Central Falls Transformation Report - Annenberg Institute for School ...
Central Falls Transformation Report - Annenberg Institute for School ...
Central Falls Transformation Report - Annenberg Institute for School ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Staff Survey Question: Do you feel per<strong>for</strong>mance management activities have been beneficial to teachers<br />
this year? Why or why not? Please provide examples of the ways per<strong>for</strong>mance<br />
activities have or have not been beneficial.<br />
Teachers (n=36 teachers: 35 responses*; 1 blank)<br />
15. No-as I noted be<strong>for</strong>e these activities have not been used to improve practice. They have been<br />
used to build a case <strong>for</strong> dismissing a teacher not improving practice.<br />
16. No, <strong>for</strong> the most part. My colleagues have told tales of evaluations that seemed too personal.<br />
My evaluations were okay; I found it easy to speak w/ Mary Canole and Wayne Ogden: I found<br />
them to be caring and professional. Idealistically we could move the experience closer to the<br />
team or academy level where we can evaluate each other’s practices professionally.<br />
17. No, There has been no attempt to HELP struggling teachers. It was just a way to find fault and<br />
fire those teachers who are outspoken.<br />
18. NO! THE EVALUATION SYSTEM IN THIS SCHOOL IS A JOKE! VERY SUBJECTIVE!<br />
19. NO. I believe evaluators were told in advance how to evaluate. My own evaluator told me she<br />
was told “not to make it look too good”. Additionally, my observer wrote things in my report<br />
that didn’t happen (maybe in her mind they did). And, although I implemented my professional<br />
growth actions, no one visited <strong>for</strong> a follow-up observation.<br />
20. No. There is nothing <strong>for</strong> Inclusion teachers that they provide. Nothing is shared with us. Everything<br />
is thrown at us.<br />
21. no. per<strong>for</strong>mance management staff was not as professional as they could have been. Punitive<br />
and not a time of growth. Teachers should be evaluated by building administrators only.<br />
22. No. Too often the PD is unorganized and the expectations are unclear.<br />
23. Per<strong>for</strong>mance management is seriously lacking a component that would help a teacher who is<br />
deficient to improve. There has been a lot of emphasis on pointing out deficiencies, but no<br />
clearly defined plan or process to promote teacher improvement.<br />
24. Professionals need to be accountable.<br />
25. Somewhat<br />
26. Somewhat, there are still some teachers who do not fully understand the evaluation tool.<br />
Teachers are very appreciative and respectful to the evaluators and are willing to build relationships<br />
27. Somewhat. It is always beneficial to be observed and critiqued by your peers. However, the<br />
protocols as explained to us at the outset were not followed. It seems to me to have become a<br />
way to punish teachers<br />
28. The <strong>for</strong>mat was a refresher to my student teaching experience with evaluations and the in<strong>for</strong>mation<br />
needed to complete the process.<br />
29. There was no consistency with per<strong>for</strong>mance management. The administration was out on a<br />
witch hunt. I received a good evaluation, but overall the process was not fair. Calibration needs<br />
to be done. Also, if you really want this tool to work; the teachers need to know that they can<br />
make mistakes and learn. There is none of that. Also having an elementary or middle school<br />
teacher from a white suburban district telling me what I should or shouldn’t be doing is ridiculous.<br />
Please give us evaluators of our peers to make this more beneficial and non-threatening.<br />
79