March 14, 2012

and

Related Activities

New Teacher Evaluation Framework

The SWSD Teacher Evaluation Framework Review Team has been working to identify the best evaluation framework for Swedesboro-Woolwich School District.  The team’s members include:

Victor Valeski – representing the District

Mike Griggel – representing Business

Ed Leypoldt – representing Technology

Heather Worrell – representing Special Education

Rob Titus – representing Principals

Leigh Donato – representing Principals

Rachael Anderson – representing Clifford and Lead Teachers

Sheena Snitcher – representing Stratton and TOY’s

Cheryl Serpiello – representing Harker and Curriculum Leads

Matt Sparacio – representing Hill and SWEA

Sheena Snitcher has provided an excellent overview of the three frameworks we evaluated and analyzed.  My sincere thanks to her for summarizing our investigation:

Newly Mandated Teacher Evaluation Framework Analysis, ranked most to least expensive

Charlotte Danielson and Teachscape:

·         Research based – it is used all over the country with proven results

·         Claims observations will take 45 minutes to complete in class by note taking, and then 15 minutes to apply notes to the rubric

·         Inter-rater reliability with observer certification – new tests every June

·         With the “app”, it is not dependent on wireless internet

·         Designed to be online training (we can have face-to-face training for extra $)

·         Extensive online library of professional development for teachers organized by grade and subject

·         Schools can choose what part of the framework to focus on

·         School District has the ability to create own walk through (similar to Survey Monkey) and can modify/change the walk through

·         Not much background information given about Charlotte Danielson framework other than

o   “Only research based model/framework”

o   “The elements that are in this framework are shown/proven to increase student achievement”

·         It covers 4 domains, 60 elements – emphasis on instruction

·         Resource library in iObservation

·         Private conversation conferences – can make posts back and forth between observer and teacher

·         Former teachers give the teacher training

o   Focus on high impact learning goals

o   “Train the trainer” model

·         Appeared to be the only model that looked at evidence/strategies provided by the teacher  to give a rating versus an objective opinion from an observer

·         We need to establish a PLC book study on Marzano to insure teachers understand the background of the framework

McREL and Classroom Instruction that Works

·         Local (EIRC)

·         Formal observation – internet based; informal observations (power walkthrough) – app based

·         Based on “Classroom Instruction that Works”

o   Uses that terminology

o   Extensive teacher training

o   To someone without knowledge of the basis of the framework, the things an observer is looking for in power walkthroughs seemed abstract

·         Formal observations left a lot of room for opinion – may be more difficult to have inter-rater reliability

·         User friendly form for formal observations

·         No Professional Development component

 These are the critical items the selection committee considered:

·         Cost

·         What the other sending districts and Kingsway are using?

·         The framework – Is it teacher friendly?  Do you need more background knowledge to understand it? 

·         Assurance of inter-rater reliability

·         Professional development library and opportunities for teachers (especially important to correlate with the walkthroughs – otherwise they are useless)

Clifford            Tuesday                      September 18, 2012

Stratton           Wednesday                September 19. 2012

Harker             Tuesday                     September 25, 2012

Hill                   Wednesday               September 26, 2012

New Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning (DIAL) Testing Software

The future development plan is to grow Woolwich from its current size of approximately 10,000 residents to 35,000 residents over the next 25 years.  Minimal commercial development is in this plan. 

Of specific concern to the school district are the following projects:

Pondview (multi-family).............................. 200 units coming on line in December 2012 followed by 50 more units which will complete the project.

Lexington Mews (multi-family).....................184 units anticipated to be complete in the next three years.

Villages 1 (multi-family)..............................820 units, owner is currently looking for a builder.

Auburn Road Village (multi-family)...............372 units with no construction timeline available.

As the result of our application SWSD is eligible for $6,924 in Race to the Top (RttT) funds.  These funds will be applied to the rollout of our new teacher evaluation system.

1. Recruit a five-member project team, typically a school board member, principal, two teachers, and a facilities manager (school board members must be part of every team) to attend GSLI training in June 2012; recruit 2-3 additional teachers (of additional grades or subjects) to attend GSLI training in June/July 2013 and participate in team activities thereafter; recruit 2-3 additional teachers (of additional grades or subjects) to attend GSLI training in June/July 2014 and participate in team activities thereafter.

2.    Support the team’s participation in the project throughout the three-year process, subject to annual approval by the board of education, including:

·         four-day institutes in the summers of 2012, 2013, and 2014;

·         development and implementation of a green strategic plan, including a mission statement, measureable   objectives, action steps/lesson plans, and a list of resources necessary to implement the plan in the period July 2012-June 2015;

·         active involvement in a green online professional learning community, including online coaching and consulting sessions during the entire three-year period;

·         whole-group sharing sessions in mid-year 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15;

·         maintenance of an online log documenting implementation activities and progress;

·         development of a presentation to share with key stakeholders;

·         presentations to school/district staff and the board of education at the beginning and end of each year;

·         presentations at NJSBA and other conferences, as opportunities arise; and

3.    Ensure the cooperation of team members and district and school administrators as the external evaluator conducts interviews and gathers data at the beginning of Years 1 and 2 and at the end of Year 3, relative to:

·         impediments to implementation and how they were overcome;

·         reducing district operating costs;

·         improving district water quality, air quality, lighting, recycling procedure, or procurement practices;

·         improving curriculum;

·         improving teacher instructional strategies;

·         improving student achievement;

·         preparing students for emerging green and STEM careers;

·         raising student and staff consciousness about environmental issues;

·         communicating about the GSLI process to other staff, other districts, and other organizations; and

·         identifying roles, policies, partnerships, and Professional Development needed by school board members to implement a green schools model.

Sincerely,