M EASURING T EACHER E FFECTIVENESS (MTE). H OW DID WE GET HERE ? Video from the Arizona School Administrators PUSD Measuring Teacher Effectiveness Committee.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers August 2013 Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for Teachers.
Advertisements

Leon County Schools Performance Feedback Process August 2006 For more information
Chad Allison May 2013  1-2 Formal Classroom Evaluations  Drop-in Visits.
DPAS II Jessica Baker & Cheryl Cresci MED 7701 Dr. Joseph Massare.
Charlotte Danielson’s The Four Domains of Teaching Responsibility
Teacher Evaluation New Teacher Orientation August 15, 2013.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 9, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
Overarching Question Who does the thinking? Therefore, who does the learning and growing?
C OLLABORATIVE A SSESSMENT S YSTEM FOR T EACHERS CAST
Teacher Evaluation Model
1.  Why and How Did We Get Here? o A New Instructional Model And Evaluation System o Timelines And Milestones o Our Work (Admin and Faculty, DET, DEAC,
Activity: Introducing Staff to Danielson’s Framework for Teaching
Overview of the New Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework Opening Day Presentation August 26, 2013.
Academy School District 20. Licensed staff of Academy School District 20 will engage in a differentiated, collaborative, and reflective evaluation process.
Alaska Educator Evaluation Overview Yukon Koyukuk School District.
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.
EDUCATOR EVALUATION August 25, 2014 Wilmington. OVERVIEW 5-Step Cycle.
Ramapo Teachers’ Association APPR Contractual Changes.
Evaluating Teacher Performance: Getting it Right CPRE Annual Conference November 21-23, 2002 Charlotte Danielson
Differentiated Supervision
Teacher Evaluation Ashley Greene 10/29/13.
Deliberate Practice Technical Assistance Day
Teachscape Overview John Monahan, Instructional Supervisor
ADEPT Framework
Welcome to... Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements 9/9/2015PBevan, D.ED.
The Danielson Framework and Your Evaluation AK Teaching Standard DP_8c: Engages in Instructional Development Activities Danielson Domain 4e: Growing and.
CLASS Keys Orientation Douglas County School System August /17/20151.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
An Effective Teacher Evaluation System – Our Journey to a Teaching Framework Corvallis School District.
Marco Ferro, Director of Public Policy Larry Nielsen, Field Consultant With Special Guest Stars: Tammy Pilcher, President Helena Education Association.
“We will lead the nation in improving student achievement.” CLASS Keys TM Module 7: Formal Observation Spring 2010 Teacher and Leader Quality Education.
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.
The New Massachusetts Principal Evaluation
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for Teachers.
The Danielson Framework Emmanuel Andre Owings Mills High School Fall 2013.
Using Teacher Evaluation as a Tool for Professional Growth and School Improvement Redmond School District
R OBERT M ARZANO E VALUATION & O BSERVATION. B ASICS Designed to create a common focus on instruction and to maximize student achievement. Research based.
Lincoln Intermediate Unit 12 August 11, 2014 Differentiated Supervision: The Danielson Framework.
Teacher Effectiveness Who begins in ? Teaching Specialists Special Education Teachers English as a Second Language Teachers Gifted Teachers.
 Development of a model evaluation instrument based on professional performance standards (Danielson Framework for Teaching)  Develop multiple measures.
BY COURTNEY N. SPEER TECHNOLOGY AS A TOOL SPRING Professional Growth & Self- Reflection.
PGES: The Final 10% i21: Navigating the 21 st Century Highway to Top Ten.
A Framework for Teaching Charlotte Danielson’s Model SHS – Professional Development 14 November 2012 ( Brenda Baker/Marnie Malone)
Introduction to... Teacher Evaluation System Teacher Effectiveness 12/6/
Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements: Evidence.
 Nuts & Bolts 2015/16 PAS…. Learning Targets: Administrators will be able to: Understand and Articulate the First Observation Cycle Review and Approve.
T HE T EACHER E FFECTIVENESS E VALUATION S YSTEM P ILOT P ROGRAM C HARLOTTE D ANIELSON M ODEL IMPLEMENTATION.
FOUR DOMAINS Domain 4: Domain 1: Professional Planning & Responsibilities Preparation Domain 3: Domain 2: Instruction Classroom Environment.
Curriculum and Instruction: Management of the Learning Environment
Teacher Evaluation University of New England - EDU 704 Dr. William Doughty Submitted By: Teri Gaston.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
Focused Evaluation. Who?  Teachers who completed the Comprehensive cycle  Proficient or distinguished.
KPBSD Effective Instruction Evaluation Committee LaDawn Druce Marina Bosick Daniel Olson Margaret Griffen Troy Minogue Juliana DeBoard Megan.
Implementing the Professional Growth Process Session 3 Observing Teaching and Professional Conversations American International School-Riyadh Saturday,
EISD Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System T-TESS
Welcome to... Introduction to A Framework for Teaching 7/8/2016pbevan 1.
Oconee Keys Training September, Oconee Keys is designed to: Evaluate classroom teachers using qualitative rubrics to assess instructional practices.
Educator Recruitment and Development Office of Professional Development The NC Teacher Evaluation Process 1.
MSBSD Educator Evaluation
Framework For Teaching (FFT)
An Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Teacher Evaluation System
Okeechobee County Instructional Evaluation
Changes to the Educator Evaluation System
Overview of Implementation and Local Decisions
Introduction to Core Professionalism
Presentation transcript:

M EASURING T EACHER E FFECTIVENESS (MTE)

H OW DID WE GET HERE ? Video from the Arizona School Administrators PUSD Measuring Teacher Effectiveness Committee – 2 “Teacher A” and 2 “Teacher B” representatives from each building

P ROCESS FOR M EASURING T EACHER E FFECTIVENESS System for collaborative teacher appraisal and professional learning 2013 and Beyond

O VERVIEW OF THE M EASURING TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS P ROCESS By the end of this presentation, the teacher will be able to Know the number of formal/informal observations Have a better understanding of the tripod survey administration Know the timelines for goal setting and observations Know the key components of the Measuring Teacher Effectiveness process Understand the transition issues associated with HB2823 which allows school districts to postpone full implementation until school year

T EACHER A PPRAISAL (E VALUATION ) W EIGHT = 50% OF OVERALL RATING The purpose of Teaching Appraisals is to help teachers grow and improve with support and feedback. Collaboration builds a strong support system and evaluation is a process that includes activities such as, but not limited to: Formal Observations, Informal Observations, professional growth options, student achievement data, and various forms of evidence and artifacts.

All Teachers will receive a minimum of 2 Formal and 3 Informal Observations By the end of October, all teachers will receive a formal observation and rating on Domain 2 and 3. (Formal Observations = Uninterrupted Lesson) By the end of February, all teachers will receive a second formal observation and a preliminary rating on Domains 2 and 3. By the first of May, all teachers will receive a summative evaluation with ratings on all Domains and a calculation of points to determine level of performance. (2013 – 2014) Evaluators reserve the right to initiate a Focused Plan of Assistance (FPA) for inadequacies determined in any Domain and at any time needed

G OAL S ETTING W EIGHT - 17% OF OVERALL RATING The purpose of Goal Setting for Teaching Practices & Classroom Environment is to collect data focused on classroom learning conditions and student engagement. Each teacher will develop two goals to submit to the Principal for approval. PUSD uses a single administration of the Tripod Survey, a reliable measure and predictor of student achievement gains, to gage seven areas of classroom life and teaching practices for one of the two goals. By mid-September, all teachers will administer the Tripod Survey to a class of students. Results should be available by late October. The teacher will work with the administrator to develop the second goal focused on Domain 3 after the first formal evaluation.

M EASUREMENT OF S TUDENT G ROWTH W EIGHT - 33% OF OVERALL RATING The purpose of including Student Growth Measurements is to measure the teacher/principal impact on the growth of students By the first of May, all teachers will receive student growth data but will NOT receive a formal rating that includes test data as a factor in that rating. HB2823 allows school districts to postpone full implementation of the teacher/principal evaluation system until school year This additional time will give PUSD an opportunity to evaluate both the technical (rating key) and policy issues involved in the inclusion of student growth measures. Rating KeyWith Out Student Growth DataWith Student Growth Data Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective

T EACHING APPRAISAL O RIENTATION – 2013 This Year Only

PUSD I NTEGRATED M ODEL Evaluation based on “A Framework for Teaching”; Charlotte Danielson’s model Supported by PUSD professional development options

T EACHER P ERFORMANCE S TANDARDS  Domain 1: Planning and Preparation  Domain 2: The Classroom Environment  Domain 3: Instruction  Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

P OWER S TANDARDS FOR T EACHING  Five essential standards have been identified. Three are in Domain 1-Planning and Preparation and two are in Domain 3 –Instruction.  All are critical for increasing student achievement.  Teachers must achieve a proficient/developing rating on these five to maintain a satisfactory evaluation

D OMAIN 1 P LANNING AND P REPARATION  Knowledge of content  Enhancing student literacy  Knowledge of students  Selecting instructional objectives  Arizona Standards  Designing coherent instruction  Assessing student learning  Coherence with instructional objectives

D OMAIN 2 T HE C LASSROOM E NVIRONMENT  Establishing a Culture for Learning  Managing Classroom Procedures  Managing Student Behavior

D OMAIN 3 I NSTRUCTION  Communicating clearly and accurately  Engaging students in learning  Modeling  Student involvement in learning  Flexibility and responsiveness

D OMAIN 4 P ROFESSIONAL R ESPONSIBILITIES  Reflecting on teaching  Maintaining accurate records  Communicating with families  Showing professionalism  Growing and developing professionally

D EFINITION OF I NADEQUATE C LASSROOM P ERFORMANCE  Less than 80% of elements at proficient rating (11 or more)  One or more unsatisfactory rating  Less than proficient rating on one or more of the 5 Power Standards

I F I HAVE AN UNSATISFACTORY EVALUATION, WHAT HAPPENS THEN ?  Focused Plan of Assistance– written definition of expectations  Support provided  Intensive evaluation for defined period  Decision regarding contract renewal

T RACKS  Track I  First three years in the district  Two formal observations  Several informal observations  Planning review (with first Pre-Observation Conference)  Summative review

T RACKS  Track IIA - Full evaluation  Continuing teachers: once every three years  All four domains  One formal observation  Several informal observations  Planning review (with Pre Observation Conference)  Summative review

T RACKS  Track IIB –Goals or Learning Teams  No formal observation  At least two 10 minute informal observations  Develop a plan based on student data/building goals  Plan activities that will improve your practice  Provide evidence that demonstrates learning and improved practice  Can be linked to Learning Team or Action Research plan for seat time.

F OCUSED P LAN OF A SSISTANCE  Track III –  Focused Plan of Assistance (after notice of inadequate classroom performance)  Plan for specific improvements  Support for improvements  Intensive evaluation period

CHANGES FOR SY No Tracks All teachers will receive a minimum of 2 formal and 3 informal observations 1 st formal will be before the end of October 2 nd formal will be before the end of February Formal observations will consist of an uninterrupted lesson

CHANGES FOR SY Pre observation will evaluate primarily Domain 1 through teacher provided evidence Observation will evaluate primarily Domains 2 and 3 Post observation will evaluate primarily Domain 4 and will involve the teacher bringing artifacts from Domain 1 and 4 to the summative conference to support rating

PUSD P HILOSOPHY  Teachers grow and improve with support and feedback.  Collaboration builds a strong support system.  Evaluation is a constant process of reflection for teachers.  For evaluators, it is a process to provide feedback to teachers that encourages continuous improvement.

G OAL SETTING FOR TEACHING PRACTICES & CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT ORIENTATION Pilot Implementation for

CHANGES FOR SY By mid-September, all teachers will administer the Tripod Survey to a class of students. Results should be available by late October. By the end of November, all teachers will develop TWO goals and submit to principal for approval. One will be based on data from the Tripod Survey and the second will be based on data from Domain 3 after the first formal evaluation.

GOAL SETTING FORM

GOAL ATTAINMENT RUBRIC

S TUDENT GROWTH ORIENTATION

By the first of May, all teachers will receive student growth data but will NOT receive a formal rating that includes test data as a factor in that rating. HB2823 allows school districts to postpone full implementation of the teacher/principal evaluation system until school year The district will use the 2012 – 13 school year to identify appropriate testing measures to use for both A and B teachers.

I N SUMMARY For the school year the Summative Cover Sheet and Summative Evaluation Checklist will only have minor changes. The current policy for Inadequate Performance will remain in effect A new Goals Setting Process will be in place and the attainment of these goals will be a factor in determining level of proficiency. Pursuant to HB2823, Levels of Proficiency have been changed. They are: Ineffective Developing Effective Highly Effective

Two Resources to Assist in MTE Process