Indiana Superintendent Evaluation PROCESS

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Rhode Island Model for Educator Evaluation Systems August 2010.
Advertisements

2008 K- 8 Core/Comprehensive Mathematics Curricula Review and Final Recommendations Presentation to State Board of Education by Dr. Terry Bergeson December.
Updated Training for DPAS II for Administrators
On-the-job Evaluation of Principals Jacquelyn O. Wilson, Ed.D. Delaware SAELP Director Wallace Foundation National Conference October 25-28, 2006.
Individual Professional Development Plan Santa Rosa District Schools School Year.
SLG Goals, Summative Evaluations, and Assessment Guidance Training LCSD#7 10/10/14.
Training objectives & notes to the presenter… This training module is designed for an administrative commissioner ( Council Commissioner, Assistant Council.
Simpson County Schools: New Teacher Support Program A Proposal.
Student Growth Measures in Teacher Evaluation Module 1: Introduction to Student Growth Measures and SLOs.
Mississippi Principal Evaluation System (MPES) Circle Survey Training November
Campus Improvement Plans
PUSD Site Administrator Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 23, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
The Marzano School Leadership Evaluation Model Webinar for Washington State Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project.
School Site Council Guidelines Roles and Responsibilities Adapted from: Administrator’s Guide to School Site Councils Prepared by California.
The Assistant Principal Pool Process 2014
Dallas Baptist University College of Education Graduate Programs
Compensation Model Supervisor Training Presented by: Jennifer Larson
Module 1: PERA Illinois Administrative Code Part 50
Administrative Evaluation Committee – Orientation Meeting Dr. Christine Carver, Associate Superintendent of Human Capital Development Mr. Stephen Foresi,
February 8, 2012 Session 3: Performance Management Systems 1.
Student Learning targets
Physical Education SLOs: A Clarification of the State Education Department’s 8 Component SLO Template: Grades K-5 Presented By: Laura Shaw – Dows Lane.
HEA 1388 Includes new reporting requirements based upon standards and benchmarks for teacher preparation programs and program completers.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
Committee of Practitioners ESEA Flexibility Waiver Review June 25, 2014.
Catherine C. Dunn, P.E., N.PE, P.PE Deputy Director Port Development Prt of New Orleans Catherine C. Dunn, P.E., D.NE, D.PE Director,
Senior Capstone Experience Framework A Guide for South Dakota Schools.
Information for school leaders and teachers regarding the process of creating Student Learning Targets. Student Learning targets.
“We will lead the nation in improving student achievement.” CLASS Keys TM Module 5 Pre-Evaluation Conference Spring 2010 Teacher and Leader Quality Education.
Invention Convention Seth Krivohlavek Angie Deck.
Comprehensive Cultural Assessments Summary of Scope & Methodology A. Levin © SYNERGY Consulting Services Corporation, 1999.
STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES Condensed from ODE Teacher Training.
Instructional Plan | Slide 1 AET/515 Instructional Plan December 17, 2012 Kevin Houser.
Standards IV and VI. Possible Artifacts:  School Improvement Plan  School Improvement Team  North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey  Student.
Central Kitsap School District SHARED DECISION MAKING Central Kitsap High School March 2, 2006.
Effective Grading Strategies Alison Morrison-Shetlar Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning Adapted from the book Effective Grading by Barbara Walvoord.
What you need to know about changes in state requirements for Teval plans.
Science Notebooks Management and Assessment Sue Campbell Livingston Middle School.
Module 2: Joint Committee Decisions Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Barren County Schools CERTIFIED EVALUATION PLAN
Monitoring and Oversight: College Completion and Attainment Dr. Kevin Reilly & Dr. Sheila Stearns AGB Consultants December 7th, 2015.
Mini-Project #2 Quality Criteria Review of an Assessment Rhonda Martin.
ELL Program Advisory Group November 10, TWO PHASES of WORK ELL Program Advisory Group PHASE ONE 1/1/2016As Specified in HB Criteria Determine.
Student Achievement Through Teacher Evaluation Presenters Dr. Jane Coughenour Dr. Karen Chapman Mr. Michael Matta.
Standards of Achievement for Professional Advancement District 2 Career Ladder Training April 29, 2016 Ronda Alexander & Michael Clawson.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
Ohio Principal Evaluation System Pike County Joint Vocational School March 7,
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP TEAM CAMPUS IMPROVEMENT PLANNING MARCH 3, 2016.
PHYSICAL FITNESS TESTING (DISTRICT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS) PREPARED BY SBCUSD ASSESSMENT & ACCOUNTABILITY – JANUARY 2013.
Understanding How Evaluations are Calculated Professional Practices, Measures of Student Learning/ Outcomes- Calculating Scores & Translating SLOs/SOOs.
APPR Annual Professional Performance Review Legislation: 3012-d Board of Education Work Session November 9, 2015.
2014 – 2015 EVALUATION PERIOD KCTCS ePerformance Training.
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
Analysis Manager Training Module
Campus ESSA Grant Packet Training
Project Process Leading for Impact®: Building Future Leaders
Public School Academies Unit
Implementing the Specialized Service Professional State Model Evaluation System for Measures of Student Outcomes.
Understanding How Evaluations are Calculated
Staff Finalization.
Preparing to Use This Video with Staff:
Administrator Evaluation Orientation
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
Evaluations Evaluations are regulated and required by KDE (KAR’s and KRS’s) All Certified staff are held accountable to job specific domains and standards.
PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE RENEWAL PROCESS
Staff Finalization.
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
SRCDS: ESP Evaluation System
Shasta CCD Board Retreat CEO Search, Accreditation & Student Success
Presentation transcript:

Indiana Superintendent Evaluation PROCESS Calculating Results Michael T. Adamson, Ed.D. Director of Board Services Indiana School Boards Association

What’s the Big Deal? IC 20-28-11.5-4 All certificated employees must be evaluated annually. The evaluation instrument or process must meet the standards of evaluation identified in the statute.

The Opportunity ISBA and IAPSS seized the opportunity to develop an evaluation process that reflects the duties and responsibilities of superintendents throughout Indiana, regardless of school size or administrative staff support. The strength of this process predominantly relies on a mutual understanding between a board and its superintendent regarding the objective requirements of evaluation.

Development of the process Joint committee IAPSS Dr. Tom Little, Jr. – MSD Perry Township Dr. Sherry Grate – DeKalb Central Dr. Scott Hanback – Tippecanoe Dr. Kevin Caress – Clark Pleasant (Exec. Dir. of Central IN Education Ctr.) ISBA Dr. Michael Adamson – Dir. Of Board Services Lisa Tanselle, Esq. – Staff Attorney IDOE - Advisory Dr. Dennis Brooks – Sr. Advisor to IN State Supt. (IEERB Consultant)

Board Responsibility School boards are explicitly responsible for annually evaluating their superintendent’s performance. A responsible evaluation is not an informal exercise that mainly relies upon subjective measurements.

Evaluation Components The total evaluation ranking is achieved by the combined performance scores of 3 evaluation components: The rubric composite score The composite score for personal/corporate goals The corporation accountability grade

Weighing the evaluation This instrument can be applied to any school system, regardless of demographics Boards and Superintendents mutually determine the weight of each component prior to the evaluation cycle.

Metrics Percentages The percentages next to each of the three categories is to be determined by the board and superintendent at the beginning of each evaluation period. The joint committee’s recommendation is that the greater weight of the evaluation should always reside with the evaluation instrument. Circumstance and priorities should and will affect these percentages from year-to-year and must be a topic of meaningful discussion before each evaluation period if the process is to represent a formative exercise in continuous improvement.

The Metrics Enter the date the weights were established. This cell fills automatically. Enter the weight to be given to the assessment, e.g. 45 = 45% Enter the weight to be given for the accountability grade, e.g. 30 = 30% Enter the weight to be given to goals/objectives, e.g. 25 = 25% This cell fills automatically.

The Rubric Adapted from the Doug Reeves Leadership Matrix Consists of 6 categories with a total of 25 indicators aligned with the Indiana Content Standards for Educators – School Leader – District Level Performance indicators are aligned in categories that define Highly Effective, Effective, Improvement Necessary, and Ineffective performance

Rubric Example

Rubric Performance Superintendents and the School Board should have a mutual understanding of the performance expectations for each indicator and the kinds of objective evidence of performance prior to completing this evaluation. It is an ISBA and IAPSS recommendation that the greater weight of the evaluation be assigned to the superintendent’s rubric indicator performance.

Individual Score Sheet Every board member should place a check mark in the box that reflects his or her scores for every indicator in each of the six categories of the evaluation rubric. These are the only choices . . . Marks in-between two boxes should not be counted.

Evaluation Data These cells fill automatically Enter answers next to each indicator for each board member

Superintendent goals May be personal goals or corporate objectives Need a minimum of two Identify goals at the beginning of the evaluation process Define the performance categories, i.e., HE, E, I, IN

Goals/Objectives These cells fill automatically Enter Number of Goals and/or Objectives Enter Score Based on Scoring Criteria

School Rating These cells fill automatically Enter Grade provided from IDOE

Evaluation Summary All Cells in this Worksheet Fill Automatically If the Total value of categories in the Metric Worksheet is less or greater than 1.0 (100%), these weight cells will be blank. Every board member should sign the evaluation summary.

ISBA/IAPSS Superintendent Evaluation Metrics Ranking ISBA/IAPSS Superintendent Evaluation Metrics

Final Comments Superintendents should be proactive regarding the evaluation process. The superintendent’s evaluation must be reported along with the evaluations of other certificated employees. If there are questions regarding the process or if additional training is needed for board members, contact ISBA.

Questions?