PDAS TRAINING Day 2 – Agenda

concordia.edu
  • No tags were found...

PDAS TRAINING Day 2 – Agenda

… THE GOAL OF THE PROFESSIONALDEVELOPMENT AND APPRAISALSYSTEM IS TO ...“ Enhance student learning throughthe professional development ofteachers.”S-53DOMAIN VI:PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT It is not how much staff development,but how well staff development isaligned with the needs of students,curriculum goals and objectives,campus/district goals and objectives,and results in enhanced studentperformance.S-54STAFF DEVELOPMENTMODELS Individually Guided ModelProfessional selects goals andmethods Observation/Assessment ModelWorks with colleague to viewinstruction, give feedback, andprovide reflection Development/ImprovementProcess ModelProfessional collaboration to assesscurrent practices, plans forimprovement, and implementation ofplans Inquiry ModelDesigned by the professional…involves identification of a problem,research, analysis, change inpractice, and additional datacollection Training ModelDesigned and presented by anexpert on a topic Additional Models meetinglocal needsS-552


DOMAIN VI:PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT It is not how much….. It is how well….• Aligned• Results in enhanced student learningS-56DOMAIN VIICompliance with policies, operatingprocedures and requirementsSafe and orderly schools for allstudents, staff and patronsS-57§21.351. RECOMMENDED APPRAISALPROCESS AND PERFORMANCECRITERIA(a) The commissioner shall adopt arecommended appraisal process andcriteria on which to appraise performanceof teachers. The criteria must be basedon observable, job-related behavior,including:(1) teachers’ implementation of disciplinemanagement procedures, and(2) the performance of teachers’ studentsS-583


DOMAIN VIIIImprovement of AcademicPerformance• Major Themes- Success for all- Alignment- Curriculum- CollaborationS-59DOMAIN VIII QUESTIONS How will Parts I and II of the TSR help theappraiser find evidence to support the ratingfor the criteria? How will observations/walk-throughs help theappraiser find evidence to support the ratingfor the criteria? What additional sources of documentationcould be used to support the rating for thecriteria?S-60DOMAIN VIIIThe scoring of this domain (as well asothers) may be supported bydocumentation in addition to the teacherself-report and observations/walkthroughs.Appraisers are cautioned tomake it clear to teachers that additionaldocumentation should be minimal andlimited to the normal activities of theteacher.S-614


§21.351. RECOMMENDED APPRAISALPROCESS AND PERFORMANCECRITERIA(a)The commissioner shall adopt arecommended appraisal process and criteriaon which to appraise the performance ofteachers. The criteria must be based onobservable, job-related behavior, including:(1)teachers’ implementation of disciplinemanagement procedures; and(2)the performance of teachers’ students.S-62Criterion 10Domain VIIIPLUS 10. Campus Performance Rating of:A . Exemplary = 4 ______Recognized = 2 ______Academically Acceptable = 1 ______Academically Unacceptable = 0 ______B. Meets AYP = 1 ______*Needs Improvement = 0 ______ Total A + B________*If needs improvement, list in the spaces below Indicators from page 6.____________________ __________________ Final Total Domain VIIIParticipationPerformance____________________ __________________Graduation Rate/Attend Participation & Performance (Sum of 1-10)Teacher’s 1 st Yearon CampusTeacher’s SubsequentYears on CampusTotal: 37 to 45 Exceeds Expectations 40 to 5023 to 36 Proficient 24 to 397 to 22 Below Expectations 8 to 230 to 6 Unsatisfactory 0 to 7S-63APPRAISAL PERIOD TIME LINESCHOOL CALENDAR YEARFirst 12 Weeks Second 12 Weeks Third 12 Weeks Last 15 Daysof INST.TeacherOrientation• Within 1 st 3 weeks• Observations noearlier than 3 weeksafter this orientationTeacher SelfTeacher Self Report II & IIIReport, Part IAt least two weeks prior to Summative Conference• No later thanthree weeks afterorientationFormal Observation• Minimum of 45 minutes or shorter segments• Written summary within 10 working days• Advanced notice may be given/NOT REQUIRED.• Follow district APPRAISAL CALENDAR• May have pre- or post-conference at request of Teacher or Appraiser.WALKTHROUGH VISITS• To be used at the discretion of the appraiser• Documentation shared with teacher within 10 daysSUMMATIVE ANNUAL REPORT• 5 working days before conferenceADDITIONAL TIME LINE ISSUES• No later than 15 working days before last day of instructionTeacher Response• Observation Summary• Within 10 working days (Appraiser• Walkthrough documentationmay extend to 15)• Third party/Teacher documentation• May rebut in writing or request 2 nd• Completed TSRappraisal within 10 working days afterSUMMATIVE CONFERENCEreceiving the OSF or Summative• No later than 15 working days before last day of instructionAnnual Appraisal Report• May be waived in writing by Teacher, NOT APPRAISER• If Appraiser is not administrator on campus, principal/asst. or designatedsupervisory staff will participate.S-645


SUMMATIVE ANNUAL APPRAISALREPORT What to consider Observation Summary Walk-Through Documentation* Additional Documentation that has beengiven to you by the teacher or third party* Teacher Self-Report/Parts I, II & III May Use Inference*IMPORTANT: §150.1003(f) states in part …Any documentationthat will influence the teacher’s summative annual appraisal reportmust be shared in writing with the teacher within ten working daysof the appraiser’s knowledge of the occurrence...S-65USING INFERENCE .... Performance at the “Proficient” Level may be inferred fora criteria if 80% of the criteria in the Domain aredocumented at the “Proficient” or “Exceeds Expectations”levels and no criteria are documented at “BelowExpectations” or “Unsatisfactory” .…• Applies to Domains I, II, III, IV, V, VII, VIII (ExceptCriterion 10).• One criterion can be inferred per domain.• All of Domain VII can be inferred if there is noevidence to the contrary.• Domain VI cannot be inferred.S-66CASE STUDY #1S-676


CASE STUDY #1 Read Case Study Documentation View and Script Nicole Miller teaching segment(36 Minutes) Using your Scoring Tools Score Domains I-VIII Transfer Domain Scores to the Domain ProficiencyRating Form Turn in Completed Domain Proficiency RatingForm When everyone at the table is finished, reach a“table consensus” of the Domain Scores, completethe domain strip and turn it in.S-68INTER-RATERRELIABILITY: 1S-69Inter-rater Reliability MatrixDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup P B P B P B P B E P B U E P B U E P B U E U E P B U E U E U E UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup P B P B P B P B E P B U E P B U E P B U E U E P B U E U E U E UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup P B P B P B P B E P B U E P B U E P B U E U E P B U E U E U E UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup P B P B P B P B E P B U E P B U E P B U E U E P B U E U E U E UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup P B P B P B P B E P B U E P B U E P B U E U E P B U E U E U E UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup P B P B P B P B E P B U E P B U E P B U E U E P B U E U E U E US-707


RESULTS OF THE COMMITTEE FORVALIDATION OF SCORINGCase Study #1: Nicole MillerDomainIIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIPerformance LevelS-71CASE STUDY #2S-72CASE STUDY #2 Read the Case Study Documentation View and Script the John Dunkin Tape Using the Scoring Tools Score Domains I-VIII Transfer Domain Scores to the DomainProficiency Rating Form Turn in Domain Proficiency Rating FormS-738


INTER-RATERRELIABILITY: 2S-74Inter-rater Reliability MatrixDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B US-75RESULTS OF THE COMMITTEE FORVALIDATION OF SCORINGCase Study #2: John DunkinDomainIIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIPerformance LevelS-769


CASE STUDY #3S-77CASE STUDY #3 Read the Case Study Documentation View and Script Linda Terry tape Using you Scoring Tools, score DomainsI-VIII Transfer Domain Scores to the DomainProficiency Rating Form and turn inRating Form.S-78INTER-RATERRELIABILITY: 3S-7910


Inter-rater Reliability MatrixDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B UDOMAIN I II III IV V VI VII VIIIGroup E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B U E P B US-80RESULTS OF THE COMMITTEE FORVALIDATION OF SCORINGCase Study #3: Linda TerryDomainIIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIPerformance LevelS-81S-8211

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines