Date post: | 26-Feb-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | kevinohlandt |
View: | 222 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 18
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
1/18
Alternative TeacherEvaluation Systems
Summary Overview: 2015-16Prepared by the State Board of Education
In partnership w/ the Teacher & Leader Effectiveness Unit (TLEU)
January 2016
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
2/18
Current Alternative EducatorEvaluation System Application
RequirementsLocal Education Agencies may apply for a waiver to the DelawareDepartment of Education from the Delaware Performance AppraisalSystem II (DPAS-II)1. Application requirements include:
Collective Bargaining/Community Engagement: Evaluation systems
submitted for an alternative evaluation system must be a product of thecollective bargaining process (if applicable) and other requiredcommunity engagement
Student Growth: Evaluation systems must incorporate multiplemeasures of student growth when assessing educator performance
Evaluator Certification: Evaluation systems must contain a mechanismto certify/credential evaluators and ensure quality control
The Department of Education must also ensure that the system is arigorous and as educationally sound at DPAS-II.
2
1. (f) A local school district, vocational-technical school district or charter school may make application to the Department for a waiver of the provisions of the DPAS-II evaluation system, which shall be
granted, subject to the provisions of rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to this subchapter, if the request for a waiver is based on a locally developed evaluation process that is demonstrated to be
the product of the collective bargaining process pursuant to Chapter 40 of this title and community review and is as rigorous and as educationally sound as DPAS-II, provides for evaluating educator
performance by measuring student growth using multiple measures over the course of a c urricular year, and contains a mechanism for certifying evaluators and for quality control.
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
3/18
Summary of Current Efforts
As of school year 2015-2016:
Five different systems (see right) utilize fourdifferent evaluation frameworks (DelawaresCharter Collaboratives I and II both utilizethe Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF))
One traditional district and twelve (12)charter schools have applied and receivedapproval for alternative teacherevaluationsystems
Ten (10) charter schools are members of acohort in order to benefit from economies ofscale, learn from each others efforts, andscale best practices in student goal-settingand observation/feedback cycles
3
Colonial School District (To Be Determined)
Delaware Charter Collaborative I (Fall 2013)
East Side Charter School
Family Foundations Academy Charter
School
Kuumba Academy
Prestige Academy Charter School
Thomas A. Edison Charter School
Las Americas ASPIRA Academy (Fall 2015)
Freire Charter School (Fall 2015)
Delaware Charter Collaborative II (Fall 2015)
Academia Antonia Alonso Charter School
Delaware College Preparatory Academy
Early College High School
First State Military Academy Positive Outcomes Charter School
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
4/18
Delawares Alternative Teacher
Evaluation Systems - SummarySystemComponent
System #1:
DPAS-II
Systems #2 and #3:
Delaware Charter
Collaborative I and II
System #4:
Freire Charter School
System #5:
Las Amricas ASPIRA
Academy
System #6:
Colonial School District
Observation
Rubric
Charlotte Danielson Teaching Excellence
Framework
Freire Instructional
Principles Framework
Educator Effectiveness
Framework
Colonial Teaching &
Learning Framework
Observations &
Notification
Differentiation between
experienced and novice
All observations are
unannounced
All observations are
unannounced
Differentiation between
benchmark and coaching
Varies; determined at
school leader discretion
Length Minimum of 30 minutes Minimum of 10 minutes Minimum of 10 minutes Benchmark are 60 minutes
and coaching 30 minutes
Minimum of 15 minutes
per observation
Frequency Three times annually Minimum of 8 times per
year
Four times per year from
certified evaluator and
two peer observations
Minimum of 6 times per
year
5-7 times annually,
depending on teacher
classification
Observers DDOE certified evaluators Campus leadership/
certified evaluators
Certified campus
leadership
Professional Learning
Leader
Campus leadership/
certified evaluators
Components
and Weights
Components I-IV
evaluated in all
observations and weighted
equally
Differentiated based on
need (evidence required
4x annually for each rubric
row) and not weighted
equally with focus oninstruction
Two observations focus on
all four components while
other two have
differentiated focus
Dimensions I-IV are
evaluated in all benchmark
and coaching observations
and weighted equally
Performance standards are
evaluated in all
observations (except
walkthroughs) and
weighted equally
Pre-Work Pre-observation form and
conference (if announced)
Timeline/action steps from
previous observation
Timeline/action steps from
previous observation
Not Applicable Contingent on announced
context
Follow-Up Post-observation
conference
Debrief and subsequent
focus on areas of growth
Debrief and
timeline/action steps for
next observation
Debrief and identification
of 2-3 instructional
improvement goals
Debrief and next steps
contingent on observation
type
4
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
5/18
Alternative Teacher EvaluationSystems: Observation ComponentsThe Department conducted on-site observations in Fall 2015, with focus on the followingcomponents:
Teacher & Leader Support: The LEA has demonstrated commitment towards rigorous andmeaningful teacher and leader support before and during alternative educator evaluationsystem implementation
Evaluator Certification/Credentialing: The LEA has a clear, rigorous process to certify evaluatorsand calibrate ratings to ensure validity and reliability within and between schools
Implementation Fidelity: The LEA has successfully implements all components of proposedalternative educator evaluation system
Implementation Documentation: The LEA has successfully established documentation systemsand protocols to effectively capture implementation efficacy
5
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
6/18
Teacher & Leader Support
Strengths and Opportunities
Shared Expertise: Collaborative orcharter network provides newentrants access to necessary supports(training, materials, etc.)
Economies of Scale: Sharedframework enables cost savings andmost likely encouraged schools to takeinitial step
Learning Networks: Collaboration
between schools amplifies learningand creates culture of continuousimprovement
Challenges and Barriers
Ownership: Significant variancearound buy-in on culture of feedbackbetween different campuses ofvarying contexts
Leadership: Transitions in campusleadership create lack of coherenceand strategy necessary for smoothimplementation
Differentiated Support: Struggle to
provide ongoing, differentiatedsupport if teacher developmentremains solely at individual campusand is not connected to broaderecosystem of opportunities
6
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
7/18
Evaluator Credentialing
Strengths and Opportunities
Purpose: DPAS-II set stage forunderstanding among leaders forshared instructional vision and needto calibrate evaluations
Process: Leaders understand processand reasoning behind evaluatorcredentialing and calibration toensure full faith among teachers
Network of Evaluators: Collaborative
members expressed interest innetwork of evaluators that couldcalibrate as a team
Challenges and Barriers
Networks: Campuses dont haveshared responsibility for employees(charter campuses, notably);therefore, its difficult to encourage
calibration between schools duringthe school year, which can isolateindividual schools in theirimplementation.
Leadership: Limited capacity amongleaders to design and deliver
certification/credentialing trainingor even just general trainingas thishas historically been a state ordistrict responsibility
7
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
8/18
Implementation Fidelity
Strengths and Opportunities
Timeline: Most schools are on-trackto have all required observations andfeedback cycles done before end ofschool year
Resources: All campuses havenecessary resources (observers, bellschedules, etc.) to complete requiredobservations during year
External Support and Monitoring:
Support from external supports helpsleaders effectively plan andtroubleshoot, if needed
Challenges and Barriers
Onboarding: Late start to training(mid-August) has led to slow rolloutamong campuses just starting systemimplementation in the 15-16 schoolyear
Prioritization: Many schools haveother operational issues that distractfrom the core work of improvingteaching and learning
Project Management: Difficult tosuccessfully manage implementationif an identified project lead isntpresent within an LEA
8
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
9/18
Implementation Documentation
Strengths and Opportunities
Tool Utilization: Allparticipants used a digital
tool to record theirobservation and feedbackdata
Protocols: All campuseshave a protocol in place tocapture information andenter into tool, with somedifferentiation on its use asa teacher-facing mechanism
Challenges and Barriers
State-Approved Platforms:Significant barriers in
utilizing online platforms tocollect and aggregateobservation data due to fullDPAS-II alignment withinthose information systems(on the user-end & back-end)
9
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
10/18
Key Questions/Considerations andNext StepsKey Questions
What is the process for a system for be placed on formal review or to rescind and LEAs approval?
How can the Department effectively monitor the credentialing of all evaluators so that implementation is done with
fidelity?
How should the Department utilize state-approved platforms to effectively monitor and support LEAs?
Additional Considerations
How can the Department encourage schools/LEAs to seek out highly effective external supports to guide their work?
Are there funds available to help cover start-up/planning costs, such as a project manager?
Are charter schools fully aware of this opportunity when submitting their new charter for initial approval?
10
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
11/18
Summary of Current Efforts
As of school year 2015-2016:
Five different systems (see right) utilize fourdifferent evaluation frameworks (DelawaresCharter Collaboratives I and II both utilizethe Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF))
One traditional district and twelve (12)charter schools have applied and receivedapproval for alternative teacherevaluationsystems
Ten (10) charter schools are members of acohort in order to benefit from economies ofscale, learn from each others efforts, andscale best practices in student goal-setting
and observation/feedback cycles
11
Colonial School District (To Be Determined)
Delaware Charter Collaborative I (Fall 2013)
East Side Charter School
Family Foundations Academy Charter
School
Kuumba Academy
Prestige Academy Charter School
Thomas A. Edison Charter School
Las Americas ASPIRA Academy (Fall 2015)
Freire Charter School (Fall 2015)
Delaware Charter Collaborative II (Fall 2015)
Academia Antonia Alonso Charter School
Delaware College Preparatory Academy
Early College High School
First State Military Academy Positive Outcomes Charter School
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
12/18
Delaware CharterCollaborative IITeaching Excellence Framework
1/20/2016 12
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
13/18
The Teaching Excellence Framework
1. Planning and Preparation
Components 1-3 are measured using the
Teaching Excellence Rubric. Ratings are a
summary of frequent, short lesson
observations throughout the school year.
2. Classroom Environment
3. Instruction and Assessment
4. Professional Responsibilities
Components 4 is measured using the
Teaching Excellence Rubric. Ratings are
based on a student survey, parent survey
and peer survey.
5. Student AchievementComponents 5 is measured by state and
local growth measures (same as DPAS II)
13
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
14/18
The Teaching Excellence Framework
Observation Rubric Based n exemplary rubrics from other states, districts, CMOs
Length 15-20 minutes/observation
Frequency 8 observations per year unannounced
Observers School leaders who participate in several observations and
feedback trainings each ear to ensure strong calibration across
observers
Follow-up Observation debrief occurs within one week
Teacher writes up his/her own summary of the conversation
and next steps
School leader records scores and action steps for
improvementData Observation Sheet Tally
Fall Teacher Survey
Mid-Year Conferences
Parent-Student-Peer Surveys
End of Year
14
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
15/18
The Teaching Excellence Framework
Praise Narrate the positive
Probe Check for Understanding
Start with the goal
Analyze the gap
Close the gap
Action Step Name explicitly the action step; high-leverage, measurable,bite-sized
Plan Ahead Script changes into upcoming lesson plans
Practice Role play how to implement action step in current or future
lessons
Follow-up Set timeline for follow-up
15
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
16/18
EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS FRAMEWORK
Las Amricas ASPIRA Academy
16
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
17/18
Overview ofLAAA Educator Effectiveness Framework
LAAAs strategic plan to close the achievement gap of its students is based upon a four pillar approach:Increasing Educator Effectiveness, Mastery Learning, Data-Driven Instruction, and Culture & Climate.
the effects of well-prepared teachers on student achievement can be stronger than theinfluences of student background factors, such as poverty, language background, and minoritystatus
(Darling-Hammond, 2000, p.33).
MasteryLearning
Data-DrivenInstruction
Culture &Climate
IncreasingEducator
Effectiveness
7/25/2019 Alternative Teacher Evaluation Systems
18/18
Framework ComponentsAnnual
Benchmarking ofTeacher
Effectiveness
FallBenchmarking
and Goal-SettingConference
SpringBenchmarking
End of YearEvaluation
OngoingObservations and
Feed-ForwardProfessional
Learning
Conversations
October-April
No less than 6per educator
Growth ModelSystem to Track
EducatorEffectiveness
TeacherIndicators
StudentIndicators
Evidence of Data-Driven Instructionand Measures of
StudentAchievement
CareerDevelopment
Progression Model
EducatorEffectiveness
CompensationStructure
P1 and P3
teacher
indicator
ratings
Student
Improvement
Measures
Annual
Salary
Schedule
Bonus
Program
Induction
Skillful
Teacher
Lead Teacher
Instructional
Leader
PLL