1. 2015/16 Evaluation Summary October 18, 2016 Jordan Harris
Frequently, presenters must deliver material of a technical nature to an audience unfamiliar with the topic or vocabulary. The material may be complex or heavy with detail. To present technical material effectively, use the following guidelines from Dale Carnegie Training®.
Consider the amount of time available and prepare to organize your material. Narrow your topic. Divide your presentation into clear segments. Follow a logical progression. Maintain your focus throughout. Close the presentation with a summary, repetition of the key steps, or a logical conclusion.
Keep your audience in mind at all times. For example, be sure data is clear and information is relevant. Keep the level of detail and vocabulary appropriate for the audience. Use visuals to support key points or steps. Keep alert to the needs of your listeners, and you will have a more receptive audience.
October 18, 2016
Jordan Harris

2. Teacher Evaluation
5th year of the Troy Educator Appraisal Model (TEAM).
TEAM has undergone modification each year through a collaborative process using stakeholders from different disciplines throughout the District. ( allowed the District to exempt highly effective teachers from formal annual evaluation.)
Continued utilization of Teachscape for management of evaluations in Change of evaluation management system to Frontline Learning Oasis effective

3. Teacher Evaluation (cont.)
State-Mandated Performance Ratings:
Highly Effective
Effective
Minimally Effective
Ineffective

4. Teacher Evaluation (cont.)
Highly Effective
693 Teachers (273 Exempt) (2015/16)
672 Teachers (2014/15)
573 Teachers (2013/14)
305 Teachers (2012/13)
Effective
95 Teachers (2015/16)
106 Teachers (2014/15)
184 Teachers (2013/14)
447 Teachers (2012/13)

5. Teacher Evaluation (cont.)
Minimally Effective
2 Teachers (273 Exempt) (2015/16)
5 Teachers (2014/15)
9 Teachers (2013/14)
4 Teachers (2012/13)
Ineffective
0 Teachers (2015/16)
1 Teacher (2014/15)
2 Teachers (2013/14)

6. Administrator Evaluation
5th year of more intensive evaluation process for TSD administrators (Principals, Assistant Principals, Directors).
2nd year of new process based upon Reeves’ Leadership Performance Matrix.
Goals-based aspects are included.

7. Administrator Evaluation (cont.)
Highly Effective
33 Administrators ( )
26 Administrators ( )
26 Administrators ( )
Effective
3 Administrators ( )
6 Administrators ( )
10 Administrators ( )
Minimally Effective
1 Administrator ( )
1 Administrator ( )
1 Administrator ( )
Ineffective

8. Administrator Evaluation (cont.)
Continued Work for 2016/17:
Continue to implement a goal-oriented evaluation process for District-Wide Administrators and for Non-Instructional Administrators.
Administrators are in the second year of working within their respective departments on established departmental and/or building level goals focused around the District’s core values.

9. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?