Teacher Evaluation: Lessons Learned Teaneck Public Schools Dr. Marisa M. King Dr. Deirdre Spollen-LaRaia

Teaneck Public Schools  Diverse Suburban/Urban Community  6 miles from the George Washington Bridge  3,741 Total Students  1 – High School 9-12  2 – Middle Schools 5-8  3 – Elementary Schools 1-4  1 – Early Childhood School Pre-K/K

Student Demographics African-American44% Hispanic/Latino27% White15% Asian13% Other 1%

Introduction  Grant – Excellent Educators for New Jersey Program (EE4NJ)  Pilot District General Requirements- Cohort 2  Pilot and Implement  Provide Feedback to NJDOE  Collaborate - District Evaluation Advisory Committee (DEAC)  Communicate with stakeholders, share common language  FAQ’s, addressed concerns

Teacher Evaluation System  Selection Process  Framework for Teaching (FFT) – Charlotte Danielson  Aligned to existing evaluation rubric  Online videos – Professional Development

Excellent Educators for New Jersey  EE4NJ Grant $104,000  Teachscape software to manage the FFT  Teachscape Proficiency System (per user cost)  Teachscape Learn  Digital Cameras  Danielson Group Professional Development for Administrators

Training of Administrators  iPads  30 hours – Online Professional Development Summer 2012  Collaboration among colleagues  Make-a- Meeting  Small Study Groups  Demonstrate Proficiency -2-Stage Assessment

Domain 2 The Classroom Environment 2a : Creating an Environment of Respect & Rapport 2b : Establishing a Culture for Learning 2c : Managing Classroom Procedures 2d : Managing Student Behavior

Domain 3 Instruction 3a : Communicating with Students 3b : Using Questioning/Prompts & Discussion Techniques 3c : Engaging Students in Learning 3d : Using Assessment in Instruction

Teacher Training  September 2012 – High level Overview  Rubric for Domain 2 and Domain 3  Discussion of Frequency of Observations  Discussion of Type of Observations  Faculty Meetings  Teachscape Online Modules

Preparing for Observations  Requirements for Cohort 2 Pilot Districts  Tenured and Non-Tenured  Core and Non-CoreTested/Non-tested  Double-Scored, External Evaluator, 30 min, 15 min  Observations commenced in October 2012  Oct- Dec observations focused on Domain 2 only (to allot time for teachers to acclimate to the framework) 1,240 Observations 24 Administrators Average of 51.6 Observations per Administrator

Action-Research  Permission from Superintendent  Consulted with Board Attorney  Rutgers University - External Evaluator

Preparedness to Implement the FFT Percentage of teachers who indicated administrators were prepared to implement the FFT Proficiency System 49% (35/72) Percentage of administrators who indicated they were prepared to implement the FFT Proficiency System 70% (14/20) Varying Perceptions Both groups noted that additional time was needed to learn the tool before beginning observations

Preparedness to Implement the FFT  Post survey results indicate agreement that both groups are prepared to implement the FFT following 8 months of observations PrePost Percentage of teachers who indicated administrators were prepared to implement the FFT Proficiency System 49% (35/72) 84% (21/25) Percentage of administrators who indicated they were prepared to implement the FFT Proficiency System 70% (14/20) 100% (8/8)

Understanding the Domains AdministratorTeacher Respondents who indicate having an in-depth understanding of Domain 2 (Classroom Environment) 85% (17/20)66% (48/72) Respondents who indicate having an in-depth understanding of Domain 3 (Instruction) 65% (13/20)40% (29/72) Respondents indicated a higher understanding of Domain 2 over Domain 3 Could be result of observations focused on Domain 2 for first trimester

Understanding the Domains Respondents in both groups indicate an increase in their understanding of the Domains PrePost AdministratorTeacherAdministratorTeacher Respondents who indicate having an in-depth understanding of Domain 2 (Classroom Environment) 85% (17/20) 66% (48/72) 100% (8/8) 72% (18/25) Respondents who indicate having an in-depth understanding of Domain 3 (Instruction) 65% (13/20) 40% (29/72) 100% (8/8) 60% (15/25)

The Power of Two Percentage of teachers who indicate they are confident in the model of double-scored observations 36% (25/69*) Percentage of administrators who indicate they are prepared to double-score classroom observations 60% (12/20) * Several respondents left this question blank Pilot required one double-scored observation for most teachers Final regulations double-scored observation are not required for teachers. They are required for administrators to calibrate scoring on the FFT

The Power of Two PrePost Percentage of teachers who indicate they are confident in the model of double-scored observations 36% (25/69) 62.5% (15/24) Percentage of administrators who indicate they are confident in the model of double-scored observations 60% (12/20) 100% (8/8)

Consistent Ratings Percentage of teachers who indicate the FFT will provide consistent ratings between administrators 52% (30/57*) Percentage of administrators who indicate the FFT will provide consistent ratings between administrators 65% (13/20) * Several respondents left this question blank This finding indicates that administrators and teachers do agree that FFT will provide consistent ratings between administrators Research based tool provides agreement by those who are involved

Consistent Ratings PrePost Percentage of teachers who indicate the FFT will provide consistent ratings between administrators. 52% (30/57) 56.5% (13/23) Percentage of administrators who indicate the FFT will provide consistent ratings between administrators. 65% (13/20) 100% (8/8)

Effective Feedback Percentage of teachers who indicate they have received effective feedback about teaching and learning 50% (34/67*) Percentage of administrators who indicate the FFT will enable effective feedback about teaching and learning 72% (13/18*) * Several respondents left this question blank Feedback (pre and post) using a common rubric helped to create common dialogue related to the critical attributes and evidence for each domain Subjectivity is reduced

Effective Feedback PrePost Percentage of teachers who indicate they have received effective feedback about teaching and learning. 50% (34/67) 75% (18/24) Percentage of administrators who indicate the FFT will enable effective feedback about teaching and learning 72% (13/18) 100% (8/8)

Next Steps/Lessons Learned

 Technology  Wireless network  Additional technology has been purchased  User difficulty navigating the platform for the Danielson Framework

Next Steps/Lessons Learned Continue to develop a Common Understanding and Language

Inspire

Questions?

Thank You Marisa M. King, Ed.D. Deirdre Spollen-LaRaia, Ed.D.