Source: Image light, Public Domain, http://tinyurl.com/p4pfjr7; Screen Shot, http://www.ride.ri.gov/TeachersAdministrators/EducatorEvaluation.aspx; Image red pencil/evaluation, Public Domain, http://pixabay.com/en/examination-homework-correction-154709/
Welcome. I'm Trisha Fyfe. And in today's video lesson, we'll look at the topic Analyzing Teacher Evaluation Models by Domain. As we learn about this topic, we will work towards one main learning objective. And together, we'll answer the following question to guide our learning in this video lesson-- what is the process for analyzing the domains in the teacher evaluation models?
Teacher evaluation systems are a critical part of developing as a teacher. It's extremely important to understand the domains and rubrics that are a part of the model your school or district is using. As teachers, we must analyze these models and ask questions when needed.
Why should we do this? There are several reasons for analysis. Rubrics are a tool in most evaluation models. And we must understand these rubrics and how to use them effectively and properly. To become reflective as a teacher and to make progress on improving your teaching practices, it is essential to understand the model you'll be using and the rubric involved.
Another important factor in growth as any professional is feedback. We must be able to not only listen to and process feedback, but we must have the ability to use feedback. We must turn the feedback into action. And this is done to improve practice.
Domains are another important component of teacher evaluation models. And it's important to analyze these domains of your model. What are the specific areas of focus? What are the scoring requirements? You can find and study these rubrics by various domains in teacher evaluation models that you currently use or in widely used models, such as the frameworks of Marzano and Danielson.
First, it's important to examine how exactly the model breaks down into different domains. Look at the descriptions used for the indicators. What are they? Look at the highest level of performance as far as the effectiveness of proficiency measured or described. Look for specific examples to follow. Does this rubric include examples of descriptions in action? Are possible sources of evidence provided?
Teacher evaluation models can vary from district to district. And it's important to explore different models to learn about the components. A helpful model to look at is Rhode Island's teacher evaluation model. This model has both descriptions of what the evaluator might observe in the classroom setting and sources of evidence for various domains that may not be observable during instruction. These include planning and teacher collaboration, as well as professional development or learning. I encourage you to take a quick look at this model at this website listed above.
It's important to work with other teachers in a collaborative team environment or even with your evaluator to determine what examples might look like if the rubrics in your particular model do not include these examples. It's also important to walk through the rubric and domains looking for unclear pieces or components. Are there any rubric pieces or domain elements that are not clear, not defined effectively?
It might be helpful to work collaboratively here, as well, with a team of peers or maybe with your evaluator or coach. Clarify definitions together. Define any domains and indicators that are unclear. And do this together.
Let's look at an example of the Rhode Island's evaluation system and the rubric. We'll look here at the Component 2c, Managing Classroom Procedures. You can see here that it's listed Level 1, 2, 3, 4. The Critical Attributes are at the top and Possible Examples. We'll focus here on Level 4, which is the most proficient or effective in this rubric.
"Instructional time is maximized due to the efficient and seamless classroom routines and procedures. Students take initiative in management of instructional groups and transitions, and/or handling of materials and supplies. Routines are well understood and may be initiated by students."
This proficient level also gives Critical Attributes. "With minimal prompting by the teacher, the students ensure that their time is used productively. Students take initiative in distributing and collecting materials efficiently. And students themselves ensure that transitions and other routines are accomplished smoothly."
The examples that are listed here on this actual rubric are that, "Students redirect classmates in small groups not working directly with the teacher to be more efficient in their work. A student reminds classmates of the rules that they are to play within the group. A student redirects a classmate to the table he should be at following a transition. Students propose an improved attention signal. Or students independently check themselves into class on the attendance board."
These are all examples of what might meet this criteria of the most highly effective or efficient level, Level 4. This rubric here from Rhode Island is pretty clear. But the teacher should still go through this and look at the proficiency ratings and find anything that seems unclear. Maybe this teacher is having a hard time understanding fully what efficient and seamless classroom routines look like. If this were the case, they would want to talk with their evaluator or coach and have that evaluator or coach define exactly what this efficient and seamless classroom routine or procedure might look like.
Let's talk about what we learned today. We looked at the question, what is the process for analyzing the domains in the teacher evaluation models? In this lesson, we talked about the fact that teacher evaluation systems are such a critical part of our development as teachers. And it's important for us to understand the domains as well as the rubrics that are a part of this model that you're using in your school or district. We need to analyze the models and ask questions when we have them.
We should study the rubrics and make sure we understand how to use them effectively so that we can be reflective and make progress in our practices. We also need to look at the domains in our model and make sure that we understand these domains. I provided you with a few steps that you can take when you're trying to understand the domains in your model or in the Marzano or Danielson models.
And we also looked at an example of a model from Rhode Island. We looked at the rubric. And I walked you through what the proficient, or Level 4, looks like and some examples of classroom behaviors that might fall into that most efficient category.
Now that you're more familiar with these concepts, let's reflect. Consider a teacher evaluation model that you have used or explore the website that we discussed in this lesson. Walk through the steps for analyzing the domains in this model.
Thanks for joining me today in discussing the lesson Analyzing Teacher Evaluation Models by Domain. I hope you enjoyed this video lesson and are able to apply these ideas and concepts to your own teaching. Now it's your turn to apply what you've learned in this video.
The additional resources section will be super helpful. This section is designed to help you discover useful ways to apply what you've learned here. Each link includes a brief description so you can easily target the resources that you want.
(00:00- 00:21) Introduction/Objectives
(00:22- 01:14) Background: Teacher Evaluation
(01:15- 03:11) Analyzing Domains
(03:12- 05:12) RI Teacher Evaluation Model/Rubric Example
(05:13- 06:19) Recap
(06:20- 06:59) Reflection
This New Mexico Department of Education site provides useful tools for and training videos on understanding a Value Added Measure Teacher Evaluation System. The resources included are helpful in understanding how the components of the teacher evaluation system result in a final effectiveness rating for teachers.
NYDOE: Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument
The New York Department of Education fully adopted the Danielson Model for its teacher evaluation system.
Recognizing Educators Advancing Chicago's Students: Teacher Performance Evaluation
Chicago Public Schools adapted the Danielson Framework in the Teaching Practices section of the teacher evaluation because of its connections to the Common Core State Standards and focus on high standards for teachers and students. Teachers are evaluated on the four domains and 22 elements of the Danielson Model. In addition, teachers are evaluated on teacher practice, student growth, and student feedback.
Rhode Island Department of Education: Educator Evaluation
The Rhode Island Model adapted the Danielson Framework. The model includes teacher observation, professional growth plans, student growth based on both state assessment data and the achievement of teacher-established Student Learning Objectives (SLOs), and teacher feedback.
AchieveNJ: Teacher Evaluation
The New Jersey Model combines the domains and elements from the Danielson and Marzano Models. The evaluation model includes teacher practices, student achievement, and student growth.
Broward Instructional Development and Growth Evaluation System
Florida uses a Value Added Teacher Evaluation Model, which considers year to year student growth on the state assessment model, as well as student, classroom, and school characteristics that impact student learning. Broward County has a state approved model that incorporates the Marzano rubrics as a required component of the observation of teacher practices.
Oklahoma Teacher Evaluation
Oklahoma has approved three different teacher evaluation models. The Marzano Evaluation Model is one of the 3 approved models. Oklahoma believes teacher evaluation should improve teacher effectiveness and increase student learning gains. The Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model connects elements in the evaluation model to student learning and achievement.