© 2011, tulsa public schools copyright © tulsa public schools 2011 © 2011, tulsa public schools
TRANSCRIPT
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools 3
Why implement a new teacher evaluation system?
(a) We need a better method of identifying and
describing effective teaching.
(b) We need a better method of identifying and
describing ineffective teaching.
(c) They’re making me do it!
3
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Tulsa Model’s Alignment with Oklahoma Law, including SB 2033
• Five tiers of effectiveness
• Evidence-based
• Measures observable characteristics that are correlated with student performance
• Time frames reflect state law
• Multiple supports for improvement
5
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
What’s Important To Know?
• Teacher involvement is key.
• Teachers are our talent...use the evaluation system to support them.
• Principals’ time is precious.
• Keep it simple….Measure what matters (the characteristics that impact student achievement).
6
6
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Key Features of the Tulsa Model
• Developed with and by Oklahoma teachers
• Research-based
• Independently validated
• Support-focused
• Rich, but workable
7
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Teamwork and Collaboration…
“… the fuel that allows common people to attain uncommon results.”
– Henry Ford
8
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Research-Based and Validated
• Rubrics incorporate best practices associated with higher student achievement. – Kathleen Cotton of NWREL (Northwest Regional Educational Lab)– Harvard researcher Thomas Kane
• The Tulsa Model and its indicators are empirically associated with student achievement. (It measures what matters.)– MET Validation Engine Project– University of Wisconsin findings
9
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Support-Focused
• Rubrics are detailed roadmaps for improvement for all teachers
• Observation conferences are a status check prior to formal evaluation.
• Requires customized teacher training and responses w/re to teachers ranked in bottom two tiers
10
10
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools 11
Rich, But Workable, System
RubricThe definitions of professional proficiency (effectiveness) for all 5 rankings.• Contains 20 indicators (down from 37 in first year of
implementation)
Observation Process Principal's intentional study and analysis of the teacher’s classroom performance – guided by the rubric.
• a minimum of 2 observations per evaluation
11
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
More indicators?…It’s a fine balance.
“Each additional [indicator] included in an instrument adds costs….training time and scoring time for observers.”
“Adding an indicator risks lowering the quality of data on all other indicators if observers have already reached their ability to keep track.”
“When observers are overtaxed by…tracking many different competencies at once, their powers of discernment decline.”
“…it may be useful to economize by combining or dropping competencies that commonly occur together, that prove to be too difficult to measure reliably, or that are unrelated to other outcomes.”
MET Policy and Practice BriefJanuary 2012Page 28
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Tulsa Model Evaluation System Description
Evaluation FormWeb-based or paper-based. Your choice.
ConferencesFollow every observation and evaluation
Customized Feedback and SupportFocusing the most intensive supports for 1 (“Ineffective”) and 2 (“Needs Improvement”).
13
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Customized Supports for Teacher Improvement
1. “Push Pins” (less formal, yet documented) approaches
2. Personal Development Plans (PDPs)
3. PD aligned with evaluation findings
(optional outside of TPS)
14
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools 15
Customized Teacher Supports, continued
4. PDP Support: address issues identified in PDPs (optional outside of TPS)
5. Quality Experiences Supporting Teachers (QUEST) (optional outside of TPS)
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Tulsa Model - Structure
Domains (5)
• Classroom Management
• Instructional Effectiveness
• Professional Growth & Continuous Improvement
• Interpersonal Skills
• Leadership
17
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Tulsa Model - Indicators
Indicators (20)• Classroom Management (6)
• Instructional Effectiveness (10)
• Professional Growth & Continuous Improvement (2)
• Interpersonal Skills (1)
• Leadership (1)
18
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Tulsa Model - Weight
• Classroom Management (30%)
• Instructional Effectiveness (50%)
• Professional Growth & Continuous Improvement (10%)
• Interpersonal Skills (5%)
• Leadership (5%)
19
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
A Teacher Rubric in Detail
Like a dictionary, the rubric provides definitional clarity as to each level of effectiveness.
22
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools 27
The Impact
• Identification of teachers’ strengths• Clear and actionable direction on how to improve• Customized, tiered support• PLC tool• Performance-based exits of ineffective
teachers/principals
27
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Lessons Learned
• Communicate!• Leverage research and teacher and principal
feedback to continuously improve the system
• Train evaluators, and train them again– Ensure inter-rater reliability and accuracy
28
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
For more information: www.tulsaschools.org
Talia Shaull [email protected] Burk [email protected]
918-746-6800
30