Factors in Managing Complex Change Source: Creating an Inclusive School, D. Ambrose. Adapted by Knoster, Villa, and Thousand, ASCD, 1995. VISION + SKILLS + INCENTIVE + RESOURCES + ACTION PLAN = CHANGE + SKILLS + INCENTIVE + RESOURCES + ACTION PLAN = Confusion VISION + + INCENTIVE + RESOURCES + ACTION PLAN = Anxiety VISION + SKILLS + + RESOURCES + ACTION PLAN = Gradual Change VISION + SKILLS + INCENTIVE + + ACTION PLAN = Frustration VISION + SKILLS + INCENTIVE + RESOURCES + = False Start
Before Component After Binary – Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory Performance Level Differentiation At least Four Different Levels Evaluation required twice yearly first three years, and yearly for after that Frequency of Evaluations No change: Evaluation required yearly first three years, and yearly after. Best practice observations more frequent. Not based on standards Standards Teachers based on InTASC Standards and Principals on ISLLC Standards No existing requirement for Student Performance Data Student Performance Indicator Student Performance Data will be a portion of the teacher and principal evaluation No District Summary Report Required District Report District is required to gather all of the evaluation reports in some form. State does not require one model Model No change- the state will does not require one model.
Teacher Evaluation Models InTASC 4 Domains 10 Standards 174 Indicators Danielson 4 Domains 22 Components 76 Elements Marzano 4 Domains 60 Elements Marshall 6 Domains 60 Elements McREL 5 Domains 25 Items 1 Learner and Learning 1) Planning and Preparation 1) Classroom Strategies and Behaviors A) Planning and Preparation for Learning 1)Teachers Demonstrate Leadership 2 Content Knowledge 2) The Classroom Environment 2) Planning and Preparing B) Classroom Management 2)Teachers Establish a Respectful Environment for a Diverse Population of Students 3 Instructional Practice 3) Instruction 3) Reflecting on Teaching C) Delivery of Instruction 3)Teachers Know the Content They 4 Professional Responsibility 4) Professional 4) Collegiality and Professionalism D) Monitoring, Assessment, and Follow-up 4)Teachers Facilitate Learning for Students 5 E)Family and Community Outreach 5)Teachers Reflect on Practice 6 F)Professional Responsibilities
2 (Developing Proficiency) 1 Basic 2) Developing 2) Improvement Necessary Proficient 1 Unsatisfactory 1) Beginning 1) Does Not Meet Standards Developing 0 0) Not using Not Demonstrated Examples of Principal Evaluation Models North Dakota (ISSLC) 31 Functions McREL 21 Elements Marzano 24 Categories Marshall 60 Elements Val Ed 6 Components and 6 Key processes 1 Shared Vision 1) Managing Change 1) Data-Driven on Student Achievement A) Diagnosis and Planning High Standards for Student Learning 2 School Culture and Instructional Program 2) Focus on Leadership 2) Continuous Improvement of Instruction B) Priority Management and Communications Rigorous Curriculum 3 Effective Management 3) Purposeful Community 3) Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum C) Curriculum and Data Quality Instruction 4 Collaborating with Faculty and Community 4) Cooperation and Collaboration D) Supervision, Evaluation, and Professional Development Culture of Learning & Professional Behavior 5 Integrity, fairness, ethical 5) School Climate E) Discipline and Parent Involvement Connection to External Communities 6 Context: political, social, legal, cultural F) Management and External Relations Performance Accountability * Student Achievement Growth Indicator *
Teacher and Principal Evaluation Models Model Paper Version Cost Electronic Support System Website Link School in ND School Contact Info Danielson Enhancing Professional Practice: A framework for teaching (ASCD, 2007) Paper Version Teachscape cost Tim Jarotkiewicz, Account Executive for North Dakota. Phone: 312-459-4679. Email: McREL Classroom Instruction That Works, 2nd edition Paper Version Searchsoft Cost Walkthrough software Tony Davis, Ph.D. Senior Director, The Center for Educator Effectiveness McREL p.303.632.5575 f. 303.337.3005 Marshal Rethinking Teacher Supervision and Evaluation: Edition 2 Free open source Kim Marshall Marzano iObservation Costs Chadd Slezak Director of District Partnership M 720.771.7676 P 724.459.2100 x102 877.411.7114 (toll-free) F 724.459.6373 InTASC Free ND Teacher Template No Additional Materials Free Principal Evaluation Models (Draft Copy May not be accurate)
Appendix D from North Dakota Principal Evaluation Template Sample Principal Evaluation Process (adapted from Minnesota) Articulating a systematic process for principal evaluation ensures that everyone knows what is expected and helps ensure that the evaluation system accomplishes its goal of improving leadership practice to support high quality teaching and learning. Table 1 summarizes a process for principal evaluation that includes six stages. The first five stages are formative and designed to help principals identify strengths and address areas that require more attention. An explanation of each stage of the process follows Figure 1, which illustrates the six stages. Table 1: Principal Evaluation Process Purpose Timeline Orientation on Process Formative June - August Pre-Planning (by principal) Formative June - August Goal Setting Conference (principal with supervisor) Formative August - September Evidence Collection and Monitoring of Personal Growth Plan Formative September - December Formative Conferencing Formative October - February End of Year Summative Conference Summative By March 15 TEACHER EVALUATION OVERVIEW Danielson 4 Domains with 22 Components and 76 Elements Domain 1: Planning and Preparation 1a Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy 1b Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 1c Setting Instructional Outcomes 1d Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources 1e Designing Coherent Instruction 1f Designing Student Assessments Domain 2: Classroom Environment 2a Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport 2b Establishing a Culture for Learning 2c Managing Classroom Procedures 2d Managing Student Behavior 2e Organizing Physical Space
Dakota Teacher Template (InTASC) Standard #1: Learner Development Standard #2: Learning Differences Standard #3: Learning Environments Standard #4: Content Knowledge Standard #5: Application of Content Standard #6: Assessment Criteria Criteria Criteria Criteria Criteria Criteria a. Teaching on individual student needs a. Individual student differences and holds high expectations of each a. Engage and support students as learners a. Knows content and conveys accurate information and concepts a. See relationship across disciplines a. Assessments match learning and engage the learner in demonstrating knowledge and skills b. Collaborates with families and colleagues to students b. Address each student’s diverse learning strengths and needs b. Positive learning climate b. Knows district and content standards and references them b. Applying content knowledge and skills in authentic contexts. b. Timely and descriptive feedback c. Allows for different ways for students to demonstrate learning c. Variety of classroom management strategies c. Engages students in applying methods of inquiry and standards of evidence of the discipline. c. Identifying and addressing real world problems. c. Accommodations for English language learners, students with disabilities, advanced students. d. Learning culture to encourage students to preserve and advance. d. Managing the time, space and attention d. Uses multiple representations of concepts d. Local and global resources are used. d. Makes adjustments in planning and instruction bases on assessment data e. Provides support for English language learners. e. Use of technology, media, and local and global resources. e. Students use of academic language accurately and meaningfully e. Critical thinking skills used in the content area. e. Document student progress and provides feedback to students, parents, stakeholders f. Speaking, listening, reading, writing skills in real-world context f. Digital and resources and perspectives are evaluated f. Practices appropriate and ethical assessment principals and procedures. g. Communication skills
Dakota Teacher Template (InTASC) Standard #7: Planning for Instruction Standard #8: Instructional Strategies Standard #9: Professional Learning and Ethical Practice Standard #10: Leadership and Collaboration Standard 11: Student Achievement Growth Indicator Criteria Criteria Criteria Criteria Criteria a. Instruction based on district and content standards. a. Understands and practices a range of instructional strategies a. Follows laws, policies, administrative rules, supervisory directives. a. Is an active team member. a. Data literacy is evident in knowledge and use of student data. b. Learning experiences are based on principles of effective instruction b. Adapts instruction to meet the needs of individuals and groups b. Engages in professional learning experiences b. In an active member of the learning community b. Instructional improvement by the use of data to frame and measure learning objectives c. Differentiates instruction for individuals and groups of students c. Analyzes students errors and misconceptions to redirect, focus, and deepen learning. c. Is an advocate for the learners, school, community and profession. c. Student Growth: students in the class demonstrate measureable growth and achievement d. Create opportunities for students generate and evaluate new ideas d. Variety of instructional strategies to expand and support communication skills. d. Works with other school professionals to plan and meet diverse student needs. e. Integrates cross disciplinary skills into instruction e. Develop higher-order and meta-cognitive skills e. Engages in professional learning f. Uses multiple and diverse sources and perspectives to solve real-world problems. g. Uses multiple media and technology resources h. Promote engagement with questions
North Dakota Teacher Template: Standard 11 Data Use and Student Growth Indicator Exemplary Proficient Developing Proficiency Non-Proficient Student achievement data literacy: evidences foundational knowledge and use of district-, school-, and classroom-level student achievement and growth data. The teacher demonstrates an advanced knowledge of the interpretation and use of student achievement data. A variety of student achievement data and a variety of techniques are used to interpret student data. Additional data collection methods are used beyond those provided. Data is used to make to make instructional and other classroom decisions The teacher demonstrates a solid knowledge of the interpretation and use of student achievement data. The teacher uses a variety of student achievement data to make instructional and other classroom decisions The teacher demonstrates a growing understanding of the interpretation and use of student achievement data. Limited or simple data is used to make instructional and classroom decisions The teacher demonstrates little to no knowledge of the interpretation or use of student achievement data. Data is not used to make instructional and other classroom decisions Instructional improvement: Teachers student achievement data to frame and measure curricular claims/student learning objectives. The teacher uses student achievement data as a normal and regular professional practice to measure curricular claims/student learning objectives. The use of student data results in significant impacts on student learning. The teacher uses student achievement data to develop and measure curriculum and student learning goals. The use of data to measure student learning goals results in impacts on student learning Teachers use data for limited purposes or use limited data to make instructional decisions. Most instructional decisions are made without the use of data. Data use results in little or no improvement to student achievement The teacher does not apply student achievement data to frame and measure curricular claims/student learning objectives Student Growth: students in the class Multiple sources of growth or achievement data from Multiple sources of growth or achievement data from Multiple sources of growth or achievement data from Growth or achievement
demonstrate measureable growth and achievement at two points in time show evidence of high growth for all or nearly all students. at least two points in time show clear evidence of growth for most students. at least two points in time show some evidence of growth for some students. data from at least two points in time shows no evidence of growth for most students.