Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Washington Township Public Schools District Evaluation Advisory Committee (DEAC) 2012-2013
Key Concepts
Overview of EE4NJ at the State Level:
Transforming Teacher Evaluation Systems Evaluation Implementation Responsibilities & Timelines Tenure Legislation
Nothing schools can do for their students matters more than giving them effective educators
Principal and teacher quality account for nearly 60% of a schools total impact on student achievement1
The effect of increases in teacher quality swamps the impact of any other educational investment, such as reductions in class size2
and in life
ADMINISTRATORS
PRINCIPALS
TEACHERS
STUDENTS
Everyone in this circle is essential, but students are at the core and teachers are closest to students
Adoption of robust statewide student information data system (NJSMART) Adoption and implementation of College and Career Readiness Standards, including more rigorous academic standards (CCSS) and rigorous student achievement assessment systems (future PARCC Assessments) Close the achievement gaps and turn around lowest performing schools (Priority/Focus Schools) Ensure great teachers and great leaders (EE4NJ)
8
2011-12
Cohort 1 teacher evaluation pilot Capacity-building requirements announced for all districts to follow in 2012-13
2012-13
Cohort 2 teacher evaluation & Cohort 1 of new principal evaluation pilots in progress; districts building capacity
2013-14 Statewide Implementation of New Evaluation System for teachers and principals
10
11
The mission of the DEAC is to: Solicit input from stakeholders Share information Recommend evaluation model for BOE consideration Guide and inform evaluation activities
Generate buy-in
12
13
Tenure Legislation
For all certificated staff members employed after the effective date of the new tenure law: Attainment of tenure occurs after four consecutive calendar years (for any certificated staff member BOEapproved for employment after August 6, 2012)
o Year 1: District Mentorship o Year 2-4: Receive rating of effective or highly effective in two annual summative evaluations within the first three years of employment after the initial year of employment in which the teacher completes the district mentorship program. o Evaluation rating scale includes the following four rating categories (for all certificated staff members regardless of date of employment), effective for the 2013-2014 school year:
Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
Each school must establish a School Improvement Panel (ScIP) by February 2013
14
50%
50%
PRINCIPAL PERFORMANCE
10%
40%
35%
15%
16
Composition
School principal or designee, Assistant/vice principal, Teacher Note: The teaching staff member serving on the ScIP will not participate in evaluation activities***
Selection Process
The teaching staff member serving on the ScIP shall be a person with a demonstrated record of success in the classroom who shall be selected in consultation with the majority representative * In the event an assistant or vice principal is not available, the principal shall appoint an additional member to the panel who is serving the district in a supervisory capacity **
Duties
- Oversee mentoring - Identify professional development opportunities - Conduct evaluations, including mid-year evaluation of any teacher rated ineffective or partially ineffective on most recent annual summative evaluation***
* An individual teacher shall not serve more than three consecutive years on any one ScIP. ** The administrator selected must possess a school administrator certificate, principal certificate or supervisor certificate. *** In accordance with the NJEA guidance as it relates to the teaching staff member who serves on the ScIP, the role of the teacher is not to conduct or give input into any teacher evaluations, but to ensure the integrity and consistency of the process. (NJEA.org, 1/3/13) 17
18
19
DEAC Meeting Dates & Focus for Review and Selection of Teacher Evaluation Models
Date
November 27,2012 November 30, 2012
Focus
Introduction to EE4NJ and the Evaluation Requirements (with Bob Fisicaro, NJDOE) Model: McREL Vendor Presentation: Tom Schulte and Joyce Stumpo District Presentation: Kristin ONeil, West Deptford Model: James Stronge Vendor Presentation: Matt Jennings, Alexandria District Presentation: Matt Jennings, Alexandria Model: Robert Marzano Vendor Presentation: Beth Carr District Presentation: Joe Jones, Woodbury Model: Charlotte Danielson Vendor Presentation: Marna Matthews District Presentation: John Mazzei, Pemberton
December 6, 2012
2. Break/Debriefing
3. Pilot School District Presentation of their Implementation Experience/Process for the Specific Teacher Evaluation Framework with Q & A 4. Debriefing and Review of Small Groups Analysis and Discussion Assignments 5. Small Group Review of Specific Model 6. Reports/Feedback from Small Group Discussion
23
3. 4. 5. 6.
Why Marzano?
Committee Developed List of Strengths in Accordance with What We Value Document
Research-based Designed as a growth model Clearly designed Point system/quantitative Consistent in descriptions on rating scale rubric i-Observation (secure online evaluation data preparation and collection system) Emphasis on students involvement in the learning process Provides a road map for effective teaching Teacher and student evidence of learning Multiple content areas Everyone is part of training process Availability of supportive resources
25
27
Domain #1: Classroom Strategies & Behaviors Domain #3: Reflecting on Teaching
28
29
Domain 2:
Planning and Preparing
Planning and Preparing for Lessons and Units 3 elements Planning and Preparing for Use of Resources and Technology 2 elements Planning and Preparing for the Needs of English Language Learners 1 element Planning and Preparing for the Needs of Students Receiving Special Education 1 element Planning and Preparing for the Needs of Students Who Lack Support for Schooling 1 element
Domain 3:
Reflecting on Teaching
Evaluating Personal Performance 3 elements Developing and Implementing a Professional Growth Plan 2 elements
Domain 4:
Collegiality and Professionalism
Promoting a Positive Environment 2 elements Promoting Exchange of Ideas and Strategies 2 elements Promoting District and School Development 2 elements
30
Developing 2 Strategy is used correctly but the majority of students are not monitored for the desired effect of the strategy.
Applying 3 Strategy is used and monitored to see if it has desired effect with the majority of students.
Innovating 4 New strategies are created to meet needs of specific students or class as a whole in order for the desired effect to be evident in all students.
The Principals Formative Evaluation Framework utilizes the same 5 point rubric.
31
EXAMPLE of Possible Conversion of Marzanos 5 Point Formative Scale to NJDOEs 4 Point Summative Scale
Formative Rating Scale (Marzano)
Not Using 0 Beginning 1 Developing 2 Applying 3 Innovating 4
Ineffective
Partially Effective
Effective
Highly Effective
33
DEAC Meeting Template Agenda for Review and Selection of Principal Evaluation Models
1. 2. 3.
Review of Accomplishments to Date Feedback and Questions Power Point Presentation of NJDOE Principal Evaluation Pilot 2012-2013 Requirements
4.
5. 6. 7. 8.
35
effectively supports and retains teachers who continually enhance their pedagogical skills through reflection and professional growth plans
that teachers are provided with clear, ongoing evaluations of their pedagogical strengths and weaknesses that are based on multiple sources of data (including student achievement data) as well as job- embedded professional development that is directly related to their instructional growth goals
Next Steps
38
Next Steps
Issuance of Request for Proposal (RFP) as required by law for the purchase of the evaluation system Communication of model and selection process to all staff members Development of training and implementation plan on Marzano evaluation model and use of i-Observation Purchase and scheduling of professional development trainings and resources Unpacking, review and clarification of language in Marzano Model, as necessary Review and refinement of artifact identification Building-level PLCs on Marzanos teaching framework as outlined in the book: The Art and Science of Teaching Practice implementation of Marzano evaluation model Refinement of evaluation language and protocols as necessary, based on practice.
39
Questions?
40