teacher evaluation instrument · 2019. 6. 20. · instrument that not only assessed teacher...

TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT

Developed 2007

ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Foreword .............................................................................................. 1 Committee Members............................................................................ 2 Philosophy............................................................................................ 3 Evaluation Process Evaluation Responsibilities....................................................... 4 Formative Phase........................................................................ 4 Summative Phase ...................................................................... 6 Evaluation Cycle .................................................................................. 8 Evaluation Cycle Flowchart...................................................... 9 Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP)........................................ 10

Focused Teacher Improvement Plan Flowchart ....................... 12 Communication and Inservice Training Plan....................................... 13 Appendix Formative/Summative Teacher Evaluation Instrument ............ 15 a. Planning and Preparation ................................................ 16 b. Instruction ........................................................................ 19 c. Classroom Environment................................................... 23 d. Teacher Professionalism .................................................. 26 Pre-Observation Conference Form (optional) ......................... 29 Teacher Submitted Data Log (optional) .................................. 32 Summative Evaluation Report Cover Sheet (Probationary) ..... 33 Summative Evaluation Report Cover Sheet (Tenured) ............ 34 Focused Teacher Improvement Plan......................................... 35 Board Policy and Regulations................................................... 37 Glossary................................................................................................ 38 References/Work Cited ........................................................................ 40

1

Foreword

The performance-based evaluation system outlined in this manual represents the collaborative efforts of teachers and administrators of the Rockwood School District as they researched benchmark districts and best practices across the nation with the purpose of developing an instrument that not only assessed teacher performance but also promoted individual reflection and professional growth. As such, the instrument departs from past practice in several essential areas. The Teacher Evaluation Instrument (TEI) has moved to a more objective process whereby levels of performance are clearly defined for teachers and administrators. This TEI scoring guide has individual descriptions of levels of performance to be shared, discussed and reflected upon by teachers and administrators in collaborative professional conversations. Ultimately, the performance-based evaluation in the Rockwood School District creates the optimal learning environment for each student to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. The TEI reflects changes in best practices which indicate that it is not only the teacher behavior which is important in the classroom, but also the impact that behavior has on students in the classroom. Outstanding teacher performance can be characterized by practices that result in students’ personal motivation, active engagement, and ownership of learning. Therefore, this TEI instrument has four levels of performance with the fourth level being a level of performance that “exceeds expectations.” This fourth level of performance is written with the impact on the student in mind, thus the description is often written about student behaviors, i.e. “The students are . . .” The TEI is more than just the assessment of teacher skill and competency. The TEI instrument and process have been designed to encourage professional conversations between teachers and principals regarding goals, professional growth, and best practices.

2

ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT TEACHER EVALUATION INSTRUMENT COMMITTEE

2006-07 TEACHERS

Serena Crisp Acceleration Resource Teacher

Kimberly Fallert Wildwood Middle School - Science Teacher

Adam Gabris Rockwood South Middle School - Social Studies Teacher

Erik Graham RNEA - President

Connie Lowry Eureka Elementary - Elementary Teacher

Greg Mathison Lafayette High School – Mathematics Teacher

Maryanne Moosmann LaSalle Springs Middle School - Science Teacher

Bernie Mossotti Center for Creative Learning - Gifted Teacher

Katie Nease Rockwood Valley Middle School - Teacher

Bryan Pearlman Center for Creative Learning - Gifted Teacher

Mary Peppers Geggie Elementary - Elementary Teacher

Jason Schneider Lafayette High School - Math Teacher

Christy Steele Stanton Elementary – Elementary Teacher

Becky Stevenson Eureka High School - Language Arts Teacher

Jessica Vehlewald 9-12 Social Studies (grant release)

Gail Williams Rockwood South Middle School - Language Arts Teacher

ADMINISTRATORS Brian Gentz Eureka Elementary - Principal

Dr. Karen Hargadine Fairway Elementary - Principal

Bridget Hermann Rockwood Summit High School - Associate Principal

Susan Hladky Director of Human Resources

Karen Kieffer Wild Horse Elementary - Principal

Paul Knight Special Education Coordinator

Sue McAdamis Director of Professional Development

Dr. Kelvin McMillin Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources

Dale Menke Rockwood Summit High School - Principal

Kathy Ryan Curriculum Coordinator

Larry Schmidt Lafayette High School - Principal

Dr. Karen Seiber Rockwood South Middle School - Principal

Jim Wipke Crestview Middle School - Principal

OBSERVERS Connie Connon Eureka High School – Lead Librarian

Bob George UniServ Director

Dr. Shari Sevier Director of Counseling

Melissa Twombly Westridge Elementary - Librarian

Cathy Westbury Rockwood Valley Middle School – Counselor

3

Philosophy

A performance-based teacher evaluation system is critical to improving teaching, thus improving student knowledge and performance. A performance-based evaluation system has three purposes: performance assessment, professional growth, and student learning. An evaluation system should assist the district in determining the level of skill and competency that individual teachers have in implementing the teaching-learning process. This system should guide individual building administrators as they monitor performance, help teachers that need improvement, and recognize teachers with outstanding skills. Conversely, an evaluation system should promote professional growth by helping teachers learn about, reflect upon and identify areas of their personal teaching talent that they can develop and grow. Further, the evaluation system should be a mechanism to nurture professional growth in common goals of the district and building, and should support a learning culture in which people are encouraged to improve and share insights regarding the elements of best practices in the profession. Ultimately, the performance-based evaluation in the Rockwood School District supports an optimal learning environment for each student to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. The ability to apply these competencies successfully in any setting throughout the world becomes the essence of Rockwood School District’s “World Class Education."

4

Evaluation Process I. Evaluation Responsibilities

A. Human Resources The Office of Human Resources will provide each building with a listing of teachers and their location in the evaluation process (probationary or tenured). At the beginning of the school year, the Human Resources and/or the Staff Development Department will conduct yearly training on the evaluation process for the following:

1. New teachers during their employment orientation. 2. New administrators (new to the district or first-time administrators). 3. Refresher training for all administrators using the evaluation instrument in

order to insure consistency in the process.

The Office of Human Resources will designate the building responsible for the summative evaluation of a teacher who is assigned to more than one building. When possible, the building designated will be the primary location for that teacher’s assignment. Principals from each building where a teacher is assigned shall provide input for the Summative Evaluation Report. B. Building Principal The building principal is responsible for the evaluation process of all certificated employees assigned to the building. The building principal may delegate the evaluation process of certificated staff to those holding administrator certification and serving in administrative roles (i.e. associate principals, assistant principals, athletic directors, and administrative interns). The building principal is responsible for two types of yearly inservices. The first is an inservice for teachers new to the building. The second is a yearly review of the evaluation process for all returning certificated staff. C. Teacher All certificated staff new to the district will participate in an inservice on the evaluation process. All certificated staff will participate in a yearly review of the evaluation process.

II. Formative Phase The formative phase includes the on-going process of data collection, documentation, conferencing, and assistance with professional growth.

5

A. Data Collection

Performance data may be classified as formal or informal.

Formal data is collected through scheduled or unscheduled classroom observations followed by a post conference. A probationary teacher or a tenured teacher in their summative year may request that one of their observations be conducted at a mutually agreed time as a scheduled observation.

Informal data allow an evaluator to validate or question information gathered at other times. Such activities would not require any conferences with the teacher unless he/she leads the evaluator to have concerns about the teacher’s performance prior to it being included or referenced in the Summative Evaluation Report. It is intended that the discussion with the teacher be in a timely manner following the occurrence of an event causing concern, or when the evaluator deems it to be a concern. It is recognized that informal observations and additional formal observations may occur as appropriate in the view of the evaluator. Data sources for evaluation reports may include but are not limited to the following:

• Discussions/conferences with teacher • Participation in committee, staff and staffing meetings • Review of materials and resources used • Review of student assignments and student work • Parent, student, and/or peer feedback • Physical appearance of the classroom • Disciplinary referrals • Review of lesson plans and curricular scope/sequence • Review of assessment tools/measures • Documentation of professional growth experiences • Documentation of policy/procedure compliance • Observation of classroom instruction • Teacher submitted information • Memo to file

B. Documentation

Documentation may include formal or informal data. This documentation becomes the basis for discussions between teachers and evaluators about job performance. Any documentation which may be used in the evaluation process must be shared with the teacher in a timely manner.

C. Conferencing Conferencing occurs to discuss data collection as well as observations. The conference provides a basic, essential opportunity for discussion about teacher performance and growth. It is preferred that conferences regarding observations occur within two working days after the observation however, post-observation conferences must be held within five (5) working days of the formal observation. If more than five working days (days when evaluator and

6

teacher are at school) transpire between the observation and the conference, either party has the option to reject the observation and request another.

D. Formative Evaluation If a teacher is not satisfied with a formative evaluation, they may request of the Assistant Superintendent of Human Resource that his/her next formative evaluation be performed by a different evaluator. If deemed necessary, a new evaluator will be assigned by the Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources. This formative evaluation will be shared with the teacher and the original evaluator. The original evaluator will use this formative evaluation as one additional source of data for the summative evaluation. The summative evaluation will be developed by the original evaluator. E. Professional Growth

The purpose of professional growth is to enhance the quality of teaching and learning. Therefore, a part of the evaluation process shall include the teacher and evaluator having open discussions regarding continuous growth during post-observation conferences. At the summative evaluation conference the teacher may choose to write a professional growth statement on their Summative Evaluation Report. A teacher who has a level of performance at “Does Not Meet the Standard” or “Partially/ Approaching the Standard” shall, in collaboration with the supervising evaluator, write a professional growth statement addressing those area(s).

III. Summative Phase The Summative Phase is the review and synthesis of formative performance data. The Summative Evaluation Report is the document used to summarize the evaluator’s rating of performance for each domain. The summative conference is the discussion between evaluator and employee about the information on the Summative Evaluation Report. Ratings for levels of performance on the Summative Evaluation Report must be grounded in observable data or relevant artifacts gathered during the formative evaluation process. It is of particular importance to note that ratings of “Does Not Meet the Standard” or “Partially/Approaching the Standard” must be discussed and documented prior to the rating on the Summative Evaluation Report. The Summative Evaluation Report must be completed by the evaluator before March 10 for probationary staff and prior to five working days of the end of the school year for tenured staff. The Summative Evaluation Report must be signed by the evaluator and the person being evaluated on the cover sheet confirming receipt of the report. The teacher’s signature will indicate that a copy was received, read and discussed; it will not indicate the teacher’s agreement with the contents of the report in whole or in part. If the teacher wishes to respond to the evaluation report in writing, he/she will need to provide a copy of the response to the evaluator and the office of Human Resources within five (5) working days. The evaluator will provide a copy of the Summative Evaluation Report to the office of human resources where it will be placed in the teacher’s file. A copy will also be retained by the teacher and evaluator.

7

Evaluation decisions and judgments of performance, the non-renewal of a probationary contract, or the termination of services are excluded from the grievance procedure. However, violations of the procedures of the evaluation policy may be grieved.

8

Evaluation Cycle A summative evaluation report shall be completed at least annually for probationary staff and at least once every three (3) years for tenured staff. Probationary Staff Probationary staff are on an annual evaluation cycle. Summative reports will be completed and reported to the district human resources office by March 10 of each probationary year. Thus, the formative phase begins with initial employment and continues until the summative report for that year. A new formative phase begins immediately after each summative report. Data collection during the formative phase shall include a minimum of four observations. These observations may be scheduled and/or unscheduled. The teacher may request that one of the four observations be conducted at a mutually agreed time as a scheduled observation. Observations should be a minimum of 20 minutes. One observation must be completed by October 1; and a second observation must be completed by November 1; and at least one observation must be completed second semester. Tenured Staff The evaluation cycle for tenured teachers shall typically be three years. The cycle will begin the first year of tenure with a minimum of one observation year one (1), and a minimum of one observation year two (2), and a minimum of three observations and a summative in year three (3). A summative evaluation report must be completed within each evaluation cycle. A new evaluation cycle begins after each summative evaluation report. A tenured teacher who is on a Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP) will receive three observations and a Summative Evaluation Report that year. If a tenured teacher is on a continuing FTIP he/she will receive three observations and a Summative Evaluation Report each year the FTIP continues. Year of Summative Evaluation Report

• A minimum of three observations must be conducted during the regular evaluation cycle. • A minimum of one observation must occur during each semester. • The teacher may request that one observation be a scheduled observation at a mutually

agreed time. • The three-year cycle shall continue in effect unless the evaluator or teacher determines a

more frequent summative evaluation report is appropriate. • Observations should be a minimum of twenty (20) minutes. • The evaluator shall complete a Summative Evaluation Report. • The Summative Evaluation Report must be completed prior to the last five working days

of the school year.

Non-Summative Evaluation Years • A minimum of one observation must be conducted. • The three-year cycle shall continue in effect unless the evaluator or employee determines

a more frequent summative evaluation report is appropriate. • Observations should be a minimum of twenty (20) minutes.

10

Focused Teacher Improvement Plan

The purpose of a Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP) is to provide remediation and assistance to improve teacher performance as related to a documented deficiency within one or more of the four performance domains.

Steps in the FTIP process include:

1. Documentation of Performance Concern(s) The teacher is notified of performance concerns by an evaluator via methods such as post-observation conferences, memos to file, documentation of failure to perform professional responsibilities, etc.

2. Documentation of Performance Deficiency When an evaluator gathers information and documentation regarding a performance concern, the evaluator will schedule a conference to discuss, clarify concerns, share perceptions, and define issues. This conference may be held in conjunction with a post-observation conference or may be a separate meeting. This conference will be documented in a summary written by the evaluator and a copy will be given to the teacher. The conference summary will include the specific elements of concern. The outcome of this conference may result in the development of an FTIP immediately. In order for the conference to result in an immediate FTIP, the evaluator must provide documentation that the type of concern noted had been addressed with the teacher previously, or that the concern is sufficiently egregious in nature to warrant an immediate FTIP. The conference summary may be used to develop an FTIP in the future if the discussed concerns are documented again at any time.

If an FTIP is being considered, the evaluator confers with the Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources/designee. If an FTIP is not needed, the evaluator will continue to monitor the deficiency. 3. Joint Development of an FTIP A meeting will be held between the evaluator and teacher to develop the FTIP. The evaluator will develop the FTIP with the teacher’s input and include the following:

• Element(s) in need of improvement (including domain and component). • Directives for specific changes in teacher performance (meets the standard). • Directives/strategies for (improvement) professional improvement activities.

o Teacher directed strategies o Evaluator guided strategies that include feedback

• Continued dialogue with evaluator to determine progress. • Method to be used to determine if activities have been completed • Method to be used to determine if improvement has been made. • Timeline for review of progress. • Date for official notification of completion or continuation into the next school

year.

Both the evaluator and teacher will sign the FTIP. The teacher signature will indicate understanding of the purpose and steps needed for improvement. The teacher may request that a silent observer be present during the FTIP development meeting. The

11

teacher can request 2 working days to review the FTIP between the development of the FTIP and the finalization/signing of the FTIP. A single FTIP may be written for several elements within each domain exhibiting a deficiency, or separate FTIPs may be written for each element deficiency within a domain. An FTIP may be developed for a single element in which a teacher exhibits a deficiency. FTIP Review The evaluator and teacher will meet periodically to review progress toward the FTIP. The FTIP will continue as needed with a review conference held minimally at mid year and the end of year regarding progress towards completion or continuation of the FTIP. Teachers will additionally receive an official notification on their Summative Evaluation Report regarding completion or continuation into the next school year. Once the FTIP is completed it is signed by both the evaluator and teacher.

A teacher who does not meet all requirements of the FTIP according to the time specified will receive a “does not meet standards” rating on the summative evaluation report. An evaluator may give a teacher a “partially/approaching the standard” rating if the teacher has improved on the deficiencies of the FTIP, but has not improved sufficiently to be removed from the FTIP. The FTIP will be renewed with a new timeline and the teacher may be considered for non-renewal (probationary) or a letter of deficiency. Miscellaneous A tenured teacher who is on an FTIP will receive a Summative Evaluation Report that year. If a tenured teacher is on a continuing FTIP, they will receive three observations and a Summative Evaluation Report during that continuing FTIP year.

Some performance concerns may not merit the development of an FTIP. Misuse of sick leave or chronic tardiness to work are examples of a performance concerns which if discussed with the teacher and documented could result in an unsatisfactory rating on the summative, non-renewal, and/or letter of deficiency, but may not result in the development of an FTIP. One time incidents may result in a conference and memo to a teacher’s file. If the incident is severe enough, or a second incident occurs, an unsatisfactory rating on the summative evaluation report, FTIP, non-renewal, and/or letter of deficiency may result.

13

Communication and Inservice Training Plan

The new Teacher Evaluation Instrument (TEI) described within this manual represents a dramatic change in form and in process from previous instruments used by the Rockwood School District. It is imperative for all involved that these changes are clearly communicated, discussed, and understood, thereby insuring a successful transition to the new instrument. Crucial to this process is an organized, logical, and sequential plan of communication and training for teachers and administrators. Detailed below is the training and communication plan for 2007:

Communication and Inservice for Teachers During the initial year of transition (April 2007 to June 2008) teachers will receive the following training:

April 2007 - Informational PowerPoint regarding the new TEI will be presented to all building teachers by administrators who served on the TEI committee.

April 2007 - Placement of TEI and PowerPoint on RSDs Insider. May 2007 - Survey of teachers regarding additional training needs. August 2007 - Presentation of informational DVD to all teachers during first week of school

regarding TEI changes, philosophy, and process of new TEI instrument. Presentation includes frequently asked questions from May 2007 teacher survey.

Thereafter all teachers will receive the following communication and training:

June to August - Presentation of informational DVD to all teachers new to Rockwood regarding TEI philosophy and process. Presentation includes frequently asked questions from May 2007 survey.

Presentation of PowerPoint to all certificated staff by building principal during first two weeks of school. PowerPoint to review major components and dates/deadlines of new TEI.

Communication and Inservice for Administrators

During the initial year of transition (April 2007 to June 2008) administrators will receive the following training:

April 2007 - Informational PowerPoint regarding the new TEI will be presented to Administrative Council and to the assistant principals by administrators who served on the TEI Committee.

May 30, 2007 - Administrator Training Session I – Administrators will study the purpose and philosophy of the new instrument, the four domains, and using videotaped classroom sessions and the data collection form practice domains 2 and 3.

July 25, 2007 - Administrator Training Session II – Administrators will review the four domains, discuss connections between district initiatives and components of the new TEI, discuss pre and post conferencing, and using videotaped classroom sessions and the data collection form practice domains 1 through 4.

August 2007 - Administrator Training Session III – Discuss Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP), remind administrators about their expectations for teacher training, and using videotaped classroom sessions and the data collection form practice domains 1 through 4.

Thereafter all administrators new to Rockwood will receive the following communication and training:

June - Administrator Training Session I – Administrators will study the purpose and philosophy of the new instrument, the four domains, and using videotaped classroom sessions and the data collection form practice domains 2 and 3.

July - Administrator Training Session II – Administrators will review the four domains, discuss connections between district initiatives and components of the new TEI, discuss pre and post conferencing, and using videotaped classroom sessions and the data collection form practice domains 1 through 4.

14

August - Administrator Training Session III – Discuss Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP), remind administrators about their expectations for teacher training, and using videotaped classroom sessions and the data collection form practice domains 1 through 4.

All administrators will present the informational PowerPoint to their teaching staff during first two weeks of school.

15

FORMATIVE/ SUMMATIVE

TEACHER

EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

16

ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT FORMATIVE EVALUATION AND DATA COLLECTION FORM

This form contains information gathered from pre and/or post conferences, classroom observation and the attached formative data collection log. . Teacher School Grade/Period Subject/Content Observation Date Time In /Time Out Evaluator

DOMAIN: PLANNING AND PREPARATION

LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE ELEMENT Does Not Meet the

Standard Partially/Approaching

the Standard Meets the Standard Exceeds the Standard

COMPONENT: DEMONSTRATES KNOWLEDGE OF STUDENTS 1) Uses

knowledge of student readiness, interest, and learning profile

Did Not Observe

Teacher does not use knowledge of student readiness, interest, and learning profile to design instruction.

Teacher inconsistently uses knowledge of student readiness, interest, and learning profile to design instruction.

Teacher consistently uses knowledge of student readiness, interest, and learning profile to design instruction.

Teacher uses extensive knowledge of student readiness, interest, and learning profile to design instruction. Plans include helping students identify their own readiness, interest, and learning profiles to become more effective learners.

2) Uses knowledge of student cultural heritage

Did Not Observe

Teacher does not use knowledge of student cultural heritage to design instruction.

Teacher inconsistently uses knowledge of student cultural heritage to design instruction.

Teacher consistently uses knowledge of student cultural heritage to design instruction.

Teacher uses extensive knowledge of student cultural heritage to design instruction.

COMMENTS

17


FORMATIVE EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

DOMAIN – PLANNING AND PREPARATION




COMPONENT: DEMONSTRATES KNOWLEDGE OF CONTENT AND PEDAGOGY 3) Displays

knowledge of content and skills aligned with Rockwood curriculum

Did Not Observe

Teacher planning indicates lack of content knowledge and/or errors in planning. Lesson and/or unit plans do not align with Rockwood curriculum.

Teacher planning indicates basic content knowledge but inability to articulate connections with other parts of the discipline or with other disciplines. Lesson and/or unit plans show weak or sporadic alignment with Rockwood curriculum.

Teacher planning indicates solid content knowledge and ability to make connections between the content and other parts of the discipline and other disciplines. Lesson and/or unit plans directly align with Rockwood curriculum.

Teacher planning indicates extensive knowledge of content with evidence that teacher has continued pursuit of such knowledge. Teacher demonstrates excellent working knowledge of Rockwood curriculum for specific subject area and for integration of disciplines.

4) Uses variety of instructional strategies and teaching techniques appropriate for the subject area

Did Not Observe

Teacher planning indicates little use of varied teaching and instructional strategies, and little or no integration of technology and library media resources.

Teacher planning indicates some use of varied teaching and instructional strategies, while integrating some technology and library media resources. .

Teacher planning indicates use of varied teaching and instructional strategies based upon current research and “best-practice” methods, while integrating appropriate technology and library media resources.

Teacher planning indicates extensive use of varied teaching and instructional strategies, continuing search for best practice through action research, while integrating appropriate technology and library media resources.

5) Accounts for pre-requisite relationships when planning instruction

Did Not Observe

Teacher constructs lessons and/or units that do not integrate prerequisite relationships for skills and concepts to be taught.

Teacher constructs lessons and/or units that inconsistently integrate prerequisite relationships for skills and concepts to be taught.

Teacher constructs lessons and/or units that integrate prerequisite relationships for skills and concepts to be taught.

Teacher constructs lessons and/or units that seamlessly integrate prerequisite relationships for skills and concepts to be taught and anticipates causes for student misunderstanding.

COMMENTS

18

ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT FORMATIVE EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

DOMAIN – PLANNING AND PREPARATION

LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE

ELEMENT Does Not Meet the Standard

Partially/Approaching the Standard

Meets the Standard Exceeds the Standard

COMPONENT: ALIGNS INSTRUCTIONAL GOALS WITH ASSESSMENT OF AND FOR LEARNING 6) Aligns

instructional goals, facilitating activities, and assessments

Did Not Observe

Teacher planning indicates no alignment between instructional goals, facilitating activities, formative and summative assessments.

Teacher planning indicates little or sporadic alignment between instructional goals, facilitating activities, formative and summative assessments.

Teacher planning indicates direct alignment between instructional goals, facilitating activities, formative and summative assessments.

Teacher planning indicates seamless alignment between instructional goals, facilitating activities, formative and summative assessments and as a result teacher can show evidence that such alignment significantly impacts student learning.

7) Uses assessments to plan for a variety of student learning needs

Did Not Observe

Teacher planning indicates no use of assessment methods to design instruction for varied student learning needs.

Teacher planning indicates little or sporadic use of assessment methods to design instruction for varied student learning needs.

Teacher planning indicates use of assessment methods to design instruction for varied student learning needs. Students are often involved in their own assessment.

Teacher planning indicates extensive use of assessment methods to design instruction for varied learning needs. Students are involved in their own assessment on a regular basis.

COMMENTS

COMPONENT: DESIGNS COHERENT INSTRUCTION 8) Incorporates

Elements of Effective Instruction: a. Instructional goal (teach to objective) b. Anticipatory set c. Input (instruction) d. Guided practice e. Independent practice f. Closure

Did Not Observe

Teacher planning does not incorporate elements of effective instruction. Planned activities progress unevenly with little clarity in format.

Teacher planning inconsistently and/or sporadically incorporate elements of effective instruction. Planned activities progress unevenly with limited clarity in format.

Teacher planning incorporates elements of effective instruction. Planned activities progress evenly in a generally clear and structured format.

Teacher planning incorporates elements of effective instruction. Planned activities progress coherently in a clear, logical, and appropriately structured format.

9) Defines instructional goals aligned to district curriculum

Did Not Observe

Teacher planning indicates instructional goals are unclear, poorly defined, and not aligned to district curriculum.

Teacher planning indicates instructional goals are inconsistently defined and partially aligned to district curriculum

Teacher planning indicates instructional goals are clearly defined and aligned to district curriculum.

Teacher planning indicates instructional goals are clearly defined, aligned to district curriculum, and appropriately linked to students’ readiness levels.

COMMENTS

19


FORMATIVE EVALUATION AND DATA COLLECTION FORM This form contains information gathered from pre and/or post conferences, classroom observation and the attached formative data collection log. Teacher School Grade/Period Subject/Content Observation Date Time In /Time Out Evaluator

DOMAIN: INSTRUCTION

LEVELS OF PERFORMANCE ELEMENT

Does Not Meet the



COMPONENT: DIFFERENTIATES AND ACCELERATES INSTRUCTION 1) Variety of

instructional strategies

Did Not Observe

The teacher uses a limited repertoire of instructional strategies which have not been differentiated in response to varied learner needs or ineffectively uses instructional strategies.

The teacher uses a limited repertoire of instructional strategies and is inconsistent in differentiating them in response to varied learner needs.

The teacher uses a growing repertoire of instructional strategies that have been consistently differentiated in response to varied learner needs.

The teacher uses an extensive repertoire of instructional strategies that have been consistently differentiated in response to varied learner needs.

2) Learning opportunities

Did Not Observe

The teacher provides learning opportunities which requires all students participate in the same learning opportunities with limited chances to work with higher-order thinking skills; no attention is given to different patterns of student readiness, interest, or learning profile.

The teacher provides learning opportunities which requires only high achieving students to work with higher-order thinking skills. The content, process, and/or products are inconsistently differentiated according to patterns of student readiness, interest, and learning profile.

The teacher provides learning opportunities which requires all students to work with higher-order thinking skills, and the content, process, and/or product has been differentiated according to patterns of student readiness, interest, or learning profile.

The teacher provides learning opportunities which requires all students to work with higher order thinking skills and the content, process, and/or product has been differentiated according to individual student readiness, interest, or learning profile.

3) Grouping of students

Did Not Observe

The teacher uses predominately whole class teacher directed instruction, regardless of instructional goals. Seldom utilizes other instructional groupings, or uses them ineffectively.

The teacher uses a combination of teacher directed instruction and collaborative learning groupings but the groupings are mostly random.

The teacher effectively uses a variety of student groupings as appropriate to the instructional goals. These may include but not be limited to: whole class, pairs, triads, and quads, student selected, teacher selected, and groups based on readiness, interest, and learning profile.

The teacher consistently and effectively uses a variety of fluid grouping arrangements appropriate to the instructional goals which integrate problem solving and decision-making and provide opportunities for student choice.

COMMENTS

20


DOMAIN: INSTRUCTION


ELEMENT

Does Not Meet the Standard



COMPONENT: DIFFERENTIATES AND ACCELERATES INSTRUCTION 4) Assessment

information drives instruction

Did Not Observe

The teacher makes no attempt to assess throughout the lessons in order to make adjustments to meet patterns of student needs during instruction.

The teacher attempts to use multiple forms of assessment in order to make adjustments throughout the lessons to meet patterns of student needs during instruction.

The teacher uses multiple forms of assessment on a consistent basis to make successful adjustments throughout the lessons to meet patterns of student needs during instruction.

The teacher uses multiple forms of assessment on a consistent basis to make successful adjustments throughout the lesson to meet individual student needs during instruction.

COMMENTS

COMPONENT: ENGAGES ALL STUDENTS IN LEARNING 5) Structure and

pacing

Did Not Observe

The lesson has no clearly defined structure, or the pacing of the lesson is too slow or rushed, or both. No evidence of assessment date influencing instruction seen.

The lesson has a recognizable structure, although it is not uniformly maintained throughout the lesson. Pacing of the lesson is inconsistent or inappropriate. Evidence of assessment data is collected and moderately influences instruction on student learning.

The lesson has a clearly defined structure around which the activities are organized. Pacing of the lesson is appropriate. Evidence of assessment data is collected, discussed with colleagues and students influencing instruction on student learning.

The lesson’s structure is highly coherent, allowing for reflection and closure as appropriate. Pacing of the lesson is appropriate for all students. Evidence of assessment date is collected and students are giving opportunity to self assess having a significant influence on instruction on student learning.

6) Incorporates instructional resources, and technologies

Did Not Observe

The teacher uses materials and resources that do not support instructional goals or engage students in meaningful learning, are clearly unplanned, and/or unavailable to use. Technology is not in evidence.

The teacher uses some materials and resources support instructional goals and engage a few students in some learning. Materials are not conveniently ready to use. Technology is occasionally used to facilitate learning.

The teacher uses materials and resources to support instructional goals and engage most students in meaningful learning. Materials are ready to use. Technology is integrated to facilitate learning.

The teacher uses varied materials and resources to meaningfully support instructional goals and engage students in relevant learning. Materials are ready to use. Technology is effectively integrated to facilitate learning.

7) Content of instruction

Did Not Observe

The teacher’s representation of content is inappropriate and unclear or the teacher uses poor examples or analogies.

The teacher’s representation of content is inconsistent in quality. Some is done skillfully, with good examples; other portions are difficult to follow.

The teacher’s representation of content is appropriate and links well with students' knowledge and experience.

The teacher’s representation of content is appropriate and links well with students' knowledge and experience. Students contribute to the representation of content.

8) Activities and assignments

Did Not Observe

Activities and assignments are inappropriate for students in terms of their age or backgrounds. Students are not engaged.

Some activities and assignments are appropriate to students and engage them, but others do not.

Most activities and assignments are appropriate to students. Almost all students are engaged in the activities and assignments.

All students are engaged in the activities and assignments in their exploration of content. Students initiate or adapt activities and projects to enhance understanding

COMMENTS

21


FORMATIVE EVALUATION AND DATA COLLECTION FORM

DOMAIN: INSTRUCTION


Does Not Meet the



COMPONENT: PROVIDES FEEDBACK TO STUDENTS 9) High-quality

feedback is:, Accurate Substantive Constructive Specific

Timely

Did Not Observe

The teacher’s feedback is either not provided or is of uniformly poor quality.

The teacher’s feedback is inconsistent in quality. Some elements of high quality feedback are present; others are not.

The teacher’s feedback is consistently of high quality.

The teacher’s feedback is consistently of high quality. The teacher makes provisions for students to use feedback in their learning.

COMMENTS

COMPONENT: COMMUNICATES CLEARLY AND ACCURATELY 10) Directions and

procedures

Did Not Observe

The teacher’s directions and procedures are confusing to students.

The teacher’s directions and procedures are clarified after initial student confusion or are excessively detailed.

The teacher’s directions and procedures are clear to students and contain an appropriate level of detail.

The teacher’s directions and procedures are clear to teacher and anticipates possible student misunderstanding.

11) Oral and written communication

Did Not Observe

The teacher’s spoken language is inaudible, or written language is illegible. Spoken or written language may contain many grammar and syntax errors. Vocabulary may be inappropriate, vague, or used incorrectly, leaving student confused.

The teacher’s spoken language is audible, written language is legible. Both are used correctly, and vocabulary is correct, it may be limited or inappropriate to students’ age or background.

The teacher’s spoken and written language is clear and correct. Vocabulary is appropriate to students’ age and interest.

The teacher’s spoken and written language is correct and expressive, with well chosen vocabulary that enriches the lesson.

12) Clearly communicates instructional goals to students

Did Not Observe

The teacher’s instructional goals are not clear and/or delivered effectively to students.

The teacher’s instructional goals are mentioned but value of them has not been communicated.

The teacher’s instructional goals are mentioned and clearly communicated to students.

The teacher’s instructional goals have been articulated in such a manner they have set the expectations for the class.

COMMENTS

22


FORMATIVE EVALUATION AND DATA COLLECTION FORM

DOMAIN: INSTRUCTION


Does Not Meet the



COMPONENT: PROMOTES CRITICAL THINKING AND PROBLEM-SOLVING SKILLS 13) Quality of questions

Did Not Observe

The teacher’s questions are of poor quality and do not enhance the learning objective.

The teacher’s questions are a mix of higher-level and lower-level questions.

The teacher’s questions are mostly of high quality with adequate time for students to respond.

The teacher’s questions enhance the learning objective with adequate time for students to respond. Students formulate many questions.

14) Discussion techniques

Did Not Observe

The teacher’s interaction with students does not promote discussion.

The teacher engages some students in the discussion with inconsistent results.

The teacher facilitates effective discussion and students are engaged.

The teacher facilitates effective discussion and students assume responsibility for the success of the discussion, make contributions, and initiate topics when developmentally appropriate.

15) Transfer of knowledge and skills

Did Not Observe

The teacher makes no attempt to guide students to create connections between prior knowledge, to other subject areas, and real world applications.

The teacher inconsistently guides students to create connections between prior knowledge, other subject areas, and real world applications.

The teacher consistently guides students to create connections between prior knowledge, other subject areas, and real world applications.

The teacher consistently gives students the opportunity to apply concepts and skills in new situations and real world applications.

COMMENTS

23


This form contains information gathered from pre and/or post conferences, classroom observation and the attached formative data collection log. Teacher School Grade/Period Subject/Content Observation Date Time In /Time Out Evaluator

DOMAIN: CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT




COMPONENT: CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT OF RESPECT AND RAPPORT 1) Teacher

interaction with students

Did Not Observe

Teacher interaction with at least some students is negative, demeaning, sarcastic, or inappropriate to the age or culture of the students. Students exhibit disrespect for teacher.

Teacher-student interactions are generally appropriate but may reflect occasional inconsistencies, favoritism, or disregard for students’ cultures. Students exhibit only minimal respect for teacher.

Teacher-student interactions are friendly and demonstrate general warmth, caring, and respect.

Teacher demonstrates genuine caring and respect for individual students. Students exhibit respect for teacher.

2) Student interaction

Did Not Observe

Student interactions are characterized by conflict, sarcasm, or put-downs.

Student interactions demonstrate negative behavior toward one another.

Student interactions are generally polite and respectful.

Students demonstrate genuine respect for one another by supporting each other’s learning.

COMMENTS

COMPONENT: ESTABLISH A CULTURE FOR LEARNING AND ACHIEVEMENT 3) Importance of

the content

Did Not Observe

Teacher or students demonstrate a negative attitude toward the content, suggesting that the content is not important or is mandated by others.

Teacher communicates importance of the work but with little conviction and only minimal apparent buy-in by the students.

Teacher demonstrates the genuine enthusiasm of the subject, and students demonstrate value of curriculum content.

Both student and teacher demonstrate through their active participation, curiosity, quality of work, and are personally connected/invested in learning.

4) Student responsibility for quality work

Did Not Observe

Students demonstrate little or no pride in their work. They seem to be motivated by the desire to complete a task rather than do high-quality work.

Students are aware of their responsibility to “do good work” but invest little of their energy in the quality of the work.

Students accept teacher expectations on work of high quality.

Students review and reflect to ensure high quality work.

5) Expectations for learning and achievement

Did Not Observe

Instructional goals and activities, interactions, and the classroom environment convey only modest expectations for student achievement.

Instructional goals and activities, interactions, and the classroom environment convey inconsistent expectations for student achievement.

Instructional goals and activities, interactions, and the classroom environment convey high expectations for student achievement.

Both students and teacher collaborate on learning activities, interactions, and environment to promote high expectations of all students.

COMMENTS

24


DOMAIN – CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT





COMPONENT: MANAGE CLASSROOM PROCEDURES 6) Management of

instructional groups

Did Not Observe

Students not working with the teacher are not productively engaged in learning.

Tasks for group work are partially organized, resulting in some off-task behavior when teacher is involved with one group.

Tasks for group work are organized, and groups are managed so most students are engaged at all times.

Groups working independently are productively engaged at all times, with students assuming responsibility for productivity when appropriate.

7) Management of transitions

Did Not Observe

Much time is lost during transitions.

Transitions are sporadically efficient, resulting in some loss of instructional time.

Transitions occur smoothly, with little loss of instructional time.

Transitions are seamless, with students being given and assuming responsibility for their role.

8) Management of materials and supplies

Did Not Observe

Teacher uses supplies, materials and resources poorly, or learning is not accessible to some students.

Teacher uses supplies, materials and resources adequately, and at least minimal learning is accessible to all students

Teacher uses supplies, materials and resources skillfully with little loss of instructional time.

Both teacher and students use supplies, materials and resources optimally.

9) Performance of non-instructional responsibilities

Did Not Observe

Considerable instructional time is lost in performing expected noninstructional responsibilities.

Systems for performing expected noninstructional responsibilities are fairly efficient, resulting in little loss of instructional time.

Efficient systems for performing expected noninstructional responsibilities are in place, resulting in minimal loss of instructional time.

Systems for performing expected noninstructional responsibilities are well established, resulting in efficient use of instructional time.

COMMENTS

COMPONENT: MANAGE STUDENT BEHAVIOR AND PROMOTE APPROPRIATE STUDENT INTERACTIONS 10) Expectations

Did Not Observe

No expectations for behavior appear to have been established, or students are confused as to what the standards are.

Expectations for behavior appear to have been established for most situations, and most students seem to understand them.

Expectations for behavior have been made clear to students by the teacher.

Expectations for behavior are clear to students and appear to have been embedded in the culture of the classroom.

11) Monitoring of student behavior

Did Not Observe

Teacher is unaware of what students are doing and student behavior is not monitored.

Teacher is generally aware of student behavior but may miss the activities of some students or no serious disruptive behavior occurs.

Teacher is alert to student behavior or student behavior is generally appropriate.

Monitoring by teacher is subtle and preventive. Students contribute to the overall positive behavior of the class and student behavior is entirely appropriate.

12) Response to student misbehavior

Did Not Observe

Teacher responds inappropriately to misbehavior and does not respect student’s dignity

Teacher attempts to respond to student misbehavior.

Teacher response to misbehavior is appropriate and successful and respects the student’s dignity.

Teacher response to misbehavior is highly effective.

COMMENTS

25


DOMAIN – CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT





COMPONENT: ORGANIZE PHYSICAL SPACE 13) Safety and

arrangement of furniture

Did Not Observe

The classroom is unsafe, or the furniture arrangement is not suited to the lesson activities, or both.

The classroom is safe, and classroom furniture is adjusted to the lesson, with minimal effectiveness.

The classroom is safe, and the furniture is adjusted for a lesson or, if necessary, a lesson is adjusted to the furniture effectively.

The classroom is safe, and the furniture arrangement is a resource for learning activities.

14) Accessibility to learning and use of resources

Did Not Observe

Teacher uses supplies, materials and resources poorly, or learning is not accessible to some students.

Teacher uses supplies, materials and resources adequately, and at least minimal learning is accessible to all students.

Teacher uses supplies, materials and resources skillfully, and learning is equally accessible to students.

Both teacher and students use supplies, materials and resources optimally.

COMMENTS

26


This form contains information gathered from pre and/or post conferences, classroom observation and the attached formative data collection log. Teacher School Grade/Period Subject/Content Observation Date Time In /Time Out Evaluator

DOMAIN: TEACHER PROFESSIONALISM




COMPONENT: PROMOTES A POSITIVE SCHOOL COMMUNITY 1) Relation-

ship with colleagues

Did Not Observe

Teacher’s relationships with colleagues are negative or self-serving.

Teacher maintains cordial (minimal) relationships with colleagues to fulfill the duties that the school or district requires.

Support and cooperation characterize relationships with colleagues.

Support and cooperation characterize relationships with colleagues. Teacher takes initiative in assuming leadership among the faculty.

2) Decision making

Did Not Observe

Teacher makes decisions based on self-serving interests.

Teacher’s decisions are based on limited, though, genuinely professional considerations.

Teacher maintains an open mind and participates in team or departmental decision making.

Teacher takes a leadership role in team or departmental decision making and helps ensure that such decisions are based on the highest professional standards.

3) School climate

Did Not Observe

Teacher makes little or no contribution to a positive school climate, and behaviors may even have a negative impact.

Teacher makes a limited contribution to a positive school climate.

Teacher actively participates in contributing positively to the overall school climate.

Teacher takes a leadership role in building a positive school climate.

4) Contributes to the school and district

Did Not Observe

Teacher avoids becoming involved in school and/or district activities.

Teacher participates in school and/or district activities only when specifically asked.

Teacher volunteers to participate in school and/or district activities making a substantial contribution.

Teacher volunteers to participate in school, district, and/or outside of district activities and/or assumes a leadership role in a school or district activity.

COMMENTS

COMPONENT: COMMUNICATES EFFECTIVELY 5) Engagement of

families in the instructional program

Did Not Observe

Teacher provides no information to parents about the instructional program.

Teacher provides minimal information to parents about the instructional program.

Teacher’s provides information to parents, as appropriate, in order to engage families in the instructional program.

Teacher provides multiple sources of information to parents, as appropriate, in order to engage families and exchange information about the instructional program.

6) Information about individual students

Did Not Observe

Teacher provides no information to parents and does not respond or responds insensitively to parent concerns about students.

Teacher provides minimal information about students’ progress. Responses to parent concerns are minimal.

Teacher communicates with parents about students’ progress, as appropriate, and is available as needed to respond to parent concerns.

Teacher provides information to parents on both positive and negative aspects of student progress, as appropriate. Response to parent concerns is handled with great sensitivity.

COMMENTS

27


DOMAIN – TEACHER PROFESSIONALISM





COMPONENT: GROWS AND DEVELOPS PROFESSIONALLY 7) Enhancement

of content knowledge and pedagogical skill

Did Not Observe

Teacher engages in no professional development activities to enhance knowledge or skill.

Teacher participates in professional development activities to a limited extent.

Teacher actively engages in professional development to enhance content knowledge and pedagogical skill.

Teacher seeks out opportunities for professional development and systematically applies new knowledge.

8) Professional collaboration

Did Not Observe

Teacher makes no effort to collaborate with others.

Teacher rarely collaborates with other educators.

Teacher actively collaborates with other educators.

Teacher serves as a leader in the area of collaboration.

COMMENTS

COMPONENT: MAINTAINS ACCURATE RECORDS 9) Instructional

records

Did Not Observe

Teacher has no system for maintaining information on student progress in learning or the system is in disarray.

Teacher’s system for maintaining information on student progress in learning is minimally effective.

Teacher’s system for maintaining information on student progress in learning is fully effective and aligns with standards.

Teacher’s system for maintaining information on student progress in learning is fully effective and aligns with standards. Students contribute information and interpretation of the records.

COMMENTS

28


DOMAIN – TEACHER PROFESSIONALISM





COMPONENT: REFLECTS ON LEARNING 10) Perception of

lesson effectiveness

Did Not Observe

Teacher does not know if a lesson was effective or achieved its goals, or profoundly misjudges the success of a lesson.

Teacher has a general impression of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which instructional goals were met.

Teacher makes an accurate assessment of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which it achieved its goals and can cite some references to support the judgment.

Teacher makes a thoughtful and accurate assessment of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which it achieved its goals, citing many specific examples from the lesson and weighing the relative strength of each.

11) Modifies instruction

Did Not Observe

Teacher has no suggestions for how a lesson may be improved another time.

Teacher offers minimal suggestions about how a lesson may be improved.

Teacher makes a few specific suggestions of how a lesson may be improved.

Drawing on an extensive repertoire of skills, the teacher offers specific alternative actions, complete with probable successes of different approaches.

COMMENTS

29


PRE-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE In order to gain insight into the teacher's reflective understanding regarding lesson planning, the following questions may be useful: Teacher______________________________ School________________________ Grade/School_________________________ Date_____/_____/_____ 1. Briefly describe the lesson and students. 2. What objective and activities will be used that are a part of the District's curriculum

guide? What do you expect the students to be able to know or do at the end of this lesson? How does this relate to what the students should be able to know and do at the end of this unit?

3. How does the lesson plan provide for students to engage in learning? What will the

students do?

30

4. What difficulties do students typically experience in this area, and how do you plan to anticipate those difficulties and enable students to persist in the work?

5. What instructional materials or other resources will you use? 6. How do you plan to assess student achievement? What procedure will you use? What

products will the students produce? (Attach tests or performance tasks and include scoring guides.)

7. Is there anything about the learning environment that you think might affect your students

during the observation?

31

8. What are the most important classroom routines, procedures, rules and expectations for

student behavior that will be in operation during the observed lesson? 9. Are there any special circumstances of which the observer should be aware? NOTES:

Principal’s Signature/Date ` Teacher’s Signature/Date Distribution: One copy for principal; one copy for teacher.

32

ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT TEACHER SUBMITTED DATA LOG (OPTIONAL)

Teacher School Evaluator School Year This form is kept by the teacher and discussed with the evaluator at each formative and summative conference. This form should reflect professional growth and involvement in the school which could include conferences/ workshops, attendance at activities, committees, leadership roles, coursework and professional organizations. Teachers may attach samples that demonstrate the data listed.

DATE

EVENT

33


PROBATIONARY TEACHER Summative Evaluation Report

(cover sheet) Name: Subject: Location: Academic Year: Years in Rockwood:

OBSERVATION DATE

MINUTES CONFERENCE DATE

DUE DATE

Observation 1 October 1 Observation 2 November 1 Observation 3 Observation 4

Anytime prior to March 10

Summative March 10

Principal’s Summary Statement Professional Growth Statement (optional) Teacher’s Comments Recommendation for continued employment (check one) If teacher is on an FTIP (check one)

Recommended for continued employment. Performance has improved. Remove from FTIP.

Not recommended for continued employment . Performance concerns exist. Continue FTIP into next school year.

Signature of Teacher and Date Signature of Principal/Supervisor and Date (Signatures indicate the content of this document has been discussed. It does not necessarily mean agreement with its contents. Either party has the opportunity to make written comments within five (5) work days). COPIES: Human Resources, Principal, and Teacher

34

ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT TENURED (FIRST PERM. AND PERMANENT) TEACHER

Summative Evaluation Report (cover sheet)

Name: Subject: Location: Academic Year: Years in Rockwood:

OBSERVATION DATE


DUE DATE Tenure Years - 1, 4, 7, 10, etc.

Observation 1 Anytime during the

school year

OBSERVATION DATE


DUE DATE Tenure Years - 2, 5, 8, 11, etc.

Observation 1 Anytime during the

school year

Tenure Years - 3, 6, 9, 12, etc.

OBSERVATION DATE


DUE DATE

Observation 1 First Semester Observation 2 Anytime during the

school year Observation 3 Second Semester SUMMATIVE By the end of the

school year Principal’s Summary Statement Professional Growth Statement Teacher’s Comments If teacher is on an FTIP (check one)

Performance has improved. Remove from FTIP. Performance concerns exist. Continue FTIP into next school year.

Signature of Teacher and Date Signature of Principal/Supervisor and Date (Signatures indicate the content of this document has been discussed. It does not necessarily mean agreement with its contents. Either party has the opportunity to make written comments within five (5) work days). COPIES: Human Resources, Principal, and Teacher

35

Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP) List the Element(s), Component, and Domain for the FTIP: Expectation for change in teacher performance to complete the FTIP: Professional Improvement Strategies:

Strategies Evidence of Strategy Completion

Review Conference to be held on or before: _____________________________ ____________________________ ________________________________

Evaluator Signature/Date Teacher Signature/Date Signatures indicate development and implementation of FTIP

36

Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP) Continued

Data Regarding Improvement in Teacher Performance Date Met

Summary on Progress (attach memo)

Signatures

Evaluator Teacher

Date of FTIP review conference: ____________________________ Review Comments:_______________________________________________________________

_____ Continue FTIP _____ FTIP completed _______________________________ ________________________________

Evaluator Signature/Date Teacher Signature/Date

37

BOARD POLICIES AND

REGULATIONS

TO BE INSERTED WHEN

APPROVED

38

Glossary

For the purpose of this policy, the following terms are defined below:

1. Administrator: An individual holding a Missouri administrative license whose position in Rockwood is classified as “Administrator” (see Missouri Revised Statues 168.081, 168.083 and 168.405).

2. Components: The distinct subcategories of a domain.

3. Elements: Specific features of a component.

4. Evaluation Cycle: An evaluation cycle proceeds from initial employment through the summative

evaluation report. Once a summative evaluation report has been completed, a new evaluation cycle begins.

5. Evaluation Process: The process used in which a teacher is observed, given feedback from observations and other data collection sources, and given written evaluation reports/feedback that assesses the teacher’s performance.

6. Evaluator: The term evaluator refers to those individuals who hold a proper Missouri administrative

license and have received the required training in the District’s evaluation process.

7. Focused Teacher Improvement Plan (FTIP): A formal evaluator-directed written and documented approach to provide assistance in a teacher’s performance when the teacher has been evaluated as performing unsatisfactorily.

8. Formal (Classroom) Observation: An evaluator’s observation of a teacher’s classroom performance of a

minimum of 20 minutes. The evaluator will create a written record of their observations.

9. Formal Observation Process: The formal process for evaluation which includes a classroom observation of at least 20 minutes and a post-observation conference between the evaluator and the teacher. A written formative evaluation report shall be a part of the post-observation conference. A pre-observation conference is an optional part of this process.

10. Formative Evaluation Report: A formal, written report of an evaluator’s judgments about the teacher’s

performance given to the teacher in a post-observation conference.

11. Informal Observation: Those unscheduled observations of a teacher that may take place as an evaluator walks through a classroom, helps a student, or just “drops in” the teacher’s classroom for a few minutes, or otherwise observes a teacher in an interaction which has a bearing on that teacher’s performance of professional duties.

12. Performance Domain: A distinct aspect of teaching that includes several elements and components that

form the basis for the evaluation of a teacher.

13. Performance Level: A standard used as a measure of performance: Does not Meet the Standard: A teacher’s performance is deemed ‘Unsatisfactory’ when the teacher’s

performance does not indicate an understanding of the concepts within an element.

39

Partially/Approaching the Standard: A teacher’s performance is deemed ‘Approaching the Standard’ when the teacher’s performance gives indications of an understanding of the concepts within an element but the implementation is sporadic, intermittent or otherwise unsuccessful.

Meets the Standard: A teacher’s performance is deemed ‘Meets the Standard’ when the teacher’s performance clearly demonstrates an understanding of the concepts within an element and implements them well.

Exceeds the Standard: Teachers at this level are master teachers and make a contribution to the field of teaching, both at the building and district level; students are highly engaged and assume considerable responsibility for his/her own learning.

14. Permanent (Tenured) Teacher: A Rockwood teacher who has completed his/her probationary period and

continues to be employed as certified teacher (see Missouri Revised Statute 168.104(4)).

15. Post-Observation Conference: A meeting between the evaluator and teacher within five (5) working days of the classroom observation. A written evaluation report (formative or summative) shall be produced which reflects the evaluator’s judgment of the teacher’s performance based upon the classroom observation.

16. Pre-Observation Conference: An optional part of the formal observation process that is a meeting

between the evaluator and teacher prior to the classroom observation. The intent of this meeting is to discuss the lesson to be observed and other topics related to the evaluation.

17. Probationary Evaluation Cycle: probationary teachers shall have an evaluation cycle of one (1) year.

Probationary teachers shall receive a minimum of four (4) formal observations of a minimum of twenty (20) minutes each per school year, followed by a summative evaluation report.

18. Probationary Teacher: A certified teacher who has been employed in Rockwood for five successive

years or less except that a teacher who has been employed in any other Missouri public school system as a teacher for two or more years shall have one year of his/her probationary period waived (see Missouri Revised Statute 168.104(5)).

19. Summative Evaluation Report: A formal, written summary report from all post-observation conferences,

and data collections given to the teacher at the end of their evaluation cycle.

20. Summative Year: Any year in which a teacher receives a Summative Evaluation Report.

21. Tenured Evaluation Cycle: Tenured teachers shall have an evaluation cycle of three (3) years. The cycle will begin with the first year of tenure and include a minimum of one (1) formal observation. The second year will be the same as the first. The third year of will include a minimum of three (3) formal observations. A summative evaluation report must be completed minimally during the third year of each evaluation cycle. A new evaluation cycle begins after each summative evaluation report.

40

References/Works Cited

PRE-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE ROCKWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICTPROBATIONARY TEACHERSummative Evaluation Report

OBSERVATION DATEMINUTESCONFERENCE DATEDUE DATEObservation 1October 1Observation 2November 1Observation 3Anytime prior to March 10Observation 4SummativeMarch 10TENURED (FIRST PERM. AND PERMANENT) TEACHER Summative Evaluation Report

Tenure Years - 1, 4, 7, 10, etc.Observation 1OBSERVATION DATEMINUTESCONFERENCE DATEDUE DATEAnytime during the school yearTenure Years -Observation 1OBSERVATION DATEMINUTESCONFERENCE DATEDUE DATEAnytime during the school yearTenure Years -3, 6, 9, 12, etc.OBSERVATION DATEMINUTESCONFERENCE DATEDUE DATEObservation 1First SemesterObservation 2Anytime during the school yearObservation 3Second SemesterSUMMATIVEBy the end of the school year

teacher evaluation instrument · 2019. 6. 20. · instrument that not only assessed teacher...

Documents