OEA Leadership Academy 2011 Michele Winship, Ph.D.

 Evidence of growth in student learning and competency  Standardized tests, pre/post tests in untested subjects  Student performance (art, music, etc.)  Curriculum-based tests given in a standardized manner  Classroom-based tests such as DIBELS  Evidence of instructional quality  Classroom observations  Lesson plans, assignments, and student work  Student surveys such as Harvard’s Tripod  Evidence binder (next generation of portfolio)  Evidence of professional responsibility  Administrator/supervisor reports, parent surveys  Teacher reflection and self-reports, records of contributions

 What is the district policy concerning lesson plans?  What are the expectations for  Completing in advance,  Completing in a particular format, and  Review and approval?  Are lesson plans created individually? Co- created? Created by teams?  What is the expectation for reflection and revision of lesson plans? 3

 The single-cell plan book 4

5

6

 Establish standards for lesson planning and the lesson plans themselves.  Provide training in the models/formats required.  Develop a rubric for assessing lesson plans.  Train evaluators.  Provide examples of lesson plans at each performance level of the rubric.  Establish a formative assessment cycle where lesson plans are collected and reviewed with feedback given to the teacher.  Determine how lesson plan evidence will be included in the evaluation process. 7

 What is the district policy concerning student assignments?  What are the expectations for  Alignment with standards?  Rigor?  Differentiation for diverse learners?  Passive vs. active learning?  Are lesson assignments created individually? Co-created? Created by teams?  What is the expectation for reflection and revision of assignments? 8

 Establish standards for assignments, including alignment, rigor, delivery method and differentiation.  Provide training in areas needed (most often differentiation).  Develop a rubric for assessing assignments.  Train evaluators.  Provide examples of assignments at each performance level of the rubric.  Establish a formative assessment cycle where assignments are collected and reviewed with feedback given to the teacher.  Determine how assignment evidence will be included in the evaluation process. 9

 What is the district policy concerning use of student work?  What are the expectations for  Collection and analysis of student work?  Grading of student work?  Providing feedback to students about their work?  Is student work reviewed and graded individually? Analyzed and discussed in PLCs?  What is the expectation for revised teaching practice based on analysis of student work? 10

 Establish standards for student work including collection, analysis, grading and providing feedback.  Develop a process for analyzing and reflecting upon student work.  Create a rubric for assessing the analysis and reflection.  Train evaluators.  Provide examples of analysis and reflection at each performance level of the rubric.  Establish a time and process for teams of teachers to review and analyze student work together.  Determine how student work evidence will be included in the evaluation process. 11

 Use of student surveys in educator evaluation are controversial (although common in colleges and universities).  Survey design plays a huge role in the validity of the survey instrument and the level of subjectivity.  The focus in an evaluation should not be the survey “results” themselves, but educator response to survey “results.”  The Harvard Tripod Survey is part of the Gates Measures of Effective Teaching project. 12

 Design a standard survey with questions that provide formative feedback to teachers.  Allow teachers to administer, collect and analyze survey results.  Create a format/process for analyzing and reflecting on survey results (PLCs?).  Create a rubric for assessing the analysis and reflection.  Train evaluators.  Provide examples of analysis and reflection at each performance level of the rubric.  Determine how student survey evidence will be included in the evaluation process. 13

 Review Laura Goe’s preliminary work on Evidence of Teaching Performance Binders. Evidence of Teaching Performance Binders  Could tie into or become part of the LPDC process for license renewal.  “Instructional Cycle” component could be the basis for observation conferences.  Key issues are  How to score/assess,  Who scores/assess, and  Training for scorers/assessors. 14

 What are the expectations for professional responsibility in the district? (Parent contact, community involvement, participation on teams or committees, etc.)  Do they vary by school, grade level or subject area?  How is professional responsibility documented and by whom?  How is professional responsibility assessed and by whom? 15

 Logs of parent contact  Lists community involvement activities  Lists of team and committee positions and responsibilities  Log of professional development activities  Parent survey results and analysis  Administrator reports of professionalism— attendance, behavior, etc. 16

 Create standards for expected professional responsibility including parent contact, professional development, reflection, participation, attendance, behavior, etc.  Determine who provides the evidence for the standards and in what format.  Create a rubric(s) that delineates levels of performance for each standard.  Train evaluators.  Determine how professional responsibility evidence will be included in the evaluation process. 17

18

 Michele Winship   19