Loading...
AP 804.1 Teacher Evaluation ProceduresAP 804.1 - Teacher Evaluation Procedures Statement of Philosophy Teacher performance has the most enduring and consequential influence on students, therefore the District has a firm commitment to performance evaluation. Every effort will be made to assure that only highly qualified teachers are retained on the staff of School District 91. The primary purpose of evaluation is to enhance the quality of instructional performance, promote improvement in student learning and support personnel in professional development to facilitate the achievement of district goals. Supervision and evaluation of professional employees involve a collaborative process between staff member and administrator for the purposes of identifying and documenting the performance of individual staff members Statutory Requirements There shall be a minimum of one written evaluation in each of the annual contract years of employment, which shall be completed no later than June 1 of each year. The evaluation shall include a minimum of two (2) documented observations, one (1) of which shall be completed prior to January 1 of each year. The requirement to provide at least one (1) written evaluation does not exclude additional evaluations that may be performed. (Idaho Code 33-514; see also Idaho Code 33-513 and Idaho Code 33-515) IDAPA Rule Requirements IDAPA 08.02.02.120.02 Professional Practice: For evaluations conducted on or after July 1, 2013, all certificated instructional employees must receive an evaluation in which at least ninety percent (90%) of the evaluation results are based on Professional Practice. All measures included within the Professional Practice portion of the evaluation must be aligned to the Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching Second Edition. Evaluators will rate the professional practice of each certificated teacher in all components found in Domains 1, 2, 3 and 4. The evaluator will assign a numerical value of (1) for Unsatisfactory, (2) for Basic, (3) for Proficient, and (4) for Distinguished for each component including specific evidence that supports the rating given. Pre-observation and Post-observation conferences may include a review of lesson plans, parent contact log, student work samples, classroom assessments, behavior management plans, and reflection log. The Performance Continuum found later in this document provides further clarification regarding this rubric and the associated ratings. The sum of the numerical values shall be divided by the number of components to determine an average numerical rating for professional practice listed. This average rating will be counted as 90% of the teacher’s overall rating. An initial evaluation report including ratings and evidence will be discussed with the teacher in the post-observation conference prior to the January 1 deadline. A second post-observation conference will be completed prior to the May 1 deadline. A final evaluation report will include evidence from both observations and completed prior to the June 1 deadline. Final ratings will be based on evidence from both observations. Parent/guardian input and student input shall be encouraged. No numerical rating from these inputs will be included in the teacher’s performance rating but the number of Parent/Guardian Input forms will be noted on the final evaluation. The teacher will receive a copy of all Parent/Guardian Input forms submitted. IDAPA 08.02.02.120.03 Student Achievement: For evaluations conducted on or after July 1, 2013, all certificated instruction employees, principals and superintendents must receive an evaluation in which at least ten percent (10%) of the evaluation results are based on an objective measure selected collaboratively by the teacher and evaluator. The objective measure may include but is not limited to IRI test results, End of Course Assessments, PSAT/SAT, graduation rates, and AP testing result. The District Key Performance Indicators will provide guidance as to which assessment data is used for the student achievement portion of the teacher evaluation model . (Idaho Code 33-1001 (18), see also HB 523 – Idaho (18) ) Using the following rubric, the teacher will be given a numerical rating based on data collected from the measurable student achievement indicators for the current year. The rating from this data will be counted as 10% of the teacher’s overall evaluation. The actual data evidence for student growth will be included on the teacher’s evaluation form. (1) Unsatisfactory 0-25% of the teacher’s students met their measurable achievement targets (2) Basic 26-50% of the teacher’s students met their measurable achievement targets (3) Proficient 51-74% of the teacher’s students met their measurable achievement targets (4) Distinguished 76-100% of the teacher’s students met their measurable achievement targets IDAPA 120.07 Evaluation Policy-Personnel Records Permanent records of each certificated personnel evaluation will be maintained in the employee’s personnel file. All evaluation records will be kept confidential within the parameters identified in federal and state regulations regarding the right to privacy (Idaho Code 33-518). Local school districts shall report the rankings of individual certificated personnel evaluations to the State Department of Education annually for State and Federal reporting purposes. The State Department of Education shall ensure that the privacy of all certificated personnel is information in the aggregate by the local school district. Definitions For the purposes of this document, teacher is defined as all certificated staff members who are not employed in an administrative role. The Teacher Evaluation Process is based on the Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching Second Edition which centers on the four domains for teachers. Certificated specialists including Instructional Specialists, Library/Media Specialist, School Nurse, School Counselor, School Psychologist, and Therapeutic Specialists are guided by specific frameworks which are also found in Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching 2013 Edition. Special education teachers are evaluated using rubrics based on the Danielson Framework, created by Idaho school districts and approved by the Idaho state department of education. These specialists will follow the same procedures for evaluation but use their specific framework for the evaluation process. Statement of Purpose The evaluation shall be conducted with each teacher to provide services as follows: ➢ Inform each professional teacher of how he/she is performing in his/her assignment. ➢ Communicate to each teacher his/her strengths and areas where improvement, if any, is needed. ➢ Create an opportunity for the supervisor and the teacher to discuss objectively the Teacher’s job performance. ➢ Provide the following information to a teacher whose performance necessitates the imposition of probation or nonrenewal of contract: 1. Written notice of the specific areas of unsatisfactory performance. 2. A reasonable time period to make corrections. 3. Adequate supervision, assistance, and evaluation during the period of probation (see probation procedures) Framework The Teacher Evaluation Process is based upon the Danielson Framework for Teaching (2nd edition) which centers on four domains. DOMAIN 1: Planning and Preparation Component 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Component 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Component 1c: Selecting Instructional Outcomes Component 1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction Component 1f: Designing Student Assessments DOMAIN 2: The Classroom Environment Component 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Component 2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning Component 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures Component 2d: Managing Student Behavior Component 2e: Organizing Physical Space DOMAIN 3: Instruction Component 3a: Communicating with Students Component 3b: Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning Component 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness DOMAIN 4: Professional Responsibilities Component 4a: Reflecting on Teaching Component 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records Component 4c: Communicating with Families Component 4d: Participating in a Professional Community Component 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally Component 4f: Showing Professionalism Performance Continuum The continuum ranges from describing teachers who are striving to master the rudiments of teaching to highly accomplished professionals who are able to share their expertise. ➢ Unsatisfactory - The teacher does not yet appear to understand the concepts underlying the component. Working on the fundamental practices associated with the elements will enable the teacher to grow and develop in this area. ➢ Basic - The teacher appears to understand the concepts underlying the component and attempts to implement its elements. But implementation is sporadic, intermittent, or otherwise not entirely successful. Additional reading, discussion, visiting classrooms of other teachers, and experience (particularly supported by a mentor) will enable the teacher to become proficient in this area ➢ Proficient - The teacher clearly understands the concepts underlying the component and implements it well. Most experienced, capable teachers will regard themselves and be regarded by others as performing at this level. ➢ Distinguished - Teachers at this level are master teachers and make a contribution to the field, both in and outside their school. Their classrooms operate at a qualitatively different level, consisting of a community of learners, with students highly motivated and engaged and assuming considerable responsibility for their own learning. Evaluation Process Forms The District has created forms for use in the supervision and evaluation of staff. Evaluation forms and rubrics are included in the Teacher Evaluation Procedures. Evaluation resources will be available in the Evaluation Resources Google Drive Folder for teachers to access. A 2013 PDF copy of “Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching” is available free online. https://www.ode.state.or.us/wma/teachlearn/commoncore/danielson-2013-rubric-only.pdf Focus Teachers will be evaluated on their performance in all components of the Framework for teaching. Teachers will receive a copy of the rubrics for these domains and components at the beginning of the school year. During classroom observations, the administrator will be looking for evidence of the teacher’s performance level for each of the components in these identified domains. The administrators will rate the teacher’s performance in each component using the rubric from Frameworks. Specific evidence will be listed to validate the rating given. Pre-evaluation Communications The administrator will explain the evaluation process to the teachers at the beginning of the new evaluation cycle begins. A variety of communication methods will be utilized including faculty meeting discussions and training, one on one communications, e-mail, and written documents. The following topics are to be included in these communications: ● Review all domains of the Danielson’s Frameworks and all the associated components. ● Identification of examples of evidence that would support the ratings using the rubrics for each of the components. ● Teachers will be instructed in the procedures for up-loading evidence into the platform provided for evaluation. ● Discussion and identification of the assessment data that the teacher and school will be using to analyze growth and achievement. Decisions on the data sources used in the evaluation are made during Pre-Observation Communication. Classroom observations Observations will be conducted openly and with the full knowledge of the teacher. Each observation should be at least one (1) instructional period in length or for sufficient time to make an adequate performance judgment. Observations will vary in frequency to ensure the identified components for evaluation have been observed. All monitoring or observation of the performance of a teacher shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the teacher. Pre-observation Communication The administrator and teacher communicate prior to the observation regarding the observation. Either party may request a meeting The teacher and principal will: ● Review of the purpose for the observation ● Review the learning objectives and lesson plan associated with the classroom observation ● Discuss the needs of students in the class to be observed ● Clarify evidence expectations ● Schedule a date and time for the observation and schedule a date and time for the post observation conference. Post-observation Conference All formal observations should be followed by a post-conference between the teacher and the administrator. The post-observation conference will provide the opportunity for the teacher and evaluator to review the activities, evidence and preliminary rating for observed components. It will also provide an opportunity for the teacher to reflect upon his/her professional performance and an opportunity to reflect upon a particular lesson to determine if the instructional goals were met and how he/she might teach the same topic or concept another time. The discussion should focus on, but is not limited to, the classroom environment and instruction. The teacher has the option to reply to the administrator’s comments regarding the classroom observation. Either the teacher or the administrator may request a third party to observe the teacher. Teacher or administrator may request an additional date for an observation due to unforeseen circumstances. Evaluation Conference The evaluation conference will provide the teacher an opportunity to review the final ratings with the associated evidence for both the professional practice and student achievement. Feedback received from parents/guardians and students will also be reviewed and discussed. Evaluation Report Following the evaluation conference, the teacher will be provided a final evaluation report that addresses the professional practice ratings and student achievement rating. The approved evaluation report form will be used for all written evaluations. The teacher has the option to respond in writing to the evaluation report as per the Negotiated Master Contract. Probation The purpose of probation is to remediate the area(s) of unsatisfactory performance. A probationary period shall be provided by the Board to any teacher whose performance is determined to be unsatisfactory. 1. The principal will notify the teacher regarding the specific areas of unsatisfactory performance with supporting evidence and the intent to recommend probation to the Board. 2. The principal and/or supervisor will recommend to the Board in writing that the teacher be placed on probation. 3. If the Board adopts the recommendation, the employee will be notified in writing by the Board. 4. The specific areas of unsatisfactory performance will be defined in writing to the teacher. A clearly articulated probationary plan will be developed by the administrator and the teacher. The plan will include identified concern(s), desired outcomes, and improvement targets. The plan will also include strategies for assistance and improvement. 5. The probation plan will include classroom observations (minimum of 2 scheduled), including pre and post-observation conferences. The period of probation shall not be less than 8 weeks, 40 instructional days. Each step of the probation process, including observations, identification of unsatisfactory area(s) of performance, and pre and post-conference notes shall be documented and initialed by both the teacher and the administrator. After the probationary period, action shall be taken by the board as to whether the employee is to be retained, immediately discharged, discharged upon termination of the current contract or reemployed at the end of the contract term under a continued probationary status. (Idaho Code 33-514). Portfolio Reference IDAPA 08.02.02.120.05.b Administrators and teachers will create portfolios by uploading evidence into the evaluation management system. Informal Observations: Informal observations, brief classroom visits that enable the administration to observe implementation of the curriculum, instructional teaching practices, and decisions related to teaching practices. Verbal and/or written feedback to the teacher is considered best practice and is encouraged. Monitoring and Evaluation The district’s procedure for supervision and evaluation of teachers will be developed and reviewed annually by a committee. The committee will consist of three (3) teachers selected by the President of the Representative Organization to include one elementary, one secondary and one ancillary. The committee shall also include (3) administrators selected by the superintendent or his/her designee (Negotiated Master Contract 6-4 Evaluation Procedures). Professional Practice and Achievement Data collected by principals through the evaluation process will be considered when planning and designing staff development activities. Administrators responsible for performing evaluations will participate in teacher evaluation training in accordance with Idaho Code 33-1204 (1). New teachers will receive training in the teacher evaluation prior to October 15th. Additional professional development opportunities will be provided as needed. The costs associated with teacher evaluation professional development will be paid by the district.