Acknowledging and Honoring Quality Performance.  The purpose of the EAS process is to provide teachers with the opportunity to reflect on professional.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mentoring New Educators
Advertisements

Individual Professional Development Plan Santa Rosa District Schools School Year.
Leon County Schools Performance Feedback Process August 2006 For more information
School Based Assessment and Reporting Unit Curriculum Directorate
NC Educator Evaluation System Process Orientation
Are You (Click).
PD Plan Agenda August 26, 2008 PBTE Indicators Track
By the end of this session we will have an understanding of the following:  A new model for teacher evaluation based on current research  The correlation.
Annual Orientation. NC State Board Policy # TCP-004: “Within two weeks of a teacher’s first day of work in any school year, the principal will provide.
Simpson County Schools: New Teacher Support Program A Proposal.
Utah Effective Teaching Standards-based Jordan Performance Appraisal System Orientation (UETS-based JPAS)
Teacher Evaluation Model
New Mexico Public School Department Guidelines for Annual Teacher Performance Evaluation School Year PDP Revision Committee: Dr. Janaan Diemer,
What it means for New Teachers
Idaho Tiered Teacher Licensure May 13, Vision for Tiered Teacher Licensure Attract and retain great teachers in Idaho Identify struggling teachers.
August 15, 2012 Fontana Unified School District Superintendent, Cali Olsen-Binks Associate Superintendent, Oscar Dueñas Director, Human Resources, Mark.
Overview of the New Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework Opening Day Presentation August 26, 2013.
Peninsula School District
Cooperating Teacher Orientation
Professional Development and Appraisal System
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.
ADEPT for School Guidance Counselors
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
Your Mentoring Program: Step by Step including the Danielson Framework North Palos #117 Presenters: Marilyn Marino, NBCT – Mentor Coordinator David Creagan.
ADEPT Framework
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1 for Districts & Schools for Educators.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
TCS Orientation. NC State Board Policy # TCP-004: “Within two weeks of a teacher’s first day of work in any school year, the principal will provide the.
Introduction to Working Portfolios Educator Effectiveness System Training.
Connecting the Dots PLC AfL DI Higher Order Thinking TLCP Multi- Literacies Arts Technology Inquiry BIP SEF SIP.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT EDUCATOR EVALUATION PROJECT Presentation to the SLCSD Board of Education May 7, 2013.
Commission on Teacher Credentialing Ensuring Educator Excellence 1 Biennial Report October 2008.
AWMLP BOARD MEETING JANUARY 26, 2014 MIKE HUBERT.
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
Workshops to support the implementation of the new languages syllabuses in Years 7-10.
Teacher Performance Evaluation System Data Sources.
Standards IV and VI. Possible Artifacts:  School Improvement Plan  School Improvement Team  North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey  Student.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Program Introduction to Principal Evaluation in Washington 1 June 2015.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
Teacher Growth and Assessment: The SERVE Approach to Teacher Evaluation The Summative or Assessment Phase.
BEGINNING EDUCATOR INDUCTION PROGRAM MEETING CCSD Professional Development Mrs. Jackie Miller Dr. Shannon Carroll August 6, 2014.
Jeffrey Freund. Jeff Freund: Education and Work History Class of 2000 Class of 2004 Elementary Education Middle Level Mathematics.
GEA TOOL KIT PRESENTATION STAR ORULLIAN – EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GRANITE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION.
Certified Evaluation Orientation August 19, 2011.
Wisconsin Administrative Code PI 34 1 Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction - Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Support from a Professional.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
Focused Evaluation. Who?  Teachers who completed the Comprehensive cycle  Proficient or distinguished.
1 Rose Hermodson Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education December 13, 2011 Teacher Evaluation Components in Legislation.
Ohio Principal Evaluation System Pike County Joint Vocational School March 7,
Teacher Licensure PI-34 Wisconsin’s New Process. New License Stages  Initial Educator 5 year, non-renewable  Professional Educator 5 year renewable.
EISD Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System T-TESS
Educator Recruitment and Development Office of Professional Development The NC Teacher Evaluation Process 1.
What it means for New Teachers
Dissemination Training
Rockingham County Public Schools Teacher Evaluation Process
Evaluation Orientation Teacher & Licensed Support Staff with NCEES process
Teacher Evaluation System
Chapter 14: Evaluation of Instruction
Teacher Evaluation Process Training
Okeechobee County Instructional Evaluation
Evaluation Orientation Teacher & Licensed Support Staff with NCEES process
Personal Growth and Professional Development
State Board of Education Progress Update
Exploring Assessment Options NC Teaching Standard 4
Teacher Evaluation Process Training
HEYWORTH COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS
Presentation transcript:

Acknowledging and Honoring Quality Performance

 The purpose of the EAS process is to provide teachers with the opportunity to reflect on professional practice that increases student achievement as well as evaluation.  Teachers having ongoing, reflective conversations with administrators is the key to improved practice and effectiveness.

 Provisional Educator  An educator new to the profession with less than 3 years experience in DSD, or  An educator with prior experience but less than 3 consecutive, full-contract years in DSD  Career Educator  A tenured educator who has 3 or more consecutive years of successful teaching in Davis School District

 Career Educators year cycle  Provisional Educators year cycle

 Goal Setting  Interaction with administrators  Two formal observations and follow-up conferences (required for provisional educators)  Working administrator form  Informal classroom visits (all educators)  Educator Data Sources  Administrator Evaluation Report

 Years 1 & 2  Administrator report  2 required formal classroom observations and conferences  Informal classroom visits  Professional goals and activities  2 data source reports ▪ Evidence of student achievement (required) ▪ 1 additional data source of educator’s choice

 Year 3  Administrator report  2 required formal classroom observations and conferences  Informal classroom visits  Professional goals and activities  3 data source reports ▪ Evidence of student achievement (required) ▪ Professional reflective portfolio (required for EYE teachers only) ▪ Additional data sources of educator’s choice (1 additional for EYE teachers; 2 additional for all others)

 Years 1, 2, & 3  Administrator report  Optional formal classroom observations and conferences  Informal classroom visits  Professional goals and activities  1 data source report of educator’s choice

 Year 4  Administrator report  Optional formal classroom observations and conferences  Informal classroom visits  Professional goals and activities  3 data source reports ▪ Evidence of student achievement (required) ▪ 2 additional data sources of educator’s choice

 Evidence of student achievement  required for provisional educators annually  required for career educators, year 4  Documentation of professional development  Parent and/or student survey results  Evidence unique to the educator

 Educator requested formal classroom observations (career educators only)  Teacher proficiency tests  GRE  Praxis II: Subject area  Praxis II: Principles of Learning and Teaching  National Board Certification  Action Research  Collaborative Investigation

 DSD Homepage  Departments  Research & Assessment  Educator Assessment System (left hand side)  Data Source Forms

 Well Functioning A “W” indicates an educator is well functioning in that component of professional practice.

 Needs Attention  An “N” can be given at any time during the year when the administrator believes that a component of the educator’s performance needs attention  An “N” requires a plan for improvement and a time line  An “N” on the Working Administrator Form can be corrected during the year and changed to a “W” on the Administrator Evaluation Report

 Unsatisfactory A “U” given at any time during the year requires Performance Assistance as described in the Performance Improvement Section of the EAS Manual

 Goals and activities set from the beginning of the year are reviewed and progress discussed  Educator Data Sources are shared with administrator  Notable Performance may be shared  Administrator Evaluation Report is shared and signed

Questions or Concerns Suzanne Cottrell EAS Coordinator