SGO RESOURCES FOR LEADERS AND TEACHERS Office of Evaluation Division of Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Summer 2016.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Specialists August 2013 Training Module I Introduction to DPAS II Training for Specialists.
Advertisements

Sub-heading ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION AND SUPPORT SYSTEM Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Leader Proposed Adaptations.
Teacher Evaluation Model
Amendments to TEACHNJ Educator Evaluation Regulations April 2014.
Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal Requirements SB 290 ESEA Waiver Oregon Framework.
 Reading School Committee January 23,
Service Agency Accreditation Recognizing Quality Educational Service Agencies Mike Bugenski
1. 6 leadership standards what are they? 3 2 Teaching & Learning 1 Vision, Mission & Goals 6 The Education System 4 Collaborating with Families and Stakeholders.
1 GENERAL OVERVIEW. “…if this work is approached systematically and strategically, it has the potential to dramatically change how teachers think about.
Student Learning targets
Student Growth Goals Pendleton School District Teacher Evaluation System Domain Five Targeting Growth Using Student Growth Goals as a Measure of Educator.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
GTEP Resource Manual Training 2 The Education Trust Study (1998) Katie Haycock “However important demographic variables may appear in their association.
New Teacher Introduction to Evaluation 08/28/2012.
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
Technology Use Plan Bighorn County School District #4 Basin / Manderson, Wyoming “Life-long learning through attitude, academics, and accountability.”
NEW TEACHER PRINCIPAL EVALUATION. RACE TO THE TOP AND ESSB 5895  The principles guiding the change  Quality teaching and leading is critically important.
REVIEW PROCESS District Capacity Determination:. Review Team Selection Teams will contain geographically balanced representation. Each review team will.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II (DPAS II) for Teachers Training Module I Introduction to DPAS II Training for Teachers.
Student Growth Objectives Unifying Standards, Instruction, and Assessment to Improve Student Learning June
Building and Recognizing Quality School Systems DISTRICT ACCREDITATION © 2010 AdvancED.
Standards IV and VI. Possible Artifacts:  School Improvement Plan  School Improvement Team  North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey  Student.
Connecticut PEAC meeting Today’s meeting Discussion of draft principal evaluation guidelines (1 hour) Evaluation and support system document.
March 23, NYSCSS Annual Conference Crossroads of Change: The Common Core in Social Studies.
Writing Policy for SBDM Councils. Goals of this Session provide an overview of Senate Bill 1 requirements related to writing provide guidance in reviewing.
Aligning Academic Review and Performance Evaluation AARPE Session 5 Virginia Department of Education Office of School Improvement.
Mathematics Performance Tasks Applying a Program Logic Model to a Professional Development Series California Educational Research Association December.
Educator Effectiveness Updates April Updates Closing up Looking forward to
Building and Recognizing Quality School Systems DISTRICT ACCREDITATION GRAVES COUNTY SCHOOLS © 2010 AdvancED.
Ohio Principal Evaluation System Pike County Joint Vocational School March 7,
Achievenj in 2016 and beyond
The North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Process November 1, 2012
TEACHNJ Proposed Regulations. TEACHNJ Regulations Proposal  Two Terms that are very important to know: SGO – Student Growth Objective (Created in District)
ACHIEVENJ IN 2016 AND BEYOND PROPOSAL LEVEL Peter Shulman Deputy Commissioner Kristen Brown Chief Talent Officer Carl Blanchard Director, Office of Evaluation.
Educator Recruitment and Development Office of Professional Development The NC Teacher Evaluation Process 1.
ACHIEVENJ AND BEYOND Office of Evaluation Division of Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Summer 2016.
APS Teacher Evaluation System Preparing for Implementation May 2012.
MSBSD Educator Evaluation
Stages of Research and Development
Achievenj in 2016 and beyond Adoption
World’s Best Workforce (WBWF)
Dissemination Training
District Accreditation
Improving the Accessibility of Locally Developed Assessments CCSSO National Conference on Student Assessment 2016 Phyllis Lynch, PhD Director, Instruction,
Teacher Evaluation Process Training
Teacher Evaluation “SLO 101”
Overview This presentation provides information on how districts compile evaluation ratings for principals, assistant principals (APs), and vice principals.
DESE Educator Evaluation System for Superintendents
Five Required Elements
What’s the connection to Ohio’s other initiatives?
School Improvement Plans and School Data Teams
Overview of Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) for
AchieveNJ: Teacher Evaluation Scoring Guide
Gary Carlin, CFN 603 September, 2012
Common Core State Standards
Introduction to Student Achievement Objectives
Teacher Evaluation Process
Overview of Implementation and Local Decisions
Administrator Evaluation Orientation
Teacher Evaluation Process Training
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
Overview This presentation provides information on how districts compile evaluation ratings for principals, assistant principals (APs), and vice principals.
Evaluation Information
Teacher Evaluation in BTSD (AchieveNJ)
Roadmap November 2011 Revised March 2012
STUDENT GROWTH OBJECTIVES
Evaluation Training September 4, 2018
Overview of Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) for
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
Aligning Academic Review and Performance Evaluation (AARPE)
Presentation transcript:

SGO RESOURCES FOR LEADERS AND TEACHERS Office of Evaluation Division of Teacher and Leader Effectiveness Summer 2016

2 Changes to Address Challenges* ChallengeChange 1. Balancing time between paperwork and working directly with teachers Observation requirements are simplified 2. Prescriptive evaluation of Highly Effective teachers Flexibility for evaluating Highly Effective teachers 3. Misaligned and tight deadlines PDP, CAP, and SGO deadlines are aligned 4. Developing high-quality SGOs Administrator training /district policy requirements for SGOs are aligned 5. Complicated/restrictive principal evaluation Principal evaluation is more flexible * All changes discussed in this presentation were approved at proposal level by the State Board of Education on July 13, 2016 and are pending final adoption.

3 New All administrators receive training on all components of the evaluation rubric prior to conducting evaluations, including on the SGO process. Districts develop policies and procedures describing the process of developing and scoring SGOs. Benefits All educators better understand each component of the evaluation rubric prior to the start of the evaluation cycle. Coupled with more flexibility offered in the observation process, increased focus on the SGO process will help increase the quality of goals set and support given to teachers. Change 4 Training /district policy requirements for SGOs are aligned

4 SGO Development: Three Guiding Principles Educators must understand that high-quality SGOs should be: 1.Aligned to standards 2.Grounded in data 3.Driven by high expectations for students

5 Administrator Training Requirement for SGOs “Training shall be provided on each component of the evaluated teaching staff member’s evaluation rubric before the evaluation of a teaching staff member.” ~N.J.A.C. 6A: AchieveNJ SGO Page

6 Two Recommended Training Processes 1.Read the “SGO Overview Document”SGO Overview Document 2.Watch all four of the SGO videos in the SGO video series (coming soon) 3.Complete the SGO 101 Review and discuss the results with a direct supervisor or mentorSGO 101 Review 1.Watch the SGO video series 2.Review and analyze the most current staff observation and SGO scores 3.Use the SGO Quality Rating Rubric to review and analyze a sample of last year’s SGOsSGO Quality Rating Rubric 4.Identify one or more areas in which the SGO process/product can be improved 5.Review resources provided by the Department and those developed locally and determine whether and how they may best be usedresources 6.Contribute to developing, and implementing as indicated, an action plan to address areas needing improvement SGO BasicsImproving SGOs

7 Step One Watch the SGO Video Series Improving SGOs

8 Step Two Review and Analyze SGO and Other Evaluation Scores Improving SGOs

9 1.Familiarize your team with the SGO quality rating rubric 2.Choose a representative sample of SGOs to review 3.Discuss strengths and weaknesses of the SGOs based on rubric guidelines Step Three Review and Analyze a Sample of Last Year’s SGOs Is scoring range justified by analysis of baseline data and the rigor of the assessment? Improving SGOs

10 Step Four Identify Areas of Improvement for SGO Process/Product Improving SGOs

11 Step Four Identify Areas of Improvement for SGO Process/Product Improving SGOs Scoring range is not reflected by baseline data and the rigor of the assessment.

12 Step Five Review Resources and Determine Best Use From the Department 1.SGO Video SeriesSGO Video Series 2.SGO Integration ToolSGO Integration Tool 3.SGO GuidebookSGO Guidebook Local Resources Use/refine resources that you have created Improving SGOs

13 Improving SGOs Training Step Six Contribute to Developing and Implementing an Action Plan Improving SGOs From the Department Collaborative Teams Toolkit

14 Other SGO Tools SGO Scoring and Tracking Tool –Microsoft Excel-based –Teachers compile their SGO baseline data –Creates scoring tiers automatically –Automatically populates SGO form – Assists in monitoring student performance

15 All AchieveNJ Resources and Questions General Information Questions/Suggestions Thank you!