Presentation for Teachers and Administrators in the New Canaan Public Schools, New Canaan, CT What...
Preview:
Citation preview
- Slide 1
- Slide 2
- Presentation for Teachers and Administrators in the New Canaan
Public Schools, New Canaan, CT What is differentiated supervision?
Why is it necessary? How do we make teacher evaluations both
meaningful and purposeful? How can school leaders respond to
evaluations to make key decisions regarding teacher needs? How will
differentiated supervision ultimately benefit teachers and
students? Differentiated Supervision Because Students Are Not the
Only Ones with Differences!
- Slide 3
- What is Differentiated Supervision? Differentiated Supervision
is effectively using evaluations to inform meaningful decisions on
teacher needs. It occurs when school leaders recognize teachers
vary greatly in their readiness levels, their skill sets, and in
their confidence, resulting in significant variation in teacher
effectiveness.
- Slide 4
- Why is Differentiated Supervision Necessary?
- Slide 5
- Teachers are NOT all the Same! The Widget Effect, as described
in a research report by the New Teacher Project, is defined as the
failure of our schools to recognize that teacher effectiveness is
not the same from classroom to classroom; teachers are not
interchangeable parts. Evaluations must acknowledge, and be
responsive to, their strengths and weaknesses. (Weisberg, Sexton,
Mulhern & Keeling, 2009)
- Slide 6
- Decisions, Decisions Key decisions regarding teachers are
rarely based on teacher performance: Tenure is typically granted
after a predetermined number of years of service. Salary advances
are based on years of service and education level. Professional
development is often random or fad-based rather than tied to
observed teacher effectiveness. Evaluators typically decide that
the overwhelming majority of teachers are performing well.
(Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009)
- Slide 7
- Change Required Effective Differentiated Supervision requires a
cultural shift administrators and teachers must adjust how they
have historically viewed the evaluation system. It must be
understood that the core purpose of evaluation must be maximizing
teacher growth and effectiveness (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern &
Keeling, 2009, p. 9). Teachers must stop viewing a positive rating
as the singular goal of an evaluation, but instead view it as an
opportunity to receive constructive feedback and differentiated
support.
- Slide 8
- Where to Begin? Differentiated Supervision begins with
purposeful, meaningful, objective analysis of overall teacher
effectiveness. Researchers agree that one single tool should not be
used to evaluate teachers, but that multiple instruments and
frameworks should be utilized. It is critical that evaluators are
trained in the use of observation and data-gathering protocols.
(Hinchey, 2010)
- Slide 9
- Observation and Evaluation Whats the Difference? Observation
refers to seeing, hearing, recording, reviewing, and analyzing
teacher performance through the school year. Evaluation is much
broader; it refers to making judgments based upon information
accumulated on all aspects of the teacher's professional
performance, both instructional and non- instructional.
- Slide 10
- Tool Options for Evaluations (Goe, Bell & Little, 2008)
DescriptionStrengthsCautions Classroom Observations Measures
observable classroom processes. Provides information about
classroom activities and behaviors. Can be used for both formative
and summative purposes. Important to choose a valid and reliable
protocol; raters must be trained. Cannot assess teacher beliefs,
intentions, or outcomes of lessons. Instructional Artifacts
Protocols used to analyze/measure quality of lesson plans, rubrics,
student work, etc. Can be good measure of instructional quality.
Practical and feasible measure. Limited research on reliability and
validity. Training scorers can be costly. Portfolio Used to
document array of teaching behaviors and responsibilities. Used to
assess beginning teachers/teacher candidates. Can measure aspects
of teaching not seen in single observations. Good tool for teacher
self-improvement. Time-consuming and difficult to standardize.
Typically represents a teachers exemplary work.
- Slide 11
- More Options DescriptionStrengthsCautions Teacher Self-Report
Reports of classroom activities/goals; obtained through surveys,
instructional logs or interviews. Can measure unobservable factors;
provides teachers perspective. Feasible and cost-efficient. Still
need a validated instrument to increase reliability/validity. This
method should never be primary measure. Student Survey Student
opinions about teaching practice. Can offer formative information
to help teachers improve. Students are not able to comment on
teachers content knowledge, curriculum use or professional
activities. Value- Added Model Formula used to determine teachers
contributions to test score gains. Measure of student learning vs.
teaching methods; little burden at school level; useful for
identifying outstanding teachers. Cannot separate teacher effects
from classroom effects; not useful for formative purposes; measure
only teachers contributions to test scores, not other measures of
student growth.
- Slide 12
- So How do we Evaluate and Differentiate? In a nutshell, a good
evaluation system is used as a foundation for responses to varying
teacher effectivenessan evaluation is not an end in and of itselfit
is not a document to be stuffed away in a file. Charlotte
Danielsons Framework for Teaching and TAP (The System for Teacher
and Student Advancement) are examples of systems in which the
teacher evaluation process is inherently tied to the schools
responses, including decisions to mentor, coach, provide
professional development, change teacher assignments, and/or
reward, advance or dismiss. (Eckhert, 2010), (Sartain, Stoelinga,
& Krone, 2010)
- Slide 13
- Danielsons Framework: Domain Focus Domain 1 Planning and
Preparation What a teacher knows and does in preparation for
teaching. Domain 2 The Classroom Environment All aspects of
teaching that lead to a culture for learning in the classroom.
Domain 3 Instruction What a teacher does to engage students in
learning. Domain 4 Professional Responsibilities Professional
responsibilities and behavior in and out of the classroom.
- Slide 14
- Evaluation Outcomes not just a score or rating Both Danielsons
Framework and TAP ensure that evaluations are not the equivalent of
jumping through a cursory, bureaucratic hoop (Eckhert, 2010).
Instead, they are the basis of support for interventions for low
performing teachers, continued growth options for teachers in the
middle, and advancement opportunities for teachers who have
demonstrated expertise. Research indicates that the use of such
frameworks are successful in identifying more low-performing
teachers and that they are effective in identifying teachers in
need of additional supports (Sartain, Stoelinga & Krone,
2010).
- Slide 15
- Typical Evaluation Process
- Slide 16
- Differentiated Evaluation Process
- Slide 17
- Differentiated Supervision for New Teachers Beginning teachers
need special attention and tailored response to evaluations! 1 st
year of teaching should not be a game of education survivor.
Supervisors should provide individualized attention. Teacher
self-efficacy and learning needs should be assessed. Mentors
strengths should match new teachers needs. Targeted observations
should be conducted and timely feedback provided. (Elliott,
Isaacs,& Chugani, 2010)
- Slide 18
- Differentiated Interventions for Struggling Teachers
Professional Development directly linked to observed weaknesses.
Peer/Instructional Coaching. Mentors or Supervisors to model
effective instruction or co-teach lessons. Use of technology (video
lesson reviews, bug-in-ear tech, webcam/Skype for frequent
check-ins). Teachers who have received fair and comprehensive
evaluations, and who still fail to meet performance standards
despite individualized support should be dismissed. End of
story.
- Slide 19
- Help! I Need Somebody! Supervisors should remember to always
focus on contexts in which teachers are most likely to feel
unprepared. Research indicates this includes: Beginning teachers
Teachers of students with behavior issues Teachers of students with
learning disabilities Teachers learning to use data to inform
instruction (Elliot, Isaacs & Chugani, 2010) (Goe, Bell &
Little, 2008)
- Slide 20
- Differentiated Actions for Achieving and Excelling Teachers
Teachers achieving acceptable standards typically still have room
for improvement: Provide professional growth opportunities.
Schedule opportunities to observe exemplary teachers. Assign to
data teams, curriculum committees and/or PD groups. Teachers who
excel can fall to the wayside if they are not recognized and
continually challenged: Advance them to roles as mentors or master
teachers. Train advanced teachers to work with supervisors as
teacher evaluators. Adjust compensation system to reward master
teachers.
- Slide 21
- How does Differentiated Supervision Ultimately Benefit Teachers
and Students? Please also share concerns and remaining questions.
Group Discussion
- Slide 22
- References Eckert, D. J. (2010). More than widgets, TAP: A
systemic approach to increased teacher effectiveness. The TAP
System for Teacher and Student Advancement Created by Lowell
Milken. Retrieved from
http://www.tapsystem.org/resources/resources.taf?page=ffo_rpts_eckert
Elliott, E. M., Isaacs, M. L., & Chugani, C. D. (2010).
Promoting self-efficacy in early career teachers: A principals
guide for differentiated mentoring and supervision. Florida Journal
of Educational Administration & Policy, 4(1), 131-146. Goe, L.,
Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher
effectiveness: A research synthesis. National Comprehensive Center
for Teacher Quality. Retrieved from
http://www.tqsource.org/publications/teachereffectiveness.php
Hinchey, P. H. (2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What
policymakers can learn from research. National Education Policy
Center | School of Education, University of Colorado at Boulder.
Retrieved April 03, 2011, from
http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/getting-teacher-assessment-right
Sartain, L., Stoelinga, S. R., & Krone, E. (2010). Rethinking
teacher evaluation: Findings from the first year of the excellence
in teaching project in Chicago public schools (Policy brief No.
978-0-9814-6047-5). Retrieved from
http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/content/publications.php?pub_id=143
Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009).
The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on
differences in teacher effectiveness. The Widget Effect. Retrieved
from http://widgeteffect.org/downloads/TheWidgetEffect.pdf