LCSD APPR Introduction: NYS Teaching Standards and the Framework for Teaching Rubric Welcome! Please be seated in the color-coded area (marked off by colored.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
USING THE FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING TO SUPPORT EFFECTIVE TEACHER EVALUATION Mary Weck, Ed. D Danielson Group Member.
Advertisements

NC Educator Evaluation System Process Orientation
Western Suffolk BOCES Workshop Resources APPR Training for Lead Evaluators 1.
NIET Teacher Evaluation Process
Thank you!. At the end of this session, participants will be able to:  Understand the big picture of our new evaluation system  Create evidence-based.
OCM BOCES APPR Regulations As of % Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures APPR.
Student Growth Measures in Teacher Evaluation
Evidence: First… 1. Assemble your district team to include teachers, administrators, association representatives 2. Research and select an instructional.
Imagine you are in the classroom of a highly effective teacher:  What would you see?  What would you hear?  What would the students be doing or saying?
Student Learning Objectives Session 3 Denver Public Schools Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 2014.
August 2014 The Oregon Matrix Model was submitted to USED on May 1, 2014 and is pending approval* as of 8/8/14 *Please note content may change Oregon’s.
December 13, 2011 ICSD facilitated by Dr. Heather Sheridan-Thomas & Cheryl Covell TST BOCES Network Team Lead Evaluator of Teachers Training: Session 4.
September 2013 The Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 2: Student Learning Objectives.
Student Learning Objectives NYS District-Wide Growth Goal Setting Process December 1, 2011 EVOLVING.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Preparing and Applying Formative Multiple Measures of Performance Conducting High-Quality Self-Assessments.
March, What does the new law require?  20% State student growth data (increases to 25% upon implementation of value0added growth model)  20%
Student Growth 2.0 Fall,  Face-to-Face Sessions  Student Growth 2.0  Rater Agreement Practices  TPEP/ Washington State Learning Standards.
March 28, What does the new law require?  20% State student growth data (increases to 25% upon implementation of value0added growth model)  20%
2012 Secondary Curriculum Teacher In-Service
Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) Evaluation Process for Teachers.
LCSD APPR: Overview Review and Focus on the 60 points December 3, 2012.
Regents Reform Agenda Update as of November 2012 C-A Teachers' Resource Center-- J. Robinson, director 1 A special thank you to Jill Robinson, Director.
Creating a Student Learning Objective (SLO). Training Objectives Understand how Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) fit into the APPR System Understand.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
Compass: Module 2 Compass Requirements: Teachers’ Overall Evaluation Rating Student Growth Student Learning Targets (SLTs) Value-added Score (VAM) where.
* Provide clarity in the purpose and function of the Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) as a part of the APPR system * Describe procedures for using.
Ongoing Training Day 4. Agenda Growth and Value-Added Update 21 st Century Readiness and APPR Evidence Collection Inter-rater agreement and.
Teacher Effectiveness Day 5. Housekeeping Parking Breaks and lunch Emergencies.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
February 10, 2012 Session 3: Effective Leadership in the Common Core February 10, 2012 Session 3: Effective Leadership for the Common Core NYSED Principal.
The APPR Process And BOCES. Sections 3012-c and 3020 of Education Law (as amended)  Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) based on:  Student.
THE DANIELSON FRAMEWORK. LEARNING TARGET I will be be able to identify to others the value of the classroom teacher, the Domains of the Danielson framework.
Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 4: Reflecting and Adjusting December 2013.
Working Portfolios For Non Classroom Teachers. Agenda Determine Working Portfolio rubric Understand the performance levels and scoring Brainstorm possible.
OCM BOCES SLOs Workshop. Race To The Top: Standards Data Professional Practice Culture APPR.
STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND YOUR TEACHER EVALUATION NYSUT Education and Learning Trust NYSUT Field and Legal Services NYSUT Research and Educational.
Teacher and Principal Evaluations and Discipline Under Chapter 103.
FEH BOCES Student Learning Objectives 3012-c.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Update 11/29/12.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Program Introduction to Principal Evaluation in Washington 1 June 2015.
Winter, 2012 Teacher Effectivensss Day 5. To download powerpoint:
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Introduction to Teacher Evaluation in Washington 1 June 2015.
Student Learning Objectives SLOs April 3, NY State’s Regulations governing teacher evaluation call for a “State-determined District-wide growth.
March 23, NYSCSS Annual Conference Crossroads of Change: The Common Core in Social Studies.
A Framework for Teaching Charlotte Danielson’s Model SHS – Professional Development 14 November 2012 ( Brenda Baker/Marnie Malone)
APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011.
Race to the Top (RTTT) and the New York State Regents Reform Agenda Dr. Timothy T. Eagen Assistant Superintendent for Instruction & Curriculum South Huntington.
Changes in Professional licensure Teacher evaluation system Training at Coastal Carolina University.
Sample Science SLO’s Grades Student Growth Goal Setting Process (SLO’s) Y Central School District Science Points Grade Level/Subject.
Creating a Student Learning Objective (SLO). Training Objectives Understand how Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) fit into the APPR System Understand.
SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 facilitated by Dr. Heather Sheridan-Thomas TST BOCES Network Team Lead Evaluator of Teachers Training: Session 2 Developed by Teaching.
Ms. Omentum 95 Students 3 sections of Grade 7 Life Science with 25, 23, 25, students respectively, 1 section of Grade 8 Physical Sciences with 22 students.
Citywide Expectations for
Student Learning Objectives NYS District-Wide Growth Goal Setting Process December 1, 2011 EVOLVING.
2011 – 2012 School Year. * Walk-Throughs * Observation(s) * Pre-/Post-Evaluation Form * Year-End Evaluation * Summative Score Report.
1 Far West Teacher Center Network - NYS Teaching Standards: Your Path to Highly Effective Teaching 2013 Far West Teacher Center Network Teaching is the.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
Iredell-Statesville Schools Orientation to the North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Instrument & Process
Student Learning Objectives!
Lead Evaluator for Principals Part I, Series 1
Student Learning Objective (SLO) Staff Development
Sachem Central School District Teacher Evaluation Training 2012
Mary Weck, Ed. D Danielson Group Member
NEWARK CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT APPR OVERVIEW
Introduction to Core Professionalism
Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System (T-TESS)
Creating Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
SUPPORTING THE Progress Report in MATH
Roadmap November 2011 Revised March 2012
A student learning objective is an academic goal for a teacher’s students that is set at the start of a course. It represents the most important learning.
Presentation transcript:

LCSD APPR Introduction: NYS Teaching Standards and the Framework for Teaching Rubric Welcome! Please be seated in the color-coded area (marked off by colored bows) which is indicated on the cover of your packet.

 Familiarity with ◦ Changes to NYS APPR Regulations ◦ Evaluation criteria for the Multiple Measures section of APPR (60 points) ◦ The NYS Teaching Standards ◦ The Framework for Teaching Rubric  Resources for more information

 Overview of NYS Reform Policies  Introduction to APPR parts and rules  NYS Teaching Standards and Elements ◦ See and Hear  Framework for Teaching Rubric ◦ Proficient and Distinguished

NYS Reform Policies Common Core Learning Standards Data Informed Instruction Teacher/Leader Effectiveness ► Evaluators know and look for the content of CCLS during observations ►Leaders are knowledgeable and look for the ELA & math shifts during observation ►Leaders look for text-based questioning ►Leaders look for cognitive engagement, constructivist learning and 21 st century skills ►Interim assessments reflect CCLS ►Teacher and leaders analyze results within 48 hours ►An action planned is calendared to address CCLS weaknesses ►Leaders and teachers develop a culture around data ►State and local assessments are worth 40% of teacher evaluation ►Evidence based observation and documentation of meeting NYS teaching standards ►The goal of APPR is to improve instruction through a team approach and individualized, focused Professional Development School Change Increase College and Career Readiness

60 EBOP, etc Growth Local 100

Standards for Rating Categories HEDI DefinitionsPoints Bands Highly Effective Overall performance and results exceed standards Effective Overall performance and results meet standards Developing Overall performance and results need improvement in order to meet standards Ineffective Overall performance and results do not meet standards. 0-64

ELA Scale Score Proficiency In a growth model, we look at how all students with similar scores in one year (or several years) do when compared to each other In this example, we take one student from the previous slide and see how all students with that score in 2011 performed in This tells us whether the change in scores between two years is average or above or below average. In a growth model, we look at how all students with similar scores in one year (or several years) do when compared to each other In this example, we take one student from the previous slide and see how all students with that score in 2011 performed in This tells us whether the change in scores between two years is average or above or below average. Above Average Below Average Average

8 Student2010 Score2011 ScoreSGP Student2010 Score2011 ScoreSGP

 More information to come  Everyone except grades 4-8 ELA and Math teachers will need these next year  Status: determining SLO structures and processes  District will provide training, time, and guidance to write these by mid-October  Will be based on state test, if your course is associated with one

 20 pts if no Value-Added Score available for your course  15 pts if a Value-Added Score is available for your course (model expected for grades 4-8 ELA and Math in )  NYS planning to add assessments for core content areas: e.g., 6-8 SS, 6-8 Science, 9-10 ELA (budget prevented additions this year)

 Each teacher must be assessed for each NYS Teaching Standard every year.  A NYS-approved rubric (negotiated) must be used to assess teachers.  The rubric determines the criteria for Ineffective, Developing, Effective, and Highly Effective ratings.  The selected rubric is used to assess observations of practice and structured reviews of artifacts.

 Find the element that is written on the front of your packet near the color of your standard (We combined a few elements so some of you have multiples)  Locate the list of Standards and Elements in your packet to read your assigned element  Gather near the chart paper for your element to find your working group  Write the description of the element on the chart paper

 Create a display describing what teachers and students would “look like and sound like” while effectively meeting this standard element. Possible Layout 2.5 – Designs relevant instruction that connects students’ prior understanding and experiences to new knowledge Teacher ActionsStudent Actions

 Teaching Standards ◦ Elements ◦ Performance Indicators  Framework for Teaching ◦ Domain ◦ Component ◦ Elements ◦ Levels of Performance (Distinguished, Proficient, Basic, Unsatisfactory)  One to one correspondence with (Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, Ineffective)

NYSED Teaching StandardsFFT-Based Rubrics Standard 1: Knowledge of Students and Student Learning Elements Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Component 1B: Knowledge of Students Standard 2: Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning Elements Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Components 1A, 1C-1E Standard 3: Instructional Practice Elements Domain 3: Instruction Components: 3A-3F Standard 4: Learning Environment Elements Domain 2: Classroom Environment Components: 2A-2E Standard 5: Assessment for Student Learning Elements Domains 1,3,4,5 Components 1F, 3D, 4A, 5C Standard 6: Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration Elements Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Components 4B, 4C, 4F Standard 7: Professional Growth Elements Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Components 4A, 4C, 4E

 Use the Crosswalk Between the NYSED Teaching Standards and the Rubric to find the criteria for Proficient (Effective) and Distinguished (Highly Effective) associated with your element.  On your new chart paper, detail the differences between Proficient and Distinguished as described in the rubric.  Now apply the rubric to your element description: o Add new descriptors or examples of Distinguished teaching on the new chart paper

 Take the remaining time to read and take notes on other descriptions of Effective and Highly Effective teaching.  We provided note-taking sheets for each element in the back of your packet.  Please remember that you can leave sticky note questions on the back doors of the auditorium.  You will receive a feedback form electronically.  Thank you for your participation!