Transcript Slide 1
NIET Teacher Evaluation Process © 2011 National Institute for Excellence in Teaching. All rights reserved. Do not duplicate without permission. TEAM Evaluation Multiple Measures Changes to Evaluation Measures (HB 150/SB 156) • Weight of growth for teachers in non-tested grades/subjects – Teachers who do not generate an individual growth score will continue to use their preselected school-wide growth score for the growth component of their overall level of effectiveness. The revised weighting is below: • o Growth: 25% • o Observation: 60% • o Achievement: 15% • Special education students will now be included in the calculation of individual growth scores. Overview of Evaluation Process— Professional Teachers Overview of Evaluation Process—Apprentice Teachers Updates to the number of observations: • For year 2, the minimum required number of observations will be based on licensure status and evaluation scores from the previous year. – Any teacher (professional or apprentice) who previously scored a 5 on his/her overall evaluation or individual growth score will be required to have one classroom visit covering three observation domains, as well as two walk throughs. – Any teacher (professional or apprentice) who previously scored a 1 on his/her overall evaluation or individual growth score will be required to have four classroom visits covering seven observation domains. Additionally, evaluators must have an initial coaching conversations with these teachers prior to any official observation. Updates to the number of observations, cont… – Professional teachers who do not meet either of the above criteria will be required to have two classroom visits covering four observation domains. – Apprentice teachers who do not meet either of the above criteria will be required to have four classroom visits covering seven observation domains. Research Supporting Instructionally Focused Accountability • The challenge of creating an effective teacher accountability system is to improve the quality of teacher instruction, and thereby raise student achievement. • States and school districts need to identify the knowledge and skills that a teacher needs to teach successfully, and then create standards and rubrics to measure teaching performance. Odden, Milanowski & Youngs Odden and Clune Elements of an Effective Lesson Elements When you think of a lesson you deem to be effective, what were all the elements that led you to that decision? Effective Elements Summary • Defined learning goal that is clearly communicated to students • Student engagement and interaction • Alignment of activities and materials throughout lesson • Student relevancy • Numerous checks for mastery • Differentiation NIET Rubric NIET has defined a set of professional indicators, known as the Instructional Rubrics, to measure teaching skills and knowledge of the teachers in a school. Standards and Objectives Instruction Significantly Above Expectations (5)* At Expectations (3)* 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. 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. Significantly 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 Standards and Objectives Instruction Significantly Above Expectations (5)* At Expectations (3)* 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. 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. Significantly 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 Objectives andObjectives Standards Standardsand Instruction Significantly Above Expectations (5)* At Expectations (3)* 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. 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. Significantly 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 • Descriptors • Indicators 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 explicitly communicated. communicated. Sub-objectives Sub-objectives are are aligned aligned and and logically logically sequenced to the lesson’s major sequenced to the lesson’s major objective. objective. Learning objectives are: (a) consistently Learning objectives are: (a) consistently connected connected to to what what students students have have previously previously learned, learned, (b) (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, demanding, and high. clear, demanding, and high. State State standards standards are are displayed displayed and and referenced throughout referenced throughout the the lesson. lesson. There There is is evidence evidence that that most most students students demonstrate mastery of the objective. demonstrate mastery of the objective. At Expectations (3)* Most Most learning learning objectives objectives and and state state content content standards standards are are communicated. communicated. Sub-objectives Sub-objectives are are mostly mostly aligned aligned to the lesson’s major objective. to the lesson’s major objective. Learning Learning objectives objectives are are connected connected to what students students have to what have previously previously learned. learned. Expectations Expectations for for student student performance performance are are clear. clear. State standards are State standards are displayed. displayed. There is evidence that There is evidence that most most students students demonstrate demonstrate mastery mastery of of the objective. the objective. Significantly Below Expectations (1)* Few Few learning learning objectives objectives and and state state content content standards standards are are communicated. communicated. Sub-objectives Sub-objectives are are inconsistently inconsistently aligned to he lesson’s aligned to he lesson’s major major objective. objective. Learning Learning objectives objectives are are rarely rarely connected to what what students students have have connected to previously learned. previously learned. Expectations Expectations for for student student performance performance are vague. are vague. State State standards standards are are displayed. displayed. There is evidence that There is evidence that few few students students demonstrate mastery of demonstrate mastery of the the objective. objective. The Parts of the Rubric • Domains • Descriptors • Indicators • Performance Levels Standards and Objectives Instruction Significantly Above Expectations (5)* At Expectations (3)* 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. 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. Significantly 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 Instructional Domain of the rubric has been updated for the 2013-14 school year. The newest rubric can be found at http://team-tn.org/forms#teameducator-evaluation. This link includes a copy showing the revisions in color. Review of Previous Learning Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model (TEAM)* (*modified from the TAP Teaching Performance Standards) Instruction Planning • Instructional Plans • Student Work • Assessment Professionalism • Staff Development • Instructional Supervision • School Responsibilities Reflecting on Teaching 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 Knowledge • Teacher Knowledge of Students • Thinking • Problem Solving Procedural Understanding vs. Conceptual Understanding Procedural Knowledge Conceptual Knowledge Beginning of understanding Thorough understanding/ independence Training Portal: Evaluation Process Training Modules Video Library TEAM Logistics Q & A • What questions do you have about the Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model (TEAM)? • http://team-tn.org/