staff member Selected evaluator of record Immediate supervisor
Filing One copy of the signed review is retained at the site Another is given to the staff member The original signed copy is sent to Human Resources
Next Steps – 4 out of 4 An employee who earns 4 out of 4 scores of Meets Standard resulting in an overall score of: Meets Standard Will be evaluated again in the regular cycle
Next Steps – 3 out of 4 An employee who earns 3 out of 4 scores of Meets Standard resulting in an overall score of: Meets Standard May continue with the review the following year, focusing on the standard that was scored Growth Needed if desired However, this is not required Will be evaluated again in the regular cycle
Next Steps – 2, 1 or 0 out of 4 An employee who earns 2, 1 or 0 out of 4 scores of Meets Standard resulting in an overall score of: Growth Needed Continues with this review next year, focusing on the standards that were scored Growth Needed Or chooses to return to the traditional teacher evaluation process for next year
Professional Development Directors and principals meeting, June 2006 Cohort groups form, Fall 2006 Salary advancement credit for attendance Dennis Hamann - Facilitator Evaluation plans developed during first quarter Evaluations start during second quarter or semester Cohort works together through all stages Available online www.aps.k12.co.us/hr/pilot www.aps.k12.co.us/hr/pilot This overview Links to start a new evaluation and to search for an existing evaluation Sample evaluation plan Examples of evidence (coming soon)
Review of Pilot The pilot: Will run in the 2006-07 and 2007-08 school years May be adjusted for second year Will be reviewed by the Performance Evaluation Council each year Will return to bargaining teams at the end of two years to determine next steps
Questions Direct questions to: The Division of Instruction –Dennis Hamann –Linda Damon The Division of Human Resources –Kari Allen –Sheri Charles –Kathleen Hostetler