APS Teacher Evaluation and Advancement System Pilot Proposals

1. APS Teacher Evaluation and Advancement System Pilot Proposals Arlington Public Schools April 2006

2. Objectives • To assure quality teaching over time • To maintain the existing teacher salary scale • To increase student achievement through improved instruction • To affect the development of teaching capabilities and effective practice over time • To support on-going systemwide instructional goals • To provide opportunities for meaningful career progression that encourages excellence in classroom teaching

3. Instruments and Procedures • Incorporate the “natural harvest” of teachers’ work • Provide opportunities for teachers to demonstrate performance at the highest level through rigorous documentation of evidence • Use scoring rubrics that promote consistency of application • Incorporate questions that guide the professional conversation between teachers and administrators • Promote self-assessment and reflection on practice • Provide an appropriate degree of choice for teachers • Include anonymous review (CAP) to eliminate perceptions of bias • Provide training that assures interrater reliability and clarity of purpose • Present accountability measures to the community and profession

4. Existing Components • Probationary Cycle • Professional Development Plan (PDP) • Formal Improvement Plan (FIP) Proposed Pilot Components • Professional Development Plan plus Observation (PDPO) for continuing contract teachers • Optional Career Advancement Program (CAP)

5. Evaluation and Advancement PDPO PDPO/NCBT CAP PEP PDP FIP

6. Professional Development Plan with Observation (PDPO) and PDPO for Non-Classroom Based Teachers (PDPO-NCBT) • For continuing contract teachers to assure comprehensive assessment once every 3 years beginning with year 5 • A PDP tied to a unit plan, lesson plan, observation, analysis of student work, and reflection. • Addresses non-classroom based T-scale staff through action plans focused on 3 areas of responsibilities • Provides for systematic collection of multiple teaching artifacts as evidence of performance • Incorporates pre and post observation conferences and guided questions and rubrics for conducting professional conversations about practice

7. PDPO Pilot Project Comprised of 30-35 T-scale staff • Instructional Lead Teachers • One each: Teacher Specialist, School Counselor, School Psychologist, Social Worker, and Therapist

8. Pilot Group Participants: • are knowledgeable about best practices • have training/professional development as teacher leaders • can participate in training/support at existing meeting structure • represent multiple levels, content areas, and T-scale positions • have leadership goals that align with PDPO objectives • will provide productive feedback

9. Career Advancement Program (CAP) • Participation is Optional • Based on portfolio development and certification by APS 5 member review panel (composed of teachers and administrators) and/or national board • Opportunity to complete one portfolio per window • All portfolio reviews are anonymous • Three (3) windows of opportunity beginning with year 6 of service in APS • Requires 15 hour introductory seminar • Completion of three (3) pre-requisite skill sets identified as desirable by APS and achieved through county offerings or university courses • Award of step increase for each successful evaluation of portfolio

10. CAP Pilot Project Comprised of 30-35 T-scale staff • National Board Certified Teachers • Non-classroom based T-scale staff • Other T-scale staff meeting specified criteria (if necessary)

11. Pilot Group Participants: • are knowledgeable about portfolio based procedures of National Board Certification • are more likely to have completed requisite skill blocks • represent multiple levels, content areas, and T-scale positions • will provide feedback on rigor, training, and content

12. Training Modules • For both teachers and administrators • Focus on understanding evidence that supports and evaluates various components • Assurance of interrater agreement on evidence • Work with consultant and affinity groups • Assess protocols and procedures

13. Budget Projected cost for pilots: $219,000 in new FY07 funds, combined with existing funds ($100,000) • stipends, courses, consultants, clerical assistance • supplies, printing, training, and materials

14. Next Steps • School Board Approval of Pilots - Spring 2006 • Development of Training modules - Spring 2006 • Implementation of pilots - Fall 2006 • Completion and Evaluation of Pilots - Winter 2006-07 • Report to School Board - Spring of 2007 • Full implementation - 2007-2008

15. Evaluation and Advancement PDPO PDPO/NCBT CAP PEP PDP FIP

16. Pilot Evaluation • Criteria to be evaluated: • effectiveness of training • evidence of APS initiatives in observed practice • issues of time, fairness, and coordination for implementation of the process • Procedures for evaluation: • focus groups and interviews - teachers, administrators • surveys • review of products • observations

17. Questions?