1 / 24

Coventry Public Schools Coventry, Rhode Island

Coventry Public Schools Coventry, Rhode Island. John E. Deasy, Superintendent William Berger, President AFT. Using National Board Certification as a Platform for Alternative Evaluation. Introduction to Coventry Public Schools. 33,000 residents of a suburban/rural district

alfonso-pearson
Download Presentation

Coventry Public Schools Coventry, Rhode Island

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Coventry Public SchoolsCoventry, Rhode Island John E. Deasy, Superintendent William Berger, President AFT

  2. Using National Board Certification as a Platformfor Alternative Evaluation

  3. Introduction to Coventry Public Schools • 33,000 residents of a suburban/rural district • 5700 students 20% poverty, 20% special services • 6 neighborhood elementary schools, 1 middle school, 1 high school, 1 career/technical center (regional) • fastest growing community in the State • blue collar community • median family income: 38,000 • 475 faculty • current leadership...

  4. Cultural Shift • HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE • Relationships: • Teachers • Union • Administration • Community • School Board

  5. Building a Professional Collaborative Cultureusing National Board Certification • The Journey • Strategic Planning • Structuring Supports • Designing Levers • Using Data • Going to Scale

  6. Pre-Candidacy Program Candidacy Program Information Sessions Candidate Support Groups Post-Candidate Involvement Contract Language On-Site Facilitator Equipment throughout schools Training and consultation in videotaping Classroom videotaping service Colleague support groups Monthly newsletter Professional development center (position on advisory board) Pre-candidate & candidate courses Fiscal supports throughout the process Recognition program Developing Supports

  7. National Board as a Lever • The process is central to all professional development • The Processional Development and Leadership Center • Teacher and Administrator Evaluation System • Compensation & Pay for Performance

  8. Data as another lever • Experimental design • English Language Arts • 4th grade assessment • 1997-98 no NBPTS faculty • 1998-99 NBPTS faculty

  9. Going to Scale • 9 Year process • 100% success rate • State Teacher Center • Pay for Performance • State candidates

  10. Creation of a New System • Negotiation of process • Formation of committee • ERD process • Discovery of the Framework • Construction of instrument • Construction of process • Construction of policies

  11. STAFF DEVELOPMENT IMPERATIVE • The need to understand • The need to feel competent • The need for time to construct the portfolio • PD for start-up • Sustained professional development • Respect for concerns

  12. The Transition Process • School Board Involvement • Full Staff Understanding • Full Support for Professional Development • The phase in process • Building teacher-leaders • Annual review

  13. ADMINISTRATOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Team evaluations and data comparison Practice evaluations with volunteers Annual retreats Working with consultants

  14. Change in Culture Change in Instructional Practice The Use of Data Board Support Community Awareness and Appreciation Student Awareness and Appreciation RESULTS

  15. DATA ANALYSIS • Previous Years: • 0 terminations • 0 non-renewals • 209 Satisfactory/209 evaluated

  16. AFTER NEW EVALUATION YEAR 2 2 terminations 3 non-renewals 3 unsatisfactory 30 basic 189 proficient 21 distinguished (4 NBPTS) YEAR 1 1 termination 4 non-renewals 4 unsatisfactory 22 basic 141 proficient 31 distinguished

  17. AFTER NEW EVALUATION YEAR 3 1 termination 6 non-renewals 2 unsatisfactory 15 basic 122 proficient 17 distinguished (4 more NBPTS)

  18. Hindsight Is Not Possible • Faculty angst • Board expectation…the rain dance • The cost of doing it right • The human capitol cost • Administrator concerns…giving them voice • Sustaining the effort • The reality of non-renewal…cultural shift

  19. RHODE PROCESS • process called RHODE: the Recognition and Honoring of Outstanding Demonstrated Excellence. • A model based on the National Board Process, and developed from the research base on effective and authentic pedagogy (Newmann& Wehlage). • Developed over two years, it provides an opportunity for faculty to Beginning in 2000, we brought to scale a pay for performance demonstrate their craft and knowledge in 10 areas. These elements are designed in portfolio construction format.

  20. CORE BELIEFS • Our work is based from the following beliefs: • that rigorous on-going professional development can lead to excellence in teaching • that reflecting on one’s practice through portfolio creation is a highly effective professional development approach to achieving excellence in teaching • that there must be a fair and objective way for teachers to demonstrate and be judged on the excellence of their instructional practice; and • that there must be a way to recognize outstanding practice

  21. THE ELEMENTS • 1.) Evidence the teacher knows his/her students well • 2.) Preparation for differentiated instruction • 3.) Analysis of a lesson plan • 4.) Videotape and analysis of a learning experience • 5.) Assessment of student work • 6.) Analysis of student assessment • 7.) Evidence that the teacher motivates, challenges, and supports all students • 8.) Extensive and meaningful family and community contact • 9.) Professional development and contributions • 10.) Expert command of the written language

  22. The RHODE Process: • The RHODE process consists of two components: a portfolio developed specifically for the RHODE process and a 30 minute conversation about the portfolio • A panel is convened to review the portfolio and conduct the conversation. The panel is composed of 2 Nationally Certified faculty and 2 administrators from the district. • Ultimately the panel will determine if the evidence is of the quality and rigor that represents the highest levels of excellent teaching. • A scoring matrix is used. Banking of near-scores are allowed.

  23. PORTFOLIO REVIEW • Review elements of the portfolio • Quality assurance • Confidentiality assurances • Compensation

  24. Questions and Answers JDEASY@RIDE.RI.NET

More Related