Santa Rosa County District Schools Evaluation Systems.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Training for Teachers and Specialists
Advertisements

Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluation Guidelines. The single most influential component of an effective school is the individual teachers within that school.
Introducing LEADAlabama June 13, 2012 EDUCATEAlabama/LEADAlabama Section.
We will lead the nation in improving student achievement. CLASS Keys SM Module 10: Professional Development Plan For Improvement Spring 2010 Teacher and.
Guide to Compass Evaluations and
NC Educator Evaluation System Process Orientation
Performance Appraisal Systems
Day 2: Learning and Teaching Session 3: Effective Feedback NYSED Principal Evaluation Training Program.
The SCPS Professional Growth System
Smarter Balanced Field Test MARCH 2014 WHITTIER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
Evaluation Orientation Meeting Teacher Evaluation System
RTI 101 Mia Hyde Tennessee Department of Education Coordinator of Reading Content & Resources.
Santa Rosa County District Schools Educational Support Evaluation System.
Santa Rosa County District Schools Professional Orientation Program (POP) Professional Improvement Plan (PIP)
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education Updated: July 2011.
DPAS II Jessica Baker & Cheryl Cresci MED 7701 Dr. Joseph Massare.
Lee County Human Resources Glenda Jones. School Speech-Language Pathologist Evaluation Process Intended Purpose of the Standards Guide professional development.
A Visiting Committee’s Work in the WCEA Process for Accreditation
Lim Sei cK.  16 th September 2013 – 7 th December 2013  ACADEMIC WEEK 1 – WEEK 11  9 th December 2013 – 4 th January 2014  BRUNEI STUDENT HOLIDAY.
SCIA Special Circumstances Instructional Assistance
Products being integrated to create Home Base OpenClass Collaboration Schoolnet Instructional Tools and Assessment PowerSchool Student Information Core.
August 22, 2014 ELA Coordinators Meeting
District Leadership Team Stakeholder Involvement in the District Strategic Plan! Session #4 April 12th, 2011.
1 Phase III: Planning Action Developing Improvement Plans.
By the end of this session we will have an understanding of the following:  A model for teacher evaluation based on current research  The FEAPs as a.
SLG Goals, Summative Evaluations, and Assessment Guidance Training LCSD#7 10/10/14.
Weekly Attendance by Class w/e 6 th September 2013.
Osceola School District’s Classroom Instructor Evaluation The Ins and Outs of Our Classroom Instructor Evaluation
North Carolina Educator Effectiveness System Training Script.
TEACHER EVALUATION What it is going to look like….
1 Office of New Teacher Induction Introducing NTIMS New Teacher Induction Mentoring System A Tool for Documenting School Based Mentoring Mentors’ Guide.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation August 20, 2014 Elizabeth M. Osga, Ph.D.
McRel’s Evaluation System Training Session 1 May 14, 2013 Herbert Hoover Middle School.
Teacher Evaluation System LSKD Site Administrator Training August 6, 2014.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 9, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
Instructional Hours Required Instructional Time / OAR
Math Content Network Update The Power of Mistakes Student Engagement Culture of Learning Growth Mindset Congruent Tasks.
Utah Effective Teaching Standards-based Jordan Performance Appraisal System Orientation (UETS-based JPAS)
C OLLABORATIVE A SSESSMENT S YSTEM FOR T EACHERS CAST
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,
Teacher Evaluation Update Marzano Protocol System.
Teacher Evaluation & Developing Goals Glenn Maleyko, Executive Director, Ph.D Haigh Elementary September 8, 2014.
Teacher Evaluation Update
Appraisal Process and Forms Probationary – first 3 years of employment Permanent – tenured On or before Oct. 1 – meet, In person, with appraiser to review.
ComprehensiveFocused  Evidence needs to be collected for all 27 components found in all 8 Criteria  Evidence needs to be collected in one of the 8 Criteria.
CLASS Keys Orientation Douglas County School System August /17/20151.
Verona Public Schools DEAC Meeting Agenda: PARCC vs Marzano Configuration Discussion Marzano Moving Forward: Administrator/Supervisor/Teacher.
South Western School District Differentiated Supervision Plan DRAFT 2010.
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
In-Service September 19, 2012 Teacher Evaluation System.
ADEPT 1 SAFE-T Judgments. SAFE-T 2 What are the stages of SAFE-T?  Stage I: Preparation  Stage II: Collection of evidence  Stage.
1 NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT: PROCESS North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Department of Public Instruction.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
KPBSD Effective Instruction Evaluation Committee LaDawn Druce Marina Bosick Daniel Olson Margaret Griffen Troy Minogue Juliana DeBoard Megan.
In-Service September 19, 2012 Teacher Evaluation System.
Introduction to the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model for USD 259
Evaluation Orientation Teacher & Licensed Support Staff with NCEES process
Teacher Evaluation System
Teacher Evaluation Process
What component is the greatest barrier for you as an evaluator?
Okeechobee County Instructional Evaluation
Evaluation Orientation Teacher & Licensed Support Staff with NCEES process
Teacher Evaluation Training
Teacher Evaluation Process
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluation Guidelines
Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluation Guidelines
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
SRCDS: ESP Evaluation System
Presentation transcript:

Santa Rosa County District Schools Evaluation Systems

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – (IP) Levels IP I: Beginning Teachers in first year with SRCDS – 2 formal, 4 informal, overall evaluation Fall & Spring IP II: Teachers in 2-3 year rated HE or E – 2 formal, 4 informal, 1 overall evaluation in Spring IP III: Teachers in 4 -9 year rated HE or E – 1 formal, 4 informal, 1 overall evaluation in Spring IP IV: Teachers more than 9 years rated HE or E – 1 formal if certificate up for renewal, 4 informal

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – (IP) Levels IP V: Not Implemented until : – Teachers more than 10 years rated HE or E serving in a leadership role in at least two instructional related activities (see noninclusive list pg. 7 in Instructional Evaluation System) – 1 formal IF certificate up for renewal, 4 informal Veteran Teachers new to Santa Rosa County District Schools (regardless of teaching experience) will be placed as IP level 1 the first year and be required to have two formal observations during their first year in the district.

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel Observations It is the philosophy of the Santa Rosa District School that school administrators should be proactive in their approach to teacher observations and interactions. Administrators should spend as much time as possible in the classrooms observing teachers interacting with students. To help enable them in this process, the District will provide each administrator with an iPad with access to all observation documents beginning with the 2011‐2012 school year. This will make the record keeping task more manageable for the administrators as they increase the number of formal and informal observations. Each teacher will be observed and evaluated by their school principal unless the principal delegates that responsibility to an assistant principal. If the principal does delegate this responsibility the principal will still be responsible for reviewing the evaluation before it is finalized. --SRCDS Instructional Evaluation System Manual (page 8)

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel Formal Observations: – Scheduled (mutually agreed upon time) – Pre-Observation Conference: Face-To-Face Detailed discussion of lesson to be observed Prior to the day of the observation – Observation 30 minutes or longer – Post Observation Conference Face to Face A teacher who is not required to have a formal observation may request that one be done as part of their formal evaluation.

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel Informal Observations: – Unscheduled – Generally lasts 5-10 minutes – Format: Classroom walkthrough Conversations in the hallway or office Parent conferences Any other setting which allows the administrator to observe the teacher performing his/her responsibilities – Once every nine weeks (4 times per year)

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – HOW DID WE DO ? Administrative Training – total hours of training offered June/July:Discovery Education Marzano Research Introduction Sessions Sept-April:Discovery Education Marzano Training/Video Observation Practice

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – HOW DID WE DO ? Administrative Training – In excess of 90 total hours of training July: Administrative Conference Training (Discovery Ed) Assessment July-March: Principal/AP Meetings 2 hour training session, practice video observations PowerPoint Presentations and video on each element was posted for administrators to use with their teachers. Oct-March: Site-based Walk-Through Sessions/PGS Jan-May: Online Modules (18 Marzano Hurricane Make-up Modules)

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – HOW DID WE DO ? Total observations of Instructional Personnel (Formal and Informal combined) – 8150 – 1 st Quarter: 17% (25%) – 2 nd Quarter: 24%(22%) – 3 rd Quarter: 22%(22%) – 4 th Quarter: 37%(31%)

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – Total Tally Marks All Domains: (Formal and Informal cumulative) Highly Effective (HE): 72.0 % Effective (E):26.7 % Developing (D): 1.1 % Unsatisfactory (U):.2%

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – Total Tally Marks By Domain: Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors – HE: 67.6 % – E: 30.9 % – D: 1.3 % – U:.2 % Domain 2: Planning and Preparation – HE: 82.9 % – E: 16.2 % – D:.7 % – U:.2 %

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Instructional Personnel – Total Tally Marks Domain 3: Reflection on Teaching – HE: 79.4 % – E: 19.2 % – D: 1.2 % – U:.2 % Domain 4: Collegiality & Professionalism – HE: 94.9 % – E: 4.6 % – D:.4 % – U:.1 %

SRCDS Evaluation Systems

Instructional Evaluation System – Section I (Verify Assignments) Moved to Student Performance Section – Section II (Stakeholder Satisfaction Surveys) Moved to Student Performance Section – Added: Self Assessment using the “Evaluation Rubric” – Updated Observation Rubrics (see Handout) – Updated PDP (see Handout) – Updated FEAPS sign off process

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Administrative Evaluation System – Section I (Verify Assignments/ Determination of Areas of Focus) Step 1: Moved “Verify Assignments “to Student Performance Section Step 2: Removed: Administrative Conference – Section II (Professional Development Plan) Updated – Not New But A Reminder: If you are an administrator, your supervising administrator should complete an observation on you for the 2 nd, 3 rd, and 4 th quarters.

SRCDS Evaluation Systems Proposed Administrative Trainings – JulyAdministrative Conference (C2) Review of PGS Evaluation Formats (ESP/POP/PIP) Review of PDP/Rubrics Administrative Evaluation Research Basis (Julie Smith) – Sept-OctSite-based review of new teacher evaluation rubric/practice walks/sync data/discuss Groups of 6-10/administrators may select one of five sections to attend across the district. – Sept-OctNew Administrator in-service to cover evaluation items for new APs/maybe some new principals too. Principals should complete the POP observations if they have a new AP. – October, March, April, May Principal Meetings-2 hour presentations on evaluation systems – October, March, April, May A.P. Meetings-2 hour presentations on evaluation Systems

SRCDS Evaluation Systems After Lunch: – New Electronic POP – New Electronic PIP – New Educational Support Personnel Evaluation System