 Teacher completes Step #1: Lesson Plan in advance and sends to evaluator two days in advance of planning conference  Teacher and Evaluator meet to discuss.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Day 2: Learning and Teaching Session 3: Effective Feedback NYSED Principal Evaluation Training Program.
Advertisements

Overarching Question Who does the thinking? Therefore, who does the learning and growing?
Welcome to... Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements 4/14/2015PBevan, D.ED.
Conewago Valley School District Teacher Evaluation Tool Training Please sit at your “building” table. 2. Complete a nameplate – first name only.
1.  Why and How Did We Get Here? o A New Instructional Model And Evaluation System o Timelines And Milestones o Our Work (Admin and Faculty, DET, DEAC,
Teachscape - Teacher Effectiveness Platform Pennsylvania Schools Conewago Valley School District 1.
LEARNING CENTERED CONFERENCING USING THE CEL FRAMEWORK NICK HEDMAN AND PATTY HOWARD.
Appraisal Process and Forms Probationary – first 3 years of employment Permanent – tenured On or before Oct. 1 – meet, In person, with appraiser to review.
OASYS TRAINING COLLECTING & SUBMITTING EVIDENCE. APPR 20% Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures Knowledge of Students & Student.
Pause for Discussion Multiple pauses are included for discussion opportunities.
Coaching for School Improvement: A Guide for Coaches and Their Supervisors An Overview and Brief Tour Karen Laba Indistar® Summit September 2, 2010.
Teacher Evaluation Process Component 1: Training Before participating in the evaluation process, all teachers, principals and peer evaluators must complete.
Differentiated Supervision
What Is Evidence? PRESENTED BY SCHAUNA FINDLAY, PH.D.
Welcome to... Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements Day 2: Evidence 9/3/2015PBevan, D.ED.
The Card Sort Does this help? Do you need to make a change?
Welcome to... Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements 9/9/2015PBevan, D.ED.
Selma Unified School District Department of Curriculum and Instruction Kindergarten Release Day Day 1 Sept. 17, 2010.
LCSD APPR: Overview Review and Focus on the 60 points December 3, 2012.
From Compliance to Quality TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS IN PA: PIL Institute 2012 Tracy Hinish, Sunny Minelli Weiland and Cristine Wagner-Deitch.
Tom Corbett, Governor ▪ Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Educationwww.education.state.pa.us Measuring Educator Effectiveness May 3, 2012 revision, modified.
State Board Mission, Goals, and Policies
Welcome to... Introduction to A Framework for Teaching 10/12/2015pbevan 1.
Learning Centered Conferencing with the Using the Danielson Framework John Hellwich & Michelle Lewis.
South Western School District Differentiated Supervision Plan DRAFT 2010.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 3 The DPAS II Process Training for Teachers.
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
Introduction to Kentucky’s Professional Growth and Effectiveness System and Framework for Teaching.
From Mad River Schools Waiver Day Presentation May 15, 2013.
Lincoln Intermediate Unit 12 August 11, 2014 Differentiated Supervision: The Danielson Framework.
 I can examine the benefits of peer observation.  I can demonstrate understanding of the PGES protocols for the peer observation process.
In-Service September 19, 2012 Teacher Evaluation System.
Secaucus Reflect Live Observation Process Observer Guide.
Framework In Action: Theory into Practice
Education Unit The Practicum Experience Session Two.
Idaho Principal Evaluation Process Tyson Carter Educator Effectiveness Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education
Instructional Rounds Toby Boss ESU 6. Agenda Develop Common Understanding of Rounds Focus on Details – What do we do to prepare? – What do we do during.
Introduction to... Teacher Evaluation System Teacher Effectiveness 12/6/
APS Teacher Evaluation Module 9 Part A: Observation Data for the Summative Rating.
STANDARD V AND WRAP-UP: NC TEACHER CANDIDATE EVALUATION TRAINING GWU TRAINING SESSION.
Teachscape Reflect User Guide Teacher Observation and Evaluation Howard County Public School System.
NYC DOE – Office of Teacher Effectiveness F. Prioritize Areas for Feedback 1.
PEER COACHING INTRODUCTION Lisa Bruno Tanza Shuy.
GEA TOOL KIT PRESENTATION STAR ORULLIAN – EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GRANITE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION.
QUADRANT PARTNERS VIDEO SUCCESSFUL COACHING Know contemporary views & standards Model & demonstrate effective instructional behaviors Provide.
 Pre-Observation Conference  Priority component: 1e (Designing Coherent Instruction)  Observation  Priority components: 3c, 3d (Engaging Students in.
Teacher Evaluation University of New England - EDU 704 Dr. William Doughty Submitted By: Teri Gaston.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
Calibrating Feedback A Model for Establishing Consistent Expectations of Educator Practice Adapted from the MA Candidate Assessment of Performance.
Using Student Assessment Data in Your Teacher Observation and Feedback Process Renee Ringold & Eileen Weber Minnesota Assessment Conference August 5, 2015.
Teacher Evaluation & CEL 5 D
Tri City United Public Schools August 6, 2013 “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”
Page 1 Teacher Evaluation Process & Instrument Dale Ellis Bill Long Jed Stus.
Process for Evaluating Teachers. Principal’s Responsibility ManageKnowIdentifyEnsureSupervise.
PA-ETEP Overview for Teachers. Table of Contents  Registration Registration  Portal Navigation Portal Navigation  Notifications Notifications.
Iredell-Statesville Schools Orientation to the North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Instrument & Process
From Compliance to Quality TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS IN PA: SAS Institute 2011 Debra Dendas Eric Rosendale Cristine Wagner-Deitch,
EVALUATIONS Evaluations are regulated and required by KDE (KAR’s and KRS’s) All Certified staff are held accountable to job specific domains and standards.
EISD Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System T-TESS
Cohort Training, Phase II November 29 – 30, 2012.
In-Service September 19, 2012 Teacher Evaluation System.
MA-PAL Task 3 This task aligns with course assignments from EDC 5630 Supervision and Evaluation of Instruction.
Teacher Evaluation Process
Educator Effectiveness Evaluation Overview
What component is the greatest barrier for you as an evaluator?
Teacher Evaluation Process
When do Administrators collect evidence?
Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System (T-TESS)
Steps in the TDES Evaluation Process
TDES Think Tank September 25, 2018 Jill Cabe, Director of Performance Management Megan Scully, TDES Coordinator Time: 1 Minute.
Presentation transcript:

 Teacher completes Step #1: Lesson Plan in advance and sends to evaluator two days in advance of planning conference  Teacher and Evaluator meet to discuss the upcoming lesson framed around the following: Question Stems:  1a. What is the content being taught? What prerequisite for learning is required?  1b. Tell me about the composition of your class. How will you modify this lesson for groups or individual students?  1c. What do you want students to learn during this lesson?  1d. What resources were considered for this lesson and rejected? Why? What resources will be used? Why?  1e. List very briefly the steps of the lesson.  1f. How will you measure the goals articulated in 1c? What does success look like?  Evidence is added to the lesson plan document that emerges from the pre-observation conference. Step # 1: Pre-Observation (Focused on Domains 1 & 4) Before

 Evaluator arrives 5 minutes prior to beginning of lesson to ‘walk the walls’ (D2)  Types of Observation Evidence:  Scripting of Teacher or Student comments  Descriptions of Teacher and Student behaviors  Numeric information  Environment Remember:  Collect evidence from Students – “What are you learning?; Is what you’re doing hard in a good way?  Non-negotiable - Record observation on standard form  Optional – May use T-charts, seating charts, or similar templates to record relative numeric data (tally marks)  Evaluator does NOT retype observation Step # 2: Observation (Focused on Domains 1,2, & 3) During

 Teacher and Evaluator do not need to meet during Step #3.  With prerequisite training, the Teacher can engage in Step #3 independently or with the support of a coach.  Evaluator provides Teacher with completed observation form from Step #2.  Teacher is provided with an opportunity to add evidence to the observation form that may have been overlooked by Evaluator  Teacher returns the observation form to Evaluator with their additions  Teacher completes the self-assessment rubric (he/she may highlight phrases in multiple levels of the same component) and returns back to Evaluator prior to the post-teaching conference  Evaluator highlights or checks ONLY the areas on the self-assessment with which he/she agrees Step # 3: Preparing for the Post-Conference (Focused on Domains 1,2, 3, & 4) After

 Teacher meets with Evaluator to reflect on lesson - Evidence not required for each D4 component for this one lesson  Evaluator notes components of agreement and then invites teacher to take the lead in discussing the other components.  Components are collaboratively rated. Evaluator is the “rater of record” in the event of non-agreement. Evidence is the basis. Conversation Stems:  Comment on the evidence for...  Let’s look at the rubric for...  Tell me more about ….  What’s the backstory for...  Let’s look at the language that was highlighted here…talk about the evidence for that in this lesson Step # 4: Post-Teaching Collaborative Assessment (Focused on Domains 1,2, 3, & 4) After

During the Post Observation Conference – an area of focus is determined Plan of action determined Walkthrough is conducted to monitor and provide feedback on the actions being taken to reach goals. Teacher given a copy of the evidence by the end of the day Step # 5: Walk-Through (Focused on agreed upon area of concentration) After

6

Teacher Training 7 SAS: Teachscape

Susan Blyth Rae Ann Crispell 6/23/2016pbevan 8