Transcript What are the 4 main components of TAP and what is the

TAP Overview and
Evaluation Process
TAP System Evaluation Overview Objectives
The participants will:
• Understand the “Big Picture” of the evaluation and
support components of the TAP System.
Once upon MacDonald’s Farm
Concepts from book that relate to TAP
“A talented
teacher
makes all the
difference.”
What are the 4 main components of TAP and what is
the purpose of implementing TAP?
On a sticky note, individually answer the two questions
above (no one needs to see this….unless you choose
to share)
Put the note somewhere that you will be able to locate
it at the end of the presentation
How Does TAP Work?
How Does TAP Work?
Powerful opportunities
for more responsibility
and commensurate pay
Multiple Career Paths
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
31%
Strong
48%
40%
Moderate
30%
20%
10%
41%
31%
2005
2012
0%
8
Shared Leadership
TAP Leadership Team
•
•
•
•
•
Principal
Assistant Principal
Master Teachers
Mentor Teachers
Or others seen as instrumental in the
implementation of TAP within a school
Process of Master/Mentor Selection
•
•
•
•
•
•
Representative hiring committee
Analysis of student achievement results
Classroom observation
Interview focusing on working with/coaching adults.
Area of expertise (school need)
Evaluation and certification procedure?
Training and Support
Initial TAP CORE Training
• Overview and Evaluation A(3 days)
• Cluster and Leadership Team (3 days)
• Evaluation B and Certification Test (2 days)
Principal meetings
Master teacher meetings
TAP Summer Institute
On-site visits (ongoing)
• Observation and feedback on implementation of cluster meetings
• Observation and feedback on implementation of leadership
meetings
• Coaching (master/mentor teachers and principals)
Questions – Multiple Career Paths
Turn and tell your shoulder partner:
1 thing you learned or had clarified about Multiple
Career Paths
Or
1 “Aha” you had about Multiple Career Paths
How Does TAP Work?
Continuous on-site
professional development
during the school day
Ongoing Applied Professional Growth
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
50%
59%
Strong
Moderate
37%
27%
2005
2012
A K-6 School-wide
Cluster Configuration
Kindergarten
cluster
First grade
cluster
Special area
cluster
Sixth grade
cluster
Second grade
cluster
Leadership Team
Fifth grade
cluster
Third grade
cluster
Fourth grade
cluster
*Special education most often joins grade-level cluster
meetings, but may meet together at times.
A Middle/High School
Cluster Configuration
Language
Arts cluster
Special Area
cluster
Social Studies
cluster
Leadership
Team
Math
cluster
Science cluster
*Special education, ESL, Reading, etc often join content area cluster
membership and on occasion form their own cluster meetings.
Steps for Effective Learning in Cluster
1
Identify problem
or need
Evidence of (using
pre-test) is clear,
specific, high quality
and measurable in
student outcomes
and addresses
student content
learning with links to
teacher strategies
and the Rubric
2
Obtain new teacher
learning aligned to
student need and
formatted for
classroom application
Using credible
sources
Proven application
showing student
growth
3
Develop new
teacher learning
with support in the
classroom
Development
through
demonstration,
modeling, practice,
team teaching and
peer coaching with
subsequent
analysis of student
work
4
Apply new
teacher
learning to the
classroom
Evidenced
through
observation, peer
coaching and self
reflection applied
to student work
as a formative
assessment
5
Evaluate the
impact on student
performance
Evidence includes
student
assessment (posttest) aligned with
data analysis and
the new teaching
strategies
Questions – Applied Professional Development
Stand Up, Hands Up, Pair Up (if room allows):
1 thing you learned or had clarified about Applied
Professional Development (Clusters)
Or
1 “Aha” you had about Applied Professional
Development (Clusters)
How Does TAP Work?
Fair evaluations based on
clearly defined, researchbased standards
 Multiple observations
 Multiple trained and certified observers
 Cluster training and classroom support
Instructionally Focused Accountability
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
49%
62%
Strong
Moderate
29%
28%
2005
2012
Rubric Domains
Designing and
Planning
Instruction
• Instructional Plans
• Student Work
• Assessment
Professionalism
• Staff Development
• Instructional Supervision
• School Responsibilities
Reflecting on Teaching
Learning
Environment
• Managing Student
Behavior
• Expectations
• Environment
• Respectful Culture
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standards & Objectives
Motivating Students
Presenting Instructional Content
Lesson Structure & Pacing
Activities & Materials
Questioning
Academic Feedback
Grouping Students
Teacher Content Implementation
Teacher Knowledge of Students
Thinking
Problem Solving
Evaluator Expectations
When first introduced to the TAP system rubric, it
is not expected that individuals will be able to
begin immediately utilizing this multi-dimensional
observational tool at a conceptual level of
application.
Evaluator Expectations
• In order to utilize this tool effectively, each person has to
develop his/her skills in order to frame and reference each
indicator with practical application.
• Understanding and expertise will only be increased through
exposure and engagement in simulated or practice episodes.
• This practice will define the evaluator’s understanding and
strengthen his/her skills as an evaluator.
NIET Rubric
NIET has defined a set of professional indicators, known as the
Instructional Rubrics, to measure teaching skills, knowledge, and
responsibilities of the teachers in a school.
Instruction
Standards and Objectives
Above Expectations (5)*
 All learning objectives and state content standards are
explicitly communicated.
 Sub-objectives are aligned and logically sequenced to the
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are: (a) consistently connected to
what students have previously learned, (b) know from life
experiences, and (c) integrated with other disciplines.
 Expectations for student performance are clear,
demanding, and high.
 State standards are displayed and referenced throughout
the lesson.
 There is evidence that most students demonstrate
mastery of the objective.
Proficient (3)*
 Most learning objectives and state content
standards are communicated.
 Sub-objectives are mostly aligned to the
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are connected to what
students have previously learned.
 Expectations for student performance are
clear.
 State standards are displayed.
 There is evidence that most students
demonstrate mastery of the objective.
Below Expectations (1)*
 Few learning objectives and state content
standards are communicated.
 Sub-objectives are inconsistently aligned to he
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are rarely connected to what
students have previously learned.
 Expectations for student performance are vague.
 State standards are displayed.
 There is evidence that few students demonstrate
mastery of the objective.
The Parts of the Rubric
• Domains
Instruction
Standards and Objectives
Above Expectations (5)*
 All learning objectives and state content standards are
explicitly communicated.
 Sub-objectives are aligned and logically sequenced to the
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are: (a) consistently connected to
what students have previously learned, (b) know from life
experiences, and (c) integrated with other disciplines.
 Expectations for student performance are clear,
demanding, and high.
 State standards are displayed and referenced throughout
the lesson.
 There is evidence that most students demonstrate
mastery of the objective.
Proficient (3)*
 Most learning objectives and state content
standards are communicated.
 Sub-objectives are mostly aligned to the
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are connected to what
students have previously learned.
 Expectations for student performance are
clear.
 State standards are displayed.
 There is evidence that most students
demonstrate mastery of the objective.
Below Expectations (1)*
 Few learning objectives and state content
standards are communicated.
 Sub-objectives are inconsistently aligned to he
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are rarely connected to what
students have previously learned.
 Expectations for student performance are vague.
 State standards are displayed.
 There is evidence that few students demonstrate
mastery of the objective.
The Parts of the Rubric
• Domains
• Indicators
Instruction
Objectives
andObjectives
Standards
Standardsand
Above Expectations (5)*
 All learning objectives and state content standards are
explicitly communicated.
 Sub-objectives are aligned and logically sequenced to the
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are: (a) consistently connected to
what students have previously learned, (b) know from life
experiences, and (c) integrated with other disciplines.
 Expectations for student performance are clear,
demanding, and high.
 State standards are displayed and referenced throughout
the lesson.
 There is evidence that most students demonstrate
mastery of the objective.
Proficient (3)*
 Most learning objectives and state content
standards are communicated.
 Sub-objectives are mostly aligned to the
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are connected to what
students have previously learned.
 Expectations for student performance are
clear.
 State standards are displayed.
 There is evidence that most students
demonstrate mastery of the objective.
Below Expectations (1)*
 Few learning objectives and state content
standards are communicated.
 Sub-objectives are inconsistently aligned to he
lesson’s major objective.
 Learning objectives are rarely connected to what
students have previously learned.
 Expectations for student performance are vague.
 State standards are displayed.
 There is evidence that few students demonstrate
mastery of the objective.
The Parts of the Rubric
• Domains
• Indicators
• Descriptors
Instruction
Standards and Objectives
Significantly Above Expectations (5)*
 All
All learning
learning objectives
objectives and
and state
state content
content standards
standards are
are
explicitly
communicated.
explicitly communicated.
 Sub-objectives
Sub-objectives are
are aligned
aligned and
and logically
logically sequenced
sequenced to
to the
the
lesson’s
lesson’s major
major objective.
objective.
 Learning
Learning objectives
objectives are:
are: (a)
(a) consistently
consistently connected
connected to
to
what
students
have
previously
learned,
(b)
what students have previously learned, (b) know
know from
from life
life
experiences,
experiences, and
and (c)
(c) integrated
integrated with
with other
other disciplines.
disciplines.
 Expectations
Expectations for
for student
student performance
performance are
are clear,
clear,
demanding,
and high.
high.
demanding, and
 State
State standards
standards are
are displayed
displayed and
and referenced
referenced throughout
throughout
the
the lesson.
lesson.
 There
There is
is evidence
evidence that
that most
most students
students demonstrate
demonstrate
mastery
mastery of
of the
the objective.
objective.
At Expectations (3)*
 Most
Most learning
learning objectives
objectives and
and state
state content
content
standards
are communicated.
communicated.
standards are
 Sub-objectives
Sub-objectives are
are mostly
mostly aligned
aligned to
to the
the
lesson’s
lesson’s major
major objective.
objective.
 Learning
Learning objectives
objectives are
are connected
connected to
to what
what
students
have
previously
learned.
students have previously learned.
 Expectations
Expectations for
for student
student performance
performance are
are
clear.
clear.
 State
standards are
are displayed.
displayed.
State standards
 There
is
evidence
that
There is evidence that most
most students
students
demonstrate
mastery
of
demonstrate mastery of the
the objective.
objective.
Significantly Below Expectations (1)*
 Few
Few learning
learning objectives
objectives and
and state
state content
content
standards
are communicated.
communicated.
standards are
 Sub-objectives
Sub-objectives are
are inconsistently
inconsistently aligned
aligned to
to he
he
lesson’s
lesson’s major
major objective.
objective.
 Learning
Learning objectives
objectives are
are rarely
rarely connected
connected to
to what
what
students
have
previously
learned.
students have previously learned.
 Expectations
Expectations for
for student
student performance
performance are
are vague.
vague.
 State
standards
are
displayed.
State standards are displayed.
 There
There is
is evidence
evidence that
that few
few students
students demonstrate
demonstrate
mastery
mastery of
of the
the objective.
objective.
Advice from long time users of the TAP Rubrics
•
•
•
•
•
•
The instructional rubric is ‘holistic’
It is not a checklist
It takes time, effort and SUPPORT to implement the practices
appropriately
Understanding the rubric will be supported in cluster (first
cluster cycle) and in the classroom (all year long)
There is significant overlap between indicators (remember the
‘holistic’ part
School-level leadership teams will be fully trained and certified
to support teachers
Questions – Instructionally Focused Accountability
(The TAP Rubrics)
Use talking chips to answer one of these questions at
your table (if room arrangement allows):
1 thing you learned or had clarified about
Instructionally Focused Accountability
Or
1 “Aha” you had about Instructionally Focused
Accountability
How Does TAP Work?
Salaries and bonuses tied to
responsibilities, instructional
performance and student achievement
growth.
• The teacher’s instructional performance
• Student achievement growth a teacher makes in
the classroom
• Student achievement growth the school makes
as a whole
Performance-Based Compensation
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
15%
41%
Strong
Moderate
34%
36%
2005
2012
0%
Value-Added Analyses
Because value-added measures growth
in achievement of the same students
over time, and because schools are
largely responsible for achievement
growth, value-added scores reflect the
school and teacher contribution to
student learning, not family and
neighborhood factors.
How Teacher Performance is Determined
Individual
student
growth
achievement
30%
Determined
by approved
Testing or SLO
School-wide
student
growth
30%
Teacher skills,
knowledge and
responsibilities
40%
Determined by
evaluations
using TAP
Rubrics and
Responsibility
Survey
Teacher Collegiality
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
53%
66%
Strong
Moderate
37%
25%
2005
2012
How Administrator Performance is Determined
Approved 360°
Survey Instrument
School-wide
Growth
20%
TAP Leadership
team rubric
20%
60%
Determined using
valid and reliable
student data
TIF 4 Details: Teacher Effectiveness Score
Educator
Criterion 1
Criterion 2
K–3 Teacher
40% SKR*
40% class value-added 10% school value-
10% LEA-based
on MAP
decision
4–8 Teacher—
40% SKR
tested subject area
4–8 teacher—non-
40% SKR
40% SKR
added
Criterion 4
40% class value-added 10% school value-
10% LEA-based
on state assessments
added
decision
30% based on SLOs
20% school value-
10% LEA- based
added
decision
tested subject area
9–10 Teacher—
Criterion 3
35% class value-added 15% school value-
10% LEA-based
ELA and Math
on MAP
added
decision
All 9–12 Teacher— 40% SKR
30% based on SLOs
20% school value-
10% LEA-based
added
decision
not 9–10 math/ELA
K–8 Principal
20% 360-degree
20% fidelity of
50% on school-wide 10% LEA-based
TIF 4 Details: Teacher Effectiveness Score
Overall
Certification
Plan
Effectiveness Score
1.0−2.24
Performance
Eligibility for Career
Compensation
Ladder
Instructor placed on Annual
Diagnostic Improvement
Salary schedule with no No
Diagnostic contract
Plan
performance
compensation
2.25−2.75
Instructor placed on deferred Improvement Plan
Salary schedule with no No
continuing contract
performance
compensation
2.76−3.00
Instructor remains on
Individual Growth Plan
TAP Payout Plan
No
Individual Growth Plan
TAP Payout Plan
Mentor-level position
continuing contract
3.01−3.5
Instructor remains on
continuing contract
3.5−5.0
Instructor remains on
continuing contract
Principal Mentor
Individual Growth Plan
TAP Payout Plan
Mentor- or master-level
position
Master Level Principal
Questions – Performance-Based Compensation
Talk to the shoulder partner on the other side of you
and answer one of the following:
1 thing you learned or had clarified about
Instructionally Focused Accountability
Or
1 “Aha” you had about Instructionally Focused
Accountability
TAP Training Portal and Tools to Assist You
The CODE System
The CODE System is an optional web-based application for managing
school goals and clusters, collecting teacher observation data, and
providing real time reports to support your TAP system implementation.
Features of CODE
•
By entering the observations into
CODE, users can get reports and
analyze the results of teacher
evaluations across grade levels,
content areas, and over 20 other
reports
•
CODE provides tools for ensuring
inter-rater consistency of
evaluators
•
CODE can be used to analyze
teacher evaluation data for states
or districts using any instructional
rubric and to manage higher
education clinical evaluation
Using CODE to Support Professional Development Planning
The following chart shows how often particular indicators on the teacher evaluation
rubric have been chosen as an area of refinement in one example school:
Areas for Refinement
3.68%
10.12%
6.48%
13.55%
Lesson Structure and
Pacing
Assessment
53.75%
12.42%
Questioning
Academic Feedback
Using CODE to locate documents such as
The Implementation Manual
Or
The TAP Evaluation and Compensation (TEC) Guide
TAP Scripting App
How will we determine our implementation progress?
Comprehensive, on-site Program Review visit (Spring)
along with weekly regional master teacher visits will
determine each school’s progress of TAP
implementation
• Includes quantitative (structural) measurements.
• Includes qualitative (effectiveness) measurements.
What does this visual say to you that may make
TAP seem different than what you did previously?
School
Focus
TLT
Data
Walk
Through
Teacher
Structure: Talk as
a table group
Based on Research We are Moving From Fragmented
Follow-up to Holistic Support
Follow- Up
School Focus
TLT
Data
Walk Through
Cluster
IGP
Evaluation
Reinforcement/Refinement
General Capacity
Personal Need
Support
We Want to Support Student Growth Through
Focused Teacher Support
School
Focus
TLT
Personal
Need
General
Cluster
Capacity
Data
Walk
Through
Teacher
Reinforce
IGP/SLOs
Teacher
Refine
Big Picture!
What are the 4 main components of TAP and what is
the purpose of implementing TAP?
Locate your sticky note from the beginning of the
session
Is there anything you would like to add to it or change?
If so, do that at this time
Share with a person near you what the 4 components
of TAP are and what 2 things TAP does for a school
Effective education for our youth…
Is an investment in
the future.