The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers 2013-2014 Training Module 3 The DPAS II Process Training for Teachers.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers August 2013 Training Module 4 Component Five – Student Improvement.
Advertisements

Updated Training for DPAS II for Administrators
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Specialists August 2013 Training Module I Introduction to DPAS II Training for Specialists.
Training Overview For separate modules:
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers August 2013 Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for Teachers.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Specialists August 2013 Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for.
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.
Delaware Performance Appraisal System
DPAS II Jessica Baker & Cheryl Cresci MED 7701 Dr. Joseph Massare.
Performance management guidance
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.
Gwinnett Teacher Effectiveness System Training
C OLLABORATIVE A SSESSMENT S YSTEM FOR T EACHERS CAST
Developing Principals One State’s Initiative Dr. Sharon Brittingham RTTT Project Director, Development Coaches Dr. Jacquelyn Wilson Director, Delaware.
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,
Overview of the New Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework Opening Day Presentation August 26, 2013.
EDUCATOR EVALUATION August 25, 2014 Wilmington. OVERVIEW 5-Step Cycle.
The Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation Training Module 5: Gathering Evidence August
“We will lead the nation in improving student achievement.” CLASS Keys TM Module 2: Overview of the Evaluation Process Spring 2010 Teacher and Leader Quality.
Delaware’s Performance Evaluation System II for School Administrators Jackie O. Wilson, Ed.D. Interim Director Delaware Academy for School Leadership College.
1 Core Module Three – The Summative Report Core Module Three: The Role of Professional Dialogue and Collaboration in the Summative Report.
Pause for Discussion Multiple pauses are included for discussion opportunities.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 4 Component Five – Student Improvement.
The Massachusetts Framework for Educator Evaluation: An Orientation for Teachers and Staff October 2014 (updated) Facilitator Note: This presentation was.
SMART Goals and Educator Plan Development
Observations A Mirror of the Classroom. Objectives  Gain specific strategies for communicating with teachers to promote successful teaching and learning.
ADEPT Framework
CHEA GENERAL MEETING August 31, 2011 STATE SALARY SCALE Professional Learning Community (PLC) NEGOTIATIONS DPAS II CHANGES STATE SALARY SCALE Professional.
LCSD APPR: Overview Review and Focus on the 60 points December 3, 2012.
CLASS Keys Orientation Douglas County School System August /17/20151.
TCS 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 the.
For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For Whom TPGES/OPGES Does NOT Apply Certified Evaluation Orientation For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For.
APS Teacher Evaluation Module 9 Part B: Summative Ratings.
Compass: Module 2 Compass Requirements: Teachers’ Overall Evaluation Rating Student Growth Student Learning Targets (SLTs) Value-added Score (VAM) where.
Graduate School of Education Leading, Learning, Life Changing Teacher Evaluation Patrick Burk, Ph.D. Graduate School of Education Educational Leadership.
Data Sources Artifacts: Lesson plans and/or curriculum units which evidence planned use of diagnostic tools, pre- assessment activities, activating strategies,
South Western School District Differentiated Supervision Plan DRAFT 2010.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II (DPAS II) for Teachers Training Module I Introduction to DPAS II Training for Teachers.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for Teachers.
March Madness Professional Development Goals/Data Workshop.
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.
MANAGING TEACHER EVALUATIONS EFFICIENTLY TO MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS
What you need to know about changes in state requirements for Teval plans.
Barren County Schools CERTIFIED EVALUATION PLAN
STANDARD V AND WRAP-UP: NC TEACHER CANDIDATE EVALUATION TRAINING GWU TRAINING SESSION.
Teachscape Reflect User Guide Teacher Observation and Evaluation Howard County Public School System.
 Pre-Observation Conference  Priority component: 1e (Designing Coherent Instruction)  Observation  Priority components: 3c, 3d (Engaging Students in.
For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For Whom TPGES Does NOT Apply Certified Evaluation Orientation For Staff Who Are NOT Administrators & For Whom TPGES.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System (T-TESS)
1 NORTH CAROLINA TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS REVIEW Welcome Introductions Agenda.
What Does it Mean to Observe Only Observable Elements? Defining Observation for Your District for
Process for Evaluating Teachers. Principal’s Responsibility ManageKnowIdentifyEnsureSupervise.
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.
EISD Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System T-TESS
Oconee Keys Training September, Oconee Keys is designed to: Evaluate classroom teachers using qualitative rubrics to assess instructional practices.
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.
Educator Recruitment and Development Office of Professional Development The NC Teacher Evaluation Process 1.
MA-PAL Task 3 This task aligns with course assignments from EDC 5630 Supervision and Evaluation of Instruction.
Lynne Griffith-Jones Superintendent of Human Resources
Evaluations (TPGES) All Certified staff are held accountable to job specific domains and standards. SB 1 Changes The Process Starts with the PGP. Bourbon.
Teacher Evaluation System
CLASS KeysSM Module 2: Overview of the Evaluation Process Spring 2010
Teacher Evaluation “SLO 101”
Gary Carlin, CFN 603 September, 2012
Overview of Implementation and Local Decisions
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
Presentation transcript:

The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 3 The DPAS II Process Training for Teachers

Training Overview  For separate modules: Module 1: Introduction to DPAS II Module 2: DPAS II and the Delaware Framework Module 3: The DPAS II Process Module 4: Component Five – Student Improvement

Materials for this module  Power Point Presentation  DPAS II Guide for Teachers

DPAS II: Process  Roster Identification  Measures Selection  Fall Conference  Pre-Observation Conference  Observation

DPAS II: Process (continued)  Post-Observation Conference  Formative Feedback Documentation  Summative Evaluation Conference  Summative Evaluation Documentation

DPAS II: Process (continued)  Improvement Plans Effective , changes to Regulation 106A modifies when an Improvement Plan must be developed versus may be developed. Changes to Regulation also eliminate some requirements related to Professional Development completed by a teacher during an Improvement Plan.  The Challenge Process

Professional Responsibilities  Form completed in Fall  Discussions held during pre and post- observation conferences  Discussion during summative evaluation conference

Pre-observation  Form Required for Novice Teachers May be waived for Experienced Teachers Only if both the teacher and evaluator agree  Conference Required for all announced observations – may not be waived Does not apply to unannounced observations Whenever possible, held in teacher’s classroom or work area

Observations  Announced or Unannounced  Length of observation  Frequency of observations  Limitations on when observations may occur  Evidence collection

Post-observation Conference  Requirements  Teacher Responsibilities Lesson Reflection Template - optional  Timing

Formative Feedback  Requirements and Timeline  Evidence  Formative rating documentation  How do rubric levels translate to Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory performance?

Summative Evaluation  Requirements and Timelines  Evidence  Summative ratings  Summative evaluation forms

Summative Ratings Chart

Pattern of Ineffective Teaching

Overall Feedback  Commendations  Recommendations and expectations Difference between expectations and recommendations How expectations are communicated How evaluators asses teacher performance toward expectation outcomes Documenting completed expectations  Additional feedback

Challenge Process  Used when a teacher disagrees with the evaluator’s assessment  Different from Grievance (can only grieve process infractions) Must try to resolve difference with evaluator first Submit written challenge to evaluator’s supervisor within 1 working days of receipt of evaluation document Within 15 working days the supervisor of the evaluator must meet with the teacher Within 15 work days the supervisor of the evaluator must issue a written decision

DOE monitoring of DPAS II  Annual audit of DPAS II formative and summative evaluation documents Conducted by DOE staff All information is strictly confidential Use of review criteria to ensure written evaluation documents provide Objective, specific, and relevant evidence of teacher performance and areas for commendation Supportive, specific, and actionable guidance, including timelines, for any recommendations and/or expectations

More Information