Slide 1

Slide 2

Presentation for Teachers and Administrators in the New Canaan Public Schools, New Canaan, CT What is differentiated supervision? Why is it necessary? How do we make teacher evaluations both meaningful and purposeful? How can school leaders respond to evaluations to make key decisions regarding teacher needs? How will differentiated supervision ultimately benefit teachers and students? Differentiated Supervision Because Students Are Not the Only Ones with Differences!

Slide 3

What is Differentiated Supervision? Differentiated Supervision is effectively using evaluations to inform meaningful decisions on teacher needs. It occurs when school leaders recognize teachers vary greatly in their readiness levels, their skill sets, and in their confidence, resulting in significant variation in teacher effectiveness.

Slide 4

Why is Differentiated Supervision Necessary?

Slide 5

Teachers are NOT all the Same! The Widget Effect, as described in a research report by the New Teacher Project, is defined as the failure of our schools to recognize that teacher effectiveness is not the same from classroom to classroom; teachers are not interchangeable parts. Evaluations must acknowledge, and be responsive to, their strengths and weaknesses. (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009)

Slide 6

Decisions, Decisions Key decisions regarding teachers are rarely based on teacher performance: Tenure is typically granted after a predetermined number of years of service. Salary advances are based on years of service and education level. Professional development is often random or fad-based rather than tied to observed teacher effectiveness. Evaluators typically decide that the overwhelming majority of teachers are performing well. (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009)

Slide 7

Change Required Effective Differentiated Supervision requires a cultural shift administrators and teachers must adjust how they have historically viewed the evaluation system. It must be understood that the core purpose of evaluation must be maximizing teacher growth and effectiveness (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009, p. 9). Teachers must stop viewing a positive rating as the singular goal of an evaluation, but instead view it as an opportunity to receive constructive feedback and differentiated support.

Slide 8

Where to Begin? Differentiated Supervision begins with purposeful, meaningful, objective analysis of overall teacher effectiveness. Researchers agree that one single tool should not be used to evaluate teachers, but that multiple instruments and frameworks should be utilized. It is critical that evaluators are trained in the use of observation and data-gathering protocols. (Hinchey, 2010)

Slide 9

Observation and Evaluation Whats the Difference? Observation refers to seeing, hearing, recording, reviewing, and analyzing teacher performance through the school year. Evaluation is much broader; it refers to making judgments based upon information accumulated on all aspects of the teacher's professional performance, both instructional and non- instructional.

Slide 10

Tool Options for Evaluations (Goe, Bell & Little, 2008) DescriptionStrengthsCautions Classroom Observations Measures observable classroom processes. Provides information about classroom activities and behaviors. Can be used for both formative and summative purposes. Important to choose a valid and reliable protocol; raters must be trained. Cannot assess teacher beliefs, intentions, or outcomes of lessons. Instructional Artifacts Protocols used to analyze/measure quality of lesson plans, rubrics, student work, etc. Can be good measure of instructional quality. Practical and feasible measure. Limited research on reliability and validity. Training scorers can be costly. Portfolio Used to document array of teaching behaviors and responsibilities. Used to assess beginning teachers/teacher candidates. Can measure aspects of teaching not seen in single observations. Good tool for teacher self-improvement. Time-consuming and difficult to standardize. Typically represents a teachers exemplary work.

Slide 11

More Options DescriptionStrengthsCautions Teacher Self-Report Reports of classroom activities/goals; obtained through surveys, instructional logs or interviews. Can measure unobservable factors; provides teachers perspective. Feasible and cost-efficient. Still need a validated instrument to increase reliability/validity. This method should never be primary measure. Student Survey Student opinions about teaching practice. Can offer formative information to help teachers improve. Students are not able to comment on teachers content knowledge, curriculum use or professional activities. Value- Added Model Formula used to determine teachers contributions to test score gains. Measure of student learning vs. teaching methods; little burden at school level; useful for identifying outstanding teachers. Cannot separate teacher effects from classroom effects; not useful for formative purposes; measure only teachers contributions to test scores, not other measures of student growth.

Slide 12

So How do we Evaluate and Differentiate? In a nutshell, a good evaluation system is used as a foundation for responses to varying teacher effectivenessan evaluation is not an end in and of itselfit is not a document to be stuffed away in a file. Charlotte Danielsons Framework for Teaching and TAP (The System for Teacher and Student Advancement) are examples of systems in which the teacher evaluation process is inherently tied to the schools responses, including decisions to mentor, coach, provide professional development, change teacher assignments, and/or reward, advance or dismiss. (Eckhert, 2010), (Sartain, Stoelinga, & Krone, 2010)

Slide 13

Danielsons Framework: Domain Focus Domain 1 Planning and Preparation What a teacher knows and does in preparation for teaching. Domain 2 The Classroom Environment All aspects of teaching that lead to a culture for learning in the classroom. Domain 3 Instruction What a teacher does to engage students in learning. Domain 4 Professional Responsibilities Professional responsibilities and behavior in and out of the classroom.

Slide 14

Evaluation Outcomes not just a score or rating Both Danielsons Framework and TAP ensure that evaluations are not the equivalent of jumping through a cursory, bureaucratic hoop (Eckhert, 2010). Instead, they are the basis of support for interventions for low performing teachers, continued growth options for teachers in the middle, and advancement opportunities for teachers who have demonstrated expertise. Research indicates that the use of such frameworks are successful in identifying more low-performing teachers and that they are effective in identifying teachers in need of additional supports (Sartain, Stoelinga & Krone, 2010).

Slide 15

Typical Evaluation Process

Slide 16

Differentiated Evaluation Process

Slide 17

Differentiated Supervision for New Teachers Beginning teachers need special attention and tailored response to evaluations! 1 st year of teaching should not be a game of education survivor. Supervisors should provide individualized attention. Teacher self-efficacy and learning needs should be assessed. Mentors strengths should match new teachers needs. Targeted observations should be conducted and timely feedback provided. (Elliott, Isaacs,& Chugani, 2010)

Slide 18

Differentiated Interventions for Struggling Teachers Professional Development directly linked to observed weaknesses. Peer/Instructional Coaching. Mentors or Supervisors to model effective instruction or co-teach lessons. Use of technology (video lesson reviews, bug-in-ear tech, webcam/Skype for frequent check-ins). Teachers who have received fair and comprehensive evaluations, and who still fail to meet performance standards despite individualized support should be dismissed. End of story.

Slide 19

Help! I Need Somebody! Supervisors should remember to always focus on contexts in which teachers are most likely to feel unprepared. Research indicates this includes: Beginning teachers Teachers of students with behavior issues Teachers of students with learning disabilities Teachers learning to use data to inform instruction (Elliot, Isaacs & Chugani, 2010) (Goe, Bell & Little, 2008)

Slide 20

Differentiated Actions for Achieving and Excelling Teachers Teachers achieving acceptable standards typically still have room for improvement: Provide professional growth opportunities. Schedule opportunities to observe exemplary teachers. Assign to data teams, curriculum committees and/or PD groups. Teachers who excel can fall to the wayside if they are not recognized and continually challenged: Advance them to roles as mentors or master teachers. Train advanced teachers to work with supervisors as teacher evaluators. Adjust compensation system to reward master teachers.

Slide 21

How does Differentiated Supervision Ultimately Benefit Teachers and Students? Please also share concerns and remaining questions. Group Discussion

Slide 22

References Eckert, D. J. (2010). More than widgets, TAP: A systemic approach to increased teacher effectiveness. The TAP System for Teacher and Student Advancement Created by Lowell Milken. Retrieved from http://www.tapsystem.org/resources/resources.taf?page=ffo_rpts_eckert Elliott, E. M., Isaacs, M. L., & Chugani, C. D. (2010). Promoting self-efficacy in early career teachers: A principals guide for differentiated mentoring and supervision. Florida Journal of Educational Administration & Policy, 4(1), 131-146. Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from http://www.tqsource.org/publications/teachereffectiveness.php Hinchey, P. H. (2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn from research. National Education Policy Center | School of Education, University of Colorado at Boulder. Retrieved April 03, 2011, from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/getting-teacher-assessment-right Sartain, L., Stoelinga, S. R., & Krone, E. (2010). Rethinking teacher evaluation: Findings from the first year of the excellence in teaching project in Chicago public schools (Policy brief No. 978-0-9814-6047-5). Retrieved from http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/content/publications.php?pub_id=143 Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. The Widget Effect. Retrieved from http://widgeteffect.org/downloads/TheWidgetEffect.pdf