Alaska Educator Evaluation Overview Yukon Koyukuk School District.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
USING THE FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING TO SUPPORT EFFECTIVE TEACHER EVALUATION Mary Weck, Ed. D Danielson Group Member.
Advertisements

Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation Pilot September 1, 2011 – September 30, 2012 NJ State Board of Education, July 13, 2011.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Specialists August 2013 Training Module I Introduction to DPAS II Training for Specialists.
Teacher Evaluation New Teacher Orientation August 15, 2013.
Teacher Evaluation System LSKD Site Administrator Training August 6, 2014.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
Briefing: NYU Education Policy Breakfast on Teacher Quality November 4, 2011 Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor NYC Department of Education.
C OLLABORATIVE A SSESSMENT S YSTEM FOR T EACHERS CAST
Teacher Evaluation Model
PUSD Site Administrator Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 23, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER RENEWAL Overview of Proposed Renewal March 6, 2015 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Overview of the New Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework Opening Day Presentation August 26, 2013.
Evidence: First… 1. Assemble your district team to include teachers, administrators, association representatives 2. Research and select an instructional.
 Reading School Committee January 23,
August 2014 The Oregon Matrix Model was submitted to USED on May 1, 2014 and is pending approval* as of 8/8/14 *Please note content may change Oregon’s.
Differentiated Supervision
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1.
Evaluating the school librarian using the Danielson Model
M EASURING T EACHER E FFECTIVENESS (MTE). H OW DID WE GET HERE ? Video from the Arizona School Administrators PUSD Measuring Teacher Effectiveness Committee.
Teacher Evaluation Ashley Greene 10/29/13.
Program Overview The College Community School District's Mentoring and Induction Program is designed to increase retention of promising beginning educators.
Session Materials  Wiki
Welcome What’s a pilot?. What’s the purpose of the pilot? Support teachers and administrators with the new evaluation system as we learn together about.
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1 for Districts & Schools for Educators.
Iowa’s Teacher Quality Program. Intent of the General Assembly To create a student achievement and teacher quality program that acknowledges that outstanding.
Arkansas Teacher Evaluation Pilot Program
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
Marco Ferro, Director of Public Policy Larry Nielsen, Field Consultant With Special Guest Stars: Tammy Pilcher, President Helena Education Association.
TEACHER EVALUATION TRAINING November 1 st, 2012 General Admin Meeting BY GLENN MALEYKO, Ph.D Director of Human Resources John McKelvey– Teachscape November.
Introduction to Working Portfolios Educator Effectiveness System Training.
TEACHER DEVELOPMENT, EVALUATION, AND PEER SUPPORT Overview Session for MPS Staff March 10, 2014.
Laying the Groundwork for the New Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System TPGES.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
The Danielson Framework ….how does this change things?
THE DANIELSON FRAMEWORK. LEARNING TARGET I will be be able to identify to others the value of the classroom teacher, the Domains of the Danielson framework.
Teacher and Principal Evaluation A new frontier….
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for Teachers.
The Danielson Framework Emmanuel Andre Owings Mills High School Fall 2013.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Update 11/29/12.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY 14/15 Governing Board Presentation May 13, 2014 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Introduction to Teacher Evaluation in Washington 1 June 2015.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
Teacher Effectiveness Who begins in ? Teaching Specialists Special Education Teachers English as a Second Language Teachers Gifted Teachers.
 Development of a model evaluation instrument based on professional performance standards (Danielson Framework for Teaching)  Develop multiple measures.
What you need to know about changes in state requirements for Teval plans.
PGES: The Final 10% i21: Navigating the 21 st Century Highway to Top Ten.
A Framework for Teaching Charlotte Danielson’s Model SHS – Professional Development 14 November 2012 ( Brenda Baker/Marnie Malone)
Introduction to... Teacher Evaluation System Teacher Effectiveness 12/6/
Welcome to todays session!  Please take a moment to check your connection and audio settings.  If this is your first time using LYNC please see the resources.
New Work January 28, 2015 Yukon Koyukuk School District.
BISD Update Teacher & Principal Evaluation Update Board of Directors October 27,
Assessing Teacher Effectiveness Charlotte Danielson
Teacher Evaluation Danielson Framework Yukon Koyukuk School District New Teacher Training.
Teacher Evaluation University of New England - EDU 704 Dr. William Doughty Submitted By: Teri Gaston.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
Focused Evaluation. Who?  Teachers who completed the Comprehensive cycle  Proficient or distinguished.
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Update Kentucky Board of Education August 8,
EISD Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System T-TESS
One Team. One Vision. Unlimited Success Gerald Oehler Old Court Middle School
Framework For Teaching (FFT)
Changes to the Educator Evaluation System
Teacher Evaluation “SLO 101”
Introduction to Framework for Teaching Classroom Observations
MSBSD Educator Evaluation
Introduction to Core Professionalism
Administrator Evaluation Orientation
Presentation transcript:

Alaska Educator Evaluation Overview Yukon Koyukuk School District

Quick Facts Piloting a new system this year. Full implementation in Based on the Danielson Framework Evaluation will be on 12 specific Danielson components Data points will not be included until next year.

Quick Thoughts The new system will be more about coaching than evaluation “The quality of the coaching conversations is the lynch pin of the system” “Feedback is the breakfast of champions” Expectations will be clear The new system will appear complex and daunting and will produce anxiety. Clear Communication, collaboration and our experience will overcome this

Danielson Framework  Each teacher has a copy of Enhancing Professional Practice  Book Study on the 12 components  During Chane’s Collaboration Wednesdays  1 Framework  4 Domains  12 Components

YKSD Danielson Component Card

YKSD Danielson Smart Card

Each of the 12 Components has a rubric of clear expectations

Teachers will use these 12 components to: Complete the self reflections Set instructional goals for the school year Know exactly what is expected of them regarding instruction.

Instructional Goals

Alaska EED Requirements

YKSD Educator Evaluation System Requirements *Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments  Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)  Information from parents, students, etc.  Other information (as determined by the district) Information Sources YKSD Evaluation Components Results & Actions Professional Learning Focus for district & teacher. _______________ Annual Evaluation Alternative for the following school year (as determined by the district) District Support OR Plan of Professional Growth (optional) Plan of Improvement Proficient or higher on 7 standards and basic or higher on 1 standard. ______________ Exceeds the districts performance standards (as determined by the district) Basic on 2 or more standards Unsatisfactory on 1 or more standard Student Learning Objectives Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities Domain 3 – Instruction Domain 1- Planning And Preparation Domain 2 – Classroom Environment Cultural Standards Performance Rating on each of the four ( 4) components  Unsatisfactory  Basic  Proficient  Exemplary

Information Sources Districts: may select a nationally recognized observational framework approved by the department or continue to use the observation tools they have previously adopted. must have a procedure and a form to collect information concerning an educator’s performance from students, parents, and other stakeholders. may use other information like surveys, self-assessments, portfolios, etc. to gather information concerning an educator’s performance. Qualitative  Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)  Information from parents, students, etc.  Other information (as determined by the district )

Information Sources 2015 and Beyond *Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments Districts must: Select appropriate measures of student growth with the input of the educators being evaluated. Establish standards and performance levels for student learning data. Develop procedures based on objective & measurable criteria to ensure that data used accurately reflects student growth based on the educator performance. Use statewide assessment data for teachers who provide instruction in the content areas assessed. Quantitative

Two to four student data points. We will need to write an Student Learning Objective (SLO) for each one. Performance Rating on each of the four (4) Danielson components.  Unsatisfactory  Basic  Proficient  Exemplary Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities Domain 3 – Instruction Domain 2 – Classroom Environment Domain 1- Planning And Preparation Cultural Standards Aligning Information Sources to Evaluation Components Information Sources YKSD Evaluation Components * Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments  Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)  Information from parents, students, etc.  Other information (as determined by the district)

Levels of Performance Standards Performance Levels EPBU Domain 1 – Planning and Preparation Domain 2 – Classroom Environment Domain 3 - Instruction Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities 2 – 4 Student Learning Objectives (Student data points) Performance Rating on each of the 4 Danielson components.  Unsatisfactory (U)  Basic (B)  Proficient (P)  Exemplary (E)

Overall Rating & Student Learning Data A district will evaluate whether an educator’s overall performance is exemplary, proficient, basic, or unsatisfactory. A district shall include student learning data in teacher and administrator’s overall rating according to the following schedule: SY 2015 ‐ 16 & SY 2016 ‐ 17, at least 20% SY 2017 ‐ 18 at least 35% SY 2018 ‐ 19 and after, at least 50% A district may not give an educator an overall performance rating of proficient or higher if the educator has been evaluated to be performing at a level of basic or lower on one or more of the content standards or other criteria for which evaluation is required.

Overall Rating District Reporting School Year & School Year Student Learning Standards Alaska Teacher Standards Student Learning Standard 20% Student Learning Objective  Exemplary  Proficient  Basic  Unsatisfactory Content Standard 80% Alaska Teacher Standards Student Learning Standards Exemplary Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory Proficient or higher on all standards Basic or Unsatisfa ctory on any one standard Rating on each of the 4 Danielson Components  Exemplary  Proficient  Basic  Unsatisfactory Domain 1- Planning And Preparation Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities Domain 2 – Classroom Environment Domain 3 – Instruction

District Reporting Student Learning Standard 35% Content Standard 65% Content Standard 50% Student Learning Standard 50%

Danielson Education Book study on Enhancing Professional Practice – 12 YKSD Components Quarterly Newsletters ( ½ Danielson, ½ AK Standards ) Chane’s Collaboration Meetings ( 1x/month ) On Site Trainings with Patty White and Chane Review AK EED website for more detailed information Remember: This is about coaching…not “gotcha” Coaching > evaluation Don’t worry, we will help you through this