oregon city school district december 2010. goal: implement a performance based evaluation system for...
TRANSCRIPT
Oregon City School District
December 2010
GOAL: Implement a performance based evaluation system for all
certified staff in fall 2011
• Adopt standards with criteria
• Design performance based evaluation system
• Define effectiveness for teachers and principals by Feb
GOAL: Implement a performance based evaluation system for all
certified staff in fall 2011• Adopt
standards with criteria
• Design performance based evaluation system* Agree on components (OCSD, best practices, TIF parameters)*look at models/examples*Design handbook *Plan ‘training for supervisors/teachers
Adopt as is
Adopt with edits
Design anew
GOAL: Implement a performance based evaluation system for all
certified staff in fall 2011• Adopt
standards with criteria
• Design performance based evaluation system
* Agree on components (OCSD, best practices, TIF parameters)
*look at models/examples
*Design handbook*Plan ‘training’ for supervisors/teachers
Adopt as is
Adopt with edits
Design anew
Today’s Agenda
• Review work completed to date related to Performance based Evaluation System
• Share components of effective evaluation systems and overview parameters of CLASS/TIF grant
• Determine descriptors for domains/components• Reach consensus on definitions for levels of
performance• Reach initial consensus on components of
performance based evaluation system• Homework
Rigorous Performance Evaluation Systems
Student Growth
Multiple MeasuresIndividual Student School Growth GrowthStandards
and Criteria
Smart Goals
Observations and Conferences
Rigorous Performance Evaluation Systems
Student Growth
Multiple MeasuresIndividual Student School Growth GrowthStandards
and Criteria
Smart Goals
Observations and Conferences
Review of Work Work Defined Work in
ProgressWork to be done
Handbook Align current handbook with parameters of TIF
Align required forms with standards/criteria and process
Probationary, Trad’l and Non Trad’l tracks
Determine differentiation components, if any
Determine specific components and steps in process
Performance levels labeled
Performance levels defined
Link student growth to performance evaluation using multiple measures
Domains identified Domains/components defined
Train evaluators/teachers on ‘new’ model
System components identified (self-assess, PGP etc.)
Descriptors of performance levels for each component
Define effectiveness for teachers and principals
ALL ON THE WALL
• Pluses1.2.3.
• Challenges1.2.3.
Pluses
Challenges/Concerns/?s
ONES TWOS THREES
Effective Performance Based Evaluation Systems• How good is good enough?
• Good at what?
• How do we know?
• Who decides? Charlotte Danielson (2010)
Standards for Quality and Professional Growth
• Quality = Standards as criteria for assessing performance
• Professional Growth = Standards become targets for professional growth goals
Free powerpoint template: www.brainybetty.com
13
•What? • How?Standards with criteria:“use an objective, evidence based rubric aligned with teacher performance framework developed by Danielson (2007)”Clear definition of exemplary practice:“effective teacher..rated as proficient or distinguished as a result of rigorous and comprehensive performance eval.”
Procedure supports novice and experienced teachers:“trajectory of professional growth in which employees are empowered to be self-directed”
“self-assessment, goal setting, professional development, student learning targets (SMART)”
Promoting Professionalism and Ensuring Quality
• How?“enact a structured process for evaluation and observation including pre-conference, observation, collection of artifacts over time, post-observation conference with written documentation –teacher’s self reflection and a formative evaluation by principal with a timeline to follow-up”
Promoting Professionalism and Ensuring Quality
What?
“performance evaluationthat incorporates student growth”
“portfolios of professional practice linked to performance ratings”
“artifacts in portfolios”
•What? • How?“conduct informal and formal observation based assessments of teacher performance using multiple points that take into account student growth as well as other measures of effectiveness”
Promoting Professionalism and Ensuring Quality
•What? • How?“to ensure quality and rigor, the consortium will use data from student assessments (formative and summative) information collected through observations, as well as artifacts from classroom as its foundation for the CLASS evaluation system”
Promoting Professionalism and Ensuring Quality
Effective Evaluation Systems
• Link evaluation with professional growth/development and district mission
• Continuous processes for learning
• Focus on student learning
• Allocate adequate resources
Continued..• Reflection on Practice
• Collaboration and Professional Conversations
• Self-Assessment/Self directed Inquiry
• Portfolios of evidence
• A Community of Learners
Continued..• Reflection on Practice
• Collaboration and Professional Conversations
• Self-Assessment/Self directed Inquiry
• Portfolios of evidence
• A Community of Learners
What How = Framework of Professional Practice
• Standards to consider:
• InTASC• Danielson’s Domains• State of Oregon
(TSPC/no criteria)• Marshall• California (New
Teacher Center)• Marzano• Other states (DC, LA)
Handbook/Models to consider:
Klamath FallsSherwoodTillamookNewport News, VABethel SistersMarshall’s workOther states
Currently Proposed
Domains
• Planning and Preparation
• Learning and Work Environment
• Instruction or Delivery of Service
• Professional Responsibilities
Performance levels• Emerging
• Applying
• Integrating
• Exemplary
What Standards?InTASC• Domains 4
– Standards 10– 3 areas in each standard:
Performances
Essential KnowledgeCritical Dispositions
• Standards under review to be adopted Mar/Apr
• Criteria are in development• Will most likely be adopted
by TSPC as pre-service stds, perhaps later by state for teacher eval
Danielson
• Domains 4Components 22Elements 76
• Standards/criteria developed for all components/levels
• Aligned with InTASC
InTASC Std #1: Learner Development
Performances Essential Knowledge
Critical Dispositions
(a) The teacher regularly assesses individual and group performance in order to design and modify instruction to meet learner’s needs in each area of development (cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical) and scaffolds the next level of development.
(d) The teacher understands how learning occurs- how students construct knowledge, acquire skills, and develop disciplined thinking processes – and knows how to use instructional strategies that promote student learning.
(h) The teacher respects students’ differing strengths and needs and is committed to using this information to further each student’s development.
Danielson Domain 3: Instruction
Component Element
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
Activities and Assignments
Grouping of Students
Instructional Materials and Resources
Structure and Pacing
Decision #1
• Do we adopt/adapt one of these?• Design our own?
• If we adopt/adapt: Which one?
Levels of Performance
1 2 3 4
“Place your Bets”1. A teacher with many years of experience will
perform consistently at the 4 (exemplary/distinguished) level.
2. A novice teacher will often perform skills at the 1 (emerging/ unsatisfactory) level.
3. Most teachers will perform at the 3 (integrating/proficient) level in skills after five years of experience.
4. Once teachers reach 3 (integrating/proficiency) in most skills, they will remain at that level t/o their career.
Levels of Performance1 2 3 4
*Does not yet appear to understand the concepts underlying the components*Working on the fundamental practices*Performance is below licensing standard of do no harm
Levels of Performance1 2
*Understands concepts and attempts to implement*Implementation is sporadic, intermittent, not successful*Characteristic of student teacher/new teacher/Experienced teacher learning new skill“minimally competent, improvement will occur with experience, no actual harm being done”
Does not yet appear to understand the concepts underlying the components*Working on the fundamental practices*Performance is below licensing standard of do no harm
Levels of Performance1 2
*Have mastered the work of teaching while working to improve*Understands concepts, knows content*Has a broad array of strategies and activities*Eyes in the back of their heads”
*Understands concepts and attempts to implement*Implementation is sporadic, intermittent, not successful*Characteristic of student teacher/new teacher/Experienced teacher learning new skill“minimally competent, improvement will occur with experience, no actual harm being done
Does not yet appear to understand the concepts underlying the components*Working on the fundamental practices*Performance is below licensing standard of do no harm
Levels of Performance1 2 3 4
*Have mastered the work of teaching while working to improve*Understands concepts, knows content*Has a broad array of strategies and activities*Eyes in the back of their heads
*Master teachers making contributions to the field in and outside their school*A community of learners, with students assuming responsibility for learning*Classroom appears to run itself, seamless
*Understands concepts and attempts to implement*Implementation is sporadic, intermittent, not successful*Characteristic of student teacher/new teacher/Experienced teacher learning new skill“minimally competent, improvement will occur with experience, no actual harm being done
Does not yet appear to understand the concepts underlying the components*Working on the fundamental practices*Performance is below licensing standard of do no harm
Levels of Performance1 2 3 4
Emerging
Unsatisfactory
Does not meet standards
Beginning
Novice
Applying
Emerging
Basic
Developing
Working towards
Improvement Needed
Integrating
Proficient
Applying
Meeting the standard
Meets expectations
Effective
Exemplary
Distinguished
Master
Integrating
Expert
Innovating
Highly Effective
Advanced
Rubric Choices• ? Levels of performance describing
developing levels of expertise(beginning to advanced)
• ? Levels of performance silent on performance “not meeting expectations”
• ? Levels to include descriptions of what is considered “not meeting”
Decision # 2
• How many levels of performance?
• What information should level #1 provide?– Not meeting standards?OR– Standards are emerging?
Decisions: Standards and Criteria
• Levels of Performance• Standards
What’s Next?
Components of Process
• # of observations and when?
• Self-assessment?• Self-reflection?• Teaching artifacts?• Differentiation?
Definition of Effectiveness?• rated as either proficient or
distinguished as a result of a rigorous and comprehensive performance evaluation system;
• demonstrate at least a year’s worth of student growth using a value added model;
• his/her school must demonstrate at least a year’s worth of growth using a value-added model;
• and he/she must meet other performance measures to be
determined by the Consortium.
Evaluation Activities: Formative and Summative
• Observations of teaching, professional practice, communications
• Self-assessment• Self-directed inquiry• Reflection on practice• Collaboration • Teaching artifacts: assignments, assessments, worksheets…• Planning documents : lesson plans, curriculum units,
classroom management plan, assessment • Parent and Community Communications: newsletters,
student progress reports…• Student work• Student, parent feedback• Communication logs• Records
Group Agreements: Components
Oregon City TIF• Goals linked to student
growth/professional growth/SMART
• Self –assessment• Self-reflections• Observations: informal
and formal• Formal: pre-obs. conf,
data collection, post observation conf, teacher self reflection
Group Agreements: Components
Oregon City CLASS• Trajectory towards
self-directed learning• Portfolios of artifacts• Portfolios of
professional practice linked to performance ratings
• Artifacts demonstrating “effectiveness”
Free powerpoint template: www.brainybetty.com
41
Best Practices Required (state reg)
Choices/Decisions
Self-Assessment X
Goals X (SMART) How many? Type?Domains, SIP, Prof’l Growth
Observations (data collection and analysis)
X How many? Formal? Informal?
Reflections on Observation
X – written, verbal?
Feedback on Observations
X - written
Self-reflection on goals X
Portfolios of evidence(student growth, artifacts)
X
Summative Evaluation Annual Targeted domains for Year 1, Year 2 and Year 3?
Components of Evaluation Systems: Probationary
Free powerpoint template: www.brainybetty.com
42
Components of Evaluation System: Contract Teachers
Best Practices Required (state) Choices and Decisions
Self-Assessment X
Goals How many? SMART goals? SIP goals? Professional growth goals?
Observations X (informal/formal, how many)
Reflection on Obs. X
Feedback on Observations
X written? Verbal?
Differentiated Plans based on performance
X
Self-Reflection on Goals
X
Portfolios X
Summative Evaluation A defined cycle, usually 2 years or3 years
Why Differentiate??
• Different stages of career:– Different needs– Different levels of skill
Novice– Rapid, intense learning– Need support to develop basic skillsExperienced• Routines under control• Refining skills
Free PowerPoint template: www.brainybetty.com
44
Differentiated ComponentsTraditional Supervision Guided Self-Directed:
Self-Directed Plan
Self-Directed:
Traditional Supervision
Status Probationary/temp Contract Status Contract Status
Cycle Annual Cycle 2 year cycle 3 year cycle
Observations 4 obs/per year 2 obs/2 years 2 obs/3 years 6 obs/3yrs
Professional Growth Targeted Growth areas from domains (self-assessment and admin input)
Targeted Growth areas from domains (self-assessment and admin input)
Educ selected formative activity for prof’l growth
Educ selected formative activity
prof’l growth
Calendar obs of targeted domains
Evaluation Annual self-reflection
Annual admin evaluation
Annual status check
Biannual self-reflection on domains and self-directed plan
Biannual Admin eval on domains and self-directed plan
Annual status check
Tri-annual self-reflection on progress on self-directed plan
Tri-annual admin eval of progress on self-directed plan
Annual status check
Tri-annual self-reflection on growth in targeted domains
Tri-annual admin eval of growth on domains
Decision # 3
• Do you want to differentiate the system based on teacher performance and experience?
Decisions…What is doable?Self-
AssessGoals Obs. Reflec
t on Obs.
Written Feedback
Self-Reflect on Goals/PGP
Portfolios
Summ Eval.
Each yr?
Before each cycle?
How many?
Smart format?
Linked to stdt growth?
Formal/Informal? How many of each?
Differ for prob/cont
When: each cycle?each year?
In writing or conver.
After formal?
After informal?
Annual?
Each cycle?
What artifacts?
Common comp?
Teacher choice?
How often?
Same for differ plans or Differ evals. for differ. cycle?
Multiple Measures of Student Growth
The Process Visually
Group Agreements
Next Steps
• Homework – review examples to identify forms, examples to be borrowed or adapted
• Design OCSD handbook• Begin discussions of definitions of
‘effectiveness’• Begin developing the ‘training plan’
for fall implementation
TIF graphic
Feedback
• What worked?
• Questions unanswered?
• Suggestions/next steps: