Transcript Tulsa Model for Teacher Observation and Evaluation

©Copyright
2011, Tulsa
Tulsa
PublicPublic
Schools
Public
Schools
© Tulsa
Schools 2011
2
Tulsa Model for Teacher
Observation and Evaluation
© 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!
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
3
4
Why Teacher Effectiveness Matters
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
4
5
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

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
6
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).
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
6
7
Key Features of the Tulsa Model
• Developed with and by Oklahoma teachers
• Research-based
• Independently validated
• Support-focused
• Rich, but workable
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
8
Teamwork and Collaboration…
“… the fuel that allows
common people to attain
uncommon results.”
– Henry Ford
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
9
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.
measures what matters.)
– MET Validation Engine Project
– University of Wisconsin findings
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
(It
10
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
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
10
11
Rich, But Workable, System
Rubric
The 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
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
of 2 observations per evaluation
11
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.”
MET Policy and Practice Brief
January 2012
Page 28
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
“…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.”
13
Tulsa Model Evaluation System Description
Evaluation Form
Web-based or paper-based. Your choice.
Conferences
Follow every observation and evaluation
Customized Feedback and Support
Focusing the most intensive supports for 1 (“Ineffective”)
and 2 (“Needs Improvement”).
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
14
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)
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
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
15
16
STRUCTURE
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
17
Tulsa Model - Structure
Domains (5)
• Classroom Management
• Instructional Effectiveness
• Professional Growth & Continuous Improvement
• Interpersonal Skills
• Leadership
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
18
Tulsa Model - Indicators
Indicators (20)
• Classroom Management (6)
• Instructional Effectiveness (10)
• Professional Growth & Continuous
Improvement (2)
• Interpersonal Skills (1)
• Leadership (1)
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
19
Tulsa Model - Weight
• Classroom Management (30%)
• Instructional Effectiveness (50%)
• Professional Growth & Continuous
Improvement (10%)
• Interpersonal Skills (5%)
• Leadership (5%)
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
20
RUBRICS AND FORMS
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
21
Teacher Rubric
The Foundation for Defining Effectiveness
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
22
A Teacher Rubric in Detail
Like a dictionary, the rubric provides definitional clarity as to
each level of effectiveness.
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
23
Teacher Observation Form
The tool to operationalize the rubric
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
24
Teacher Observation Form
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
25
Teacher Evaluation Form
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
26
THE IMPACT & LESSONS LEARNED
© 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
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
27
28
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
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
Questions?
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools
29
30
For more information: www.tulsaschools.org
Talia Shaull [email protected]
Jana Burk [email protected]
918-746-6800
© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools