Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Committed to Excellence
TEAM Teacher Evaluation
& Achievement Model
TEAM Classroom Teacher Quick Guide 2017-2018
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOPIC PAGE(S)
TEAM Updates for 2017-2018 3
Observation Requirements for Classroom Teachers 4
Observation Requirements for Classroom Category 1A Teachers 5
Marzano Learning Map 2017-2018 (Classroom) 6-7
Marzano Scoring Rubric 8
Instructions on Scoring Observations 9-10
Deliberate Practice Plan 11-15
Deliberate Practice Plan Examples 16-17
TEAM Summative Evaluation Components 18
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
3
TEAM Updates for 2017-2018
The Goal for 2017-2018 was DECREASE….
• Fewer Ratable Elements or Instructional Categories in Domain 1 for Observations
• Element 1
• Element 10
• Element 14
• Element 15
• Element 19
• Element 23
• No changes in Domains 2, 3, and 4
• 17 total ratable elements for 2017-18
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
4
Observation Requirements Classroom Teacher
Evaluation Procedures for Classroom-Based Teachers How a teacher will be assessed will be determined by the category they are assigned based upon experience. There are three designations of teachers in LCS’ TEAM.
Category 1(A): Instructional Probationary Annual Contract Teachers who are in their first year of employment in the district (new or experienced)
Category 1(B): Annual Contract Teachers who have one (1) through three (3) years of experience
Category 2: Annual Contract, Professional Contract, or Continuing Contract Teachers who have four (4) or more years of experience
TEAM Observation Requirements For Classroom
Teachers
2017-2018
TEAM Plan Informal
Observation
Formal
Observation
Artifact
Conference
Total
Classroom-Based
Category 1A
(1st Year or New to
the District)
3
1 by Dec. 31
2 by May 1
2
1 by Dec. 31
1 by May 1
0 5
Classroom-Based
Category 1B
(Years 2-3)
2
1 by Dec 31
1 by May 1
1
by May 1
0 3
Classroom-Based
Category 2
(4+ Years and
Advanced or
Distinguished LIFT
Level)
1
by Dec 31
1
by May 1
0 2
* Please note: Observations must be completed by the dates indicated above.
** Virtual School Teachers will be listed as Classroom Teachers but will follow the Non-Classroom Schedule.
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
5
Observation Requirements for Category 1A Classroom Teachers
(Includes Teachers Hired Late in the Year)
Note: This includes teachers new to teaching AND teachers new to the district.
DPP - YES
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
6
Domain 1 Elements that can be Scored
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
7
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
8
Marzano Scoring Rubric
Innovating
Applying
Category 1 Developing
Or
Category 2
Needs Improvement
Beginning Not Using
Refers to professional teaching that innovatively involves students in the learning process. Additional strategies are incorporated when some students are not reaching the desired effect, which leads to all students reaching the desired effect at this level.
Refers to successful, professional teaching that is consistently at a high level. Students are engaged and the teacher monitors the extent to which desired outcomes are produced. The majority of students reach the desired effect at this level. It would be expected that most experienced teachers would frequently perform at this level.
Refers to teaching that has the necessary knowledge and skills to be effective. Students are engaged but the monitoring of outcomes is inconsistent or lacking.
Effective teaching strategies are used incorrectly or with parts missing.
Effective strategies are called for but not exhibited.
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
9
Classroom-Based Teachers – Scoring Observations
Domain Weightings
Domain 1 68%
Domain 2 14%
Domain 3 8%
Domain 4 10%
Calculating the Status Score
• Step 1: Rate observed elements at each of the following levels:
Innovating (4), Applying (3), Developing (2), Beginning (1), and Not Using (0)
• Step 2: Count the number of ratings at each level for each of the four domains
• Step 3: For each domain, determine the percentage of the total each level represents (% Innovating, % Applying, % Developing, % Beginning, % Not Using)
• Step 4: For each domain, apply the results from Step 3 to the description for each level on the Proficiency Scale below (based on teacher’s experience level).
• Step 5: Compute the weighted average of the 4 domain proficiency scores and find the resulting number on the scale below
Category 1 (Teacher in first 3 years of teaching) Domain Proficiency Scores:
C1 Highly Effective (3.5 – 4)
Effective (3)
Developing (2)
Unsatisfactory (1)
D1: 3.5 - 50% - 64% at Innovating (4) and 0 at Beginning (1) or Not Using (0) 4.0 – 65% - 100% at Innovating (4) and 0 at Beginning (1) or Not Using (0)
At least 65% at Applying (3) or higher
Less than 65% at Applying (3) or higher and Less than 50% at Beginning (1) or Not Using (0)
Greater than or equal to 50% at Beginning (1) or Not Using (0)
D2:
D3:
D4:
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
10
Category 2 (Teachers with 4 or more years of teaching experience)
Domain Proficiency Scores:
C2 Highly Effective
(3.5 – 4)
Effective
(3)
Needs Improvement
(2)
Unsatisfactory
(1)
D1: 3.5 - 50% - 74% at Innovating (4) and 0 at Beginning (1) or Not Using (0) 4.0 – 75% - 100% at
Innovating (4) and 0
at Beginning (1) or
Not Using (0)
At least 75% at Level
Applying (3) or higher
Less than 75%at Applying
(3) or higher and Less
than 50% at Beginning (1)
or Not Using (0)
Greater than or equal
to 50% at Beginning (1)
or Not Using (0) D2:
D3:
D4:
For instructional personnel in their first three years of teaching, the following ratings will be applicable: Highly
Effective, Effective, Developing or Unsatisfactory. Instructional personnel with 4 or more years of experience,
Needs Improvement will be used in place of Developing.
Highly Effective Effective Developing / Needs Improvement
Unsatisfactory
3.5 – 4.0 2.5 – 3.49 1.5 – 2.49 0 – 1.49
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
11
Deliberate Practice Plan
The Deliberate Practice Plan for the 2017-2018 school year will include one Deliberate
Practice Focus Strategy.
The Deliberate Practice Plan (DPP) is to be completed in Truenorthlogic\Performance
Matters.
A DPP target can be a Design Question (Domain 1) or a Domain (2-4)
Deliberate Practice will be scored as 20% of the TEAM Summative Evaluation.
Deliberate Practice steps include:
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
12
Instructions for Completing the Deliberate Practice Plan
Teacher selects target
Teacher designs plan for professional improvement – Plan is completed in one step in TNL
Principal Acknowledges Plan
No Reflections. Instead, teachers gather evidence of impact along the way.
Teacher Provides Evidence that Plan was Completed
o Evidence that Plan was completed – Effective
o Evidence that Plan showed impact on student achievement or impacted others –
Highly Effective
Principal Scores Deliberate Practice Plan at Year-End Meeting Based on Evidence
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
13
Step 1A - Identify Focus Strategy and Develop Deliberate Practice Plan
Complete these
Questions
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
14
Step 1B - Identify Focus Strategy and Develop Deliberate Practice Plan
Complete these
Questions
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
15
Step 2 – Outcome, Evidence and Reflection - (To be completed at the end of the project)
Complete this after the
DPP Project has concluded
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
16
Classroom DPP Example #1
Domain: 1
Design Question: #3 Helping Students Practice and Deepen New Knowledge OR DQ #8 Establishing and Maintaining
Effective Relationships with Students (Either one would fit here)
1. What do I want to see improve in my practice as a result of focusing on this targeted Strategy?
Currently students typically stick close to my lessons and topics given and I would like to see them branch out a create
projects based on their interest and abilities.
2. What is my expected outcome?
As a result of focusing on this element, I would like to see students' interests being reflected in my lessons and
assignments. I want to begin to build lessons and projects that focus on topics that better reflect and interest the learner.
3. Action Steps
Allow opportunities for students in the I.T. Directed Study course to create web development projects based on
their interests. I would also like to see them create a portfolio of projects that they have created that they could
showcase to a potential employer.
I am going to provide students with a student interest survey to get to know their individual likes/dislikes and
interests and provide them with some goal setting opportunities.
I will begin to provide multiple, varied opportunities for my students to perform in ways that develops and
demonstrates their own understanding of the standards that coincide with my lessons.
I will begin to build more focused lessons and projects around topics that are of interest to my students and their
abilities.
I want to build in time to do weekly or monthly data and personal chats with my students to build a strong rapport
and understanding of each student.
4. How will I determine positive impact?
Assignment completions (compared to prior years)
Assignment grades (compared to prior years)
Student Feedback on assignments (letting them tell me what worked for them and what didn't)
Data chats about assignments and how their choices impacted them
5. Outcome, Evidence and Reflection
Outcome - Through this project, I learned that by understanding student likes and interests and allowing them voice and
choice on certain assignments allows the students to take an active interest in completing the assignment above the norm.
Evidence – Assignment completions and assignment grades have improved as compared to the last two years. Allowing
them to choose from a choice of assignment topics or letting them choose their topic has proven successful in terms of the
quality of work students are creating, as evidenced by completed projects. For example, in my web design classes,
allowing the students to pick the type of website they want to design based on their interests has proven to produce high
quality work and motivation to really make the design standards their very best work. Feedback from students indicated
that they enjoyed the work much more when assignments were relevant and interesting to them.
Reflection – Based on the success of this year, I will continue to structure assignments around my group of students and
individual student interests to gain motivation, active participation, and the student(s) going above and beyond because
they enjoy the assignment. The classroom is much more conducive to learning when students are motivated and engaged
fully in their learning.
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
17
Classroom DPP Example #2
Domain: 2 - Planning and Preparing
1. What do I want to see improve in my practice as a result of focusing on this targeted Strategy?
I would like to improve my skills in guiding ELL students through the thought process of outlining their main
ideas and pieces of text evidence, which can then transfer into paragraph form for an essay.
2. What is my expected outcome?
With a concrete method of planning from Thinking Maps and from Core Connections, ELL students will be
able to express their ideas orally and record them in written form. After working with a small group of ELL
students on a regular basis, I expect to see improvement in their writing samples throughout the year.
3. Action Steps 1. Attend the “Thinking Maps for ELL Students” PD session. 2. Utilize strategies including Thinking Maps and the boxed planning methods employed by Core Connections to
help ELL students record and organize thoughts. 3. Develop a planning sheet to assist ELL students with planning a written piece. 4. Work with small group of ELL students, guiding them through the writing process. We will take a paragraph at a
time, check it off on the planning sheet, and make sure we have a beginning, middle, and end. All parts will focus on the writing prompt.
5. Utilize the “Write Score” program to provide benchmark data and areas of need for ELL students. 6. Provide data to classroom teachers so they can also support ELL students in their classrooms.
4. How will I determine positive impact?
Students will be tracked through three Write Score samples, as well as grades from DBQs done in class.
5. Outcome, Evidence and Reflection
Outcome: I have learned that ELL students have many obstacles to face when putting their thoughts into
writing in English. These obstacles can be cultural (tendency to work in circles rather than getting to the point)
as well as conventions (especially with capitalization and punctuation.) I found that I need to really guide them
through the thought process of outlining their main ideas and pieces of text evidence. Only then were we able to
transfer a written plan into paragraph form for an essay.
Evidence: From the writing essays scored through the Write Score program, all students improved their writing
skills. Some improved more significantly than others, but all showed improvement.
Reflection: While writing samples clearly improved during the year, I found that I needed to help students find
evidence in the text after determining their main ideas, as well as help them elaborate on this evidence in their
own words. Some were tempted to copy from the text. I am hopeful that I can move students to the next level,
which will involve more independent work on their part, without my step-by-step guidance. We all eagerly
await the FSA evaluation on these students' performance on the state writing exam. ELL students who will
continue with us next year as fifth graders will have a starting point as we progress to the next level.
TEAM
Teacher Evaluation & Achievement Model – Classroom Teachers
18
TEAM Summative Evaluation Components