Updated on: October 15, 2013

Category 1 and 2 teachers

Score does not compute into the Summative Evaluation

Designed to give feedback on Instructional Practice and IPDP status

Informs professional development and support needed

Provided to state and teacher will receive notification from the state

3 days in advance of Observation

Pre-conference with administrator

Prior to November 22 ObservationWithin 10 days of observation Post-conference with administrator

Prior to December 14th Mid-Year Conference

Review collected evidence, artifacts and data regarding the ten Key Components of the Framework for Teaching and determine formative Instructional Practices ratingReview teacher’s progress relative to the IPDP and assign a formative IPDP ratingAssign a formative evaluation overall rating based on the Formative Evaluation Rubric Readdress the teacher’s IPDP as appropriate and as needed

See Project 8 website for Detail and Yearly Calendars: http://www.bay.k12.fl.us/rttt/Project8.aspx

Ten Key Components o A portion of the rubric you used to self-assesso Taken from Charlotte Danielson’s research

Observation Cycleo Pre-Conference, Observation, Post-Conference

Collection of evidence and artifactso Consistency and quality over timeo No number

• Most evidence will demonstrate multiple components• Consistency and quality over time

• Vary based on type of evidence and what administrative team already collects

o Administrative team will provide guidance

Mid-year conferenceo Evaluation of Instructional Practice

To which part of your curriculum does this lesson relate? (1e) How does this learning fit in the sequence of learning for this class? (1a, 1c, 1e) Briefly describe the students in this class, including those with special needs.

(1b) What are your learning outcomes for this lesson? What do you want the

students to understand? (1c) How will you engage the students in the learning? What will you do? What will

the students do? Will the students work in groups, or individually, or as a large group? Provide any worksheets or other materials the students will be using. (1d, 1e)

How will you differentiate instruction for different individuals or groups of students in the class? (1b, 1d)

How and when will you know whether the students have learned what you intend? (1f)

Is there anything that you would like me to specifically observe during the lesson?

In general, how successful was the lesson? Did the students learn what you intended for them to learn? How do you know? (3d, 4a)

If you have samples of student work, what do they reveal about the students’ levels of engagement and understanding? Do they suggest modifications in how you might teach this lesson in the future? (3d, 3c)

Comment on your classroom procedures, student conduct, and your use of physical space. To what extent did these contribute to student learning? (2c, 2d, 2e)

Did you depart from your plan? If so, how and why? (3e) Comment on different aspects of your instructional delivery (e.g., activities,

grouping of students, materials, and resources). To what extent were they effective? (2c, 3c, 3e, 1d, 1e)

If you had an opportunity to teach this lesson again to the same group of students, what would you do differently? (4a)

Consider different aspects of your planning and execution of the lesson in light of the domains and components on the following pages. Determine evidence, if any, for each of the components, and what that evidence demonstrates about your level of performance.

10 Key Components Pre-conference, observation, post-conference

and other evidence Basic information Enhancing Professional Practice by Charlotte

Danielson Evidence added to based on school’s strengths,

initiatives, etc. Complete rubric available on the RTTT Website:

http://www.bay.k12.fl.us/rttt/Project8.aspx

Background Information:Based on standards and course descriptions Able to be assessedIncludes needs of group as well as individual students Clear to stakeholders in language appropriate to the learner

Evidence:Pre-conference questions Other evidence:Lesson plans

Background Information:Alignment to standards and correspondence cognitive complexity Formative and summative Groups and individualsRubrics Authentic, real-world applicationExact items not provided to students; similar items are presented for student review Evidence:Pre-conference questions Other evidence:

Lesson Plans

Background Information:Teacher-student and student-student interactionsTeacher cares enough to insist on high standards of work and conductStudent understands there are ground rules and standards of conduct or routines that may be different than those at home

Evidence:Classroom observation

o Words and actions that show teacher-student and student-student interactions. o How does the teacher speak to students and allow them to speak to each other? o How does the teacher respond to off-task behavior and redirect behavior? o Does the teacher greet students as they enter the room and ask questions or

show concern about things beyond the classroom?Other evidence

o Lesson Plans showing how the environment was created or how the teacher allowed students to assist in any procedural creation that is posted in the room.

o Handouts? Posters created by students?

Background InformationStudents and teachers

o Engaged in pursuits of value with cognitive complexityo Take pride in work and give best effortso High energy and high expectations

EvidenceClassroom Observation

o Look of the room –is student work displayed, for example? What is the nature of interactions and tone of conversations from teacher-student and student-student?

Other evidenceo Lesson plans with instructional outcomes and activities demonstrating high

expectationso Conversations reveal they value learning and hard work

Background Information:Standards of conduct are clear, communicated to students, and posted in the classroomMonitoring is subtle and preventative-the teacher goes to stand next to off-task studentsStudent behavior indicates standards established at the beginning of the year and have been maintained consistently

Evidence:Classroom Observation and Post-Observation ConferenceOther evidence

o Lesson plans showing how standards were developed or posters of the classroom standards (rules, procedures, etc.).

o Students themselves explain the agreed-upon standards of conductKagan, Fred Jones, Harry Wong, RtI strategies

Background Information:Mix of cognitively complex questions related to lesson objectivesALL students involved in questioning and discussion- no single student dominates and teacher calls on those who don’t initially volunteerStudents initiate higher order questions

o Note: Developmentally appropriate. IB or AICE versus ESE-Autistic class; Kindergarten versus 12th grade. All students should be asked questions that are cognitively complex.

EvidenceClassroom observation

o A class session demonstrating questioning and discussion (CRISS strategies )Other evidence

o Planning for cognitively complex questions; training students to answer complex questions or participating in a discussion

o Lesson plans, student samples, handouts used with students, or procedural information placed in the room that students reference during discussions

Background Information:Clear structure and objectives ALL students mentally involved, actively participate, and make genuine contributionsStudents have choice task completion- activities are differentiated for learners and students are grouped accordingly

Evidence:Classroom observation and Post-Conference

o Students given an opportunity to engage with the materialOther evidence:

o Lesson plans showing how the teacher planned for student engagement, student samples and classroom evidence of differentiated instruction

CRISS strategies, Reading Framework strategies such as guided reading, learning stations, etc. can use these as evidence of student engagement

Background Information:Reflection is the mark of a true professionalAble to assess effectiveness of work and can take steps to improveTeaching, given its complexity, can never be perfectNo matter how good a lesson, it can always be improvedThis is not to suggest a lesson is of poor quality and must be fixed, but because quality teaching is so hard, some aspect can always be improved

Evidence:Post-conference questionsAdditional discussion will help in understanding how the teacher reflects and what they do with that knowledgeOther evidence:

o Lesson study or any other reflection activities

Background Information:Records are an important aspect of teachingInforms student-teacher interactions and enables teachers to respond to individual needsAware of which assignments have been completed and which are still outstandingStudents contribute to design and implementation (where appropriate), because of exposure to many different systems over the course of their educational careerEvidence:Post Conference Other Evidence:Use of online gradebook, RtI folders, assessment results, and record keeping systems of non-instructional activities (such as field trip forms, lunch records, etc.)

Background Information:Most parents care deeply about the progress of their child and appreciate meaningful participation in the processJust as students should not be surprised about an assessment or the procedures of the class, parents also need information that will not make the teacher’s approach to learning a surprise

Evidence:Post-Conference Other evidence:Written information, web site, Open House information, regular newsletters, phone calls, formalized procedures (progress reports, report cards), notes, emails

Pre-conference, Observation, Post-conference Review additional evidence Balance of information

Instructional Practice70%

Levels 0 1 2 3

Ratings Unsatisfactory Developing Effective Highly Effective

All teachers Greater than or equal to 50% at Level 1 and/or

Level 0

If not meeting HE, E

or U, then Developing

At least 75% at Level 3 and/or

Level 2 and 0% AT Level 0

At least 80% at Level

3 and 0% at Level 1 and/or Level 0

Mid-year conference IPDP review Review IPDP and assign a score to each section of

the IPDPo Student Baseline Datao Needs-Based Questiono Student Goalo Professional Development Objectiveso Professional Development Training/Activitieso Classroom Implementation

IPDP30%

Levels 0 1 2 3

Ratings Used for Each IPDP

Component

Unsatisfactory Developing Effective Highly Effective

All categories 1 or more rated 0

(Unsatisfactory)

1 or morerated 1

(Developing)

If not meeting HE, D

or U, Effective

6/6 rated 3 (Highly Effective)

Instructional Practice Level______X 70%=___________IPDP Level_______X 30%=______________Total Evaluation Level_______________

Levels 0 1 2 3Ratings Used for

Each SectionUnsatisfactory Developing Effective Highly Effective

All Categories Less than or equal to .75

Greater than .75 Greater than or equal to 1.5

Greater than or equal to 2.40

The results of the Formative Evaluation score will be used to guide category 1 and 2 teacher professional development and support

The Formative Evaluation score does NOT compute into the Summative Evaluation score

Allows the Category 1 and 2 teacher to know where they need to improve PRIOR to the summative evaluation

This concludes the review of the Formative Evaluation

Please remember all materials are placed on the Race to the Top website: http://www.bay.k12.fl.us/rttt/Project8.aspx

Thank you