OCM BOCES Annual Professional Performance Review 2012-2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Performance Appraisal Systems
Advertisements

SEED – CT’s System for Educator and Evaluation and Development April 2013 Wethersfield Public Schools CONNECTICUT ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION Overview of.
... and what it means for teachers of non-tested subjects Johanna J. Siebert, Ph.D. NAfME Symposium on Assessment June 24-25, 2012.
 Teacher Evaluation and Effectiveness laws are now in place  Legislature has passed a law that student performance can now be a part of teacher evaluation.
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.
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.
Teacher Evaluation New Teacher Orientation August 15, 2013.
Utah Effective Teaching Standards-based Jordan Performance Appraisal System Orientation (UETS-based JPAS)
Freehold Borough Teacher Evaluation System Freehold Intermediate School Friday – February 15, 2013 Rich Pepe Director of Curriculum & Instruction.
Briefing: NYU Education Policy Breakfast on Teacher Quality November 4, 2011 Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor NYC Department of Education.
OCM BOCES Day 6 Principal Evaluator Training. 2 Nine Components.
David Guyette, Laura Six, Rose Drake and Paige Kinnaird
OCM BOCES APPR Regulations As of % Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures APPR NOTE: All that is left for implementation.
OCM BOCES APPR Regulations As of % Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures APPR.
RISE Principal Evaluation and Development System: Overview and Principal Effectiveness Rubric.
 Reading School Committee January 23,
LCSD APPR Introduction: NYS Teaching Standards and the Framework for Teaching Rubric Welcome! Please be seated in the color-coded area (marked off by colored.
EDUCATOR EVALUATION August 25, 2014 Wilmington. OVERVIEW 5-Step Cycle.
OASYS TRAINING COLLECTING & SUBMITTING EVIDENCE. APPR 20% Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures Knowledge of Students & Student.
Ramapo Teachers’ Association APPR Contractual Changes.
September 5,  Be present  Demonstrate Active Listening  Help ensure a balance of voices  Respect time boundaries  Use electronics respectfully.
Annual Professional performance review (APPR overview) Wappingers CSD.
Pause for Discussion Multiple pauses are included for discussion opportunities.
Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) as approved by the Board of Regents, May 2011 NOTE: Reflects guidance through September 13, 2011 UPDATED.
Day 3. Agenda [always] Aligning RTTT Growth and Value-Added Update 21 st Century Readiness and APPR Evidence Collection Inter-rater agreement.
2012 Secondary Curriculum Teacher In-Service
Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) Evaluation Process for Teachers.
LCSD APPR: Overview Review and Focus on the 60 points December 3, 2012.
Regents Reform Agenda Update as of November 2012 C-A Teachers' Resource Center-- J. Robinson, director 1 A special thank you to Jill Robinson, Director.
Creating a Student Learning Objective (SLO). Training Objectives Understand how Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) fit into the APPR System Understand.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
* Provide clarity in the purpose and function of the Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) as a part of the APPR system * Describe procedures for using.
Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR). What are the components of APPR? Teacher Evaluation –60 points (observation*/goal setting) –20 points (State.
Ongoing Training Day 4. Agenda Growth and Value-Added Update 21 st Century Readiness and APPR Evidence Collection Inter-rater agreement and.
OCM BOCES Day 7 Lead Evaluator Training 1. 2 Day Seven Agenda.
Laying the Groundwork for the New Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System TPGES.
Teacher Evaluation System Part II: Student Learning Data May 5, 2015.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
The APPR Process And BOCES. Sections 3012-c and 3020 of Education Law (as amended)  Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) based on:  Student.
The New Massachusetts Principal Evaluation
OCM BOCES SLOs Workshop. Race To The Top: Standards Data Professional Practice Culture APPR.
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
Teacher and Principal Evaluations and Discipline Under Chapter 103.
Day 3. Here We Are: 9 Components 1.New York State Teaching Standards and Leadership Standards 2.Evidence-based observation 3.Application and.
EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS: 1 An Orientation for Teachers.
In-Service September 19, 2012 Teacher Evaluation System.
Jeffrey Freund. Jeff Freund: Education and Work History Class of 2000 Class of 2004 Elementary Education Middle Level Mathematics.
Day 9. Agenda Research Update Evidence Collection SLO Summative Help Summative Evaluation Growth-Producing Feedback The Start of the Second.
Changes in Professional licensure Teacher evaluation system Training at Coastal Carolina University.
Creating a Student Learning Objective (SLO). Training Objectives Understand how Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) fit into the APPR System Understand.
CCSS/APPR/SLO/LMA A Summary. A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty. ~ Winston Churchill.
Day 4. Here We Are: 9 Components 1.New York State Teaching Standards and Leadership Standards 2.Evidence-based observation 3.Application and.
2011 – 2012 School Year. * Walk-Throughs * Observation(s) * Pre-/Post-Evaluation Form * Year-End Evaluation * Summative Score Report.
APPR & SLO Solutions Innovation for Teaching & Learning RIGHT REASON TECHNOLOGIES YOUR SOLUTION FOR STUDENT SUCCESS.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
Understanding How Evaluations are Calculated Professional Practices, Measures of Student Learning/ Outcomes- Calculating Scores & Translating SLOs/SOOs.
EISD Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System T-TESS
APPR Next Steps NYSUT WNYRO Winter Leadership Conference 2 March 2013 Elizabeth Vignaux SLOs 60 pts TIPs Appeals Best Practices to Survive APPR.
TEACHNJ Proposed Regulations. TEACHNJ Regulations Proposal  Two Terms that are very important to know: SGO – Student Growth Objective (Created in District)
In-Service September 19, 2012 Teacher Evaluation System.
1 Overview of Teacher Evaluation 60% Multiple Measures of Teacher Performance At least 31 points based on “at least 2” observations At least one observation.
APPR 2.0 (based on CR 3012-d) NSCSD Goals The NSCSD District Goals Can be evidenced in planning, classroom instruction, assessment and teacher’s.
APPR Update School Year.
Teacher Evaluation “SLO 101”
APPR Overview 3012c Draft Revision March 2012
Sachem Central School District Teacher Evaluation Training 2012
APPR Update School Year.
Creating Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
Central Square School District and CSTA
Presentation transcript:

OCM BOCES Annual Professional Performance Review

Committee Work Goal – Design an evaluation system that improves instructional practice and student learning. Committee met 7 full days from October-May Committee Membership 8 OCMBFT Members 8 Administrators All Departments Represented

20% Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures =100

60 Points for Multiple Measures Evidence collected throughout the school year Teacher submits evidence Administrator collects evidence from observation At least three 5-15 minutes- long mini-observation for all teachers (written feedback within 2 days) Also one extended observation (including pre and post-conference) for probationary teachers

60 Points for Multiple Measures Collected evidence gets sorted according to the 7 NYS Teaching Standards At end of the year, collected evidence is compared to the NYSUT Professional Practice Rubric Committee chose NYSUT Rubric instead of Danielson Rubric because of strong alignment to NYS Teaching Standards.

60 Points for Multiple Measures Levels on the rubric get converted to points: Highly Effective = 4.0 pts Effective = 3.3 pts Developing = 2.8 pts Ineffective = 0 pts IDEH 1.1a Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1b Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1c Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1d Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj

60 Points for Multiple Measures Levels on the rubric get converted to points: Highly Effective = 4.0 pts Effective = 3.3 pts Developing = 2.8 pts Ineffective = 0 pts IDEH 1.1a Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1b Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1c Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1d Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj

60 Points for Multiple Measures Levels on the rubric get converted to points: Highly Effective = 4.0 pts Effective = 3.3 pts Developing = 2.8 pts Ineffective = 0 pts IDEH 1.1a Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1b Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1c Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 1.1d Hdjkfh jewklqfj fkwfj jgklrgj rjgk gh rlkgh klgh kjtr fjlafja itugj 4.0 pts 3.3 pts 2.8 pts

60 Points for Multiple Measures Scores on indicators for each Indicator within a Teaching Standard get averaged into an overall score for each Teaching Standard Scores for the 7 Teaching Standards get averaged for the overall rubric score Overall rubric score gets translated to 60 points

20 Points for Student Growth State provides these points for 4- 8 ELA and math teachers Everyone else must make a Student Learning Objective to figure these points out for ourselves

20 Points for Student Growth Student Learning Objective is a process the state has prescribed Set goals for the most important learning Based on where your kids are starting the year Common teachers will collaborate on measures No one will have 10 SLOs Varied and vast Additional training

INGREDIENTS

20 Points for Local Achievement A lot like the SLOs Same basic process and format Can’t be exactly the same as the SLO used for State Growth 20% Like SLOs, committee structure will select assessments.

20% Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures =100

Annual Summative Evaluation = Annual Summative Score for each teacher HEDI (91-100, 75-90, 65-74, 0-64) Final score by the end of the year (unless waiting for state’s 20%) Appeals process If “developing” or “ ineffective,” will have improvement plan for following year

A Year at a Glance Beginning of the year meeting between teacher and Lead Evaluator Set Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) Baseline information about students and plans for the year Mini-observations (and possible extended observation) End of the year meeting between teacher and Lead Evaluator Review SLOs Compare evidence to rubric Summative evaluation

A Work in Progress APPR Committee will meet mid-year to discuss how the process is working. At the end of the year the APPR Committee will re-convene to make changes if appropriate.

Questions?