volusia system for - volusia county schoolsmyvolusiaschools.org/rttt/documents/vset archived... ·...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Table of Contents Introduction Disclaimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Statement of Philosophy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 General Guidelines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Common Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Volusia System for Empowering Teachers Introduction to the Volusia System for Empowering Teachers . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Pie Charts of VSET Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Implementation of the Danielson Framework for Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 System Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Nine Power Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Breakdown of the Weights Assigned to each Domain and Component. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Online System and Electronic Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Observation Process Steps in the Observation Cycle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Step‐by‐Step Guidance on Conducting an Observation Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Walk‐Through . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Administrative Observation Overview Observation Cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 New to Teaching and New to District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Satisfactory, High Performing, or Outstanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Improvement Needed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Unsatisfactory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Peer Assistance and Review Observation Overview New to Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 New to District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Needs Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Unsatisfactory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Multiple Evaluation Elements Classroom Teacher Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Additional Metric Evaluation Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 VSET Professional Growth Plan at a Glance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Growth Plan Rubric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Professional Growth Plan‐Phase I Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Evaluator Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Peer Assistance and Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Appendices 47 Teaching Fields Requiring Special Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 School Counselor Rubric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Instructional Coach Rubric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Media Teacher Rubric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Race to the Top Communications/Design Teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Contemporary Research Reference List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
2
DISCLAIMER
This handbook is a reference guide for assessment of employees represented by the Volusia Teachers Organization (VTO) bargaining unit serving the School District of Volusia County. The Volusia System for Empowering Teachers (VSET) Implementation Committee may consider changes to these procedures during Phase I implementation. Such changes will be recommended to the Superintendent and submitted the School Board for approval. Neither the handbook, nor its content, in any way creates an expressed or implied contract of employment.
STATEMENT OF PHILOSOPHY
Evaluation is a continuous, collaborative process designed to improve instruction and the performance of students. It is intended to be positive and growth‐oriented. It is based on fundamental principles of effective evaluation and contemporary research in assessment practices. The assessment system shall be applied equitably and shall conform to legally sound evaluation procedures.
GENERAL GUIDELINES
1. Administrators are responsible for training teachers as it relates to their evaluations.
2. Evaluations shall identify strengths as well as establish a plan for continued professional growth and development.
3. Components of the Volusia System for Empowering Teachers (VSET) are designed to reflect the performance of teachers and increased student achievement.
4. Evaluations shall be based on observable evidence or records pertaining to job performance.
5. The principal or administrative designee shall evaluate teachers. The immediate supervisor shall evaluate all other members of the bargaining unit.
6. In addition, district Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) teachers, as defined in the VTO contract, will be involved in the evaluation process of participating teachers in the PAR program.
7. Modifications or changes in the evaluation system shall be reviewed by the VSET Implementation Committee and subsequently approved by the School Board.
8. VSET evaluations are stored electronically. VCTAS folders, older than three years, should be
handled per Records Destruction Guide. (See www.volusia.k12.fl.us/fpwebs/armweb.)
9. Updates to the manual are on-going. For the most recent version, please check the Volusia website (external access) or the VSET Sharepoint (internal access) for the most recent version.
3
Common Language
Common Language: A transparent way to talk about instruction that is shared by everyone. This well‐
articulated knowledge base describes the complexity of teaching and describes key strategies revealed by
the research to have a high probability of affecting student learning. It should also describe the
instructional context for appropriate use of instructional strategies to have the highest probability for
raising student learning. The common language represents what a school or district defines as effective
instruction. A common language enables teachers to engage in decision‐making, professional
conversations and growth aimed at improving student achievement. For administrators, a common
language provides the means to offer focused formative and summative feedback. It supports
administrators in making decisions regarding hiring and selection of teachers, the induction of new
teachers, professional development, coaching and support for struggling teachers as well as opportunities
to develop career ladders for teachers. A common language is a key improvement strategy that provides
the context for aligning all instructional programs.
Announced Scheduled
Artifacts Deliberate examples selected to provide evidence of aspects of a teacher's practice. (i.e. lesson plans, teacher assignments, scoring rubrics, data, student work)
Classroom Observation Observer collects and sorts evidences for Domains 2 and 3
Classroom Teachers Teachers with students on rosters
Component An identified aspect of teaching within one of the four domains
Domain One of four broad areas in which teachers execute professional roles
Domain 1 Danielson Framework ‐ Planning and Preparation
Domain 2 Danielson Framework ‐ Classroom Environment
Domain 3 Danielson Framework – Instruction
Domain 4 Danielson Framework ‐ Professional Responsibilities
Evidence Evidence may include factual reporting of teacher and student actions and behaviors. It may also include artifacts prepared by the teacher, students, or others. It does not include personal opinions or biases. It is selected using professional judgment by the observer and/or the teacher.
FEAP Florida Educator Accomplished Practices
Feedback Information shared relevant to something observed in the context of learning or other educational setting.
Formative Observation Observation conducted for gathering evidence. Formative observations shall be ongoing throughout the school year, providing the basis for summative evaluations.
Framework for Teaching Teacher observation and evaluation rubric based on Charlotte Danielson’s research.
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
4
Multi‐metric Using more than one measure to evaluate the performance of a teacher or leader– Volusia will use student achievement, the professional growth plan, and observations / collaborative planning to calculate a final evaluation report
New to assignment Change in more than 50% of content area assignment or major change in school level (e.g., Primary (grades K‐1) to Intermediate (grades 3‐5): or secondary to elementary).
New to district Experienced teacher new to Volusia County School District
New to teaching First year teacher
Observation Cycle Planning conference, observation, post conference
Observation Length Recommended length of observation in Secondary is one class period (a minimum of 30 minutes). Best practice for elementary is a minimum of 30 minutes.
Observer Individual fully‐trained to conduct observations for the evaluation process
PAR Teacher Peer Assistance and Review ‐ District based teacher on assignment who provides peer support for teachers. They will have a caseload of teachers they mentor and a caseload of teachers they evaluate.
Planning Conference Teacher submits responses and artifacts as evidence for Domain 1.Teacher and observer talk about the lesson prior to the formal scheduled observation. During this time, the teacher and observer use the planning conference form as a means to discuss the lesson, engage in collaborative decision‐making, clarify expectations, and identify areas where specific feedback will be provided.
Post Conference Teacher submits responses and artifacts as evidence for Domain2‐4. The reflection or post‐conference provides an opportunity for the teacher and the administrator to reflect about the lesson, clarify expectations, and plan forward using the reflection (post‐conference) form as a guide for reflection and feedback.
PLC Professional Learning Community
Power Components Nine components of the Danielson Framework for Teaching that have the greatest correlation to increased student achievement. They are also the components that are highly interrelated with other components.
Professional Growth Plan Florida Statute requires all instructional personnel annually create an individual Professional Growth Plan. Instructional personnel use FCAT results (if applicable) as well as other forms of student performance data to determine a learning goal for student growth, measurable objectives to meet the goal that clearly identify the expected change(s) in professional practice, and an evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the professional development.
Proficient At this level of performance, the teacher demonstrates thorough knowledge of the concepts underlying a component. Students are engaged in learning. This level of performance represents successful, professional, and effective teaching. Teachers at this level have mastered the work of teaching while continually working to improve that practice.
5
Rating ‐ Basic Description of teaching that has the necessary knowledge and skills to be effective, but its application is inconsistent (perhaps due to recently entering the profession or recently transitioning to a new curriculum, grade level, or subject).
Rating ‐ Distinguished Description of professional teaching that innovatively involves students in the learning process and creates a true community of learners. Teachers performing at this level are master teachers and leaders in the field, both inside and outside of their school.
Rating – Proficient Description of successful, professional teaching that is consistently at a high level. Most experienced teachers would frequently perform at this level.
Rating ‐ Unsatisfactory Description of teaching that does not demonstrate understanding of the concepts underlying the component. This level of performance is doing harm in the classroom.
Reflection Thoughtful analysis and processing of a teaching event or data
Responsiveness Reacting to situations within and beyond the classroom that further learning opportunities
Scheduled Observation Teacher is notified in advance of observation cycle. Observation cycle includes the pre‐conference, observation, and post conference.
Self‐Inventory Learning Bridges inventory
Self‐Reflection Teacher reflects on own performance on observation rubric as part of observation cycle.
Student Evidence Specific observable student behaviors in response to the teacher's use of particular instructional strategies, student work samples, assessment data
Summative Assessment Assessment of teaching and learning at a given point of time that counts toward the final evaluation.
Summative Observations Count toward summative report. Principal and PAR observations count equally.
Summative Rating ‐ Developing Rating based on combination of all metrics for teaching (1‐3 years) that has the necessary knowledge and skills to be effective, but its application is inconsistent (perhaps due to recently entering the profession or recently transitioning to a new curriculum, grade level, or subject).
Summative Rating ‐ Effective Rating based on combination of all metrics for successful, professional teaching that is consistently at a high level. Most experienced teachers would frequently perform at this level.
Summative Rating ‐ Highly Effective Rating based on combination of all metrics for professional teaching that innovatively involves students in the learning process and creates a true community of learners. Teachers performing at this level are master teachers and leaders in the field, both inside and outside of their school.
Summative Rating ‐ Needs Improvement
Rating based on combination of all metrics for teaching (>3 years) that has the necessary knowledge and skills to be effective, but its application is inconsistent (perhaps due to recently entering the profession or recently transitioning to a new curriculum, grade level, or subject).
6
Summative Rating ‐ Unsatisfactory Rating based on combination of all metrics for teaching that does not convey understanding of the concepts underlying the component. This level of performance is doing harm in the classroom.
(Final) Summative Report Report which summarizes the combination of all metrics – final evaluation(s), the Professional Growth Plan, and student achievement to determine the rating of highly effective, effective, needs improvement/developing, or unsatisfactory.
Teacher Evidence Specific, observable behaviors demonstrated by teachers when using a particular instructional strategy. Evidence could also be documents or data relevant to a domain/component.
TOA School or district‐based Teacher on Assignment
Unscheduled Observation or walk‐through which occurs without prior notice. The observation cycle does not include a pre‐observation conference.
VCTAS Volusia County Teacher Assessment System ‐ former evaluation system used in the district.
Walkthroughs As in the formal observation, walkthroughs can be scheduled or unscheduled. Walkthroughs generally consist of very brief classroom observations of 3‐10 minutes in length in which the observer gathers evidence regarding classroom instructional practices and behaviors on a regular basis with timely and actionable feedback to teachers. Walkthroughs provide opportunities for individual feedback as well as trend and pattern data over time. Walkthroughs also inform professional development needs for individual and groups of teachers and provide a means to gauge the implementation of professional development against individual professional development plans and school improvement plans. Walkthrough evidence may also be collected during instructional activities when students are not present, such as PLC meetings or planning time.
7
Introduction to the Volusia System for Empowering Teachers
Florida’s Race to the Top initiative challenges the district to invest in human capital (educators) in order to
improve student achievement. The district focus on “learning communities” or “communities of practice”
nurtures the feedback and collaboration that foster teacher workplace learning. Information and data
must be readily available to provide feedback on the quality of instruction and its impact on student
learning. Through collaboration, the data are utilized to assess student needs and adjust instruction.
In the past, teacher evaluation was the sole
responsibility of the supervisor. Under the new
evaluation system developed through the Volusia
Race to the Top plan, the administrator and teacher
collaboratively evaluate the quality and the
effectiveness of instruction.
The Volusia System for Empowering Teachers (VSET)
is an instructional improvement system. Design
teams collaborated to create aligned, rigorous, and
fair processes that support teacher professional growth, incorporate contemporary research, and align
with the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices, Race to the Top requirements, and Florida Statutes.
Volusia's design teams, working collaboratively with the Department of Education, other school districts,
and educational partners, have utilized the following evaluation system requirements in preparing the
Volusia System for Empowering Teachers (VSET):
The system is designed to support effective instruction and student learning growth
Results will be used when developing district and school level improvement plans
Results will be used to identify professional development for instructional personnel and school
administrators
The system will provide online access to examine performance data from multiple sources,
including opportunities for parents to provide input into employee evaluations when appropriate
The system will provide identification of teaching fields for which special evaluation
procedures/criteria are necessary
The evaluation process will be managed for each teacher and instructional leader, following state
statute
The charts on the following page display the new design of the multi‐metric evaluation system that is
differentiated according to certain categories of teachers. Experienced teachers with “Effective” or
“Highly Effective” ratings have three metrics in their evaluation. New teachers or experienced teachers in
need of improvement have an additional peer assistance and review component. The process for each of
the teacher categories is explained in detail in this manual.
8
Educator Evaluation (25%) + Professional Growth Plan (25%) + Student Achievement (50%)
= Summative Educator Report (100%)
Educator Evaluation (20%) + PAR Evaluation (20%) + (Professional Growth (10%)
+ Student Achievement (50%) = Summative Educator Report (100%)
This evaluation model is designed for:
• Educators New to Teaching
• Educators New to District
• Experienced Educators with overall Rating of
“Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory”
• Educators Self‐Selecting into Program
• New Assignment
• In need of support
This new evaluation model is
designed for Educators Rated as
“Effective” or “Highly Effective”
9
Implementation of the Danielson Framework for Teaching
Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching establishes a common language for teaching practice. A
common language provides a shared way to talk about instruction that everyone at the district and school
level uses and understands. Principals and teachers use a common language of instruction to converse
about effective teaching, give and receive feedback, collect evidence and monitor data points. A common
language is a key improvement strategy that provides the context for aligning all instructional programs.
Definitions of common language terms are provided in the front of this manual.
The four Domains of Danielson’s Framework for Teaching are included in the evaluation system. The
teacher and observer gather evidence for Domains 1 and 4 outside of the classroom observation and
present the evidence for these domains at the planning conference. The observer collects evidence for
Domains 2 and 3 during a classroom observation or walk‐through. The following tables display a
breakdown of the weights assigned to each Domain and Component for the Classroom Teacher rubric.
Other instructional specialist job roles have similar weights under each Domain and Component, even
though the wording of the Domain or Component may have been adapted to suit the role and
responsibilities of each specialized position. The rubric score is calculated using the component weights.
The nine components with the greatest weighting are called Power Components.
The nine Power Components represent the areas of effective teaching practice that have the greatest
correlation to increased student achievement. These components are also highly interrelated with other
components. Since research indicates the centrality to good teaching of these practices, the new teacher
induction program focuses on the nine power components to ensure that beginning teachers concentrate
on the practices that directly relate to student achievement.
The following sections provide procedures for informal Walk‐Through observations and formal
Observation Cycles. Both formative and summative data are collected. An overview of the timeline for
school‐based administrative observation cycles is included for each category of classroom teachers. In
addition, a school‐based administrator evaluates instructional coaches, media teachers, and school
guidance counselors. Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) teachers conduct additional observation cycles
for teachers participating in the Peer Assistance and Review Program as outlined in the Peer Assistance
and Review Overview charts. Similar observation cycles apply to other non‐classroom instructional roles.
The appropriate district‐based administrator, following the procedures identified in this manual, evaluates
certain specialized roles such as school psychologists, social workers, program specialists, therapeutic
specialists, compliance specialists, and district teachers on assignment.
10
System Components
Volusia County Schools based the new teacher evaluation model on Charlotte Danielson’s “Framework for
Teaching”. Danielson’s framework is a research‐based set of components of instruction, grounded in a
constructivist view of learning and teaching. In this framework, the complex activity of teaching is divided
into 22 components clustered into four domains of teaching responsibility: planning and preparation
(Domain 1), classroom environment (Domain 2), instruction (Domain 3), and professional responsibilities
(Domain 4). Levels of teaching performance (rubrics) describe each component and provide a roadmap
for improvement of teaching.
The Framework for Teaching by Charlotte Danielson consists of: Four Domains and Twenty‐two Components
Domain 1: Planning an
d Preparation
•Component 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy (3 Elements)
•Component 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students (5 Elements)
•Component 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes (4 Elements)
•Component 1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources (3 Elements)
•Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction (4 Elements)
•Component 1f: Assessing Student Learning (4 Elements)
Domain 2: Classroom Environment
•Component 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport (2 Elements)
•Component 2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning (3 Elements)
•Component 2c: Managing Classroom Procedures (5 Elements)
•Component 2d: Managing Student Behavior (3 Elements)
•Component 2e: Organizing Physical Space (2 Elements)
Domain 3: Instruction
•Component 3a: Communicating with Students (4 Elements)
•Component 3b: Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques (3 Elements)
•Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning (4 Elements)
•Component 3d: Using Assessment in Instruction (4 Elements)
•Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness (3 Elements)
Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities
•Component 4a: Reflecting on Teaching (2 Elements)
•Component 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records (3 Elements)
•Component 4c: Communicating with Families (3 Elements)
•Component 4d: Participating in a Professional Community (4 Elements)
•Component 4e: Growing and Developing Professionally (3 Elements)
•Component 4f: Showing Professionalism (5 Elements)
11
Professional development for new teachers concentrates on the Nine Power Components, which are:
1c
•Setting Instructional OutcomesInstructional outcomes are stated as goals that can be assessed, reflecting rigorous learning and curriculum standards. They represent different types of content, offer opportunities for both coordination and integration, and take account of the needs of individual students.
If
•Assessing Student LearningThe teacher's plan for student assessment is fully aligned with the instructional outcomes, with clear criteria and standards that show evidence of student contribution to their development. Assessment methodologies may have been adapted for individuals, and the teacher intends to use assessment results to plan future instruction for individual students.
2a•Creating an Environment of Respect and RapportClassroom interactions between the teacher and individual students are highly respectful, reflecting geniune warmth and caring and sensitivity to students' culture and levels of development. Students themselves ensure high levels of civility among members of the class.
2b•Establishing a Culture for LearningHigh levels of student energy and teacher passion for the subject create a culture for learning in which everyone shares a belief in the importance of the subject and all students hold themselves to high standards for performance‐for example, by initiating improvements to their work.
3b •Using Questioning and Discussion TechniquesQuestions reflect high expectations and are culturally and developmentally appropriate. Students formulate many of the high level questions and ensure that all voices are heard.
3c•Engaging Students in LearningStudents, throughout the lesson, are highly intellectually engaged in significant learning, and make material contributions to the activities, student groupings, and materials. The lesson is adapted as necessary to the needs of individuals, and the structure and pacing allow for student reflection and closure.
3d •Using Assessment in Instruction (Formatively)Assessment is used in a sophisticated manner in instruction, through student involvement in establishing the assessment criteria, self ‐assessment by students, monitoring of progress by both students and teacher, and high‐quality feedback to students from a variety of sources.
4a•Reflecting on TeachingThe teacher's reflection on the lesson is thoughtful and accurate, citing specific evidence. The teacher draws on an extensive repertoire to suggest alternative strategies and predicts the likely success of each.4b
•Maintaining Accurate RecordsThe teacher's systems for maintaining both instructional and noninstructional records are accurate, efficient, effective, and students contribute to its maintenance.
12
Breakdown of the Weights Assigned to each Domain and Component
Evidence and Artifacts are collected “Off Stage” for Domains 1 and 4.
• Teacher prepares lesson plan for observation and collects data prior to conference • Discussed during Pre‐observation Conference • Power components in bold print • Domains and Components are weighted • Evidence for some presented as artifacts (e.g. , data reports, lesson plans,
communications) • Evidence for others collected in other contexts (e.g., PLC meeting, professional
development )
Domain 1 – Planning and Preparation – 20% 2.5% Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy 2.5% Demonstrating knowledge of students 5.0% Setting instructional outcomes 2.5% Demonstrating knowledge of resources 2.5% Designing coherent instruction 5.0% Assessing Student Learning
Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities ‐ 20% 5.0% Reflecting on teaching 5.0% Maintaining accurate records 2.5% Communicating with families 2.5% Participating in a professional community 2.5% Growing and developing professionally 2.5% Showing professionalism
Observable Behaviors are documented through “On Stage” Domains 2 and 3.
• Evidence observed during observation or walk‐through • Domains and Components are weighted • Power Components are in bold print
Domain 2‐ The Classroom Environment ‐ 20 % 5.0% Creating an environment of respect and rapport 5.0% Establishing a culture for learning 3.0% Managing classroom procedures 4.0% Managing student behavior 3.0% Organizing physical space
Domain 3 – Instruction ‐ 40% 5.0% Communicating with students 10.0% Using questioning and discussion techniques 10.0% Engaging students in learning 10.0% Using assessment in instruction 5.0% Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness
Weighting for all other instructional specialist rubrics are found in the Appendices.
13
Online System
The online system is linked from the district’s homepage under Staff Applications and the URL is
http://vweb13/ . All users will be linked directly into the system and their appropriate role. The site is
maintained by the district’s Technology Services Department, and users should call the Technical Services
Help Desk at extension 20000 for problems accessing the system. Training, including a training guide, will
be provided by Technology Services and/or designated trainers and an online training module will be
available for those teachers who need a refresher or miss the training opportunities provided.
The VSET online system provides an individualized dashboard in which the user selects the school year,
observation type, and can filter by: date, type, and school year. The user can view, edit and print
appropriate fields and can view all completed observations.
View of Teacher Dashboard
Pre‐Observation Form – Domains 1 and 4:
14
Viewing an Observation Self‐Review Form – Select by Domain from the Tab:
This form is for teachers to write about observations from their perspective.
Walk‐Through Form:
This form is used for brief observations, focusing on one or more components of Danielson's
rubric.
15
Steps in the Observation Cycle
** 5. This step is a vitally important difference in the role of the teacher in the evaluation system. This empowers the teacher and makes the process collaborative.
OBSERVATIONS Under routine circumstances, the length of a scheduled or unscheduled VSET observation should be a minimum of 30 minutes in elementary schools or a full class period in secondary schools.
Scheduled and unscheduled VSET observations shall not occur:
On the first or last five days of the school year On the first or last day of a course On the day before or after Thanksgiving, Winter Break, or Spring Break On an FCAT or other standardized testing date (This does not refer to the test window.) This
refers to all teachers, including those who do not administer FCAT or other standardized tests. A formal VSET observation may occur during a test make‐up day, if circumstances are conducive to a formal observation. However, it would probably be wise to avoid these days, if possible.
A qualified observer upon written request of the teacher may perform a second scheduled observation.
Note: The teacher may not waive the above exceptions.
1. Administrator or PAR initiates
formal observation.
2. Pre‐observation form is completedby the teacher.
3. Pre‐observation
conference is held.
4. Formal observation Is conducted.
** 5. Post‐observation form/rubric is completed by
the observer and the teacher, separately.
6. Post‐observation
conference is held.
16
STEP‐BY‐STEP GUIDANCE ON CONDUCTING AN OBSERVATION CYCLE
Step 1: Schedule the observation and pre‐observation conference The evaluator sets an observation date, time, and length of observation with the teacher. The evaluator schedules the pre‐observation conference to occur between two to three school
days before the observation. At the same time, the evaluator schedules the post‐observation conference to occur no later than five school days after the observation.
The educator shares the completed pre‐observation conference form with the evaluator at least one day in advance of the conference.
An observation consists of one fully complete learning experience or lesson. Step 2: Hold the pre‐observation conference The evaluator reviews the completed Pre‐observation Conference Form to guide the conversation
and adds any additional evidence of Domains 1 and 4. The evaluator and educator discuss the lesson to be observed. The educator should do most of
the talking, but the evaluator should ask questions and offer suggestions for improvement to the lesson, if necessary, and this evidence should be added to the pre‐observation form.
Step 3: Observe the educator The evaluator gathers evidence of the teacher’s and students’ actions, statements, and questions
on the Observation of Evidence Form. The evaluator submits evidence to the educator within 24 hours of the observation. The educator
adds to or corrects evidence as necessary. Step 4: Prepare for the post‐observation conference The educator and the evaluator individually score the rubric assessment of the lesson based on all
evidence collected on domains and components. The educator submits a self‐assessment rubric to the evaluator at least one day prior to the post‐
observation. The evaluator reviews the educator’s self‐assessment and marks areas of agreement on his/her
rubric and leaves blank the areas for discussion.
Step 5: Hold the post‐observation conference The evaluator acknowledges areas of agreement on components. The educator is invited to discuss the evidence for components on which the ratings of the
evaluator and educator differ. The evaluator and educator come to consensus on component ratings. The evaluator or educator adds relevant evidence for Domain 4. Both the evaluator and educator review status of Professional Growth Plan. Both the evaluator and educator develop next steps.
17
Walk Through
Walkthroughs generally consist of very brief classroom observations of 3‐10 minutes in length in which
the observer gathers evidence regarding classroom instructional practices and behaviors on a regular
basis. Walkthroughs provide opportunities for timely and actionable individual feedback as well as trend
and pattern data over time. Walkthroughs also inform professional development needs for individual and
groups of teachers and provide a means to gauge the implementation of professional development
against individual professional development plans and school improvement plans.
Who conducts the walk‐through observation and data reviews?
A number of individuals may conduct the walk‐through observations for feedback. For the purposes of the
evaluation, the evaluator might be the principal, the assistant principal, or a PAR (Peer Assistance and
Review) teacher.
Informal Walk‐Throughs are important for all teachers. The purpose of the informal walk‐through is to
ensure that what is observed in a formal observation is also seen during the day‐to‐day practice. Evidence
collected aligns with the components observed.
The walk‐through can focus on any domain, or the professional growth plan. The chart below indicates
the minimum number of walk‐through observations electronically recorded in VSET for different groups of
teachers. The teacher or evaluator may elect to include a walk‐through observation as evidence. Teachers
may request that an evaluator visit the classroom to observe specific activities as evidence for the
Professional Growth Plan or for a particular component. The evaluator will make an effort to arrange to
visit the classroom as schedule permits.
ACTION
New to Teaching
New to District
New to Assignment
Rating of Unsatisfactory
Rating Needs Improvement OR Developing
Highly Effective
Or Effective
Timeline
Walk‐Throughs by
PAR
4
4 4 6 4
n/a
Minimum of
1 per quarter
Walk‐Throughs
by
Administrator
2
2 2
3
3
1
One per Evaluation
cycle
Note: Numbers represent minimums
18
Observation Cycles
The following pages explain the various observation cycles by administrators and PAR teachers
(when applicable) based on the different points in a teacher’s career.
Changes in Evaluation Models shall only occur under the following circumstances:
A teacher who is placed in an assignment that is significantly different from his/her prior
assignment and who would like to receive additional support, may opt into the evaluation model
of teachers who are new to the district. If a teacher wishes to get the additional support of this
model, they shall notify their principal or supervisor by the 20th workday of the school year.
When an administrator notices a concern with a teacher’s performance during the formative
phase of VSET and the teacher is not already receiving additional support under VSET, the
administrator shall explain two options for the teacher:
1. One option is for the teacher to remain in the current evaluation model and work
independently to address the concern(s).
2. The other is for the teacher to opt into the evaluation model of teachers who received an
“I” on their last summative.
The teacher will be offered these options during a post‐conference and will be given at least 24
hours to consider the options. If the teacher chooses to change evaluations models, the teacher
shall inform his/her principal within the stated timeline, and the administrator shall inform the
district coordinator of the PAR program. The PAR program coordinator shall assign a PAR and
inform the district’s Technology Services and other relevant district personnel.
19
Administrative Observation Overview
New to Teaching and New to District
Activity Completion Date
Sign off on Growth Plan (Monitored)
Must have met prior to signing off to provide input and guidance
October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Formative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes K‐5 or a full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan. o Modify plan, if necessary.
December 14, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
2nd Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan. o Sign off at end of the school year.
May 25, 2012
Final Rating on Professional Growth Plan
Schedule the final Professional Growth Plan meeting between May 1,
2012 and May 25, 2012.
Conduct the meeting between May 1, 2012 and May 25, 2012 to review
and discuss results, coming to consensus on a final rating.
Window for final
review of
Professional
Growth Plans
May 1 – 25, 2012
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of
test scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically.
20
Administrative Observation Overview
Rating in 2010‐11 School Year of Satisfactory, High Performing or Outstanding
Activity Completion Date
Sign off on Professional Growth Plan (Individual) October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycle (Unscheduled, Formative)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes in K‐5 or full period in 6‐12))
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher Rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Growth Plan. o Modify plan, if necessary.
December 14, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
2nd Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan. o Sign off at end of the school year.
May 25, 2012
Final Rating on Professional Growth Plan
Schedule the final Professional Growth Plan meeting between May 1,
2012 and May 25, 2012.
Conduct the meeting between May 1, 2012 and May 25, 2012 to review
and discuss results, coming to consensus on a final rating.
Window for final
review of
Professional
Growth Plans
May 1 – 25, 2012
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of
test scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically.
21
Administrative Observation Overview
Rating from 2010‐2011 School Year of Improvement Needed (I)
Activity Completion Date
Sign off on Growth Plan (Monitored)
Must have met prior to signing off to provide input and guidance
October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycle (Unscheduled, Formative)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes in K‐5 or full period in 6‐12))
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher Rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Growth Plan.
o Modify plan, if necessary.
November 10,
2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
2nd Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan. o Sign off at end of the school year.
March 2, 2012
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
3rd Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous scheduled observation.
May 25, 2012
Final Rating on Professional Growth Plan
Schedule the final Professional Growth Plan meeting between May 1,
2012 and May 25, 2012.
Conduct the meeting between May 1, 2012 and May 25, 2012 to review
and discuss results, coming to consensus on a final rating.
Window for final
review of
Professional
Growth Plans
May 1 – 25, 2012
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of
test scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically.
22
Administrative Observation Overview
Rating from 2010‐2011 School Year of Unsatisfactory (U)
Activity Completion Date
Sign off on Growth Plan (Directed)
Must have met prior to signing off direct area(s) to be addressed
October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycle (Unscheduled, Formative)
Observation (at least 30 minutes in K‐5 or full period in 6‐12))
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher Rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference
Conduct Post Conference (within 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Growth Plan. o Modify plan, if necessary.
November 10, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
2nd Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation)
o Review Professional Growth Plan. o Sign off at end of the school year.
March 2, 2012
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
3rd Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous scheduled observation.
May 25, 2012
Final Rating on Professional Growth Plan
Schedule the final Professional Growth Plan meeting between May
1, 2012 and May 25, 2012.
Conduct the meeting between May 1, 2012 and May 25, 2012 to
review and discuss results, coming to consensus on a final rating.
Window for final
review of Professional
Growth Plans
May 1 – 25, 2012
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of test
scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically.
23
Peer Assistance and Review Observation Overview
New to Teaching
Activity Completion Date
Assist in development of Professional Growth Plan (Monitored) October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycles (Scheduled, Formative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher ‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan and modify, if necessary.
October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
2nd Observation Cycle (Unscheduled, Formative)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes in K‐5 or full period in 6‐12))
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher Rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan. o Modify plan, if necessary.
December 14, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
3rd Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous Scheduled Formative.
March 2, 2012
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
4th Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous Scheduled Formative.
May 25, 2012
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of test
scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically based on administrator and
PAR evaluations, Professional Growth plan, and value‐added score.
24
Peer Assistance and Review Observation Overview
New to the District
This schedule may also apply to an experienced teacher who opts to participate
in the PAR Program during the year of a major change of teaching assignment.
Activity Completion Date
Assist in development of Professional Growth Plan (Monitored) October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycle (UnScheduled, Formative)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes in K‐5 or full period in 6‐12))
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher Rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan.
o Modify plan, if necessary.
December 14, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
2nd Observation Cycles (Scheduled, Summative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan. o Modify plan, if necessary.
May 25, 2011
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of test
scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically based on administrator and
PAR evaluations, Professional Growth plan, and value‐added score.
25
Peer Assistance and Review Observation Overview
Rating from 2010‐2011 School Year of Improvement Needed (I)
This schedule may also apply to an experienced teacher who opts to participate
in the PAR Program during the year, if performance does not meet expectations.
Activity Completion Date
Assist in Development of Professional Growth Plan (Monitored) October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycles (Scheduled Formative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (within 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan and modify, if necessary
October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
2nd Observation Cycle (Unscheduled , Formative)
Observation (at least 30 minutes in K‐5 or full period in 6‐12))
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher Rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference
Hold Post Conference (within 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan and modify if necessary
December 14, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
3rd Observation Cycle (Scheduled , Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous Scheduled Formative.
March 2, 2012
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
4th Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous Scheduled Formative.
May 25, 2012
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of test
scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically based on administrator and
PAR evaluations, Professional Growth Plan, and value‐added score.
26
Peer Assistance and Review Observation Overview
Rating from 2010‐2011 School Year of Unsatisfactory
Activity Completion Date
Assist in Development of Professional Growth Plan (Directed) October 31, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one before Observation Cycle
1st Observation Cycles (Scheduled, Formative)
Schedule Pre‐Conference, Observation & Post Conference
Pre‐Conference (2‐3 workdays before Observation)
Observation (at least 30 minutes K‐5 or full period in 6‐12)
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher‘s reflection on rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference.
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan and modify, if necessary.
September 30, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
2nd Observation Cycle (Unscheduled , Formative)
Observation (should be at least 30 minutes in K‐5 or full period in 6‐12))
Send evidence to teacher (within 24 hours of observation)
Teacher Rubric due 1 day prior to Post Conference
Conduct Post Conference (no later than 5 workdays after Observation) o Review Professional Growth Plan and modify, if necessary.
October 28, 2011
Walk‐Through – at least one between Observation Cycles
3rd Observation Cycle (Unscheduled , Formative)
Follow same procedure as previous Unscheduled Summative.
December 14, 2011
4th Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous Scheduled Formative.
February 10, 2012
5th Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous Scheduled Summative.
April 6, 2012
6th Observation Cycle (Scheduled, Summative)
Follow same procedure as previous Scheduled Summative.
May 25, 2012
Score from Value‐added student achievement data calculated using formula
(50%).
Upon receipt of test
scores
Final Summative Rating calculated electronically based on administrator and
PAR evaluations, Professional Growth Plan, and value‐added score.
27
VOLU
SIAFR
AMEW
ORKFO
RTEACHING
Classroom
Teachers
Domain1:Planningan
dPreparation
1a:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofContentan
dPedagogy
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher’splansandpracticedisplaylittle
knowledge
ofthecontent,prerequisite
relationshipsbetweendifferentaspectsofthe
content,oroftheinstructionalpractices
specificto
that
discipline.
Teacher’splansandpracticereflectsome
awaren
essoftheim
portantconceptsinthe
discipline,prerequisiterelationsbetweenthem
andoftheinstructionalpractices
specificto
that
discipline.
Teacher’splansandpracticereflectsolid
knowledge
ofthecontent,prerequisite
relationsbetweenim
portantconceptsandof
theinstructionalpractices
specificto
that
discipline.
Teacher’splansandpracticereflectextensive
knowledge
ofthecontentandofthestructure
ofthediscipline.Teacher
activelybuildson
knowledge
ofprerequisites
and
misconceptionswhen
describinginstructionor
seekingcausesforstuden
tmisunderstanding.
DiscussionofEvidence
1b:D
emonstratingKnowledge
ofStuden
ts
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher
makes
littleornoattemptto
acquire
knowledge
ofstuden
t’sbackground,skills,or
interest,anddoes
notuse
such
inform
ationin
planning.
Teacher
dem
onstratespartialknowledge
of
studen
ts’backgrounds,skills,andinterests,
andattemptsto
use
thisknowledge
inplanning
fortheclassas
awhole.
Teacher
dem
onstratesthorough
knowledge
of
studen
ts’backgrounds,skills,andinterests,
andusesthisknowledge
toplanforgroupsof
studen
ts.
Teacher
dem
onstratesthorough
knowledge
of
studen
ts’backgrounds,skills,andinterests,
andusesthisknowledge
toplanforindividual
studen
tlearning.
DiscussionofEvidence
1c:
SettingInstructionalOutcomes
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher’sgoalsrepresenttriviallearning,are
unsuitableforstuden
ts,orarestated
onlyas
instructionalactivities,andthey
donotpermit
viablemethodsofassessmen
t.
Teacher’sgoalsareofmoderatevalues,or
suitability
forstuden
tsintheclass,consisting
ofacombinationofgoalsandactivities,some
ofwhichpermitviablemethodsofassessmen
t.
Teacher’sgoalsrepresentvaluablelearning
andaresuitableformoststuden
tsintheclass;
they
reflectopportunitiesforintegrationand
permitviablemethodsofassessmen
t.
Teacher’sgoalsreflecthighlevellearning
relatingto
curriculum
fram
eworksand
standards;they
areadapted,w
herenecessary,
totheneedsofindividualstuden
ts,andpermit
viablemethodsofassessmen
t.
DiscussionofEvidence
28
1d:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofResources
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher
dem
onstrateslittleornofamiliarity
withresources
toen
hance
ownknowledge,to
use
inteaching,orforstuden
tswhoneed
them
.Teacher
doesnotseeksuch
knowledge.
Teacher
dem
onstratessomefamiliaritywith
resources
availablethrough
theschoolor
districtto
enhance
ownknowledge,touse
in
teaching,orforstuden
tswhoneedthem
.
Teacher
does
notseekto
extendsuch
knowledge.
Teacher
isfully
awareoftheresources
availablethrough
theschoolordistrictto
enhance
ownknowledge,touse
inteaching,or
forstuden
tswhoneedthem
.
Teacher
seeks
outresources
inandbeyondthe
schoolordistrictinprofessionalorganizations,
ontheInternet,andinthecommunityto
enhance
ownknowledge,touse
inteaching,
andforstuden
tswhoneedthem
.
DiscussionofEvidence
1e:DesigningCoherentInstruction
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Theseries
oflearningexperiencesarepoorly
aligned
withtheinstructionaloutcomes
anddo
notrepresentacoheren
tstructure.They
are
suitableforonlysomestuden
ts.
Theseries
oflearningexperiences
dem
onstratespartialalignmen
twith
instructionaloutcomes,someofwhichare
likelyto
engage
studen
tsinsignificantlearning.
Thelessonorunithas
arecognizablestructure
andreflectspartialknowledge
ofstuden
tsand
resources.
Teacher
coordinates
knowledge
ofcontent,of
studen
ts,andofresources,todesignaseries
oflearningexperiencesaligned
toinstructional
outcomes
andsuitableto
groupsofstuden
ts.
Thelessonorunithas
clearstructure
andis
likelyto
engage
studen
tsinsignificantlearning.
Teacher
coordinates
knowledge
ofcontent,of
studen
ts,andofresources,todesignaseries
oflearningexperiencesaligned
toinstructional
outcomes,differentiated
whereappropriateto
makethem
suitableto
allstuden
tsandlikelyto
engage
them
insignificantlearning.Thelesson
orunit’sstructure
isclear
andallowsfor
differentpathwaysaccordingto
studen
tneeds.
DiscussionofEvidence
1f:
AssessingStudentLearning
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher’splanforassessingstuden
tlearning
containsnoclear
criteriaorstandards,ispoorly
aligned
withinstructionaloutcomes,oris
inappropriateto
manystuden
ts.Theresultsof
assessmen
thaveminim
alim
pactonthedesign
offuture
instruction.
Teacher’splanforstuden
tassessmentis
partiallyaligned
withtheinstructional
outcomes,w
ithoutclearcriteria,and
inappropriateforat
leastsomestuden
ts.
Teacher
intendsto
use
assessmen
tresultsto
planforfuture
instructionfortheclassas
a
whole.
Teacher’splanforstuden
tassessmentis
aligned
withtheinstructionaloutcomes,using
clearcriteria,isappropriateto
theneedsofthe
studen
ts.Teacherintendsto
use
assessmen
t
resultsto
planforfuture
instructionforgroups
ofstuden
ts.
Teacher’splanforstuden
tassessmentisfully
aligned
withtheinstructionaloutcomes,w
ith
clearcriteriaandstandardsthat
areshow
evidence
ofstuden
tcontributionto
their
developmen
t.Assessm
entmethodologies
may
havebeenadaptedforindividuals,andthe
teacher
intendsto
use
assessmen
tresultsto
planfuture
instructionforindividualstuden
ts.
DiscussionofEvidence
29
Domain2:Th
eClassroom
Environment
2a:
Creatingan
EnvironmentofRespectan
dRap
port
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Classroom
interactions,both
betweenthe
teacher
andstuden
tsandam
ongstuden
ts,are
negative,inappropriate,orinsensitive
to
studen
ts’culturalbackgrounds,and
characterizedbysarcasm,putdowns,or
conflict.
Classroom
interactionsaregenerally
appropriateandfree
from
conflictbutmay
be
characterizedbyoccasionaldisplays
of
insensitivity.
Classroom
interactionsreflectgeneralwarmth
andcaring,andarerespectfulofthecultural
anddevelopmen
taldifferencesam
onggroups
ofstuden
ts.
Classroom
interactionsarehighlyrespectful,
reflectinggenuinewarmth
andcaringtoward
individuals.Studen
tsthem
selves
ensure
maintenance
ofhighlevelsofcivilityam
ong
mem
bersoftheclass.
DiscussionofEvidence
2b:EstablishingaCulture
forLearning
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Theclassroom
doesnotrepresentaculture
for
learningandischaracterizedbylowteacher
commitmen
tto
thesubject,lowexpectations
forstuden
tachievemen
t,andlittlestuden
t
prideinwork.
Theclassroom
environmentreflectsonlya
minim
alculture
forlearning,withonlymodest
orinconsisten
texpectationsforstuden
t
achievemen
t,littleteacher
commitmen
tto
the
subject,andlittlestuden
tprideinwork.Both
teacher
andstuden
tsareperform
ingat
the
minim
allevelto“getby.”
Theclassroom
environmentrepresentsa
genuineculture
forlearning,withcommitmen
t
tothesubjectonthepartofboth
teacher
and
studen
ts,highexpectationsforstuden
t
achievemen
t,andstuden
tprideinwork.
Studen
tsassumemuch
oftheresponsibility
for
establishingaculture
forlearninginthe
classroom
bytakingprideintheirwork,
initiatingim
provemen
tsto
theirproducts,and
holdingthework
tothehigheststandard.
Teacher
dem
onstratesapassionate
commitmen
tto
thesubject.
DiscussionofEvidence
2c:
Man
agingClassroom
Procedures
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Much
instructionaltimeislostdueto
inefficien
tclassroom
routines
andprocedures,
fortransitions,handlingofsupplies,and
perform
ance
ofnoninstructionalduties.
Someinstructionaltimeislostdueto
only
partiallyeffectiveclassroom
routines
and
procedures,fortransitions,handlingof
supplies,andperform
ance
ofnoninstructional
duties.
Littleinstructionaltimeislostdueto
classroom
routines
andprocedures,fortransitions,
handlingofsupplies,andperform
ance
ofnon
instructionalduties,w
ithoccursm
oothly.
Studen
tscontribute
totheseam
lessoperation
ofclassroom
routines
andprocedures,for
transitions,handlingofsupplies,and
perform
ance
ofnoninstructionalduties.
DiscussionofEvidence
30
2d:M
anagingStudentBehavior
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Studen
tbeh
aviorispoor,withnoclear
expectations,nomonitoringofstuden
t
beh
avior,andinappropriateresponse
to
studen
tmisbeh
avior.
Teacher
makes
aneffortto
establishstandards
ofconductforstuden
ts,m
onitorstuden
t
beh
avior,andrespondto
studen
tmisbeh
avior,
buttheseeffortsarenotalwayssuccessful.
Teacher
isaw
areofstuden
tbeh
avior,has
establishes
clear
standardsofconduct,and
respondsto
studentmisbeh
aviorinwaysthat
areappropriateandrespectfulofthestuden
ts.
Studen
tbeh
aviorisen
tirelyappropriate,with
evidence
ofstuden
tparticipationinsetting
expectationsandmonitoringbeh
avior.
Teacher’smonitoringofstuden
tbeh
avioris
subtleandpreventive,andteacher’sresponse
tostuden
tmisbeh
aviorissensitive
to
individualstuden
tneeds.
DiscussionofEvidence
2e:Organ
izingPhysicalSpace
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Thephysicalen
vironmen
tisunsafe,orsome
studen
tsdon’thaveaccessto
learning.Thereis
pooralignmen
tbetweenthephysical
arrangemen
tandthelessonactivities.
Theclassroom
issafe,andessentiallearningis
accessibleto
moststuden
ts’suse
ofphysical
resources,includingcomputertechnology,is
moderatelyeffective.Teacher
may
attemptto
modifythephysicalarrangemen
tto
suit
learningactivities,w
ithpartialsuccess.
Theclassroom
issafe,andlearningisaccessible
toallstuden
ts;teacher
ensuresthat
the
physicalarrangemen
tisappropriateto
the
learningactivities.Teacher
makes
effectiveuse
ofphysicalresources,includingcomputer
technology.
Theclassroom
issafe,andthephysical
environmen
ten
suresthelearningofall
studen
ts,includingthose
withspecialneeds.
Studen
tscontribute
totheuse
oradaptationof
thephysicalen
vironmen
tto
advance
learning.
Technology
isusedskillfully,asappropriateto
thelesson.
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain3:Instruction
3a:
CommunicatingwithStudents
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Expectationsforlearning,directionsand
procedures,andexplanationsofcontentare
unclearorconfusingto
studen
ts.Teacher’suse
oflanguagecontainserrorsorisinappropriate
tostuden
ts’culturesorlevelsofdevelopmen
t.
Expectationsforlearning,directionsand
procedures,andexplanationsofcontentare
clarifiedafterinitialconfusion;teacher’suse
of
languageiscorrectbutmay
notbecompletely
appropriateto
studen
ts’culturesorlevelsof
developmen
t.
Expectationsforlearning,directionsand
explanationsofcontentareclear
tostuden
ts.
Communicationsareappropriateto
studen
ts’
culturesandlevelsofdevelopmen
t.
Expectationsforlearning,directionsand
procedures,andexplanationsofcontentare
clearto
studen
ts.Teacher’soralandwritten
communicationisclear
andexpressive,
appropriateto
studen
ts’culturesandlevelsof
developmen
t,andanticipates
possiblestuden
t
misconceptions.
DiscussionofEvidence
31
3b:UsingQuestioningan
dDiscussionTechniques
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher’squestionsarelow
levelor
inappropriate,elicitinglim
ited
studen
t
participation,andrecitationrather
than
discussion.
Someoftheteacher’squestionselicita
thoughtfulresponse,butmostarelow
level,
posedinrapidsuccession.Teacher’sattempts
toen
gage
allstuden
tsinthediscussionare
onlypartiallysuccessful.
Mostoftheteacher’squestionselicita
thoughtfulresponse,andtheteacher
allows
sufficienttimeforstuden
tsto
answ
er.All
studen
tsparticipateinthediscussion,w
iththe
teacher
step
pingasidewhen
appropriate.
Questionsreflecthighexpectationsandare
culturally
anddevelopmen
tally
appropriate.
Studen
tsform
ulate
manyofthehighlevel
questionsanden
sure
that
allvoices
areheard.
DiscussionofEvidence
3c:
EngagingStudentsinLearning
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Activitiesandassignmen
ts,m
aterials,and
groupings
ofstuden
tsareinappropriateto
the
instructionaloutcomes,orstuden
ts’cultures
orlevelsofunderstanding,resultinginlittle
intellectualen
gagemen
t.Thelessonhas
no
structure
oritispoorlypaced
.
Activitiesandassignmen
ts,m
aterials,and
groupings
ofstuden
tsarepartiallyappropriate
totheinstructionaloutcomes,orstuden
ts’
culturesorlevelsofunderstanding,resultingin
moderateintellectualen
gagemen
t.Thelesson
has
arecognizablestructure
butitisnot
maintained
.
Activitiesandassignmen
ts,m
aterials,and
groupings
ofstuden
tsarefully
appropriateto
theinstructionaloutcomes,andstuden
ts’
culturesandlevelsofunderstanding.All
studen
tsareengagedinwork
ofahighlevelof
rigor.Thelesson’sstructure
iscoheren
t,with
appropriatepace.
Studen
tshighlyintellectuallyengaged
throughoutthelessoninsignificantlearning,
andmakematerialcontributionsto
the
activities,studen
tgroupings,andmaterials.
Thelessonisadaptedas
neededto
theneeds
ofindividuals,andthestructure
andpacing
allowforstuden
treflectionandclosure.
DiscussionofEvidence
3d:UsingAssessmentinInstruction
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Assessm
entnotusedininstruction,either
through
studen
ts’awaren
essofthe
assessmen
tcriteria,monitoringofprogressby
teacher
orstuden
ts,orthrough
feed
backto
studen
ts.
Assessm
entoccasionallyusedininstruction,
though
somemonitoringofprogressof
learningbyteacher
and/orstuden
ts.Feedback
tostuden
tsisuneven
,andstuden
tsareaw
are
ofonlysomeoftheassessmen
tcriteriausedto
evaluatetheirwork.
Assessm
entregularlyusedininstruction,
through
selfassessmen
tbystudents,
monitoringofprogressoflearningbyteacher
and/orstuden
ts.Studen
tsarefully
awareof
theassessmen
tcriteriausedto
evaluatetheir
work.
Assessm
entusedinasophisticatedmanner
in
instruction,through
studen
tinvolvem
entin
establishingtheassessmen
tcriteria,self
assessmen
tbystuden
tsandmonitoringof
progressbyboth
studen
tsandteachers,and
highqualityfeed
backto
studen
tsfrom
a
varietyofsources.
DiscussionofEvidence
32
3e:DemonstratingFlexibility
andResponsiveness
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher
adheres
totheinstructionplaninspite
ofevidence
ofpoorstuden
tunderstandingor
studen
ts’lackofinterest,andfails
torespond
tostuden
ts’questions;teacher
assumes
no
responsibility
forstuden
ts’failure
to
understand.
Teacher
dem
onstratesmoderateflexibility
and
responsivenessto
studen
ts’needsandinterest
duringalesson,andseeksto
ensure
the
successofallstuden
ts.
Teacher
seeks
waysto
ensure
successful
learningforallstuden
ts,m
akingadjustmen
ts
asneeded
toinstructionplansandresponding
tostuden
tinterestsandquestions.
Teacher
ishighlyresponsive
tostuden
ts’
interestsandquestions,makingmajorlesson
adjustmen
tsifnecessary,andpersistsin
ensuringthesuccessofallstuden
ts.
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain4:ProfessionalResponsibilities
4a:ReflectingonTeaching
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher’sreflectiondoes
notaccuratelyassess
thelesson’seffectiven
ess,thedegreeto
which
outcomes
weremetand/orhas
nosuggestions
forhowalessoncouldbeim
proved.
Teacher’sreflectionisagenerallyaccurate
impressionofalesson’seffectiven
ess,the
degreeto
whichoutcomes
weremetand/or
makes
generalsuggestionsabouthowalesson
couldbeim
proved.
Teacher’sreflectionaccuratelyassessesthe
lesson’seffectiven
ess/degreeto
which
outcomes
weremetandcancite
eviden
ceto
supportthejudgm
ent;makes
specific
suggestionsforlessonim
provemen
t.
Teacher’sreflectionaccurately,thoughtfully
assesses
thelesson’seffectiven
ess/degreeto
whichoutcomes
weremet,citingspecific
exam
ples;offersspecificalternativeactions
drawingonan
extensive
repertoireofskills.
DiscussionofEvidence
4b:M
aintainingAccurate
Records
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Theinform
ationmanagem
entsystem
on
studen
tcompletionofassignmen
ts,studen
t
progressinlearningand/ornoninstructional
activities
areeither
absentorindisarray.
Theinform
ationmanagem
entsystem
for
studen
tcompletionofassignmen
ts,progressin
learningand/ornoninstructionalactivities
is
rudim
entary,and/orrequires
freq
uen
t
monitoringforaccuracy.
Theinform
ationmanagem
entsystem
for
studen
tcompletionofassignmen
ts,studen
t
progressinlearningand/ornoninstructional
activities
isfully
effective.
Theinform
ationmanagem
entsystem
for
studen
tcompletionofassignmen
ts,progressin
learningand/ornoninstructionalactivities
is
fully
effective,andstuden
tscontribute
totheir
maintenance
and/orinterpretation.
DiscussionofEvidence
33
4c:
CommunicatingwithFamilies
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher
provides
littleornoinform
ationto
families
andmakes
noattemptto
engage
them
intheinstructionalprogram
.
Teacher
complieswithschoolproceduresfor
communicatingwithfamilies
andmakes
an
effortto
engage
families
intheinstructional
program
.
Teacher
communicates
freq
uen
tlywith
families
andsuccessfully
engagesthem
inthe
instructionalprogram
.
Teacher
communicates
freq
uen
tlyand
sensitivelywithfamilies
andsuccessfully
engagesthem
intheinstructionalprogram
;
studen
tsparticipateincommunicatingwith
families.
DiscussionofEvidence
4d:Contributingto
theSchoolandDistrict
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Professionalrelationshipswithcolleagues
are
negativeorselfserving;teacher
avoids
participationinaculture
ofinquiryand/or
avoidsbecominginvolved
inschoolevents
and/orschoolanddistrictprojects.
Professionalrelationshipswithcolleagues
are
cordial,andfulfillrequired
school/district
duties;includeinvolvem
entinaculture
of
inquiry,schooleventsand/orschool/district
projectswhen
asked.
Professionalrelationshipsarecharacterizedby
mutualsupportandcooperation;include
active
participationinaculture
ofprofessional
inquiry,schooleventsandschool/district
projects,withteacher
makingsubstantial
contributions.
Professionalrelationshipsarecharacterizedby
mutualsupport,cooperationandinitiative
in
assumingleadershipinpromotingaculture
of
inquiryandmakingsubstantialcontributionsto
school/districtprojects.
DiscussionofEvidence
4e:Growingan
dDevelopingProfessionally
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher
engagesinnoprofessional
developmen
tactivities
and/orresistsfeed
back
onteachingperform
ance
and/ormakes
no
effortto
shareknowledge
withothersorto
assumeprofessionalresponsibilities.
Teacher
engagesinprofessionalactivities
toa
limitedextentand/oracceptswithsome
reluctance,feedbackonteachingperform
ance
and/orfindslim
itedwaysto
contribute
tothe
profession.
Teacher
engagesinseekingoutprofessional
developmen
topportunities,welcomes
feed
backonperform
ancesandparticipates
activelyinassistingother
educators.
Teacher
engagesinseekingoutopportunities
forprofessionaldevelopmen
tandmakes
a
system
aticeffortto
conductactionresearch,
seeksoutfeedbackandinitiatesim
portant
activities
tocontribute
totheprofession.
DiscussionofEvidence
34
4f:
ShowingProfessionalism
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teacher’sprofessionalinteractionsare
characterizedbyquestionableintegrity,lack
of
awaren
essofstuden
tneeds,and/ordecisions
that
areselfserving,and/ordonotcomply
withschool/districtregulations.
Teacher
interactionsarecharacterizedby
honest,genuine,butinconsisten
tattemptsto
servestuden
ts,decisionmakingbased
on
limiteddata,and/orminim
alcompliance
with
school/districtregulations.
Teacher
interactionsarecharacterizedby
honesty,integrity,confiden
tialityand/or
assurance
that
allstuden
tsarefairlyserved
,
participationinteam
ordep
artm
entaldecision
making,and/orfullcompliance
with
school/districtregulations.
Teacher
interactionsarecharacterizedbythe
higheststandardsofhonesty,integrityand
confiden
tiality;assumptionofleadershiprole
withcolleagues,inservingstuden
ts,
challengingnegativeattitudes/practices,andin
ensuringfullcompliance
withschool/district
regulations.
DiscussionofEvidence
Anelectronicversionofthisrubrichas
beendevelopedforuse
byevaluatorsandteachersduringtheevaluationcycleandduringdevelopmen
tofthe
ProfessionalGrowth
Plan.Evaluatorswillbeableto
accesstherubriconlaptopsormobile
devicessuch
asan
iPad.
35
Additional Metric Evaluation Elements
One additional metric employed as part of the multi metric evaluation is the Professional Growth Plan.
All teachers are responsible for managing a Professional Growth Plan. The plan is completed online
collaboratively with the principal or supervisor. This new Professional Growth Plan will replace the
Individual Professional Development Plan (IPDP) and district Success Plan, including all MOU, DOE, and
legislative requirements.
Professional Growth Planning is a process of self directed inquiry focused on what teachers need to learn
and do to improve their practice, resulting in improved student learning. In this process, teachers engage
in self assessment, analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data, and the priorities of both the school
and district. A teacher’s professional growth plan will align with a component of the Danielson
Framework. A meaningful professional growth plan is one that engages teachers in significant new
learning of a skill related to one’s responsibilities. Preparing a professional growth plan requires skills of
self assessment and analysis of practice, knowledge of resources available to contribute to one’s learning,
and the discipline to engage in learning activities to improve practice. The teacher works on the activities
of the plan individually and then discusses the plan collaboratively, with the result meeting the goal:
improved classroom practice and enhanced student learning.
State law (F.S. 1012.98) specifies that the purpose of the professional development system is to increase
student achievement, enhance classroom instructional strategies that promote rigor and relevance
throughout the curriculum, and prepare students for continuing education and the workforce. The growth
plan aligns the teacher's professional development with Danielson's Framework ( the 4 Domains: Domain
1 – Planning and Preparation, Domain 2 – The Classroom Environment, Domain 3 – Instruction, Domain 4
– Professional Responsibilities), and Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAP).Volusia has
purchased access to online resources to ensure that teachers have differentiated professional
development to support this new reform.
This Professional Growth Plan is 25% of the final summative rating for those teachers previously rated
“Highly Effective” or “Effective”, or 10% for those teachers rated “Needs Improvement / Developing” and
“Unsatisfactory”. Teachers in their first year of teaching or teachers with below Effective ratings are
required to work with a Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) teacher.
The Professional Growth Plan is checked individual, monitored, or directed depending on the evaluation
category of the teacher. The teacher identifies one component and creates one SMART Goal aligned to
the goals of the school improvement plan. Through the Professional Growth Plan, tied to student learning
outcomes and longitudinal data, the evaluator and teacher manage and monitor the implementation of
the plan goals.
The educator and the supervisor will collaborate on the final rubric rating. If the collaboration does not
result in an agreed rating, the decision is determined through the district appeals process.
36
VSET Professional Growth Plan at a Glance
The VSET growth plan is an important component of the overall system. As the district makes the shift to
a system designed for customized professional growth, this plan is the road map for success. The
developers felt so strongly that growth had to be an integral part of the Volusia System of Empowering
Teachers (VSET), that it has significant weight. The Professional Growth Plan counts for 25% of the Final
Summative Teacher Report for teachers with teaching experience in the district and an evaluation rating
of Effective or Highly Effective (Satisfactory or above prior to 2012). For all other teachers, it counts for
10% of the Final Summative Teacher Report.
Facts about the Growth Plan:
It must be based on data (both student and teacher).
It must align with one or more of the 22 components of effective teaching practice.
It must be customized to the individual teacher.
A more challenging plan may increase the potential for a distinguished final rating.
It is all about what was learned as a professional – how it impacts practice.
The plan is under the teacher’s control, if on an individual plan (monitored and directed requiremore administrative input and approval).
Directions for completing the Professional Growth Plan:
Developing the Plan (Sections A and B should be completed and reviewed by October 31st):
1) First, read the rubric –Think through the process – plan with the end in mind.2) A1. Look at personal data.
Identify strengths.
Identify areas for improvement.
Consider the prior year’s evaluation.
Complete a self reflection using the VSET Framework for Teaching rubric.
Look at achievement and growth data of students in past years’ classes.3) A2. Look at current student data.
Use either the prior year’s test scores or any assessments given in the first few weeks ofschool.
Identify students’ strengths and areas of focus.4) A3. Review the School Improvement Plan (SIP).
Select a SMART goal from the SIP and indicate this goal on the Professional Growth Plan.
How will the plan support the school’s SMART goal focus?5) A4. Based on the data collected in A1–A3:
Identify the component of the framework that best aligns with the need indicated bypersonal and student data.
Consider power components first (those in bold).
Teachers on a monitored or directed growth plan must use at least one (1) of the powercomponents.
6) B1. Develop your professional learning goal(s).
Only one goal is required, but limit to no more than two.
Using all of the information from section A, what area or practice does the data indicateas the area for improvement or further study?
37
Think of a challenging professional goal that will improve teaching practice and have apositive impact on student learning.
The Professional Growth Plan rubric assesses how well the goal aligns with the data andhow much the goal represents a challenging professional learning experience.
Accomplishing a certification requirement, such as ESOL endorsement, is an appropriategoal.
Select a goal of sufficient rigor and value to merit a yearlong focus.7) B2. Select strategies planned to reach the goal(s).
Include the type of professional development planned (courses, lesson studies, PLCmeetings, etc.).
Think creatively and be willing to explore a practice in depth.
Be specific and determine how to measure professional learning.8) Review the plan with the assigned administrator.
The administrator reviews and signs Independent plans for Effective and Highly Effectiveteachers.
Monitored or Directed plans require approval by the administrator.9) Begin working on the growth plan as soon as the administrator signs or approves the plan.
During Post Conferences for each Observation Cycle:
10) C1. Discuss the progress on the growth plan with the evaluator at each post conference.
Present any evidence of professional learning gained through the process.
Example: Explain how a discussion during a PLC meeting or a strategy tried with studentshad an impact and reinforced or changed a teaching practice.
11) C2. Make any changes to the plan as indicated by data that are more recent.
Make adjustments as indicated by ongoing data.
Provide evidence to support decisions.
At the End of the year (Between May 1 – May 25, the administrator will request the final section at
least 1 week before it is due):
12) D1. At the end of the year, The teacher will reflect on the growth plan and its impact on theteacher’s professional practice. In this section, the teacher explores in detail the activitiesconducted, explains what was learned, describes how the he/she implemented what was learned,and provides evidence of the impact the plan activities had on instruction. Ultimately, this sectionis evaluated on the quality and depth of the teacher’s reflection on professional learning, how thelearning influenced instruction, and what changes occurred in student learning. Supportingevidence, such as a printout of professional development from the year, notes taken during a PLCmeeting, observations of another teacher during lesson study, student data, or other relevantevidence of implementation of learning is acceptable.
13) D2. This section shows the student growth toward the SMART goal established in section A3.
These data are not considered for evaluating the growth plan, as they may not beavailable at that time. The data simply demonstrate the plan’s contribution to SIP goals.
14) E1. After completing the growth plan, use the rubric to evaluate the plan.
Once the teacher rates his/her completed plan, he/she will send a copy to the evaluatorfor review.
If the evaluator agrees with the teacher’s rating, he/she will sign off.
If the evaluator does not agree, then a meeting to discuss the rating of the plan will bescheduled.
If both the teacher and the administrator reach an agreement on the rating, both sign off.
If agreement cannot be reached, the plan is forwarded to the district Professional GrowthPlan Review Panel for a final decision.
38
Performance Rating for Professional Growth Plan
3Distinguished
The Professional Growth Plan demonstrated a direct correlation to needs indicated by studentlearning data and the educator’s previous performance rating, credentials and/or selfassessment. Strategies were specific, fully developed and focused on improving or changingprofessional practice for the purposes of improved student learning. The educator reviewedhis/her plan during the school year, and readily adjusted the plan when ongoing evidenceindicated the need. The educator not only completed all activities identified in growth plan, butidentified strategies and resulting evidence that ultimately improved or changed the educator’spractice in an effort to improve student learning. The educator’s reflection provided extensiveand thorough evidence of why the educator implemented those strategies and how and whythe chosen strategies improved or changed his/her practice. In the course of implementing theplan, the educator collaborated with other educators in a deliberate and meaningful way.Results of the plan were effectively shared with the wider school community and impacted thepractice of others.
2Proficient
The Professional Growth Plan demonstrated a direct correlation to needs indicated by studentlearning data and the educator’s previous performance rating, credentials and/or selfassessment. Strategies were specific, well developed and focused on improving or changingprofessional practice for the purposes of improved student learning. The educator reviewedhis/her plan during the school year and, if necessary, made adjustments to the plan. Theeducator completed all activities identified in growth plan and produced evidence thatidentified strategies were implemented in the classroom. The educator’s reflection madeadequate connections between student data and the strategies the educator chose toimplement. In the course of implementing the plan, the educator collaborated with othereducators in a meaningful way. Results of the plan were shared with departments or gradelevels and may have had an impact on some colleagues.
1Basic
The Professional Growth Plan demonstrated some correlation to needs indicated by studentlearning data and the educator’s previous performance rating, credentials and/or selfassessment. Strategies were loosely focused on improving or changing professional practice forthe purposes of improved student learning. The educator reviewed his/her plan during theschool year, but made few or no adjustments to the plan unless suggested by the evaluator. Theeducator’s reflection demonstrated that he/she completed most or all activities identified in thegrowth plan, but provided limited evidence of implementation or how it improved or changedhis/her practice. The educator’s attempts to collaborate with others were not deliberate andcontributed little to the evidence. Results of the plan were minimally shared with others.
0Unsatisfactory
The Professional Growth Plan did not directly correlate to needs indicated by student learningdata and the educator’s previous performance rating, credentials and/or self assessment.Strategies were not clear or did not specifically focus on improving or changing professionalpractice for the purposes of improved student learning. The educator reviewed his/her planduring the school year but did not recognize or accept the need to make adjustments to theplan. The educator’s reflection (if one exists) provided little evidence that the strategies wereimplemented or how those strategies improved or changed his/her practice. There wasminimal or no evidence to support the plan. The educator did not collaborate with others in ameaningful way. Results of the plan were not shared with others.
39
Pro
fess
ion
al G
row
th P
lan
– P
has
e I
Imp
lem
enta
tion
C
lass
room
Tea
cher
T
ype
of P
lan
: I
nd
ivid
ual
M
onit
ored
Dir
ecte
d
SchoolYear:
LastFourDigitsSocialSecurity
__________________
Teacher:
Position/SubjectArea:
School:
Mentor/Peer:_________________________________________(Educatorsintheirfirstthreeyearsofteachingare
required
towork
withaMentorand/orPeer)
Administrator:________________________________________ A.IdentificationofArea(s)ofFocus
A1
A2
A3
A4
Whichofthefollo
wingwillbeusedto
determ
inearea(s)offocus?
(Checkallthat
apply)
SelfInventory
(LearningBridges
Program)
SelfReflection(CharlotteDanielsonFramew
ork
MatrixForm
)Endorsem
entReq
uirem
ent
PreviousYear’sSummativeEvaluation
Other
___________________________________________________
What
studentdatawillbeusedto
guidethedevelopmentoftheprofessionallearninggoals?
(e.g.,Perform
ance
Matters:RankingReport,SubjectStrand;Suggested
FASTeReports:AchievementLevelImpact,Comparative
Perform
ance;Perform
ance
MattersReportsforNonFCATTeachers:BaseballCard)
Write
ameasureab
legoalto
indicateexpectedim
provementinstuden
tachievemen
t.(ThisisaSM
ARTgoalthatalig
nswiththeSchoolImprovemen
tPlan)
Check
Domain(s)ofFocus:
Domain1–PlanningandPreparation
Domain2–TheClassroom
Environmen
tDomain3–Instruction
Domain4–ProfessionalResponsibilities
TeachersonIndividualGrowth
Plansmustselectonecomponen
tthat
theteacher
has
iden
tified
ashavingthegreatestpotentialforincreasingstuden
tlearning.
MonitoredandDirectedGrowth
PlansmustaddressonePower
Componen
t.PowerComponentsareinbold.
1a
1b
1c
1d
1e
1f
2a
2b
2c
2d
2e
3a
3b
3c
3d
3e
4a
4b
4c
4d
4e
4f
EffectiveandHighly
E ffectiveTeachers
New
Tea
chers
New
toDistrict
NeedsIm
provemen
t
Unsatisfactory
Teachers
40
B.D
evelopmentofProfessionalLearningGoals
B1
ProfessionalLearningGoal(s)
Whatgoalswillen
ablemeto
strengthen
mypractice?
B2
ProfessionalLearningActivities/Actions
Whatactivities/actionswillhelpmeattainmygoals?
Goal1:
Goal2:
IndividualGrowth
PlanReviewed
__________________________________________
___________________________
AdministratorSignature
Date
Monitored/D
irectedGrowth
Plan
ApprovaltoProceed
__________________________________________
___________________________
AdministratorSignature
Date
41
C.O
ngo
ingMonitoringan
dReview
TheProfessionalG
rowth
Planshallbereview
edateverypostconference
meeting.
C1
Evidence
tosupportprogress:
C2
PlanModifications:(ifneed
ed)
Monitoredan
dReviewedby__________________________________________________
Date(s)_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
_____________________
42
D.P
rofessionalGrowth
Plan
EndofYear
Review
D1
Evidence
andartifactsthat
supportthat
theprofessionallearninggoalswere
met:
(Examplesofthingsto
reflectuponwhen
completingthissection:(1)Whatpatterns,insights,andnew
understandingsdidyouuncoverthroughthisprocess?(2)Whatmea
ningdo
thesepatterns,insights,andnew
understandinghave
foryourpractice?
(3)Whathave
youlearned
thathasim
pacted
yourpractice?)
D2
StudentPerform
ance
Outcomes:
(Studen
tdata
reported
inthissectionisnotcalculatedintheoverallratingoftheProfessionalG
rowth
Plan.Itisto
beusedfordiscussion
purposesonly.)
43
E.ProfessionalGrowth
Plan
EndofYear
Review
E1OverallratingforProfessionalGrowth
Plan
_____________________________________
RatingRubricforProfessionalGrowth
Plan
3
Distinguished
TheProfessionalGrowth
Plandem
onstratedadirectcorrelationto
needsindicated
bystudentlearningdataandtheed
ucator’sprevious
perform
ance
rating,cred
entialsand/orselfinventory.Strategieswerespecific,fully
developed
andfocusedonim
provingorchanging
professionalpracticeforthepurposesofim
provedstuden
tlearning.Th
eeducatorreview
edhis/her
planduringtheschoolyear,and
readily
adjusted
theplanwhen
ongoingeviden
ceindicated
theneed.Theed
ucatornotonlycompletedallactivitiesiden
tified
ingrowth
plan,butiden
tified
strategies
andresultingeviden
cethat
ultim
atelyim
provedorchangedtheed
ucator’spracticeinan
effortto
improve
studen
tlearning.Th
eed
ucator’sreflectionprovided
extensive
andthorough
eviden
ceofwhytheed
ucatorim
plemen
tedthose
strategies
andhowandwhythechosenstrategies
improvedorchangedhis/her
practice.Inthecourseofim
plemen
tingtheplan,theed
ucator
collaboratedwithother
educatorsinadeliberateandmeaningfulw
ay.R
esultsoftheplanwereeffectivelyshared
withthewiderschool
communityandim
pactedthepracticeofothers.
2
Proficient
TheProfessionalGrowth
Plandem
onstratedadirectcorrelationto
needsindicated
bystudentlearningdataandtheed
ucator’sprevious
perform
ance
rating,cred
entialsand/orselfinventory.Strategieswerespecific,w
elldeveloped
andfocusedonim
provingorchanging
professionalpracticeforthepurposesofim
provedstuden
tlearning.Th
eeducatorreview
edhis/her
planduringtheschoolyearan
d,if
necessary,m
adead
justmen
tsto
theplan.Theed
ucatorcompletedallactivitiesiden
tified
ingrowth
planandproducedeviden
cethat
iden
tified
strategies
were
implementedintheclassroom.Theed
ucator’sreflectionmadead
equateconnectionsbetweenstuden
tdata
andthestrategies
theed
ucatorchose
toim
plemen
t.Inthecourseofim
plemen
tingtheplan,theed
ucatorcollaboratedwithother
educatorsinameaningfulw
ay.R
esultsoftheplanwereshared
withdep
artm
entsorgradelevelsandmay
havehad
anim
pactonsome
colleagues.
1
Basic
TheProfessionalGrowth
Plandem
onstratedsomecorrelationto
needsindicated
bystuden
tlearningdataandtheed
ucator’sprevious
perform
ance
rating,cred
entialsand/orselfinventory.Strategieswerelooselyfocusedonim
provingorchangingprofessionalpracticefor
thepurposesofim
provedstuden
tlearning.Th
eed
ucatorreview
edhis/herplanduringtheschoolyear,butmadefewornoadjustmen
tsto
theplanunlesssuggestedbytheevaluator.Th
eed
ucator’sreflectiondem
onstratedthat
he/shecompletedmostorallactivities
iden
tified
inthegrowth
plan,butprovided
limited
eviden
ceofim
plemen
tationorhowitim
provedorchangedhis/her
practice.Th
eed
ucator’sattemptsto
collaborate
withotherswere
notdeliberateandcontributedlittleto
theeviden
ce.R
esultsoftheplanwere
minim
allyshared
withothers.
0
Unsatisfactory
TheProfessionalGrowth
Plandidnotdirectlycorrelateto
needsindicated
bystuden
tlearningdataandtheed
ucator’sprevious
perform
ance
rating,cred
entialsand/orinventory.Strategieswerenotclear
ordidnotspecificallyfocusonim
provingorchanging
professionalpracticeforthepurposesofim
provedstuden
tlearning.Th
eeducatorreview
edhis/her
planduringtheschoolyearbutdid
notrecognizeoraccepttheneedto
makeadjustmen
tsto
theplan.Theeducator’sreflection(ifoneexists)provided
littleeviden
cethat
thestrategies
wereim
plemen
tedorhowthose
strategies
improvedorchangedhis/her
practice.
Therewas
minim
alornoeviden
ceto
supporttheplan.Theed
ucatordidnotcollaborate
withothersinameaningfulw
ay.R
esultsoftheplanwerenotshared
withothers.
E2
TeacherSignature
_______________________________________
Date____________________________
AdministratorSignature
__________________________________
Date____________________________
44
Evaluator Training
Who is an evaluator?
An evaluator is defined as: a site based administrator, district based administrator, or peer
evaluator (district based) with training in collecting evidence and scoring the Framework for
Teaching rubric as well as the Professional Growth Plan rubric. PAR Teachers (district based) do
not evaluate any teacher they support as a mentor.
The process for initial training of evaluators
Initial training of evaluators is conducted over four days with a consultant. The training includesinformation on the Danielson Framework domains and components, evidence collection, VSETprocedures for evaluation, and the Professional Growth Plan.
The process for on going training of evaluators
A train the trainer model will develop district capacity to train teachers during pre planning, and
throughout the year. Phase I trainers will then support the rollout to all other schools for the
2012 2013 school year. Ongoing support with the Danielson consultant through site visits, team
meetings, and webinars is scheduled to ensure fidelity of implementation and inter rater
reliability.
Volusia will collaborate with Educational Impact and Learning Bridges to provide online
professional development to build capacity for training teachers and evaluators. Three courses
provided by Educational Impact include:
Charlotte Danielson’s Teaching Framework
22 Components of Great Teaching
Teacher Evaluation Using the Danielson Framework
The purpose of the Volusia System of Empowering Teachers (VSET) is to provide quality
assurance and professional growth. Implementation of a process as complex as a new
professional evaluation system requires a high degree of attention to training on procedures,
understanding the criteria on the framework, and developing inter rater reliability. In addition, it
is necessary to be sensitive to the demands on personnel caused by such a major change in
practice. From the outset of implementation, the district will be mindful of these challenges.
How is supervisor for evaluation purposes determined?
The school principal will determine which administrator available at the building will evaluate each
teacher. In instances where the principal supervises more than one building, additional evaluators may
45
be recruited from district staff or other trained evaluators. In the case of specialized instructional roles
that report to a district administrator, the appropriate district administrator will conduct the evaluation.
Input into Evaluation by Personnel other than the Supervisor
The evaluator may consider input from other trained evaluation personnel. The teacher may also electto submit as evidence, walk through observations completed by coaches or district staff, records ofparticipation in special assignments and committees, and commendations from district staff or otheragencies, and other relevant evidence.
46
Peer Assistance and Review
Volusia School District has established a peer assistance and review process –as part of the evaluationsystem. The Volusia Teachers Organization supports the Peer Assistance and Review program. The PeerAssistance and Review (PAR) teacher will conduct both formative and summative observations forparticipating teachers. The evaluation and feedback of the PAR teacher will be separate from and equalto the weight of the evaluating supervisor. PAR teachers will support and evaluate new teachers,teachers new to the district, and teachers with either an unsatisfactory or needs improvement rating.
The PAR’s final evaluation for a participating teacher will count for 20% of the multiple metric
evaluation system. The first part of the year the feedback will be formative and the later part of the year
will be summative.
Training for Peer Assistance and Review Practitioners
4 day workshop on Danielson Framework for Effective Teaching
2 day workshop on the Toledo PAR Model provided through AFT/VTO
1 day workshop for district procedures, followed by weekly meetings and training
Additional training provided by the New Teachers Center and funded through a grant fromFADSS and the Gates Foundation.
Responsibilities of PAR teacher
Assist assigned teachers with setting classroom procedures and environment.
Assist with data analysis for assigned teachers’ incoming students.Provide guidance on developing the assigned teacher’s Professional Growth Plan.
Monitor and refine assigned teachers’ instructional planning and delivery.
Provide timely feedback to assigned teachers to improve practice.
Maintain confidentiality while working with assigned teachers; Share progress with the buildingadministrator only with teacher permission.
Seek additional assistance if assigned teacher is not making sufficient progress.
Follow the appropriate observation cycle procedures and timeline for evaluation set by VolusiaSystem for Empowering Teachers.
Monitor completion of the E3 folder requirements for the teachers participating in theEmpowering Educators for Excellence (E3) teacher induction program.
Evaluation Process for PAR teachers
PAR teachers are district based teachers on assignment.
PAR teachers are evaluated using an adapted Danielson Framework rubric.
The two district administrators designated as supervisors for the PAR program (Coordinator ofK 12 Curriculum and Human Resource Specialist) shall serve as evaluators for the PAR teachers.
The number of observation cycles will be the same as an Effective or Highly Effective teacher.
PAR teachers will complete a Professional Growth Plan.
The designated district supervisors will monitor and evaluate the Professional Growth Plandeveloped by a PAR teacher.
The final Summative Evaluation Rating for a PAR teacher will consist of 25% Educator Evaluation,25% Professional Growth Plan, and 50% based on a district value added calculation.
48
Teaching Fields Requiring Special Procedures
The district has identified certain teaching positions that require special evaluation procedures.Evaluation frameworks for these positions are adapted from the Classroom Teacher rubric match theservice delivery provided by people in these instructional support positions. K 12 Curriculum, Title I, theESE and Student Services Department have created specialized rubrics for:
Specialist Rubrics – Framework and Professional Growth Plan
1. Compliance Specialists
2. District Teacher on Assignment
3. Instructional Coach
4. Media Teachers
5. Parent Education Facilitator
6. Peer Assistance and Review Teacher/Evaluator
7. Program Specialists
8. School Counselor
9. School Psychologists
10. School Social Workers
11. Therapeutic Specialists
49
VOLU
SIAFR
AMEW
ORKFO
RTEACHING
SchoolCounselorRubric
Domain1:Planningan
dPreparation
1a:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofContent
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheSchoolCounselorrarelypractices
professionalcompeten
ceinthedeliveryof
schoolcounselingandstuden
tservice
deliveryandinthecontextsofdiverse
individual,fam
ily,school,andcommunity
characteristics.
TheSchoolCounselorregularlypractices
professionalcompeten
ceinthedeliveryof
schoolcounselingandstuden
tservice
deliveryandinthecontextsofdiverse
individual,fam
ily,school,andcommunity
characteristics.
TheSchoolCounselorconsisten
tlyapplies
theirknowledge
ofSchoolCounseling
Practices
andfactorsthat
impactpersonal,
socialanded
ucationaldecisionmakingfor
allstakeholders.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cyinthis
componen
t,theSchoolCounselorisaresource
forstuden
t,paren
ts,teacher
andadministrator
regardingtheculturalfactorsthat
impact
personal,socialanded
ucationaldecisionmaking
forallstakeholders.
DiscussionofEvidence
1b:D
emonstratingKnowledge
ofStuden
ts
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselordisplays
littleornoknowledge
of
child
andadolescen
tdevelopmen
tandor
studen
tneeds,interestsandacadem
ic
program
s.
Counselordisplays
partialknowledge
ofchild
andadolescen
tdevelopmen
tandorstuden
t
needs,interestsandacadem
icprogram
s.
Counselordisplays
accurate
understanding
ofstuden
tneeds,interestsandacadem
ic
program
sandorthetypicaldevelopmen
tal
characteristicsoftheagegroup,aswellas
exceptionsto
thegeneralpatterns.
Inadditionto
accurate
knowledge
ofthetypical
developmen
talcharacteristicsoftheagegroup
andexceptionsto
thegeneralpatterns,counselor
displays
knowledge
oftheextentto
which
individualstuden
tsfollowthegeneralpatterns.
Counselorisalso
awareandproactive
in
inden
tifyingandmeetingstuden
tneeds,interests
anden
suringappropriateplacemen
tofstuden
ts
inacadem
icprogram
s.
DiscussionofEvidence
1c:
SettingServiceDelivery
Outcomes
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counseloradheresto
theplanorprogram
,in
spiteofevidence
ofitsinadeq
uacy.
Counselormakes
modestchangesinthe
counselingprogram
when
confrontedwith
evidence
oftheneedforchange
Counselormakes
revisionsinthecounseling
program
when
theyareneeded.
Counseloriscontinuallyseekingwaysto
improve
theCounselingprogram
andmakeschangesas
needed
inresponse
tostuden
t,paren
t,orteacher
input.
50
DiscussionofEvidence
1d:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofResources
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselordem
onstrateslittleorno
knowledge
ofdistrict,stateorfederal
policiesandregulationsandofresources
availableforstuden
ts.
Counselordisplays
awaren
essofdistrict,
stateandfederalpoliciesandregulations
andofresources
forstuden
tsavailable
through
theschoolordistrict,butno
knowledge
ofresources
availablemore
broadly.
Counselordisplays
awaren
essofdistrict,
stateandfederalpoliciesandregulations
andofresources
forstuden
tsavailable
through
theschoolordistrict,andsome
familiaritywithresources
externalto
the
school.
Counselor’sknowledge
ofdistrict,stateand
federalpoliciesandregulationsandofresources
isextensive,includingthose
availablethrough
the
schoolordistrictandinthecommunity.
DiscussionofEvidence
1e:DesigningCoherentServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheCounselorhas
nocleargoalsforthe
counselingprogram
,orthey
are
inappropriatefortheageofthestuden
tsor
theneedsoftheschool.
TheCounselors’plansforthecounseling
program
arerudim
entary
andarepartially
suitableto
thesituation,theneedsofthe
schoolandtheageofthestuden
ts.
TheCounselors’goalsforthecounseling
program
areclear
andappropriateto
the
situation,theneedsoftheschoolandto
the
ageofthestuden
ts.
TheCounselors’goalsforthecounselingprogram
arehighlyappropriateto
thesituation,theneeds
oftheschoolandto
theageofthestuden
tsand
havebeendevelopedfollowingconsultations
withstuden
ts,paren
ts,andcolleagues.
DiscussionofEvidence
1f:
AssessingGoalAchievemen
t
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselorhas
noplanto
evaluatethe
program
orresistssuggestionsthat
such
an
evaluationisim
portant.
Counselorhas
arudim
entary
planto
evaluatethecounselingprogram
.
Counselor’splanto
evaluatetheprogram
is
organized
aroundclear
goalsandthe
collectionofevidence
toindicatethedegree
towhichthegoalshavebeenmet.
Counselor’sevaluationplanishighly
sophisticated,w
ithim
aginativesourceof
eviden
ceandaclear
pathtowardim
proving
theprogram
onan
ongoingbasis.
DiscussionofEvidence
51
Domain2:Th
eEn
vironment
2a:
Creatingan
EnvironmentofRespectan
dRap
port
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Thecounselors’relationship(s)withparen
ts
andstuden
tsareinappropriateanddonot
promote
positive
interactions.
The
Counselorsmakesnoattemptto
establisha
culture
forproductivecommunicationinthe
schoolasawhole,either
amongstuden
tsor
amongteachers,orbetweenstuden
tand
teachers.
Thecounselors’interactionswithothersare
acombinationofboth
positive
andnegative.
Counselor’sattemptsto
promote
aculture
throughouttheschoolforproductiveand
respectfulcommunicationbetweenand
amongstuden
tsandteachersarepartially
successful.
Thecounselors’interactionsarepositive
and
promote
healthyinteractions.
Counselor
promotesaculture
throughouttheschool
forproductiveandrespectful
communicationbetweenandam
ong
studen
tsandteachers.
Thecounselors’interactionsarepositive
and
promote
healthyinteractions.Studen
tsseek
outthecounselor,reflectingahighdegree
ofcomfortandtrust.Theculture
inthe
schoolforproductiveandrespectful
communicationbetweenandam
ong
studen
tsandteachers,while
guidedbythe
counselor,isproductiveandrespectful.The
counseloroften
takesaleadershiprolein
promotingpositive
interpersonal
relationships.
DiscussionofEvidence
2b:EstablishingaCulture
forGoalAchievement
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheSchoolCounselorrarelyintegrates
beh
avioralsupportsandmen
talhealth
services
withacadem
icandlearninggoals
forstuden
ts.
TheSchoolCounselorregularlyintegrates
beh
avioralsupportsandmen
talhealth
services
withacadem
icandlearninggoals
forstuden
ts.
TheSchoolCounselorconsisten
tly
synthesizes
schoolw
idebeh
avioraldatain
order
topromote
positive
academ
icand
learningoutcomes
forstuden
ts.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cy,the
SchoolCounselorappliestheirexpertise
of
beh
aviorandmentalhealthto
positively
impactschoolwideacadem
icandbeh
avioral
tren
ds.
DiscussionofEvidence
2c:
Man
agingProcedures
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheSchoolCounselorrarelypromotesthe
use
ofevidence
based
instructional,
beh
avioralandmen
talhealthinterven
tions
targeted
tothearea(s)ofconcern
based
on
multiplesources
ofassessmen
tdata.
TheSchoolCounselorregularlypromotes
theuse
ofeviden
cebased
instructional,
beh
avioralandmen
talhealthinterven
tions
targeted
tothearea(s)ofconcern
based
on
multiplesources
ofassessmen
tdata.
TheSchoolCounselorconsisten
tlypromotes
theuse
ofeviden
cebased
instructional,
beh
avioralandmen
talhealthinterven
tions
targeted
tothearea(s)ofconcern
and
analyzes
theeffectiven
essofthe
interven
tions.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cyinthis
componen
t,theSchoolCounselorprovides
continuousfeed
backregardingthe
effectiven
essoftheinterven
tion(s)and
supportstheinterven
tionprovider
accordingly.
52
DiscussionofEvidence
2d:M
anagingCompliance/ClientBehavior
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselors’relationshipswithcolleagues
are
negativeorselfserving,andcounselor
avoidsbeinginvolved
inschoolanddistrict
even
tsandprojects.Counselordoes
not
assessstuden
tneeds,ortheassessmen
t
resultsarenotaccurate.
Counselors’relationshipswithcolleagues
are
cordialandcounselorparticipatesinschool
anddistricteven
tsandprojectswhen
specificallyrequested.Counselor’s
assessmen
tsofstuden
tneedsare
perfunctory.
Counselorparticipates
activelyinschooland
districteven
tsandprojectsandmaintains
positive
andproductiverelationshipswith
colleagues.Counselorassesses
studen
t
needsandknowstherange
ofstuden
tneeds
intheschool.
Counselormakes
asubstantialcontribution
toschoolanddistricteven
tsandprojects
andassumes
leadershipwithcolleagues.
Counselorconductsdetailedand
individualized
assessmen
tsofstuden
tneeds
tocontribute
toprogram
planning.
DiscussionofEvidence
2e:Organ
izingPhysicalSpace
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheCounselordoes
notincorporate
various
techniques
fordatacollection,
measuremen
t,analysis,accountability
and
use
oftechnology
resources
inevaluationof
services
attheindividual,group,and/or
system
slevels.
TheCounselorregularlyincorporatesvarious
techniques
fordatacollection,
measuremen
t,analysis,accountability
and
use
oftechnology
resources
inevaluationof
services
attheindividual,group,and/or
system
slevels.
TheCounselorconsisten
tlyincorporates
varioustechniques
fordatacollection,
measuremen
t,analysis,accountability,and
use
oftechnology
resources
inevaluationof
services
attheindividual,group,and/or
system
slevels.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cyinthis
componen
t,theCounselorim
pactssystem
s
change
asaresultoftheevaluationof
services
attheindividual,group,and/or
system
slevel.
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain3:ServiceDelivery
3a:
CommunicatingClearlyan
dAccurately
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselorprovides
noinform
ationor
inaccurate
inform
ationto
families,either
aboutthecounselingprogram
asawholeor
aboutindividualstuden
ts.
Counselorprovides
limitedthough
accurate
inform
ationto
familiesaboutthecounseling
program
asawholeandaboutindividual
studen
ts.
Counselorprovides
thorough
andaccurate
inform
ationto
familiesaboutthecounseling
program
asawholeandaboutindividual
studen
ts.
Counselorprovides
thorough
andaccurate
inform
ationto
families.
Counselorisproactive
inproviding
inform
ationto
familiesaboutthecounseling
program
andaboutindividualstuden
ts
through
avarietyofmeans.
DiscussionofEvidence
53
3b:Inform
ationGathering
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheCounselordoes
notcollectdatafrom
multiplesources
asafoundationfor
decisionmakingandconsidersecological
factors(e.g.,classroom,fam
ily,community
characteristics)as
acontextforassessmen
t
andinterven
tion.
TheCounselorregularlycollectsdatafrom
multiplesources
asafoundationfor
decisionmaking.
TheCounselorconsisten
tlycollectsdata
from
multiplesources
andusesongoing
progressmonitoringdatato
determinethe
effectiven
essoftheinterven
tions.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cyinthis
componen
t,thecounselorassumesa
leadershippositionindataanalysisand
technology
resources
inorder
toim
prove
educationandbehavioraloutcomes.
DiscussionofEvidence
3c:
EngagingStudentsinGoalAchievement
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselor’sprogram
isindep
enden
tof
studen
tneedsanddoes
nothelpstuden
ts
andteachersform
ulate
academ
ic,
personal/social,andcareer
plans.
Counselor’sattemptsto
helpstuden
tsand
teachersform
ulate
academ
ic,
personal/socialandteachersform
ulate
academ
ic,personal/social,andcareer
plans
arepartiallysuccessful.
Counselor’sattemptsto
helpstuden
tsand
teachersform
ulate
academ
ic,
personal/socialandteachersform
ulate
academ
ic,personal/social,andcareer
plans
aresuccessful.
Counselorhelpsindividualstuden
tsand
teachersform
ulate
academ
ic,
personal/socialandcareer
planseffectively
andefficien
tly.Counselorconductsdetailed
andindividualized
assessmentsofstuden
t
needsto
contribute
toindividualplanning.
DiscussionofEvidence
3d:UsingAssessmentinServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheSchoolCounselorrarelyevaluates
services,program
s,academ
icorbeh
avioral
achievemen
tat
theindividualgroupand/or
system
slevel.
TheSchoolCounselorregularlyincorporates
datainevaluationofservices,program
s,
academ
icorbeh
avioralachievemen
tat
the
individualgroupand/orsystem
slevel.
TheSchoolCounselorconsisten
tly
incorporatesvarioustechniques
fordata
collection,m
easuremen
t,analysis,
accountability,anduse
oftechnology
resources
inevaluationofservices,
program
s,academ
icorbeh
avioral
achievemen
tat
theindividualgroupand/or
system
slevel.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cyinthis
componen
t,theSchoolCounselorim
pacts
system
change
asaresultoftheevaluation
ofservices,program
s,academ
icor
beh
avioralachievemen
tat
theindividual
groupand/orsystem
slevel.
DiscussionofEvidence
54
3e:DemonstratingFlexibility
andResponsiveness
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counseloradheresto
theplanorprogram
,
inspiteofeviden
ceofitsinadeq
uacy.
Counselormakes
modestchangesinthe
counselingprogram
when
confrontedwith
evidence
oftheneedforchange.
Counselormakes
revisionsinthecounseling
program
when
theyareneeded.
Counseloriscontinuallyseekingwaysto
improve
thecounselingprogram
andmakes
changesas
neededinresponse
tostuden
t,
paren
t,orteacher
input.
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain4:ProfessionalResponsibilities
4a:ReflectingonPractice/ServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselordoes
notreflectonpractice,or
thereflectionsareinaccurate
orselfserving.
Counselor’sreflectiononpracticeis
moderatelyaccurate
andobjectivewithout
citingspecificexam
plesandwithonlyglobal
suggestionsas
tohowitmightbeim
proved.
Counselor’sreflectionprovides
anaccurate
andobjectivedescriptionofpractice,citing
specificpositive
andnegativecharacteristics.
Counselormakes
somespecificsuggestions
asto
howthecounselingprogram
mightbe
improved.
Counselor’sreflectionishighlyaccurate
and
perceptive,citingspecificexam
plesthat
werenotfully
successfulforat
leastsome
studen
ts.Counselordrawsonan
extensive
repertoireto
suggestalternativestrategies.
DiscussionofEvidence
4b:M
aintainingAccurate
Records
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselors’rep
orts,records,and
documen
tationaremissing,late,or
inaccurate,resultinginconfusionand
misinform
ationormisadvisemen
t.
Counselors’rep
orts,records,and
documen
tationaregenerally
accurate
but
areoccasionallylate.
Counselors’rep
orts,records,and
documen
tationareaccurate
andare
submittedinatimelymanner.
Counselors’approachto
record
keep
ingis
highlysystem
aticandefficien
tandserves
as
amodelforcolleagues
inother
schools.
DiscussionofEvidence
55
4c:
CommunicatingwithStakeholders
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselorprovides
noinform
ationto
families,either
aboutthecounseling
program
asawholeoraboutindividual
studen
ts.
Counselorprovides
limitedthough
accurate
inform
ationto
familiesaboutthecounseling
program
asawholeandaboutindividual
studen
ts.
Counselorprovides
thorough
andaccurate
inform
ationto
familiesaboutthecounseling
program
asawholeandaboutindividual
studen
ts.
Counselorisproactive
inproviding
inform
ationto
familiesaboutthecounseling
program
andaboutindividualstuden
ts
through
avarietyofmeans.
DiscussionofEvidence
4d:ParticipatinginaProfessionalCommunity
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Counselor’srelationshipswithcolleagues
are
negativeorselfserving,andcounselor
avoidsbeinginvolved
inschoolanddistrict
even
tsandprojects.
Counselor’srelationshipswithcolleagues
are
cordial,andcounselorparticipates
inschool
anddistricteven
tsandprojectswhen
specificallyrequested.
Counselorparticipates
activelyinschooland
districteven
tsandprojectsandmaintains
positive
andproductiverelationshipswith
colleagues.
Counselormakes
asubstantialcontribution
toschoolanddistricteven
tsandprojects
andassumes
leadershipwithcolleagues.
DiscussionofEvidence
4e:Growingan
dDevelopingProfessionally
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheSchoolCounselorrarelyengagesin
professionaldevelopmen
tactivities
and
does
notstay
abreastofdevelopmen
tsin
thefield.
TheSchoolCounselorregularlyen
gagesin
professionaldevelopmen
tactivities
and
staysabreastofdevelopmen
tsinthefield.
TheSchoolCounseloractivelyengagesin
lifelonglearningandstrategically
alignstheir
professionaldevelopmen
tactivities
to
enhance
theirongoingprofessionalgrowth.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cyinthis
componen
t,theSchoolCounselorapplies
theknowledge
learnedfrom
the
professionaldevelopmen
tactivities
to
trainings
andworkshopsforschoolstaff,
studen
ts,paren
ts,and/orother
professional
groups.
DiscussionofEvidence
56
4f:
DemonstratingProfessionalism
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
TheSchoolCounselorrarelypractices
in
waysthat
dem
onstrate
knowledge
of
ethical,professional,andlegalstandardsand
regulationsthat
guideed
ucationandschool
counseling.Thecounselordisplays
issues
withhonesty
andconfiden
tialityandis
unethical
TheSchoolCounselorregularlypractices
in
waysthat
dem
onstrate
knowledge
of
ethical,professional,andlegalstandardsand
regulationsthat
guideed
ucationandschool
counseling.Thecounselorattemptsto
displayhonestyandconfiden
tialityat
all
times.G
enerally
thecounseloradheres
to
his/her
professionalethicalstandards.
TheSchoolCounselorconsisten
tlypractices
inwaysthat
dem
onstrate
knowledge
of
ethical,professional,andlegalstandardsand
regulationsthat
guideed
ucationandschool
counseling.Thecounselorpromotes
relationshipsbased
onhonestyand
confiden
tialityisoften
successful.The
counselorconsisten
tlyadheres
to
professionalethicalstandards.
Inadditionto
meetingproficien
cyinthis
componen
t,theSchoolCounselortakesa
leadershiproleininform
ingothersof
ethical,professional,andlegalstandardsand
regulationsthat
guideed
ucationandschool
counseling.Thecounselorisopen
and
honestandadheres
toethicssurrounding
confiden
tialityat
alltim
es.Inaddition,to
consisten
tlyadheringto
professionalethical
standards,thecounselorpractices
good
judgm
ent,often
takingaleadershiprole
withcolleagues.
DiscussionofEvidence
57
VOLU
SIAFR
AMEW
ORKFO
RTEACHING
InstructionalCoachRubric
Domain1:Planningan
dPreparation
1a:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofContent
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachdem
onstrateslittleorno
knowledge
ofcontentandtheresearch
based
practices
specificto
that
discipline.
Instructionalcoachdem
onstratesbasic
knowledge
ofcontentandtheresearch
based
practices
specificto
that
discipline.
Instructionalcoachdem
onstratessolid
knowledge
ofcontentandtheresearch
based
practices
specificto
that
discipline.
Instructionalcoachdem
onstratesextensive
knowledge
ofthecontentandtheresearch
based
practices
specificto
that
discipline;
coachisregarded
asan
expertbycolleagues.
DiscussionofEvidence
1b:D
emonstratingKnowledge
ofStuden
ts
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachdem
onstrateslittleorno
knowledge
ofclients’backgroundandskills.
Instructionalcoachdem
onstratesthe
importance
ofunderstandingclients’
backgroundandskills,andusesthis
inform
ationto
adjustpresentation.
Instructionalcoachactivelyseeksknowledge
ofclients’backgroundandskills,anduses
thisinform
ationto
adjustpresentation.
Instructionalcoachactivelyseeksknowledge
ofclients’backgroundandskillsfrom
a
varietyofsources,usesthisinform
ationto
adjustpresentation,andmodelsthis
techniqueforclients’use
inworkingwith
studen
ts.
DiscussionofEvidence
1c:
SettingServiceDelivery
Outcomes
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachhas
noclear
goalsfor
coaching,ortheyareinappropriateto
either
thesituationortheneedsofthestaff.
Instructionalcoach’sgoalsforcoachingare
rudim
entary
andarepartiallysuitableto
the
situationandtheneedsofthestaff.
Instructionalcoach’sgoalsforcoachingare
clear,suitableto
thesituationandneedsof
thestaff,andarecapableofassessment.
Instructionalcoach’sgoalsforcoachingare
highlyappropriateto
thesituationand
needsofthestaff,andarecapableof
assessmen
t.
DiscussionofEvidence
58
1d:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofResources
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachdem
onstrateslittleorno
familiaritywithresearch
basedresourcesto
teachclientsanden
hance
ownknowledge.
Instructionalcoachdoes
notseeksuch
knowledge.
Instructionalcoachdem
onstratessome
familiaritywithresearch
basedresourcesto
teachclientsanden
hance
ownknowledge.
Instructionalcoachdoes
notseekto
extend
such
knowledge.
Instructionalcoachisfully
awareof
resources
availableto
teachclientsand
continuallyseeksoutnew
research
based
resources.Instructionalcoachalso
actively
seeksoutandsuppliesclientswithresources
that
willhelppositivelyim
pactstuden
t
achievemen
t.
Instructionalcoachseeksoutresources
in
andbeyondtheschoolordistrictin
professionalorganizations,ontheInternet,
andinthecommunityto
enhance
own
knowledge,touse
inservicedelivery,andfor
clientswhoneedthem
.
DiscussionofEvidence
1e:DesigningCoherentServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoach’splanconsistsofa
random
collectionofunrelatedactivities,
lackingcoheren
ceoran
overallstructure.
Instructionalcoach’splanhas
aguiding
principleandincludes
anumber
of
worthwhile
activities,butsomeofthem
don’tfitwiththebroader
goals.
Instructionalcoach’splaniswelldesigned
to
supportclientsintheim
provemen
toftheir
instructionalskillsandtakesinto
accountthe
follow
upwithclients.Consultationwith
administratorsandclientshas
occurred
prior
todevelopmen
t.
Instructionalcoach’splanishighlycoheren
t,
takinginto
accountthecompetingdem
ands
ofmakingpresentationsandfollow
upwith
clients,andhas
beendeveloped
after
consultingwithadministratorsandclients.
DiscussionofEvidence
1f:
AssessingGoalAchievement
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoach’splanforassessingthe
servicedeliveryisnotaligned
withthe
outcomes
andcontainsnoclear
perform
ance
criteria.
Instructionalcoach’splanforassessingthe
servicedeliveryispartiallyaligned
withthe
outcomes
andiswithoutclear
perform
ance
criteria.
Instructionalcoach’splanforassessingthe
servicedeliveryisaligned
withtheoutcomes
andisbasedonclear
perform
ance
criteria.
Assessm
entresultsareusedto
make
appropriatedecisionsabouttheservice
delivery’sim
pactandthedesignoffuture
servicedelivery,includingfollowup
coaching.
Instructionalcoach’splanforassessingthe
servicedeliveryisfully
aligned
withthe
servicedeliveryoutcomes,w
ithclear
criteria
andstandards.
Theassessmen
tresultsare
continuouslyutilized
toguidethedesignof
future
ofservicedelivery.
DiscussionofEvidence
59
Domain2:Th
eEn
vironment
2a:
Creatingan
EnvironmentofRespectan
dRap
port
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Clientsarereluctantto
requestassistance
from
theinstructionalcoach,fearingthat
such
arequestwillbetreatedas
asign
of
deficiency.
Relationshipswiththeinstructionalcoach
arecordial;Clientsdon’tresistinitiatives
established
bytheinstructionalcoach.
Relationshipswiththeinstructionalcoach
arerespectful,withsomecontactsinitiated
byclients
Relationshipswiththeinstructionalcoach
arehighlyrespectfulandtrusting,withmany
contactsinitiatedbyteachers.
DiscussionofEvidence
2b:EstablishingaCulture
forGoalAchievement
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Theen
vironmentconveys
anegativeculture
forgoalachievemen
t,characterizedbylow
professionalcommitmen
tto
thesubject,low
expectationsforclientachievemen
t,and
littleornoclientprideinwork.
Instructionalcoach’sattemptsto
create
a
culture
forgoalachievemen
tarepartially
successful,withlittleprofessional
commitmen
tto
thesubject,m
odest
expectationsforclientachievemen
t,and
littleclientprideinwork.Both
coachand
clientappearto
beonly“goingthrough
the
motions.”
Theen
vironmentischaracterizedbyhigh
expectationsformostclients,gen
uine
commitmen
tto
thesubjectbyboth
coach
andclients,w
ithclientsdem
onstratingpride
intheirwork.
Instructionalcoachcreateshighlevelsof
clienten
ergy
andprofessionalpassionfor
thesubject.A
culture
forgoalachievemen
t
inwhicheveryoneshares
abeliefinthe
importance
ofthesubjectiseviden
t,andall
clientsholdthem
selves
tohighstandardsof
perform
ance.
DiscussionofEvidence
2c:
Man
agingProcedures
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Much
servicedeliverytimeislostdueto
inefficien
troutines
andprocedures.
Someservicedeliverytimeislostdueto
only
partiallyeffectiveroutines
andprocedures.
Servicedeliveryiscarefully
planned
using
efficien
tandeffectiveroutines
and
procedures.
Servicedeliveryiscarefully
planned
using
efficien
tandeffectiveroutines
and
procedures.
Clientscontribute
totheseam
lessoperation
ofroutines
andprocedures.
DiscussionofEvidence
60
2d:M
anagingCompliance/ClientBehavior
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Nonorm
sofprofessionalconducthavebeen
established
;teachersarefreq
uen
tly
disrespectfulintheirinteractionswithone
another.
Instructionalcoach’seffortto
establish
norm
sofprofessionalconductarepartially
successful.
Instructionalcoachhas
established
clear
norm
sofmutualrespectforprofessional
interactions
Instructionalcoachhas
established
clear
norm
sofmutualrespectforprofessional
interaction.C
lientsen
sure
that
their
colleagues
adhereto
thesestandardsof
conduct.
DiscussionofEvidence
2e:Organ
izingPhysicalSpace
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachmakes
noeffortto
plan
thephysicalen
vironmen
tand/ortheuse
of
trainingeq
uipmen
t.
Instructionalcoachmakes
limitedeffortto
planthephysicalen
vironmen
tand/orthe
use
oftrainingeq
uipmen
t.
Instructionalcoachselectsservicedelivery
venues
that
aresafe,convenient,and
conducive
togoalachievemen
t.Theuse
of
resources
includingtrainingeq
uipmen
tis
usedeffectively.
Instructionalcoachmakes
highlyeffective
use
ofphysicalen
vironmen
tand/ortraining
equipmen
tresultinginen
gagementofall
participants.
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain3:ServiceDelivery
3a:
CommunicatingClearlyan
dAccurately
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Expectationsforgoalachievemen
t,
directionsandprocedures,andexplanations
ofcontentareunclear
orconfusingto
clients.Instructionalcoach’suse
of
languagecontainserrorsorisinappropriate
toclients’skilllevelandbackground.
Expectationsforgoalachievemen
t,
directionsandprocedures,andexplanations
ofcontentareclarifiedafterinitial
confusion;Instructionaluse
oflanguageis
correctbutmay
notbecompletely
appropriateto
clients’skillleveland
background.
Expectationsforgoalachievemen
t,
directionsandprocedures,andexplanations
ofcontentareclearto
clients.
Communicationsareappropriateto
clients’
skilllevelandbackground.
Expectationsforgoalachievemen
t,
directionsandprocedures,andexplanations
ofcontentareclear
toclients.Instructional
coach’soralandwritten
communicationis
clear
andexpressive,Communicationsare
appropriateto
clients’skilllevel,
background,andanticipates
possible
misconceptions.
DiscussionofEvidence
61
3b:Inform
ationGathering
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachhas
noskillsinobserving
andrecordingclients’teachingeventsto
gather
inform
ationaboutclients’stren
gths,
deficits,andneedsinorder
tomake
appropriatedecisionsaboutservicedelivery.
Instructionalcoachhas
limitedskillsin
observingandrecordingclients’teaching
even
tsto
gather
inform
ationaboutclients’
strengths,deficits,andneedsinorder
to
makeappropriatedecisionsaboutservice
delivery.
Instructionalcoachisskilled
inobservingand
recordingclients’teachingeventsto
gather
inform
ationaboutclients’stren
gths,deficits,
andneedsinorder
tomakeappropriate
decisionsaboutservicedelivery.
Instructionalcoachishighlyskilledin
observingandrecordingclients’teaching
even
tsto
gather
inform
ationaboutclients’
strengths,deficits,andneedsinorder
to
makeappropriatedecisionsaboutservice
deliver.
DiscussionofEvidence
3c:
EngagingStudentsinGoalAchievement
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Activitiesandmaterialsareinappropriateto
theservicedeliveryoutcomes.Theservice
deliveryhas
nostructure
orispoorlypaced
.
Activitiesandmaterialsarepartially
appropriateto
theservicedelivery
outcomes.Theservicedeliveryhas
a
recognizablestructure
butisnotfully
maintained
.
Activitiesandmaterialsen
gage
allclientsin
servicedeliveryoutcomes
andarecongruen
t
withtheintended
goalachievemen
t.
Activitiesandmaterialsareappropriatefor
theclients’skilllevelsandneeds,reflecthigh
expectationsoftheclients,are
coheren
t
withoverallgoals,andareappropriately
paced
.
Clientsarehighlyengagedthroughoutthe
servicedeliveryinsignificantgoal
achievemen
t.Theservicedeliveryis
adaptedas
neededto
theneedsof
individuals,andthestructure
andpacing
allowforclientreflectionandclosure.
DiscussionofEvidence
3d:UsingAssessmentinServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachneverassesses
the
progressofclientstowardgoalachievemen
t.
Instructionalcoachprovides
nofeed
backto
theclientsontheirprogress.
Instructionalcoachoccasionallyassessesthe
progressofclientstowardgoalachievemen
t.
Instructionalcoachprovides
limited
feed
backto
theclientsontheirprogress.
Instructionalcoachfreq
uen
tlyassessesthe
progressofclientstowardgoalachievemen
t.
Instructionalcoachprovides
specifichigh
qualityfeed
backto
theclientsontheir
progress.
Clientsarefully
awareofthe
assessmen
tcriteriausedto
evaluatetheir
work.
Instructionalcoachroutinelyassesses
the
progressofclientstowardgoalachievemen
t.
Instructionalcoachprovides
specifichigh
qualityfeed
backto
theclientsontheir
progress.
Clientsareinvolved
inthe
developmen
toftheassessmen
tcriteriaused
toevaluatetheirwork.
DiscussionofEvidence
62
3e:DemonstratingFlexibility
andResponsiveness
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachadheres
totheservice
deliveryplan,evenwhen
achange
would
improve
theservicedeliveryorofclients’
lack
ofinterest.Instructionalcoachbrushes
asideclientinform
ationgathering
techniques;w
hen
clientsexperience
difficulty,theprofessionalblames
theclient
ortheirhomeen
vironmen
t.
Instructionalcoachattemptsto
modifythe
servicedeliverywhen
needed
andto
respondto
clientinform
ationgathering
techniques,w
ithmoderatesuccess.
Instructionalcoachacceptsresponsibility
for
clientsuccess,buthas
onlyalim
ited
repertoireofstrategies
todrawupon.
Instructionalcoachpromotesthesuccessful
goalachievemen
tofallclients,m
aking
adjustmen
tsas
needed
toservicedelivery
plansandaccommodatingclient
inform
ationgatheringtechniques,needs
andinterests.
Instructionalcoachseizes
anopportunityto
enhance
goalachievemen
t,buildingona
spontaneo
useventorclientinterests.
Instructionalcoachen
suresthesuccessofall
clients,usingan
extensive
repertoireof
servicedeliverystrategies.
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain4:ProfessionalResponsibilities
4a:ReflectingonPractice/ServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachdoes
notreflecton
practiceorthereflectionsareinaccurate
or
selfservicing.
Instructionalcoach’sreflectiononpracticeis
moderatelyaccurate
andobjectivewithout
citingspecificexam
plesandwithonlyglobal
suggestionsas
tohowitmightbeim
proved.
Instructionalcoach’sreflectionprovidesan
accurate
andobjectivedescriptionof
practice,citingspecificpositive
andnegative
characteristics.
Instructionalcoachmakes
somespecificsuggestionsas
tohowthe
supportprogram
mightbeim
proved.
Instructionalcoach’sreflectionishighly
accurate
andperceptive,citingspecific
exam
ples.
Instructionalcoachdrawsonan
extensive
repertoireto
suggestalternative
strategies,accompaniedbyapredictionof
thelikelyconsequen
cesofeach.
DiscussionofEvidence
4b:M
aintainingAccurate
Records
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Recordsofclientprogressingoal
achievemen
tand/orother
servicedelivery
activities
areeither
absentorindisarray.
Recordsofclientprogressingoal
achievemen
tand/orother
servicedelivery
activities
arerudim
entary
and/orrequire
freq
uen
tmonitoringforaccuracy.
Instructionalcoachmaintainsaccurate,
ongoingrecordsofclients’progresstoward
goalachievemen
tand/orother
service
deliveryactivities.
Instructionalcoachmaintainsaccurate,
ongoingrecordsofclients’progresstoward
goalachievemen
tand/orother
service
deliveryactivities.C
oachmakes
adjustmen
ts
based
onprogress.
DiscussionofEvidence
63
4c:
CommunicatingwithStakeholders
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachprovides
little/no
inform
ationto
stakeh
oldersaboutservice
deliveryprogram
.Communicationis
insensitive
orinappropriateand/ormakes
noattemptto
engage
stakeh
oldersinthe
servicedelivery.
Instructionalcoachprovides
minim
al
and/oroccasionallyinsensitive
communicationandmakes
partially
successfulattem
ptsto
engage
stakeh
olders
intheservicedeliveryprogram
s
Instructionalcoachisinregular
communicationwithallstakeholders,
includingadministration,clients,andother
instructionalcoaches
abouttheprogressof
thevariousinitiativesintheservicedelivery
program
andtheirim
pactonstuden
tgoal
achievemen
t.
Instructionalcoachisinregular
communicationwithallstakeholders,
includingadministration,clients,andother
instructionalcoaches
abouttheprogressof
thevariousinitiativesintheservicedelivery
program
andtheirim
pactonstuden
tgoal
achievemen
t.Theinstructionalcoachmakes
freq
uen
tsuccessfuleffortsto
engage
stakeh
oldersinmakingdecisionsabout
servicedeliveryto
enhance
studen
tgoal
achievemen
t.
DiscussionofEvidence
4d:ParticipatinginaProfessionalCommunity
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoach’srelationshipswith
colleagues
arenegative
orselfserving,and
thecoachavoidsbeinginvolved
inschool
anddistricteven
tsandprojects.
Instructionalcoach’srelationshipswith
colleagues
arecordial,andthecoach
participates
inschoolanddistricteven
ts
andprojectswhen
specificallyrequested.
Instructionalcoachparticipates
activelyin
schoolanddistricteven
tsandprojectsand
maintainspositive
andproductive
relationshipswithcolleagues.
Instructionalcoachmakes
asubstantial
contributionto
schoolanddistricteven
tsand
projectsandassumes
aleadershiprolewith
colleagues.
DiscussionofEvidence
64
4e:Growingan
dDevelopingProfessionally
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachen
gagesinprofessional
developmen
tactivities
and/orresists
feed
backonteachingperform
ance
and/or
makes
noeffortto
shareknowledge
with
othersorto
assumeprofessional
responsibilities.
Instructionalcoachen
gagesinprofessional
activities
toalim
ited
extentand/oraccepts
withsomereluctance,feedbackon
teachingperform
ance
and/orfindslim
ited
waysto
contribute
totheprofession.
Instructionalcoachen
gagesinseekingout
professionaldevelopmen
topportunities,
welcomes
feedbackonperform
ancesand
participates
activelyinassistingother
professionals.
Instructionalcoachen
gagesinseekingout
opportunitiesforprofessionaldevelopmen
t
andmakes
asystem
aticeffortto
conduct
actionresearch,seeks
outfeedbackand
initiatesim
portantactivities
tocontribute
to
theprofession.
DiscussionofEvidence
4f:
DemonstratingProfessionalism
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Instructionalcoachinteractionsare
characterizedbyquestionableintegrity,lack
ofaw
aren
essofclientneeds,and/or
decisionsthat
areselfserving,and/ordonot
complywithapplicableregulations.
Instructionalcoachinteractionsare
characterizedbyhonest,genuinebut
inconsisten
tattemptsto
serveclients,
decisionmakingbased
onlim
iteddata,
and/orminim
alcompliance
withapplicable
regulations.
Instructionalcoachinteractionsare
characterizedbyhonesty,integrity,
confiden
tialityand/orassurance
that
all
clientsarefairlyserved
,participationin
team
ordep
artm
entaldecisionmaking,
and/orfullcompliance
withapplicable
regulations.
Instructionalcoachdisplays
thehighest
standardsofhonesty,integrity,
confiden
tiality;assumptionofleadershiprole
withcolleagues,inservingclients,challenging
negativeattitudes/practices,inen
suringfull
compliance
withapplicableregulations.
DiscussionofEvidence
65
VOLU
SIAFR
AMEW
ORKFO
RTEACHING
MediaTeacherRubric
Domain1:Planningan
dPreparation
1a:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofContent
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
isnotfamiliar
withthe
curriculum
anddoes
notunderstandthe
connectionsto
theresources,literacies,and
theresearch
process.
Med
iaTeacher
isfamiliar
withthe
curriculum
butcannotarticulate
connections
withliteraciesandtheresearch
process.
Med
iaTeacher
displays
knowledge
ofthe
curriculum,resources,variousliteracies,and
theresearch
process,andisableto
develop
connections.
Med
iaTeacher
displays
extensive
knowledge
ofthecurriculum,resources,various
literacies,andtheresearch
process,and
developsmeaningfulconnections.
DiscussionofEvidence
1b:D
emonstratingKnowledge
ofStuden
ts
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
makes
littleornoattemptto
acquireknowledge
ofthestuden
ts’
inform
ationliteracy
needs.Med
iaTeacher
does
notunderstandtheneedforthis
inform
ationinplanninganddevelopingthe
collection
Med
iaTeacher
demonstratessome
knowledge
ofthestuden
ts’inform
ation
literacy
needs.
Med
iaTeacher
showssome
understandingofthisneedinplanningand
developingthecollection.
Med
iaTeacher
demonstratesadeq
uate
knowledge
ofthestuden
ts’inform
ation
literacy
needs.Med
iaTeacher
usesthis
knowledge
inplanninganddevelopingthe
collection.
Med
iaTeacher
has
athorough
knowledge
of
thestuden
ts’inform
ationliteracyneedsand
usesthisknowledge
expertlyinplanning
instruction,developingandpromotingthe
resources
inthecollection.
DiscussionofEvidence
1c:
SettingServiceDelivery
Outcomes
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
has
noclear
goalsforthe
med
iaprogram
anddoes
notdisplayareal
understandingoftheschool’s
instructional
goalsforadiverse
studen
tpopulation.
Med
iaTeacher’sgoalsforthemedia
program
arerudim
entary,andindicatea
partialunderstandingoftheschool’s
instructionalgoalsforadiverse
studen
t
population.
Med
iaTeacher’sgoalsforthemedia
program
areclear
andindicatean
understandingoftheschool’s
instructional
goalsforadiverse
studen
tpopulation.
Med
iaTeacher’sgoalsforthemedia
program
arehighlyappropriate,supportthe
school’s
instructionalgoalsforadiverse
studen
tpopulation,andhavebeen
developed
followingconsultationswith
studen
tsandcolleagues.
DiscussionofEvidence
66
1d:DemonstratingKnowledge
ofResources
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
has
littleaw
aren
essofthe
resources
withtheschool’s
med
iacollection
orresources
availableelectronically,and
does
notseekresources
outsidethelibrary
med
iacenter.
Med
iaTeacher
isaw
areoftheresources
withintheschool’s
med
iacollection,aswell
asresources
availableelectronicallyor
online,andisaw
areofsomeplacesto
seek
other
resources
throughoutthedistrictand
thelocalcommunity.
Med
iaTeacher
has
commen
dable
knowledge
oftheresources
withinthe
school’s
med
iacollection;h
asknowledge
of
andtheskillsto
accesselectronicand/or
onlineresources;andseeksother
resources
throughoutthedistrictandfrom
agencies,
organizations,andinstitutionswithinthe
communityat
large.
Med
iaTeacher
has
anextensive
knowledge
oftheresources
withintheschool’s
med
ia
collection;h
asknowledge
ofavarietyof
electronicandonlineresources,
accompaniedwithadvancedskillsfor
accessingtheseresources;andactivelyseeks
other
resources
throughoutthedistrictand
from
agencies,organizations,and
institutionswithinthecommunityat
large
andbeyond.
DiscussionofEvidence
1e:DesigningCoherentServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
has
littleknowledge
ofthe
threeliteracies(inform
ation,digital,
technology)required
todesignanddeliver
comprehen
sive
instructionaligned
with
standardsat
theappropriatelevelofrigor.
Med
iaTeacher
has
partialknowledge
ofthe
threeliteracies(inform
ation,digital,
technology)required
todesignanddeliver
comprehen
sive
instructionaligned
with
standardsat
theappropriatelevelofrigor.
Med
iaTeacher
has
commen
dable
knowledge
ofthethreeliteracies
(inform
ation,digital,technology)required
to
designanddeliver
comprehen
sive
instructionaligned
withstandardsat
the
appropriatelevelofrigor.
Med
iaTeacher
has
anextensive
knowledge
ofthethreeliteracies(inform
ation,digital,
technology)required
todesignanddeliver
comprehen
sive
instructionaligned
with
standardsat
theappropriatelevelofrigor.
Med
iaTeacher
demonstratesability
to
differentiateinstructionwhereappropriate.
DiscussionofEvidence
67
1f:
AssessingGoalAchievemen
t
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
doesnotcollaborate
with
teachersinplanning,im
plemen
ting,and
assessinglearningactivities.
Med
iaTeacher
collaborateswithsome
teachersto
coordinatetheuse
ofthemed
ia
centeranditsresources
andmay
provide
learningexperiencesthat
support
instruction.
Med
iaTeacher
collaborateswithsome
teachersinplanningandim
plemen
ting
learningactivities
that
integratetheuse
of
multipleresources,andthedevelopmen
tof
research
skillsandvariousliteracies
(inform
ation,digital,technology).
Med
iaTeacher
collaborateswithteachersin
mostdisciplines
indesigning,planning,
implemen
ting,andassessingmeaningful
learningactivities
that
integratetheuse
of
multipleresources
andthedevelopmen
tof
research
skillsandvariousliteracies
(inform
ation,digital,technology).
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain2:Th
eEn
vironment
2a:
Creatingan
EnvironmentofRespectan
dRap
port
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher’sinteractionswithsome
studen
tsandstaffaresometimes
negative,
dem
eaning,orsarcastic.Studen
tsingeneral
exhibitdisrespectfortheMed
iaTeacher.
Somestuden
tinteractionsarecharacterized
byconflict,sarcasm,orputdowns.
Med
iaTeacher’sinteractionswithstuden
ts
andstaffaregenerallypoliteandrespectful
butmay
reflectinconsisten
cies.R
espect
towardtheMed
iaTeacher
isnotalways
eviden
t.
Med
iaTeacher
demonstratesgenuinecaring
andrespectforstuden
tsandstaff.Most
studen
tsandstaffexhibitamutualrespect
fortheMed
iaTeacher.
Med
iaTeacher
demonstratesgenuinecaring
andrespectforstuden
tsandstaff,anduses
praiseandpositive
reinforcem
ent.Studen
ts
andstaffexhibitahighregard
fortheMed
ia
Teacher.
DiscussionofEvidence
2b:EstablishingaCulture
forGoalAchievement
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
maintainsacontrolledand
stiflingen
vironmen
tnotconducive
to
learning.
Med
iaTeacher
maintainsan
environmen
t
that
isattractive,w
ithexpectationsthat
studen
tsuse
thelibrary
appropriately.
Med
iaTeacher
maintainsan
environmen
t
that
isinviting,flexibleandattractive,w
ith
expectationsthat
studen
tsbeproductively
engaged.
Med
iaTeacher
maintainsan
environmen
t
that
isinviting,flexibleandattractive,w
ith
expectationsthat
studen
tsarecurious,on
task
andvaluethemed
iacenter.
DiscussionofEvidence
68
2c:
Man
agingProcedures
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaCen
terpoliciesandproceduresare
minim
alanddonoteffectivelyprovide
accessto
theresources,themediacenter,
andtheexpertise
oftheMed
iaTeacher.
Med
iaCen
terpoliciesandprocedureshave
beenestablished
intheareasofcirculation
andsched
ulinguse
ofthemed
iacenter,but
sometim
esfunctioninconsisten
tlyresulting
inunreliableaccessto
resources,thefacility,
andtheexpertise
oftheMed
iaTeacher.
Med
iaCen
terpoliciesandprocedureshave
beenestablished
intheareasofcirculation
andsched
ulinguse
ofthemed
iacenterto
provideadeq
uateaccessto
resources,the
facility,andtheexpertise
oftheMed
ia
Teacher.
Med
iaCen
terpoliciesandprocedureshave
beenestablished
intheareasofcirculation
andsched
ulinguse
ofthemed
iacenterto
provideoptimal,flexibleaccessto
resources,
thefacility,andtheexpertise
oftheMed
ia
Teacher.
DiscussionofEvidence
2d:M
anagingCompliance/ClientBehavior
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Thereisnoevidence
that
standardsof
conducthavebeenestablished
,andthereis
littleornomonitoringofstuden
tbeh
avior.
Response
tostuden
tmisbeh
avioris
repressiveordisrespectfulofstuden
t
dignity.
ItappearstheMed
iaTeacher
has
madean
effortto
establishstandardsofconductfor
studen
ts,andtriesto
monitorstuden
t
beh
aviorandrespondto
studen
t
misbeh
avior,buttheseeffortsarenot
alwayssuccessful.
Standardsofconductappearto
beclearto
studen
ts,andtheMed
iaTeacher
monitors
studen
tbeh
avioragainstthose
standards.
Med
iaTeacher’sresponse
tostuden
t
misbeh
aviorisappropriateandrespectfulto
studen
ts.
Standardsofconductareclear,with
evidence
ofstuden
tparticipationinsetting
them
.Med
iaTeacher’smonitoringof
studen
tbeh
aviorissubtleandpreventive,
andresponse
tostuden
tmisbeh
avioris
sensitive
toindividualstuden
tneeds.
Studen
tstake
anactive
roleinmonitoring
thestandardsofbeh
avior.
DiscussionofEvidence
2e:Organ
izingPhysicalSpace
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
makes
pooruse
ofthe
physicalen
vironmen
t,resultinginpoor
trafficflow,confusingsignage,inadeq
uate
spacedevotedto
work
areasandcomputer
use,andgeneralconfusion.
Med
iaTeacher’seffortsto
makeuse
ofthe
physicalen
vironmen
tareuneven
,resulting
inoccasionalconfusion.Signageis
inconsisten
t.
Med
iaTeacher
makes
effectiveuse
ofthe
physicalen
vironmen
t,resultingingood
trafficflow,clear
signage,andadeq
uate
spacedevotedto
work
areasandcomputer
use.
Med
iaTeacher
makes
highlyeffectiveuse
of
thephysicalen
vironmen
t,resultinginclear
signage,excellenttrafficflow,andadeq
uate
spacedevotedto
work
areasandcomputer
use.Inaddition,displays
areattractive
and
inviting.
DiscussionofEvidence
69
Domain3:ServiceDelivery
3a:
CommunicatingClearlyan
dAccurately
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Library
med
iaprogram
policies,procedures,
andservices
areunclearorconfusingto
studen
tsandteachers.
Thereisnoeviden
ce
ofcollaborationinthedesignandsupportof
instruction.
Someofthelibrary
med
iaprogram
policies,
procedures,andservices
areunclearor
confusingto
studen
tsandteachers.
Med
ia
Teacher
collaboratesinthedesign
and
supportofinstructionwhen
specifically
askedto
doso.
Library
med
iaprogram
policies,procedures,
andservices
areclear
tostuden
tsand
teachers.Med
iaTeacher
initiates
collaborationinthedesignandsupportof
instruction.
Library
med
iaprogram
policies,procedures,
andservices
areclear
tostuden
tsand
teachers.Med
iaTeacher
initiates
collaborationintheeffectivedesign
and
supportofinstruction,locatingadditional
resources
from
sourcesoutsidetheschool.
DiscussionofEvidence
3b:Inform
ationGathering
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher’squestionsareofpoor
qualityandlowlevel,andthereisminim
alor
nodiscussionorinteractionbetw
eenMed
ia
Teacher
andstuden
ts/teachers.
Med
iaTeacher’squestionsarea
combinationoflowandhighquality,and
thereissomeattemptat
discussionand
interactionbetw
eenMed
iaTeacher
and
studen
ts/teachers.
Med
iaTeacher’squestionsareofhigh
quality,andthereisgenuinediscussionand
interactionbetw
eenMed
iaTeacher
and
studen
ts/teachers.
Med
iaTeacher’squestionsareuniform
ly
highquality,withadeq
uatefor
studen
ts/teachersto
respond.
Studen
ts/Teachersassumeconsiderable
responsibility
forthesuccessofthe
discussion,initiatingtopics,andmaking
unsolicited
contributions.
DiscussionofEvidence
3c:
EngagingStudentsinGoalAchievement
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Teachers/Studen
tsarenoten
gagedin
learning/goalachievemen
tdueto
poor
designofinstruction,poorgrouping
strategies,orinappropriatematerials.
Teachers/Studen
tsaresomewhat
engaged
inlearning/goalachievemen
tdueto
uneven
designofinstruction,grouping
strategies,orpartiallyappropriatematerials.
Teachers/Studen
tsareen
gagedinlearning
/goalachievemen
tdueto
effectivedesign
ofinstruction,groupingstrategies,and
appropriatematerials.
Teachers/Studen
tsarehighlyengagedin
learning/goalachievemen
t,andas
aresult,
take
initiative
inen
suringtheen
gagemen
tof
theirpeers.
DiscussionofEvidence
70
3d:UsingAssessmentinServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Studen
tsarenotaw
areofthecriteriaby
whichtheirlearningwillbeevaluated
,and
Med
iaTeacher
doesnotmonitorstuden
t
learning.
Med
iaTeacher
does
notassessthe
library
med
iaprogram
.
Studen
tsaresomew
hat
awareofthe
criteriabywhichtheirlearningwillbe
evaluated
andmonitoringofstuden
t
learningisuneven.M
ediaTeacher’s
assessmen
tofthelibrary
med
iaprogram
is
infreq
uen
t.
Studen
tsarefully
awareofthecriteriaby
whichtheirlearningwillbeevaluated
and
thereisfrequentmonitoringofstuden
t
learning.Med
iaTeacher
routinelyassesses
thelibrary
med
iaprogram
.
Studen
tsarefully
awareofthecriteriaby
whichtheirlearningwillbeevaluated
and
havecontributedto
thedevelopmen
tofthe
criteria.Monitoringofstuden
tlearningis
datadrivenandongoing.Assessmentofthe
library
med
iaprogram
isongoing.
DiscussionofEvidence
3e:DemonstratingFlexibility
andResponsiveness
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
adheres
tohisorher
plan,in
spiteofevidence
ofitsinadeq
uacy.
Med
iaTeacher
makes
modestchangesin
thelibrary
med
iaprogram
when
confronted
witheviden
ceoftheneedforchange.
Med
iaTeacher
makes
revisionsto
thelibrary
med
iaprogram
when
they
areneeded.
Med
iaTeacher
iscontinuallyseekingwaysto
improve
thelibrary
med
iaprogram
,and
makes
changesas
needed
inresponse
to
studen
t,paren
t,orteacher
input.
DiscussionofEvidence
Domain4:ProfessionalResponsibilities
4a:ReflectingonPractice/ServiceDelivery
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
rarelyreflectsonthe
effectiven
essofservices,resources
and
instructionalstrategies,orthereflections
areinaccurate
orselfserving.
Med
iaTeacher’sreflectiononeffectiveness
ofservices,resources,andinstructional
strategies
ismoderatelyaccurate
and
objective,withoutcitingspecificexam
ples
andwithonlyglobalsuggestionsas
tohowit
mightbeim
proved.
Med
iaTeacher’sreflectionprovides
an
accurate
andobjectivedescriptionof
effectiven
essofservices,resources,and
instructionalstrategies,citingspecific
positive
andnegativecharacteristics.
Med
ia
Teacher
makes
somespecificsuggestionsas
tohowthemed
iaprogram
mightbe
improved.
Med
iaTeacher’sreflectionishighlyaccurate
andperceptive,citingspecificexam
plesof
effectiven
essofservices,resources,and
instructionalstrategies.Med
iaTeacher
drawsonan
extensive
repertoireto
suggest
alternativestrategies
andtheirlikely
success.
DiscussionofEvidence
71
4b:M
aintainingAccurate
Records
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
doesnotmaintainaccurate
orcurren
trecordsthat
adeq
uatelyreflect
theneedsofthelibrary
med
iaprogram
Med
iaTeacher
maintainsrecords,including
circulationandinventory
ofresources,
statistics
oflibrary
use,andutilizationof
med
iabudget.
Curren
trecordsreflectneeds
tomaintainthemed
iaprogram
.
Med
iaTeacher
maintainsaccurate,fairly
curren
t,andaccessiblerecordsincluding:
circulationandinventory
ofresources,
statistics
oflibrary
use,andutilizationof
med
iabudget.These
recordsarereported
andreflectneedsforacomprehen
sive
med
iaprogram
.
Med
iaTeacher
maintainsaccurate,curren
t,
andeasilyaccessiblerecordsincluding:
circulationandinventory
ofresources,
statistics
oflibrary
use,andutilizationof
med
iabudget.These
recordsareassembled,
carefully
review
ed,andreported
inatimely
manner.M
ediaTeacher
usesdataeffectively
toaccuratelyreflectneedsforaprogressive
andcomprehen
sive
med
iaprogram
.DiscussionofEvidence
4c:
CommunicatingwithStakeholders
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
makes
noeffortto
communicatewiththeschoolcommunity
aboutthelibrary
med
iacenterprogram
and
services.
Med
iaTeacher
isinconsisten
tin
communicatingwiththeschoolcommunity
aboutthelibrary
med
iaprogram
,new
resources,andservices.
Med
iaTeacher
regularlycommunicates
with
theschoolcommunityto
keep
them
inform
edandto
promote
theuse
ofthe
library
med
iaprogram
,new
resources,and
services.
Med
iaTeacher
effectivelyandconsisten
tly
communicates
withtheschoolcommunity
tokeep
them
inform
ed,topromote
the
developmen
tofthelibrary
med
iaprogram
,
new
resources
andservices.TheMed
ia
Teacher
activelysolicitsfeed
backandinput
from
theschoolcommunityto
improve
instruction,program
,andservices.
DiscussionofEvidence
72
4d:ParticipatinginaProfessionalCommunity
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher’srelationshipswith
colleagues
arenegative
orselfserving,and
theMed
iaTeacher
avoidsbeinginvolvedin
schoolanddistricteven
tsandprojects.
Med
iaTeacher’srelationshipswith
colleagues
arecordial,andtheMed
ia
Teacher
participates
inschoolanddistrict
even
tsandprojectswhen
specifically
requested.
Med
iaTeacher
participates
activelyinschool
anddistricteven
tsandprojects,and
maintainspositive
andproductive
relationshipswithcolleagues.
Med
iaTeacher
makes
asubstantial
contributionto
schoolanddistrictby
activelyparticipatinginschooleventsand
projects,servingonschoolanddistrict
committees,andassumingaleadershiprole.
Supportandcooperationcharacterize
relationshipswithcolleagues.
DiscussionofEvidence
4e:Growingan
dDevelopingProfessionally
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
makes
noattemptto
participateinprofessionaldevelopmen
t
activities,toshareknowledge
withothers,
orto
assumeprofessionalresponsibilities.
Med
iaTeacher
participates
inprofessional
activities
when
convenient,and
contributionsto
theprofessionarelim
ited.
Med
iaTeacher
seeksoutopportunitiesfor
professionaldevelopmen
tto
enhance
professionalpractice.Med
iaTeacher
welcomes
feedbackfrom
colleaguesand
administratorsandparticipates
activelyin
assistingother
educators.
Med
iaTeacher
activelypursues
professional
developmen
topportunitiesthrough
professionalreading,mem
berships,
conferencesandactionresearch.M
edia
Teacher
activelyseeksoutfeedbackfrom
colleagues
andadministrators.M
edia
Teacher
makes
asubstantialcontributionto
theprofessionthrough
teachingworkshops,
writingarticles,andmakingpresentationsto
contribute
totheprofessiononaschool,
district,state,andnationallevel.
DiscussionofEvidence
73
4f:
DemonstratingProfessionalism
�UNSA
TISFACTO
RY
�BASIC
�PROFICIENT
�DISTINGUISHED
Med
iaTeacher
does
notadhere
to
professionalethics,displays
dishonestyin
interactionswithcolleagues,students,and
thepublic;violatescopyrightlaws.
Med
iaTeacher
displays
knowledge
of
professionalethics,ishonestininteractions
withcolleagues,students,andthepublic;
adherence
tocopyrightlawsisinconsistent.
Med
iaTeacher
displays
goodknowledge
of
professionalethics,showshighstandardsof
honestyandintegrityininteractionswith
colleagues,students,andthepublic;adheres
carefully
tocopyrightlaws.
Med
iaTeacher
dem
onstratesa
commitmen
tto
professionalethicsandcan
becountedonto
holdthehigheststandards
ofhonestyandintegrity;takesaleadership
rolewithcolleagues
inhelpingto
ensure
thereisnoplagiarismorviolationofcopyright
laws.
DiscussionofEvidence
74
Volusia County School DistrictRace to the Top – Communications / Design Teams
VOLUSIA RACE TO THE TOP ADMINISTRATIVE TEAM:
Dr. Margaret Smith, Superintendent, Volusia County Schools
Stan Schmidt, Chairman, Volusia County School Board
Andrew Spar, President, Volusia Teacher Organization (VTO)
RACE TO THE TOP STEERING COMMITTEE:
Dr. Chris Colwell, Deputy Superintendent, Instructional Services, Race to the Top Chairman
Peromnia Grant, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Dr. Don Boulware, Executive Director, Technology Services
Allene Dupont, Director, K 12 Curriculum
Mary Diez, Coordinator, K 12 Curriculum
Tom Besaw, Coordinator, Applied Technology & Project Implementation
Teresa Northrup, Coordinator, Professional Development
Dr. Alicia Parker, Coordinator, Assessment and Accountability
Andrew Spar, President, VTO
Dr. Primrose Cameron Hall, VTO Professional Development & Membership Specialist
Chris Yahn, Consultant, Race to the Top Coordinator
VOLUSIA COUNTY TEACHER ASSESSMENT DESIGN TEAM:
Dr. Chris Colwell, Deputy Superintendent, Instructional Services, Race to the Top Chairman
Peromnia Grant, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Dr. Don Boulware, Executive Director, Technology Services
Mary Diez, Coordinator, K 12 Curriculum
Teresa Northrup, Coordinator, Professional Development
Dr. Alicia Parker, Coordinator, Assessment and Accountability
Andrew Spar, President, VTO
Dr. Primrose Cameron Hall, VTO Professional Development & Membership Specialist
Barbara Hoffman, Academic Coach, Holly Hill Elementary and Vice President, VTO
Chris Yahn, Consultant, Race to the Top Coordinator
VOLUSIA COUNTY TEACHER ASSESSMENT SYSTEM STEERING COMMITTEE:
Marta Pascale, Coordinator, Human Resources
Stan Whitted, Area Superintendent
Teresa Northrup, Coordinator, Professional Development
Mary Diez, Coordinator, K 12 Curriculum
James Bishop, Director, Human Resources
Linda Knowles, Specialist, Human Resources
Leslie Frazee, Principal, Pride Elementary School
Tom Russell, Principal, Pine Ridge High School
75
Mamie Oatis, Principal, Southwestern Middle School
Barbara Hoffman, Academic Coach, Holly Hill Elementary and Vice President, VTO
Dr. Karen Beattie, Principal, Creekside Middle School
Lisa Alexander, Teacher, Mainland High School
Susan LeFils, Teacher, Forest Lake Elementary School
Jacqueline Sadler, Teacher, Sugar Mill Elementary School
Joann Williams, Teacher, Euclid Avenue Learning Center
Andrew Spar, President, VTO
Richard Kizma, Counsel for Labor Relations, Contract Services and Policy Development
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS INNOVATION FUND / VOLUSIA TEACHERS ORGANIZATION:
Leadership Team
Dr. Margaret Smith, Superintendent, Volusia County Schools
Andrew Spar, President, VTO
Dr. Primrose Cameron Hall, VTO Professional Development and Membership Specialist, CoChair
Marta Pascale, Coordinator, Human Resource, Co Chair
Dr. Christopher Colwell, Deputy Superintendent, Instructional Services, Race to the TopChairman
Peromnia Grant, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Rich Kizma, Counsel for Labor Relations, Contract Services and Policy Development
Value AddedTeachers
Becky Pittard, Teacher, Pine Trail Elementary School
Beth Bosse, Teacher, New Smyrna Beach High School
Tricia Randall, Teacher, Osteen Elementary SchoolAdministrators
John Atkinson, Principal, River Springs Middle School
John Cash, Principal, Palm Terrace Elementary School
Marilyn Travis, Principal, Read Pattillo Elementary School
Formative and Summative AssessmentsTeachers
Mary Thomas, Reading Coach, Deltona High School
Anthony Johnson, Teacher, Horizon Elementary School
David Finkle, Teacher, Southwestern Middle SchoolAdministrators
Alba Perez, Principal, Louise S. McInnis Elementary School
Matt Krajewski, Principal, DeLand Middle School
Susan Persis, Principal, Pine Trail Elementary School
76
Alternative AssessmentsTeachers
Lekita Howard, Teacher, Spruce Creek High School
Diane Clow, Teacher, Campbell Middle School
Yania Gonzalez, Teacher, Galaxy Middle SchoolAdministrators
Tom Russell, Principal, Pine Ridge High School
Ron Pagano, Principal, Atlantic High School
Vickie Presley, Principal, Campbell Middle School
Universities
Dr. Leslie Sena, Bethune Cookman University
Dr. Patrick Coggins, Stetson University
Dr. Mark Howse, Daytona State College
Technical Assistance Support TeamCo Chairs
Deb Drawdy, Coordinator, Secondary Education
Leticia Roman, Coordinator, Elementary EducationMembers
Kristen Bowles Pierce, Specialist, Applied Technology
Jason Caros, Specialist, Social Studies, K 12 Curriculum
Mary Diez, Coordinator, K 12 Curriculum
Susan Reaves, Coordinator, ESE Programs
77
Design teams, comprised of district staff, principals, teachers, union representatives, and consultants,
spent months reviewing research, attending conferences, gathering input from a variety of resources
and shared current research findings, focusing on the meta research of Charlotte Danielson and Robert
Marzano.
Contemporary Research Reference List
Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching (2nded.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Grossman, P., & Loeb, S. (2010). Learning from multiple routes. Educational Leadership, 67(8),22 27.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta analyses relating to achievement.New York: Routledge.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1),81–112.
Learning Point Associates. (2010). Measurement of student growth: Emerging trendsreflected in the state phase 1 Race to the Top applicationswww.learningpt.org/pdfs/RttT_Measurement.pdf
Marzano, R. J. (2010). Developing expert teachers. In R. J. Marzano (Ed.), On excellence inteaching (pp. 213 246). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Marzano, R. J. (2010). Formative assessment and standards based grading. Bloomington, IN:Marzano Research Laboratory.
Marzano, R. J., & Brown, J. L. (2009). A handbook for the Art and Science of Teaching. Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R. J., & Waters, T. (2009). District leadership that works: Striking the right balance.Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
The New Teacher Project. (2007) Teacher hiring, assignment, and transfer in Chicago PublicSchools. Brooklyn, NY: Author
United States Department of Education. (2009) Resources for Race to the Top.www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html