Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Considerations Concerning the Design and Implementation of Teacher Evaluation Models That Support the Academic and Social Growth of Students with Disabilities: What is the Impact on Teacher Preparation? . Lynn Holdheide, Deputy Director
Considerations Concerning the Design and Implementation of Teacher Evaluation Models That Support the Academic and Social Growth of Students with Disabilities: What is the Impact on Teacher Preparation?
The mission of the Center on Great Teachers and Leaders (GTL Center) is to foster the capacity of vibrant networks of practitioners, researchers, innovators, and experts to build and sustain a seamless system of support for great teachers and leaders for every school in every state in the nation.
Preparation Programs can impact performance evaluation in two broad areas:
Evaluation can impact preparation programs in:
Measures of Teaching Practice
(e.g., classroom observation, performance rubrics, and teaching artifacts)
Measures of Student Growth
Promote coherent and aligned professional learning opportunities, beginning with preservice preparation and throughout the career continuum, to build teacher and leader capacity.
Provide multiple opportunities for application coupled with quality and timely feedback so that teacher and leader candidates exit with the knowledge, skills, and confidence to implement instructional strategies and professional responsibilities with fidelity.
Although students with disabilities present unique challenges in measuring growth, it is important that students with disabilities be included in growth measures. Doing so ensures accountability for growth of students with disabilities within educator evaluation.
Combine multiple measures (both student growth and measures of teacher practice).
Select measures that can accurately measure growth of students with disabilities.
Provide guidance concerning student learning objective (SLO) development, implementation, and accountability across the various service delivery models.
Provide guidance in how to differentiate learning targets established through the SLO process that take into account past learning trajectories and students’ current levels of performance.
Inform educatorsthat an IEP should not be used to measure student growth for the purpose of teacher and leader evaluation.
The IEP could be used as a source of evidence to develop SLOs and/or appropriate learning targets.
“Advancing state efforts to grow, respect, and retain great teachers and leaders for all students”
Pennsylvania’s Educator Effectiveness System:Use of the Danielson Framework with Instructionally Certified Personnel, Educational Specialists and Licensed Professionals
Under Act 82, all instructionally certified teaching professionals who provide direct instruction to students will be evaluated with Pennsylvania’s Educator Effectiveness System in 2013-2014.
firstname.lastname@example.orgContact Information www.pattan.net
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Tom Corbett, Governor
Pennsylvania Department of Education
William E. Harner, Ph.D., Acting Secretary
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Ed.D., Deputy Secretary
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
John J. Tommasini, Director
Bureau of Special Education
Kharon Grimmet, Associate Instructor
OSEP Conference – Washington DC
July 16, 2013
In our state, teacher and leadership preparation programs have been extensively involved in the retooling of teacher and leader evaluation.
In our state, there is a common understanding of the role that teacher and leadership preparation programs need to play in teacher and leader performance evaluation.
In our state, there is a shared belief that teacher and leadership preparation play a major role in teacher and leader quality and are an essential element to the recruitment, support, and retention of highly effective teachers and leaders.