· Web viewIn January 2010, the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA – Senate Bill 315; Public Act 96-0861) was passed by the Illinois General …

Joppa-Maple Grove Unit District #38

Teacher Evaluation ManualProfessional Practice/Student Growth

Joppa-Maple Grove UD #38 is committed to excellence in education. This commitment is emphasized by the ongoing process of professional appraisal for all teachers.

Table of ContentsIntroduction.................................................................................................................................................4

Mission Statement/Statement of Purpose..............................................................................................5

Model Refinements.................................................................................................................................5

Performance Evaluation Reform Act.......................................................................................................6

Illinois Administrative Code – Part 50......................................................................................................6

Key Terms – Part 50.............................................................................................................................7

Charlotte Danielson – The Framework for Teaching................................................................................9

Teacher Performance Levels..................................................................................................................12

Professional Practice.................................................................................................................................13

Self-Reflection.......................................................................................................................................14

Growth Plan.......................................................................................................................................14

Conferences...........................................................................................................................................15

Initial Conference..............................................................................................................................15

Pre-Observation Conference.............................................................................................................15

Post-Observation Conference............................................................................................................16

Summative Conference.....................................................................................................................16

Observation...........................................................................................................................................17

Step-By-Step Guidance of Scheduled Observation Process...............................................................17

Evidence Collection / Domains 1 and 4..............................................................................................18

Filing of Evaluations...........................................................................................................................19

Descriptions of Performance.............................................................................................................19

Rating.................................................................................................................................................19

Rating Scale.......................................................................................................................................20

Rating Scale Procedure......................................................................................................................20

Weighted Components......................................................................................................................20

Teacher Attendance...........................................................................................................................22

Schedule of Evaluations.....................................................................................................................22

Timeline: Non-Tenured......................................................................................................................23

Timeline: Tenured..............................................................................................................................23

Professional Assistance......................................................................................................................24

Remediation Process.........................................................................................................................24

Remediation Plan Participants...........................................................................................................25

Key Terms – Professional Practice.........................................................................................................26

1 | J o p p a - M a p l e G r o v e U D # 3 8

Student Growth.........................................................................................................................................27

SLOs and Student Growth......................................................................................................................28

SLO Guidelines.......................................................................................................................................28

SLO Process and Key Deadlines.........................................................................................................28

Requirements and Guidelines...............................................................................................................31

SLO Framework and Approval Tool...................................................................................................31

Assessment Requirements................................................................................................................31

Assessment Quality...........................................................................................................................32

Evaluation Cycles for Tenured and Non-Tenured Teachers...............................................................32

Assessment Administration...............................................................................................................33

Steps to SLO Writing..............................................................................................................................35

Step 1: Baseline.................................................................................................................................35

Step 2: Population.............................................................................................................................37

Step 3: Objective................................................................................................................................39

Step 4: Rationale................................................................................................................................42

Step 5: Strategies...............................................................................................................................44

Step 6: Assessment............................................................................................................................45

Step 7: Targeted Growth...................................................................................................................47

Summative Student Growth Rating...................................................................................................49

Summative Performance Evaluation Rating......................................................................................49

Support..............................................................................................................................................50

Key Terms – Student Growth.................................................................................................................51

References.................................................................................................................................................52

Appendix A: Danielson’s Framework for Teaching – Domains Explained..............................................52

Appendix B: Details of Domain 1 - Planning and Preparation................................................................53

Appendix C: Details of Domain 2 - Classroom Environment..................................................................54

Appendix D: Details of Domain 3 - Instruction.......................................................................................55

Appendix E: Details of Domain 4 - Professional Responsibilities...........................................................56

Appendix F: Self-Reflection Form..........................................................................................................57

Appendix G: Professional Growth Goals................................................................................................62

Appendix H: Professional Growth Goals (Example)...............................................................................63

Appendix I: Professional Growth Plan...................................................................................................64

Appendix J: Professional Growth Plan (Example)..................................................................................65

Appendix K: Pre-Observation Report.....................................................................................................66


Appendix L: Domain 1 Report................................................................................................................67

Appendix M: Domain 1 – Artifact List....................................................................................................69

Appendix N: Post-Observation Report...................................................................................................70

Appendix O: Post-Observation Report (Example)..................................................................................71

Appendix P: Domain 4 Report...............................................................................................................72

Appendix Q: Domain 4 Artifact List........................................................................................................74

Appendix R: Formal Observation Report...............................................................................................75

Appendix S: Professional Practice Summative Evaluation Report.........................................................77

Appendix T: Professional Assistance Plan..............................................................................................79

Appendix U: Notification of Needs Improvement/Unsatisfactory Performance...................................80

Appendix V: Remediation Plan..............................................................................................................81

Appendix W: Informal Observation Form..............................................................................................82

Appendix X: Observation Log.................................................................................................................84

Appendix Y: Approval Guide – Type III Assessments.............................................................................85

Appendix Z: Standards Alignment and Coverage Check........................................................................86

Appendix AA: Assessment Rigor Analysis – Depth of Knowledge (DOK)................................................87

Appendix BB: Assessment Approval Rubric – Type III Assessments.......................................................89

Appendix CC: SLO Framework Criteria...................................................................................................90

Appendix DD: SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form..................................................................................91

Appendix EE: SLO Examples...................................................................................................................93

Appendix FF: Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument..............................................................96


IntroductionIn January 2010, the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA – Senate Bill 315; Public Act 96-0861) was passed by the Illinois General Assembly and signed by the Governor. To summarize, PERA requires that, among other things, upon a school’s applicable implementation date, performance evaluations of the principals, assistant principals, and teachers must include data and indicators of student growth as a “significant factor.” For Joppa-Maple Grove, student growth will consist of 30% of a teacher’s summative rating, with professional practice comprising the remaining 70%.

Additionally, Part 50 of the Illinois Administrative Code establishes the minimum requirements for valid and reliable performance evaluation systems for employees who hold a professional educator license in a teaching or administrative field and are serving as a teacher, principal or assistant principal. In accordance with PERA and Part 50, Joppa-Maple Grove’s new evaluation system will include a rigorous observation and collaboration cycle where evaluators and teachers speak regularly about their practice. This evaluation plan utilizes Charlotte Danielson’s The Framework for Teaching to establish a common definition of effective teaching for Joppa-Maple Grove, which will be combined with a student growth component to assign a summative rating. This plan seeks to use The Framework for Teaching to define effective practice, encourage conversations about instruction, and identify areas for professional growth. Teachers will be notified on or before the first day of student attendance, in writing, if they are to be evaluated in that given school year. All teachers will have a copy of the Teacher Evaluation Manual, which will contain all necessary information.

Three core beliefs about an improved teacher evaluation system guide this work:1. Nothing we can do for our students matters more than giving them effective teachers. Without

effective evaluation systems, schools cannot identify and retain excellent teachers, provide useful feedback and support, or provide remediation when teachers consistently perform poorly.

2. Teachers deserve to be treated like professionals. Many current evaluations fail to give teachers the accurate, useful feedback they need to be the most successful in the classroom. We are committed to creating evaluations that are fair, accurate, and consistent and that are based on multiple factors that provide a more complete picture of each teacher’s success in helping students learn.

3. A new evaluation system will make a positive difference in teachers’ everyday lives. Novice and veteran teachers alike will be provided detailed, constructive feedback. Teachers and principals will meet regularly to discuss successes and areas for improvement, providing a proper support system for all teachers.


Mission Statement/Statement of Purpose

The Joppa-Maple Grove School District believes that education is a cooperative venture shared by the school, parents or guardians, and the youth community. The District's mission is to help each student mature individually to his/her fullest capacities including moral, intellectual, social, emotional and physical development, and thereby prepare him/her for effective participation in a democratic society. The District's aim is to provide a safe, orderly, caring, and supportive environment that supports this mission.

Our students deserve the highest quality of instruction. The evaluation of all certified personnel is an essential component to ensure that every student is receiving quality instruction that aligns with district goals and objectives. The purposes of this evaluation plan are to:

1. Continuously improve the quality of instruction and performance of staff.2. Enhance and improve student learning.3. Create positive attitudes toward the purposes and value of appraisal and professional

development.4. Collect reliable data from various sources for making employment decisions.5. Identify performance and support needs, leading to appropriately differentiated professional

support for teachers. 6. Satisfy the requirements set forth by the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) of 2010

and Part 50 of the Illinois Administrative Code.

Model Refinements

This Teacher Evaluation Manual represents the best efforts of the Joint Committee and district administration. However, as our district becomes more familiar with the process involved with the new evaluation requirements set forth by the Performance Evaluation Reform Act of 2010, it is anticipated that oversights will be discovered and adjustments will need to be made. Conversely, it is not ideal to react too quickly before the evaluation process has been implemented in a way that allows for full understanding of all portions. Thus, it is understood by all parties that this manual will be a working document, which will be reviewed and adjusted when the Joint Committee and district administration deem it necessary. The Joint Committee has agreed to meet at least once after the first year (2016-17), once after the second year of implementation (2017-18), and on an annual basis, if needed, thereafter to continue to refine this system. Feedback will be collected via surveys and school meetings to continually assess the implementation of the system, determine any supports needed, and potentially refine key parts of the model to ensure fidelity of implementation.


Performance Evaluation Reform Act

The Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) of 2010 is the result of a collaborative effort among lawmakers, educators, union leaders, and other education experts to dramatically reform Illinois’ education landscape. With an eye toward improving the value of feedback teachers receive from performance evaluations and for ensuring teacher performance is directly linked to their students’ performance, PERA collaborators designed a law that ensures every district in Illinois implements a comprehensive evaluation system that:

Guarantees every teacher and principal is evaluated by a certified evaluator; Differentiates continued-service performance among unsatisfactory, needs improvement,

proficient, and excellent educators and administrators; Includes student growth as a significant factor in a final performance rating; Evaluates tenured teachers at least once every two years and non-tenured teachers once every

year; Provides for remediation and support for lower performing teachers; and, Guarantees every evaluated teacher receives a statement of strengths and weaknesses.

Illinois Administrative Code – Part 50

The Illinois Administrative Code, Part 50, “establishes the minimum requirements for the establishment of valid and reliable performance evaluation systems for employees who hold a professional educator license endorsed in a teaching or administrative field and are serving as a teacher, principal or assistant principal. Pursuant to Article 24A of the School Code [105 ILCS 5/Art. 24A], the performance evaluation systems shall assess both professional competence/practice and student growth. The purposes of this Part are to:

a) identify the minimum components, including those that address the use of data and indicators of student growth as a significant factor in rating performance, of a teacher performance evaluation system and of a principal and, as applicable, assistant principal performance evaluation system that each school district must implement;

b) provide a State model for the evaluation of teachers that addresses the use of data and indicators on student growth as a significant factor in rating teacher performance, some or all of which shall be required of a school district under certain circumstances outlined in Section 24A-4 of the School Code [105 ILCS 5/24A-4];

c) establish criteria for locally developed programs to prequalify and retrain evaluators, pursuant to Section 24A-3 of the School Code [105 ILCS 5/24A-3].”

Additionally, Part 50 establishes the dates for specific groups of school districts to implement performance evaluation systems, including both professional practice and data and indicators of student growth, for teachers, principals, and assistant principals. Due to the fact that Joppa-Maple Grove was not a Chicago Public School, a SIG (School Improvement Grant) school, or a school performing in the bottom 20 percent among all Illinois schools, the new performance evaluation system shall be implemented by September 1, 2016.


Key Terms – Part 50

To provide a better understanding of the terms that will be used throughout this evaluation plan, these definitions have been included from Part 50.

1) Adaptive conditional measurement model - a measurement model used to analyze assessment data to determine student growth that consists of at least a collection of baseline data that is used to determine student growth expectations for all students or for individual and/or groups of students and the recording of student outcomes in comparison to the growth expectations identified.

2) Assessment - any instrument that measures a student's acquisition of specific knowledge and skills. Assessments used in the evaluation of teachers, principals and assistant principals shall be aligned to one or more instructional areas articulated in the Illinois Learning Standards (see 23 Ill. Adm. Code 1.Appendix D) or Illinois Early Learning and Development Standards – Children Age 3 to Kindergarten Enrollment Age (see 23 Ill. Adm. Code 235.Appendix A), as applicable. For the purposes of this Part, assessments will be defined as the following types.

a. Type I assessment - a reliable assessment that measures a certain group or subset of students in the same manner with the same potential assessment items, is scored by a non-district entity, and is administered either statewide or beyond Illinois. Examples include assessments available from the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), Scantron Performance Series, Star Reading Enterprise, College Board's SAT, Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate examinations, or ACT's EPAS® (i.e., Educational Planning and Assessment System).

b. Type II assessment - any assessment developed or adopted and approved for use by the school district and intended to be used on a district wide basis by all teachers in a given grade, course or subject area. Examples include collaboratively developed common assessments, curriculum tests and assessments designed by textbook publishers.

c. Type III assessment - any assessment that is rigorous, that is aligned to the course’s curriculum, and that the qualified evaluator and teacher determine measures student learning in that course. Examples include teacher-created assessments, assessments designed by textbook publishers, student work samples or portfolios, assessments of student performance, and assessments designed by staff who are subject or grade level experts that are administered commonly across a given grade or subject. A Type I or Type II assessment may qualify as a Type III assessment if it aligns to the curriculum being taught and measures student learning in that subject area (see Section 50.110(b)(2)).

3) Assistant principal - an administrative employee of the school district who is required to hold a professional educator license issued in accordance with Article 21B of the School Code [105 ILCS 5/21B] endorsed for either general administrative or principal, and who is assigned to assist the principal with his or her duties in the overall administration of the school.

4) Formal observation - a specific window of time that is scheduled with the teacher, principal, or assistant principal for the qualified evaluator, at any point during that window of time, to directly observe professional practices in the classroom or in the school. (Also see Sections 50.120(c) and 50.320(c).)

5) Growth expectation - the outcome that students are expected to achieve by the end of the instructional period and includes consideration of a starting level of achievement already acquired and determination of an ending goal for the level of achievement to be reached.

6) Informal observation - observations of a teacher, principal, or assistant principal by a qualified evaluator that are not announced in advance of the observation and not subject to a minimum time requirement.


7) Interval of instruction - the period of time during which two or more assessment scores are analyzed for the purpose of identifying a change in a student's knowledge or skills.

8) Joint committee - a committee composed of equal representation selected by the district and its teachers or, when applicable, the exclusive bargaining representative of its teachers, which shall have the duties set forth in this Part regarding the establishment of a performance evaluation plan that incorporates data and indicators of student growth as a significant factor in rating teacher performance. (Section 24A-4 of the School Code)

9) Measurement model - the manner in which two or more assessment scores are analyzed for the purpose of identifying a change in a student's knowledge or skills over time.

10) Performance evaluation plan - a plan to evaluate a teacher, principal, or assistant principal that includes data and indicators on student growth as a significant factor in judging performance, measures the individual's professional practice, and meets the requirements of Article 24A of the School Code and this Part.

11) Performance evaluation rating - the final rating of a teacher's, principal's, or assistant principal's performance, using the rating levels required by Sections 24A-5(e), 34-8, and 34-85c of the School Code [105 ILCS 5/24A-5(e), 34-8, and 35-85c], that includes consideration of both data and indicators of student growth, when applicable under Section 24A-2.5 of the School Code [105 ILCS 5/24A-2.5] and Section 50.20 of this Part, and professional practice.

12) Qualified evaluator - shall have the meaning set forth in Section 24A-2.5 or 24A- 15 of the School Code and shall be an individual who has completed the prequalification process required under Section 24A-3 of the School Code or Subpart E of this Part, as applicable, and successfully passed the State-developed assessments specific to evaluation of teachers or principals and assistant principals. Each qualified evaluator shall maintain his or her qualification by completing the retraining required under Section 24A-3 of the School Code or Subpart E of this Part, as applicable.

13) State performance evaluation model - those components of an evaluation plan that address data and indicators of student growth that a school district is required to use in the event that its joint committee fails to reach agreement pursuant to Section 24A-4(b) of the School Code.

14) Student growth - a demonstrable change in a student's or group of students' knowledge or skills, as evidenced by gain and/or attainment on two or more assessments, between two or more points in time.

15) Student learning objective process or SLO process - a process for organizing evidence of student growth over a defined period of time that addresses learning goals that are measurable and specific to the skills or content being taught and the grade level of the students being assessed, and are used to inform and differentiate instruction to ensure student success. "Student learning objectives" or "SLO" consists of a learning goal, assessment and procedures to measure that goal, and growth expectation.

16) Teacher - full-time or part-time professional employees of the school district who are required to hold a professional educator license endorsed for a teaching field issued in accordance with Article 21B of the School Code. For the purposes of the requirements specific to student growth outlined in Article 24A of the School Code and this Part, "teacher" shall not include any individual who holds a professional educator license endorsed for school support personnel issued under Article 21B of the School Code and is assigned to an area designated as requiring this endorsement, including but not limited to school counselor, school psychologist, nonteaching school speech and language pathologist, school nurse, school social worker, or school marriage and family counselor.


Charlotte Danielson – The Framework for Teaching

The Framework for Teaching, by Charlotte Danielson, will be used as the basis for the Joppa-Maple Grove teacher evaluation system. The Framework for Teaching identifies those aspects of a teacher’s responsibilities that have been documented through empirical studies and theoretical research as promoting improved student learning. Although they are not the only possible description of practice, these responsibilities seek to define what teachers should know and be able to do in the exercise of their profession. In this framework, teaching is divided into 22 components clustered into the following four domains of teaching:

Domain 1: Planning and Preparationo Defines how a teacher organizes the content that the students are to learn – how the

teacher designs instruction. All elements of the instructional design – learning activities, materials, assessments, and strategies – should be appropriate to both the content and the students. The components of Domain 1 are demonstrated through the plans the teachers prepare to guide their teaching. The plan’s effects are observable through actions in the classroom.

Domain 2: The Classroom Environmento Consists of the non-instructional interactions that occur in a classroom. Activities and

tasks establish a respectful classroom environment and a culture for learning. The atmosphere is businesslike; routines and procedures are handled efficiently. Student behavior is cooperative and non-disruptive, and the physical environment supports instruction. The components of Domain 2 are demonstrated through classroom interaction and are observable.

Domain 3: Instructiono Consists of the components that actually engage students in the content. These

components represent distinct elements of instruction. Students are engaged in meaningful work that is important to students as well as teachers. Like Domain 2, the components of Domain 3 are demonstrated through teacher classroom interaction and are observable.

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilitieso Encompasses the professional’s role outside of the classroom. These roles include

professional responsibilities such as self-reflection and professional growth, in addition to contributions made to the school, the district, and to the profession as a whole. The components of Domain 4 are demonstrated through interactions with colleagues, families, and the larger community. It also includes attendance and punctuality.


The Framework for Teaching is organized in a four-square grid, with domains displayed in a clockwise order. This design choice is deliberate; it reminds us that the planning precedes the work in the classroom, a strong classroom environment must be in place for instruction to occur, and upholding professional responsibilities leads to better planning. Each domain has 5-6 components, which describe distinct aspects of teaching practice.

Framework for TeachingDomain 1: Planning and Preparation

1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy

1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students

1c: Setting instructional outcomes

1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources

1e: Designing coherent instruction

1f: Designing student assessment

Domain 2: The Classroom Environment

2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport.

2b: Establishing a culture for learning

2c: Managing classroom procedures

2d: Managing student behavior

2e: Organizing physical space

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

4a: Reflecting on teaching

4b: Maintaining accurate records

4c: Communicating with families

4d: Participating in a professional community

4e: Growing and developing professionally

4f: Demonstrating professionalism

Domain 3: Instruction

3a: Communicating with students

3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques

3c: Engaging students in learning

3d: Using assessment in instruction

3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness


Danielson’s The Framework for Teaching was chosen as our district’s framework because it:1) Enhances professional practice by seeking to identify principles of effective practice and

classroom organization. Such principles maximize student learning and promote student engagement.

2) Provides a common vocabulary for discussions regarding professional excellence in teaching.

3) Provides clear expectations , via the rubrics, about what constitutes good teaching and serves as a guide for educators striving to attain mastery of teaching status.

4) Parallels district improvement initiatives currently underway at Joppa-Maple Grove (i.e. improving classroom practice, school improvement goals, improving professional development, continuous improvement, Professional Learning Communities, high expectations, etc.).

5) Is based on research . The Educational Testing Service (ETS) conducted research, led by Charlotte Danielson, which produced the development of Praxis III: Classroom Performance Assessments for Licensing Beginning Educators.

The development process incorporated extensive literature reviews, expert panels, job analyses, and pilot and field-testing. More recently, ASCD’s book Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching (Danielson, 1996 & 2007) was based on the Praxis III. It was researched and linked to the principles of exemplary practice described by the Interstate New Educator Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC). The book expands the teaching skills identified in Praxis III to include the work of experienced educators, and the book reflects the vision of teaching and learning embedded in the work of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). This framework, building on the earlier work of others, is the latest effort along these lines; and many school districts have used it as an organizing structure defining effective teaching and establishing criteria for their evaluation systems. (Danielson & McGreal, 2000)

6) The Framework for Teaching, with its four domains and 22 specific components, is designed to:a. Provide every educator, via the rubrics, valuable feedback to guide their planning for

effective instruction.b. Provide evaluators, via Domains 2 and 3, clear guidelines to assess the components for

effective teaching that are directly observable in the classroom setting.c. Provide educators and evaluators, via Domains 1 and 4, an avenue for meaningful

discussions on teaching skills not directly observable in the classroom.


Teacher Performance Levels

The Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) specifies that all districts in Illinois include four rating categories for all teachers in their teacher evaluation system: Excellent, Proficient, Needs Improvement, Unsatisfactory. All teachers at Joppa-Maple Grove will receive a summative evaluation score, combining teacher practice and measures of student learning, in one of these four categories. The following are the four performance level definitions as agreed upon by the Joppa-Maple Grove PERA Joint Committee:

Excellent: An excellent teacher performs above expectations in both student achievement and professional contribution to the school or district. This is a teacher who consistently demonstrates excellence in the Domains of Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities by engaging in activities believed to be strongly related to positive student learning outcomes. An excellent teacher’s students, in aggregate, exceed expectations for academic growth.

Proficient: A proficient teacher meets expectations by working with students to achieve a high level of success. This is a teacher who consistently demonstrates proficiency in the Domains of Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities by engaging in activities believed to be strongly related to positive student learning outcomes. A proficient teacher’s students, in aggregate, have achieved acceptable rates of academic growth.

Needs Improvement: A teacher who needs improvement does not consistently promote student success through professional practice. This is a teacher who regularly demonstrates a need for improvement in one or more of the Domains of Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities. This teacher may recognize or intermittently engage in activities believed to be strongly related to positive student learning outcomes, but still shows significant room for professional growth. A needs improvement teacher’s students, in aggregate, have achieved below acceptable rates of academic growth.

Unsatisfactory: An unsatisfactory teacher fails to meet professional expectations. This is a teacher who consistently demonstrates unsatisfactory performance in the Domains of Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities. An unsatisfactory teacher’s students, in aggregate, have not demonstrated growth.

** Please note: These definitions represent a guide and spectrum of performance. It is possible, and even likely, that a teacher could receive an end-of year rating in one category for the teacher practice protocol and another category for student growth.


Professional Practice

The Professional Practice component of the summative evaluation is required to be implemented by September 2016. Listed below are the components of the plan:

a. Self-Reflection Growth Plan

b. Conference c. Observationd. Additional Components

Professional Assistance Remediation


Self-Reflection

The evaluation cycle will begin with a teacher’s self-reflection in preparation for the Initial Conference. Teachers will complete the Self-Reflection Form (Appendix F) prior to the conference. By completing this form, the teacher is preparing for a meaningful and targeted conversation with the evaluator, where the teacher and evaluator can collaborate to establish Professional Growth goals. The self-reflection will serve three purposes:

1. to create a time and place for the teacher to reflect on his/her practice and assess performance;2. to help inform and facilitate a reflective dialogue on performance;3. to help identify areas for improvement and areas for growth.

Growth Plan

The Professional Growth Plan is a tool for teachers to assess their own performance and set professional growth goals. During the Initial Conference, a teacher and an evaluator will discuss two or three professional goals that the teacher has developed prior to the meeting. Teachers will use the Self-Reflection Form, relevant student learning data, evaluation feedback, previous professional learning, prior growth plans, and other relevant data to determine the goals. Goals will be recorded on the Professional Growth Goals Form (Appendix G). There is also a completed example with this form that you may look at for guidance (Appendix H). A Professional Growth Plan Form (Appendix I) must be completed on each of the goals that are listed on the Professional Growth Goals Form. Each goal is important but should be ranked in order of priority. There is a completed example with this form that you may look at for guidance (Appendix J). Additional resources could include the Illinois Professional Teaching Standards and the Standards for Professional Learning.

The teacher and evaluator will use that Professional Growth Plan throughout the year and will specifically revisit the document during a Summative Conference. Furthermore, the teacher and evaluator will participate in additional collections of evidence, including an observation cycle, in order to gauge and support progress toward the goals. Professional growth goals should be directly tied to areas of improvement within The Danielson Framework for Teaching and to local professional development opportunities.


Conferences

In addition to pre- and post-observation conference requirements for formal observations, each teacher will have an Initial and Summative Conference with the assigned evaluator. These conferences serve as a time to discuss professional growth goals, self-reflect on performance, and receive feedback on performance and progress towards goals. In addition to serving a summative purpose, conferences should be formative in nature throughout the year. During conferences, evaluators and teachers can have meaningful conversations surrounding teacher performance that will help teachers to improve their practice.

Initial ConferenceThe evaluator and teacher will meet prior to September 1 (Non-Tenured) or September 15 (Tenured) of each year for the Initial Conference. The Initial Conference is intended as a time for teacher and evaluator to discuss professional goals for the year/cycle. The conversation should be structured around the individual teacher’s goals and support needed for the upcoming year/cycle.

Prior to the conference:● The evaluator and teacher should individually review the previous cycle’s summative

evaluation as a point of reference for the new year/cycle.● The teacher should complete a Self-Reflection Form (Appendix F). ● The teacher should create a list of potential growth goals.

During the conference: ● The evaluator and teacher may review the previous cycle’s summative evaluation.● The evaluator and teacher should review the teacher’s self-reflection results.● The evaluator and teacher should formalize two to three (2-3) professional growth goals

for the year using the Professional Growth Plan Form.

Pre-Observation Conference

The pre-observation conference will take place at least two school days before the scheduled formal observation to discuss the objectives of the observed lesson.

Prior to the conference: ● The teacher will fill out the Pre-Observation Report (Appendix K), which provides some

guiding questions about your students and the lesson that will be observed. ● The teacher will fill out the Domain 1 Report (Appendix L), which provides specific

information to the evaluator about the planning and preparation for the lesson. Examples for possible artifacts for Domain 1 can be found in Appendix M.

During the Conference:● The evaluator and teacher should review the objectives and goals for the lesson, any

special circumstances about the lesson/students/etc., and any other relevant information that may help the evaluator understand the lesson.


Post-Observation Conference

The post-observation conference will take place within five school days of the observation. At the post-observation conference, the evaluator and teacher will discuss the lesson and evidence collected.

Prior to the Conference:● The teacher should reflect on the lesson and complete the Post-Observation Report

(Appendix N). An example of a Post-Observation Report can be found in Appendix O. ● The evaluator will take all the evidence (notes) gathered during the observation and

align each piece of evidence to the Framework components.● The teacher will complete the Domain 4 Report (Appendix P), which provides specific

information to the evaluator about professional practice activities. Examples for possible artifacts for Domain 4 can be found in Appendix Q.

● The evaluator will complete the Formal Observation Report (Appendix R).

During the Conference:● The evaluator and teacher will debrief about the components of the lesson, using the

Post-Observation Report and the Formal Observation Report, as well as the evidence gathered during the observation.

● Feedback will be provided to the teacher following a formal observation either electronically or in writing. Teacher will sign-off stating that feedback was received. Signature does not indicate that teacher agrees with feedback. Teacher always has the opportunity to provide evidence or response to dispute feedback.

● After any observation the evaluator determines that the evidence collected up to that point may result in a final performance evaluation rating of “needs improvement” or “unsatisfactory”, the evaluator must notify the teacher of that determination using the Notification of Needs Improvement/Unsatisfactory Performance form (Appendix U).

Summative Conference

The Summative Conference is an opportunity for the evaluator and teacher to discuss all the evidence collected throughout the evaluation cycle, which will also include the Student Growth portion. During the conference the teacher and evaluator will discuss strengths and weaknesses which were documented on the Professional Practice Summative Evaluation Report. Summative Conferences should be completed no later than March 1 for all teachers.

Prior to the Conference:● The evaluator should complete the Professional Practice Summative Evaluation Report

(Appendix S) prior to the Summative Conference. ● The evaluator should use all evidence collected, which will include: documentation from

formal observations, informal observations, conferencing, and any additional evidence the teacher has presented or the evaluator deems necessary.

● The evaluator should gather as much evidence as possible before a rating is assigned. ● The teacher should have Student Growth data (SLO’s) completed.


During the Conference● All evidence will be presented and discussed with the teacher using the Professional

Practice Summative Evaluation Report.● Student Growth data will be discussed and a Student Growth rating will be assigned.● Summative rating will be given – Professional Practice (70%) and Student Growth (30%)● Both the teacher and evaluator need to sign the report (signature does not indicate

agreement with evaluation, only that it was received).a. The teacher receives one copy.b. The original is kept in the personnel file.

Observation

Both formal and informal observations are opportunities for evaluators to collect evidence. Formal observations will be mutually scheduled between the evaluator and the teacher. Each non-tenured teacher will receive a minimum of two formal evaluations each year. Each tenured teacher will receive a minimum of one formal evaluation every two years. Informal observations are not scheduled or limited, but both non-tenured and tenured teachers will be subject to a minimum of three informal observations. For tenured teachers, informal observations may occur at any time during the two-year cycle.

Evaluators are expected to provide specific and meaningful feedback on performance following all observations, formal and informal. Any evidence collected must be shared with the teacher in written feedback and the teacher must be given the opportunity to meet with the evaluator to discuss the feedback. Written feedback from collections of evidence must:

● be identified as either from an informal or formal observation;● state any evidence collected;● reference The Danielson Framework for Teaching.

Step-By-Step Guidance of Scheduled Observation Process

Step 1: Schedule the observation and pre-observation conference● The evaluator and teacher work together to set an observation date.● The pre-observation conference should be scheduled at least two school days prior to the

observation.● The teacher should fill out the Pre-Observation Report prior to the conference.

○ The Framework for Teaching should be used to guide preparation.

Step 2: Pre-observation conference● The evaluator and teacher should use the Pre-Observation Report to guide the discussion during

the conference.● Discussion should be on the objectives of the lesson to be observed. ● The evaluator should be recording evidence of Domain 1 – Planning and Preparation using the

Domain 1 Report submitted by the teacher● Evidence that is gathered from the Pre-Observation conference by the administrator should be

entered on the Formal Observation Report (Appendix R).


Step 3: Observation of the teacher● The evaluator gathers evidence of the teacher and student actions and statements, teacher

planning, instructional delivery, and classroom management skills using the Observation Log (Appendix X).

● During the observation, the evaluator will write/type what is seen and heard during the lesson, focusing on Domains 2 and 3.

Step 4: Schedule the post-observation conference● After the observation, the teacher needs to complete the Post-Observation Report and the

Domain 4 Report.● The evaluator needs to schedule a post-observation conference within five school days after the

observation.

Step 5: Aligning the evidence using the Framework● After the observation, the evaluator should identify the relevant component(s) from The

Framework for Teaching for each piece of evidence and document them in the Observation Log.

Step 6: Post-observation conference● The post-observation conference must take place within five school days of the observation.● The teacher needs to bring a copy of the Post-Observation Report and the Domain 4 Report to

the meeting to be discussed.● The evaluator should spend time discussing the evidence that was collected during the

observation.● Evidence gathered during the Post-Observation conference by the evaluator should be entered

on the Formal Observation Report.● After any observation the evaluator determines that the evidence collected up to that point may

result in a final performance evaluation rating of “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory”, the evaluator must notify the teacher in writing of that determination.

Step 7: Completion of the Formal Observation Report● After all evidence is entered, both the teacher and administrator will sign the Formal

Observation Report as an acknowledgement of receipt and not necessarily agreement.

Evidence Collection / Domains 1 and 4

Evaluators must collect evidence outside of the classroom to assess performance in Domains 1 and 4. Teachers should also be proactive in presenting evidence of proficiency in these areas. Pre- and post-observation conferences are a valuable time to present and discuss additional evidence in these two domains.

● Examples of evidence for Domain 1 – Planning and Preparation include but are not limited to: lesson and unit plans, planned instructional materials, and activities, assessments and systems for record keeping.

○ Domain 1 Report is to be completed by the teacher and presented to the evaluator at or before the Pre-Observation Conference.

● Examples of evidence for Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities include, but are not limited to: documents from team planning and collaboration, call-logs or notes from parent-teacher


meetings, and attendance records from professional development or school-based activities/events.

○ Domain 4 Report is to be completed by the teacher and presented to the evaluator at or before the Post-Observation Conference.

● For further examples please refer to the Artifact Lists for Domains 1 and 4.● Evidence for Domains 2 and 3 will be gathered using the observation report. Examples of each

Domain, Component and Element can be found in the Danielson Framework 2013.

Filing of Evaluations

Each completed Observation Log, Formal Observation Report, and Professional Practice Summative Evaluation Report will be completed in duplicate and will be signed by the administrator and the teacher. This may include a response by the teacher to the evaluation. Observation Logs and Formal Observation Reports must be completed and signed within five (5) school days of the said observation. One copy of the signed report will be given to the teacher and one will be retained by the administrator and forwarded to the District Administrative Office for placement in the teacher’s personnel file.

Descriptions of Performance

Joppa-Maple Grove presently employs certified personnel for the following job classifications: teacher and guidance counselor. For the purpose of this evaluation plan, teachers shall be evaluated utilizing the Framework for Teaching model. All others will utilize the appropriate forms. All certified staff will be evaluated by administrators approved to conduct evaluation of certified staff, which could include superintendent, principal, assistant principal, etc.

Each certified staff member is expected to achieve a “Proficient” or “Excellent” rating on the Summative Evaluation Report. Certified tenured or non-tenured teachers receiving a “Needs Improvement” rating will be subject to the Professional Assistance Plan as outlined later in this document.

Any certified non-tenured teacher who receives a rating of “Unsatisfactory” shall be subject to dismissal at the end of the personal contract period. Certified tenured teachers receiving an “Unsatisfactory” rating will be required to follow remediation activities as outlined later in this document. Teachers who fail to complete the ninety (90) school day remediation plan with a “Proficient” or above rating shall be dismissed in accordance with 105 ILCS 5/24A-1 through 5 of The Illinois School Code.

Rating

After each formal observation the evaluator will assign a rating to each component. This evidence will become part of the collection to inform the summative rating. A summative rating for teacher practice will not be determined until the end of the observation cycle when all evidence has been collected and assessed. Evidence used for rating may include: documentation from formal observations, informal observations, conferencing, and any additional evidence the teacher has presented or the evaluator deems necessary.


Rating Scale

The Rating Scale for the Professional Practice portion of the Teacher Evaluation is a weighted scale. The weighting reflects the emphasis on Domain 2 and Domain 3 that is pervasive throughout the writings and recordings of Dr. Danielson. Below is a summary of how the system operates.

Rating Scale Procedure

1. Evaluator assigns a rating per component.2. Each component rating is scored:

a. Excellent = 3b. Proficient = 2c. Needs Improvement = 1d. Unsatisfactory = 0

3. The component rating is multiplied by the weighted factor (%).4. Components are totaled within each domain.5. Domains are totaled for a composite score.6. The Professional Practice Rating is based on the scale below:

a. 2.6 or higher ------------------------------------ Excellentb. 2.0 up to (but not including) 2.6 ----------- Proficientc. 1.2 up to (but not including) 2.0 ----------- Needs Improvementd. Less than 1.2 ------------------------------------ Unsatisfactory

Weighted Components

Framework Components Weight %

DOMAIN 1: Planning and Preparation

1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy 9%

1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students 2%

1c: Setting instructional outcomes 2%

1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources 1%

1e: Designing coherent instruction 5%

1f: Designing student assessment 4%

Overall rating for DOMAIN 1 23%

DOMAIN 2: Classroom Environment


2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport 6%

2b: Establishing a culture for learning 9%

2c: Managing classroom procedures 7%

2d: Managing student behavior 5%

2e: Physical space 1%


DOMAIN 3: Instruction

3a: Communicating with students 8%

3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques 5%

3c: Engaging students in learning 9%

3d: Using assessment in instruction 6%

3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness 4%


DOMAIN 4: Professional Responsibilities

4a: Reflecting on teaching 2%

4b: Maintaining Accurate Records 2%

4c: Communicating with families 2%

4d: Participating in a professional community 2%

4e: Growing and developing professionally 2%

4f: Showing professionalism 7%


Teacher Attendance

Teacher attendance is imperative to student learning. Teachers need to follow the Collective Bargaining Agreement when dealing with their absences, including sufficiently preparing for your absence. Failure to do so may impact the domains of Planning and Preparation, as well as Professional Responsibilities. Additionally, misconduct related to attendance could have an impact as well. Examples of such attendance misconduct include, but are not limited to, the following:

Repeated tardiness Repeated unplanned absences with short notice Short notice of planned absences


Planned or unplanned absences on key dates for the school (i.e. report card pick-up, PD days, testing days, special event days, etc.)

Repeated Friday/Monday, day before holiday/break absences Excessive numbers of days off without a leave of absence Use of sick days for other than personal illness

Educators are encouraged to be mindful of the importance of punctuality and regular attendance, but should not be deterred from appropriately using contractual leave time.

Schedule of Evaluations

The following schedule will be utilized to conduct teacher evaluations:

● Full-Time Non-Tenured Teachers -- All full-time, non-tenured teachers will be evaluated annually and have a minimum of two (2) formal, scheduled observations each year. There will be a minimum of three (3) informal, unscheduled observations.

● Full-Time Tenured Teachers -- All tenured teachers will be formally evaluated a minimum of once every two years. The evaluation will consist of a minimum of one (1) scheduled formal observation and three (3) informal, unscheduled observations. Informal observations may occur at any time during the two-year cycle. If the tenured teacher receives a rating of “needs improvement’ or “unsatisfactory” in the last evaluation, the following year the teacher will be in either Professional Assistance or Remediation and subject to at least two (2) formal evaluations.

● Part-Time Teachers -- All part-time teachers will be evaluated annually and will receive a minimum of two (2) formal evaluations each year and three (3) informal, unscheduled observations.

Evaluations which recommend dismissal will be completed at least forty-five (45) calendar days before the end of the school year.

If a teacher has a planned leave of absence or an absence that falls under the FMLA, the administrator will make every effort to complete the evaluation prior to the absence. If this cannot be done, then the teacher will be placed on the evaluation cycle the following school year.


Timeline: Non-TenuredEvery effort will be made to adhere to the following timelines. However, depending on extenuating circumstances (i.e. snow days, illness, etc.), the dates may be somewhat fluid.

Date Observation / Conference Description

September 1 Initial Conference See Initial Conference

October 1 Observation 1 Informal Observation

November 1 Observation 2 Informal or Formal Observation

December 1 Observation 3 Informal or Formal Observation

January 15 Observation 4 Informal Observation

February 1 Observation 5 Informal or Formal Observation

March 1 Summative Conference See Summative Conference

Timeline: TenuredEvery effort will be made to adhere to the following guidelines. However, depending on extenuating circumstances (i.e. snow days, illness, etc.), the dates may be somewhat fluid.

Date Observation / Conference Description

September 15 Initial Conference See Initial Conference

October 1 Observation 1 Informal Observation

November 1 Observation 2 Informal or Formal Observation

January 1 Observation 3 Informal or Formal Observation

February 1 Observation 4 Informal or Formal Observation

March 1 Summative Conference See Summative Conference


Professional Assistance

Certified tenured or non-tenured teachers receiving a “needs improvement” as an overall rating on the Professional Practice Summative Evaluation Form or as identified through a “letter of direction” will be subject to the professional assistance process and evaluated in the year following the rating. The plan must be developed within 30 school days after the completion of the evaluation.

The Professional Assistance process will provide for a minimum of four scheduled observations and four unscheduled observations for the school year following the receipt of the “Needs Improvement” rating. A professional assistance plan will be developed with input from the teacher and administrator, utilizing the Professional Assistance Form (Appendix T). The professional assistance plan will focus on areas that need improvement and will outline supports that the district will provide to address areas of concern that have been identified in the previous evaluation.

Should a problem, situation or weak area of teacher performance be identified via “letter of direction” during a non-evaluation year, the following process will be put into place:

1. A meeting between the teacher and administrator will take place, immediately after the Summative Evaluation or the letter of direction. The teacher has a right to union representation at this meeting.

2. Identification of the problem will be submitted to the teacher in writing.3. A plan of action will be developed to remedy the problem/situation. A timeline will be included

for review.4. If the problem is not resolved to meet administrator expectations within the limits of the

collaborative timeline, the teacher will be evaluated for the remainder of the current school year as well as the following school year utilizing the Professional Assistance process.

Remediation Process

For tenured teachers, the Remediation Plan (Appendix V) will be developed and initiated within thirty (30) school days after an evaluation has been completed which results in an overall “unsatisfactory” rating. This plan will be designed to correct the areas identified as unsatisfactory, provided the deficiencies are deemed remediable. Any professional development provided as part of a professional development plan for tenured educators rated “needs improvement” or a remediation plan for tenured educators rated “unsatisfactory” shall align to Standards for Professional Learning from Learning Forward (http://learningforward.org/standards). The remediation plan will provide for two 45-day evaluation periods in which a minimum of two (2) scheduled and two (2) unscheduled observations shall be completed in each period. At the conclusion of the first 45-day evaluation, the administrator must complete the Summative Evaluation Report and assign an overall rating for that time period. At the conclusion of the second 45-day evaluation period, the administrator must complete the Summative Evaluation Report and assign an overall rating for the entire 90-day period.

1. Failure of the teacher to comply with the timelines for the required evaluations due to events such as summer months, illness, or district approved leaves of absence under a remediation plan shall not invalidate the results of the plan.

2. Failure of the administration to strictly comply with time requirements contained within the remediation process shall not invalidate the results of the remediation plan.

3. There shall be a conference for the overall remediation plan evaluation within ten (10) school


days of the completed remediation process.

Remediation Plan Participants

The participants in the remediation plan shall include the teacher deemed “unsatisfactory,” the evaluator, and a consulting teacher as approved by the association and by the Superintendent. The writing of the remediation plan may include the participation of the above mentioned personnel to assist in correcting areas identified as unsatisfactory.

1. The participation of the consulting teacher shall be voluntary.2. The qualified consulting teacher shall have received a rating of “excellent” or “proficient” on the

most recent evaluation, has a minimum of five (5) years experience in teaching, and has knowledge and experience in the assignment of the teacher under remediation.

3. The consulting teacher shall be chosen from the names of all teachers so qualified.4. Where no consulting teacher is available in the district, the district shall request the State Board

of Education to provide a consulting teacher. The State Board of Education shall then provide a consulting teacher who meets the requirements for qualification as a consulting teacher.

5. If the consulting teacher becomes unavailable during the course of a remediation plan, a new consulting teacher shall be selected in like manner as the initial consulting teacher. The remediation plan shall be amended, as may be necessary upon consultation with the new consulting teacher.

6. The consulting teacher shall provide advice to the teacher under remediation as to how to improve teaching skills and how to successfully complete the remediation plan.

7. The consulting teacher shall not be required to participate in either of the two 45-day evaluation cycles in an official observation role, nor be engaged to evaluate the performance of the teacher under remediation.

8. In order to provide assistance to the teacher under a remediation plan, the consulting teacher shall attend each post-observation conference as well as the 45-day evaluation conference.

Successful Completion of RemediationA teacher who successfully completes a remediation program with a “Proficient” or above (final) rating shall be placed on a regular cycle of evaluation.

Remediation DismissalThe remediation plan shall provide that if the teacher under remediation fails to complete the ninety (90) school day remediation plan with a “Proficient” or above (final) rating, the teacher shall be dismissed in accordance with 105 ILCS 5/24A-1 through 5 of The Illinois School Code.


Key Terms – Professional Practice

1) Evaluation - The evaluation of a certified staff member consists of the observation process throughout the entire observation cycle.

2) Observation - Observation consists of an administrator formally documenting the professional activities of the teacher in the educational setting.

3) Evaluation Rating - The overall evaluation rating is provided on the summative evaluation document.

4) Scheduled Observation - This observation is scheduled ahead of time with the teacher and includes a pre-observation conference and post-observation conference.

5) Unscheduled Observation - This observation is not scheduled ahead of time with the teacher. Therefore, no pre-observation conference is necessary. However, a post-observation conference may be requested by either the teacher or administrator.

6) Formal Observations - A formal observation is an observation that is a complete lesson, or a minimum of 45 minutes, or one full class period. A set of conferences accompanies the formal observation. This includes a pre-observation conference no more than five workdays prior to the observation and a post-observation conference within six workdays after the observation. A teacher must receive written feedback following a formal observation before or during the post-conference. The teacher and evaluator must complete any appropriate paperwork prior to any conferences.

7) Informal Observations - An informal observation lasts a minimum of 10 minutes and does not need to be announced. There are no conferencing requirements around informal observations, but it is expected that a post-observation conference will be scheduled if a teacher is at risk for receiving an “Unsatisfactory” or “Needs Improvement” rating. A teacher or an evaluator may request a post-conference. A teacher must receive written feedback of any evidence within five workdays after the informal observation.

8) Evaluators - Trained, state-certified, and school board approved evaluators will conduct the evaluation and observation of certified staff. This may include principals, superintendents, or any other administrative staff (Type 75 endorsement required).

9) Letter of Direction - An official letter from administration describing a staff member’s inappropriate conduct or behavior, including reference to District policy and/or school/site procedures plus expectations of improvement.


Student Growth

Using student growth measures helps achieve the mission of Joppa-Maple Grove UD #38 to provide educational opportunities focused on the future and to meet the needs of all in a safe, nurturing environment so that all may reach their fullest potential. The district will utilize an adaptive-conditional measurement model. The student growth portion of the evaluation plan will use multiple measures of student achievement and growth in order to capture teacher impact on student learning.

Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) are the process of setting targets and measuring to the extent to which they have been achieved. Targets must be measureable and evaluators must be able to do something with those measurements. SLOs are a long-term goal for advancing student learning. It is a data-informed process that involves diagnosing and improving specific student learning needs.

By using Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) in an accurate and meaningful way, teachers can implement strategies to allow the students to achieve their highest potential and maximize growth. Using SLOs allows the teacher to monitor student progress throughout the year and adapt teaching methods accordingly. This in turn, consistently lets the teacher know where students are and where they should be. SLOs provide teachers a map, leading the teacher down the appropriate path for individualized student success.

SLOs also connect to the Danielson Framework for Teaching. Multiple measures of teacher’s practice, which includes frequent observations using the Danielson Framework, conferences, regular feedback, and student growth measures, provide a more complete picture of a teacher’s performance and create more meaningful dialogue and evaluations.

Student growth will represent 30% of a teacher’s summative performance evaluation rating, with the other 70% of the evaluation coming from the professional practice portion of the evaluation. At the end of the evaluation cycle, a teacher will receive a final summative rating of “Excellent,” “Proficient,” “Needs Improvement,” or “Unsatisfactory.”

A student growth rating will be determined based on the average percent of students who met minimum growth targets as defined by a teacher’s SLOs. For a better understanding of how the student growth rating is assigned, refer to “SLO Scoring.”

Rating Category Student Growth Threshold Student Growth Rating ScoreExcellent 80% and up 3Proficient 65% up to (not including) 80% 2

Needs Improvement 50% up to (not including) 65% 1Unsatisfactory Less than 50% 0


SLOs and Student Growth

The Student Learning Objectives themselves do not measure student growth but rather outline a process in which growth can be measured through various tools. By setting SLOs, using approved assessments, and regularly progress monitoring students’ development, an accurate picture of the student’s growth (and a teacher’s contribution to student growth) may be developed. Student Growth is defined as a demonstrable change in a student’s or a group of students’ knowledge or skills, as evidenced by two or more assessments between two or more points in time. Student growth is not the same thing as attainment. Attainment is a measure only at a single point in time, such as proficiency on the standardized state tests, College Readiness Scores on EXPLORE or PLAN, or the ability to run a 7:00 mile. Therefore, attainment is not as beneficial as using growth, which measures average change over one point in time to another. Now, we are looking to see if a student improved from the EXPLORE to the PLAN test, or whether a student cuts 30 seconds from his time on the mile. Since growth measures average change in student scores from one point in time to the next, it actually benefits teachers with students who start further behind or at lower levels since they have more room to grow.

SLO Guidelines

Each teacher needs to use at least two assessments. Only one assessment can be used for a single SLO. Thus, every teacher will be required to write at least two SLOs. For teachers who are required to use two Type III assessments, the second assessment can be postponed until after the initial evaluation cycle.

SLO Process and Key Deadlines

SLOs involve a basic three step process. The overall process for SLOs is as follows:

However, tenured compared to non-tenured teachers will have different evaluation cycles. Tenured teachers with “Excellent” or “Proficient” ratings have a two-year evaluation cycle. Tenured teachers with “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” ratings AND non-tenured teachers are on a one-year cycle.


Step One: Setting and Approving SLOs

Teachers will submit their SLOs to the evaluator for approval, and together, the evaluator and teacher will work collaboratively to ensure that the growth targets are feasible and attainable

Key Deadlines/Points: Teachers assess students within three weeks of school or semester start date unless you teach a

quarter class. Teachers submit SLOs that satisfy the SLO Framework criteria (Appendix CC).

within four weeks of start of school or the semester for approval. Teachers will be notified whether or not SLOs are approved. Teacher and evaluator will meet

within two weeks of approval/disapproval to discuss any necessary SLO revisions. All SLO modifications must be submitted within five school days following the aforementioned

meeting. If the teacher and evaluator disagree, the Joint Committee will make final SLO determination.

Note: The teacher and evaluator must meet only the first time in the evaluation cycle that a teacher submits an SLO. If a teacher submits an SLO first semester (and meets with an evaluator for approval) and chooses to submit another SLO second semester, the teacher and evaluator do not need to meet, but either can request a meeting.

Step Two: Revising SLOs

SLO Revision is an important step, especially during the first few years of implementation, when limited data is available by which to set feasible growth targets. The teacher should regularly monitor student progress after the SLO is approved. After the mid-point assessment and data collection, once more data is available, the teacher is allowed the opportunity to revise growth targets, based upon the progress monitoring data or changes in the classroom. The evaluator must approve any SLO revisions, and the teacher needs to provide sufficient evidence that revisions are needed. The teacher needs to provide the original SLO and the revised SLO. The teacher should also provide evidence for growth target revision. Lastly, the teacher provides the original baseline data.

Key Deadlines/Points: SLO Resubmission Deadline: It is the responsibility of the teacher to submit revised student

population and growth targets, if necessary, as well as original SLO and baseline data, within five attendance days after the midpoint data collection.

The evaluator reviews revised SLO to determine if data supports a change according to the SLO Framework. Any changes must be mutually agreed upon by teacher and evaluator.

The evaluator rejects the proposed SLO if it is not satisfactory against the SLO Framework and the data does not support a change.

If teacher and evaluator do not agree, even after meeting, teacher may appeal the decision to the Joint Committee for an additional review.


Step Three: Scoring SLOs

This is the final step in SLO development. The scoring is assigning a singular performance rating to the SLO. The SLOs for each certified staff member must be scored and approved. The SLOs will be averaged together to yield a score in one of four categories, “Unsatisfactory,” Needs Improvement,” “Proficient, or “Excellent,” based upon the following thresholds:

Performance Ratings ThresholdsExcellent Use approved SLO

At least 80% of students met targeted growthProficient Use approved SLO

65% up to (but not including) 80% of students met targeted growthNeeds Improvement Use approved SLO

50% up to (but not including) 65% of students met targeted growthUnsatisfactory Did not use approved assessment

Did not correctly score assessment Did not accurately administer assessment Did not use approved SLO Less than 50% of students met targeted growth

Key Deadlines/Points: Assessments must be scored and data entered on SLO form within 10 working days after

assessments are administered. Final assessment data must be complete by March 1. Teacher submits final SLO and documentation of students’ test scores to evaluator for scoring

and determination of performance rating. If the SLO scores are rejected, teacher and evaluator meet. If teacher and evaluator still cannot

agree, the SLO scoring is determined by the Joint Committee. The teacher can submit additional data, comments, or evidence to amend or exempt any

student data from the summative rating (additional work samples, attendance data, misc. student information).

o For instance, if a student performs poorly on a Type I assessment, such as AIMSWeb, but the teacher feels the student has made sufficient growth, the teacher can submit additional evidence, such as formative or summative assessments, projects, and class-work, to show that the student mastered the appropriate material.

o The teacher will need to provide standards-aligned items, to show the student mastered the appropriate standards, as well as comparative data from the class, to ensure rigor and appropriate growth. For example, the student in question could correctly demonstrate mastery as other students did who meet the growth target on the Type I assessment, and the teacher can provide these test scores and the student’s assessment to have that student’s score counted towards the teacher’s evaluation. On the other hand, the teacher can also submit student data, such as in-seat attendance data, to show that the student missed an inordinate amount of time of class, to have that student’s data removed from the SLO roster.

o If the teacher and evaluator cannot agree, the Joint Committee makes a scoring determination.


Requirements and Guidelines

SLO Framework and Approval Tool

The SLO Framework Criteria (Appendix CC) is the guide to use when setting targets and measuring the extent to which they are achieved. All teachers must submit one SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form (Appendix DD) for each SLO written. The SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form is composed of seven categories to be completed by the teacher and submitted to the evaluator.

Assessment Requirements

Teachers are required to use at least two assessments, and therefore, all teachers will write at least two SLOs. PERA has defined assessments according to three distinct types: Type I, Type II, and Type III. See the graphic below:

Collaboration is encouraged when selecting or writing assessments.

At Joppa-Maple Grove, the teachers have access to the following Type I and Type II assessments (list is not all-inclusive and may expand if/when other assessments become available).

TYPE I TYPE IITeaching Strategies Gold (Checkpoints) Teaching Strategies Gold (Reports)Dial 3 Unit TestsSTAR Rigby PM BenchmarkDibels Go MathALEKS Reading StreetPARCC Pearson AssessmentsMoby MaxAuto Skills


Assessment Quality

All Type III assessments must be approved using the Assessment Approval Rubric for Type III Assessments (Appendix BB). The Approval Guide for Type III Assessments (Appendix Y) outlines the process to be followed when developing a Type III assessment for approval and must be completed and submitted, along with the assessment. Teachers must also complete the Standards Alignment and Coverage Check (Appendix Z) and the Assessment Rigor Analysis – Depth of Knowledge (Appendix AA). Evaluators will use the Assessment Approval Rubric – Type III Assessments (Appendix BB) to approve Type III assessments. If pre- and post-assessments are not identical, both must be approved by evaluator. All Type III assessments must be approved prior to administration. If assessment is not approved, changes must be made and it should be re-submitted for approval for administration of assessment. Any changes or edits in the Type III assessment should be highlighted for resubmission. With the exception of the first year of PERA implementation, Type III assessments should be submitted for approval by the last day of teacher attendance for approval for the following school year. Evaluator will review and return the Type III assessment by the first contractual day of each school year. If an assessment has been approved and questions are raised as to whether it meets the approval requirements, the assessment must be reviewed by the Joint Committee. The Joint Committee will then decide, through a majority vote, if the assessment meets the approval requirements. If an administrator approves a Type III assessment that does not meet the approval requirements, that evidence should be noted in the administrator’s evaluation.

Evaluation Cycles for Tenured and Non-Tenured Teachers

The number of total SLOs a teacher writes will depend upon the length of the evaluation cycle and course/class length.

Tenured teachers receiving “Excellent” or “Proficient” will submit two SLOs in their summative evaluation year. Non-tenured or tenured teachers who have “Needs Improvement” or “unsatisfactory” ratings are on a yearly evaluation cycle and will submit two SLOs per year. Any teacher who is required to utilize two Type III assessments may postpone the implementation of the second assessment until their subsequent evaluation cycle.


Assessment Administration

Assessments must be administered across the district in similar ways, to ensure consistency and fairness for all teachers. Administration requirements vary, based upon the Type of assessment.

For Type I Assessments, such as DiscoverEd, DIBELS, Aims Web:


For Type II/III Assessments, such as common Benchmark assessments or teacher-created assessments:


Steps to SLO Writing

There are seven steps in writing SLOs, as follows:

Step 1: Baseline Teachers will need to collect baseline data on students in order to better understand students’ strengths and weaknesses when setting growth targets. Knowing where students start the year at, and knowing what they already have mastered and have yet to master, can help inform your instruction. If students already know how to write a five paragraph essay but struggle with using evidence, you can target your instruction throughout the year. However, teachers should look for as much viable data as possible when determining students’ strengths and weaknesses. More data, beyond one test administration, will provide a more comprehensive picture of students’ starting points and will help facilitate grouping students when creating growth targets. Therefore, teachers should begin collecting data on students to help create that more comprehensive picture of student strengths and weaknesses.

Teachers can use the following data at the beginning of the year to help assist in assessing students’ strengths and weaknesses:

Formative assessments Previous student grades Previous achievement data Attendance data Student criteria (e.g. SPED, ELL)

Teachers can start building portfolios of student data to start grouping students who start at similar places. Formative assessment data and previous achievement data might indicate that a student has actually mastered a certain concept, in which he or she did not indicate mastery on the pre-test. Conversely, a student may have correctly answered certain items on a pre-test, but previous achievement data and formative assessments indicate the student struggles with those concepts when multiple-choice answers are not provided. Attendance, too, can have an impact on how much a student might learn in a school year. If a student has a history of attendance problems, then he or she might not have as ambitious a growth target as someone who has more regular attendance. Previous achievement data, such as previous standardized test scores, can indicate how well a student performs on standardized tests over time. If a student has gaps lasting over several years, his or her growth targets might look much different than someone who has a stellar academic history.

Teachers will use baseline data to answer the following questions: How did students perform on the pre-assessment? What student needs are identified using the baseline data? How will you use this baseline data to inform growth targets and grouping of students?

Thus, data need to be disaggregated, or pulled apart, in multiple ways. Teachers must have an idea of how the class performed overall, how groups of students performed, and what concepts or skills students need help with.

Eventually, by the end of the baseline analysis phase, teachers should identify needs for their students and be able to meet the following criteria.

Use allowable data to drive instruction and set growth targets Be measureable


Targets specific academic concepts, skills, or behaviors based upon approved assessment objectives and student needs

This also means that any analysis should address student needs based upon how student performed on certain standards, and teacher should identify specific skills or concepts to target, using pre-assessment and other data as evidence of that need.

Baseline Data and Analysis consists of the following six-step process:1) Analyze the baseline data, including the pre-assessment. Teachers will examine all allowable

data, such as previous achievement data or previous grades. The teacher is required to use the pre-assessment, as well. If the pre-test is not yet administered, teachers can begin collecting all allowable data to get a better sense of students’ needs.

2) Determine how the class performed overall (e.g. behind or above grade level). Teachers can look at the pre-test and any relevant formative assessments and observational data to determine what students already know and what students struggle with. You need to have an idea of students’ overall reading levels or how students perform on certain strands (e.g. Number Sense, Algebra, Non-fiction Reading, Fiction Reading, etc.) compared to other strands.

3) Identify specific skills students have not mastered yet or are struggling with. Teachers analyze assessment data to determine specifically what skills and concepts students struggle with. Go back to the assessment itself, if available, to try to determine where students made mistakes. Develop a list of standards, skills, or concepts that need to be targeted within the classroom. This might mean you have to analyze the data in different ways, or disaggregate the data, so you can look at how students performed on particular items or on particular concepts.

4) Determine specific students who may need help or students who are excelling. Determine which students may need additional help or students who may be far above grade level. Think about how you might need to differentiate instruction and how you might group students when setting growth targets. Which students struggle with similar concepts? Which students need more challenging material?

5) Write a succinct statement summarizing student needs, based upon the data. Write a short 1-3 sentence statement in the first column of the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form (Appendix Y), explaining the class’s performance overall on pre-test (or other assessments) and specific student needs. At least one specific student need MUST be identified.

Example: Students are, on average, behind grade-level since 10 out of 28 students hit the target on AIMSWeb. 5 students are far below average and struggle with basic number operations skills and geometric concepts. 4 students were far above average and need less support with numbers and operations and more challenging work with algebraic concepts.

6) Check your answer against all the criteria. Refer back to the criteria listed above to ensure that you have analyzed allowable data and identified students’ needs. Make sure you have analyzed the data to determine strengths, weaknesses, specific concepts or skills that have yet to be mastered, and to identify specific students who may be struggling or excelling.


Step 2: Population All teachers must identify students to be included on their Student Learning Objective (SLO) roster. This is the second column of the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form. The Student Population included in a SLO will be a roster of those identified students whose growth throughout the year will be used for evaluative purposes. Not all students’ growth scores will “count” towards a teacher’s success on a SLO. While teachers will set goals for all students and monitor all students’ progress towards those goals throughout the year, only certain students’ score will be used for evaluative purposes.

When developing SLOs to be used for evaluations, any data should be reflective of the instruction that takes place inside the classroom. Thus, students with low attendance or who miss class often may not have growth targets that “count” towards a teacher’s evaluation, and the teacher’s final SLO roster may be different than the teacher’s actual in-class roster.

Joppa-Maple Grove has identified the following criteria for the Student Population portion of the SLO: 90% attendance is assumed Pre-test data available for each student included Exceptions are allowed, based upon evaluator approval

What do these criteria mean for teachers?

1) First, students with 90% attendance or higher will be included on a final SLO roster at the end of the evaluation cycle. Teachers will include all students with pre-test data at the beginning of the year, but those students who do not meet the attendance minimum will be excluded from the teacher’s summative student growth rating. The teacher will record the students’ pre-test and post-test data, but then indicate which students’ growth scores will not be used for evaluative purposes.

2) Additionally, students must be present for the pre-test and must be continuously enrolled after that date. All students must be tested within the first four weeks of school or the semester. Thus, any students who arrive after the fourth week after the start of school or the semester will not be included on a teacher’s SLO roster. So, teachers must test any students who arrive in class by end of the fourth week of school or the start of the semester, and only these students will be eligible for the teacher’s SLO roster. Thus, teachers using AIMSWeb or other assessments will need to wait until after the fourth week of school or the semester to have a comprehensive SLO roster.

3) Moreover, at the end of the evaluation cycle (e.g. at the Summative Conference), teachers can request exceptions for certain students who they feel should not be included on their final SLO rosters. Exceptions can be allowed on a student-by-student basis and must be approved by an evaluator. Sub-groups (e.g. SPED, ELL) c anno t be excluded. Teachers must appeal for any exceptions and must present evidence to the evaluator to justify any exceptions. Examples of data for exceptions include:

a. Additional work samples (e.g. a portfolio, previous assessments, that are standards-aligned, with comparative data and work samples from other students)

b. Attendance/attribution data (e.g. student was pulled from class x amount)c. Miscellaneous student information

The teacher submits additional data to evaluator, and evaluator makes the decision. If teacher does not believe the decision accurately reflects his/her contribution to student growth, the teacher may appeal the decision to the Joint Committee. T he r e f o r e , an y r eque st f o r e x c ep t i on s are t h e r e s pon s i bi li t y o f t h e t ea c he r .


Teachers should track data on students who may miss class for medical reasons, absences for sports, etc. For example, a student may be in attendance but miss a certain number of days in your Biology 1 course due to In-School Suspension or an extracurricular activity. The student is still counted as present, and therefore meets the 90% attendance requirement, but if the amount of time for ISS or other excuses was counted, the student was not in attendance in your class for 90% of the time. Thus, that student’s performance is not reflective of the instruction taking place inside the classroom, and the teacher can request an exception.

Additionally, a teacher may present evidence if he or she feels the assessment data does not accurately reflect the student’s performance or growth and if that student’s score should be changed from “not meeting” the growth target to “meeting” the growth target (e.g. the student had a “bad” test day). The teacher can present additional work samples that are aligned with the pre- and post-assessment, to show that the student did master the concepts on the approved assessment, thus warranting the score of “meeting” the growth target. Moreover, the teacher must also submit data from other students to indicate how that student in question performed in comparison to other classmates who did or did not meet their growth targets.

How to Begin Identifying the Student Population

1) Pre-test all students by the end of fourth week after the start of school or the semester.2) Identify all students who were present for the pre-assessment and are still enrolled in your class

by the end of the fourth week after the start of school or the semester. This becomes your SLO roster.

3) In the second column of the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form, indicate the number of students who took the pre-test, describe the class, and attach the roster for evaluators to review (e.g. 25 students in 4th hour English 1. See attached roster).

4) Keep data on student attendance in your class.5) At the end of the evaluation cycle, you will determine which students remain on your roster. Any

student who has less than 90% attendance or whose exception has been approved will have data recorded but will NOT have data included towards determining the success of the SLO.


Step 3: Objective All teachers must write an Objective within their Student Learning Objective (SLO). This is the third column of the SLO Framework. An Objective is a long-term goal for advancing student learning. In terms of a Student Learning Objective (SLO), the objective is a broad statement of what students will be expected to know or do by the end of a course. It should be aligned to what students are assessed on.

Here are some example Learning Objectives from national models: Grade Level & Subject

Assessment Learning Objectives

9th Grade Literacy

SRI Students will increase their comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency in reading.

9th-12th Grade Literacy

Teacher/Student Created Rubric

Students will be able to write reflections in response to a particular reading that demonstrate higher order thinking above and beyond the first level of Bloom’s Taxonomy ladder where students simply copy or repeat facts from their reading.

Biology I End-of-course Assessment

Students will use the scientific method to organize, analyze, evaluate, make inferences, and predict trends from biology data.

9th Grade Art Scott Foresman Art Rubric

Students will improve their ability to draw from direct observation via studies of still life, skulls, African masks, etc.

9th Grade Algebra

Type III Assessment

The students will demonstrate an understanding of quadratics and exponent rules.

AP US History AP DBQ Rubric and AP Free-Response Question

AP US History students will increase their ability to identify and create the key elements of a strong DBQ response including a clear thesis statement, presentation of strong supportive arguments, and incorporation of primary documents.

NOTE: In the above examples, standards are NOT directly referenced.

Example Objectives Using Common Core Standards:Grade Level & Subject

Assessment Learning Objectives

Geometry Final Exam Students will improve their ability to solve problems and apply concepts using congruence, similarity, right triangles and trigonometry, circles, expressing geometric properties with equations, geometric measurement and dimension, and modeling with geometry (CCM – Geometry).

12th Grade English

Teacher/Student Created Rubric

Students will be able to write arguments to support claims in an analysis of a grade level literature text using valid reasoning, relevant and sufficient evidence, and citing strong and thorough textual evidence of what the text says explicitly and inferences drawn from the text (Grade 12 – CCW1, Grade 11-12 – CCRL1).

Joppa-Maple Grove has identified the following criteria for Objectives. An Objective must be:

• Rigorous• Targets specific academic concepts, skills, and behaviors based on the CCSS or

district curriculum, where available• Use baseline data to guide selection and instruction• Targets year-long, semester-long, or quarter-long concepts, skills, or behaviors


• Is measureable• Collaboration required


1) Objectives need to be rigorous, meaning the content being taught should be standards-aligned and appropriate for the course and/or grade level of the students. An Objective should match the skill level of the students. So, Objectives will be less rigorous for English 1 students than English 2 or 3 students, since these students may not have as rigorous content or curriculum in terms of assessments. This content should match what is being assessed on the identified assessment.

2) Objectives should target specific concepts, skills, or behaviors. “9th grade Language Arts” or “Chemistry” would no t be an acceptable Objective since the teacher should be more specific with what skills or concepts will be taught. See the examples above. “Students will increase their comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency in reading” is much more descriptive in terms of skills

and concepts than “9th Grade Literacy.”a. Hint: Use the prompt “Students will be able to…” and then use Bloom’s Taxonomy

language to describe exactly what students must be able to do by the time they finish your class by the end of the year.

3) Additionally, Objectives should be aligned to standards. If national and/or state standards are available (e.g. English, Math, and Science), the Objective should cover the same content and align in terms of rigor. If national and state standards are not available, teachers should reference district or school curricula, scope & sequence, textbooks, goals, etc.

4) Baseline data can help inform your Objective. If the pre-assessment data shows that student already have mastered certain concepts, your Objective can focus on those concepts students have yet to master. If students are behind grade-level in reading, your Objective may focus on scaffolding or remedial skills, in addition to grade-level appropriate skills.

5) Objectives should be different if a course lasts an entire year versus a course that is taught for one semester. Students may not learn the same material to the same extent in these classes.

6) Measureable Objectives means that you can assess whether your students have learned these skills. Referring to the “9th Grade Literacy” example above, it is very difficult to assess “9th Grade Literacy.” However, it is much more measurable to assess if students have increased their comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency in reading.

7) Teachers should collaborate with other teachers in the same department, grade-level, or subject area to ensure objectives are aligned within and across courses. If a 4th grade student must be able to complete numbers operations using fractions, then the 5th grade objective should build upon those concepts.

How to Begin Writing Your Learning Objective:

1) Review: a) any available standards, b) district- or school-wide goals, c) end-of course objectives, d) end-of-course objectives for preceding and subsequent courses within your

department, e) any available curricula or scope and sequence, f) the content of the available assessment, g) baseline data. Use any available examples from national models, as well.


2) Then, based upon the assessment, develop a succinct statement (1-2 sentences) of what students should be expected to know by the end of the course. Write it in the appropriate box in the “SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form.” Refer directly to any standards, if applicable.

3) Check your Objective by comparing your objective to those developed by teachers within the same department or grade level. Make sure that your students will be prepared for the next course in the department, if available, and that students entering your class are adequately prepared, based upon the prior class’s Learning Objective.

4) Check to make sure your objective meets the criteria listed above.


Step 4: Rationale After examining Baseline data and writing an Objective, teachers will need to develop a Rationale for their Objective. This is the fourth column of the SLO Framework. Essentially, teachers explain why they have determined to cover this content, using an analysis of students’ strengths and needs as evidence, or a rationale, for that content. Teachers will answer the question: Why did you choose this Objective?

Joppa-Maple Grove has identified three criteria for approving the Rationale. The Rationale must:

Align with school and district improvement plans Align with teaching strategies and learning content Classroom data is reviewed for areas of strengths and needs by student group, subject area,

concepts, skills, and behavior

To review and possibly revise their Objective, teachers connect any student needs identified in the Baseline Analysis step to the Objective and therefore, better target student needs.

Example Rationales: Students struggle with motive, inference, making predictions, and drawing conclusions from

text, according to the pre-assessment, so I will focus on these specific reading comprehension skills. Most (19 out of 22 students) have already mastered identifying character traits, summarizing the main idea, and identifying cause-and-effect, so that will not be the focus of instruction.

Most students (23 out of 25) cannot classify organisms, identify the procedures for controlled experiments, identify the main branches of Biology, or identify basic Biology vocabulary to describe scientific processes. Some students (12 out of 25) can identify the basic components of a lab report and lab safety techniques. Most students (20 out of 25) can identify the steps of the scientific inquiry process. Therefore, the Objective targets the underlying tenets of Biology, including the organization of the field, vocabulary, procedures for experiments, and classification of organisms, but we only need to briefly review the scientific inquiry process.

11 out of 27 students scored on “Average” or “Above Average” on 5th grade AIMSWeb Math. Most of these students (9 out of 11) have mastered addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of whole numbers and fractions. Few of these students (2 out 11) can use proportional reasoning to solve mathematical problems. 9 out of 27 students are “Well Below Average.” These students struggle with basic number and operations skills, including multiple digit subtraction, multiplication and division of whole numbers and fractions. According to CCSS, the class overall performed best on Data and Analysis questions on AIMSWeb but lowest on Algebra questions.

What do the criteria mean for teachers?

1) Rationale should reference any school or district goals identified in the improvement plan. If literacy is an identified area for student improvement in the school improvement plan, the teacher’s Objective and Rationale should align with that goal. Make sure that what you are


doing in your classroom aligns with any district or school-wide initiatives, so that everyone is working towards those same goals.

2) Ensure that your Rationale supports the Objective and that the Strategies you identified earlier match this Rationale. If your Objective mentions that students will improve their ability to add, subtract, multiply, and divide fractions, your Rationale should state the reason why your students are learning those skills (e.g. it prepares them for the next math course and builds off their existing conceptual knowledge of fractions). Additionally, your Strategies section should be able to help you implement that instruction (e.g. use of small and large group instruction to target specific student needs, learning centers with different fractions activities, use of manipulatives to help students develop a conceptual understanding of using fractions, differentiated instruction since some students already have a stronger conceptual understanding of representing fractions).

3) Ensure that you are mentioning BOTH students’ strengths and needs. You will not need to target instruction to those skills students already have learned, but you will need to target instruction toward students’ needs. Additionally, you might have slightly different content or rigor for certain groups of students, based upon the Baseline analysis. Make sure you have examined data in multiple ways (whole group, student group, specific skills or concepts), and cite that analysis here.

By the end of this step, you will have a succinct 1-3 sentence statement in the fourth column of the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form, explaining why you have chosen your Objective, while referencing Baseline data and students’ strengths and needs. Think of this as explaining to your evaluator your thought process when establishing your content and strategies.


Step 5: Strategies All teachers must write Strategies within their Student Learning Objective (SLO). This is the fifth column of the SLO Framework. Strategies help connect the professional practice work of teacher evaluations with the student growth work. These strategies can be implemented in the classroom to help you achieve both your Professional Growth and student growth goals. Strategies also show the evaluator that you have a plan in place to help you achieve these goals.

Strategies are best developed after reviewing baseline data, but teachers can identify a few strategies before the baseline data is available (after the assessment and objective are identified). Teachers must identify at least one strategy to be implemented in the classroom.

Examples of Strategies include: Small- and whole-group work on a daily basis Learning centers Regular circulation Use of higher-order thinking questions Differentiated instruction Weekly newsletters home to families, with opportunities for family feedback

Joppa-Maple Grove has identified the following criteria for Strategies. Strategies must: Identify the model of instruction or key strategies to be used Be appropriate for learning content and skill level observed in assessment data provided

throughout the year Follows research-based best practices

What do these criteria mean for teachers?1) Teachers must identify at least one strategy to be implemented in the classroom.2) Strategies should be related to the curriculum.3) Strategies should be appropriate for that group of students, using data from

formative and summative assessments to determine student needs.4) Strategies should be based upon research. Teachers can use previous PD to inform their

strategies. Examples from the 2011 Danielson Framework also offer excellent research-based practices (e.g. regular circulation during small group activities, students write their own rubrics and use them to inform their individual progress).

How to Identify Strategies:1) Complete a review of what you already know. Identify any previous Professional

Development and any resources, such as the curriculum or textbook. Reference any school-wide initiatives. Search the Internet or available research for effective and proven strategies.

2) In the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form, fifth column, write at least one strategy to be used to help students achieve their growth goals. Multiple strategies can be identified.

3) Once baseline data is available, review the identified strategy or strategies, and add to or revise the initial strategies identified.

4) Check the strategies against the established criteria.44 | J o p p a - M a p l e G r o v e U D # 3 8

Step 6: Assessment To begin, teachers identify the assessment they will be using to measure student growth. This is the second to last column from the right on the SLO Framework. High quality assessments generate high quality data that can be used to inform instruction and ensure accurate measures of student growth. Teachers can create standards-aligned items using the Standards-Aligned Assessment Tool (Appendix Z).

Each teacher will eventually need to use at least two assessments. This assessment can be teacher-created or a Type I (national) or Type II (district-wide) assessment, such as the AIMSWeb test or the Formative Benchmark tests. If the teacher creates his or her own assessment, the evaluator MUST approve the assessment before administering it. For teachers who are required to create both of their assessments, only one assessment is required in the first evaluation cycle.

Remember, assessments must be given at least twice per school year to measure growth (not attainment), according to the state law. Thus, teachers should administer a test at the beginning of the semester (within the first four weeks) and then give the same (or very similar) assessment at the end of the semester/year.

For any teacher-created assessment, the assessment must meet the following criteria: Administered in a consistent manner and data is secure Applicable to the purpose of the class and reflective of the skills students have the opportunity

to develop Produces timely and useful data Standardized; has the same content, administration, and results reporting for all students Aligned with state or district standards

What do these criteria mean for teachers?1) An assessment must be administered in a similar manner on both the pre- and post-test. So, if

you allow calculators or other materials on the post-test, students must be allowed the same access to those resources on the pre-test.

2) Data must be secure. Students should not able to view the test or answers ahead of time. Be careful when making copies – you do not want to send a student to make them.

3) A test must be applicable to the class and items must reflect the skills students have the opportunity to learn throughout the school year or semester, based upon your growth targets and instructional time with those students. Thus, a student in a 5th grade reading class should be given an assessment measuring those 5th grade skills, not 4th or 6th grade skills. If a test does not adequately assess those skills a student should learn, the evaluator may ask the teacher to create another assessment.

4) All assessments should produce timely and relevant data. Therefore, ensure that each item is standards-aligned, so you can use that data to determine which skills are most important to teach or which skills students have already mastered. Make sure that the assessment does not take an unusually long period of time – that might not produce the timely and manageable data you need to inform instruction.

5) Make sure that each administration of the assessment (e.g. pre- and post-test) tests for the same content or skills. The pre-test should look almost identical to the post-test. However, a math teacher might change around some numbers, a reading teacher might use the same reading passage but use different questions, as long as the post-assessment measures the same skills as the pre-test.


6) Teachers do not need to write the standards in the assessment, but teachers should refer to district or other standards when writing assessment items. Make sure you can justify each assessment item by being able to refer to a standard to which it is aligned. Use Common Core Standards when possible.

When identifying the assessment, state the name of the assessment in the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form, in the appropriate cell. If you are using a teacher-created assessment, briefly describe the assessment (e.g. 40 question multiple-choice Science test with one open-response). If you are using a teacher-created assessment, attach the assessment and note “see attached” in the appropriate space in the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form. If you are using a Type I assessment, such as AIMSWeb or DIBELS, note the test and subject you are using (e.g. AIMSWeb 4th Grade Math - Comp), just to clarify your process to the evaluator.

Example Assessments: 5th grade AIMSWeb Reading 20 multiple-choice Business test. See attached. (Teacher attaches the test) 5 open-response questions using a four-point writing rubric, aligned with CCSS Writing

Standards for 10th grade. See attached. (Teacher attaches the test) One-mile run and strength test (sit-ups or push-ups). Students are timed in the mile run.

Then, students must complete as many sit-ups or push-ups in one minute.


Step 7: Targeted Growth Once teachers have an understanding of where students start, teachers can determine how much students will grow by the end of the evaluation cycle or course. For this, teachers can refer to the last column of the SLO Framework.

As previously discussed, teachers can use the following data to inform the setting of growth targets: Formative assessments Previous student grades Previous achievement data Attendance data Student criteria (e.g. SPED, ELL)

So, teachers should already have a good understanding of students’ strengths and students’ needs. Growth targets are the most crucial pieces of a high quality SLO. Knowing the criteria the district has provided, along with some additional best practices, can help teachers create ambitious yet feasible growth targets for their students. Teachers should have high expectations of their students, yet these growth targets should also be reasonable and attainable.

Joppa-Maple Grove has identified the following criteria for Growth Targets. Maximum of 5 tiers Expressed in whole numbers Encourage collaboration, but teachers can set distinct targets Based upon pre-assessments data Allowable baseline data can include: assessment tools, formative assessments,

previous student grades, previous achievement data, attendance data, student criteria Students can uphold high achievement Quantifiable goals


1) Teachers can create a target with up to five tiers/groups of students. After pre-assessment data is gathered, students should be placed into tiers based on how they performed. The growth target would then identify which tier each student will be in after the post-assessment data. The tiers should be created and categorized based on reasonable and justifiable data (i.e. if the assessment is out of 100%, tiers could be in intervals of 20%). It is expected that the minimum growth target for all students will be to move up at least one tier. Special populations (i.e. IEP, ELL, etc.) may be an exception to this. However, even exceptions to the “one-tier” growth rule will be expected to attain reasonable growth as agreed upon by the teacher and evaluator.

2) Teachers should use whole numbers for consistency. Tier thresholds, growth targets, and student data should be reported as whole numbers. If all teachers use the same format, it will be easier for evaluators to analyze and verify the data.

3) Teachers should collaborate when setting these growth targets. Collaboration helps create consistency across the school, helping to ensure that a teacher will not be accused of creating too easy or hard a growth target. Teachers should look at similar students to determine how much students might be expected to grow. If a common assessment is given, similar students should have similar growth targets, even if they are not in the same class. Even if the


students’ scores look different across classes, the growth targets can be based upon one another. Example: Teacher B has many of the low performing Biology students in Biology 1. Teacher B expects his students to grow by at least 15 points from the pre-assessment to the post-assessment. Meanwhile, Teacher C, who had more of the higher performing Biology students, will expect her students to grow by at least 10 points, since we would expect less growth from students who are already near the top and have less to room to grow.

4) Based upon pre-assessments data. Growth targets are the amount of points or tiers students are expected to improve from the pre-test to the post-test. Teachers must use the pre-test data to base growth targets. Example: If you are using AIMSWeb math, you cannot “switch” to another assessment for growth targets. Whatever assessment you use as your pre-test should inform your Baseline analysis, Objective, and Rationale.

5) Teachers can use the following data to inform growth target setting: assessment tools, formative assessments, previous student grades, previous achievement data, attendance data, and student criteria. Remember, a multitude of sources can help you as the teacher to get a better understanding of how much a student might be expected to grow and how to group students into tiers. Two or more data points provide you more data than one pre-test.

6) Growth targets can uphold high achievement. This means that students who perform exceptionally well on the pre-test can be expected simply to maintain their high achievement. These students have little room to grow, so a teacher will ensure that these students maintain high achievement on this one assessment.Example: Tier/Group 5: Students who score above 90% on the pre-test will maintain 90% or better on the post-test, or Students who score in the “Far Above Average” on AIMSWeb Reading will remain in the “Far Above Average” on the post-test.

7) Quantifiable goals. Make sure you are using numerical targets to set growth targets. An evaluator will need to make sure your students hit their growth targets at the end of the evaluation cycle, so you want these goals to be as clear as possible.

Setting growth targets is a 5-step process:1) Examine Baseline Data and determine student needs. 2) Collaborate with other teachers, if possible3) Determine tiers/groups for students4) Set growth targets for each student5) Check to make sure you met all criteria

Be sure to write your tiers/groups and the growth targets for each tier/group in the last column in the SLO Framework – Teacher’s Form.

Congrats! You have now successfully written an SLO! Now, it’s time to get back to the classroom to begin implementing your plan!


Summative Student Growth Rating

The summative student growth rating will be determined by averaging SLO scores. The teacher scores each SLO and determines the percent of students who met their Growth Target on each. The teacher submits these scores to the evaluator, along with all student growth data, to the evaluator prior to the Summative Conference.

The process for determining the summative student growth rating is as follows: The teacher calculates the percent of students who meet their Growth Target on each SLO.

There should be two percentages – one for each SLO used.

The percentages are averaged to determine the percent to be used for the summative student growth rating. The table below displays student growth thresholds and the accompanying category rating.

Rating Category Student Growth Threshold Student Growth Rating ScoreExcellent 80% and up 3Proficient 65% up to (not including) 80% 2

Needs Improvement 50% up to (not including) 65% 1Unsatisfactory Less than 50% 0

If the teacher only has two SLOs and one SLO is rated “Unsatisfactory” and the other is rated “Excellent,” the evaluator must collect further evidence to assign a rating. If the teacher disagrees with the rating, he/she can appeal to the Joint Committee.

Example: A teacher has the following SLOs: SLO 1: 64% of students met growth targets SLO 2: 85% of students met growth targets

Step 1: Average the percentages for each SLO.64 + 85 = 149149/2 = 74.5

Step 2: A student growth rating will be assigned based on the average. In this example, 74.5% falls into the proficient category. Thus, the student growth rating score will be calculated as a 2.

Summative Performance Evaluation Rating

At the end of the evaluation cycle, the summative student growth rating will be combined with the professional practice rating for each teacher to determine the summative performance evaluation rating. Note that the student growth rating is determined by multiple (at least two) SLO scores. The percent of students who meet their intended growth target on both SLO’s will be averaged together to determine the overall Student Growth rating. The Student Growth rating will be multiplied by 30% (0.3) and the Professional Practice rating will be multiplied by 70% (0.7). These scores will then be combined to yield the overall Summative Rating. The following table includes Summative Rating thresholds.


Summative Rating Numerical Value Summative Rating Category2.6 or higher Excellent2.0 up to (but not including) 2.6 Proficient1.2 up to (but not including) 2.0 Needs ImprovementLess than 1.2 Unsatisfactory

Example 1: The teacher from the previous example has a Student Growth rating of Proficient, which corresponds to a score of 2. This same teacher attained a Professional Practice rating score of 2.94. The summative performance evaluation rating would be determined as follows:

30% x 2 + 70% x 2.84 = 2.588, which would result in a “Proficient” for the summative rating.

There will be no summative rating assigned until all evidence is collected and analyzed at the end of the evaluation cycle. However, evaluators are expected to provide specific, meaningful, and written feedback on performance following any and all observations.

All summative reports will be discussed with the teacher during the Summative Conference and delivered to the teacher in writing.

Summative evaluation reports will be completed prior to the March Board Meeting.

Support

Training will be provided through Professional Development. Teachers will be trained in the new system throughout the school year. Evaluators will receive supplemental training, in addition to the prequalification training mandated by the state, in order to better understand and implement the new evaluation system and support teachers. The training areas of focus are grouped into the following categories:

The Danielson Framework SLO Development Student Growth Measurement SLO Scoring and Performance Rating Determination System Requirements

Any teacher receiving an “Unsatisfactory” summative performance evaluation rating will develop a remediation plan with an evaluator, which will include appropriate professional development, in order to improve performance. Any teacher receiving a “Needs Improvement” rating will develop a Professional Assistance Plan, in collaboration with an administrator.


Key Terms – Student Growth

1) Assessment – means any instrument that measures a student's acquisition of specific knowledge and skills.

2) Attainment – a “point in time” measure of student proficiency which compares the measured proficiency rate with a pre-defined goal.

3) Depth of Knowledge (DOK) – the level of rigor of assessment questions, categorized into four levels of increasing rigor: Recall, Skill/Content, Strategic Thinking, and Extended Thinking.

4) Design Committee – a committee composed of equal representation selected by the district and its teachers or, when applicable, the exclusive bargaining representative of its teachers, which shall have the duties regarding the establishment of a performance evaluation plan that incorporates data and indicators of student growth as a significant factor in rating teacher performance.

5) Learning Objective – a targeted long-term goal for advancing student learning.6) Performance Evaluation Rating – the final rating of a teacher’s performance, using the rating

levels of “Unsatisfactory,” “Needs Improvement,” “Proficient,” and “Excellent” that includes consideration of both data and indicators of student growth, when applicable under Section 24A-25 of the School Code.

7) Revising SLOs – the window that includes the review and revision of the SLO, specifically revision of growth targets and the student population

8) Scoring SLOs – the window that includes the scoring of the assessment, the final submission of the SLO, and the scoring of the SLO against performance thresholds

9) Setting/Approving SLOs – the window that includes the creation and approval of the SLO and its component parts, including learning objective, growth target, and assessment

10) Student Growth – demonstrable change in a student's or group of students' knowledge or skills, as evidenced by gain and/or attainment on two or more assessments, between two or more points in time.”

11) Student Growth Exemption – The law provides exemptions from the student growth requirement for various specialized disciplines, including but not limited to; school counselor, school psychologist, nonteaching school speech and language pathologist, non-teaching school nurse, or school social worker.

12) Student Learning Objective (SLO) - targets of student growth that teachers set at the start of the school year and strive to achieve by the end of the semester or school year. These targets are based on a thorough review of available data reflecting students' baseline skills and are set and approved after collaboration and consultation with colleagues and administrators.

13) Summative Student Growth Rating – the final student growth rating, after combining the scores of multiple SLOs

14) Type I Assessment – a reliable assessment that measures a certain group or subset of students in the same manner with the same potential assessment items, is scored by a non-district entity, and is administered either statewide or beyond Illinois. Examples include assessments available from the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA), Scantron Performance Series, Star Reading Enterprise, College Board's SAT, Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate examinations, or ACT's EPAS® (i.e., Educational Planning and Assessment System).


References

Appendix A: Danielson’s Framework for Teaching – Domains Explained

The Framework for Teaching is organized in a four-square grid, with domains displayed in a clockwise order. This design choice is deliberate; it reminds us that the planning precedes the work in the classroom, a strong classroom environment must be in place for instruction to occur, and upholding professional responsibilities leads to better planning. Each domain has 5-6 components, which describe distinct aspects of teaching practice.

Framework for TeachingDomain 1: Planning and Preparation

1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy

1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students

1c: Setting instructional outcomes

1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources

1e: Designing coherent instruction

1f: Designing student assessment

Domain 2: The Classroom Environment

2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport.

2b: Establishing a culture for learning

2c: Managing classroom procedures

2d: Managing student behavior

2e: Organizing physical space

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities

4a: Reflecting on teaching

4b: Maintaining accurate records

4c: Communicating with families

4d: Participating in a professional community

4e: Growing and developing professionally

4f: Demonstrating professionalism

Domain 3: Instruction

3a: Communicating with students

3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques

3c: Engaging students in learning

3d: Using assessment in instruction

3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness


Appendix B: Details of Domain 1 - Planning and Preparation

Instructional planning includes a deep understanding of content and pedagogy and an understanding and appreciation of the students and what they bring to the educational encounter. But understanding the content is not sufficient; the content must be transformed through instructional design into sequences of activities and exercises that make it accessible to students. All elements of the instructional design – learning activities, materials, and strategies – must be appropriate to both the content and the students, and aligned with larger instructional goals. In their content and process, assessment techniques must also reflect the instructional outcomes and should serve to document student progress during and at the end of a teaching episode. Furthermore, in designing assessment strategies, teachers must consider their use for formative purposes, and how assessments can provide diagnostic opportunities for students to demonstrate their level of understanding during the instructional sequence, while there is still time to make adjustments.

Components and Elements Sample Evidence1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and PedagogyKnowledge of Content and the Structure of the DisciplineKnowledge of Prerequisite RelationshipsKnowledge of Content‐Related Pedagogy

History lesson connected to current events

1b. Demonstrating Knowledge of StudentsKnowledge of Child and Adolescent DevelopmentKnowledge of the Learning ProcessKnowledge of Students’ Skills, Knowledge, and Language ProficiencyKnowledge of Students’ Interests and Cultural HeritageKnowledge of Students’ Special Needs

Student inventory at the beginning of the year; used to inform lessons

1c. Setting Instructional OutcomesValue, Sequence, and AlignmentClarityBalanceSuitability for Diverse Learners

Teacher collaborated with other teachers to develop unit outcomes

1d. Demonstrating Knowledge of ResourcesResources for Classroom UseResources to Extend Content Knowledge and PedagogyResources for Students

Trade books used to develop and enhance lesson plans

1e. Designing Coherent InstructionLearning ActivitiesInstructional Materials and ResourcesInstructional GroupsLesson and Unit Structure

Reading groups prepared for students based on their abilities

1f. Designing Student Assessment Congruence with Instructional Outcomes Criteria and Standards Design of Formative Assessments

Rubric for grading persuasive essays designed by students


Appendix C: Details of Domain 2 - Classroom Environment

Teachers create a learning environment through positive interpersonal interactions, efficient routines and procedures, clear and consistent standards of conduct, and a safe physical environment that supports the learning purposes. In addition, the environment encourages students to take pride in their work and to assume responsibility for their learning. Students respond to the warmth and caring of teachers, their high expectations for achievement, and their commitment to students. Students feel safe with these teachers and know that they can count on the teachers to be fair and, when necessary, compassionate. Students are also sensitive to the subtle messages they receive from teachers as to their capabilities.The components of Domain 2 are not associated with the learning of any particular content; instead, they set the stage for all learning. The teacher establishes a comfortable and respectful classroom environment, which cultivates a culture for learning and creates a safe place for risk‐taking. The atmosphere is businesslike, with non‐instructional routines and procedures handled efficiently; student behavior is cooperative and non‐disruptive; and the physical environment conducive to learning.

Components and Elements Sample Evidence2a. Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport Teacher Interaction with Students Student Interactions with One Another

Teacher knelt next to student’s desk to answerquestion

2b. Establishing a Culture for Learning Importance of the Content Expectations for Learning and Achievement Student Pride in Work

Teacher modeled how she came to the answer of a math problem

2c. Managing Classroom Procedures Management of Instructional Groups Management of Transitions Management of Materials and Supplies Performance of Non‐Instructional Duties Supervision of Volunteers and Paraprofessionals

Students took attendance while teacher distributed materials for class work

2d. Managing Student Behavior Expectations Monitoring of Student Behavior Response to Student Misbehavior

All students had their eyes on the teacher as he was speaking

2e. Organizing Physical Space Safety and Accessibility

Arrangement of Furniture and Use of Physical Resources

Students asked teacher to close the window shades so she could see the overhead; teacher complied and thanked her for the good idea


Appendix D: Details of Domain 3 - Instruction

Domain 3 contains the components that are at the essential heart of teaching – the actual engagement of students in learning, through the vision of students developing complex understanding and participating in a community of learners. Students are engaged in meaningful work, which carries significance beyond the next test and is relevant to students’ lives.Teachers who excel in Domain 3 have finely honed instructional skills. Their work in the classroom is fluid and flexible; they can shift easily from one approach to another when the situation demands it. They seamlessly incorporate ideas and concepts from other parts of the curriculum into their explanations and activities. Their questions probe student thinking, and serve to extend understanding. They are attentive to different students in the class, and the degree to which they are thoughtfully engaged; they carefully monitor student understanding as they go (through well‐designed questions or activities) and make minor mid‐course corrections as needed. And above all, they promote the emergence of self‐directed learners fully engaged in the work at hand.

Components and Elements Sample Evidence3a. Communicating with Students Expectations for Learning Directions and Procedures Explanations of Content Use of Oral and Written Language

Directions for activity were written on the board before the class began

3b. Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Quality of Questions Discussion Techniques Student Participation

Teacher asked, “Do you think this action wasjustified?” Student answered. Teacher followed up: “How do you know?” Student responded.

3c. Engaging Students in Learning Activities and Assignments Grouping of Students Instructional Materials and Resources Structure and Pacing

All students worked in groups to read a text at their instructional level, discuss and respond in writing to questions

3d. Using Assessment in Instruction Assessment Criteria Monitoring of Student learning Feedback to Students

Student Self‐Assessment and Monitoring of Progress

Teacher circulated around the room and provided individual feedback to students

3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness Lesson Adjustment Response to Students Persistence

Teacher used a teachable moment: “Thanks for bringing that up! Let’s talk about the patterns we see on that chart.”


Appendix E: Details of Domain 4 - Professional Responsibilities

The components of Domain 4 are associated with being a true professional educator: they encompass the roles assumed outside of and in addition to those in the classroom with students. Students rarely observe these activities; parents and the larger community observe them only intermittently. But the activities are critical to preserving and enhancing the profession. Educators exercise some of them (for example, maintaining records and communicating with families) immediately upon entering the profession, since they are integral to their work with students.

Domain 4 consists of a wide range of professional responsibilities, from self‐reflection and professional growth, to participation in a professional community, to contributions made to the profession as a whole. The components alsoinclude interactions with the families of students, contacts with the larger community and advocacy for students. Domain 4 captures the essence of professionalism by teachers; teachers are, as a result of their skills in this domain, full members of the teaching profession, and committed to its enhancement.

Components and Elements Sample Evidence4a. Reflecting on Teaching Accuracy Use in Future Teaching

Teacher reflected on teaching and makesadjustments to plans: How can I improve? What would I change? Were my students engaged?

4b. Maintaining Accurate Records Student Completion of Assignments Student Progress in learning Non‐instructional Records

Anecdotal notes and records are updated daily

4c. Communicating with Families Information about the Instructional Program Information about Individual Students Engagement of Families in the Instructional Program

Planned evening tutorial for parents to learn how to access the new electronic grading system

4d. Participating in a Professional Community Relationships with Colleagues Involvement in a Culture of Professional Inquiry Service to the School Participation in School and District Projects

Participated in committee to select textbooks for the following year

4e. Growing and Developing ProfessionallyEnhancement of Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Skill Receptivity to Feedback from Colleagues Service to the Profession

Invited colleagues into teacher’s classroom to offer feedback on his teaching style

4f. Demonstrating Professionalism/ Attendance & Punctuality Integrity and Ethical Conduct Service to Students Advocacy Decision MakingCompliance to school and district regulations

Decision‐making in the classroom is supported by assessment data


Appendix F: Self-Reflection FormJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Self-Reflection Form

Teacher:

Date:

Evaluator:

Directions: Please carefully consider each component and element within the Danielson Framework. Place an “x” in the rating box (E=Excellent / P=Proficient / N=Needs Improvement / U=Unsatisfactory) that you believe best describes your current level of performance. Also, in the Component Strength/Growth column, insert any comments pertaining to areas of strength or growth that you find relevant and may lead to professional discussions during the Initial Conference.

Component/Element E P N U Component Strengths/Growth

1a Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy

Knowledge of Content and the Structure of the Discipline

Knowledge of Prerequisite Relationships

Knowledge of Content-Related Pedagogy

1b Demonstrating Knowledge of Students

Knowledge of Child and Adolescent Development

Knowledge of the Learning Process

Knowledge of Students’ Skills, Knowledge, and Language Proficiency

Knowledge of Students’ Interests and Cultural Heritage

Knowledge of Students’ Special Needs



1c Setting Instructional Outcomes

Value, Sequence, and Alignment

Clarity

Balance

Suitability for Diverse Learners

1d Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources

Resources for Classroom Use

Resources to Extend Content Knowledge and Pedagogy

Resources for Students

1e Designing Coherent Instruction

Learning Activities

Instructional Materials and Resources

Lesson and Unit Structure

1f Designing Student Assessment

Congruence with Instructional Outcomes

Criteria and Standards

Design of Formative Assessment

Use for Planning

2a Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport

Teacher Interaction with Students

Student Interaction with other Students



2b Establishing a Culture for Learning

Importance of the content

Expectations for Learning and Achievement

Student Pride in Work

2c Managing Classroom Procedures

Management of Instructional Groups

Management of Transitions

Management of materials and Supplies

Performance of Noninstructional Duties

Supervision of Volunteers and Paraprofessionals

2d Managing Student Behavior

Expectations

Monitoring of Student Behavior

Response to Student Misbehavior

2e Organizing Physical Space

Safety and Accessibility

Arrangement of Furniture and Use of Physical Resources

3a Communicating with Students

Expectations for Learning

Directions and Procedures

Explanations of Content

Use of Oral and Written Language

3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques

Quality of Questions



Discussion Techniques

Student Participation

3c Engaging Students in Learning

Activities and Assignments

Grouping of Students

Instructional Materials and Resources

Structure and Pacing

3d Using Assessment in Instruction

Assessment Criteria

Monitoring of Student Learning

Feedback to Students

Student Self-Monitoring of Progress

3e Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness

Lesson Adjustment

Response to Students

Persistence

4a Reflecting on Teaching

Accuracy

Use in Future Teaching

4b Maintaining Accurate Records

Student Completion of Assignments

Student Progress in Learning

Noninstructional Records

4c Communicating with Families

Information about the Instructional Program

Information about Individual Students



Engagement of Families in the Instructional Program

4d Participating in a Professional Community

Relationships with Colleagues

Involvement in a Culture of Professional Inquiry

Service to School

Participation in School and District Projects

4e Growing and Developing Professionally

Enhancement of Content Knowledge and Pedagogical Skill

Receptivity to Feedback from Colleagues

Service to the Profession

4f Showing Professionalism/ Attendance & Punctuality

Integrity and Ethical Conduct

Service to Students

Advocacy

Decision Making

Compliance with School and District Regulations

Attendance & Punctuality


Appendix G: Professional Growth GoalsJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Professional Growth Goals

Directions: Using your Self Reflection, relevant student learning data, evaluation feedback, previous professional learning, and prior growth plans, establish 2-3 areas of professional growth with your evaluator and list them below. These should be aligned with elements from the Danielson Framework for Teaching. Each of your goals is important, but you should rank your goals in order of priority. On the following pages, complete the growth plan form for each goal.

Teacher: Date:

Goal Component

1.

2.

3. (Optional)


Appendix H: Professional Growth Goals (Example)Joppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Professional Growth Goals (example)

Directions: Using your Self Reflection, relevant student learning data, evaluation feedback, previous professional learning, and prior growth plans, establish 2-3 areas of professional growth with your evaluator and list them below. These should be aligned with elements from the Danielson Framework for Teaching. Each of your goals is important, but you should rank your goals in order of priority. On the following pages, complete the growth plan form for each goal.

Teacher: ____________ Date: ___________

Goal Component

1.Increase skill in using writing workshop instructional model, with particular attention to modeling the writing process using my own work. By the end of the year, I will model three lessons for my grade-level team, and will develop a portfolio of my own writing that I have revised in front of students. 80% of the students will achieve 90% proficiency on each of the lessons.

1c 1e 1f

3a 3c 3d

4a

2.Increase collaborative learning in math by creating project-based lessons to allow students to work in groups. By the end of the year, I will develop, teach, and evaluate 6 lessons, and share them with the grade level team for feedback. 80% of the students will achieve 90% proficiency on each of the lessons.

1c 1e 1f

3a 3c 3d

4a

3. (Optional)Increase positive communication with parents of struggling students. By the end of the year, I will make at least 5 positive contacts with my 10 lowest-performing students’ families, and will update the student support team on their progress. Assessment of success will be anecdotal notes of improved student participation, attitude and commitment.

4b 4c


Appendix I: Professional Growth PlanJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Professional Growth Plan

Teacher Name: ___________________________________ Date: ___________________

Professional Growth Goal: # ____Overall Goal: Using your most recent evaluation and formative information, identify a professional growth goal below. Include how you will know that your goal has been achieved. Identify alignment to The Danielson Framework for Teaching.

Action Steps and Data: Include detailed steps and the data you will use to determine whether each benchmark is met.

Benchmarks and Data: Set benchmarks to check your progress throughout the year. Also include data you will use to ensure your progress is achieved at each benchmark.

Evidence of Achievement: How do you know that your goal has been met?

Action Step: 1__/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

Action Step: 2__/__/__ __/__/__ __/__/__

Action Step: 3(Opt.)__/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/


Appendix J: Professional Growth Plan (Example)Joppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Professional Growth Plan (Example)

Teacher Name: ______________________________________ Date: __________________

Prof. Growth Goal: # __1__Overall Goal: Increase skill in using writing workshop instructional model, with particular attention to modeling the writing process using my own work. By the end of the year, I will model three lessons for my grade-level team, and will develop a portfolio of my own writing that I have revised in front of students. 80% of the students will achieve 90% proficiency on each of the lessons.

Action Steps and Data: Include detailed steps and the data you will use to determine whether each benchmark is met.

Benchmarks and Data: Set benchmarks to check your progress throughout the year. Also include data you will use to ensure your progress is achieved at each benchmark.

Evidence of Achievement: How do you know that your goal has been met?

Action Step: 1

Develop 3 writing workshop lessons and present to students

10/15/14

Lesson plans

01/15/15

Lesson plans

03/01/15

Lesson plansPortfolio of lessons presented

Action Step: 2

Assess students after each lesson

10/15/14

Grade BookAssessments

01/15/15


03/01/15


Test resultsStudent Achievement

Action Step: 3(Opt.) __/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/ __/


Appendix K: Pre-Observation ReportJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Pre-Observation Report

The teachers should have this form filled out and given to the administrator prior to the Pre-Observation Conference. Both parties should use this form to direct discussion during the conference.

Name of TeacherSchoolGrade Level /SubjectName of ObserverDate of Pre-Observation ConferenceDate of Scheduled Classroom ObservationType of LessonLearning Outcomes (1c)

Evidence will be gathered in all components in domains 2 and 3. However, there might be specific components where additional feedback is requested. In the table below, circle the components within domains 2 and 3 that you would like the evaluator to pay special attention to during the lesson.

Component Focus Domain 2: 2a 2b 2c 2d 2eDomain 3: 3a 3b 3c 3d 3e

1. To which part of your curriculum does the lesson relate? (1e)

2. How does this learning “fit” in the sequence of learning for this class? (1b, 1e, 1a)

3. Briefly describe the students in this class, including those with special needs. (1b)

4. What do you want the students to understand? (1c, 1f)

5. How will you engage the students in the learning? What will you do? What will the students do? Will the students work in groups, or individually, or as a large group? Provide any worksheets or other materials the students will be using. (1d, 1e, 1a)

6. How will you differentiate instruction for different individuals or groups of students in the class? (1d, 1c)

7. How and when will you know whether the students have learned what you intend? (1f)

Appendix L: Domain 1 ReportJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38


Domain 1 - Planning and Preparation

Teacher: Date: Evaluator:

Component Indicators Evidence1aDemonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy

● Lesson and unit plans that reflect important concepts in the discipline

● Lesson and unit plans that accommodate prerequisite relationships among concepts and skills

● Clear and accurate classroom explanations ● Accurate answers to student questions ● Feedback to students that furthers learning● Inter-disciplinary connections in plans and

practice

1bDemonstrating Knowledge of Students

● Teacher gathers formal and informal information about students for use in planning instruction

● Teacher learns student interests and needs for use in planning

● Teacher participation in community events● Teacher-designed opportunities for families

to share heritage● Database of students with special needs

Component Indicators Evidence1cInstructional Outcomes

● Outcomes of a challenging cognitive level● Statements of student learning, not student

activity● Outcomes central to the discipline and

related to those in other disciplines● Permit assessment of student attainment● Differentiated for students of varied ability

Component Indicators Evidence1dDemonstrating

● District provided materials● Range of texts


Knowledge of Resources

● Guest speakers● Internet resources● Materials provided by professional

organizations● Teacher continuing professional education

courses or professional groups● Community Resources

1eDesigning Coherent Instruction

● Lessons that support instructional outcomes and reflect important concepts

● Instructional maps that indicate relationships to prior learning

● Activities that represent high-level thinking● Opportunities for student choice● The use of varied resources● Thoughtfully planned learning groups● Structured lesson plan

Component Indicators Evidence1fDesigning Student Assessments

● Lesson plans indicate correspondence between assessments and instructional outcomes

● Assessment types are suitable to the style of outcome

● Variety of performance opportunities for students

● Modified assessments are available for individual students as needed

● Expectations clearly written with descriptors for each level of performance

● Formative assessments are designed to inform minute-to-minute decision-making by the teacher during instruction


Appendix M: Domain 1 – Artifact ListJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Domain 1 - Planning and Preparation

Artifact List for Domain 1 (not all inclusive):

Examples of Possible Artifacts –Domain 1 1a. Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Continuing education in the content area Lesson plans incorporating best practices Sharing new knowledge with peers In-Service Training/Workshops in content area Active involvement in Professional Learning Communities (logs, team agendas) Trouble-shooting (teacher writes a list of commonly made student errors)

1b. Knowledge of Students Review cumulative file of student Personal Plans of Progress Instructional Grouping Techniques Student profile worksheets Index cards with student information Lesson plans reflecting differentiated instructions (awareness of students needing accommodations and awareness of developmental and cognitive abilities)

1c. Selecting Instructional Goals Lesson Plans (show relationship to district curriculum & state standards) Standards are posted in the classroom. Curriculum (map, calendar) Evidence of modified curriculum (intervention plans, IEPs, enrichment)

1d. Knowledge of Resources List of resources with varying levels to accommodate students (notes, assessments, anecdotal records). Demonstration of school/community resources (library, Eureka College, local educational field trips). Classroom budget money is spent on substantive educational resources Record of human resources (i.e. speakers, parent volunteers, civic groups, classroom visitors, field trips). Evidence of collaboration and learning with peers and colleagues. Classroom Inventory

1e. Designing Coherent Instruction Lesson plans show progression of complexity Curriculum Mapping Teacher & student reflection of lessons, learning, or feedback (written or oral). Student developed rubric (teacher) tied to specific goals. Meaningful/respectful tasks

1f. Assessing Student Learning Assignments & assessments including standards that are clearly identified. Documentation of how student learning of standards is assessed. Performance assessment tasks (student samples-exemplary) Rubrics Student portfolios with reflection


Vary assessment techniques meeting all learning styles.

Appendix N: Post-Observation ReportJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Post-Observation Report The teacher is required to complete this form and turn it in to the administrator prior to or at the post-observation conference.

Name of Teacher: Date of Observation: Date of Scheduled Post-Observation Conference: 1. In general, how successful was the lesson? Did the students learn what you intended for them to learn? How do you know? (3d, 4a)

2. If you were able to bring samples of student work, what do those samples reveal about those students’ levels of engagement and understanding? (3d, 3c)

3. Comment on your classroom procedures, student conduct, and your use of physical space. To what extent did these contribute to student learning? (2c, 2d, 2e)

4. Did you depart from your plan? If so, how, and why? (3e)

5. Comment on different aspects of your instructional delivery (i.e. activities, grouping of students, materials and resources.) To what extent were they effective? (2a, 2b, 3c, 3e, 1d, 1e)

6. If you had a chance to teach this lesson again to the same group of students, what do you do differently, from planning through execution? (4a)


Appendix O: Post-Observation Report (Example)Joppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Sample Post-Observation Report The teacher is required to complete this form and turn it in to the administrator prior to or at the post-observation conference.

Name of Teacher: John Q. Public Date of Observation: 9/17/11 Date of Scheduled Post-Observation Conference: 9/24/11 1. In general, how successful was the lesson? Did the students learn what you intended for them to learn? How do you know? (3d, 4a) I thought the read aloud and discussion went well. However, the students at centers need more guidance to successfully work independently.

2. If you were able to bring samples of student work, what do those samples reveal about those students’ levels of engagement and understanding? (3d, 3c) 90% of the students' sketches and summaries showed mastery. All students were engaged during the lesson and 10% of the students need additional follow-up. 75% of center work was successfully completed according to the rubric. Not all students were engaged and 25% need additional time to complete the assignment.

3. Comment on your classroom procedures, student conduct, and your use of physical space. To what extent did these contribute to student learning? (2c, 2d, 2e) Desks should have been pre-arranged in groups because it wasted instructional time. Rug areas is large enough to accommodate the entire class comfortably. Students were clear on instructions and rotation schedule. They were also posted as a reference. However, some students did not self-monitor in order to complete the assignment in the allotted time.

4. Did you depart from your plan? If so, how, and why? (3e) Yes, I took the kids to the bathroom because more than one student asked to go to the bathroom and this took ten minutes.

5. Comment on different aspects of your instructional delivery (eg., activities, grouping of students, materials and resources.) To what extent were they effective? (2a, 2b, 3c, 3e, 1d, 1e) The read-aloud was engaging to the students because they could relate to the main character. Most students also enjoy drawing so they were involved in sketching the story. The written instructions and models were an effective support for students at the centers. The guided reading lesson was successful because the text was at the students' instructional level.

6. If you had a chance to teach this lesson again to the same group of students, what do you do differently, from planning through execution? (4a) I would prearrange the seats into groups for centers. I would not take the whole class to the bathroom but refer them to the "pass procedure" already established. I would consistently enforce the classroom


rules. I would spend more time establishing the procedures/expectations for working in centers.

Appendix P: Domain 4 ReportJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities

Teacher:Date:Evaluator:

Component Indicators Evidence4aReflecting on Teaching

● Accurate reflections on a lesson● Citations of adjustments to practice,

drawing on a repertoire of strategies

4bMaintaining Accurate Records

● Routines and systems that track student completion of assignments

● Systems of information regarding student progress against instructional outcomes

● Processes of maintaining accurate non-instructional records

4cCommunicating with Families

● Frequent and culturally appropriate information sent home regarding the instructional program, and student progress

● Two-way communication between the teacher and families

● Frequent opportunities for families to engage in the learning process


Component Indicators Evidence4dParticipating in a Professional Learning Community

● Regular teacher participation with colleagues to share and plan for student success

● Regular teacher participation in professional courses or communities that emphasize improving practice

● Regular teacher participation in school activities

● Regular teacher participation and support of community initiatives

4eGrowing and Developing Professionally

● Frequent teacher attendance in courses and workshops; regular academic reading

● Participation in learning networks with colleagues; feedback freely shared

● Participation in professional organizations supporting academic inquiry

4fShowing Professionalism

● Teacher has a reputation as someone who can be trusted and is often sought as a sounding board

● During committee or planning work, teacher frequently reminds participants that the students are the utmost priority

● Teacher will support students, even in the face of difficult situations or conflicting policies

● Teachers challenge existing practice in order to put students first

● Teacher consistently fulfills school district mandates regarding policies


and procedures


Appendix Q: Domain 4 Artifact ListJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities

Artifact List for Domain 4 (not all inclusive):

Examples of Possible Artifacts – Domain 4 4a. Reflecting on Teaching Written reflection on a lesson taught Lesson plans with reflective notations Pre and Post Tests with explanations Projects/Portfolios Student and/or Parent Survey Samples of Student Work Peer Observations

4b. Maintaining Accurate Records Copy of Gradebook Copy of Seating Chart Copy of Lesson Plan Book Copy of Classroom Budget and/or Inventory Student Documentation

4c. Communicating with Families Parent Newsletter Notes to Parents Classroom Webpage Parent e-mails Letters to parents Conference Summaries Parent Nights

4d. Contributing to the School and District List of School and District Committees Record of outside activities that you sponsor Supplemental Assignments Volunteer and supervision activities

4e. Growing and Developing Professionally Summaries of workshops attended Reading Current Literature Best Practices Website reviews National Board Certification Mentoring Supervising Student Teachers Professional organization membership

4f. Showing Professionalism/Attendance & Punctuality Professional organization leadership roles Leadership roles in the school or in the community Student Advocacy


Attendance Records


Appendix R: Formal Observation ReportJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Formal Observation Report

Name of Teacher: __________________________________________

Name of Evaluator: _________________________________________

Date of Evaluation: _____/______/______

Exce

llent

Profi

cien

t

Nee

ds Im

prov

emen

t

Uns

atisf

acto

ry

DOMAIN 1: Planning and Preparation1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students1c: Setting instructional outcomes1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources & designing coherent instruction1e: Designing Coherent Instruction1f: Designing Student Assessments

DOMAIN 2: Classroom Environment2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport2b: Establishing a culture for learning2c: Managing classroom procedures2d: Managing student behavior2e: Organizing Physical Space

DOMAIN 3: Instruction3a: Communicating with students3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques3c: Engaging students in learning3d: Using assessment in instruction3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness

DOMAIN 4: Professional Responsibilities 4a: Reflecting on teaching4b: Maintaining Accurate Records4c: Communicating with families4d: Participating in a professional community4e: Growing and developing professionally4f: Demonstrating professionalism/attendance & punctuality


Domain / Component Documentation

Strength

Weakness

Note: The signature of the evaluator and teacher verifies that the report has been reviewed and that the proper process has been followed. Signature does not indicate teacher agreement with evaluator.

Teacher Signature: _______________________ Evaluator Signature: _______________________


Appendix S: Professional Practice Summative Evaluation ReportJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Professional Practice Summative Evaluation Report

Name of Teacher: __________________________________________

Name of Evaluator: _________________________________________

Date of Evaluation: _____/______/______

Exce

llent

Profi

cien

t

Nee

ds Im

prov

emen

t

Uns

atisf

acto

ry

DOMAIN 1: Planning and Preparation1a: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy1b: Demonstrating knowledge of students1c: Setting instructional outcomes1d: Demonstrating knowledge of resources & designing coherent instruction1e: Designing Coherent Instruction1f: Designing Student Assessments

Overall rating for DOMAIN 1DOMAIN 2: Classroom Environment2a: Creating an environment of respect and rapport2b: Establishing a culture for learning2c: Managing classroom procedures2d: Managing student behavior2e:Organizing Physical Space

Overall rating for DOMAIN 2DOMAIN 3: Instruction3a: Communicating with students3b: Using questioning and discussion techniques3c: Engaging students in learning3d: Using assessment in instruction3e: Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness

Overall rating for DOMAIN 3DOMAIN 4: Professional Responsibilities 4a: Reflecting on teaching4b: Maintaining Accurate Records4c: Communicating with families4d: Participating in a professional community4e: Growing and developing professionally4f: Demonstrating professionalism/attendance & punctuality

Overall rating for DOMAIN 4

PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE SUMMATIVE RATING: __________


Domain / Component Documentation

Strength

Weakness


Teacher Signature: _______________________ Evaluator Signature: _______________________


Appendix T: Professional Assistance PlanJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Participant: Date:

Grade/Content Area:School Year:

List the components which have been identified as an area in need of ImprovementComponent # Component Description

For each Component listed above, write a plan for support and/or professional development that can be provided by the administration.

________________________ ___________________________Teacher Signature/Date Administrator Signature/Date


Appendix U: Notification of Needs Improvement/Unsatisfactory PerformanceJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Educator: ______________________________ Evaluator: ______________________________

Evaluation Period: _______________________

Official Notice – Rating has been determined and is "Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” Unofficial Notice – Rating has not been determined but could be “N.I.” or “Unsatisfactory”

The evaluator is responsible for making the initial recommendation concerning a teacher’s future employment status within Joppa-Maple Grove Unit District # 38. This form constitutes notice, either official or unofficial, from your immediate supervisor that your performance in the area(s) indicated has been determined to be in the “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” rating areas. If this is an unofficial notice, the evaluator has determined that performance up to this point may result in a rating of “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory.” Areas Requiring Improvement:1.

2.

3.

This notification has been discussed with the certified employee. The employee acknowledges receipt of this form. If this is an official notification, either a Professional Assistance Plan or a Remediation Plan will be developed collaboratively between the educator and the evaluator. If this is an unofficial notification, the evaluation cycle will be completed before a plan is developed.

Date/Time Meeting to Develop Action Plan: Date: ____________ Time: ___________

Joppa-Maple Grove Unit School District #38’s Action Plan for the teacher is to be developed collaboratively between the educator and the evaluator. The educator will bring ideas to the Action Plan Development Meeting for the area(s) requiring improvement. The ideas must include, but are not limited to the following:

1) Proposed corrective actions which will improve the educator’s performance; 2) Actions which reflect evidence of sufficient improvement in the unsatisfactory area(s).

______________________ __________ _______________________ __________Educator’s Signature Date Evaluator’s Signature Date

The educator’s signature on this form does not necessarily indicate agreement. As soon as this form is complete and the Action Plan has been developed a copy of each will be given to the employee, the Principal, and the Superintendent.


Appendix V: Remediation PlanJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Remediation Plan

Educator: ____________________________ School: _________________________

Assignment: __________________________ Date: __________________________

Evaluator: ___________________________

Unsatisfactory area(s) requiring improvement:

Plan of action and resources recommended for corrective action:

Evidence of sufficient improvement will include:

Target date for completion of remediation plan:

Evaluator should complete this section after remediation plan has been completed.Summary of progress of remediation plan:

Recommendations: 1. Return to regular evaluation cycle. 2. Continue Remediation for a specific agreed upon time. 3. Initiate non-renewal procedures.

Signature of Educator: ________________________ Date: ___________

Signature of Evaluator: ________________________ Date: ___________

Signature indicates that a copy of this form was received and reviewed with the educator. This does not necessarily indicate agreement.


Appendix W: Informal Observation FormJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Informal Observation Form (Domains 2 & 3)

Educator ___________________________ Subject _________________________ Date ____________

Observer _______________________ Class Period /Grade ______Time In ________ Time Out _______

2a. Respect and Rapport *Educator Interaction with Students * Student Interaction

2c. Managing Classroom Procedures* Instructional groups *Transitions * Materials & supplies * Non-Instructional duties * Volunteers and paraprofessionals

2b. Establishing a culture for Learning*Importance of content * Student pride in work *Expectations for learning and achievement

2d. Managing Student Behavior*Expectations * Monitoring of student behavior *Response to student behavior


2e. Organizing Physical Space* Safety and arrangement of furniture *Accessibility to learning and use of physical resources

3c. Engaging Students in Learning*Representation of content * Activities and assignments *Groups of students * Instructional materials and resources * structure and pacing

3a. Communicating Clearly and Accurately*Directions and procedures * Oral and written language

3d. Providing Feedback to Students*Quality: accurate, substantive, constructive, and specific *Timeliness

3b. Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques*Quality of questions * Discussion techniques * Student participation

3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness*Lesson adjustments *Response to students *Persistence


Appendix X: Observation LogJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

OBSERVATION LOG

Teacher: __________________________________ Evaluator: ______________________________

Class: ______________________________ Period: __________ Date: _____________________

Type of Observation: ___________________ Time In: _________ Time Out: _________________

Time Teacher Student Component + / -



Teacher Signature: __________________________ Evaluator Signature: _________________________

Appendix Y: Approval Guide – Type III AssessmentsJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Teacher: ______________________________ Course/Class: _________________________

Directions: For any Type III assessment used for SLOs, it is required that teachers complete the steps below, using the Standards Alignment and Coverage Check Chart, Rigor Analysis Chart, and Assessment Approval Rubric.

1) Using the assessment and any applicable scoring guide/rubric, identify which standards align to which items or tasks on your assessment. Use National Common Core State Standards, if applicable. Type standards next to assessment questions. Then, use the Standards Alignment and Coverage Check Chart to note which questions are aligned to which standards and to ensure that each standard is covered by sufficient number of items or tasks. Attach this chart to the assessment. Note: Not all performance-based assessments may need several tasks for each standard, but all tasks should be aligned to standards. Thus, even teachers using performance- based assessments must align any tasks to standards using the Standards Alignment and Coverage Check Chart.

2) Use the Assessment Rigor Analysis Chart to give examples of assessment questions/tasks that fall under various levels of the Depth of Knowledge Framework. Note: Not all questions must be categorized, but there must be sufficient examples given of questions meeting at least three levels of rigor. Attach this chart to the assessment.

3) Review the format of the assessment questions. Check for the following: Are questions/tasks written clearly? Are there a variety of types of questions/tasks? Are the questions/tasks free of bias? Are the questions appropriate for the subject/grade level?

4) If the assessment(s) will need to be adapted for students with special needs, please specify any changes below:

5) What is the content mastery score on this assessment? In other words, what score should students receive to indicate that they have mastered the Learning Objective for this course?

Please return this form to your primary evaluator, along with a copy of the assessment(s), Standards Alignment and Coverage Check Chart, Assessment Rigor Analysis Chart, and any additional supporting materials (rubrics, scoring guides, etc).

Adapted from: Indiana Department of Education RISE Evaluation and Development System. Student Learning Objectives Handbook Version 2.0. 30 January 2013. Accessed at http://www.riseindiana.org/sites/default/files/files/Student%20Learning%20Objectives%20Handbook%202%200%20final%284%29.pdf


Appendix Z: Standards Alignment and Coverage CheckJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Teacher(s): ______________________________ Course/Class: ________________________

Directions: After aligning assessment items or tasks to any available standards, use the chart below to list assessment questions with the corresponding standards to which they are aligned. Only fill in the total number of standards that apply.

Standard: Standard Description Question Numbers/Tasks


Appendix AA: Assessment Rigor Analysis – Depth of Knowledge (DOK)Joppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Teacher(s): ______________________________ Course/Class: ________________________

Directions: Use the chart below to categorize assessment questions, if applicable. Rigor increases as you go down the chart. While not all questions need be categorized, there must be sufficient examples of at least three levels of rigor.

Level Learner Action Key Actions Sample Question Stems QuestionLevel 1: Recall

Requires simple recall of such information as a fact, definition, term, or simple procedure

List, Tell, Define, Label, Identify, Name, State, Write, Locate, Find, Match, Measure, Repeat, Indicate, Show

How many...?Label parts of the…. Find the meaning of...Which is true or false...? Point to …Show me (the time signature/the piece of Renaissance art).Identify (which instrument is playing/the art form/home plate/the end zone)

Level 2: Skill/Concept

Involves some mental skills,concepts, or processing beyond a habitual response; students must make some decisions about how to approach a problem or activity

Estimate, Compare, Organize,Interpret, Modify, Predict, Cause/Effect, Summarize, Graph, Classify, Describe, Perform a Technical Skill, Perform a Skill with Accuracy

Identify patterns in...Use context clues to...Predict what will happen when...What differences exist between...?If x occurs, y will….Shoot 10 lay-ups in a minute, 5 free throws (out of 10 shots), and remain in control of dribbling the ball for 1 minute.Memorize and perform a theatrical scene with at least85% accuracy in terms of line memorization, cues, and staging.Perform a piece of music with technical accuracy. Demonstrate knowledge and skills to create works of visual art using sketching and constructing.

Level 3:StrategicThinking

Requires reasoning,planning, using evidence, problem-solving, and thinking at a higher level

Critique, Formulate,Hypothesize, Construct, Revise, Investigate, Differentiate, Compare, Argue, Perform a task using Problem-solving, Writing with Textual Analysis and

Construct a defense of….Can you illustrate the concept of…? Apply the method used to determine...? What might happen if….?Use evidence to support….Sing or play with expression and accuracy a variety of music representing diverse cultures and styles.Use problem-solving to perform an appropriatebasketball/football/baseball play in a given scenario(e.g. complete a double play, set up a basketball screen, run the spread offense for a first down).


Support Demonstrate knowledge and skills to create 2- and 3- dimensional works and time arts.

Level 4: Extended Thinking

Requires complex reasoning, planning, developing, thinking, designing, creating, and evaluating, most likely over an extended time. Cognitive demands are high, and students are required to make connections both within and among subject domains. Student may use orperform a variety of methods or mediums to convey complex ideas or solve problems.

Design, Connect, Synthesize, Apply, Critique, Analyze, Create, Prove, Evaluate, Design, Create and Perform Complex Performance- or Project-Based Assessment Tasks

Design x in order to….. Develop a proposal to…. Create a model that…. Critique the notion that….Evaluate which tools or creative processes are best forx theatre or musical production.Create and perform a complex work of art using a variety of techniques, technologies and resources and independent decision making.Perform a complex musical piece with a high level of expression and accuracy.Design and perform a complex basketball or footballplay appropriate for a given situation.Evaluate and perform various offensive plays or movements in a basketball/football/baseball game, based upon the defensive scenario.Evaluate the use of various mediums to communicate ideas and construct 2 and 3 dimension works of art using these mediums.


Appendix BB: Assessment Approval Rubric – Type III AssessmentsJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38

Excellent Proficient Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory

Asse

ssm

ent Contains all items

from Proficient category AND: Items represent all

4 DOK levels/tasks Extends and

deepens understanding of each student’s level of achievement

Uses a collaborative scoring process

Uses a variety of item types to accurately gauge student growth

Items represent at least 3 DOK levels/tasks

Grade level appropriate for class/course

Scoring is objective (includes scoring guides/rubrics)

Item type and length of assessment is appropriate for grade level/subject

Sufficient number of standards, based upon course or subject and grade level, with at least 5 standards covered (excluding any applicable performance-based assessment)

3-5 items or tasks for each standard/skill to be assessed for content-area subjects

Question stem and answers choices are clear, free from bias, and do not cue the correct answer

Items represent only 2 DOK levels/tasks

Grade level appropriate for class/course

Scoring may be subjective, and the scoring guide/rubric does not adequately describe the critical elements of the task for each performance level

Either the item type or length of assessment is insufficient for the grade-level/subject

Question stem or answer choices indicate bias

Question stem or answer choices cue the correct answer

Question stem or answer responses are either too broad or too narrow to elicit the intended response.

Items represent only 1 DOK level/task

Inappropriate for the grade level for the class/course

No scoring guide/rubric is provided

Both item type or length of assessment is insufficient for the grade-level/subject

Question stem or answer choices indicate bias

Question stem or answer choices cue the correct answer

Question stem or answer choices are unclear and invite a wide range of responses.

I approve of this assessment/task and any accompanying rubrics without further change.

Please make changes suggested in feedback below and resubmit the assessment/tasks and rubrics:

Signature of Evaluator: _________________________________ Date: _______________

Signature of Teacher: __________________________________ Date: _______________


Appendix CC: SLO Framework CriteriaJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38


Appendix DD: SLO Framework – Teacher’s FormJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38



Appendix EE: SLO ExamplesJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38




Appendix FF: Framework for Teaching Evaluation InstrumentJoppa-Maple Grove UD #38


Documents

· Web viewIn January 2010, the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA – Senate Bill 315; Public Act 96-0861) was passed by the Illinois General …