To respond to emerging national trends focusing on teacher effectiveness, instructional leadership, student growth and the passage of State legislation requiring both standards-based performance evaluation and performance-based pay for teachers and administrators.

Revised school code 1249

Using rigorous standards that are streamlined, transparent and fair to grant tenure, full certification or both to teachers and administrators. To inform decisions regarding the placement and/or continued employment of teachers and administrators.

EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 2011

Revised school code 1250

A district shall implement a compensation method for teachers and administrators that includes job performance and job accomplishments as significant factors to determine compensation and additional compensation.

7. His/Her rapport with parents & other teachers8. His/Her ability to withstand the strain of teaching9. His/Her attendance & disciplinary record, if any10. His/Her significant, relevant accomplishments &

contributions (above normal expectations)11. His/Her relevant special training (other than PD

or continuing education required by the district or state law) & integration of that training into instruction in a meaningful way.

Development of a More “Meaningful” and Comprehensive Evaluation Process

Annual Evaluations Required for Every Teacher (700+ TSD Teachers)

Need to Consider an “Efficient” Means for Conducting Teacher Observations & Evaluations

The

Orig

ina

l TE

AM

Com

mitt

eeTh

e C

urre

nt T

EAM

Com

mitt

ee

Aaron Maliepaard - 4th Grade Teacher at Martell Elementary School Brian Canfield -Principal at Schroeder Elementary Tonia Romancheck -Special Education/MOCI Teacher at Hamilton Elementary School Mary Haezebrouck -Principal at Barnard Elementary Carrie Sekich -Show Choir Teacher at Baker Middle School Jan Keeling -Assistant Superintendent , Elementary Instruction Karen Bush -3rd Grade Teacher at Barnard Elementary School Joe Duda -Assistant Principal at Athens High School Joe Brandinisio -Science Teacher at Troy High School Jasen Witt -Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources Wendy Wilcox -Language Arts Teacher at Larson Middle School Anne Mull -Director, Instruction & Assessment Dina Chrisopoulos -Spanish Teacher at Athens High School Tim Fulcher -Principal at Smith Middle School Stephen Lucchi -T.E.A. President Richard Machesky -Assistant Superintendent, Secondary Instruction

Aaron Maliepaard - 4th Grade Teacher at Martell Elementary School Brian Canfield -Principal at Schroeder Elementary Tonia Romancheck -Special Education/MOCI Teacher at Hamilton Elementary School Mary Haezebrouck -Principal at Barnard Elementary Carrie Sekich -Show Choir Teacher at Baker Middle School Jan Keeling -Assistant Superintendent, Elementary Instruction Karen Bush -3rd Grade Teacher at Schroeder Elementary School Joe Duda -Principal at Larson Middle School Harriet Clark -English Teacher at Troy High School Jasen Witt -Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources Nancy Lining -Social Studies Teacher at Larson Middle School Anne Mull -Director, Instruction & Assessment Danielle Szachta -English Teacher at Athens High School Tim Fulcher -Principal at Smith Middle School Stephen Lucchi -T.E.A. President Richard Machesky -Assistant Superintendent, Secondary Instruction

The purpose of the Troy School District (TSD) Troy Educator Appraisal Model (TEAM) is to maintain a climate that ensures quality instruction and enhances the professional growth of all members of our professional community. The goal of this process is to ensure continuous improvement through the use of:

Research-based instructional practice Staff development aligned to common core and

other nationally-recognized curricular expectations Instructional leaders that promote and support

instructional best practice

Dom

ain

1Do

mai

n 2

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Demonstrating Knowledge of Content

and Pedagogy Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Selecting Instructional Goals Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Designing Coherent Instruction Assessing Student Learning

Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Creating an Environment of Respect

and Rapport Establishing a Culture for Learning Managing Classroom Procedures Managing Student Behavior Organizing Physical Space

Dom

ain

3Do

mai

n 4

Domain 3: Instruction Communicating Clearly and Accurately Using Questioning and Discussion

Techniques Engaging Students in Learning Providing Feedback to Students Demonstrating Flexibility Responsiveness

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Reflecting on Teaching Maintaining Accurate Records Communicating with Families Contributing to the School and District Growing and Developing Professionally Showing Professionalism

Dom

ain

5Domain 5: Student Growth Measuring Student Growth

*Demonstrates student growth

Demonstrates Ability to Enhance Student Growth Through Professional Practice

*Modifies instruction based on student growth*Collaborates with colleagues to enhance student growth*Student self-assessment and monitoring of progress

Overall RatingsIneffective – 0%

Minimally Effective – 1%Effective – 96%

Highly Effective – 3%

The New Model Formulates a More Meaningful Process.

The Process Generated More Conversation Around Quality Instruction.

There are Too Many Elements within the Rubric.

The Overall Rating of “Highly Effective” was too Difficult to Attain.

The Range for an Overall Rating of “Effective” was too Broad.

The rubric has been scaled down per the consensus of the TEAM committee.

› The old rubric had 75 elements.› The new rubric has 53 elements.› This represents a reduction of 30%.› Additional rubrics for “specialty” areas were

also developed. (Ex. Media Specialists, Speech Pathologists, etc.)

2011-2012 2012-2013Domain 1:Planning and Preparation

20% 15.0%

Domain 2:Classroom Environment

20% 20.25%

Domain 3:Instruction

20% 24.75%

Domain 4:Professional Responsibilities

20% 15.0%

Domain 5:Student Growth

20% 25%

2011-2012 2012-2013

Ineffective 25.0-55.0% 25.0-57.9%

Minimally Effective 55.1%-67.0% 58.0-73.9%

Effective 67.1%-90.0% 74.0%-86.9%

Highly Effective 90.1%-100.0% 87.0-100.0%

Elementary Reading Goal-All students will improve in the area of nonfiction reading levels; 70%-80% of my fourth grade students will show at least one year of growth in their reading level from 3rd to 4th grade.

Provision of Additional Training for Evaluators in the Danielson Framework For Teaching via Teachscape

Consideration of the Impact of the Governor’s Council Pilot Programs and Legal/Constitutional Challenges on Our Work

Further Use to Inform the Professional Development We Provide for Teachers

Consideration of Peer Coaching and Peer Observation Models

Further Development of Consistent Student Growth Measures derived from Multiple Sources (including value-added measures)