Grand Forks Public Schools Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Framework Teacher Growth and Evaluation Handbook 2016-2017
GRAND FORKS PUBLIC SCHOOLS Grand Forks, ND Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Framework Teacher Growth and Evaluation Handbook TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview... 2 Mission/Vision... 2 Purpose... 2 Acknowledgements... 2 Belief Statements... 4 Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Framework.....5 General Procedures of Documenting Performance of Teachers... 6 Observation Process... 7 Procedures for Evaluating Performance... 8 Procedures for Improving Performance... 11 General Procedures of Documenting Performance of Non-Classroom Teachers... 11 Appendix A: Glossary.. 12 1
Overview Link to Strategic Plan To meet the demands of continued success as an organization and in response to both internal and external evaluation, Grand Forks Public Schools developed a strategic plan in August 2011 to guide the district into the future. Priority area number three of this plan states: Promote practices that attract and retain high quality staff. The following goal was created to achieve this priority: Develop a staff evaluation model that promotes effectiveness. The Strategic Plan commission district leadership to: Review the current research on evaluation models. Develop a plan for collaborative involvement of stakeholders in model development and implementation. Provide professional development for staff The teacher evaluation system of the Grand Forks Public Schools is integrated with several existing initiatives. Mission/Vision The Grand Forks Public Schools believes that teaching is a complex practice that demands high-quality educators. When given tools of support and time for reflection, high-quality teachers will adopt a growth mindset to learn new techniques for deliberate practice and continue to grow as professionals throughout their careers, consistently increasing student performance. Purpose The ultimate goal of any teacher evaluation system is to improve teaching and learning. The primary purpose of the Grand Forks Public School District teacher growth and evaluation process is to contribute to the successful achievement of the Strategic Plan by improving the quality of instruction as a means of increasing student achievement. This growth and evaluation process will allow teachers to further develop their expertise through personalized professional development that builds upon existing strengths and reveals and develops areas in need of growth. This growth and evaluation process will be a collaborative process between teachers and administrators that promotes self-assessment, instructional effectiveness and ongoing, continuous improvement. The purpose of the teacher growth and evaluation process is to incorporate standards of teaching into our practice but not to standardize teaching itself. Acknowledgements The process of selecting a teacher growth and evaluation model began in the fall of 2011. The District Staff Evaluation Committee, a group comprised of teachers, principals and specialists, was assembled by Dr.Terry Brenner, Director of Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development to research teacher evaluation models. This committee read The Art 2
and Science of Teaching (Marzano, 2007) and Teacher Evaluation: To Enhance Professional Practice (Danielson and McGreal, 2000), articles, conducted conference calls with school district Acknowledgements (cont d) and state level leaders across the country, participated in webinars, consulted with Dr. Laura Goe from the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality, and with Dr. Peggy Schooling from Learning Sciences International. Based on the research, belief statements were written, rigorous conversations resulted, and the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model was selected as being transparent with the committee s work. The Grand Forks Public School District recognizes the following individuals for their collective and remarkable work: Dr. Terry Brenner, Director of Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development, District Office Tracy Abentroth, Human Resources Manager, District Office Reyne Armbrust, Science Teacher, Red River High School Amy Bartsch, Grades 2/3 Teacher, Wilder Elementary School Bonnie Black, Speech/Language Pathologist, Lewis and Clark Elementary School Tim Delmore, Health and Physical Education Teacher, Red River High School Chris Douthit, Associate Principal, Valley Middle School Lynnette Greicar, Grade 2 Teacher, Century Elementary School Jill Grzadzielewski, English Teacher, Valley Middle School Angie Jonasson, Principal, Carl Ben Eielson School Buck Kasowski, Principal, Central High School Denise K. Loftus, Counselor, Phoenix, Wilder and Winship Elementary Schools Kim Sande, Grade 1 Teacher, Lake Agassiz Elementary School Brad Srur, Remedial Math Teacher, Phoenix Elementary School and GFEA President Jody Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning Selection of Marzano s Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model Dr. Robert Marzano s Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model is the product of decades of educational research. This research base aligns with our belief statements and is comprised of instructional behaviors that have been proven to increase student achievement. The purpose of the Marzano model is to develop teacher expertise as opposed to only scoring and rating teachers. The Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model is a causal model; if teachers use the strategies in this framework effectively, there will be a positive impact on student performance. This growth model acknowledges teachers can achieve continual improvement with focus, feedback and practice. The Marzano model is divided into 60 elements in 4 domains that recognize and value the complexity of teaching. Evaluation of teachers is based on multiple sources of evidence including classroom observations of varying lengths and personal reflection data. Rubrics used by raters in this model are in the form of developmental continuums, which allow teachers to see the potential progression in their expertise. This model, together with the software program, iobservation, is both teacher and administrator friendly. 3
Belief Statements In this document certified staff and teachers are used synonymously. 1. Teachers are committed to students and their learning. all students can learn equitable treatment recognize differences adjust practices to meet student needs foster self-esteem, character and civic-mindedness 2. Teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students. understands central concepts of content provide meaningful learning experiences use a variety of inquiry tools to encourage critical and analytical thinking 3. Teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning. maintain and alter the instructional setting for learner engagement variety of instructional techniques multiple methods of assessment that measure student growth and understanding clearly communicate student performance to parents 4. Teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience. model virtues expected of students such as: curiosity tolerance fairness respect for diversity appreciation of cultural differences ability to reason multiple perspectives that allow creativity and encourage risk taking problem-solving hard work/effort make principled judgments that provide sound practice based on literature and experience are lifelong learners critically examine practice and expand knowledge 5. Teachers are members of learning communities. collaborate with colleagues to continually improve instructional policy, curriculum development, and staff development 4
Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Framework Key Features Core of Effective Practices: Four Domains Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors (41 Elements) This domain targets observable teacher actions and strategies to be employed in the classroom that can directly impact student achievement. This domain will provide a framework for common language and practice across our district as well as a means to observation and feedback. These 41 elements are organized into sections entitled: Lesson Segments Involving Routine Events Lesson Segments Addressing Content Lesson Segments Enacted on the Spot Domain 2: Planning and Preparing (8 Elements) This domain provides the foundation for success in Domain 1 with careful consideration given to scaffolding, understanding and transfer of content, materials and technology and the variety of learning needs that exist in the classroom. Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching (5 Elements) This domain ensures that self-evaluation not only occurs, but also translates into a written plan (Individual Professional Growth Plan) for continued professional growth with adjustments made as progress is monitored. Domain 4: Collegiality and Professionalism (6 Elements) While this domain is not directly observable in classroom strategies and behaviors, collegiality and professionalism characteristics provide an environment conducive to the success of teachers and students. This domain addresses positive interactions, mentoring, adherence to rules and procedures and participation in district initiatives. 5
General Procedures of Documenting Performance of Teachers Self-Assessment The self-assessment questionnaire in iobservation (optional) will provide teachers the opportunity to learn how the design questions in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model can support their teaching practices. In the future this self-assessment tool will assist teachers in designing individual professional growth plans by careful reflection on strengths and weaknesses. Definition of Formal Observation scheduled visits by building principal preceded by a pre-conference, followed by a post-conference used in evaluation documented in iobservation long enough to observe entire lesson or class period Definition of Informal Observations announced or unannounced visits by building principal used in evaluation documented in iobservation 15-20 minutes in length Definition of Walkthroughs unannounced visits by building principal 3-5 minutes in length not used in evaluation documented in iobservation Definition of Category I Teachers Teachers who are in their first three years of service as a full-time certified teacher with the Grand Forks Public Schools. Category I Number of Formal Observations* Number of Informal Observations Number of Walkthroughs 2 *1 before Dec. 15 *final before Mar. 15 2-4 4-6 Only formal and informal observations contribute to the summative evaluation score. 6
General Procedures (continued) Definition of Category II Teachers Teachers who have over three years of completed service as a full-time certified teacher with the Grand Forks Public Schools. Category II Number of Formal Observations* Number of Informal Observations Number of Walkthroughs 1 2 2 Only formal and informal observations contribute to the summative evaluation score. *These charts represent minimum required observations; more may be conducted at the discretion of the principal. Definition of Category III Teachers Struggling teachers (Category III) are individuals who have been identified by a principal as needing additional time and professional development to meet targeted elements of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model. These teachers, together with their principal, will develop an Intensive Assistance Plan. Observation Process Formal Observation Process 1) Pre-Observation Conference The purpose of the pre-observation conference is to help teachers: clarify the lesson/unit goals specify what evidence will indicate the objectives are met by students anticipate approaches, strategies, decisions and how to monitor them establish a personal learning focus and processes for self-assessment Roles and Responsibilities of the Teacher participate in dialogue about teaching and learning brief the principal about classroom makeup, needs, levels, abilities and special needs revise the lesson based on the conversation bring completed pre-observation conference form and lesson goal(s) and objectives Roles and Responsibilities of the Principal schedule conference with teacher 2-3 days before observation clarify expectations with regard to the process question, probe and clarify gain as much information as possible about the lesson and instructional decision-making identify elements that principal and teacher determine are the focus of the lesson 7
Observation Process (continued) 2) Observation Principal: completes observation using iobservation to gather evidence sends the teacher feedback from the observation prior to the post observation conference 3) Post-Observation Conference The purpose of the post-observation process is to: summarize the lesson analyze student learning against the planned purpose develop new learning from the lesson consider ways this learning will impact future instruction reflect on how the process was helpful Roles and Responsibilities of the Teacher reflect on the lesson identify the impact this lesson had on student learning share evidence of student learning identify new insights, potential adjustments Roles and Responsibilities of the Principal schedule post-observation conference with teacher within 10 days of the observation clarify expectations regarding the process probe, clarify and affirm model a reflection process to include insights made during observation help teacher consider the impact the lesson had on student learning help teacher consider future adjustments Procedures for Evaluating Performance Element Performance Scales The Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model is a growth model for teachers as well as an evaluation tool. In Domain 1, Classroom Strategies and Behaviors, a growth continuum has been created in the form of performance scales for each of the 41 elements. The purpose of these scales is to first, provide a means for teachers to reflect against common language of instruction; and second, to provide a method to offer specific, timely feedback that guides teachers to action. A generic performance scale below shows the five ratings from 0 to 4. The words Target Strategy would be replaced with a strategy/element from Domain 1. During early learning and implementation of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model, lower scores are expected and should not be seen as criticism but rather as an opportunity for growth and learning. A brief explanation of each score follows. Not Applicable An observer can indicate that there were no instances during the observation when this particular strategy was applicable. This N/A rating does not count against the teacher. Not Using (0) When the observer sees an opportunity for a teacher to use a strategy that would enhance the instruction, but the teacher did not use it, the score for this strategy would be 0. 8
Procedures for Evaluating Performance (continued) Beginning (1) A rating of 1 indicates the teacher is beginning to implement this strategy. Developing (2) A score of 2 in the developing category means that the strategy was observed. A teacher receiving a 2 is working toward improving the use of this strategy. The strategy is evident at only a rudimentary level. The majority of students are either not monitored or are not displaying the desired effect of the strategy. Applying (3) A score of 3 indicates the teacher has effectively implemented this strategy, is gaining fluency and is focusing efforts on monitoring students understanding. The applying level describes teaching that has high probability of impacting student learning according to decades of research. This is A level teaching. Monitoring student learning can take many forms including feedback from students in the form of work samples, conferences, response rate strategies, looking, listening and responding. A teacher at the applying level may have students put the learning goal in their own words, then record and share it. There is evidence that most students have been monitored and have responded to the strategy. Innovating (4) At this level the teacher has gone beyond applying the strategy fluidly and seamlessly into instruction. At this expert level, the teacher has been able to make modifications and add creative, innovative methods that result in increased learning for students. The teacher is also able to demonstrate with student evidence how this innovation works better for groups of students and/or for individuals. This innovation results from monitoring student learning, takes repeated focused practice, and requires making intentional and purposeful adjustments and adaptations of the element/strategy. The strategy has been monitored and the desired effect is evident in all students. Weighting and Scoring for the Annual Evaluation Beginning in the 2016-2017 school year all Domains and Elements are subject to evaluation. The weighting of each Domain will be as follows: Domain 1: 68% Domain 2: 14% Domain 3: 8% Domain 4: 10% 9
Procedures for Evaluating Performance (continued) Summative Performance Scale Category I Highly Effective (4) Effective (3) Developing (2) Unsatisfactory (1) At least 65% of performance scale scores are at level 4 and 1% are at level 1 or 0. At least 65% of performance scale scores are at level 3 or higher. Less than 65% at level 3 or higher and less than 50% at level 1, 0. Greater than or equal to 50% at level 1, 0. Summative Performance Scale Category II Highly Effective (4) Effective (3) Developing (2) Unsatisfactory (1) At least 70% of performance scale scores are at level 4 and 1% are at level 1 or 0. At least 75% of performance scale scores are at level 3 or higher. Less than 75% at level 3 or higher and less than 50% at level 1, 0. Greater than or equal to 50% at level 1, 0. Summative Annual Evaluation Conference Purpose Each year building principals and teachers will discuss annual evaluation results together with the purpose of setting specific goals for improved instruction. Roles and Responsibilities of the Supervisor schedule meeting with teacher 2-3 days before conference provide teacher with access to annual evaluation prior to the conference review goals set by teacher for improved teacher performance and increased student learning based on iobservation data Roles and Responsibilities of the Teacher reflect on the summative annual evaluation provided by supervisor share evidence of student learning provide written goals for professional growth and increased student learning based on iobservation data 10
General Procedures of Documenting Performance of Non-Classroom Teachers The following groups will be exempt from the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model, however they will be evaluated and provided with formal written feedback: Occupational and Physical Therapists Social Workers School Psychologists School Counselors Special Education Coordinators Building Resource Coordinators Secondary Library Media Specialists Career Coordinators Procedures for Improving Teacher Performance A. Individual Professional Growth Plans All teachers (Categories I and II) will be required to formulate professional goals and upload these into iobservation. B. Intensive Assistance Plans Purpose of the Process To provide supportive and structured intensive assistance for struggling teachers* who are not meeting district expectations. *Struggling teachers (Category III) are individuals who have been identified by a principal as needing additional time and professional development to meet targeted elements of the Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Framework Teacher Evaluation Model. General Procedures Upon detection of performance that is below expectation, the evaluator will notify the employee in writing and clearly explain the gap between actual performance and desired performance. The notice will describe the unsatisfactory performance in any of the four domains. In recognition that performance improvement can be progressive, the administrator will carefully weigh the nature and impact of the performance gap. Where performance gap is small and/or of low significance and frequency, the administrator can initially intervene with informal coaching and feedback followed up by a Summary of Conference memorandum. Where a performance gap is large and /or of high significance and frequency, the administrator will intervene with the development of an Intensive Assistance Plan (IAP) or a formal notice as prescribed by North Dakota Century Code Chapter 15.1-15. Recommendations for improvement will be made with respect to performance that is unsatisfactory and assistance will be provided. Multiple formal and informal observations and/or other monitoring will be conducted and feedback will be provided to the teacher throughout the improvement process. The IAP will also have a specific timeline for completion of activities and evidence of improvement. Documentation of such an IAP will be housed in the teacher s personnel file at the district office. 11
Appendix A: Glossary 1. Category I Teacher: Teachers who are in the first three years of service as a fulltime certified teacher with the Grand Forks Public Schools. 2. Category II Teacher: Teachers who have over three years of completed service as a full-time certified teacher with the Grand Forks Public Schools. 3. Category III Teacher: Teachers identified as struggling by a building principal who need additional time and professional development to meet targeted elements of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model. 4. Classroom Teacher: Any full-time certified teacher who works with students as a whole class in a classroom, in small groups in resource rooms, or one-on-one inside or outside a regular classroom. 5. Design Questions: Nine questions in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model which are to be used by teachers to plan effective units and lessons. 6. Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors. This domain targets observable actions and elements/strategies to be employed in the classroom that can directly impact student achievement. The 41 elements/strategies are organized into three lesson segments. 7. Domain 2: Planning and Preparation. This domain provides the foundation for success of Domain 1 with careful consideration given to scaffolding, understanding and transfer of content, materials and technology and the variety of learning needs that exist in the classroom. There are 8 elements in this domain. 8. Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching. This domain ensures that self-evaluation not only occurs, but also translates into a written plan (Individual Professional Growth Plan) for continued professional growth with adjustments made as progress is monitored. There are 5 elements in this domain. 9. Domain 4: Collegiality and Professionalism. Characteristics of collegiality and professionalism provide an environment conducive to the success of teachers and students. This domain addresses positive interactions, mentoring, adherence to rules and procedures and participation in district initiatives. There are 6 elements in this domain. 10. Elements: Actions listed in the Marzano model that when employed correctly are likely to have a positive impact on student performance. This term is used interchangeably with strategy. 11. Element Performance Scales: Rubrics/continuums used during an observation that articulate distinct levels of knowledge and skill relative to specific elements/strategies. 12. Forms ( iobservation): Each element/strategy has its own form in iobservation. When an observation is conducted, the form provides space for observation comments, explanations and observed evidence. 13. Formal Observation: Scheduled visit of teacher by the principal in which complete lesson or class period is observed. This visit is preceded by a pre-conference and followed by a post-conference. It is documented in iobservation, and is used in the annual summative evaluation. 12
Appendix A: Glossary (continued) 14. Informal Observation: Announced or unannounced visit to the classroom by a principal. These observations are used in evaluation, are documented in iobservation and are 15-20 minutes in length. 15. Individual Professional Growth Plans: All teachers will develop Individual Professional Growth Plans (IPGP) based on many sources of information (e.g. data from iobservation, self-assessments, principal input). The plan will consist of goals from the current district focus as well as specific items and professional development activities that will support the plan. (Note: For 2012-2013 school year, predetermined goals will take the place of the IPGP.) 16. Intensive Assistance Plans: Teachers identified as Category III teachers (struggling teachers) by their principal will submit an Intensive Assistance Plan (IAP). This plan will specifically address the unsatisfactory performance with recommendations suggested. Assistance will be provided. 17. i-observation: The on-line tool used for teacher growth and evaluation. 18. Lesson Segment Involving Routine Events: In this segment (present in every lesson) teachers are responsible to plan for and think about the everyday communication of learning goals and feedback (Design Question 1) and how rules and procedures (Design Question 6) can impact student achievement. 19. Lesson Segment Addressing Content: In this segment (present in every lesson) teachers are responsible to plan for and think about how students will interact with new knowledge, (Design Question 2), how students will practice and deepen their understandings, (Design Question 3) and what can be done to help students generate and test hypotheses (Design Question 4). 20. Lesson Segment Enacted on the Spot: In this segment (present in every lesson) teachers are responsible to plan for and think about student engagement, (Design Question 5) how adherence (or lack of adherence) to rules and procedures will be recognized and acknowledged, (Design Question 7) how to establish and maintain effective relationships with students, (Design Question 8) and the communication of high expectations (Design Question 9). 21. Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model: Based on decades of research on increasing student achievement, this model is a complete set of deliberate teacher practices organized into four domains that develop teacher expertise. 22. Non-Classroom Teacher: Any certified staff that work outside the definition of classroom teacher. (Classroom Teacher: Any full-time certified teacher who works with students as a whole class in a classroom, in small groups in resource rooms, or one-on-one inside or outside a regular classroom.) 23. Pre-Observation Conference: Scheduled meeting between principal and teacher in which discussion is held regarding upcoming formal observation. The purpose of this conference is to help the teacher: clarify the lesson/unit goals, specify what evidence will indicate the objectives are met by students, anticipate approaches,strategies, decisions and how to monitor them, establish a personal learning focus and processes for self-assessment. 13
Appendix A: Glossary (continued) 24. Post-Conference: Scheduled meeting between principal and teacher in which the lesson is summarized, student learning analyzed, new learning is developed,impact on future instruction is discussed, and reflection on the process. 25. Protocol: Used as a guide to look for elements/strategies during observations, it includes example of teacher and student evidence as well as performance scales. 26. Self-Assessment: A self-assessment questionnaire in iobservation allows teachers the opportunity to reflect on their own teaching practice and assist them in developing a plan for professional growth. 27. Student Evidence: During observations, principals are attuned to language or actions of students that indicate the element being observed is effectively employed. Several examples of student evidence are listed on the observation forms but there is not a direct correlation between the number of evidences checked and the scale score. 28. Strategy: Actions listed in the Marzano model that when employed correctly in the classroom are likely to have a positive impact on student performance. This term is used interchangeably with element. 29. Summary of Conference Memorandum 30. Summative Annual Evaluation: In iobservation the summative annual evaluation will be a scale score that is calculated based on the informal, formal observations conducted over the course of the academic year. The summative scale classifications are: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, or Unsatisfactory. Thinking more broadly, the summative evaluation is a summary of all scale scores, comments and general performance. 31. Summative Performance Scales: Scale consisting of four classification levels: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, or Unsatisfactory. See page 13 of handbook for a chart. 32. Teacher Evidence: During observations, principals are attuned to language and actions of the teacher that indicate the element being observed is effectively employed. Several examples of teacher evidence are listed on the observation forms but there is not a direct correlation between the number of evidences checked and the scale score. 33. Walkthrough: Unannounced, 3-5 minute classroom visit by a building principal. 14