SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT EDUCATOR EVALUATION PROJECT Presentation to the SLCSD Board of Education May 7, 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Updated Training for DPAS II for Administrators
Advertisements

Training for Teachers and Specialists
On-the-job Evaluation of Principals Jacquelyn O. Wilson, Ed.D. Delaware SAELP Director Wallace Foundation National Conference October 25-28, 2006.
PD Plan Agenda August 26, 2008 PBTE Indicators Track
Annual Orientation. NC State Board Policy # TCP-004: “Within two weeks of a teacher’s first day of work in any school year, the principal will provide.
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.
Simpson County Schools: New Teacher Support Program A Proposal.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
Utah Effective Teaching Standards-based Jordan Performance Appraisal System Orientation (UETS-based JPAS)
Teacher Evaluation Model
New Mexico Public School Department Guidelines for Annual Teacher Performance Evaluation School Year PDP Revision Committee: Dr. Janaan Diemer,
1.  Why and How Did We Get Here? o A New Instructional Model And Evaluation System o Timelines And Milestones o Our Work (Admin and Faculty, DET, DEAC,
August 15, 2012 Fontana Unified School District Superintendent, Cali Olsen-Binks Associate Superintendent, Oscar Dueñas Director, Human Resources, Mark.
Performance Based Teacher Evaluation March 10, 2006.
Purpose of Evaluation  Make decisions concerning continuing employment, assignment and advancement  Improve services for students  Appraise the educator’s.
Speech/Language Pathologist Evaluation System Orientation SY14-15 Evaluation Systems Office, HR John Adams, CHRO.
“We will lead the nation in improving student achievement.” CLASS Keys ™ Module 8: Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Spring 2010 Teacher and.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
Professional Growth= Teacher Growth
Bibb County Schools Standard 1: Vision and Purpose Standard: The system establishes and communicates a shared purpose and direction for improving.
SCPS is…  We are a high-performing district  We are focused on student achievement  We are committed to achieving excellence and equity through continuous.
Agenda Overview of evaluation Timeline Next steps.
Aligning Academic Review and Performance Evaluation (AARPE)
Implementing post-290 EVALUATION: Remediating Inadequate Performance of Teachers 1 The Hungerford Law Firm April 13, 2015.
ADEPT Framework
Iowa’s Teacher Quality Program. Intent of the General Assembly To create a student achievement and teacher quality program that acknowledges that outstanding.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
Teacher Keys Effectiveness System Forsyth County Schools Orientation May 2013 L.. Allison.
For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For Whom TPGES/OPGES Does NOT Apply Certified Evaluation Orientation For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
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.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
The Jordan Performance Appraisal System (JPAS) is designed to help educators in their continuing efforts to provide high quality instruction to all students.
Professional Practice Required Elements Self-Reflection, Professional Growth Planning To be completed by all principals and assistant principals annually.
South Western School District Differentiated Supervision Plan DRAFT 2010.
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
Las Cruces Public Schools Principal Evaluation Overview Stan Rounds Superintendent Stan Rounds Superintendent.
Standards IV and VI. Possible Artifacts:  School Improvement Plan  School Improvement Team  North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey  Student.
Ohio Department of Education March 2011 Ohio Educator Evaluation Systems.
Teacher Growth and Assessment: The SERVE Approach to Teacher Evaluation The Summative or Assessment Phase.
TEACHER EVALUATION After S.B. 290 The Hungerford Law Firm June, 2012.
Evaluation School Year Review. Evaluation Intent  Collaborative process to support professional growth  Conversations and reflection should.
BEGINNING EDUCATOR INDUCTION PROGRAM MEETING CCSD Professional Development Mrs. Jackie Miller Dr. Shannon Carroll August 6, 2014.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
Learning More About Oregon’s ESEA Waiver Plan January 23, 2013.
+ SOUTH DAKOTA PRINCIPAL EFFECTIVENESS MODEL PROCESS OVERVIEW PE WEBINAR I 10/29/2015.
GEA TOOL KIT PRESENTATION STAR ORULLIAN – EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GRANITE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION.
Certified Evaluation Orientation August 19, 2011.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Teacher Appraisal and Development System Update Training HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT.
Certified Evaluation Orientation Non-Principal Administrative Certified Staff July 20, 2015 Complete Plan posted on District Website
For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For Whom TPGES Does NOT Apply Certified Evaluation Orientation For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For Whom TPGES.
1 Rose Hermodson Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education December 13, 2011 Teacher Evaluation Components in Legislation.
Ohio Principal Evaluation System Pike County Joint Vocational School March 7,
1 NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS REVIEW Welcome Introductions Agenda.
Lenoir County Public Schools New North Carolina Principal Evaluation Process 2008.
A Critical Friend: Peer Review of Teaching at AUS Daniel Kirk Daniel Kirk: Oct 2007.
1 Update on Teacher Effectiveness July 25, 2011 Dr. Rebecca Garland Chief Academic Officer.
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Update Kentucky Board of Education August 8,
Iredell-Statesville Schools Orientation to the North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Instrument & Process
EVALUATIONS Evaluations are regulated and required by KDE (KAR’s and KRS’s) All Certified staff are held accountable to job specific domains and standards.
Richard Woods, Georgia’s School Superintendent “Educating Georgia’s Future” gadoe.org Quality Comprehensive Improvement System Key School Performance Standards.
Educator Recruitment and Development Office of Professional Development The NC Teacher Evaluation Process 1.
Evaluations (TPGES) All Certified staff are held accountable to job specific domains and standards. SB 1 Changes The Process Starts with the PGP. Bourbon.
Rockingham County Public Schools Teacher Evaluation Process
Evaluation Orientation Teacher & Licensed Support Staff with NCEES process
Evaluation Orientation Teacher & Licensed Support Staff with NCEES process
Overview of Implementation and Local Decisions
Pike County Schools Certified Evaluation Annual Training
Presentation transcript:

SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT EDUCATOR EVALUATION PROJECT Presentation to the SLCSD Board of Education May 7, 2013

Joint Educator Evaluation Committee  Teachers: Chrissy Paulos, Diane Pulver, Monty Eyink, Dessie Olson  Administrators: Bert Steele, Logan Hall, Peggy Paterson, Dan Bergman  Parents: Melissa Ford, Sherri Hutten, Christopher King, Michelle Tuitupou  Chair: Craig Ruesch  Steering Committee: Patrick Garcia, Susan McFarland, Jo Ellen Shaeffer

In Review  June Report to the Board about the new state-mandated components required in the educator evaluation programs and our intention to adapt our programs to meet the new requirements  July First meeting held with the Joint Educator Evaluation Committee (JEEC) to set a direction for the work  Agreed to maintain as much of the structure of ECAP and the administrators’ program as possible and to honor the established guiding and operating principles which reflect a commitment to educator support  The JEEC has met monthly to become informed, review the programs and make adaptations consistent with state law and state board policy  May 8, the JEEC will meet for a final time this year to finalize our recommended pilot plans  The JEEC will continue to meet to address issues and needs that arise as a result of this year’s state pilot and our implementation of the program in our district

Educator Evaluation Components  Orientation  Mentor Provided  Professional Growth Plan  Fall Collaborative Conference  Monitoring  Observations  Providing Support  Mid-Year Collaborative Conference  Spring Collaborative Conference  Evaluation With minor differences, the components are essentially the same for teachers and administrators.

Orientation  Provided to all educators at the beginning of each school year.  Must be provided prior to beginning the evaluation process  Includes the evaluation process and forms to be used in the program  We hope to make the yearly initial orientation a video presentation to increase consistency throughout the district

Mentor Provided  A mentor will be provided to all provisional educators  The mentor shall be a career educator with at least 3 years of successful educational experience who performs substantially the same duties as the provisional educator  Training will be provided to mentors through the STAR program

Professional Growth Plan  Professional Growth Plan (PGP) development begins with a review and a self-assessment of the Utah Effective Teaching or Utah Educational Leadership Standards  Goals are selected to address areas needing improvement  Plans for goal accomplishment are established  Professional learning resources are identified  We are working to make the PGP an on-line process

Fall Collaborative Conference  Scheduled early in the school year (months 2-3)  Educator meets with his/her supervisor  The Professional Growth Plan (self-assessment, goals, and professional learning plan) is discussed  Other items such as disclosure documents, instructional time lines, pacing maps, documentation of student progress, school and district goals, and agreements regarding formal observations are reviewed

Monitoring  The supervisor observes and collects information from a variety of sources, such as walk-throughs, informal classroom observations, asking the customers (students, parents, staff members), interacting with the educator, and listening  This information helps inform the Professional Practices portion of the evaluation

Observations  Several informal observations will be conducted throughout the year with all educators  Provisional Teachers will be formally observed a minimum of two times  Career Teachers in the summative year of their three-year evaluation cycle will be formally observed at least once

Providing Support  Supervisor will provide assistance to educators needing additional support to increase effectiveness  Step 1- Collaborative Intervention (informal), supervisor works with the educator  Step 2 (if needed)- Performance Assistance (more formal), other support personnel, including the association, are called upon for added support  Step 3 (if needed)- Remediation (formal), well-defined high stakes process to help correct unresolved deficiencies This process will be reviewed by the JEEC during and revised if needed.

Mid-Year Collaborative Conference  Supervisor meets with all educators  Scheduled mid-year to review student data and progress on the Professional Growth Plan and goals  Provisional educators are also evaluated as part of this conference to comply with the requirement to evaluate provisional educators two times during the year

Spring Collaborative Conference  Professional Growth Plan and goal progress are reviewed  A “Data Source,” in its current format, will no longer be required. Data sources (i.e. documents/artifacts) may be submitted as evidence of effective practice.  Record of Professional Development and Learning Activities reviewed  Evaluation Report and Decision Summary forms are discussed and signed

Evaluation  Evaluation components are reviewed and discussed  Observed Professional Practices: related to standards  Stakeholder Input: student surveys yearly, parent surveys every year or every third year (plus teacher surveys for administrators)  Student Growth Data: Student Growth Percentiles for tested subjects/grades, Student Learning Objectives for non-tested subjects/grades ( )  Annual Effectiveness and Decision Summary forms are reviewed and signed  Educator receives one of four rating designations:  Not Effective  Minimally Effective or Emerging Effective (option for provisional educators)  Effective  Highly Effective

USOE Model Evaluation System TING OBSERVATIONS CONFERENCES DOCUMENTS & ARTIFACTS OTHER DATA PROFESSIONAL GROWTH PLAN SELF ASSESSMENT PERFORMANCE GOALS PROFESSIONAL LEARNING PLAN AND OTHER DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS SUPERVISOR EVALUATION STUDENT GROWTH & LEARNING STAKEHOLDER INPUT, (PARENTS, TEACHERS, AND STUDENTS) PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES FOR HIGH QUALITY INSTRUCTION & LEADERSHIP % % % %%

Annual Educator Evaluation Overview Evaluation ComponentCareer Educator Provisional Educator OrientationXX Mentor Provided X Professional Growth PlanXX Fall Collaborative ConferenceXX Monitoring / Informal ObservationsXX Formal ObservationsXX Providing Additional Supportas needed Mid-Year Collaborative ConferenceXX Spring Collaborative ConferenceXX EvaluationXX

Looking Ahead  Scope of the Pilot (Key agenda item for the JEEC meeting tomorrow)  We will discuss things such as how many of the standards to focus on for the pilot year, how stakeholder input will be handled, and what types of protocols we will use for observations, etc.  Our pilot may be impacted by feedback generated by the state pilot. Some of this feedback will not be available until fall  We feel we have a good foundation on which to begin our pilot but some changes will likely occur over the course of the school year  Unknowns  Observation and Evaluation Protocols (format and platform)  Results of the state pilots (surveys, instruments, protocols)  Next Steps  Create modules for fall teacher and administrator orientation (spring/summer)  Work to create demonstrations of what the descriptors look like in practice  Create training to increase reliability among observers  Guide development and use of stakeholder surveys tailored to SLCSD  Revise intervention piece as needed  Inform revisions of the written agreement, written understanding and board policy  Address concerns identified in the pilot