performance appraisal for teachers
DESCRIPTION
Performance Appraisal for Teachers . Enhancing Teacher Effectiveness Initiative using The Danielson Model. Superintendent’s Remarks…. A New Way of Doing Business Legislative Mandate Teacher evaluation – Charlotte Danielson Principal Evaluation – Doug Reeves Peer Evaluator - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL FOR TEACHERS
Enhancing Teacher Effectiveness Initiative using
The Danielson Model
Superintendent’s Remarks….
A New Way of Doing Business Legislative Mandate
Teacher evaluation – Charlotte Danielson
Principal Evaluation – Doug Reeves Peer Evaluator Value-Added Model (VAM)
Why Are We Doing This? Federal Grant- Race to the Top
SBHC applied for and received federal funds (+$2 million)
A requirement of the grant includes development of a performance appraisal system based upon a growth model for teachers and administrators and a system of compensation based upon student achievement data
Senate Bill 736 – Student Success Act (1012.33/1012.34 FS) - Requires all school districts in Florida to implement research-based models of performance evaluation and include a system of performance pay.
And, most importantly…..
Instruction will improve and, as a result, student learning will improve…..
“among the factors within the school that contribute to student learning, the quality of teaching is the single most important.”
(Danielson, 2008)
What the research says….. The “Ten Year Rule”
It takes approximately ten years or 10,000 hours of deliberate practice to reach expert status.
Number of years of experience is not necessarily a predictor of performance.
Teachers progress through various stages on the way to becoming expert Factors include:
Motivation Focused Feedback Focused Practice
Implementation Schedule 2011-12 – implement teacher and school
administrator performance appraisal system
2014 – Pay teachers and school administrators based upon performance appraisal system and student achievement data. (based upon 2013-14 data)
Purpose of New Teacher Evaluation “ETEI” – Enhancing Teacher Effectiveness
InitiativePurpose Statement: Working Together to Help Students Achieve by Helping Teachers Succeed
1. Ensuring quality of teaching and effectiveness of practices.
2. Promoting teacher growth and learning.
3. Improving student growth and achievement.
1. Rigorous2. Valid3. Reliable4. Defensible
The Danielson Model A Framework for Teaching
Four Domains
1. Planning and Preparation2. The Classroom Environment3. Instruction4. Professional Responsibilities
Domains 2 and 3 are “onstage” domains and are weighted more than 1 and 4 (Danielson research)
Planning and Preparation Knowing the content and understanding
what we teach. Knowing the students (demographic
information, academic background, special needs, etc)
Understanding instructional materials and resources
Understanding instructional design and assessment
Time
The Classroom Environment
Standards for Conduct are clear and routine
No loss of instructional time Respectful interactions among students
and teacher Physical environment supports learning
Instruction Students are engaged High quality activities and assignments Higher order questioning techniques Use of feedback and formative
assessment Teacher Flexibility - Use of “Plan B” when
necessary Differentiates instruction
Professional Responsibilities
High Ethical Standards Professionalism Reflection on Instruction Regular attendance Accurate Record Keeping Frequent communication with families Participation in school events Professional Development
Formal Classroom Observations Teacher provides a formative self-
assessment Pre-conference-respond to a variety of
written questions regarding the lesson to be observed and to determine the range of ability within the classroom
Observe the lesson-collect/script evidence only; not opinion, interpretation, or emotion
Post Conference-reflection; determine strengths and areas of development; make recommendations where appropriate
Peer Evaluators Support for First Year Teachers and New
to District; and Teachers in Need of Development
Frequent, formative feedback ; 3-4 “pop-ins” per semester
One Formal observation per semester (two per year) with Pre and Post Conferences
20% of Summative Evaluation Content Area Specialists, District
Resource Teachers, others (outside experts)
Category II Teachers• Professional Service Contract (PSC), Continuing Contract (CC) Teachers and Teachers with 4+ years of experience• One formal observation per year by school administrator (may conduct additional observations if needed)• 2-3 informal observations (walk-throughs, formative) per year
Calibration: Performance Appraisal Ratings All Administrators and Peer
Evaluators Certified by Cambridge Education
Must use rubric and evidence Insures Inter-rater Reliability Does not promote “rater-bias”
What about the evidence? Planning – Unit planning; the big picture; developing
prompts and activities that require students to use analysis, synthesis and evaluation
Student engagement – student work, relevancy, focus on deep meaning; use higher order questioning techniques
Communication with families – newsletters, phone logs, emails, etc.
Professional Growth – attendance log of professional development activities, workshop or conferences; reflection
Participation in a professional learning community (PLC) or action research project, log of school-wide or district committee service
Ratings Highly Effective- meets stringent criteria
in rubric; “elite” group of teachers; should have school-wide impact
Effective – classroom impact and rating that encompasses most teachers
Needs Improvement- developing skills and willing to improve practices
Ineffective – Little to no evidence of practices that impact student learning
(refer to generic ratings in Guidelines)
Value-added ModelsTeacher A
Student0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Prior PerformanceCurrent PerformancePredicted Performance
The difference between the predicted performance and the actual performance represents the value added by the teacher’s instruction.The predicted performance
represents the level of performance the student is expected to demonstrate after statistically accounting for factors through a value-added model.
New Standard for Teacher Evaluations
Category I Teacher - FCAT
Student Achievement - VAM Score 50%
Adminstrator 25%
Peer 20%
Teacher 5%
New Standard for Teacher Evaluations
Category II Teacher - FCAT
Student Achievement - VAM Score 50%Administrator 45%Teacher - Self 5%
Evaluating “Non-FCAT” Teachers
Category I Non-FCAT
Student Achievement District Assess-ment 40%Student Achievement School VAM 10%Administrator 25%Peer 20%Teacher 5%
Evaluating “Non-FCAT” Teachers
Category II Non-FCAT
Student Achievement District Assessment 40%Student Achievement School VAM 10%Administrator 45%Teacher 5%
Data State Growth Model – Value-Added covariance FCAT End of Course Exams SAT 10 for 2011-12 only; district selected
assessment after 2011-12 IPDP – collaborative/conversations with
principal (pre-post?) Student Achievement Goal Performance Appraisal (Instructional Practices) Goal Prescriptive Professional Development
After first year of implementation:
How are we doing?What have we learned?
Where do we go from here?
Questions ????