1 / 14

Evaluating Teachers Across Content Areas

Evaluating Teachers Across Content Areas. School Accountability Growth. Better Evaluation of Teachers. In order to improve practice, teachers need feedback that is accurate, authentic, and actionable.

Download Presentation

Evaluating Teachers Across Content Areas

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Evaluating Teachers Across Content Areas

  2. School Accountability Growth

  3. Better Evaluation of Teachers • In order to improve practice, teachers need feedback that is accurate, authentic, and actionable. • Accurate: Feedback precisely reflects the teacher’s practice in the classroom (not just during observation). • Authentic: Feedback recommends action that is consistent with established best practice. • Actionable: Feedback provides concrete examples of what teachers can do to improve. • The feedback that teachers receive should be specific to the content that the teacher delivers.

  4. Standards 3 and 4 • Standard 3 (Content Knowledge) and Standard 4 (Facilitate Learning) should be strongly related to student achievement and growth. • Standard 3 is the “what” and Standard 4 is the “how” of student learning. • While teacher behavior measured by Standard 4 could be uniform across subject areas, Standard 3 is highly variable across content domains. • How well do higher ratings on Standard 3 relate to student growth (as compared to ratings on Standard 4)?

  5. Standards 3 and 4 (Math) Value-Added Index Grades 6 and up

  6. Standards 3 and 4 (ELA) Value-Added Index Grades 6 and up

  7. Principal Content Expertise Value-Added Index Grades 6 and up

  8. Conclusions • Differences in Standard 4 ratings (the how) in math are more predictive of student growth than differences in Standard 3 ratings (the what). • This doesn’t mean that content knowledge doesn’t matter, but that, on average, we aren’t measuring this aspect of teaching as well the facilitation of learning. • We cannot determine from these data whether the issue of evaluating math content knowledge is “skill” or “will.” • Our READY Principals meetings will focus on improving the observation and evaluation of mathematics instruction.

  9. Questions and Comments Thomas Tomberlin 919-807-3440 thomas.tomberlin@dpi.nc.gov educatoreffectiveness@dpi.nc.gov

  10. Analysis of Student Work Principal Updates

  11. ASW - Principal Role Approve the Teacher’s Schedule • Principal receives notification from TNL • Signature step in TNL looks exactly like signature steps in the evaluation platform. • Practice Schedule Validation • Approval window in January 2015 • Final Schedule Validation • Late January - Early February 2015

  12. ASW - Principal Role Approve Chosen Objectives • Approve objectives chosen by Teacher • Approval window opens in early February • No final deadline – can be done in the system at any time. • Guidance • Review objectives with the Teacher, and then approve in TNL system. • Strands and Standards Guidance Charts available on the ASW Wiki for each content area.

  13. ASW - Resources ASW Wiki: ncasw.ncdpi.wikispaces.net • Implementation Timeline • Strands and Standards Guidance Charts • ASW Memos from NCDPI • Participation Requirements for ASW • List of Courses included in the ASW Process • Information on Standard 6 Waivers • Teacher Resources • FAQ

  14. Questions and Comments Jennifer DeNeal 919-807-3288 Jennifer.DeNeal@dpi.nc.gov educatoreffectiveness@dpi.nc.gov

More Related