Educator Evaluation Requirements

Educator Evaluation Requirements - Posting for Website

(PA 173, Section 1249 Revised School Code, posted on district website by September 30, 2016). Effective beginning the 16-17 School Year

Croswell-Lexington Community School District utilizes Danielson’s Framework for Teaching Evaluation. Framework and rubric The following adaptations have been made, in accordance with Michigan State Law:

  1. Danielson’s evaluation levels of unsatisfactory, basic, proficient, and distinguished have been replaced with the required labels of ineffective, minimally effective, effective, and highly effective.
  2. Criteria is added to the end of each evaluation to address: Attendance record, Disciplinary record, Accomplishments and contributions above normal expectations, and Non-required but relevant special training.
  3. These changes do not negatively impact the validity or reliability of the Danielson Framework.

Process

  1. Each educator reflects on their practice and completes a self-evaluation using Danielson’s Framework and rubric.
  2. Educators set professional growth goals and collaborate with others for professional learning opportunities based on feedback from their supervisor.
  3. Supervisors/administrators observe each staff person at least twice during the year, at least one unannounced starting in 17-18, looking specifically for student engagement and evidence of student outcomes.
  4. Supervisors/administrators review teaching artifacts including lesson plans, evidence, and planning documents.
  5. Within 30 days of each observation, staff receive written feedback.
  6. Near the end of the school year, the supervisor/administrator reviews all accumulated information and completes a written evaluation. Each educator is identified as ineffective, minimally effective, effective, or highly effective. The written evaluation is reviewed jointly by the administrator and staff person.
  7. A written Individualized Development Plan is developed jointly for any staff person deemed ineffective or minimally effective (and also an Individualized Professional Development Plan for all new teachers)
  8. A copy of the end-of-year evaluation is placed in the staff members’ personnel file.
  9. The educator and evaluator use feedback from the evaluation process to collaboratively develop educator goals for the subsequent school year.

Research

Research base and evidence of reliability, validity, and efficacy of Danielson’s framework, taken from: https://www.danielsongroup.org/questions-about-the-framework-for-teaching/  on 5/10/2016.

“First, the Framework for Teaching (FFT) is a valid instrument for defining effective teaching. Several large research studies (the MET project, a study in Chicago) demonstrated its predictive validity: that is, when teachers demonstrate high levels of proficiency on the FFT, their students show greater learning gains than do the students of teachers who perform less well.”
 
MET Project website containing all the available reports and recommendations from the MET Project.
 

Qualifications of the Author

Taken from https://www.danielsongroup.org/charlotte-danielson/ 5/10/2016.
 
“Charlotte Danielson recognizes the complexity of teaching and the cognitive demands it makes. She developed the framework as a means to promote clear and meaningful conversations about effective teaching practice.
 
Charlotte Danielson, a former economist, is an internationally-recognized expert in the area of teacher effectiveness, specializing in the design of teacher evaluation systems that both ensure teacher quality and promote professional learning. She advises State Education Departments and National Ministries and Departments of Education, both in the United States and overseas. She is in demand as a keynote speaker at national and international conferences, and as a policy consultant to legislative and administrative bodies.
 
Ms. Danielson is a graduate of Cornell University (history), Oxford University (philosophy, politics, and economics) and Rutgers University (educational administration and supervision.) She has taught at all levels, kindergarten through university, has worked as a curriculum director and staff development director, and is the founder of The Danielson Group. Her Framework for Teaching has become the most widely used definition of teaching in the United States, and has been adopted as the single model, or one of several approved models, in over 20 states.”
 

Educator Training

 All teachers participated in training on August 29, 2016, by an individual with expertise in the Danielson tool. The session included the process, the Danielson tool, and how it will be used. The training will be reviewed annually.
 

Educator Evaluator Training

Administrative training for evaluators was conducted by a Danielson Group trainer in August of 2016. The two-day training included an in-depth study of the Danielson tool and how to use to improve outcomes for students.
 

Administrator Training

Administrators who evaluate principals are being trained with Michigan Association of School Administrators (MASA) School Advance system on September 26-27, 2016. Details regarding the training and evaluation process are available at: http://www.goschooladvance.org/

Assurances about the reliability and validity of the evaluation tool are available at: http://www.goschooladvance.org/node/259
 

Board of Education Training

Board of Education Training for evaluating the superintendent will be held in October/November of 2016 (actual date to be determined) through Michigan Association of School Boards (MASB) http://www.masb.org/superintendents.aspx

 MASB offers documentation of Superintendent Evaluation Overview, a Frequently Asked Questions, and Superintendent Evaluation documents at http://www.masb.org/superintendents.aspx.