VSET HANDBOOK Volusia System 2013-2014 for Empowering Teachers FINAL – July 24, 2013 Table of Contents Disclaimer ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Statement of Philosophy ................................................................................................................ 3 General Guidelines ......................................................................................................................... 3 VSET Steering Committee Members .............................................................................................. 3 Definitions/Common Language ...................................................................................................... 4 Statutory Requirements ................................................................................................................. 8 Implementation of the 2007 Danielson Framework for Teaching ................................................. 8 Framework for Teaching................................................................................................................. 9 Volusia System for Empowering Teachers ..................................................................................... 10 Domains and Components ............................................................................................................. 11 Nine Power Components................................................................................................................ 12 Breakdown of Weights Assigned to Each Domain and Component .............................................. 13 Steps in the Observation Cycle ....................................................................................................... 14 Scheduled Observation Cycle ......................................................................................................... 15 Unscheduled Observation Cycle ..................................................................................................... 17 Planning Conference Form ............................................................................................................. 18 Walk-Throughs ............................................................................................................................... 19 Observation Overviews .................................................................................................................. 20-22 Deliberate Practice Plan ................................................................................................................ 23-26 Ongoing Monitoring of the DPP ..................................................................................................... 26 DPP Rubric ...................................................................................................................................... 27-29 Evaluator Training........................................................................................................................... 30 Peer Assistance and Review ........................................................................................................... 30 Teachers Hired Second Semester ................................................................................................... 31 VSET 2013-2014 End-of-Year Procedures....................................................................................... 32 Open Investigations ........................................................................................................................ 33 No Progress or Insufficient Progress Re: Reading and ESOL ......................................................... 33 Itinerant Teachers........................................................................................................................... 34 Teachers With More Than One Job Function ................................................................................. 34 VSET Improvement Plan ................................................................................................................. 35 VSET Support Form ......................................................................................................................... 36 Placement on VSET Improvement Plan Form................................................................................. 37 VSET Improvement Plan Form ........................................................................................................ 38-40 Accessing the Teacher Evaluation System (VSET) .......................................................................... 41 Appendix 1 ..................................................................................................................................... 42 Input Form .............................................................................................................................. 43 Effective Evaluations............................................................................................................... 44 Record of Conference ............................................................................................................. 45 Letter of Caution ..................................................................................................................... 46 Letter of Reprimand................................................................................................................ 47 Appendix 2 ..................................................................................................................................... 48 Rubrics………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..48 The Framework for Teaching – Classroom Teacher Rubric………………………………………………….49-58 VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 2 INTRODUCTION Disclaimer This handbook is a reference guide for assessment of employees represented by the Volusia Teachers Organization (VTO) bargaining unit serving the School District of Volusia County. The Volusia System for Empowering Teachers (VSET) Implementation Committee may consider changes to these procedures. Such changes will be recommended to the Superintendent and submitted to the School Board for approval. Neither the handbook, nor its content, in any way creates an expressed or implied contract of employment. Statement of Philosophy Evaluation is a continuous, collaborative process designed to improve instruction and the performance of students. It is intended to be positive and growth-oriented. It is based on fundamental principles of effective evaluation and contemporary research in assessment practices. The assessment system shall be applied equitably and shall conform to legally sound evaluation procedures. General Guidelines 1. Administrators and VSET teams are responsible for training teachers at their schools/sites/departments as it relates to their evaluations. 2. Evaluations shall identify strengths as well as establish a plan for continued professional growth and development. 3. Components of the Volusia System for Empowering Teachers (VSET) are designed to reflect the performance of teachers and increased student achievement. 4. Evaluations shall be based on observable evidence or records pertaining to job performance. 5. The principal or administrative designee shall evaluate teachers. 6. In addition, Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) teachers, as defined in the VTO contract, will be involved in the evaluation process of teachers participating in the PAR program. 7. Judgment of the evaluator may not be grieved. Procedures may be grieved in accordance with Article 23 of the VTO Contract within 10 days of the event. 8. Contacts: VSET Questions – Marta Pascale, Ext. 50817 Professional Development – Dr. Karen Beattie – Ext. 50761 Technology – Help Desk, Ext. 25000 and Ext. 20000 Value Added Questions – Dr. Alicia Parker, Ext. 20695 VSET STEERING COMMITTEE Sandra Archer, PAR Teacher Karen Beattie, Coordinator, Professional Development Gary Blair, Teacher, Heritage Middle School Primrose Cameron-Hall, Specialist, VTO Mike Dyer, Chief Counsel Leslie Frazee, Principal, Pride Elementary School Susan Freeman, Principal, Deltona High School Peromnia Grant, Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources Susan Higle, Teacher, David Hinson Middle School Barbara Hoffman, Executive Vice-President, VTO Linda Knowles, Specialist, Human Resources VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Jennifer Morrison, Teacher, Freedom Elementary School Dana Paige-Pender, Director, Human Resources Janet Piazza, Teacher, Read-Pattillo Elementary School Vickie Presley, Area Superintendent Patricia Randall, Teacher, Osteen Elementary School Susan Reaves, Coordinator, ESE Programs Tom Russell, Area Superintendent Marlo Spallone, Teacher, Pine Ridge High School Andrew Spar, President, VTO Craig Zablo, Principal, Campbell Middle School July 24, 2013 Page 3 Definitions/Common Language 24 hours Administrative Educator Evaluation 24 hours = 1 work day Tab in My PGS that contains the administrator evaluator portion of the evaluation including Walk-Through, announced observation and unannounced observation data. PAR Educator Evaluation Tab in My PGS that contains the PAR evaluator portion of the evaluation including Walk-Through, announced observation and unannounced observation data. Announced Artifacts Scheduled Examples selected to provide evidence of aspects of a teacher's practice (i.e. lesson plans, teacher assignments, scoring rubrics, data, student work, communication to parents, etc.) Collaboration Collaboration as it relates to VSET and/or the Deliberate Practice Plan refers to a coordinated, structured, interactive process that facilitates the accomplishment of an end product or goal. Collaborators employ comprehensive planning to construct and develop new knowledge, projects and plans, together achieving better results than they are likely to achieve alone. Component An identified aspect of teaching within one of the four domains Core Teachers Teachers of language arts, mathematics, science, or social studies Deliberate Practice Plan Florida Statute requires all instructional personnel to annually create an individual Deliberate Practice Plan. Instructional personnel use FCAT results (if applicable) as well as other forms of student performance data to determine learning goals for student growth, measurable objectives to meet the goals that clearly identify the expected change(s) in professional practice, and an evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the professional development. Note: Deliberate Practice Plans align with state language. Deliberate Practice: Individual Teachers who are rated Highly Effective or Effective shall develop an Individual Deliberate Practice Plan designed to improve performance on domains and/or components identified by the teacher. Monitored A teacher shall be placed on a Monitored Deliberate Practice Plan when he/she is new to teaching or is a veteran teacher in need of improvement. The evaluator and teacher will identify the domains and/or components to be addressed, as well as the goals to be accomplished, and the activities the teacher will undertake to achieve proficiency in these areas Directed A teacher shall be placed on a Directed Deliberate Practice Plan when he/she is rated Unsatisfactory in the overall rating. The evaluator of the teacher shall identify the domains and/or components to be improved, the goals to be accomplished, and the activities the teacher is to complete to achieve proficiency. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 4 Domain One of four areas in which teachers execute professional roles Domain 1 Danielson Framework - Planning and Preparation Domain 2 Danielson Framework - Classroom Environment Domain 3 Danielson Framework – Instruction Domain 4 Danielson Framework - Professional Responsibilities E3 (Empowering Teachers for Excellence) Evidence Teacher Induction Program/Volusia Beginning Teacher Program FEAPs Florida Educator Accomplished Practices Feedback Information shared relevant to evidence in the context of learning or other educational setting Report which includes the combination of all metrics: final evaluation ratings, the Deliberate Practice, and value added measures Formal and informal assessment procedures intended to modify teaching and learning activities to improve student achievement Final Summative Report Formative Assessment Formative Period Formative Observation Framework for Teaching Input Form Leader Multi-metric MyPGS New to assignment New to teaching Newly hired Non-Classroom Teachers Non-Core Teachers Non-FCAT Teachers Novice Teacher VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Evidence may include factual reporting of teacher and student actions and behaviors. It may also include artifacts prepared by the teacher, students, or others. It does not include personal opinions or biases. The first quarter of the school year; a time for growth, not evaluation. Observation conducted for gathering evidence. Formative observations shall be ongoing throughout the school year. Teacher observation and evaluation rubric based on Charlotte Danielson’s research Form used by parents, teachers, or other interested parties to provide input regarding the assessment of teachers Volusia school and district-level administrators Using more than one measure to evaluate performance My Professional Growth System: an online, web-based system that supports evaluation, professional development, mentoring logs and HR support data Teacher for whom more than 50% of the assignment has changed First-year teacher Personnel “newly hired” for their first year of employment in our district regardless of their prior work experience elsewhere Teachers who do not have a roster of students assigned directly to them Teachers of subjects other than language arts, mathematics, science, or social studies Teachers of non-FCAT tested courses Teachers in their first year of teaching July 24, 2013 Page 5 Observation Observation Cycle Observation Length Observer PAR Teacher The monitoring actions in evaluation systems that contribute evidence to performance, or the impact of performance on others. Evidence collected through observation is used for formative feedback and contributes to the final evaluation rating. Observations may be formal or informal, and announced or unannounced. Pre-observation conference, observation, post-observation conference Best practice for secondary is one class period. Best practice for elementary is a minimum of 30 minutes. Individual qualified to conduct observations for the evaluation process. Peer Assistance and Review district-based teachers-onassignment who provide peer support for teachers. Peer Evaluator Peer Mentor Post Conference District-based peer evaluator for teachers District or school-based peer mentor for teachers Teacher submits responses and artifacts as evidence for Domains 2-4. The reflection or post-conference provides an opportunity for the teacher and the evaluator to reflect about the lesson/event, to clarify expectations, and to plan using the postconference form as a guide for reflection and feedback. PLC Power Components Professional Learning Community Power Components are the nine components of the 2007 Danielson Framework for Teaching that have the greatest correlation to increased student achievement. They are also the components that are highly interrelated with other components. Ratings Distinguished/ Highly Effective 4 Description of professional teaching that innovatively involves students in the learning process and creates a true community of learners. Teachers performing at this level are master teachers and leaders in the field, both inside and outside of their schools. Proficient/ Effective 3 Description of successful, professional teaching that is consistently at a high level. Most experienced teachers should consistently perform at this level. Basic/Developing/ Needs Improvement 2 Description of teaching that includes the necessary knowledge and skills to be effective, but its application is inconsistent (perhaps due to recently entering the profession or recently transitioning to a new curriculum, grade level, or subject). (Developing – Teachers in Year 1, 2, or 3 only) Unsatisfactory 1 Description of teaching that does not demonstrate understanding of the concepts underlying the component. This level of performance is doing harm in the classroom. Reflection Responsiveness Rubric VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Thoughtful analysis and processing of a teaching event or data Reacting to situations within and beyond the classroom that further learning opportunities A set of criteria used to distinguish between performance or proficiency levels. The rubric is used to assess evidence; the rubric is not evidence. July 24, 2013 Page 6 Scheduled Observation Self-Assessment Self-Inventory Student Evidence Summative Rating Teacher Evidence TOA Unannounced Unscheduled Observation Value Added Measure (VAM) Teacher is notified by the evaluator in advance of observation cycle, which includes the pre-conference, observation, and postconference Personal assessment A self-assessment based on teacher evaluation rubric Specific observable student behaviors in response to the teacher's use of particular instructional strategies, student work samples, assessment data Rating which summarizes the combination of all metrics – final evaluation(s), the Deliberate Practice, and student achievement, as determined by the state, to determine the rating of Highly Effective, Effective, Needs Improvement/Developing, or Unsatisfactory. Specific, observable behaviors demonstrated by teachers when using a particular instructional strategy. Evidence could also be documents or data relevant to a domain/component. Teacher-on-Assignment Not scheduled, unscheduled Observation which occurs without prior notice. This observation cycle does not include a pre-observation conference. Value-added models measure the influence of schools or teachers on the academic growth rates of students. Value-added compares the change in achievement of a group of students from one year to the next to an expected amount of change based on their prior achievement history and other potential influences. VSET Volusia System for Empowering Teachers – the evaluation system approved by the FL DOE Walk-Throughs As in the formal observation, Walk-Throughs can be scheduled or unscheduled. Walk-Throughs generally consist of very brief classroom observations during which the observer gathers evidence regarding classroom instructional practices and behaviors on a regular basis with timely and actionable feedback to teachers. Walk-Throughs provide opportunities for individual feedback as well as trend and pattern data over time. WalkThroughs also inform professional development needs for individual and groups of teachers and provide a means to gauge the implementation of professional development against individual professional development plans and school improvement plans. Walk-Through evidence may also be collected during instructional activities when students are not present, such as PLC meetings or planning time. Note: WalkThroughs are marked “observed” or “unobserved,” not rated. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 7 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS Florida Statute 1012.34 requires that evaluations: be conducted at least once a year for classroom teachers, EXCEPT teachers newly hired by the district who must be evaluated at least twice in their first year; are based on at least 50% student learning growth data; are based on four levels of performance: “Highly Effective,” “Effective,” “Needs Improvement” (“Developing” for teachers in their first three years) and “Unsatisfactory,” and; include criteria based on the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices. In addition, Florida statute requires that: districts report performance evaluation results from the previous school year to the State by December 1 (1012.34(1)(c), F.S); and, any reductions in workforce be based primarily on performance evaluations (1012.33(5), F.S.). Volusia County Schools has adopted a new multi-metric instructional evaluation system: The Volusia System for Empowering Teachers (VSET). VSET is an instructional improvement system that: is based on current research; supports teacher professional growth; is aligned with the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices, Race to the Top requirements, and Florida Statute; is divided into 22 components clustered into four domains of teaching responsibility: planning and preparation (Domain 1), classroom environment (Domain 2), instruction (Domain 3), and professional responsibilities (Domain 4). includes a Deliberate Practice; o The Deliberate Practice Plan (DPP) is completed online collaboratively with the principal or supervisor. o Deliberate Practice Planning is a self-directed process focused on what teachers need to learn and to do to improve their teaching skills, resulting in improved student learning. is based on four levels of performance: “Distinguished,” “Proficient,” “Basic,” and “Unsatisfactory.” Implementation of the 2007 Danielson Framework for Teaching Charlotte Danielson’s 2007 Framework for Teaching establishes a common language for teaching practice. The four Domains of Danielson’s 2007 Framework for Teaching are included in the evaluation system. The teacher and observer gather evidence for Domains 1 and 4 outside of the classroom observation and discuss the evidence for these domains at the planning conference. The observer collects evidence for Domains 2 and 3 during a classroom observation or Walk-Through. The tables on the following pages display a breakdown of the weights assigned to each domain and component for the classroom teacher rubric. Other instructional specialist job roles have similar weights under each domain and component, even though the wording of the domain or component may have been adapted to suit the role and responsibilities of each specialized position. The rubric score is calculated using the component weights. The nine components with the greatest weighting are called Power Components. The nine Power Components represent the areas of effective teaching practice that have the greatest correlation to increased student achievement. These components are also highly interrelated with other components. Since research indicates the centrality to good teaching of these practices, the new teacher induction program focuses on the nine Power Components to ensure that beginning teachers concentrate on the practices that directly relate to student achievement. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 8 The Framework for Teaching Instrument The Volusia System for Empowering Teachers is based on the 2007 edition of The Framework, by Charlotte Danielson, and was published by ASCD as Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching. The Framework was enhanced in 2011 to add “Critical Attributes” for each level of performance for each component and examples for each level of performance for each component. The architecture of The Framework for Teaching 2011 did not change the 4 domains, the 22 components, nor the elements. The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument (2011) is available in a PDF and iPad format http://www.danielsongroup.org/article.aspx?page=FfTEvaluationInstrument from the Danielson Group website. Any educator may download this file and use the print version in his/her own setting. (Statement from website – http://www.danielsongroup.org). VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 9 VOLUSIA SYSTEM FOR EMPOWERING TEACHERS The VSET system is designed to support effective instruction and student learning growth. Results will be used when developing district and school improvement plans. Results will be used to identify professional development for instructional personnel and school administrators. The system will provide online access to examine performance data from multiple sources, including opportunities for parents to provide input into employee evaluations, when appropriate. The system will provide identification of teaching fields for which special evaluation procedures/criteria are necessary. The evaluation process will be managed for each teacher and instructional leader, following state statute. The charts below represent the multi-metric evaluation system that is differentiated according to certain categories of teachers. Experienced teachers with “Highly Effective” or “Effective” ratings have three metrics in their evaluation. New teachers or experienced teachers in need of improvement have an additional Peer Assistance and Review component. This evaluation model is designed for experienced teachers rated as “Highly Effective” or “Effective.” Administrative Evaluation (25%) + Deliberate Practice (25%) + Student Achievement (50%) = Final Summative Rating (100%) This evaluation model is designed for: • Teachers new to teaching • Experienced teachers with overall ratings of “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory.” Administrative Evaluation (20%) + PAR Evaluation (20%) + Deliberate Practice (10%) System Components + Student Achievement (50%) = Final Summative Rating (100%) VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 10 The Framework for Teaching by Charlotte Danielson consists of: Four Domains and Twenty-Two Components VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 11 Professional Development for new teachers concentrates on the Nine Power Components, which are: VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 12 BREAKDOWN OF THE WEIGHTS ASSIGNED TO EACH DOMAIN AND COMPONENT Evidence and Artifacts are collected “Off Stage” for Domains 1 and 4. • • • • Teacher prepares lesson plan for observation and collects data prior to conference. Lesson plan and data are discussed during pre-observation conference. Evidence could be artifacts (e.g. , data reports, lesson plans, communications). Evidence could be collected in other contexts (e.g., PLC meeting, professional development). Domain 1 – Planning and Preparation – 20% 2.5% Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy 2.5% Demonstrating knowledge of students 5.0% Setting instructional outcomes 2.5% Demonstrating knowledge of resources 2.5% Designing coherent instruction 5.0% Assessing Student Learning Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities - 20% 5.0% Reflecting on teaching 5.0% Maintaining accurate records 2.5% Communicating with families 2.5% Participating in a professional community 2.5% Growing and developing professionally 2.5% Showing professionalism Observable Behaviors are documented through “On Stage” Domains 2 and 3. • Evidence is observed during observation or Walk-Through. Domain 2- The Classroom Environment - 20 % 5.0% Creating an environment of respect and rapport 5.0% Establishing a culture for learning 3.0% Managing classroom procedures 4.0% Managing student behavior 3.0% Organizing physical space Domain 3 – Instruction - 40% 5.0% Communicating with students 10.0% Using questioning and discussion techniques 10.0% Engaging students in learning 10.0% Using assessment in instruction 5.0% Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness Note: Power components are in bold. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 13 STEPS IN THE OBSERVATION CYCLE Evaluators and PARS are encouraged to schedule the dates and times of observations and conferences on the calendar well in advance to assure compliance with deadlines. Observations Under routine circumstances, the length of a scheduled or unscheduled VSET observation should be a minimum of 30 minutes in elementary schools and a full class period in secondary schools. Scheduled and unscheduled VSET observations and Walk-Throughs shall not occur: On the first or last five days of the school year On the first two days or last two days of a course On the two days before or after Thanksgiving, Winter Break, or Spring Break Conferences and meetings may be conducted at any time with the required 24 hours’ notice, as per the VTO contract. On an FCAT or other standardized testing date. (This does not refer to the test window.) This refers to all teachers, including those who do not administer FCAT or other standardized tests. A formal VSET observation may occur during a test make-up day, if circumstances are conducive to a formal observation. However, it is recommended that these days be avoided, if possible. Note: Conferences may occur during the state-wide assessment window. A qualified observer, upon written request of the teacher, may perform a second scheduled observation. The teacher may not waive the above. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 14 THE SCHEDULED OBSERVATION CYCLE Step 1: Schedule the pre-observation conference and the observation. The evaluator informs the teacher of the pre-conference date at least 5 work days prior to the meeting so the teacher has time to do the required paperwork. The evaluator schedules the pre-observation conference to occur within three school days before the observation. At the same time, the evaluator schedules the post-observation conference to occur no later than seven (7*) school days after the observation. * During 2013-2014, post-observation conferences are to be conducted within 7 school days of the observation. It will not be considered a violation if the post-conference is conducted within 10 days of the observation. Day 1 is the day after the observation. The evaluator schedules an observation date and time of observation with the teacher. The teacher shares the completed Pre-Observation Conference Form with the evaluator at least one day in advance of the conference. An observation consists of one complete learning experience or lesson. Under routine circumstances, the length of a scheduled or unscheduled VSET observation should be a minimum of 30 minutes in elementary schools and a full class period in secondary schools. Step 2: Conduct the pre-observation conference The evaluator reviews the completed Pre-Observation Planning Conference Form (see Page 18) to guide the conversation and adds any additional evidence of Domains 1 and 4. The evaluator and teacher discuss the lesson to be observed. The teacher should do most of the talking, but the evaluator should ask questions for guidance and understanding and offer suggestions for improvement to the lesson, if necessary. Any evidence regarding that lesson should be added to the Pre-Observation Conference Form. Step 3: Observe the teacher The evaluator gathers evidence of the teacher’s and students’ actions, statements, and questions on the Observation of Evidence Form. The evaluator submits evidence to the teacher within *24 hours of the observation. The teacher adds to the evidence, as necessary, also within 24 hours. *It is expected that evidence is shared with teachers within 24 hours. However, it will not be considered a violation of VSET procedures if evidence is shared within 48 hours for the 20132014 school year. Evidence for this observation cannot be added after the post-conference. Step 4: Prepare for the post-observation conference The teacher and the evaluator independently score the rubric assessment of the lesson based on preponderance of all evidence collected on domains and components. There is no expectation that the evaluator’s and the teacher’s ratings must match. Any component for which there is no evidence is marked unobserved. The teacher submits a self-assessment rubric to the evaluator at least one day prior to the postobservation. The teacher must have at least one day to complete the self-assessment after evidence is received. The evaluator reviews the teacher’s self-assessment and marks areas of agreement on his/her rubric and leaves blank the areas not observed or areas that require further discussion. Assessment of evidence will be discussed at the post-conference. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 15 Step 5: Conduct the post-observation conference within 7* school days of observation The teacher may add additional evidence related to this observation at this post conference. Evidence may not be added after the post-conference. The evaluator shares and acknowledges ratings for areas of agreement on components at the post-conference meeting, not before. The teacher shares and is invited to discuss the evidence for components when the ratings of the evaluator and teacher differ. The evaluator and teacher attempt to come to consensus on component ratings. Ultimately, the final rating is based on the judgment of the evaluator based on preponderance of evidence. The evaluator and/or teacher add relevant evidence for Domain 4. Both the evaluator and teacher review status of the Deliberate Practice Plan at each postobservation conference. Both the evaluator and teacher develop next steps, if necessary. Note: The teacher has the right to write a rebuttal at any time at any step of the evaluation process. However, the rebuttal must be signed and dated by the teacher. * During 2013-2014, post-observation conferences are to be conducted within 7 school days of the observation; however, it will not be considered a violation if the post-conference is conducted within 10 days of the observation. Day 1 is the day after the observation. Note: Ratings are based on preponderance of EVIDENCE. Timelines may be extended when delays occur due to district-wide or school-wide technology interruptions, as determined by the Technology Assistance Program (TAP) team. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 16 THE UNSCHEDULED OBSERVATION CYCLE Step 1: Observe the teacher The evaluator gathers evidence of the teacher’s and students’ actions, statements, and questions on the Observation of Evidence Form. The evaluator submits evidence to the teacher within *24 hours of the observation. The teacher adds to the evidence, as necessary, also within 24 hours. *It is expected that evidence is shared with teachers within 24 hours. However, it will not be considered a violation of VSET procedures if evidence is shared within 48 hours. Step 2: Prepare for the post-observation conference The teacher and the evaluator independently score the rubric assessment of the lesson based on all evidence collected on domains and components. There is no expectation that the evaluator’s and the teacher’s ratings must match. Any component for which there is no evidence is marked unobserved. The teacher submits a self-assessment rubric to the evaluator at least one day prior to the postobservation conference. The evaluator reviews the teacher’s self-assessment and marks areas of agreement on his/her rubric and leaves blank the areas not observed or areas that require further discussion. The teacher may add additional evidence related to this observation. Evidence may not be added after the post-conference. Assessment of evidence will be discussed at the post-conference. Step 3: Conduct the post-observation conference within 7* school days of observation The evaluator shares and acknowledges ratings for areas of agreement on components at the post-conference meeting, not before. The teacher shares and is invited to discuss the evidence for components when the ratings of the evaluator and teacher differ. The evaluator and teacher attempt to come to consensus on component ratings. Ultimately, the final rating is based on the judgment of the evaluator based on preponderance of the evidence. The evaluator and/or teacher add relevant evidence for Domains 1 and 4, if applicable. Both the evaluator and teacher review status of the Deliberate Practice Plan at each postobservation conference. Both the evaluator and teacher develop next steps, if necessary. *During 2013-2014, post-observation conferences are to be conducted within 7 school days of the observation; however, it will not be considered a violation if the post-conference is conducted within 10 days of the observation. Day 1 is the day after the observation. Note: Ratings are based on preponderance of the EVIDENCE. Timelines may be extended when delays occur due to district-wide or school-wide technology interruptions, as determined by the TAP team. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 17 Volusia System for Empowering Teachers PLANNING CONFERENCE 2013-2014 (The planning conference form is completed by the educator prior to the announced observation. The educator shares the completed form with the evaluator at least one day in advance of the conference.) Teacher: Date: Observer: DOMAIN 1: Elements of the Lesson DOMAIN 4: Professional Responsibilities List any evidence that relates to the lesson being taught; evidence is not required for all components 1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy: What are the skills and content of the discipline to be observed? What prerequisite learning is required? 4a. Reflecting on Teaching: Discuss the degree to which students met the objectives. What is the evidence? What might you do next time to improve your effectiveness? 1b. Demonstrating Knowledge of Students: Describe the students in the setting. How will you use your knowledge of these students to meet individual learning needs? 4b. Maintaining Accurate Records: How do you document and maintain records? 1c. Selecting Instructional Outcomes: What are your targeted instructional outcomes for this setting? 4c: Communicating with Families: How do you communicate with and engage families and/or stakeholders in student learning? 1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources: Describe the resources you are using and why. 4d: Participating in a Professional Community: In what way is today’s lesson related to *collaboration with colleagues? In addition, describe professional contributions to your school/site and/or district. 1e. Designing Coherent Instruction: Describe your plan of support or instruction to include activities as they align with the goal(s) in 1c. 4e. Growing and Developing Professionally: What aspects of this lesson are the result of recent professional learning? 1f. Assessing Student Learning: How will you measure the goal(s) articulated in 1c? What does success look like? 4f: Showing Professionalism: In what ways do you demonstrate professionalism, leadership, and student advocacy? * Collaboration is a coordinated, structured, interactive process that facilitates the accomplishment of an end product or goal. Collaborators employ comprehensive planning to construct and develop new knowledge, projects and plans, together achieving better results than they are likely to achieve alone. Note: Student also refers to client, etc., as appropriate. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 18 WALK-THROUGHS Walk-Throughs generally consist of classroom observations of 3-10 minutes in length during which the observer gathers evidence regarding classroom instructional practices and behaviors on a regular basis. Walk-Throughs provide opportunities for timely and actionable individual feedback as well as trend and pattern data over time. Walk-Throughs also inform professional development needs for individual and groups of teachers and provide a means to gauge the implementation of professional development against Deliberate Practice Plans and school improvement plans. Walk-Throughs may occur in settings other than the classroom, such as meetings, trainings, etc. Teachers may or may not be aware of which component the evaluator is focusing on during a particular Walk-Through. Who Conducts the Walk-Through Observation and Data Reviews? A number of individuals may conduct Walk-Through observations for feedback. For the purpose of the evaluation, the evaluator might be the principal, the assistant principal, a PAR Evaluator, a district administrator, or a combination thereof. Walk-Throughs are important for all teachers. The purpose of the informal Walk-Through is to ensure that what is observed in a formal observation is also seen during day-to-day practice. Evidence collected will align with the components observed. The Walk-Through can focus on any component or on the Deliberate Practice Plan. The teacher or evaluator may elect to include a Walk-Through observation as evidence. Teachers may request that an evaluator visit the classroom to observe specific activities as evidence for the Deliberate Practice or for a particular component or as follow-up to a Walk-Through. The charts that follow indicate the minimum number of Walk-Through observations required for different groups of teachers. The evaluator shares Walk-Through evidence within 24 - 48 hours. The teacher may or may not add evidence or respond to the evaluator’s comments within 48 hours. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 19 ADMINISTRATIVE/PAR EVALUATOR OBSERVATION OVERVIEW CATEGORY 1 Teachers in the 1st Year of Teaching (New to Teaching or Experienced Teachers New to Volusia County) Note: Only Novice (First Year Teachers) will receive services of a PAR Teacher. EVALUATOR PAR TEACHERS 1st Quarter (Formative) (1st Quarter ends October 18, 2013.) 1 Administrator Walk-Through for Domain 2 or 3 PAR Evaluator Walk-Through(s) at discretion of PAR Evaluator 1 PAR Scheduled Observation Cycle Pre-Observation Conference – Within 3 School Days of Observation Observation Post-Observation Conference – Within 7* School Days of Observation 2nd Quarter (2ND Quarter ends December 19, 2013.) 1 Administrator Scheduled Observation Cycle Pre-Observation Conference – Within 3 School Days of Observation Observation Post-Observation Conference - Within 7* School Days of Observation 1 PAR Evaluator Walk-Through at discretion of PAR Evaluator 1 PAR Unscheduled Observation Post-Observation Conference – Within 7* Days of Observation Mid-Year Evaluation All 22 Components must be rated by end of Quarter 2. Between the end of Quarter 2 (December 19, 2013) and April 15 1 Administrator Walk-Through in any Domain PAR Evaluator Walk-Through(s) at discretion of PAR Evaluator 1 Administrator Unscheduled Observation 1 PAR Scheduled Observation Cycle Pre-Observation Conference – Within 3 School Days of Observation Observation Post-Observation Conference – Within 7* School Days of Observation Post-Observation Conference – Within 7* School Days of Observation Between May 1 – 23: (Last Friday of May) Final Evaluation Report Based on Evidence of Administrator and PAR Deliberate Practice Plan Note: Number of occurrences is minimum. More may be conducted. It is expected that evidence will be collected prior to May 1 for the purpose of rating all 22 components. “Summative” refers to a calculation which consists of observation cycles, Walk-Throughs, the Deliberate Practice Plan rating, and Value Added Measures as determined by the State of Florida. *Post-observation conferences are to be conducted within 7 school days of the observation. It will not be considered a violation if the post-conference is conducted within 10 days of the observation. Day 1 is the day after the observation. Late Hires: A scheduled observation must be conducted for late hires so that Domains 1 and 4 can be addressed. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 20 ADMINISTRATIVE OBSERVATION OVERVIEW CATEGORY 2 Teachers With At Least One Full Year of Teaching Experience in Volusia County who were rated Proficient or Distinguished the previous year (Whether New Teachers or Experienced Teachers) EVALUATOR 1st Quarter (Formative) (First Quarter ends October 18, 2013.) 1 Administrator Walk-Through in a Power Component By April 15 2 Administrator Walk-Throughs (one before February 1 and one before April 15) for school-based instructional staff (1 Administrator Walk-Through is required for instructional staff evaluated by district-level administrators by April 15.) 1 Administrator Scheduled Observation Cycle Pre-Observation Conference – Within 3 School Days of Observation Observation Post-Observation Conference - Within 7* School Days of Observation Between May 1 – 23 Final Evaluation Report Based on Evidence Deliberate Practice Plan Note: Number of occurrences is minimum. More may be conducted. It is expected that evidence will be collected prior to May 1 for the purpose of rating all 22 components. “Summative” refers to a calculation which consists of observation cycles, Walk-Throughs, the Deliberate Practice Plan rating, and Value Added Measures as determined by the State of Florida. The teacher may request one additional scheduled observation cycle. * Post-observation conferences are to be conducted within 7 school days of the observation. It will not be considered a violation if the post-conference is conducted within 10 days of the observation. Day 1 is the day after the observation. Late Hires: A scheduled observation must be conducted for late hires so that Domains 1 and 4 can be addressed. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 21 ADMINISTRATIVE OBSERVATION OVERVIEW CATEGORY 3 Veteran/Tenured Teachers Requiring Assistance (Overall “NI” or “U” Observation Ratings (not including VAM) from Previous Year) EVALUATOR 1st Quarter (Formative) (1st Quarter ends October 18, 2013. 2 Administrator Walk-Throughs in Power Components 2nd Quarter (2nd Quarter ends December 19, 2013.) 1 Administrator Walk-Through in Any Domain Which Supports the Deliberate Practice Plan Administrator Scheduled Observation Cycle Pre-Observation Conference – Within 3 School Days of Observation Observation Post-Observation Conference – Within 7* School Days of Observation Between the end of Quarter 2 (December 19, 2013) and April 15 1 Administrator Walk-Through in Any Domain Which Supports the Deliberate Practice Plan 1 Administrator Unscheduled Observation Post-Observation Conference – Within 7* School Days of Observation Between May 1 – 23 Final Evaluation Report Based on Evidence Deliberate Practice Plan Note: Number of occurrences is minimum. More may be conducted. It is expected that evidence will be collected prior to May 1 for the purpose of rating all 22 components. “Summative” refers to a calculation which consists of observation cycles, Walk-Throughs, the Deliberate Practice Plan rating, and Value Added Measures as determined by the State of Florida. * Post-observation conferences are to be conducted within 7 school days of the observation. It will not be considered a violation if the post-conference is conducted within 10 days of the observation. Day 1 is the day after the observation. It is recognized that budget may limit service to veteran teachers requiring assistance. In this case, differentiated support will be provided to veteran teachers requiring support as determined by the Superintendent. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 22 DELIBERATE PRACTICE PLAN (DPP) Professional growth planning is a process of inquiry focused on what teachers need to learn and to do to improve their practice, resulting in improved student learning. In this process, teachers engage in selfassessment, analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data, and the priorities of both the school and district. A meaningful DPP is one that engages teachers in significant learning or improving a skill related to one’s professional practice. A teacher’s DPP will align with one or two components in the Framework for Teaching. The teacher works on the activities of the plan individually as well as collaboratively with colleagues. The evaluator supports the implementation of the goals, and monitors the progress at each post conference. Modifications should be made, as necessary, with the desired outcome of improved classroom practice and enhanced student learning. Modifications to the plan are not required when deemed not necessary. The Deliberate Practice Plan rating is 25% of the summative evaluation rating for those teachers previously rated “Highly Effective” or “Effective” or 10% for those teachers new to teaching and experienced teachers previously rated as “Needs Improvement” and “Unsatisfactory.” All teachers are responsible for developing a Deliberate Practice Plan and collaborating with their evaluators regarding the plan. The DPP is a vehicle by which the teacher sets and charts professional growth: what was learned by the teacher? Meeting the goals of the DPP is not dependent on student data. However, student data may support the fact that the goals of the DPP were met. Developing Deliberate Practice Plans Teachers are to identify individual professional needs and to establish learning goals. Teachers are expected to write professionally employing writing conventions, such as correct spelling, grammar and punctuation. STEPS Identifying DPP Type ACTIONS The teacher’s type of DPP is determined by the previous year’s summative evaluation rating. Individual DPP: Teachers identified as “Highly Effective” or “Effective” Monitored DPP: Teachers identified as new to teaching or “Needs Improvement” Directed DPP: Teachers identified as “Unsatisfactory” Teachers’ due date of the DPP is October 15. A completed DPP means the following steps have occurred: Teachers have reflected on evidence, identified growth areas, written 1-2 professional learning goals and identified professional learning activities. All of the above information has been recorded in MyPGS. DPPs have been shared with evaluators based on the DPP type. DPPs have been discussed with evaluators. Monitored and Directed DPPs have been discussed and approved by evaluator. Both the teacher and the evaluator have submitted the date for acknowledgement of review of the DPP on MyPGS. If the teacher wishes to use the same DPP goals as last year (not recommended), the following questions should be asked of the teacher: Was the goal met last year? If so, why are you working on the same goal this year? VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 23 Reflecting on Evidence A. Use one or more of the following when identifying an area of growth: Self-Reflection using the Framework for Teaching rubric The teacher conducts a self-assessment using the Framework for Teaching rubric. Previous Year’s Summative Evaluation Empowering Educators for Excellence, Year 1 Empowering Educators for Excellence, Year 2 Endorsement requirements B. The teacher identifies and examines student data to guide the development of the DPP. One or more of the following data pieces shall be considered. C. Academic-Formative/Progress Monitoring Academic-Summative/Outcome Attendance Behavior/Discipline Other Measurable Data The teacher participates in a school-wide review and discussion of school improvement plans and goals. Note: A teacher in a school classified as a Prevent, Focus, or Priority school in Florida’s Differentiated Accountability system must align his or her DPP to the needs of a targeted subgroup that did not meet Annual Measurable Objectives (AMO). The DPP for a teacher in a DA school must include participation in professional development that helps the teacher to identify and target the needs of that subgroup and hold rigorous and relevant expectations for all students. Professional Development must be designed to strengthen the ability of the teacher to prepare students for college and careers. Identification Using the information from “Reflecting on Evidence,” the teacher selects the of domain(s) and component(s) as the area(s) of focus. Growth Areas Development The teacher develops one or two professional learning goals to strengthen of his/her practice. These goals should address individual needs, but balance Professional those needs with those of the students, school, and district. Learning Goals The teacher meets with the evaluator to review growth area(s). Teachers with Monitored and Directed DPPs require administrative approval to proceed with the development of the professional learning goals. Teachers with Individual DPPs discuss their proposed plan with the evaluator before proceeding. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 24 Professional learning activities and actions are selected that will assist the teacher to attain the goals. Professional learning activities provided by the district may include, but are not limited to: District or School-Based Professional Development opportunities for inservice credit. These may include, but are not limited to: Face-to-Face Workshops Online Courses Book Studies Lesson Studies Endorsement or Add-on Certification Programs Volusia Teacher Organization Workshops Job-embedded professional development (no inservice credit) These may include, but are not limited to: PLC Work Collaborative Groups On-line Reading Journal/Research Ongoing Monitoring and Review Step 1: The teacher collects data, tracks, and analyzes progress towards attaining goals. Step 2: The teacher brings the Deliberate Practice Plan to all post-conferences for discussion purposes. Evidence is presented to support a teacher’s progress. Modifications are made to the plan as needed with evaluator notification (verbally or in an email by the teacher). Monitoring and review may be conducted by a peer evaluator or an administrator. A specific meeting for the purpose of monitoring and reviewing the DPP is not necessary but may occur at the discretion of the evaluator. Note: There is no requirement that modifications are made to the Deliberate Practice Plan. End-of-the-Year Review Step 1: The teacher completes the end-of-year reflection summarizing his/her work and results of the DPP. Supporting evidence may be attached at this time and may include no more than 5 artifacts. Note: It is recommended that the teacher reflect on the DPP throughout the year, in order to make this step less time-consuming. Step 2: The teacher meets with the evaluator to share evidence and artifacts demonstrating that professional learning goals have been met. Supporting evidence of the DPP should include no more than 5 quality, relevant artifacts. Step 3: The evaluator and the teacher utilize the rubric to determine the overall rating of the DPP considering the preponderance of the evidence. Step 4: When the teacher disagrees with the DPP rating, the teacher may contact the Office of Employee Performance Assessment. Note: Teachers on leave during May should have completed their DPP requirements prior to going on leave. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 25 ONGOING MONITORING OF THE DPP The DPP is an ongoing, living document. The expectation is that teachers will work on their DPPs throughout the year. Doing so will make the end-of-year process much easier on teachers. When is the DPP reviewed? As part of VSET, it is required that the evaluator and teacher discuss and review progress being made on the DPP at every post-conference. Do the evaluator and teacher conduct a separate meeting? No, it is only required that the DPP be reviewed at post-conferences. However, a separate meeting may be conducted for the purpose of monitoring the DPP. Who is responsible for the review? The teacher and evaluator will discuss the teacher’s progress and then record a summary of the conversation in MyPGS under the Ongoing Monitoring tab. If a modification is needed, that would be recorded in the modification tab in MyPGS. Is the teacher required to record evidence of progress in MyPGS? No, however it is encouraged by the district and VTO that teachers keep records of their activities to meet the goals of their DPPs. Teachers may use MyPGS or some other format. This will make it easier to complete the reflection that is due May 1. Does the teacher need to write a reflection for the ongoing monitoring? No. The required reflection is due no later than May 1 by 5 p.m. When is the DPP rated? The DPP is rated first by the teacher when submitting the reflection no later than May 1 by 5 p.m. and then by the evaluator prior to the final conference in May. Deliberate Practice Review Committee Procedures The Deliberate Practice Review Committee will review DPPs when there is disagreement in the rating between the teacher and the evaluating administrator. The teacher is to advise the evaluator in writing (email is acceptable) within five (5) work days of the DPP final rating conference of his/her decision to refer the plan to the committee for review. The teacher makes the request with the understanding that the rating decision of the Deliberate Practice Review Committee is the final rating to be assigned to the teacher’s final evaluation. The DPP Review Committee will review a DPP rating only when each segment of the DPP has been completed. Procedures: The teacher may request a review of the DPP by the Deliberate Practice Review Committee if the teacher and evaluator disagree on the rating of the DPP and each section of the DPP has been completed. The Administrator notifies the Office of Employee Performance Assessment of the request, (Linda Knowles, Extension 50762), within three (3) days of the request. The administrator submits the DPP to the committee as it was presented during the evaluation conference (including all evidence submitted by the teacher at that meeting) within three (3) days of notification. No additional documents may be submitted to the committee. The Deliberate Practice Review Committee convenes to review the plan and to determine the final rating. The decision of the committee will be sent to the administrator/evaluator and teacher in writing within five (5) days of the decision. The Evaluator submits the final rating for the DPP into VSET. Note: Each teacher’s DPP work must be in his/her own words. If plagiarism is suspected, the work of all involved parties will be forwarded to Professional Standards for review. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 26 DELIBERATE PRACTICE PLAN PERFORMANCE RATING RUBRIC 2013-2014 A preponderance of evidence should be used to determine the overall rubric-based score. Unsatisfactory Basic/Needs Improvement/Developing Distinguished/ Highly Effective Proficient/Effective The Teacher… The Teacher… The Teacher… The Teacher… Created a plan that included a professional learning goal(s) that was (were) unclear and not supported by the needs identified by student, teacher and/or school data. Created a plan in which the professional learning goal(s) lacked clarity in demonstrating the connection between the goal(s) and the needs identified by student, teacher and/or school data. Created a coherent plan that included professional learning goal(s) focused on the needs identified by student, teacher and school data. Created a comprehensive plan with professional learning goal(s) that included specific expectations for professional growth and directly aligned with identified growth areas based on student, teacher and school data. Did not outline a plan of action identifying professional learning that would assist him/her in accomplishing professional learning goal(s). Outlined a plan of action for professional learning that was general and/or partially related to his/her professional learning goals but was unable to align anticipated instructional practice improvements to goals. Outlined a plan of action for specific research-based and/or evidence-based professional learning with an anticipated timeline that is directly related to assisting him/her in accomplishing professional learning goal(s). Outlined a plan of action that included steps for progress monitoring and specific indicators that enabled the teacher to continuously assess intended learning outcomes for both professional practice and student learning/performance. Did not identify and/or implement new instructional strategies into his/her professional practice. Inconsistently implemented instructional strategies and rarely reflected on the impact to his/her professional growth and/or student learning/performance. Implemented specific instructional strategies learned during professional learning events. Implemented specific instructional strategies learned during professional learning events, and based on results from the implementation of specific instructional strategies and ongoing assessment of intended learning outcomes of professional practice, participated in additional professional learning as needed. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 27 Did not review his/her plan throughout the school year. Made insufficient modifications to the plan when student/teacher data indicated it was needed. Produced coherent evidence that he/she monitored (reflected on) the instructional strategy or strategies as well as the impact on student learning/performance, and, if necessary, made modifications to the strategy or strategies and/or plan based on monitoring results. Explained in specific terms the progress monitoring of changes in instructional practice utilizing a systematic approach for gathering feedback from both colleagues and students, reflected frequently on the impact of these changes and readily adjusted either the plan or the instructional strategy to promote the intended learning goal. Provided no evidence he/she collaborated with colleagues to improve his/her professional practice for the purpose of improving student performance. Evidence demonstrated minimal collaboration with colleagues to improve his/her professional practice for the purpose of improving student performance. Provided evidence that throughout the year the teacher frequently collaborated with colleagues to improve his/her own professional practice for the purpose of improving student performance as described in his/her Deliberate Practice Plan. Provided evidence that throughout the year the teacher frequently collaborated with colleagues to improve his/her own professional practice for the purpose of improving student performance as described in his/her Deliberate Practice Plan. In addition, provided extensive evidence that he/she assisted other educators beyond his/her job role in an ongoing, planned, and meaningful way to improve professional practice for the purpose of improving student performance. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 28 The Teacher’s End-of-Year Review and optional artifacts… The Teacher’s End-of-Year Review and optional artifacts… The Teacher’s End-of-Year Review and optional artifacts… The Teacher’s End-of-Year Review and optional artifacts… Did not describe new professional learning implemented, showed no analysis of student impact from new learning, and instructional practice was not adjusted accordingly. The artifacts that are included are unrelated to the professional learning goals. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Inadequately described the new professional learning implemented, showed limited and/or incorrect analysis of student impact from new learning, and did not adjust instructional practice accordingly Demonstrated the reflective process, specifically the effect on changing/improving the teacher's practice, examples of how he/she impacted student learning/performance, and next steps for continued professional growth. July 24, 2013 Demonstrated the reflective process, specifically the effect on changing/improving the teacher’s practice, examples of how he/she impacted student learning/ performance, and next steps for continued professional growth. In addition, he/she included reflections describing the impact on his/her own instructional practices as well as the other educators that occurred as a direct result of the ongoing planned collaboration. Page 29 EVALUATOR TRAINING Who is an Evaluator? An evaluator is defined as: a site-based administrator, district-based administrator, or district-based peer evaluator with training in collecting evidence and scoring the Framework for Teaching rubric as well as the Deliberate Practice Plan rubric. PAR teachers do not evaluate any teacher they support as a mentor. How is the Evaluator Determined? The school principal will determine which administrator will evaluate each teacher. In instances where the principal supervises more than one building, additional evaluators may be recruited from district staff or other trained evaluators. In the case of specialized instructional employees who report to a district administrator, the appropriate district administrator will conduct the evaluation. Input Into Evaluation by Personnel Other Than the Supervisor The evaluator may consider input from other trained evaluators. The teacher may also elect to submit as evidence Walk-Through observations completed by coaches or district staff, records of participation in special assignments and committees, and commendations from district staff or other agencies, and other relevant evidence (within this school year only). PEER ASSISTANCE AND REVIEW Volusia County School District has established a peer assistance and review process as part of the evaluation system which is supported by the Volusia Teachers Organization. The evaluation and feedback of the PAR teacher will be separate from, and equal to, the weight of the evaluating supervisor’s evaluation. Responsibilities of PAR Teachers Assist assigned teachers with classroom procedures and environment. Assist with data analysis for assigned teachers’ incoming students. Assist assigned teachers to develop Deliberate Practice Plans. Monitor and assist to refine assigned teachers’ instructional planning and delivery. Provide timely feedback to assigned teachers to improve practice. Maintain confidentiality while working with assigned teachers. (Share progress with the building administrator with teacher permission.) Seek additional assistance if assigned teacher is not making sufficient progress. Follow the appropriate observation cycle procedures and timelines for evaluation set by the Volusia System for Empowering Teachers. Note: It is the PAR teacher’s professional obligation to report misconduct to the principal/site supervisor in a timely manner. Evaluation Process for PAR teachers PAR teachers are district-based teachers-on-assignment. PAR teachers are evaluated using an adapted Danielson Framework rubric. The district administrator designated as supervisor for the PAR program (Human Resource Specialist) shall serve as evaluator for the PAR teachers. The number of observation cycles will be the same as Effective or Highly Effective teachers. PAR teachers will complete a Deliberate Practice Plan. The designated district supervisor will monitor and evaluate the Deliberate Practice Plan developed by a PAR teacher. The final Summative Evaluation Rating for a PAR teacher will consist of 25% Administrator Evaluation, 25% Deliberate Practice, and 50% based on a value-added measure. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 30 TEACHERS HIRED SECOND SEMESTER Teachers hired after the start of the second semester of the 2012-2013 school year will be considered to be first year teachers during 2013-2014. Administrative evaluators of teachers hired in the second semester of the 2013-2014 school year will follow the cycle (including Deliberate Practice Plan) corresponding with their hire date (Category 2) with a due date of May 23, 2014. It will be necessary to include a scheduled observation in order to rate domains 1 and 4. Teachers hired after the start of the fourth nine weeks of the 2013-2014 school year will not be required to complete Deliberate Practice Plans for the 2013-2014 school year. Teachers hired by March 31, 2014, must comply with Category 2 requirements. However, due date is May 1 (not April). VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 31 VSET 2013-2014 End-of-Year Procedures (PARs will follow the same procedures as administrators, as applicable.) District rating labels (Distinguished, Proficient, Basic, Unsatisfactory) will not change for 2013-2014. Note: State rating labels are Highly Effective, Effective, Needs Improvement and Unsatisfactory. The Rubric completed in the final post-conference must include ratings for all 22 components and must include any evidence collected or presented after the first quarter prior to the final post-conference. At any time up to and including the final evaluation conference, the teacher may bring forward evidence collected after the first quarter including evidence by another person trained in VSET, such as a PAR mentor (not a PAR evaluator) or district administrator, but not his/her school-based or district evaluator as that evaluation information will be in the system. However, neither the teacher nor the administrator may bring forward new evidence or artifacts after the final evaluation conference. Ratings are based on the preponderance of the EVIDENCE. This would include ALL of the following: Walk-Through(s) Pre-observation form(s) and conference(s) (Domains 1 and 4) Evidence Collection form(s) (Domains 2 and 3) Post-conference(s) A teacher may add no more than five (5) artifacts to capture components not observed via Walk-Through(s) or Observations(s). This is not a portfolio; and a portfolio is not one artifact. (These five (5) artifacts are in addition to the five (5) artifacts to support the DPP goals.) The teacher may bring forward evidence collected after the first quarter by another person trained in VSET such as a PAR mentor (not evaluator) or district administrator. Records of Conference and Letters of Caution issued after the first quarter or Letters of Reprimand issued in the first or second semesters may count as evidence. Records of Conference (R of C) and Letters of Caution (L of C) issued in the first quarter may count as evidence after the first quarter when behaviors warranting the R of C or L of C carry over and are documented after the first quarter. Note: The evidence will guide the evaluator to the teacher’s ratings in each component. Teachers will rate themselves using all EVIDENCE as described above. Administrators will rate teachers. Teachers and evaluators will meet to discuss areas of disagreement, citing evidence and artifacts. Principals and/or assistant principals shall conduct the final evaluation report and Deliberate Practice Plan conferences between May 1 and May 23. At this conference, the evaluator and the teacher will review the evaluator’s component ratings and the DPP rating. When all or parts of the evaluation cycles cannot be completed due to leaves of absence, resignations, retirements, or other extenuating circumstance, the evaluator is to indicate this information in the evaluation system. If the teacher and evaluator are aware that the teacher will be taking a leave of absence or in some other manner not completing the school year, all 22 components and the DPP should be finalized prior to the teacher’s departure, except in case of emergency. The final summative report will be available after the value added scores are released from the state. Note: If additional evidence is required to assess a rating, another Walk-Through may be conducted or another quality, relevant artifact may be provided. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 32 OPEN INVESTIGATIONS When a teacher is subject to an on-going investigation by the Professional Standards Department or school-based administrator, or when a disciplinary action is being processed through grievance procedures levels 1, 2, or 3, completion of the final evaluation will be extended beyond May 23, but not beyond June 30. NO PROGRESS OR INSUFFICIENT PROGRESS RE: READING AND ESOL Note: The district will provide evaluators with a list of affected teachers. 1. For those teachers who have made no progress toward Reading and/or ESOL for the second year or longer, the rating in the area of Professional Development will be no better than B/NI (Basic/Needs Improvement). 2. For those teachers who have made inadequate progress toward ESOL for the second year or longer (including insufficient hours or inservice toward ESOL from May 1, 2013, until April 1, 2014), the rating in the area of Professional Development will be no better than B/NI (Basic/Needs Improvement). Note: ESOL portfolios must be submitted to Professional Development no later than April 15, 2014. 3. For those teachers who have made inadequate progress toward Reading for the second year or longer (meaning they have not taken the required courses in the required period of time), the rating in the area of Professional Development will be no better than B/NI (Basic/Needs Improvement). 4. For those teachers who have made no progress or inadequate progress toward Reading and/or ESOL for the first time during 2013-2014, the rating will be no better than a B/NI (Basic/Needs Improvement) in the area of Professional Development. Note: All requirements must be COMPLETED and ASSESSED by the due date of May 21, 2014, to be considered in the 2013-2014 final ratings. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 33 ITINERANT TEACHERS Itinerant teachers (teachers who serve more than one location) will be evaluated by the building-level administrator of the base school, as determined by MyPGS. Observations may be conducted by both administrators who will confer on one final evaluation. The following teachers are evaluated by their district-level supervisors with input from the site-based administrator(s): Deaf/Hard of Hearing Teachers ESE Placement Specialists ESE Program Specialists High School Gifted Consultation Teachers Pre-K Instructional Support Teachers School Psychologists School Social Workers Speech/Language Clinicians Transition Specialists VAATT Teachers Vision Teachers TEACHERS WITH MORE THAN ONE JOB FUNCTION Teachers with more than one job function, on the same site or shared between sites, are to be evaluated as one teacher, not per job function. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 34 VSET IMPROVEMENT PLAN After one semester of support*, or the equivalent**, when performance continues to be deficient, as determined by the administrator, the principal/site administrator places the teacher on a VSET Improvement Plan. Timeline for improvement is 90 calendar days. The VSET Improvement Plan may be written at any point in the year as determined by the principal/site supervisor. The VSET Improvement Plan requires a Support Team which is coordinated with the Office of Employee Performance Assessment. The teacher and evaluator may each select three employees of the district, any site, to serve on the Support Team. The role of the Support Team is that of support, not evaluation. Typically, one Support Team meeting per month is held for the purpose of offering suggestions to the teacher. Between Support Team meetings, the Support Team members may shadow, or be shadowed by, the teacher on the improvement plan for the purpose of constructive feedback. If sufficient improvement by the teacher has been recognized while on the Improvement Plan, the teacher is monitored via a Directed Deliberate Practice Plan. If sufficient improvement has not been demonstrated by the teacher while on the Improvement Plan, termination of the teacher’s employment will be recommended by the Superintendent to the school board. The principal/site administrator, who serves as the evaluator during the VSET Improvement Plan, is to work closely with the Office of Employee Performance Assessment at this level of technical assistance. *Support could include assignment of a PAR (budget permitting). When funding prevents the assignment of a PAR, another method of support will be utilized, as directed by the Superintendent or designee which may include, but is not limited to, school-based coaches, school-based support, and/or district-level support. **For those teachers who begin later in the year, the equivalent of one semester of support is to be provided. OUTCOMES WITH PAR Three possible outcomes when completing a semester with a PAR evaluator include: Exit with success Recommendation for another semester Exit without success; 90-day “Improvement Plan” VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 35 VSET 2013-2014 One Semester of Support (18 weeks) Teacher: _________________________________________________________________ Teacher’s Assignment: _________________ School/Site: __________________________ Administrator:_________________________________ Date of meeting with teacher to discuss concerns and offer support and for the teacher to provide input regarding support: ________________________________________________________________________ List Support Provided and/or Offered Date Initiated Note: One semester of support refers to 18 weeks of support which could begin at any point in the year. Teacher’s Signature ________________________________ Date _____________________ Administrator’s Signature ____________________________ Date _____________________ _________________________________________________ Date _____________________ Signature of Witness denoting that employee received a copy of this document but refused to sign it (Witness signature is necessary only if employee refuses to sign this document.) VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 36 DATE: Write out the month, include the year TO: Name, Title Complete Social Security Number FROM: Name, Title School/Site RE: Placement on VSET Improvement Plan ______________________________________ is being placed on a VSET Improvement Plan (Teacher’s Name and has until ___________________________ to provide his/her evaluator with the names of (Date) three (3) employees of the district (any school/site) to serve on his/her VSET Improvement Plan Support Team. The evaluator will also be suggesting three (3) employees of the district (any school/site) to serve on this VSET Improvement Plan Support Team. ___________________________________________________ Signature of Teacher _____________ Date ______________________________________________ Signature of Administrator ______________ Date ______________________________________________ Signature of Witness denoting that employee received a copy of this document but refused to sign it ______________ Date (Witness signature is necessary only if employee refuses to sign this document.) Original: Copies: Employee’s File at the School/Site Employee Coordinator of Employee Performance Assessment VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 37 VSET IMPROVEMENT PLAN TEACHER’S NAME SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER SCHOOL/SITE ASSIGNMENT PRINCIPAL/SITE ADMINISTRATOR’S NAME SCHOOL YEAR SUPPORT TEAM MEMBERS’ NAMES Note: Contact Office of Employee Performance Assessment for VSET Improvement Plan template and assistance. (X) Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Setting Instructional Outcomes Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Designing Coherent Instruction Assessing Student Learning Domain 3: Instruction Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Establishing a Culture for Learning Managing Classroom Procedures Managing Student Behavior Organizing Physical Space Communicating with Students Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Engaging Students in Learning Using Assessment in Instruction Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Domain 2: Classroom Environment Domain 1: Planning and Preparation MARK AREA(S) OF CONCERN WITH AN “X” Reflecting on Teaching Maintaining Accurate Records Communicating with Families Participating in a Professional Community Growing and Developing Professionally Showing Professionalism Note: Initials of teacher and administrator are required on each page not containing signatures. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 38 VSET IMPROVEMENT PLAN Page 2 Teacher’s Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Component of Concern Details of Concern The teacher needs to Improvement Expected (The teacher is assessed by way of expectations.) The teacher will Suggestions for Improvement (The teacher is not assessed by way of suggestions.) The teacher should (For more than one component, duplicate the above as needed.) VSET Improvement Plan Developed On: ____________________________________ Improvement Assessed On or After ____________________________________ Date (Same as date of signature) Date (90 calendar days not including holidays or summer) ______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Teacher’s Signature Denoting Receipt of a Copy of This Improvement Plan Date ______________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Evaluator’s Signature Date ______________________________________________________________________ Signature of Witness Denoting that Teacher Received a Copy of this Improvement Plan but refused to sign it. (Witness signature is necessary only if teacher refuses to sign this Improvement Plan.) VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 ___________________________________________ Date Page 39 RESULTS OF VSET IMPROVEMENT PLAN Teacher’s Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Performance meets expectations. Teacher has demonstrated improvement, and will be returned to a Directed DPP. Teacher failed to show sufficient improvement. Termination of the teacher’s employment will be recommended to the School Board. _________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluator’s Signature ___________________________________________ Date _________________________________________________________________________________________ Signature of Witness Denoting that Teacher Received a Copy of this Improvement Plan Results Page but refused to sign it. (Witness signature is necessary only if teacher refused to sign this Improvement Plan Results Page.) ___________________________________________ Date Teacher’s Signature Denoting Receipt of a Copy of This Improvement Plan Original: Copies: Date Teacher’s Personnel File at the School/Site Teacher May be used as evidence in VSET System VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 40 ACCESSING THE TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM (VSET) The teacher evaluation system is managed through MyPGS (My Professional Growth System), linked from the district’s homepage or at: http://volusia.truenorthlogic.com/. This system can be accessed from school, home or anywhere with Internet access. The user can log-on through the district’s portal, using his/her network user ID and password. Teachers will not only use this system to access and manage their evaluation activities, but this will also be the system to search, register and manage professional development learning opportunities. MyPGS provides a Learning Channel with Step-by-Step Directions, Videos, and Tutorials for assistance. The online system is linked from the district’s homepage under Staff Applications and the URL is http://vweb13/. The site is maintained by the district’s Technology Services Department, and users should call the Technical Services Help Desk at extension 20000 for technical assistance. The VSET online system provides an individualized dashboard in which the user selects the school year, observation type, and can filter by: date, type, and school year. The user can view, edit and print appropriate fields and can view all completed observations. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 41 Other Evidence Collection Tools The input form may be used by parents, teachers, or other interested parties to provide evidence regarding the assessment of teachers. At times, the evaluator may feel that the issue is less academic and more behavioral. In this case, the evaluator may choose to utilize the Record of Conference or Letter of Caution or Letter of Reprimand. The following documents are not part of the VSET evaluation process. However, they are documents that may be used by an administrator who has concerns outside of the evaluation process and may be used as evidence. APPENDIX 1 VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 42 VOLUSIA COUNTY SCHOOLS INPUT FORM This form is to be used by parents, teachers, or other interested parties to provide input towards the assessment of teachers. TEACHER’S NAME: ____________________________________________ SITE: _____________________________________________________________ Comments: Signature: _____________________________Date: ___________________ Please Print Name/Title:______________________________________________ Note: When used as evidence, the Input Form will be uploaded into the VSET system. This signed form will be placed in the Principal’s correspondence file for this year and the following school year. Copy: Area Superintendent or Site Supervisor Revised: 7/14/2013 Owner: Human Resources VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 2008-144VCS Print Locally July 24, 2013 Page 43 EFFECTIVE EVALUATIONS An expectation of effective evaluation is timely communication of concerns by way of a conversation. This could result in a conversation only or a conversation that leads to a document within the VSET procedures, meaning a Record of Conference, Letter of Caution, Letter of Reprimand, or VSET Improvement Plan. Emails and personal notes do not suffice as “documents within the VEST procedures.” Record of Conference In assessing the performance of instructional personnel, issues may occasionally arise for which a Record of Conference is the appropriate vehicle for comment. These performance issues are not too serious and require immediate change. A Record of Conference is designed to provide the employee with a description of concerns and expectations. The Record of Conference should be signed and dated by the evaluator and the teacher. A copy is given to the teacher, and the original is retained in the teacher’s personnel file at the worksite. When used as evidence, the Record of Conference will be uploaded into the VSET system. Letter of Caution The Letter of Caution is not discipline. It is used to serve as a warning and to provide written expectations for future conduct and performance. The Letter of Caution should be signed and dated by the evaluator and the teacher. A copy is given to the teacher, and the original is retained in the teacher’s personnel file at the worksite. When used as evidence, the Letter of Caution will be uploaded into the VSET system. Letter of Reprimand Per the *definition of discipline in the VTO Contract, the Letter of Reprimand is discipline. It is used for serious infractions of behavior or judgment. The Letter of Reprimand should be signed and dated by the evaluator and the teacher. A copy is given to the teacher and a copy is forwarded to Professional Standards. The original is retained in the teacher’s personnel file at the worksite. When used as evidence, the Letter of Reprimand will be uploaded into the VSET system. Note: Conversations, emails, and notes will not be considered sufficient evidence under VSET to support deficient ratings as they relate to professional indiscretions. Note: When they support ratings, documents such as Records of Conference, Letters of Caution/Reprimand, Improvement Plans, and Letters in Place of Final Evaluations are to be downloaded into MyPGS. *Definition of discipline in the VTO contract: A written reprimand, suspension without pay, or termination from employment. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 44 INSTRUCTIONAL RECORD OF CONFERENCE Teacher’s Name_______________________________ School/Site_____________________ Social Security Number __________________________________________________________ This form constitutes a Record of Conference based on our conference held on _________ date to discuss the following area(s) of concern. ___________________________________________________________________ Proper procedures must be followed, meaning two ___________________________________________________________________ conferences will be required; one to provide the employee with an opportunity to discuss the ___________________________________________________________________ administrator’s concerns, and, IF NECESSARY, a ___________________________________________________________________ second to sign any paperwork resulting from the first conference. ___________________________________________________________________ Summary of Conference: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ My expectations are that you will ________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ I am confident, through your commitment, this will lead to successful performance. ___________________________________________________________ Teacher’s Signature denoting receipt of a copy of this Record of Conference _______________________________________ Date __________________________________________________________ Administrator’s Signature _______________________________________ Date __________________________________________________________ ________________________ Signature of Witness denoting that teacher received a copy of this Record of Conference but refused to sign it (Witness signature is necessary only if teacher refuses to sign this Record of Conference.) Date Note: The teacher has the right to submit a written response (must be signed and dated) which shall become a part of this document. Original: Copies: Teacher’s Personnel File at the School/Site Teacher May be used as evidence in VSET System Owner: Human Resources VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Print Locally July 24, 2013 Page 45 SCHOOL/SITE LETTERHEAD Date: [Insert date] To: [Insert name of employee, title] From: [Insert name of administrator/evaluator, title] Re: LETTER OF CAUTION At times it becomes necessary to provide written clarification or guidance regarding the expectations of the district. Such letters are referred to as letters of caution and are not disciplinary action. Please note that all employees are required to follow all rules, procedures, policies, laws and other direction/requirement from his or her evaluator and/or supervisor. Should an employee fail to comply with those requirements, it is possible that disciplinary action may result. Letters of caution serve as a warning and provide written expectations for future conduct and performance that may be relied upon in performance evaluations consistent with applicable district evaluation procedures and are intended to avoid a future situation warranting disciplinary action. On [insert date], we discussed my concern about your compliance with [insert specific reference to rule, procedure, policy, law and other direction/requirement.] This letter is intended to memorialize my concern and advise you to take immediate steps to [insert detail(s) of your expectation(s)] to ensure your compliance with the aforementioned requirement. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this letter. You are not required to respond to this letter. In the event you elect to write a rebuttal to me, a copy of that response will be attached to this letter and placed in your school/site employee file. ______________________________________________ Signature of Administrator ______________________ Date ______________________________________________ Signature of Employee denoting receipt of a copy of this Letter of Caution _____________________ Date ______________________________________________ ______________________ Signature of Witness denoting that employee received Date a copy of this Letter of Caution but refused to sign it (Witness signature is necessary only if employee refuses to sign this Letter of Caution.) Original: Copies: Employee’s File at the School/Site Employee For teachers: May be used as evidence in VSET System For administrators: May be used as evidence in VSEL System For AFSCME, Non-Bargaining/Non-Instructional and VESA: May be attached to final evaluations VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 46 SCHOOL/SITE LETTERHEAD Date: Complete Date To: Name of Employee, Title Social Security Number From: Name of Administrator/Evaluator, Title Re: LETTER OF REPRIMAND Paragraph 1 – Describe the incident/indiscretion. Example – On (complete date), it was reported to me that (specifics). Paragraph 2 – Reference the due process conference. Example – During our conference on (complete date), you admitted that (or you denied that… ) Note: Based on all the evidence you have gathered, even with a denial, a letter of reprimand may be written. Paragraph 3 – State your findings. Example – Having heard and considered your response regarding…, I have determined that it is necessary to issue this Letter of Reprimand. Note: Re-state the incident/indiscretion and why it is not acceptable. Paragraph 4 – Clarify your expectations. Example – If you repeat the behavior that necessitated this Letter of Reprimand, or if there is another incident of unsatisfactory behavior or poor judgment on your part, further disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment, may result. ______________________________________________ Signature of Administrator/Evaluator ______________________ Date ______________________________________________________ Signature of Employee denoting receipt of a copy of this Letter of Reprimand ___________________________ Date ______________________________________________ _____________________ Signature of Witness denoting that employee received Date a copy of this Letter of Reprimand but refused to sign it (Witness signature is necessary only if employee refuses to sign this Letter of Reprimand.) Original: Copies: Employee’s File at the School/Site Employee Professional Standards For teachers: May be used as evidence in VSET System For administrators: May be used as evidence in VSEL System For AFSCME, Non-Bargaining/Non-Instructional and VESA: May be attached to final evaluations VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 47 APPENDIX 2 RUBRICS The 2012-2013 non-classroom instructional rubrics will be used as hard copy conference tools (look fors) and may be uploaded into the VSET system during the 2013-2014 school year. Rubrics may be located in MyPGS VSET Online Help in pdf format. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 48 The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument 2011 – Rubrics © 2011 The Danielson Group Classroom Teachers 1 UNSATISFACTORY 2 BASIC/DEVELOPING/ NEEDS IMPROVEMENT 3 PROFICIENT/EFFECTIVE 1b Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 1a Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy In planning and practice, teacher makes Teacher is familiar with the important concepts Teacher displays solid knowledge of the content errors or does not correct errors made in the discipline but displays lack of awareness important concepts in the discipline and the by students. of how these concepts relate to one another. ways they relate to one another. 4 DISTINGUISHED/HIGHLY EFFECTIVE Teacher displays extensive knowledge of the important concepts in the discipline and the ways they relate both to one another and to other disciplines. Teacher’s plans and practice display little Teacher’s plans and practice indicate some understanding of prerequisite relationships awareness of prerequisite relationships, important to student’s learning of the content. although such knowledge may be inaccurate or incomplete. Teacher displays little or no understanding of the range of pedagogical approaches suitable Teacher’s plans and practice reflect a limited to student’s learning of the content. range of pedagogical approaches to the discipline or to the students. Teacher’s plans and practice reflect accurate understanding of prerequisite relationships Teacher’s plans and practice reflect among topics and concepts. understanding of prerequisite relationships among topics and concepts and provide a link Teacher’s plans and practice reflect familiarity to necessary cognitive structures needed by with a wide range of effective pedagogical students to ensure understanding. approaches in the discipline. Teacher’s plans and practice reflect familiarity with a wide range of effective pedagogical approaches in the discipline, anticipating student misconceptions. Teacher demonstrates little or no understanding of how students learn, and little knowledge of students’ backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs, and does not seek such understanding. Teacher understands the active nature of student learning, and attains information about levels of development for groups of students. The teacher also purposefully seeks knowledge from several sources of students’ backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs, and attains this knowledge for groups of students. Teacher indicates the importance of understanding how students learn and the students’ backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs, and attains this knowledge for the class as a whole. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Teacher actively seeks knowledge of students’ levels of development and their backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests, and special needs from a variety of sources. This information is acquired for individual students. Page 49 1c Setting Instructional Outcomes 1d Knowledge of Resources Outcomes represent low expectations for Outcomes represent moderately high students and lack of rigor, and not all of them expectations and rigor. reflect important learning in the discipline. Some reflect important learning in the Outcomes are stated as activities rather than discipline and consist of a combination of as student learning. outcomes and activities. Most outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. All outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. All the instructional outcomes are clear, are written in the form of student learning, and suggest viable methods of assessment. The outcomes are clear, are written in the form of student learning, and permit viable methods of assessment. Outcomes reflect only one type of learning and only one discipline or strand and are suitable for only some students. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and opportunities for coordination. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and, where appropriate, represent opportunities for both coordination and integration. Teacher is unaware of school or district resources for classroom use, for the expansion of his or her own knowledge, or for students. Outcomes reflect several types of learning, but teacher has made no attempt at coordination or integration. Outcomes take into account the varying Most of the outcomes are suitable for most of needs of groups of students. the students in the class in accordance with global assessments of student learning. Teacher displays basic awareness of school or district resources available for classroom use, for the expansion of his or her own knowledge, and for students, but no knowledge of resources available more broadly. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Teacher displays awareness of resources— not only through the school and district but also through sources external to the school and on the Internet—available for classroom use, for the expansion of his or her own knowledge, and for students. July 24, 2013 Outcomes take into account the varying needs of individual students. Teacher displays extensive knowledge of resources—not only through the school and district but also in the community, through professional organizations and universities, and on the Internet—for classroom use, for the expansion of his or her own knowledge, and for students. Page 50 1f Designing Student Assessments 1e Designing Coherent Instruction The series of learning experiences is poorly aligned with the instructional outcomes and does not represent a coherent structure. Some of the learning activities and materials are suitable to the instructional outcomes and represent a moderate cognitive challenge but with no differentiation for different students. The activities are not designed to engage Instructional groups partially support the students in active intellectual activity and instructional outcomes, with an effort by the have unrealistic time allocations. Instructional teacher at providing some variety. groups do not support the instructional outcomes and offer no variety. The lesson or unit has a recognizable structure; the progression of activities is uneven, with most time allocations reasonable. Assessment procedures are not congruent with instructional outcomes; the proposed approach contains no criteria or standards. Some of the instructional outcomes are assessed through the proposed approach, but others are not. Teacher has no plan to incorporate formative assessment in the lesson or unit nor any plan to use assessment results in designing future instruction. Assessment criteria and standards have been developed, but they are not clear. Approach to the use of formative assessment is rudimentary, including only some of the instructional outcomes. Teacher intends to use assessment results to plan for future instruction for the class as a whole. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Teacher coordinates knowledge of content, of students, and of resources, to design a series of learning experiences aligned to instructional outcomes and suitable to groups of students. The learning activities have reasonable time allocations; they represent significant cognitive challenge, with some differentiation for different groups of students. The lesson or unit has a clear structure, with appropriate and varied use of instructional groups. Teacher’s plan for student assessment is aligned with the instructional outcomes; assessment methodologies may have been adapted for groups of students. Assessment criteria and standards are clear. Teacher has a well-developed strategy for using formative assessment and has designed particular approaches to be used. Teacher intends to use assessment results to plan for future instruction for groups of students. July 24, 2013 Plans represent the coordination of in-depth content knowledge, understanding of different students’ needs, and available resources (including technology), resulting in a series of learning activities designed to engage students in high-level cognitive activity. Learning activities are differentiated appropriately for individual learners. Instructional groups are varied appropriately with some opportunity for student choice. The lesson’s or unit’s structure is clear and allows for different pathways according to diverse student needs. Teacher’s plan for student assessment is fully aligned with the instructional outcomes and has clear criteria and standards that show evidence of student contribution to their development. Assessment methodologies have been adapted for individual students, as needed. The approach to using formative assessment is well designed and includes student as well as teacher use of the assessment information. Teacher intends to use assessment results to plan future instruction for individual students. Page 51 2a Environment of Respect and Rapport 2b Establishing a Culture for Learning Patterns of classroom interactions, both between the teacher and students and among students, are mostly negative, inappropriate, or insensitive to students’ ages, cultural backgrounds, and developmental levels. Interactions are characterized by sarcasm, put-downs, or conflict. Teacher does not deal with disrespectful behavior. The classroom culture is characterized by a lack of teacher or student commitment to learning and/or little or no investment of student energy into the task at hand. Hard work is not expected or valued. Medium or low expectations for student achievement are the norm, with high expectations for learning reserved for only one or two students. Patterns of classroom interactions, both between the teacher and students and among students, are generally appropriate but may reflect occasional inconsistencies, favoritism, and disregard for students’ ages, cultures, and developmental levels. Students rarely demonstrate disrespect for one another. Teacher attempts to respond to disrespectful behavior, with uneven results. The net result of the interactions is neutral, conveying neither warmth nor conflict. The classroom culture is characterized by little commitment to learning by teacher or students. The teacher appears to be only going through the motions, and students indicate that they are interested in completion of a task, rather than quality. The teacher conveys that student success is the result of natural ability rather than hard work; high expectations for learning are reserved for those students thought to have a natural aptitude for the subject. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Teacher-student interactions are friendly and demonstrate general caring and respect. Such interactions are appropriate to the ages of the students. Classroom interactions among the teacher and individual students are highly respectful, reflecting genuine warmth and caring and sensitivity to students as individuals. Students exhibit respect for the teacher. Interactions among students are generally polite and respectful. Students exhibit respect for the teacher and contribute to high levels of civil interaction between all members of the class. The net result of interactions is that of connections with students as individuals. Teacher responds successfully to disrespectful behavior among students. The net result of the interactions is polite and respectful, but impersonal. The classroom culture is a cognitively busy place where learning is valued by all, with high expectations for learning being the norm for most students. The teacher conveys that with hard work students can be successful. Students understand their role as learners and consistently expend effort to learn. Classroom interactions support learning and hard work. July 24, 2013 The classroom culture is a cognitively vibrant place, characterized by a shared belief in the importance of learning. The teacher conveys high expectations for learning by all students and insists on hard work. Students assume responsibility for high quality by initiating improvements, making revisions, adding detail, and/or helping peers. Page 52 2c Managing Classroom Procedures 2d Managing Student Behavior Much instructional time is lost through inefficient classroom routines and procedures. Some instructional time is lost through only partially effective classroom routines and procedures. There is little loss of instructional time because of effective classroom routines and procedures. There is little or no evidence that the teacher is managing instructional groups, transitions, and/or the handling of materials and supplies effectively. The teacher’s management of instructional groups, transitions, and/or the handling of materials and supplies is inconsistent, the result being some disruption of learning. The teacher’s management of instructional groups and the handling of materials and supplies are consistently successful. There is little evidence that students know or follow established routines. With regular guidance and prompting, students follow established routines. There appear to be no established standards of conduct and little or no teacher monitoring of student behavior. Standards of conduct appear to have been established, but their implementation is inconsistent. Students challenge the standards of conduct. Teacher tries, with uneven results, to monitor student behavior and respond to student misbehavior. Response to students’ misbehavior is repressive or disrespectful of student dignity. 2e Organizing Physical Space The physical environment is unsafe, or many students don’t have access to learning resources. There is poor coordination between the lesson activities and the arrangement of furniture and resources, including computer technology. With minimal guidance and prompting, students follow established classroom routines. The teacher’s use of physical resources, including computer technology, is moderately effective. Teacher makes some attempt to modify the physical arrangement to suit learning activities, with partial success. Students contribute to the management of instructional groups, transitions, and the handling of materials and supplies. Routines are well understood and may be initiated by students. Student behavior is generally appropriate. Student behavior is entirely appropriate. The teacher monitors student behavior against established standards of conduct. Students take an active role in monitoring their own behavior and that of other students against standards of conduct. Teacher response to student misbehavior is consistent, proportionate, respectful to students, and effective. There is inconsistent implementation of the standards of conduct. The classroom is safe, and essential learning is accessible to most students. Instructional time is maximized because of efficient classroom routines and procedures. Teachers’ monitoring of student behavior is subtle and preventive. Teacher’s response to student misbehavior is sensitive to individual student needs and respects students’ dignity. The classroom is safe, and learning is accessible to all students; teacher ensures that the physical arrangement is appropriate to the learning activities. Teacher makes effective use of physical resources, including computer technology. The classroom is safe, and learning is accessible to all students, including those with special needs. Teacher makes effective use of physical resources, including computer technology. The teacher ensures that the physical arrangement is appropriate to the learning activities. Students contribute to the use or adaptation of the physical environment to advance learning. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 53 3b Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3a Communicating with Students The instructional purpose of the lesson is unclear to students, and the directions and procedures are confusing. The teacher’s explanation of the content contains major errors. The teacher’s spoken or written language contains errors of grammar or syntax. The teacher’s vocabulary is inappropriate, vague, or used incorrectly, leaving students confused. The teacher’s attempt to explain the instructional purpose has only limited success, and/or directions and procedures must be clarified after initial student confusion. The teacher clearly communicates instructional purpose of the lesson, including where it is situated within broader learning, and explains procedures and directions clearly. The teacher links the instructional purpose of the lesson to student interests; the directions and procedures are clear and anticipate possible student misunderstanding. The teacher’s explanation of the content may contain minor errors; some portions are clear; other portions are difficult to follow. Teacher’s explanation of content is well scaffolded, clear and accurate, and connects with students’ knowledge and experience. The teacher’s explanation of content is thorough and clear, developing conceptual understanding through artful scaffolding and connecting with students’ interests. During the explanation of content, the teacher invites student intellectual engagement. Students contribute to extending the content and help explain concepts to their classmates. Teacher’s spoken and written language is clear and correct and uses vocabulary appropriate to the students’ ages and interests. The teacher’s spoken and written language is expressive, and the teacher finds opportunities to extend students’ vocabularies. Although the teacher may use some lowlevel questions, he or she asks the students questions designed to promote thinking and understanding. Teacher uses a variety or series of questions or prompts to challenge students cognitively, advance high-level thinking and discourse, and promote metacognition. Teacher creates a genuine discussion among students, providing adequate time for students to respond and stepping aside when appropriate. Students formulate many questions, initiate topics, and make unsolicited contributions. The teacher’s explanation consists of a monologue, with no invitation to the students for intellectual engagement. Teacher’s spoken language is correct; however, his or her vocabulary is limited, or not fully appropriate to the students’ ages or backgrounds. Teacher’s questions are of low cognitive challenge, require single correct responses, and are asked in rapid succession. Teacher’s questions lead students through a single path of inquiry, with answers seemingly determined in advance. Interaction between teacher and students is predominantly recitation style, with the teacher mediating all questions and answers. Alternatively, the teacher attempts to frame some questions designed to promote student thinking and understanding, but only a few students are involved. A few students dominate the discussion. Teacher attempts to engage all students in the discussion and to encourage them to respond to one another, but with uneven results. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Students themselves ensure that all voices are heard in the discussion. Teacher successfully engages most students in the discussion, employing a range of strategies to ensure that most students are heard. July 24, 2013 Page 54 3c Engaging Students in Learning The learning tasks and activities, materials, resources, instructional groups and technology are poorly aligned with the instructional outcomes or require only rote responses. The learning tasks and activities are partially aligned with the instructional outcomes but require only minimal thinking by students, allowing most to be passive or merely compliant. The pace of the lesson is too slow or too rushed. The pacing of the lesson may not provide students the time needed to be intellectually engaged. Few students are intellectually engaged or interested. The learning tasks and activities are aligned with the instructional outcomes and designed to challenge student thinking, the result being that most students display active intellectual engagement with important and challenging content and are supported in that engagement by teacher scaffolding. The pacing of the lesson is appropriate, providing most students the time needed to be intellectually engaged. Virtually all students are intellectually engaged in challenging content through well-designed learning tasks and suitable scaffolding by the teacher and fully aligned with the instructional outcomes. In addition, there is evidence of some student initiation of inquiry and of student contribution to the exploration of important content. The pacing of the lesson provides students the time needed to intellectually engage with and reflect upon their learning and to consolidate their understanding. Students may have some choice in how they complete tasks and may serve as resources for one another. 3d Using Assessment in Instruction There is little or no assessment or monitoring of student learning; feedback is absent or of poor quality. Students do not appear to be aware of the assessment criteria and do not engage in self-assessment. Assessment is used sporadically by teacher and/or students to support instruction through some monitoring of progress in learning. Feedback to students is general, students appear to be only partially aware of the assessment criteria used to evaluate their work, and few assess their own work. Questions, prompts, and assessments are rarely used to diagnose evidence of learning. Assessment is used regularly by teacher and/or students during the lesson through monitoring of learning progress and results in accurate, specific feedback that advances learning. Students appear to be aware of the assessment criteria; some of them engage in self-assessment. Questions, prompts, assessments are used to diagnose evidence of learning. Assessment is fully integrated into instruction through extensive use of formative assessment. Students appear to be aware of, and there is some evidence that they have contributed to, the assessment criteria. Students self-assess and monitor their progress. A variety of feedback, from both their teacher and their peers, is accurate, specific, and advances learning. Questions, prompts, assessments are used regularly to diagnose evidence of learning by individual students. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 55 3e Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness 4a Reflecting on Teaching 4b Maintaining Accurate Records Teacher adheres to the instruction plan in spite of evidence of poor student understanding or lack of interest. Teacher attempts to modify the lesson when needed and to respond to student questions and interests, with moderate success. Teacher ignores student questions; when students experience difficulty, the teacher blames the students or their home environment. Teacher accepts responsibility for student success but has only a limited repertoire of strategies to draw upon. Teacher does not know whether a lesson was effective or achieved its instructional outcomes, or he/she profoundly misjudges the success of a lesson. Teacher has a generally accurate impression of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which instructional outcomes were met. Teacher has no suggestions for how a lesson could be improved. Teacher makes general suggestions about how a lesson could be improved. Teacher’s system for maintaining information on student completion of assignments and student progress in learning is nonexistent or in disarray. Teacher’s records for noninstructional activities are in disarray, resulting in errors and confusion. Teacher’s system for maintaining information on student completion of assignments and student progress in learning is rudimentary and only partially effective. Teacher promotes the successful learning of all students, making minor adjustments as needed to instruction plans and accommodating student questions, needs, and interests. Teacher seizes an opportunity to enhance learning, building on a spontaneous event or student interests, or successfully adjusts and differentiates instruction to address individual student misunderstandings. Drawing on a broad repertoire of strategies, the teacher persists in seeking approaches for students who have difficulty learning. Teacher persists in seeking effective approaches for students who need help, using an extensive repertoire of instructional strategies and soliciting additional resources from the school or community. Teacher makes an accurate assessment of a lesson’s effectiveness and the extent to which it achieved its instructional outcomes and can cite general 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 instructional outcomes, citing many specific examples from the lesson and weighing the relative strengths of each. Teacher makes a few specific suggestions of what could be tried another time the lesson is taught. Teacher’s system for maintaining information on student completion of assignments, student progress in learning, and noninstructional records is fully effective. Teacher’s records for noninstructional activities are adequate but require frequent monitoring to avoid errors. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Drawing on an extensive repertoire of skills, teacher offers specific alternative actions, complete with the probable success of different courses of action. Teacher’s system for maintaining information on student completion of assignments, student progress in learning, and noninstructional records is fully effective. Students contribute information and participate in maintaining the records. July 24, 2013 Page 56 4c Communicating with Families Teacher communication with families— about the instructional program, about individual students—is sporadic or culturally inappropriate. Teacher makes no attempt to engage families in the instructional program. 4e Growing and Developing Professionally 4d Participating in Professional Community Teacher’s relationships with colleagues are negative or self-serving. Teacher avoids participation in a professional culture of inquiry, resisting opportunities to become involved. Teacher avoids becoming involved in school events or school and district projects. Teacher makes sporadic attempts to communicate with families about the instructional program and about the progress of individual students but does not attempt to engage families in the instructional program. Communications are one-way and not always appropriate to the cultural norms of those families. Teacher communicates frequently with families about the instructional program and conveys information about individual student progress. Teacher’s communication with families is frequent and sensitive to cultural traditions, with students contributing to the communication. Teacher makes some attempts to engage families in the instructional program. Response to family concerns is handled with professional and cultural sensitivity. Information to families is conveyed in a culturally appropriate manner. Teacher’s efforts to engage families in the instructional program are frequent and successful. Teacher maintains cordial relationships with colleagues to fulfill duties that the school or district requires. Teacher’s relationships with colleagues are characterized by mutual support and cooperation; teacher actively participates in a culture of professional inquiry. Teacher’s relationships with colleagues are characterized by mutual support and cooperation, with the teacher taking initiative in assuming leadership among the faculty. Teacher volunteers to participate in school events and in school and district projects, making a substantial contribution. Teacher takes a leadership role in promoting a culture of professional inquiry. Teacher becomes involved in the school’s culture of professional inquiry when invited to do so. Teacher participates in school events and school and district projects when specifically asked to do so. Teacher volunteers to participate in school events and district projects making a substantial contribution, and assuming a leadership role in at least one aspect of school or district life. Teacher engages in no professional development activities to enhance knowledge or skill. Teacher participates in professional activities to a limited extent when they are convenient. Teacher seeks out opportunities for professional development to enhance content knowledge and pedagogical skill. Teacher seeks out opportunities for professional development and makes a systematic effort to conduct action research. Teacher resists feedback on teaching performance from either supervisors or more experienced colleagues. Teacher accepts, with some reluctance, feedback on teaching performance from both supervisors and colleagues. Teacher seeks out feedback on teaching from both supervisors and colleagues. Teacher makes no effort to share knowledge with others or to assume professional responsibilities. Teacher finds limited ways to contribute to the profession. Teacher welcomes feedback from colleagues—either when made by supervisors or when opportunities arise through professional collaboration. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 Teacher initiates important activities to contribute to the profession. Teacher participates actively in assisting other educators. July 24, 2013 Page 57 4f Showing Professionalism Teacher displays dishonesty in interactions with colleagues, students, and the public. Teacher is honest in interactions with colleagues, students, and the public. Teacher is not alert to students’ needs and contributes to school practices that result in some students’ being ill served by the school. Teacher attempts, though inconsistently, to serve students. Teacher does not knowingly contribute to some students’ being ill served by the school. Teacher makes decisions and recommendations based on self-serving interests. Teacher does not comply with school and district regulations. Teacher’s decisions and recommendations are based on limited but genuinely professional considerations. Teacher complies minimally with school and district regulations, doing just enough to get by. Teacher displays high standards of honesty, integrity, and confidentiality in interactions with colleagues, students, and the public. Teacher is active in serving students, working to ensure that all students receive a fair opportunity to succeed. Teacher maintains an open mind in team or departmental decision making. Teacher complies fully with school and district regulations. Teacher takes a leadership role with colleagues and can be counted on to hold to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and confidentiality. Teacher is highly proactive in serving students, seeking out resources when needed. Teacher makes a concerted effort to challenge negative attitudes or practices to ensure that all students, particularly those traditionally underserved, are honored in the school. Teacher takes a leadership role in team or departmental decision making and helps ensure that such decisions are based on the highest professional standards. Teacher complies fully with school and district regulations, taking a leadership role with colleagues. VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 58 School Board Members Mrs. Diane Smith, Chairman Ms. Candace Lankford, Vice-Chairman Mrs. Linda Costello Mr. Stan Schmidt Mrs. Ida D. Wright Superintendent of Schools Dr. Margaret A. Smith Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources Mrs. Peromnia Grant SCHOOL DISTRICT OF VOLUSIA COUNTY VISION STATEMENT Through the individual commitment of all, our students will graduate with the knowledge, skills, and values necessary to be successful contributors to our democratic society. School Board adopted April 14, 1992 Reaffirmed January 14, 1997 VSET Handbook, 2013-2014 July 24, 2013 Page 59
* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
advertisement
© 2021