The Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 6: Reflecting and Planning for Next Year December 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
On-the-job Evaluation of Principals Jacquelyn O. Wilson, Ed.D. Delaware SAELP Director Wallace Foundation National Conference October 25-28, 2006.
Advertisements

Support Professionals Evaluation Model Webinar Spring 2013.
Student Growth Measures in Teacher Evaluation Module 1: Introduction to Student Growth Measures and SLOs.
Training Module for Cooperating Teachers and Supervising Faculty
Teacher Performance Evaluation and Professional Growth (T-PEPG) Model Module 5: Reflecting and Adjusting.
Student Growth Measures in Teacher Evaluation
Leader Evaluation and Professional Growth (LEPG) Module 1: System Overview, Expectations, and Goal Setting.
Copyright © 2013 November 2014 LEPG Session 1: Expectations and Goal- Setting.
The Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems April Regionals Multiple Measures: Gathering Evidence 1.
Leader Evaluation and Professional Growth (LEPG) Model Module 3: Reflection, Rating, and Planning 1.
The Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation Training Module 5: Gathering Evidence August
September 2013 The Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 2: Student Learning Objectives.
TCRP TEACHER ADVISORY PANEL MEETING December 2011 Derrick Chau, VP Instruction Diane Fiello, TCRP Coach
GOAL SETTING CONFERENCES BRIDGEPORT, CT SEPTEMBER 2-3,
 Teacher and administrator evaluations are governed by Florida Statute and State Board Rule 6A  The Florida Department of Education and.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Preparing and Applying Formative Multiple Measures of Performance Conducting High-Quality Self-Assessments.
“Charting the Course Together” Implementing the Common Core State Standards -Mathematics- Middle School Leadership Teams February 6, 2014.
Professional Growth= Teacher Growth
Teacher Performance Evaluation and Professional Growth (T-PEPG) Model
LPS Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth System Core Propositions 4 and 5 Documenting Practice Through Artifacts October 10, 2012.
1 GENERAL OVERVIEW. “…if this work is approached systematically and strategically, it has the potential to dramatically change how teachers think about.
Putting the Pieces Together…. Understanding SLOs.
Session Materials  Wiki
Session Materials Wireless Wiki
1 Let’s Meet! October 13,  All four people have to run.  The baton has to be held and passed by all participants.  You can have world class speed.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Preparing and Applying Formative Multiple Measures of Performance Goal Setting in Educator Evaluation.
An Overview of the New HCPSS Teacher Evaluation Process School-based Professional Learning Module Spring 2013 This presentation contains copyrighted material.
September 2013 The Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 3: Observation and Feedback January 8 th, 2014.
Student Learning Objectives The SLO Process Student Learning Objectives Training Series Module 3 of 3.
Teacher Performance Evaluation and Professional Growth (T-PEPG) Model Module 1: Model Overview 1.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation 1.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
ISLLC Standard #1 ISLLC Standard #1 Planning School Improvement Name: Planning School Improvement that Ensures Student Success Workshop Facilitator.
Assistant Principal Meeting August 28, :00am to 12:00pm.
Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) “101”
Compass: Module 2 Compass Requirements: Teachers’ Overall Evaluation Rating Student Growth Student Learning Targets (SLTs) Value-added Score (VAM) where.
Introduction to Working Portfolios Educator Effectiveness System Training.
Laying the Groundwork for the New Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System TPGES.
Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 5: Engaging Students in Rigorous Learning Winter, 2014.
Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 1: MSFE TEPG Rubric.
Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 4: Reflecting and Adjusting December 2013.
Student Growth in the Washington State Teacher Evaluation System Michelle Lewis Puget Sound ESD
1. Housekeeping Items June 8 th and 9 th put on calendar for 2 nd round of Iowa Core ***Shenandoah participants*** Module 6 training on March 24 th will.
Student Learning Objectives The SLO Process Student Learning Objectives Training Series Deck 3 of 3.
After lunch - Mix it up! Arrange your tables so that everyone else seated at your table represents another district. 1.
Medicine Hat School District #76 PLC’s Building Capability Through Collaborative Learning Developing tomorrow’s citizens through improved learning, living.
Materials for today’s session  Shared website – Wiki   Wireless.
Session Materials  Wiki
March Madness Professional Development Goals/Data Workshop.
March 23, NYSCSS Annual Conference Crossroads of Change: The Common Core in Social Studies.
Idaho Principal Evaluation Process Tyson Carter Educator Effectiveness Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education
Changes in Professional licensure Teacher evaluation system Training at Coastal Carolina University.
Documenting Completion of your PDP
Goal Setting in Educator Evaluation Sept. 11 th,
Overview of Student Growth and T-TESS. Keys of Appraisal Student growth is a part of the appraisal process: Formative Ongoing and Timely Formalize what.
September 2013 The Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 3: Observation and Feedback.
Candidate Support. Working Agreements Attend cohort meetings you have agreed upon. Start and end on time; come on time and stay for the whole time. Contribute.
An Overview of Revisions to the Rhode Island Model
Setting Your Goals For TTESS Memorial HS Training September 11, 2015.
Best Practices in CMSD SLO Development A professional learning module for SLO developers and reviewers Copyright © 2015 American Institutes for Research.
© 2012, Community Training and Assistance Center © 2012, Teaching Learning Solutions Linking ISLLC and your Principal Rubrics to a Case.
Instructional Leadership Supporting Common Assessments.
Supporting the Development of Student Learning Objectives Teamwork in Motion.
National Summit for Principal Supervisors Building an Effective Evaluation System May 11-13, 2016 Jackie O. Wilson, Interim Director, Professional Development.
DECEMBER 7, 2015 Educator Effectiveness: Charter School Webinar.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Instructional Leadership for a Professional Learning Culture:
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Evaluating the Quality of Student Achievement Objectives
SGM Mid-Year Conference Gina Graham
Presentation transcript:

The Teacher Evaluation and Professional Growth Program Module 6: Reflecting and Planning for Next Year December 2013

Module 6: Reflecting and Planning for Next Year  Module 1: MSFE TEPG Rubric  Module 2: Student Learning Objectives  Module 3: Observation and Feedback  Module 4: Reflecting and Adjusting  Module 5: Engaging Students in Rigorous Learning  Module 6: Reflecting and Planning for Next Year 2 This module supports participants in wrapping up the four-step TEPG cycle and preparing for the next cycle to begin. Participants will think strategically about gathering and submitting a high-quality sample of evidence that reflects their performance over the year. In addition, they will reflect on evidence gathered throughout the year and identify areas of focus for next year. Finally, participants will begin to think about integrating what they’ve learned during the evaluation cycle into their planning and practices.

Agenda  Welcome and Connecting (35 minutes) Intended Outcomes Small-Group Debrief  Learning (60 minutes) Teacher-Submitted Evidence Understanding the Summative Rating Process Learner Growth  Implementing (35 minutes) Final Self-Evaluation Final Summative Rating Plans and Pathways  Reflecting (30 minutes) Whole-Group Reflection Looking Ahead Planning for Next Year Final Reflection 3

Welcome and Connecting 35 minutes 4

Intended Outcomes At the end of this session, participants will know and be able to  Review and analyze types of teacher-led evidence  Distinguish between high- and low-quality evidence  Understand the summative rating process and implications for the upcoming school year 2014–15. 5

The Four-Step Evaluation Cycle in Action 6

Core Proposition(s)  Core Proposition 4: Teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from their experience.  Core Proposition 5: Teachers are members of learning communities. 7

Connecting: Small-Group Debrief  Form groups of four or five.  Take turns debriefing a strategy for engaging students that you tried as a result of the last module. Share what you did and how it worked. How did students perceive it? How do you know?  Once you have heard from everyone, group members nominate one person to share his or her activity with the whole group. 8

Learning 60 minutes 9

 Core Proposition 5: Teachers are members of learning communities. 5-a. Professional Collaboration and Leadership: Teacher contributes to school effectiveness by collaborating with other professionals on activities related to the strategic priorities of the school and district. 5-b. Engagement with Caregivers and Community: Teacher engages in ongoing communication and collaboration between home/caregivers and the greater community to enhance student learning and school effectiveness. 5-c. Professionalism: The teacher presents himself or herself (e.g., in interactions with students, colleagues, primary caregivers and the public) in a professional manner that reflects the district’s high standards of ethics and excellence. Core Proposition 5 10

 Core Proposition 5: Teachers are members of learning communities 5-a. Professional Collaboration and Leadership: Teacher contributes to school effectiveness by collaborating with other professionals on activities related to the strategic priorities of the school and district. 5-b. Engagement with Caregivers and Community: Teacher engages in ongoing communication and collaboration between home/caregivers and the greater community to enhance student learning and school effectiveness. 5-c. Professionalism: The teacher presents himself or herself (e.g., in interactions with students, colleagues, primary caregivers and the public) in a professional manner that reflects the district’s high standards of ethics and excellence. Core Proposition 5 11

 Core Proposition 5: Teachers are members of learning communities 5-a. Professional Collaboration and Leadership: Teacher contributes to school effectiveness by collaborating with other professionals on activities related to the strategic priorities of the school and district. 5-b. Engagement with Caregivers and Community: Teacher engages in ongoing communication and collaboration between home/caregivers and the greater community to enhance student learning and school effectiveness. 5-c. Professionalism: The teacher presents himself or herself (e.g., in interactions with students, colleagues, primary caregivers and the public) in a professional manner that reflects the district’s high standards of ethics and excellence. Core Proposition 5 12

 Core Proposition 5: Teachers are members of learning communities 5-a. Professional Collaboration and Leadership: Teacher contributes to school effectiveness by collaborating with other professionals on activities related to the strategic priorities of the school and district. 5-b. Engagement with Caregivers and Community: Teacher engages in ongoing communication and collaboration between home/caregivers and the greater community to enhance student learning and school effectiveness. 5-c. Professionalism: The teacher presents himself or herself (e.g., in interactions with students, colleagues, primary caregivers and the public) in a professional manner that reflects the district’s high standards of ethics and excellence. Core Proposition 5 13

 Pair up with another teacher (could be in a similar grade or subject or not).  Review your Form 3 submissions.  If you have already shared Form 3 with your evaluator, discuss the outcome: Did your submissions work in your favor? Was your evaluator clear about their purpose and connection to your goals? Did you submit enough? Too much? What would you do differently next year?  If you have yet to submit Form 3, spend a few minutes having your peer review your submissions to check for clarity of your rationale and to see if he or she thinks you have a sufficient amount/quality of evidence.  Think ahead to next year.  What did you learn from the process of collecting evidence this year?  What (if anything) will you do differently?  Do you have suggestions to improve on this process? Teacher-Submitted Evidence 14

Understanding the Summative Rating Process Professional Practice Professional Growth Learner Perception Learner Growth Source of evidence Ratings on rubric based on observations and teacher-led evidence Progress toward/attainment of professional growth goals Student surveysSLOs Scale 1–4 Calculation Average ratingOverall rating based on progress toward all goals Survey results translated into 1–4 scale Rate performance on each measure and average Weighting (Fill in) Responsible Principal Teacher 15

Learner Growth: Scoring SLOs  Once teachers calculate the percentages of students who met their goals, an overall SLO score will be assigned. 16

Learner Growth: Scoring SLOs  Prior to the end of the interval of instruction, the teacher should identify and discuss with the administrator or administrator team any students who are eligible for exemption from scoring.  At the end of the interval of instruction, the teacher administers and scores the postassessment.  After scoring the student postassessment, the teacher calculates the percentage of students who met their growth targets.  The teacher then discusses the outcomes with his or her evaluator. 17

Learner Growth: SLO Reflection  In groups of two to four, do a shared reflection on the SLO process. Discuss the following questions and record your group’s thoughts on the handout. Briefly describe the process you used to develop your Student Learning Objectives. Did the process work? Explain. Record anything that did not work or could use improvement for developing SLOs. Are there any tips that you can share that worked especially well for you? What would have been helpful to know at the beginning of the process? The post-scoring process: If you have already had this meeting, was it useful? Do you have suggestions for how to improve this meeting? 18

Implementing 35 minutes 19

Final Self-Evaluation  Form 1: Self-Evaluation Self-evaluation is where we begin and end each school year. Take this chance to look back and see where you were at the beginning of the year and how you think you have grown and changed. Your self-evaluation will be shared with your principal prior to your summative rating conference. 20 Review what you wrote on Form 1 Part 1. Using the MSFE TEPG Rubric, look back on the feedback and evidence you have received this year and complete Part 2.

Final Summative Rating  Form 8: Summative Rating This form is completed by your principal. There are four possible summative ratings: Ineffective, Developing, Effective, and Distinguished. 21

Plans and Pathways DesignationWhat Does This Mean for Me? Ineffective Developing Effective Distinguished 22

Reflecting 30 minutes 23

 Think about the goal-setting and/or data collection and analysis you did for the following components: Professional practice Professional growth Learner perception  What would you want to change about any of these processes for next year? Why? Whole-Group Reflection 24

 Important Information [To be filled in by TEPG facilitator depending on school/district needs] Looking Ahead 25

 Important dates Summer 2014–15 school year Looking Ahead 26

Planning for Next Year—Placeholder 27  MSFE should fill this in as more details are sorted out with the National Board process. Teachers should identify the Core Proposition of focus for their PD the following year and if they are not participating in National Board, they should plan what they will be doing (action research, quarterly peer observation and feedback, university courses, etc.)

Planning for Next Year—Placeholder  To be filled in with and activity that aligns with PD plans for the 2014–15 school year.  The focus will be on applying what they have learned about their practice to planning for the following year. 28

 Please take 10 minutes to complete the end-of-year reflection. Your feedback will be taken (anonymously) together with the feedback from teachers in all TIF4 districts to help inform MSFE leadership’s thinking going forward.  We really value your honest and thoughtful feedback! Final Reflection 29

Presenter Name XXX-XXX-XXXX 1234 Street Address City, State