Teacher Performance Assessment

1. Teacher Performance Assessment Washoe County School District Human Resources Division Lynn Sawyer Director of Professional Development P.O. Box 30425 Reno, NV 89520-3425 lsawyer@washoe.k12.nv.us December 7, 2000

2. About Washoe County Schools • 83 schools K-12 • 3700 teachers • 53,000 students • 130 site administrators • encompasses entire county (1 of 17)

3. Flaws in Current Practices • Outdated, limited criteria • Few shared values and assumptions • Top-down, one-way communication • Undifferentiated for novice and experienced • All stakeholders’ expertise limited • Climate unsafe to admit limitations

4. Reasons for Change: • Teacher/Administrator dissatisfaction with status quo • Present system not fostering improved teacher performance or adequate communication regarding expectations • 9 “Teacher Effectiveness Factors”: improperly weighted, limited, and outdated. • Lacked focus on reflective practice and meaningful involvement of the evaluatee.

5. Previous Teacher Effectiveness Factors

6. The Task Force: • WCTA Appointees, all three levels • HR & Student Support Services • WCEAA Admin appointees, all three levels • Board of Trustees representative • Task Force worked from 1997-Present

7. Task Force Processes • Surveyed entire district to confirm areas/issues regarding evaluation process • Identified and scrutinized appraisal models from other districts

8. Narrowed the field based on criteria: • Used teacher performance standards • Provided fairly detailed descriptions of actual performance criteria • Complied with NRS statutes • Encompassed the effectiveness factors from existing system

9. Decision to Field Test a System Based on “Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching” • Comprehensive overview of the “knowledge base on teaching” • Well researched • Correlated to other Professional Teaching Standards

10. About the “Framework” Four Domains of Teaching with 23 components and 68 Elements

11. Two -Year Field Testing • Year One: • 60 Principals used with volunteer teachers • Changes in content and procedures were made based on survey data • Year Two: • All administrators required to use with at least five teachers • All users had opportunity to respond through surveys

12. Key Survey ResultsPercent of 4&5 Responses (strongly agree) • The annual goal-setting session helped focus teachers’ efforts and progress, and set the direction for observations.

13. Key Survey ResultsPercent of 4&5 Responses (strongly agree) • Two Domains for a Major Evaluation, and one Domain for a Minor Evaluation seemed appropriate to me.

14. Key Survey ResultsPercent of 4&5 Responses (strongly agree) • Allowing me to show other artifacts/proofs of some aspects of my teaching (in addition to classroom observations) gave the evaluator a more complete picture of my performance.

15. Key Survey ResultsPercent of 4&5 Responses (strongly agree) • Feedback given to me resulted in increased awareness of my areas for improvement.

16. Key Survey ResultsPercent of 4&5 Responses (strongly agree) • Feedback given to me resulted in improvement of my teaching performance.

17. Key Survey ResultsPercent of 4&5 Responses (strongly agree) • Using the new teacher evaluation system resulted in an increase of meaningful dialogue between the teacher and the evaluator concerning teaching.

18. Links: • Over 100 Teacher Applicant Interviews based on 4 Domains/Summer 2000 • UNR, College of Ed – Using Framework with Student Interns & Admin Candidates • WCSD Mentors/Mentees • Workshops on Domains piloted • Counselors, nurses, librarians, will field test this fall • Clark & Rural Districts

19. In Process: • Piloting Professional Growth Options for Satisfactory Post-Probationary Teachers • Action Research • Mentoring a new teacher • Peer Coaching • National Board Certification process • Self-directed professional growth • Lead teacher for student intern • Developed Procedures Manual • Implementing courses for each domain • Continuing to refine content & process • Monitoring each year