Performance Appraisal for Teachers (PowerPoint Presentation)
Download
Report
Transcript Performance Appraisal for Teachers (PowerPoint Presentation)
Enhancing Teacher Effectiveness
Initiative using The Danielson Model
A New Way of Doing Business
Legislative Mandate
Teacher evaluation – Charlotte Danielson
Principal Evaluation – Doug Reeves
Peer Evaluator
Value-Added Model (VAM)
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…..
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
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)
1.
2.
3.
Ensuring quality of
teaching and
effectiveness of
practices.
Promoting teacher
growth and learning.
Improving student
growth and
achievement.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Rigorous
Valid
Reliable
Defensible
Four Domains
1. Planning and Preparation
2. The Classroom Environment
3. Instruction
4. Professional Responsibilities
Domains 2 and 3 are “onstage” domains and are
weighted more than 1 and 4 (Danielson
research)
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
Standards for Conduct are clear and routine
No loss of instructional time
Respectful interactions among students and
teacher
Physical environment supports learning
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
High Ethical Standards
Professionalism
Reflection on Instruction
Regular attendance
Accurate Record Keeping
Frequent communication with families
Participation in school events
Professional Development
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
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)
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
•
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”
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
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)
The difference between
the predicted performance
and the actual
performance represents
the value added by the
teacher’s instruction.
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Student
The predicted performance
represents the level of
performance the student is
expected to demonstrate after
statistically accounting for
factors through a value-added
model.
Prior Performance
Current Performance
Predicted Performance
Category I Teacher - FCAT
Student
Achievement VAM Score 50%
Adminstrator
25%
Peer 20%
Teacher 5%
Category II Teacher - FCAT
Student Achievement VAM Score 50%
Administrator 45%
Teacher - Self 5%
Category I Non-FCAT
Student Achievement
District Assessment
40%
Student Achievement
School VAM 10%
Administrator 25%
Peer 20%
Category II Non-FCAT
Student Achievement
District Assessment 40%
Student Achievement
School VAM 10%
Administrator 45%
Teacher 5%
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