Formative Evaluation - Bay District Schools
Download
Report
Transcript Formative Evaluation - Bay District Schools
Updated on: October 15, 2013
Category 1
Score
and 2 teachers
does not compute into the Summative Evaluation
Designed
to give feedback on Instructional Practice and
IPDP status
Informs
professional development and support needed
Provided
to state and teacher will receive notification
from the state
3 days in advance of
Observation
Prior to November 22
Within 10 days of
observation
Prior to December 14th
Pre-conference with administrator
Observation
Post-conference with administrator
Mid-Year Conference
Review collected evidence, artifacts and data regarding the ten Key Components
of the Framework for Teaching and determine formative Instructional Practices
rating
Review teacher’s progress relative to the IPDP and assign a formative IPDP rating
Assign a formative evaluation overall rating based on the Formative Evaluation
Rubric
Readdress the teacher’s IPDP as appropriate and as needed
See Project 8 website for Detail and Yearly Calendars: http://www.bay.k12.fl.us/rttt/Project8.aspx
Ten Key Components
o A portion of the rubric you used to self-assess
o Taken from Charlotte Danielson’s research
Observation Cycle
o Pre-Conference, Observation, Post-Conference
Collection of evidence and artifacts
o Consistency and quality over time
o No number
• Most evidence will demonstrate multiple components
• Consistency and quality over time
• Vary based on type of evidence and what administrative team already collects
o Administrative team will provide guidance
Mid-year conference
o Evaluation of Instructional Practice
To which part of your curriculum does this lesson relate? (1e)
How does this learning fit in the sequence of learning for this class? (1a, 1c, 1e)
Briefly describe the students in this class, including those with special needs.
(1b)
What are your learning outcomes for this lesson? What do you want the
students to understand? (1c)
How will you engage the students in the learning? What will you do? What will
the students do? Will the students work in groups, or individually, or as a large
group? Provide any worksheets or other materials the students will be using.
(1d, 1e)
How will you differentiate instruction for different individuals or groups of
students in the class? (1b, 1d)
How and when will you know whether the students have learned what you
intend? (1f)
Is there anything that you would like me to specifically observe during the
lesson?
In general, how successful was the lesson? Did the students learn what you
intended for them to learn? How do you know? (3d, 4a)
If you have samples of student work, what do they reveal about the students’ levels
of engagement and understanding? Do they suggest modifications in how you
might teach this lesson in the future? (3d, 3c)
Comment on your classroom procedures, student conduct, and your use of physical
space. To what extent did these contribute to student learning? (2c, 2d, 2e)
Did you depart from your plan? If so, how and why? (3e)
Comment on different aspects of your instructional delivery (e.g., activities,
grouping of students, materials, and resources). To what extent were they
effective? (2c, 3c, 3e, 1d, 1e)
If you had an opportunity to teach this lesson again to the same group of students,
what would you do differently? (4a)
Consider different aspects of your planning and execution of the lesson in light of
the domains and components on the following pages. Determine evidence, if any,
for each of the components, and what that evidence demonstrates about your
level of performance.
10
Key Components
Pre-conference, observation, post-conference
and other evidence
Basic information
Enhancing Professional Practice by Charlotte
Danielson
Evidence added to based on school’s strengths,
initiatives, etc.
Complete rubric available on the RTTT Website:
http://www.bay.k12.fl.us/rttt/Project8.aspx
Background Information:
Based on standards and course descriptions
Able to be assessed
Includes needs of group as well as individual students
Clear to stakeholders in language appropriate to the learner
Evidence:
Pre-conference questions
Other evidence:
Lesson plans
Background Information:
Alignment to standards and correspondence cognitive complexity
Formative and summative
Groups and individuals
Rubrics
Authentic, real-world application
Exact items not provided to students; similar items are presented
for student review
Evidence:
Pre-conference questions
Other evidence:
Lesson Plans
Background Information:
Teacher-student and student-student interactions
Teacher cares enough to insist on high standards of work and conduct
Student understands there are ground rules and standards of conduct or
routines that may be different than those at home
Evidence:
Classroom observation
o
o
o
o
Words and actions that show teacher-student and student-student interactions.
How does the teacher speak to students and allow them to speak to each other?
How does the teacher respond to off-task behavior and redirect behavior?
Does the teacher greet students as they enter the room and ask questions or
show concern about things beyond the classroom?
Other evidence
o Lesson Plans showing how the environment was created or how the teacher
allowed students to assist in any procedural creation that is posted in the room.
o Handouts? Posters created by students?
Background Information
Students and teachers
o Engaged in pursuits of value with cognitive complexity
o Take pride in work and give best efforts
o High energy and high expectations
Evidence
Classroom Observation
o Look of the room –is student work displayed, for example? What is the
nature of interactions and tone of conversations from teacher-student and
student-student?
Other evidence
o Lesson plans with instructional outcomes and activities demonstrating high
expectations
o Conversations reveal they value learning and hard work
Background Information:
Standards of conduct are clear, communicated to students, and posted
in the classroom
Monitoring is subtle and preventative-the teacher goes to stand next to
off-task students
Student behavior indicates standards established at the beginning of
the year and have been maintained consistently
Evidence:
Classroom Observation and Post-Observation Conference
Other evidence
o Lesson plans showing how standards were developed or posters of the
classroom standards (rules, procedures, etc.).
o Students themselves explain the agreed-upon standards of conduct
Kagan, Fred Jones, Harry Wong, RtI strategies
Background Information:
Mix of cognitively complex questions related to lesson objectives
ALL students involved in questioning and discussion- no single student dominates and
teacher calls on those who don’t initially volunteer
Students initiate higher order questions
o Note: Developmentally appropriate. IB or AICE versus ESE-Autistic class; Kindergarten
versus 12th grade. All students should be asked questions that are cognitively complex.
Evidence
Classroom observation
o A class session demonstrating questioning and discussion (CRISS strategies )
Other evidence
o Planning for cognitively complex questions; training students to answer complex
questions or participating in a discussion
o Lesson plans, student samples, handouts used with students, or procedural information
placed in the room that students reference during discussions
Background Information:
Clear structure and objectives
ALL students mentally involved, actively participate, and make genuine
contributions
Students have choice task completion- activities are differentiated for
learners and students are grouped accordingly
Evidence:
Classroom observation and Post-Conference
o Students given an opportunity to engage with the material
Other evidence:
o Lesson plans showing how the teacher planned for student engagement, student
samples and classroom evidence of differentiated instruction
CRISS strategies, Reading Framework strategies such as guided reading,
learning stations, etc. can use these as evidence of student engagement
Background Information:
Reflection is the mark of a true professional
Able to assess effectiveness of work and can take steps to improve
Teaching, given its complexity, can never be perfect
No matter how good a lesson, it can always be improved
This is not to suggest a lesson is of poor quality and must be fixed, but
because quality teaching is so hard, some aspect can always be improved
Evidence:
Post-conference questions
Additional discussion will help in understanding how the teacher reflects
and what they do with that knowledge
Other evidence:
o Lesson study or any other reflection activities
Background Information:
Records are an important aspect of teaching
Informs student-teacher interactions and enables teachers to respond to
individual needs
Aware of which assignments have been completed and which are still
outstanding
Students contribute to design and implementation (where appropriate),
because of exposure to many different systems over the course of their
educational career
Evidence:
Post Conference
Other Evidence:
Use of online gradebook, RtI folders, assessment results, and record
keeping systems of non-instructional activities (such as field trip forms,
lunch records, etc.)
Background Information:
Most parents care deeply about the progress of their child and
appreciate meaningful participation in the process
Just as students should not be surprised about an assessment or the
procedures of the class, parents also need information that will not
make the teacher’s approach to learning a surprise
Evidence:
Post-Conference
Other evidence:
Written information, web site, Open House information, regular
newsletters, phone calls, formalized procedures (progress reports,
report cards), notes, emails
Pre-conference, Observation, Post-conference
Review additional evidence
Balance of information
Instructional Practice
70%
Levels
0
1
Ratings
Unsatisfactory
Developing
All teachers
Greater than or
equal to 50% at
Level 1 and/or
Level 0
If not meeting
HE, E
or U, then
Developing
2
3
Effective
Highly Effective
At least 75% at
Level 3 and/or
Level 2 and 0% AT
Level 0
At least 80% at
Level
3 and 0% at Level 1
and/or Level 0
Mid-year conference
IPDP review
Review IPDP and assign a score to each section of the IPDP
o Student Baseline Data
o Needs-Based Question
o Student Goal
o Professional Development Objectives
o Professional Development Training/Activities
o Classroom Implementation
IPDP
30%
Levels
0
1
2
3
Ratings Used for
Each IPDP
Component
All categories
Unsatisfactory
Developing
Effective
Highly Effective
1 or more rated
0
(Unsatisfactory)
1 or more
rated 1
(Developing)
If not meeting
HE, D
or U, Effective
6/6 rated
3 (Highly
Effective)
Instructional Practice Level______X 70%=___________
IPDP Level_______X 30%=______________
Total Evaluation Level_______________
Levels
Ratings Used for
Each Section
All Categories
0
Unsatisfactory
Less than or
equal
to .75
1
Developing
Greater than .75
2
Effective
3
Highly Effective
Greater than or
equal to 1.5
Greater than or
equal to 2.40
The results of the Formative Evaluation score will be used to
guide category 1 and 2 teacher professional development
and support
The Formative Evaluation score does NOT compute into the
Summative Evaluation score
Allows the Category 1 and 2 teacher to know where they
need to improve PRIOR to the summative evaluation
This concludes the review of the Formative Evaluation
Please remember all materials are placed on the Race to
the Top website:
http://www.bay.k12.fl.us/rttt/Project8.aspx
Thank you