Transcript Teacher Effectiveness Training for CVSD Teachers

2013-14
Conewago Valley School District
Teacher Evaluation Tool Training
2013-14
1.
Please sit at your “building” table.
2.
Complete a nameplate – first name only.
3.
Review materials in the folder.
2013-14
CVSD
Teacher
Evaluation Tool
Training
2013-14
Training Goals
1)
Gain an understanding of the NEW Teacher
Evaluation system.
2)
Review the content of the Danielson Framework
and its role in teacher growth.
3)
Develop an Understanding of the Clinical
Observation Framework.
2013-14
Teacher Effectiveness
Project Goal

To develop a teacher effectiveness model that will
reform the way we evaluate teachers as well as
the critical components of teacher training and
teacher professional growth
2013-14
Multi-Measure
Teacher Effectiveness
 Developed
Danielson
 Phase
in collaboration with Charlotte
3 Implementation 2012-13
 Tool
to be used with all professional staff except
“Specialists”; Guidance, School Psychologists,
Nurses, etc.
 District


Requirements:
50% of staff must be trained in new model
10% of staff must use the tool
2013-14
2013-14
Observation/Evidence (50%)
•
Based on Danielson’s Domains
•
•
•
•
Planning & Preparation
Classroom Environment
Instruction
Professional Responsibilities
•
PDE-Adapted Rubric
•
Focus of Phase III Educator Effectiveness
Implementation.
2013-14
Additional Information
•
State forms/process are encouraged but
NOT mandated. District tools/process
MUST focus on Danielson Framework and
be approved by PDE
•
Additional rubrics/process being
developed for “specialists” and
administrators (targeted for January 2013).
2013-14
A Framework for Teaching:
The Research:
•National Board for Professional Teaching Standards
•Praxis III Teaching Performance Assessments
•State Teaching Standards
2013-14
Planning & Preparation
The Classroom Environment
List 2-3 key words
that characterize
the domain
Complete the sentence
Educator
Effectiveness is…
Professional Responsibilities
Instruction
2013-14
Defensible definition of teaching
Wisdom of Practice:
Collecting our thinking about
good teaching
2013-14
Wisdom of Practice
What are the qualities
of teaching most tightly tied
to student learning?
2013-14
The Domains
1.
Planning and Preparation
2.
The Classroom Environment
3.
Instruction
4.
Professional Responsibilities
A Framework for Teaching:
Components of Professional Practice
Domain 1: Planning and
Preparation
•Demonstrating Knowledge of Content
and Pedagogy
•Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
•Setting Instructional Outcomes
•Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
•Designing Coherent Instruction
•Designing Student Assessments
Domain 4: Professional
Responsibilities
•Reflecting on Teaching
•Maintaining Accurate Records
•Communicating with Families
•Participating in a Professional Community
•Growing and Developing Professionally
•Showing Professionalism
Domain 2: The Classroom
Environment
•Creating an Environment of Respect and
Rapport
•Establishing a Culture for Learning
•Managing Classroom Procedures
•Managing Student Behavior
•Organizing Physical Space
Domain 3: Instruction
•Communicating with Students
•Using Questioning and Discussion
Techniques
•Engaging Students in Learning
•Using Assessment in Instruction
•Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness
2013-14
Matching Scenarios
Framework Focus
Domain 1 – Planning
and Preparation
Domain 2 – The
Classroom
Environment
What a teacher knows and does
in preparation for engaging
students in learning.
What a teacher does to
establish and maintain a culture
for learning that supports
cognitive engagement.
Domain 4 – Professional
Responsibilities
Domain 3 – Instruction
Professional responsibilities and
behavior in and out of the
classroom.
What a teacher does to
cognitively engage students in
the content.
2013-14
Framework Features
 Generic:
 Not
applies to all grade levels, content areas
a checklist
 Not
prescriptive: tells the “what” of teaching, not
“how”
 Comprehensive:
 Inclusive:
not just what we can see
Novice to Master teacher
22
2013-14
Why Evaluate Professional Practice?
Quality
Assurance
Professional
Learning
2013-14
Benefits of a
Supervision/Evaluation Framework
 Common
Language
 Similarity
of vision for teaching that improves
teaching: the qualities of the distinguished level
 Greater
validity and reliability potential for teacher
evaluation
 Changes
in novice thinking
 Opportunities
for collaboration
2013-14
Uses of a Framework

Self-Assessment

Reflection

Peer Coaching

Teacher Evaluation

Mentoring and
Induction

Professional
Growth Plans
2013-14
5 “Rules” for
Educator Evaluation/Supervision
1.
Defensible definition of teaching
2.
Differentiation of evaluative processes
3.
Evidence-driven process
4.
The role of teacher learning
5.
Transparency
2013-14
Rule # 1
Start with a defensible definition of
good teaching that is studied,
and understood, by all
stakeholders.
2013-14
A Framework for Teaching:
Components of Professional Practice
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation
•Demonstrating Knowledge of Content
and Pedagogy
•Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
•Setting Instructional Outcomes
•Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
•Designing Coherent Instruction
•Designing Student Assessments
Domain 4: Professional
Responsibilities
•Reflecting on Teaching
•Maintaining Accurate Records
•Communicating with Families
•Participating in a Professional
Community
•Growing and Developing Professionally
•Showing Professionalism
Domain 2: The Classroom Environment
•Creating an Environment of Respect and
Rapport
•Establishing a Culture for Learning
•Managing Classroom Procedures
•Managing Student Behavior
•Organizing Physical Space
Domain 3: Instruction
•Communicating with Students
•Using Questioning and Discussion
Techniques
•Engaging Students in Learning
•Using Assessment in Instruction
•Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
2013-14
DOMAIN 2: THE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
Figure 6.7
COMPONENT 2A: CREATING AN ENVIRONMENT OF RESPECT AND RAPPORT
Elements:
Teacher interaction with students Student interaction
L
ELEMENT
FAILING
E V E L
O F
P
E R F O R M A N C E
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT
PROFICIENT
DISTINGUISHED
Teacher
Teacher interaction with at least
Interaction some students is negative,
with Students demeaning, sarcastic, or
inappropriate to the age or
culture of the students. Students
exhibit disrespect for teacher.
Teacher-student interactions are
generally appropriate but may
reflect occasional inconsistencies,
favoritism, or disregard for
students’ cultures. Students
exhibit only minimal respect for
teacher.
Teacher-student interactions are
friendly and demonstrate general
warmth, caring, and respect.
Such interactions are appropriate
to developmental and cultural
norms. Students exhibit respect
for teacher.
Teacher demonstrates genuine
caring and respect for individual
students. Students exhibit respect
for teacher as an individual,
beyond that for the role.
Student
Interaction
Students do not demonstrate
negative behavior toward one
another.
Student interactions are generally Students demonstrate genuine
polite and respectful.
caring for one another as
individuals and as students.
Student interactions are
characterized by conflict,
sarcasm, or put-downs.
29
2013-14
Levels of Performance
 Failing:
Potential for harm
 Needs
Improvement: Inconsistent, novice
 Proficient:
Consistent, competent
 Distinguished:
Unusually excellent, no one
“lives” here permanently in all
components
30
2013-14
5 “Rules” for
Educator Evaluation/Supervision
1.
Defensible definition of teaching
2.
Differentiation of evaluative processes
3.
Evidence-driven process
4.
The role of teacher learning
5.
Transparency
2013-14
Rule # 2
Differentiate the processes of
evaluation for novices,
experienced teachers, and
teachers at risk.
2013-14
Differentiated Evaluation
Novice/Untenured
Experienced/Tenured
At-Risk
Very close observation and
assessment
Presumption of
professionalism
Not punitive
Formal and informal
observation of teaching is
key + teacher interviews
+ artifacts
Structured process 1/3yr.
Other years: informals +
teacher interviews+
professional goal-setting
Intensive, extensive
team-based support
based on persistent
unsatisfactory
performance in one or
more components
2 – 4 formal times per
year; multiple informal
observations
Professional GoalSetting: Choose from a
list of rigorous, approved
activities
Clear goals, outcomes,
evidence and timelines
anchor
No self-directed activities
Activities produce
evidence which is then
evaluated
Designed for the teacher
who can, and wishes, to
improve
2013-14
Overarching Question
Who does the thinking?
Therefore, who does the learning
and growing?
2013-14
5 “Rules” for
Educator Evaluation/Supervision
1.
Defensible definition of teaching
2.
Differentiation of evaluative processes
3.
Evidence-driven process
4.
The role of teacher learning
5.
Transparency
2013-14
Rule # 3
Let evidence, not opinion,
anchor the process.
2013-14
Evidence or Opinion?
1.
The teacher’s lesson plan was well done.
2.
The teacher said that the South should have
won the Civil War.
3.
The table groups were arranged in 2 x 2 pods.
4.
The materials and supplies were appropriate for
the lesson.
2013-14
Evidence or Opinion?
5.
Wait time was insufficient for student thinking.
6. The teacher stated that students have learned to
add 2-digit numbers in preparation for today’s
lesson.
7. Six students, questioned randomly, did not know
the day’s learning goals.
2013-14
Evidence
Evidence is a factual reporting of events.
It may include teacher and student actions and
behaviors.
It may also include artifacts prepared by the
teacher, students or others.
It is not clouded with personal opinion or biases.
It is selected using professional judgment by the
observer and/or the teacher.
2013-14
Observation-based Assessment:
Process and Evidence
1.
Pre-Observation: D1,
D4
Standard Lesson Plan with
components of D1
2.
Observation: D1, D2, D3
Standard Evidence Collection
Doc, shared w/teacher
3.
Post-Teaching: D1, D2, D3,
D4
4.
Collaborative Assessment:
D1, D2, D3, D4
Teacher Self-Assessment:
Rubrics and
addition/correction of
evidence
Evaluator Rubric and Teacher
Self-Assessment Rubric:
Teacher leads
2013-14
The Card Sort

Use a sticky note

Identify:
◦
◦
◦

Domain
Component
Element
Share with table mates as instructed; reach
consensus
2013-14
Rewrite

Select one scenario at your table

Determine tentative Level of Proficiency

Rewrite at higher & lower levels using rubric
characteristics
2013-14
Levels of Performance
Conclusions
 Failing:
 Needs
Potential for harm
Improvement: Inconsistent, novice
 Proficient:
Consistent, competent
 Distinguished:
Unusually excellent, no one
“lives” here permanently in all components
43
2013-14
Teacher Effectiveness Steps
 Pre-Observation
Conference
 Observation
 Post-Observation
Conference
----------------------------------------- Walkthrough
2013-14
Before
Step # 1: Pre-Observation
(Focused on Domains 1 & 4)



Teacher completes Step #1: Lesson Plan in advance and sends to
evaluator two days in advance of planning conference
Evidence is added to the lesson plan document that emerges from
the pre-observation conference.
T and E meet to discuss the upcoming lesson framed around the
following:
Question Stems:






1a. What is the content being taught? What prerequisite for learning is required?
1b. Tell me about the composition of your class. How will you modify this lesson for groups
or individual students?
1c. What do you want students to learn during this lesson?
1d. What resources were considered for this lesson and rejected? Why? What resources
will be used? Why?
1e. List very briefly the steps of the lesson.
1f. How will you measure the goals articulated in 1c? What does success look like?
2013-14
Step # 2: Observation
During
(Focused on Domains 1,2, & 3)

E arrives 5 minutes prior to beginning of lesson to ‘walk the walls’
(D2)

Types of Observation Evidence:




Scripting of Educator or Student comments
Descriptions of Educator and Student behaviors
Numeric information
Environment
Remember:




Collect evidence from Students – “What are you learning?; Is what you’re doing hard in
a good way?
Non-negotiable - Record observation on standard form
Optional – May use T-charts, seating charts, or similar templates to record relative
numeric data (tally marks)
Evaluator does NOT retype observation
2013-14
Rubrics
Educating is a performance.
Performances are measured
using rubrics.
2013-14
Distinguished...
Proficient...
Needs Improvement ...
Failing...
Performance Levels:
Key Words
2013-14
1.
Review the components from the Framework for
Teaching for the assigned Domain. Scan the language
used to describe each Level of Performance (LoP).
2.
What key words would you use to characterize or
describe each level?
3.
Synthesize your thinking as a group and choose two key
words that represent each level. Write the two key
words on the designated chartpaper.
2013-14
Performance Levels:
Key Words
Failing
Needs
Improvement
Proficient
Distinguished
2013-14
Performance Levels:
Key Words
Failing
Unsafe
Lack of
Unaware
Harmful
Unclear
Poor
Unsuitable
None
Needs
Improvement
Proficient
Distinguished
Performance Levels:
Key Words
Failing
Needs
Improvement
Unsafe
Lack of
Unaware
Harmful
Unclear
Poor
Unsuitable
None
Partial
Generally
Inconsistently
Attempts
Awareness
Moderate
Minimal
Some
Proficient
2013-14
Distinguished
Levels of cognition and constructivist learning increase
Performance Levels:
Key Words
Failing
Needs
Improvement
Proficient
Unsafe
Lack of
Unaware
Harmful
Unclear
Poor
Unsuitable
None
Partial
Generally
Inconsistently
Attempts
Awareness
Moderate
Minimal
Some
Consistent
Frequent
Successful
Appropriate
Clear
Positive
Smooth
Most
2013-14
Distinguished
Levels of cognition and constructivist learning increase
2013-14
Performance Levels:
Key Words
Failing
Needs
Improvement
Proficient
Distinguished
Unsafe
Lack of
Unaware
Harmful
Unclear
Poor
Unsuitable
None
Partial
Generally
Inconsistently
Attempts
Awareness
Moderate
Minimal
Some
Consistent
Frequent
Successful
Appropriate
Clear
Positive
Smooth
Most
Seamless
Solid
Subtle
Skillful
Preventative
Leadership
STUDENTS
Always
Levels of cognition and constructivist learning increase
2013-14
Using the Levels of Performance
What are some ways
teachers can use the
levels of performance
to promote their
learning and growth?
 Lesson planning
 Self assessment
 Developing
professional learning
goals
 Reflecting on teaching
and learning
 Talking about teaching
2013-14
After
Step # 3:
Preparing for the Post-Conference
(Focused on Domains 1,2, 3, & 4)

Educator and Evaluator do not need to meet during Step #3.

With prerequisite training, the Educator can engage in Step #3
independently or with the support of a coach.

Evaluator provides Educator with completed observation form from Step #2.

Teacher is provided with an opportunity to add evidence to the observation form
that may have been overlooked by Evaluator

Teacher returns the observation form to Evaluator with their additions

Teacher completes the self-assessment rubric (he/she may highlight phrases in
multiple levels of the same component) and returns back to Evaluator prior to the
post-teaching conference

Evaluator highlights or checks ONLY the areas on the self-assessment with which
he/she agrees
2013-14
A Collaborative Process
Who Collects/Provides Evidence?
Both teacher and evaluator
Evaluation is not done TO you; it is done WITH
you and FOR you.
2013-14
Remember…
•
Teachers get a copy of the evidence immediately following the lesson.
•
Teachers may add to the evidence.
•
Teachers use the evidence to complete a self-assessment.
•
Teachers assess the lesson by highlighting the appropriate rubric phrases.
•
Teachers provide this self-assessment TO THE OBSERVER IN ADVANCE OF THE
POST TEACHING CONFERENCE.
•
The observer reviews the teacher’s evidence prior to the post.
•
The observer highlights, on his/her rubric the COMPONENTS OF AGREEMENT
ONLY prior to the post.
•
The observer LEAVES BLANK the components of difference prior to the post.
2013-14
After
Step # 4:
Post-Teaching Collaborative Assessment
(Focused on Domains 1,2, 3, & 4)

Teacher meets with Evaluator to reflect on lesson - Evidence not
required for each D4 component for this one lesson

Evaluator notes components of agreement and then invites teacher to
take the lead in discussing the other components.

Components are collaboratively rated. Evaluator is the “rater of
record” in the event of non-agreement. Evidence is the basis.
Conversation Stems:





Comment on the evidence for . . .
Let’s look at the rubric for . . .
Tell me more about ….
What’s the backstory for . . .
Let’s look at the language that was highlighted here…talk about the evidence for that in
this lesson
2013-14
The Purpose of the Post
 To
discuss the components of difference
(not yet marked by observer)
 To
elicit any evidence that still remains to be
added about the lesson
 To
arrive at an assessment on the rubric for
components of difference.
2013-14
5 “Rules” for
Educator Supervision/Evaluation
1.
Defensible definition of teaching
2.
Differentiation of evaluative processes
3.
Evidence-driven process
4.
The role of teacher learning
5.
Transparency
2013-14
Rule # 4
Conduct evaluations in such a
way that they produce teacher
learning.
2013-14
Overarching Question
Who does the thinking?
Therefore, who does the learning and
growing?
2013-14
Professional Learning
“Learning is done by the learner;
it is mental WORK.”
- Charlotte Danielson
Who does the mental work in your
evaluation process?
(Overarching Question)
2013-14
The Nature of Professional Learning:
Mental Work for Teachers

Reflection on practice

Collaboration

Self-assessment

Self-directed inquiry (action research)

Feedback based upon evidence
2013-14
“Narrative-Free” Evaluation

The rubric contains the narrative

Select the language that matches the evidence

The teacher participates in language selection

The highlighter is the tool

A summative domain statement is optional
2013-14
5 “Rules” for
Educator Supervision/Evaluation
1.
Defensible definition of teaching
2.
Differentiation of evaluative processes
3.
Evidence-driven process
4.
The role of teacher learning
5.
Transparency
2013-14
Rule # 5: Transparency
Teachers must learn
the rubrics
and
the process.
2013-14
Communication is two-way,
not one way.
Notification is NOT
Communication.