Growth, Not Gotcha: Evaluating and Supporting Beginning Teachers INTC 8 th Annual Induction and...

Growth, Not Gotcha:

Evaluating and Supporting

Beginning Teachers

INTC 8th Annual Induction and Mentoring Conference

February 26, 2013

Liam GoldrickDirector of Policy

Dalia Zabala

Associate Director of Policy

Copyright © 2013 New Teacher Center. All Rights Reserved. Copyright © 2013 New Teacher Center. All Rights Reserved.

when we focus on teachers, our students succeed


New Teacher Center

• Focuses on improving student achievement by accelerating the effectiveness of new teachers and school leaders

• Founded in 1998 as part of University of California, Santa Cruz

• Became an independent non-profit in 2009 • Policy & program work in Illinois began in 2005


Outcomes

PARTICIPANTS WILL EXPLORE…

• The developmental needs of new teachers• The relationship & alignment between induction

and evaluation• The utilization of coaches/mentors/evaluators• The development and leveraging of teacher

leadership• The role and responsiveness of state policy


New Teachers

The Changing Face of the Teaching Force Richard Ingersoll and Lisa Merrill

http://www.gse.upenn.edu/review/feature/ingersol




New Teachers (continued)

Ellen Moir, 1990http://newteachercenter.org/blog/phases-first-year-teaching

http://newteachercenter.org/blog/phases-first-year-teaching

http://newteachercenter.org/blog/phases-first-year-teaching


New Teachers and Teacher Evaluation

• Evaluation systems do not sufficiently prioritize teacher development

• Evaluation is often the sole means of feedback on teachers’ performance

• States are demanding greater accountability but flagging on their commitment to develop and support new teachers

• 43 states require annual teacher evaluations• Only 11 require induction/mentoring for all 1st & 2nd

year teachers


The Illinois Context2010 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REFORM ACT (PERA)

• Requires annual evaluation of teachers and principals • 4 performance categories• Districts have two options:

• Develop their own system • Use all or portions of a

state-designed model

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ADVISORY COUNCIL (PEAC)

• Provides input from educators to ISBE• Monitors PERA• Developed rules for districts developing their own system


The Illinois Context (continued)

TEACHER INDUCTION IN ILLINOIS

• 2002 – state established a teacher induction mandate, “provided that funding is made available”

• 2006-07 – State grant program for induction • Illinois RTT grant – includes induction funding in 35

participating RTT districts • 2008 – Illinois Standards of Quality and

Effectiveness for Beginning Teacher

Induction Programs• 2010 – Illinois Induction Program

Continuum


Illinois Education Leaders

CONCERNS FROM ILLINOIS EDUCATION LEADERS

1. The connection between teacher evaluation and induction is rarely considered or made.

2. The needs of new teachers are not systematically factored into the design of evaluation systems.

• Illinois has not made induction a central

component of a statewide educator

effectiveness system.• Most district leaders think of induction

as separate from evaluation.


Illinois Education Leaders (continued)

ISSUES THAT EMERGED

• New teachers should be held to the same teaching standards as experienced teachers

• Distinguishing between feedback• from formal observations vs. • feedback that is formative in nature

• Districts can align the induction and evaluation by using the Danielson Framework

• Limitations in the number of educators receiving evaluator certification training


What Evidence Suggests about EvaluationEVALUATION MUST BE INTEGRATED WITH OTHER PROCESSES THAT SUPPORT GROWTH

• Opportunities for ongoing conversations • Multiple observations per year • Multiple observers • Pre- and Post-observation conferences • Trained evaluators• Actionable feedback• Frequent Informal observations/formative assessment of

new teachers


What Evidence Suggests about Induction

IMPACT OF INDUCTION

• The greatest improvement in instructional practice takes place in the early years in the classroom

• Comprehensive induction programs • accelerate the effectiveness of beginning teachers• produces greater student learning gains• have a positive impact on new teacher retention


What Evidence Suggests about Induction (continued)

KEY ELEMENTS OF INDUCTION THAT IMPROVE PRACTICE

• Multi-year program• Well trained mentors • Mentors who are released from classroom duties• Formative assessment aligned to evaluation • Time for beginning teachers to work with mentors• Common planning time with other teachers• Ongoing communication and support from school leaders• Reduced teaching load• Recognition of the steep and unique learning curve

of beginning teachers


Aligning Evaluation and Induction

ALIGNING EVALUATION AND INDUCTION

Have one set of expectations/standards for both induction and evaluation

Use results from evaluation to Plan professional development for an individual teacherIdentify training opportunities for a group of teachersDevelop individualized learning plansInform mentoring and coaching


Models of Evaluation Systems that Support New Teachers HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AND PLEASANTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

• Duration of induction support• Support providers vs. evaluators• Program embedded in a support system• Number of observations per year• Post-observation conference• Expectations for new teachers• Training and support for evaluators and mentors• Release time for mentors/coaches


Models of Evaluation Systems that Support New Teachers (continued)ALIGNMENT BETWEEN EVALUATION AND INDUCTION

Hillsborough Montgomery Pleasanton

The district has a PAR program for veteran teachers and an induction program for new teachers where mentors also serve as evaluators. To evaluate, mentors “swap” mentees three times a year. Because mentors also serve as evaluators, they are more acutely aware of the evaluation system and are better able to help new teachers develop toward the goals and expectations of the evaluation. It is up to new teachers to communicate outcomes of their evaluation to their mentor.

The district has a PAR program where consulting teachers support and evaluate new teachers. Consulting teachers develop a Summative Report and an administrator develops a separate Evaluation Report creating checks and balances to the system. The two sets of data inform the recommendation made by a separate PAR Panel to the superintendent regarding a teacher’s contract renewal, need for continued assistance, or termination.

School principals are responsible for teacher evaluation while induction coaches support new teachers. There are predetermined expectations for teachers in their first and second year. Coaches help new teachers work toward meeting those expectations and administrators evaluate the teachers’ performance on the same set of expectations.


Models of Evaluation Systems that Support New Teachers (continued)

CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED

• Credibility and buy-in from veteran teachers• Communication between evaluators and mentors• Including all stakeholders• Integrating new members• Maintaining support for the program


Recommended Priorities 1. Design a comprehensive educator effectiveness

system that encompasses both evaluation and robust instructional feedback and support. For new teachers, this system must include induction support aligned with PERA’s evaluation requirements.

2. Encourage and enable teacher leaders to serve as teacher mentors and as peer evaluators. Instructional improvement is a collective responsibility and is too critical and time intensive an endeavor to leave solely to school administrators.


Recommendations for State Policy Makers ALIGNING INDUCTION WITH EVALUATION

• The Governor and the Illinois General Assembly should require districts to provide induction and mentoring support to all beginning teachers and provide dedicated state funding

• State policymakers should formalize requirements for the frequency/regularity of instructional feedback to new teachers.

• PEAC should recommend that ISBE establish clear expectations for the evaluation and support of new

• ISBE should communicate and model the relationship between teacher induction and teacher evaluation within a broader system of educator effectiveness.


Recommendations for State Policy Makers (continued)

INVOLVING TEACHERS IN PEER OBSERVATION AND EVALUATION

• The state should encourage the utilization of existing teacher leaders (instructional coaches, mentors, National Board certified teachers) as peer observers and evaluators.

• ISBE and PEAC should ensure that evaluators are effectively trained not only in observing teaching, but also in conducting purposeful coaching conversations.


Recommendations for PERA Implementers ALIGNING INDUCTION WITH EVALUATION SYSTEMS

• Every Illinois school district should operate a standards-based teacher induction program and align it with their PERA-mandated evaluation system.

• School districts should pay special consideration to design elements that help align teacher evaluation and induction.

• School districts should clarify the relationship between formative and summative assessment—and the purpose of classroom observations associated with each.

• School superintendents and principals should schedule regular meetings between evaluators and mentors.


Recommendations for PERA Implementers (continued)

INVOLVING TEACHERS IN PEER OBSERVATION AND EVALUATION

• School districts should consider utilizing teacher leaders as classroom observers within PERA evaluation systems.


The best way to improve student learning is to strengthen the instructional practices of teachers through job-embedded professional development and instructional support

Thank youFor More Information

Liam GoldrickDirector of Policy

[email protected]

Dalia Zabala

Associate Director of Policy

[email protected]

www.newteachercenter.org

Growth, Not Gotcha: Evaluating and Supporting Beginning Teachers INTC 8 th Annual Induction and...

Documents

Transcript of Growth, Not Gotcha: Evaluating and Supporting Beginning Teachers INTC 8 th Annual Induction and...