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 of BEST in the observation and feedback  The structure of the new instructional appraisal system  The FEAPs as a framework for the observation process

 Evaluation process requires a two-way dialogue between observer and observee  A teacher’s impact as a leader on the school should extend beyond the classroom  The primary purpose of an evaluation is to improve instruction, evidenced by student achievement

 The development of the evaluation process for any one teacher is designed with the input of both teacher and administration  Evaluation for the teacher is an ongoing reflective process  It takes more than one observation to evaluate the effectiveness of a teacher

 Teacher effectiveness is correlated to the level of student engagement and student performance

All teachers can increase their expertise and skill level from year to year which allows gains in student achievement from year to year.

PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES 21 Points: 21 Points: Professional Practices 10 Points: 10 Points: Professional Growth Plan Development 8 Points: 8 Points: Plan Implementation 8 Points: 8 Points: Collaboration & Mutual Accountability PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES 21 Points: 21 Points: Professional Practices 10 Points: 10 Points: Professional Growth Plan Development 8 Points: 8 Points: Plan Implementation 8 Points: 8 Points: Collaboration & Mutual Accountability 50% Multi-Metric (47 pts) INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY BASED ON IDENTIFIED ASSESSMENTS 30 Points:Results 30 Points: Individual Results 5 Points: 5 Points: Regression 5 Points: 5 Points: Collaborative team student achievement closing the achievement gap results related to closing the achievement gap of the Lowest 25% in Reading and/or Math INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY BASED ON IDENTIFIED ASSESSMENTS 30 Points:Results 30 Points: Individual Results 5 Points: 5 Points: Regression 5 Points: 5 Points: Collaborative team student achievement closing the achievement gap results related to closing the achievement gap of the Lowest 25% in Reading and/or Math 40% Student Achievement (40 pts) DISTRICT OPTION: TEAM & SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY 5 Points:School Improvement Plan 5 Points: Achievement of School Improvement Plan goals assigned for whole school results or team results 2 Points: Professional Growth Plan (PGP) target(s) 2 Points: Individual accountability for meeting individual Professional Growth Plan (PGP) target(s) DISTRICT OPTION: TEAM & SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY 5 Points:School Improvement Plan 5 Points: Achievement of School Improvement Plan goals assigned for whole school results or team results 2 Points: Professional Growth Plan (PGP) target(s) 2 Points: Individual accountability for meeting individual Professional Growth Plan (PGP) target(s) 10% Student Achievement (7 pts) 3 pointsAlignment 3 points: Alignment of Professional Practices with Student Growth Measures 3 pointsAlignment 3 points: Alignment of Professional Practices with Student Growth Measures 3 points

 Observations of the Dimensions 21 Pts  Professional Growth Plan Development 10 Pts  PGP Implementation 8 Pts  Collaboration and Mutual Accountability 8 Pts

BPS Instructional Dimensions BPS Instructional Performance Appraisal System Dimensions

 Development of PGP Goal  Work Plan Strategies  Outcome Measures and Reflection

 Working the Plan  In-Process Monitoring

 Working together as a team to improve the achievement of a specific group of students.  Groups may be by grade level, department, cohorts, etc.

 Orientation  Each year - all instructional personnel  During pre-planning or 30 days within first workday  All instruments provided  Assessment forms  Data collection forms  Supporting procedures

 Observations  Reflective practice  Facilitator support: Singularly, or in combination  School administrator(s)  District level certificated personnel  Peer teachers  Resource teachers  Teacher leaders  Other qualified persons

 Teachers with 3+ years experience with Brevard Public Schools  Meet or exceed standards of FEAPs  Three conferences annually  First by October 8  Highly effective rating may participate in observation process every other year  PGP planning  Implementation  Progress toward goals

 Annual Contract Teachers  Meet standards of FEAPs  Three conferences annually  No later than October 8 for first  PGP planning  Implementation  Progress toward goals

 Teachers new to Brevard  Probationary for one year  Two formal evaluations from administrator  Two evaluations by other qualified persons

 Teachers not meeting standards of FEAPs  Interim evaluation  Notice  Four employee observations and conferences  Written PDAP  Specific strategies, suggestions, improvements  Specific teaching behaviors  Specific & reasonable timeline to correct deficient areas

 PSC Teacher who receives “unsatisfactory” rating shall be placed on probation for 90 calendar days  Four observations and conferences  14 days after 90 days for administrator to assess performance and submit to superintendent

 Summative evaluation form  Two parts  Formative observations  Peer and administrator involvement  Overall ratings  Multi-metric in fashion Summative 50% student growth 50% use of data, plan implementation, collaboration, and alignment with expectations and performance

Two rating scales for determining Highly Effective, Effective, Needs to Improve or Unsatisfactory Performance

 Formative ratings:  Distinguished – performance consistently exceeds FEAPs  Proficient – performance meets FEAPs  Professional Support Needed – performance requires additional attention  Unsatisfactory – performance does not meet minimum requirements of the position

 Summative --Multi-metric  100 point scale  0-50 – Student Growth  35 points --Value added student scores  5 points—collaborative team effort  5 points –School Improvement Plan  3 points—school regression data  2 points—target met PGP student growth

 Professional Practice  0-21 – Observations  0-10 – Plan Development  0-8 – Plan Implementation  0-8 – Collaboration  0-3 – Alignment

 – Highly Effective  – Effective  – Needs Improvement  63 and less – Unsatisfactory