Presentation for Teachers and Administrators in the New Canaan Public Schools, New Canaan, CT What is differentiated supervision? Why is it necessary? How do we make teacher evaluations both meaningful and purposeful? How can school leaders respond to evaluations to make key decisions regarding teacher needs? How will differentiated supervision ultimately benefit teachers and students? Differentiated Supervision – Because Students Are Not the Only Ones with Differences!

What is Differentiated Supervision? Differentiated Supervision is effectively using evaluations to inform meaningful decisions on teacher needs. It occurs when school leaders recognize teachers vary greatly in their readiness levels, their skill sets, and in their confidence, resulting in significant variation in teacher effectiveness.

Why is Differentiated Supervision Necessary?

Teachers are NOT all the Same! The “Widget Effect,” as described in a research report by the New Teacher Project, is defined as the failure of our schools to recognize that teacher effectiveness is not the same from classroom to classroom; teachers are not interchangeable parts. Evaluations must acknowledge, and be responsive to, their strengths and weaknesses. (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009)

Decisions, Decisions… Key decisions regarding teachers are rarely based on teacher performance: Tenure is typically granted after a predetermined number of years of service. Salary advances are based on years of service and education level. Professional development is often random or fad-based rather than tied to observed teacher effectiveness. Evaluators typically decide that the overwhelming majority of teachers are performing well. (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009)

Change Required… Effective Differentiated Supervision requires a cultural shift – administrators and teachers must adjust how they have historically viewed the evaluation system. It must be understood that “the core purpose of evaluation must be maximizing teacher growth and effectiveness” (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009, p. 9). Teachers must stop viewing a positive rating as the singular goal of an evaluation, but instead view it as an opportunity to receive constructive feedback and differentiated support.

Where to Begin? Differentiated Supervision begins with purposeful, meaningful, objective analysis of overall teacher effectiveness. Researchers agree that one single tool should not be used to evaluate teachers, but that multiple instruments and frameworks should be utilized. It is critical that evaluators are trained in the use of observation and data-gathering protocols. (Hinchey, 2010)

Observation and Evaluation – What’s the Difference? Observation refers to seeing, hearing, recording, reviewing, and analyzing teacher performance through the school year. Evaluation is much broader; it refers to making judgments based upon information accumulated on all aspects of the teacher's professional performance, both instructional and non- instructional.

Tool Options for Evaluations (Goe, Bell & Little, 2008) DescriptionStrengthsCautions Classroom Observations Measures observable classroom processes. Provides information about classroom activities and behaviors. Can be used for both formative and summative purposes. Important to choose a valid and reliable protocol; raters must be trained. Cannot assess teacher beliefs, intentions, or outcomes of lessons. Instructional Artifacts Protocols used to analyze/measure quality of lesson plans, rubrics, student work, etc. Can be good measure of instructional quality. Practical and feasible measure. Limited research on reliability and validity. Training scorers can be costly. Portfolio Used to document array of teaching behaviors and responsibilities. Used to assess beginning teachers/teacher candidates. Can measure aspects of teaching not seen in single observations. Good tool for teacher self-improvement. Time-consuming and difficult to standardize. Typically represents a teachers’ exemplary work.

More Options… DescriptionStrengthsCautions Teacher Self-Report Reports of classroom activities/goals; obtained through surveys, instructional logs or interviews. Can measure unobservable factors; provides teacher’s perspective. Feasible and cost-efficient. Still need a validated instrument to increase reliability/validity. This method should never be primary measure. Student Survey Student opinions about teaching practice. Can offer formative information to help teachers improve. Students are not able to comment on teacher’s content knowledge, curriculum use or professional activities. Value- Added Model Formula used to determine teachers’ contributions to test score gains. Measure of student learning vs. teaching methods; little burden at school level; useful for identifying outstanding teachers. Cannot separate teacher effects from classroom effects; not useful for formative purposes; measure only teachers’ contributions to test scores, not other measures of student growth.

So How do we Evaluate and Differentiate? In a nutshell, a good evaluation system is used as a foundation for responses to varying teacher effectiveness…an evaluation is not an end in and of itself…it is not a document to be stuffed away in a file. Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching and TAP (The System for Teacher and Student Advancement) are examples of systems in which the teacher evaluation process is inherently tied to the school’s responses, including decisions to mentor, coach, provide professional development, change teacher assignments, and/or reward, advance or dismiss. (Eckhert, 2010), (Sartain, Stoelinga, & Krone, 2010)

Danielson’s Framework: Domain Focus Domain 1 – Planning and Preparation What a teacher knows and does in preparation for teaching. Domain 2 – The Classroom Environment All aspects of teaching that lead to a culture for learning in the classroom. Domain 3 – Instruction What a teacher does to engage students in learning. Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities Professional responsibilities and behavior in and out of the classroom.

Evaluation Outcomes… not just a score or rating… Both Danielson’s Framework and TAP ensure that evaluations are not the equivalent of “jumping through a cursory, bureaucratic hoop” (Eckhert, 2010). Instead, they are the basis of support for interventions for low performing teachers, continued growth options for teachers in the middle, and advancement opportunities for teachers who have demonstrated expertise. Research indicates that the use of such frameworks are successful in identifying more low-performing teachers and that they are effective in identifying teachers in need of additional supports (Sartain, Stoelinga & Krone, 2010).

“Typical” Evaluation Process

Differentiated Evaluation Process

Differentiated Supervision for New Teachers Beginning teachers need special attention and tailored response to evaluations! 1 st year of teaching should not be “a game of education survivor.” Supervisors should provide individualized attention. Teacher self-efficacy and learning needs should be assessed. Mentor’s strengths should match new teacher’s needs. Targeted observations should be conducted and timely feedback provided. (Elliott, Isaacs,& Chugani, 2010)

Differentiated Interventions for Struggling Teachers Professional Development directly linked to observed weaknesses. Peer/Instructional Coaching. Mentors or Supervisors to model effective instruction or co-teach lessons. Use of technology (video lesson reviews, bug-in-ear tech, webcam/Skype for frequent check-ins). Teachers who have received fair and comprehensive evaluations, and who still fail to meet performance standards – despite individualized support – should be dismissed. End of story.

Help! I Need Somebody! Supervisors should remember to always focus on contexts in which teachers are most likely to feel unprepared. Research indicates this includes: Beginning teachers Teachers of students with behavior issues Teachers of students with learning disabilities Teachers learning to use data to inform instruction (Elliot, Isaacs & Chugani, 2010) (Goe, Bell & Little, 2008)

Differentiated Actions for Achieving and Excelling Teachers Teachers achieving acceptable standards typically still have room for improvement: Provide professional growth opportunities. Schedule opportunities to observe exemplary teachers. Assign to data teams, curriculum committees and/or PD groups. Teachers who excel can fall to the wayside if they are not recognized and continually challenged: Advance them to roles as mentors or master teachers. Train advanced teachers to work with supervisors as teacher evaluators. Adjust compensation system to reward master teachers.

How does Differentiated Supervision Ultimately Benefit Teachers and Students? Please also share concerns and remaining questions. Group Discussion

References Eckert, D. J. (2010). More than widgets, TAP: A systemic approach to increased teacher effectiveness. The TAP System for Teacher and Student Advancement Created by Lowell Milken. Retrieved from Elliott, E. M., Isaacs, M. L., & Chugani, C. D. (2010). Promoting self-efficacy in early career teachers: A principal’s guide for differentiated mentoring and supervision. Florida Journal of Educational Administration & Policy, 4(1), Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from Hinchey, P. H. (2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn from research. National Education Policy Center | School of Education, University of Colorado at Boulder. Retrieved April 03, 2011, from Sartain, L., Stoelinga, S. R., & Krone, E. (2010). Rethinking teacher evaluation: Findings from the first year of the excellence in teaching project in Chicago public schools (Policy brief No ). Retrieved from Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. The Widget Effect. Retrieved from