IU Regional Coordinators February 19, 2013. Pat Hardy - Lead.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Survey of Super LEAs Evaluation Systems Performance Evaluation Advisory Council July 16 th, 2010.
Advertisements

Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation Pilot September 1, 2011 – September 30, 2012 NJ State Board of Education, July 13, 2011.
Open Future Doors through Succession Planning Principal? Curriculum Supervisor? Assistant Superintendent? Special Services Director?
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
The IEP Individualized Educational Program. The IEP is the process and document that outlines what a free appropriate public education (FAPE) is for an.
Teacher Evaluation Model
Developing Principals One State’s Initiative Dr. Sharon Brittingham RTTT Project Director, Development Coaches Dr. Jacquelyn Wilson Director, Delaware.
PSESD Teacher Principal Evaluation Project Regional Implementation Grants October 25, pm.
Purpose of Evaluation  Make decisions concerning continuing employment, assignment and advancement  Improve services for students  Appraise the educator’s.
Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network Specialists and Licensed Professionals Spring Mini-Pilot Angela Kirby-Wehr.
Measuring Educator Effectiveness Pennsylvania’s Educator Effectiveness Project Specialist Effectiveness October 15, 2013.
Teacher: Decide what to teach Decide what to assign Decide how to assess Decide how to grade In the end, convey how the kids did compared to each.
1 Presented by Media Services Media Specialists Connections and Issues Training: November – December Zone Based Meetings.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL PROCESS: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS January29, 2015.
Schools’ Data Collection for National Partnerships Agreements (NPA) Educational Measurement and School Accountability Directorate (EMSAD)
Measuring Principal Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor ▪ Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education Measuring Principal.
Differentiated Supervision
Measuring Educator Effectiveness Pennsylvania’s Educator Effectiveness Project Specialist Effectiveness October 15, 2013.
REGIONAL PEER REVIEW PANELS (PRP) August Peer Review Panel: Background  As a requirement of the ESEA waiver, ODE must establish a process to ensure.
Aligning Academic Review and Performance Evaluation (AARPE)
Principals’ Council Meetings May  Given feedback from multiple stakeholders and after much deliberation, PDE has made the determination to classify.
Assessment Leader Training General Education Student Learning Assessment GEO Training Series: 2 of 5 Spring 2012 February 13, 2012.
Student Learning Objectives 1 Phase 3 Regional Training April 2013.
October 12, College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students 2. State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support.
Iowa’s Teacher Quality Program. Intent of the General Assembly To create a student achievement and teacher quality program that acknowledges that outstanding.
John Drugan School July 19,  PDAS remains in place as the State of Texas’s approved instrument for appraising its teachers and identifying areas.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
Honors Level Course Implementation Webinar Honors Rubric and Portfolio Review Process October 7, 2013.
Alicia Currin-Moore Executive Director, TLE Oklahoma State Department of Education.
OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES Ensuring Ownership of PARSEL by Partners.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
Teacher Effectiveness Pilot II Presented by PDE. Project Development - Goal  To develop a teacher effectiveness model that will reform the way we evaluate.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
PAIU C URRICULUM C OORDINATORS M EETING A PRIL 2015 PVAAS Update Kristen Lewald, Ed.D. PVAAS Statewide Director for PDE.
Delaware’s Performance Appraisal System for Administrators DPAS 2.5 Jacquelyn O. Wilson, Ed.D. University of Delaware Director Delaware Academy for School.
South Western School District Differentiated Supervision Plan DRAFT 2010.
Background Management Council (MC) was briefed on approach in early Feb 2003 and approved it Agreed that every Service Group (SG) will participate in.
PERSONNEL EVALUATION SYSTEMS How We Help Our Staff Become More Effective Margie Simineo – June, 2010.
Toolkit #3: Effectively Teaching and Leading Implementation of the Oklahoma C 3 Standards, Including the Common Core.
Student Learning Objectives The SLO Process Student Learning Objectives Training Series Deck 3 of 3.
OVERVIEW PRESENTATION
Materials for today’s session  Shared website – Wiki   Wireless.
Pennsylvania Value-Added Assessment System Pennsylvania Value-Added Assessment System (PVAAS) Update to PAIU CC January 17, 2014 Kristen Lewald, PVAAS.
Delaware’s Performance Appraisal System for Administrators DPAS 2.5 Jacquelyn O. Wilson, Ed.D. University of Delaware Director Delaware Academy for School.
Summary Rating Responses November 13, 2013 Adobe Connect Webinar Bill Bagshaw, Kayeri Akweks - KSDE.
Ohio Department of Education March 2011 Ohio Educator Evaluation Systems.
BEGINNING EDUCATOR INDUCTION PROGRAM MEETING CCSD Professional Development Mrs. Jackie Miller Dr. Shannon Carroll August 6, 2014.
BISD Update Teacher & Principal Evaluation Update Board of Directors October 27,
MWSD. Differentiated Supervision Mode (DSM)  Reference Pages in Plan Book 8-16 Description of Differentiated Mode Relevant Appendices 34 Teacher.
+ SOUTH DAKOTA PRINCIPAL EFFECTIVENESS MODEL PROCESS OVERVIEW PE WEBINAR I 10/29/2015.
Teacher Evaluation Process Update March 13, 2015 SCASPA Roundtable.
Summer Institute Session Team Leaders Check-In April 10 th, 2013 Re Mute Your Computer!!! Welcome! We will begin at 10:00 am I will move you to panelist,
Consortium for Educational Research and Evaluation– North Carolina Building LEA and Regional Professional Development Capacity First Annual Evaluation.
Quality Review Updates for Presented by Mary Barton, SATIF CFN 204 Assistant Principals’ Conference September 2, 2011.
Presented by Mary Barton SATIF CFN 204 Principals’ Conference September 16, 2011.
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Update Kentucky Board of Education August 8,
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
Differentiated Teacher Supervision and Evaluation Models
Greenbush Teacher/ School Specialist Mentoring Model
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education Updated: June 2012.
TN: TEACH AACTE Grant TN TEACH: The TN EPP Assistive and Collaborative Help Network.
Changes to the Educator Evaluation System
Identifying Multiple Measures and Defining Significance
COLLEGE-AND CAREER-READY STANDARDS: STATE RESOURCES
Implementing the Child Outcomes Summary Process: Challenges, strategies, and benefits July, 2011 Welcome to a presentation on implementation issues.
2019 Spring & Fall Timeline May 10, 2019
Kentucky’s Professional Growth and Effectiveness System
Implementing the Child Outcomes Summary Process: Challenges, strategies, and benefits July, 2011 Welcome to a presentation on implementation issues.
Aligning Academic Review and Performance Evaluation (AARPE)
Presentation transcript:

IU Regional Coordinators February 19, 2013

Pat Hardy - Lead

 Implementation Dates  Refresher Training  Danielson Copyright Issues  Quick Updates  Communications with Charter Schools in Phase 3  Questions from Regional Contacts

 4 Volunteers: Cori, Lori, Cristine, LeeAnn  Conference call to be scheduled w/ planning team  Send suggested training topics  Communicate w/ P. Bevan  Send out registration

 Efficiency of paper forms  Cost of digital products

 Differentiated Supervision  FAQ Document  Teachscape Licenses

 Webinar Schedule - 2-hour webinars for both TE and PE Projects  10:00am – 11:00am  Focus on TE Issues  11:00am – noon  Focus on PE Issues  Dates:  March 19 May 21  April 16 June 18

 To better facilitate communications, the following individuals will serve as primary point of contact for IU Regional Coordinators:  Teacher Effectiveness Deb Wynn, (717) ,  Principal Effectiveness Carla Wilson, (717) ,

Robert Holbrook - Lead

 Review of the expectations for Phase II participants.  RTTT questions/expectations for Phase II participants  Question regarding the development of a observation collection tool  Report on the CTC work group

 Point #4 of the 'Principal Effectiveness Process for Pilot' document was referenced during the webinar when we discussed component/domain expectations.  Point #4 reads: "Agree upon which components (3-5) representing multiple Domains are to be a focus for the pilot. Try to include at least one component within Domain #3: Leadership for Learning. Also be sure to balance strengths and weaknesses."

 We do not want to contradict the instructions that have been provided by the training facilitators. However, if any accommodations could be made to assist in gathering data on additional components/domains, it would be greatly appreciated.  The additional data would assist the researchers in the validity and reliability studies. If you believe that asking the participants to make these accommodations would only add confusion to the process, we will support your decision to keep things as they have been presented.

 We have received several inquiries regarding the evaluation percentages listed in the RTTT FAQs on their link and the expectations for Phase II.  The matrix on page 7 of the RTTT document states that 25% of the principals have to be trained in , and zero (%) have to be evaluated in  However, there is no summative evaluation associated with Phase II.

 All Phase II participants are expected to complete the following expectations: ◦ Participate in the Turn Around Training ◦ Collaboratively select of 3-5 components (preferably ◦ more) in multiple domains ◦ The supervisors/principals are to use the framework this year and follow the guidelines provided at the ‘Train the Trainer’ event in October. ◦ Completion of the Data Collection Tool

 Phase II of the Principal Effectiveness project is a pilot and the data collected will be used to aid our researchers in their work on the reliability and validity of the document.  RTTT principals should be evaluated in using their present evaluation tool. Data collected from the Principal Framework of Leadership may be used to inform your current evalution process.

 Are there plans for an observation tool for principals to use throughout the school year (created by PDE) to collect evidence of components, or should they continue to use a locally developed tool? ◦ PDE has not developed an observation tool to collect evidence throughout the school year, nor are there any plans to develop such a tool. ◦ If a local LEA has an observation collection tool in place, we would recommend continue using that instrument. We would also ask that the local LEA share their observation collection tool with the Principal Effectiveness Team.

 On Thursday, Feb. 14th, members of the Principal Effectiveness Team met with CTC Directors from across the Commonwealth.  These CTC Directors represented the diversity among the CTC organizations.  Act 82 states that the term “principal” shall include a building principal, an assistant principal, a vice principal or a director of vocational education.

 Our goals were: ◦ Review the development of the Framework for Leadership ◦ Review the domains/components of the Framework for Leadership ◦ Emphasize the skills necessary to be an educational leader ◦ Begin the development of appropriate sources of evidence for each domain/component

 We are planning to categorize the sources of evidence for CTC Directors and ask them to review the document for accuracy as well as provide further suggestions.

 Webinar Schedule - 2-hour webinars for both TE and PE Projects  10:00am – 11:00am  Focus on TE Issues  11:00am – noon  Focus on PE Issues  Dates:  March 19 May 21  April 16 June 18

 To better facilitate communications, the following individuals will serve as primary point of contact for IU Regional Coordinators:  Teacher Effectiveness Deb Wynn, (717) ,  Principal Effectiveness Carla Wilson, (717) ,