Indian Prairie School District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan

Transcription

1 Indian Prairie School District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 1

2 Table of Contents Professional Evaluation Plan Committee Members.. Sections 1 Legislation and Overview of Danielson Framework.. 2 Standards for Teachers.. 3 Standards for Specialists. 4 Professional Evaluation Rating Definitions 5 Performance Evaluation Rating System Definitions of Terms in the Professional Evaluation Plan Informal Observation, Formal Observation, and Performance Evaluation Rating Process. 8 Non-Tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart: Years Tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart.. 10 Tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart: Needs Improvement.. 11 Tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart: Unsatisfactory.... Forms Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching... Form B1: Guide Sheet for Teaching Pre-Observation Process/Conference. Form B2: Guide Sheet for Specialist Pre-Observation Process/Conference.. Form C1: Guide Sheet for Teaching Post-Observation Conference Form.... Form C2: Guide Sheet for Specialist Post-Observation Conference Form.. Form D: Indian Prairie District 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) Form Form E1: Notice of Concern for Teachers.. Form E2: Notice of Concern for Specialists.. Form F1: Professional Development Plan for Teachers.... Form F2: Professional Development Plan for Specialists. Form G: Indian Prairie Framework for Instructional Specialists Form H: Indian Prairie Framework for Library Media Specialists Form I: Indian Prairie Framework for School Nurses.... Form J: Indian Prairie Framework for School Counselors..... Form K: Indian Prairie Framework for School Psychologists.. Form L: Indian Prairie Framework for School Social Workers. Form M: Indian Prairie Framework for Therapeutic Specialists Appendix A: Performance Responsibilities Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 2

3 Evaluation Committee Process and Members We recognize that our schools are designed for student learning. Since teachers are the single most valuable contributor to student learning, this evaluation process is built on the premise that highly effective teachers are necessary for student success. Development of the Teacher Evaluation Committee In the fall of 2012, Indian Prairie School District 204 continued its collaborative effort with the Indian Prairie Education Association to develop a Teacher evaluation process that would significantly and positively impact professional teaching practice while addressing the mandates of Senate Bill 7 and the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA). After a comprehensive study, a new Teacher Evaluation Committee was formed, and began its work with the assistance of the Consortium for Educational Change (CEC). The committee determined that the newly revised evaluation system would align with Charlotte Danielson s 2013 Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument, which would provide a district-wide language and research-based framework for effective teaching to advance the professional practice of the teaching staff. The committee is a combination of professionals representing a variety of roles and responsibilities in the district. Representation includes members of the Indian Prairie Education Association and District Administration. The Evaluation Committee chose to divide into three specialized sub-committees to complete the work. The sub-committees are: Instructional Practices tasked to update our current evaluation plan and rubrics. Professional Development and Communication tasked to create professional development for teachers and evaluators on the district evaluation plan and to communicate the progress of the other two sub-committees. Student Growth tasked to develop the student growth component of the evaluation plan in accordance with state law for implementation in school year. Instructional Practice Sub-Committee Members Kristine Black Early Childhood Teacher Prairie Children Preschool Steve Correll Mathematics Teacher Scullen Middle School Val Dranias IPEA President Paul Gamboa Fifth Grade Teacher White Eagle Elementary School Sheila Kennedy Special Education Teacher Hill Middle School Rob Maldonado Physical Education Teacher Young Elementary School Beth Neu Human Resources Generalist Elizabeth Pohlmann Principal Steck Elementary School Pam Rosa Consortium for Educational Change Jason Stipp Principal Waubonsie Valley High School Karen Sullivan Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources Mark Truckenbrod Principal Scullen Middle School Kathy Wonsowski Business Teacher Metea Valley High School Specialists Work Groups Instructional Specialist Work Group Monica Carstens, Clow Elementary School Jan Newport, CEC Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 3

4 Library Media Specialists Work Group Beverly Frett, Clow Elementary School Christine Hogan, Still Middle School Debbie Turner, Metea Valley High School School Nurse Work Group Karen Elmgren, CEC - Itinerant Linda Herwaldt, CEC - Itinerant Catherine Lozon, CEC - Itinerant School Counselors Work Group Darcy Hutzler, Metea Valley High School Rebecca Koehler, Gregory Middle School Jennifer Rinkenberger, Fischer Middle School Sandra Schuller, Neuqua Valley High School Sharon Wedam, Waubonsie Valley High School School Psychologists Work Group Jake Rebus, Fischer Middle School Tanya Shea, Young Elementary/Graham Elementary Janine Wange, Metea Valley High School School Social Workers Work Group Gina Bogin, Waubonsie Valley High School Robin Shultz, Longwood Elementary Michael Treptow, Still Middle School Therapeutic Specialists Work Group Joy Bedell, Granger Middle School Sara Falli, Fischer Middle School E. Marie Wheeler, Neuqua Valley High School Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 4

5 Section 1: Legislation and Overview of Danielson Framework Legislation The Indian Prairie School District 204 Teacher Evaluation Committee recognizes the importance of student growth and teacher effectiveness in the evaluation process. The committee reviewed recent legislation (PERA, SB7, 2012 Illinois School Code) enacted in the State of Illinois calling for increased emphasis on Teacher performance evaluation ratings, which have the potential to impact Teachers continued employment. In addition to Teacher practice, student growth will be included in the Performance Evaluation Plan by At this time, student growth is not part of the Indian Prairie School District 204 Performance Evaluation Plan. The Evaluation Committee will re-examine the plan after the Illinois State Board of Education has set forth rules, regulations, and recommendations regarding student growth. Danielson Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument The 2013 Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument by Charlotte Danielson is the basis for the Indian Prairie School District 204 Performance Evaluation Plan. The Framework for Teaching is a research-based set of components of instruction that is grounded in a constructivist view of learning and teaching while incorporates instructional implications for Common Core State Standards. The Framework is a valuable tool to be used as the foundation for professional conversations among educators as they enhance their skills in the complex task of teaching. The Framework for Teaching is based on the Praxis III: Classroom Performance Assessment criteria developed by Educational Testing Service (ETS), National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS), is compatible with Interstate New Teacher Assessments and Supports Consortium (INTASC) standards, and aligned with 2010 Illinois Professional Teaching Standards. The Framework for Teaching Evaluation Instrument has been validated as a reliable and valid measurement tool when measuring teaching practice in both the 2011 Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR) study and 2012 Measuring Effective Teaching (MET) study. The framework will anchor Indian Prairie School District 204 s recruitment and hiring, mentoring, coaching, professional development, and teacher evaluation process. The goal is to link all of these activities to help teachers and evaluators become more thoughtful educators. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 5

6 Section 2: Standards for Teachers Domain 1 Demonstrates effective planning and preparation for instruction through: a. Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy b. Knowledge of Students c. Setting Instructional Outcomes* d. Designing Coherent Instruction with Appropriate Resources* e. Designing Student Assessments* Domain 2 Creates an environment conducive for learning by: a. Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport b. Establishing a Culture for Learning* c. Managing Classroom Procedures and Physical Space d. Managing Student Behavior Reflecting on Professional Practice Domain 4 Demonstrates professionalism by: a. Reflecting on Teaching b. Maintaining Accurate Records c. Communicating with Families d. Growing Individually and Collectively as a Professional e. Showing Professionalism Domain 3 Demonstrates effective instruction by: a. Communicating with Students* b. Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques* c. Engaging Students in Learning* d. Using Assessment in Instruction* e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness *These components specifically align with implementation of the Common Core State Standards. Common Themes: Equity, Cultural Competence, High Expectations, Developmental Appropriateness, Attention to Individual Students (including those with special needs), Appropriate Use of Technology, Student Assumption of Responsibility All of the Danielson frameworks are organized around levels of performance that represent an educator s growth and development throughout his/her career. The Danielson model is focused on accountability for all aspects of the profession. Just as teachers work to meet the needs of each student learner, this evaluation plan addresses the needs of each category of teacher. Under this evaluation system, the professional teaching standards to which each teacher is expected to conform are set forth in Charlotte Danielson s Framework for Teaching Instrument (Danielson, 2013). Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 6

7 Section 3: Standards for Specialists In addition to the teaching framework, alternate frameworks that are based upon Chapter 5 specialist rubrics in Enhancing Professional Practices: A Framework for Teaching (Danielson, 2007) and aligned to the 2013 Framework for Teaching components are provided for the following categories of staff (positions not otherwise listed will utilize the Framework for Teaching Instrument): Charlotte Danielson Frameworks Instructional Specialists Library/Media Specialists School Nurses School Counselors School Psychologists School Social Workers Therapeutic Specialists Framework for Teaching IPSD Certified Staff Student Services Coordinator, Deans, CEC Instructional Specialists, CEC Coordinators, CEC District Support Team, Vocational Coordinators, Assessment Coordinators, High School Technology Teachers LMC Directors Certified School Nurses Guidance Counselors School Psychologists Social Workers Speech Language Pathologists, Hearing and Vision Itinerants All certified staff not listed under another framework Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 7

8 Section 4: Performance Evaluation Rating Definitions EXCELLENT Professional practice at the Excellent level is consistently characterized by evidence of extensive knowledge and expertise in understanding and implementing the components of the Indian Prairie District 204 Framework for Teaching. Practice at the Excellent level is characterized by exceptional commitment to flexible, differentiated, and responsive instructional practice as evidenced by effective teacher modeling, high levels of student engagement, student-directed learning, and student growth. There is evidence of extensive and rigorous individualized instruction that is developmentally and culturally appropriate. A Teacher at the Excellent level takes initiative, provides leadership in the school and/or district and is committed to ethical, reflective, continuous, professional practice that ensures high levels of student learning and student ownership. PROFICIENT Professional practice at the Proficient level is consistently characterized by evidence of a solid knowledge of effective instructional practices, purposeful teaching preparation, and use of a broad repertoire of strategies and activities supported by the Indian Prairie District 204 Framework for Teaching. Practice at the Proficient level is consistent and includes high expectations for student learning. Accurate knowledge of instructional practices, content, students, and resources is demonstrated. A Teacher at the Proficient level works independently and collaboratively to improve his/her professional practice to support and promote high levels of student learning and demonstrate ethical and reflective professional practice. NEEDS IMPROVEMENT Professional practice at the Needs Improvement level is characterized by evidence of minimal understanding and/or implementation of the Indian Prairie District 204 Framework for Teaching. Practice at the Needs Improvement level is inconsistent. Understanding and implementation of instructional and/or professional behaviors demonstrate limited effectiveness with uneven results. A tenured Teacher at the Needs Improvement level requires specific supports and interventions to improve individual professional practice to Proficient or Excellent levels of practice. UNSATISFACTORY Professional practice at the Unsatisfactory level is characterized by evidence of little or no understanding and/or implementation of the Indian Prairie District 204 Framework for Teaching. Practice at the Unsatisfactory level is detrimental to student achievement. Inadequate and inappropriate instructional and/or unprofessional behaviors persist even after intervention(s) and support(s) have been provided. A tenured Teacher at the Unsatisfactory level must successfully implement specific steps to improve his/her professional practice to the Proficient or Excellent level. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 8

9 Section 5: Performance Evaluation Rating System Evaluation Plan As required by Illinois School Code, the Teacher Evaluation Plan shall address Planning (Domain 1) Classroom management (Domain 2) Instructional delivery (Domain 3) Competency in the subject matter (Domains 1 & 3) Teacher s attendance (Domain 4) Domain Ratings in Indian Prairie School District 204 Professional Appraisal Plan Excellent - Excellent ratings in at least half of the components of the domain, with the remaining components rated no lower than Proficient. Proficient No more than one component rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining components rated at Proficient or higher. Needs Improvement More than one component rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining components rated as Proficient or higher or in Domain 1 or 4 one component rated Unsatisfactory, with the remaining components rated as Proficient or higher. Unsatisfactory In Domain 2 and 3 any component rated as Unsatisfactory; Domain 1 or 4 two or more components rated as Unsatisfactory or one component rated as Unsatisfactory and one component rated as Needs Improvement. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 9

10 Overall Ratings in Indian Prairie School District 204 Professional Appraisal Plan Performance Evaluation (Summative) Rating System Excellent An Excellent rating in two or more of the Domains, with the remaining Domains rated as Proficient. Proficient No more than one Domain rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining Domains rated as Proficient or higher. Needs Improvement More than one Domain rated Needs Improvement OR one Unsatisfactory in either Domain 1 or 4, with the remaining Domains rated as Proficient or higher. Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory in more than one Domain OR Unsatisfactory rating in Domain 2 or 3. Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient X XX Excellent XXXX XXX XXX X XXXX X XX X X X XX X XXX X XXX XX XX XX X X XX XX XXX X XXX X XXXX X XXX X XX X X X XX X XXX XXXX XXX X XXX X XXX X XX XX XX X X XX X X XX XX XX XX X XXX X XX X X X XX X XXX X X XX X X X X X X XX XX Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 10

11 Professional Development Plan (Tenured Teachers Only) Within 30 school days after the receipt of a Needs Improvement performance evaluation (summative) rating, the administrator, in consultation with the teacher, shall develop a Professional Development Plan (Form F: Professional Development Plan). The Professional Development Plan (PDP) will address the following: the performance areas that need improvement, including reference to the relevant domains, the specific strategies and supports that will be used to improve performance taking into account the teacher s on-going professional responsibilities, including the teacher s regular teaching assignment(s), the dates of the first meeting and follow-up meeting(s) to be determined by the administrator and teacher, and the expected outcome(s) and indicators of progress/achievement of goals. The duration of the PDP will be minimally 30 school days. During this time the teacher and administrator will review the teacher s progress according to the PDP. The PDP may be extended for additional school days upon the recommendation of the administrator, and approval of the Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources. A performance evaluation (summative) rating will be provided to the teacher at the end of the PDP. If at the end of the Professional Development Plan, the teacher has corrected the performance areas and receives a rating of Proficient or Excellent, he or she is returned to the regular evaluation cycle. If the concerns remain unresolved, the teacher will receive an Unsatisfactory rating and the teacher will move into the remediation process. Remediation Plan (Tenured Teachers Only) At the performance evaluation (summative) conference, a teacher who receives an Unsatisfactory rating will be informed in writing of his/her need of remediation. Such tenured teacher rated as Unsatisfactory will undergo a remediation plan subject to the following (from School Code 24A): Within thirty (30) school days after summative evaluation has been reduced to writing resulting in a rating of Unsatisfactory, the District will develop and commence the remediation plan designed to correct the areas identified as Unsatisfactory, provided the deficiencies are deemed remediable. 1. The remediation plan will provide for evaluations and ratings once every forty-five (45) school days for ninety (90) school days immediately following the teacher's receipt of a remediation plan. 2. The evaluations and ratings shall be conducted by a qualified participating administrator. 3. The qualified participating administrator shall issue the final evaluation at the conclusion of the period specified by School Code within ten (10) school days after the conclusion of the plan. 4. Any teacher who successfully completes the remediation plan by receiving a Proficient or better rating at the conclusion of the remediation process shall be evaluated at least once during the school term following the receipt of the Unsatisfactory rating that triggered the remediation plan and thereafter be reinstated to a schedule of biennial evaluations so long as the teacher is rated proficient or better. Further information about the remediation process can be found in Section 6.11 of the Negotiated Agreement between Indian Prairie Education Association and Indian Prairie District 204 School Board. Please note that Form E: Notice of Concern is not used as part of the Professional Development Plan or Remediation Plan process. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 11

12 Section 6: Definitions of Terms in the Performance Evaluation Plan Artifacts An object that has been intentionally made or produced for a certain purpose. Artifacts are collected to demonstrate skill in the various components/domains of the Framework for Teaching. Artifacts are intended to stimulate discussion, reflection, and professional learning and are NOT regarded as show pieces but instead evidence of an ongoing practitioners professional learning in progress. Artifacts could include unit plans, activities, communication with families, completed student projects, professional learning notes/projects etc. Components Distinct aspects of a Domain as defined by the Framework for Teaching. Consulting Teacher An educational employee as defined in the Educational Labor Relations Act who has at least five years of experience as a Teacher and a reasonable familiarity with the assignment of the Teacher being evaluated, and who received an Excellent rating on his or her most recent evaluation. The Consulting Teacher is mutually selected by the Evaluator and Teacher from a list provided by the District or the Association and is used for the purpose of supporting the Teacher during the Remediation Plan, but s/he cannot be held responsible for the final outcome. These are considered characteristics of teaching practice and are not evident in all situations at all times. Instead, they can be used as the look for and listen for in teaching practice. Documentation Evidence/information that supports or explains the Teacher s work in each of the four Domains. Domains of Specialized Practice Four main areas of effective specialized practice (Planning and Preparation, Environment, Delivery of Services, and Professional Responsibilities). Domains of Teaching Practice Four main areas of effective teaching practice (Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities). Faculty The term faculty used in the frameworks may mean any group of staff members including but not limited to departments, grade level teams, job-alike teams, committees or special working groups, or the entire school staff. Observation (Formal) Formal observations will include the following: (1) are announced (2) are a minimum of 45 minutes, or a complete lesson, or an entire class period; (3) include pre-observation and post-observation conferences; and (4) include documentation of the observation provided to the Teacher. Observation (Informal) Informal observations will include the following: (1) are unannounced, (2) are a minimum of 10 minutes, (3) have no pre-observation conference, (4) have optional postobservation conference as requested by the Teacher or Evaluator or both; and (5) include documentation of the observation provided to the Teacher. Performance Evaluation (Summative) Written evaluation of the Teacher s job performance based on the ratings earned on each of the components. According to state requirements, Teacher performance shall be rated as: Excellent, Proficient, Needs Improvement, or Unsatisfactory. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 12

13 Performance Evaluation Conference (Summative) A performance evaluation conference is a meeting, separate from the post-observation conference, in which the Teacher and Evaluator review and sign the final Indian Prairie School District Framework for Teaching and discuss possible next steps for professional growth. Performance Evaluation Ratings (Summative) The final rating of the Teacher using the rating levels of Excellent, Proficient, Needs Improvement, or Unsatisfactory and includes consideration of professional practice and when applicable, indicators of student growth. (see Section 24A-2.5 of the School Code) Pre-Observation Conference A Pre-Observation Conference must precede a formal observation and include (1) a written lesson or unit plan and/or evidence of planning for lesson/activity in advance of the conference; (2) input by the Teacher regarding the focus of observation; and (3) a discussion of the lesson/activity to be observed. Post-Observation Conference A Post-Observation Conference must follow a formal observation and informal observation(when requested) and include (1) the Evaluator and the Teacher discussing the evidence collected about the Teacher s professional practice; (2) the Evaluator providing specific feedback in writing; (3) the Teacher being given the opportunity to reflect and respond to the evidence provided and give additional information/explanation if needed; and (4) notification by the Evaluator to the Teacher if the evidence collected to date may result in a component rating of Needs Improvement or Unsatisfactory. Professional Development Plan (PDP) A plan for professional development is created within 30 school days after a Needs Improvement performance evaluation rating is received. The PDP is developed by the Evaluator in consultation with a Teacher based upon areas that need improvement and includes supports that the district will provide to address the performance areas identified as needing improvement. (see Section 11 and Section 24 A-5 of the School Code) Qualified Evaluator An individual who has completed the pre-qualification process and who has successfully passed the state-developed assessments specified to evaluate Teachers. Each qualified Evaluator shall maintain his/her qualification by completing the re-training required. (see Section 24A-3 of the School Code) Remediation Plan A state-mandated plan created by the Evaluator to commence within 30 days after a Tenured Teacher has been rated Unsatisfactory on a Performance Evaluation. The Remediation Plan shall have deficiencies cited, provided the deficiencies are remediable; be implemented in a 90 school day timeframe; provide for a midpoint performance evaluation that includes, within 10 days, a written copy of the evaluation ratings, with deficiencies and recommendations identified; and provide for a final performance evaluation within 10 days after the conclusion of the remediation timeframe. The Teacher must receive a Proficient or Excellent rating to be reinstated to the regular evaluation cycle. A Consulting Teacher will help support the Teacher with the implementation of the Remediation Plan during the 90 school day period. (see Section 12 and the School Code) Specialist Persons included in the following categories of Teacher: Guidance Counselors, Instructional Specialists, Library Media Specialists, School Nurses, School Psychologists, Social Workers, and Therapeutic Specialists. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 13

14 Student Growth Data This will be determined after the Illinois State Board of Education has set forth rules, regulations, and recommendations regarding student growth, beginning in Teacher - A full-time or part-time professional employee of the school district who is required to hold a teaching certificate or a professional educator s license endorsed for a teaching field. (see Article 21 or Article 21B of the School Code) Written Notification Document provided to each Teacher by the first day of student attendance (or no later than thirty days after the contract is executed but prior to the commencement of the evaluation process if the Teacher is hired after the start of the school term): 1) Rating definitions and the method for determining the ratings; 2) Performance Evaluation rubric that is appropriate for the Teacher; and 3) the defined process for a Teacher who receives Needs improvement or Unsatisfactory. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 14

15 Section 7: Informal Observation, Formal Observation, and Performance Evaluation Rating Process Please note that the process below is described using Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching. Please substitute the appropriate Specialist Framework, Guidesheets (B2 and C2), etc. when necessary. Informal Observation Process: A. A Pre-Conference is not required for an informal observation. B. Observations must be made in the classroom/work setting. C. If evidence from an informal observation gathered by an Evaluator will be used in the performance evaluation (summative) rating, the Teacher will receive a copy of Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching, as completed by the Evaluator, no less than one (1) work day prior to any conference. Additional evidence specific to the observation may be documented by the Teacher and returned to the Evaluator after receiving Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching. The written compilation and any additional evidence will be discussed with the teacher within ten (10) work days of the occurrence of the informal observation. D. If evidence indicates Needs Improvement or Unsatisfactory practice in any of the components, a Post-Observation Conference shall occur no later than ten (10) work days after the Teacher has received a copy of Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching, as filled out by the Evaluator. Form E: Notice of Concern will accompany the Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching and will identify the component(s) of concern. Formal Observation Process: A. The Teacher will complete the following Pre-Observation Conference steps: Electronically document evidence in Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Domain 1 and Domain 4 sections, using the guiding questions to support the documentation. Submit the form to the Evaluator no later than one (1) work day before the Pre-Observation Conference. The Teacher should also prepare to respond to the questions contained on Form B1: Guide sheet for Teaching Pre-Observation Process/Conference. The Teacher will bring evidence of planning specific to the observation (e.g. a lesson plan). Teachers are also encouraged to bring artifacts that support the planning process. B. Observations must be for a minimum of forty-five (45) minutes, a complete lesson or an entire class period in a classroom/work setting. The Evaluator will collect evidence of the observed professional practice in Domains 2 and 3. C. The Post-Observation Conference will be scheduled no sooner than one (1) work day after the teacher receives Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching to review. Additional evidence in all domains may be documented by the Teacher and returned to the Evaluator no later than five (5) school days after receiving Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching. No more than ten (10) work days will elapse between the formal observation and the Post-Observation Conference. During the Post-Observation Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 15

16 Conference, Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching will be reviewed and may be modified based upon additional information and dialogue between the Teacher and the Evaluator. The Teacher should also prepare to respond to the questions contained on Form C1: Guide sheet for Teaching Post-Observation Process/Conference. Teachers may bring additional documents or artifacts to the Post-Observation Conference. Evaluators may also add evidence to Domains 1 and 4 prior to the Post-Observation Conference. Based upon the Post-Observation Conference, the Evaluator will make necessary modifications to Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching and provide the updated form to the Teacher. D. If evidence indicates Needs Improvement or Unsatisfactory practice in any of the components, the Teacher will receive a copy of Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching and Form E: Notice of Concern which will identify the component(s) of concern. Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) Process: A. All evidence shall be documented in Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching by Teacher and Evaluator and a Performance Evaluation (Summative) Conference will be held no later than March 1 for probationary teachers, no later than March 15 for tenured teachers, and no later than May 15 for part-time teachers in any year a performance evaluation rating is issued. B. At least one (1) work day prior to the Performance Evaluation (Summative) Conference, the Evaluator will provide the Teacher with a final Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching and Form D: Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Rating. A conference shall be held within ten (10) work days of receipt of the Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) Form. C. A copy of the Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) Form signed by both parties shall be given to the Teacher at the end of the conference, with the Teacher s signature indicating receipt of the evaluation. D. The Teacher and Evaluator will review the final Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching and discuss future steps for professional growth. E. A Teacher has the option to attach additional comments to Form D: Indian Prairie School District 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative). Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 16

17 Section 8: Non-tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart: Years 1-4 TIME OF YEAR By the first student attendance day (or within 30 days of hire, if hired after the start of the year) EVALUATION TIMELINE FOR YEAR 1-4 (NON-TENURED) PROCESS Review of the teacher evaluation process using the Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Plan Written notification of evaluation FORMS Indian Prairie School District 204 Performance Evaluation Plan 1 st day of School through March 1 Three (3) observations required: at least two (2) must be formal Two (2) required: Formal Observation (Pre- and Post- Observation Conference) One (1) or more Informal Observations (Post-Observation Conference by request of either Evaluator or Teacher or both) as needed* Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Form B1: Guidesheet for Teaching Pre- Observation Process/Conference Form C1: Guidesheet for Teaching Post- Observation Process/Conference Form E1: Notice of Concern for Teachers (if needed) By March 1 Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative)received by Teacher one (1) work day prior to Conference Performance Evaluation Conference required Form D: Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (summative) Form Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Non-Tenured Teachers must have a rating of Proficient or Excellent in the last two years of non-tenured status. Tenure will be granted in accordance with the State law. Tenure will only be considered for Teachers who have a summative rating of Proficient or Excellent at the end of the fourth probationary year. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 17

18 Section 9: Tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart TIME OF YEAR PROCESS FORMS By the first student attendance day Review of the teacher evaluation process using the Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Plan Written notification of evaluation Indian Prairie School District 204 Performance Evaluation Plan From the 1 st day of student attendance until March 15 Two (2) observations required: at least one (1) must be formal. One (1) required Formal Observation (Preand Post-Observation Conference) One (1) or more Informal Observations (Post-Observation Conference by request of either Evaluator or Teacher or both) as needed* By March 15 Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) received by Teacher one (1) work day prior to Conference Performance Evaluation Conference required o Overall Rating of Proficient or Excellent Continuation of the district s evaluation schedule o Overall Rating of Needs Improvement Professional Development Plan o Overall Rating of Unsatisfactory Remediation Plan Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Form B1: Guidesheet for Teaching Pre-Observation Process/Conference Form C1: Guidesheet for Teaching Post-Observation Process/Conference Form E1: Notice of Concern for Teachers (if needed) Form D: Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (summative) Form Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 18

19 Section 10: Tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart: Needs Improvement TIME OF YEAR PROCESS FORMS Within 30 school days of the Teacher receiving an overall rating of Needs Improvement Within the first 30 days of PDP development If PDP is extended additional days At the conclusion of the PDP Teacher and Evaluator collaborate to construct a Professional Development Plan (PDP) to address components that are cited as needing improvement Minimum of two (2) required : Formal Observation (Pre- and Post-Observation Conference) One (1) or more Informal Observations (Post-Observation Conference required) Section contract timeline of twenty (20) work days between observations does not apply to a teacher in the PDP process At least one (1) Formal Observation (Pre and Post-Observation Conference) required One or more Informal Observations (Post- Observation Conference required) Section contract timeline of twenty (20) work days between observations does not apply to a teacher in the PDP process Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) received by Teacher one (1) work day prior to Conference Performance Evaluation Conference required o Overall Rating of Proficient or Excellent Continuation of the district s evaluation schedule o Overall Rating of Unsatisfactory Remediation Plan Performance Evaluation Conference Form F: Professional Development Plan Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Form B1: Guidesheet for Teaching Pre-Observation Process/Conference Form C1: Guidesheet for Teaching Post-Observation Process/Conference Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Form B1: Guidesheet for Teaching Pre-Observation Process/Conference Form C1: Guidesheet for Teaching Post-Observation Process/Conference Form D: Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (summative) Form Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching For Tenured-Needs Improvement, a minimum of three (3) observations must be conducted during the evaluation cycle with two of the observations being formal. Please note that Form E1: Notice of Concern is not used during the PDP process. If the tenured teacher then achieves a rating equal to, or better than, Proficient in the school year following the Unsatisfactory rating, they shall be reinstated to the school district s regular evaluation schedule for tenured teachers. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 19

20 Section 11: Tenured Professional Evaluation Plan Chart: Unsatisfactory TIME OF YEAR PROCESS FORMS Within 30 school days of Teacher receiving an overall rating of Unsatisfactory Evaluator will develop a 90 day Remediation Plan to address deficiencies cited, provided the deficiencies are remediable Explain and confirm the Remediation Plan with Teacher and Consulting Teacher Remediation Plan Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Immediately upon receipt of the Remediation Plan Before the 45 day midpoint of the Remediation Plan period At the midpoint of the Remediation Plan period After the midpoint of the Remediation Plan period At the conclusion of the Remediation Plan period The Teacher begins the implementation of the Remediation Plan with the support of the Consulting Teacher One (1) Formal Observation (Pre-Observation and Post- Observation Conference) One (1) Informal Observation (Post-Observation Conference is required) Additional Formal and/or Informal Observations as determined by the Evaluator Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) Remediation Plan Evaluation is conducted and reviewed with the Teacher One (1) Formal Observation (Pre-Observation and Post- Observation Conference) One (1) Informal Observation (Post-Observation Conference is required) Additional Formal and/or Informal Observations as determined by the Evaluator Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) Remediation Plan Evaluation is conducted and reviewed with the Teacher o Overall rating of Proficient or Excellent Reinstatement to the district s evaluation schedule, Teacher will be evaluated at least once during the following school term. o If overall rating is not Proficient or better Immediate recommendation for dismissal (Section of the School Code) Remediation Plan Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Form B1: Guidesheet for Teaching Pre-Observation Process/Conference Form C1: Guidesheet for Teaching Post-Observation Process/Conference Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Form B1: Guidesheet for Teaching Pre-Observation Process/Conference Form C1: Guidesheet for Teaching Post-Observation Process/Conference Form D: Indian Prairie 204 Performance Evaluation Rating (Summative) Form Form A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching For Tenured-Unsatisfactory, a minimum of three (3) observations must be conducted during the evaluation cycle with two of the observations being formal. Please note that Form E1: Notice of Concern is not used during the Remediation process. If the tenured teacher then achieves a rating equal to, or better than, Proficient in the school year following the Unsatisfactory rating, they shall be reinstated to the school district s regular evaluation schedule for tenured teachers. Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 20

21 Domain 1: Planning and Preparation 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy In planning and practice, teacher makes content errors or does not correct errors made by students. Teacher displays little understanding of prerequisite knowledge important to student learning of the content. Teacher displays little or no understanding of the range of pedagogical approaches suitable to student learning of the content. FORM A: Indian Prairie Framework for Teaching Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient Excellent Teacher is familiar with the important Teacher displays solid knowledge of concepts in the discipline but displays the important concepts in the lack of awareness of how these discipline and how these relate to one concepts relate to one another. Teacher another. Teacher demonstrates indicates some awareness of accurate understanding of prerequisite prerequisite learning, although such relationships among topics. Teacher s knowledge may be inaccurate or plans and practice reflect familiarity incomplete. Teacher s plans and with a wide range of effective practice reflect a limited range of pedagogical approaches in the subject. pedagogical approaches to the discipline or to the students. Teacher displays extensive knowledge of the important concepts in the discipline and how these relate both to one another and to other disciplines. Teacher demonstrates understanding of prerequisite relationships among topics and concepts and understands the link to necessary cognitive structures that ensure student understanding. Teacher s plans and practice reflect familiarity with a wide range of effective pedagogical approaches in the discipline and the ability to anticipate student misconceptions. Teacher makes content errors. Teacher does not consider prerequisite relationships when planning. Teacher s plans use inappropriate strategies for the discipline. Teacher s understanding of the discipline is rudimentary. Teacher s knowledge of prerequisite relationships is inaccurate or incomplete. Lesson and unit plans use limited instructional strategies, and some are not be suitable to the content. Teacher can identify important concepts of the discipline and their relationships to one another. Teacher provides clear explanations of the content. Teacher answers student questions accurately and provides feedback that furthers their learning. Instructional strategies in unit and lesson plans are entirely suitable to the content. Teacher cites intra- and interdisciplinary content relationships. Teacher s plans demonstrate awareness of possible student misconceptions and how they can be addressed. Teacher s plans reflect recent developments in content-related pedagogy. Guiding Question: What are the key concepts and their relationship to the lesson to be observed and the unit within which it falls? Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 21

22 1b: Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient Excellent Teacher displays generally accurate knowledge of how students learn and of their varied approaches to learning, knowledge and skills, special needs, and interests and cultural heritage yet may apply this knowledge not to individual students but to the class as a whole. Teacher displays minimal understanding of how students learn and little knowledge of their varied approaches to learning, knowledge and skills, special needs, and interests and cultural heritage and does not indicate that such knowledge is valuable. Teacher does not understand child development characteristics and has unrealistic expectations for students. Teacher does not try to ascertain varied ability levels among students in the class. Teacher is not aware of student interests or cultural heritages. Teacher takes no responsibility to learn about students medical or learning disabilities. Teacher cites developmental theory but does not seek to integrate it into lesson planning. Teacher is aware of the different ability levels in the class but tends to teach to the whole group. Teacher recognizes that children have different interests and cultural backgrounds but rarely draws on their contributions or differentiates materials to accommodate those differences. Teacher is aware of medical issues and learning disabilities with some students but does not seek to understand the implications of that knowledge. Teacher understands the active nature of student learning and attains information about levels of development for groups of students. Teacher also purposefully acquires knowledge from several sources about groups of students varied approaches to learning, knowledge and skills, special needs, and interests and cultural heritage. Teacher knows, for groups of students, their levels of cognitive development. Teacher is aware of the different cultural groups in the class. Teacher has a good idea of the range of interests of students in the class. Teacher has identified high, medium, and low groups of students within the class. Teacher is well informed about students cultural heritage and incorporates this knowledge in lesson planning. Teacher is aware of the special needs represented by students in the class. Teacher understands the active nature of student learning and acquires information about levels of development for individual students. Teacher also systematically acquires knowledge from several sources about individual students varied approaches to learning, knowledge and skills, special needs, and interests and cultural heritage. Teacher uses ongoing methods to assess students skill levels and designs instruction accordingly. Teacher seeks out information from all students about their cultural heritage. Teacher maintains a system of updated student records and incorporates medical and/or learning needs into lesson plans. Guiding Question: How did your awareness of students interests/needs, prior knowledge, culture, and experiences impact your planning? Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 22

23 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient Excellent Outcomes represent moderately high Most outcomes represent rigorous and expectations and rigor. Some reflect important learning in the discipline important learning in the discipline and and are clear, are written in the form consist of a combination of outcomes of student learning, and suggest viable and activities. Outcomes reflect several methods of assessment. Outcomes types of learning, but teacher has made reflect several different types of no effort at coordination or integration. learning and opportunities for Outcomes, based on global assessments coordination, and they are of student learning, are suitable for differentiated, in whatever way is most of the students in the class. needed, for different groups of students. Outcomes represent low expectations for students and lack of rigor, and not all of these outcomes reflect important learning in the discipline. They are stated as student activities, rather than as outcomes for learning. Outcomes reflect only one type of learning and only one discipline or strand and are suitable for only some students. All outcomes represent high-level learning in the discipline. They are clear, are written in the form of student learning, and permit viable methods of assessment. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and, where appropriate, represent both coordination and integration. Outcomes are differentiated, in whatever way is needed, for individual students. Outcomes lack rigor. Outcomes do not represent important learning in the discipline. Outcomes are not clear or are stated as activities. Outcomes are not suitable for many students in the class. Outcomes represent a mixture of low expectations and rigor. Some outcomes reflect important learning in the discipline. Outcomes are suitable for most of the class. Outcomes represent high expectations and rigor. Outcomes are related to big ideas of the discipline. Outcomes are written in terms of what students will learn rather than do. Outcomes represent a range of types: factual knowledge, conceptual understanding, reasoning, social interaction, management, and communication. Outcomes, differentiated where necessary, are suitable to groups of students in the class. Teacher s plans reference curricular frameworks or blueprints to ensure accurate sequencing. Teacher connects outcomes to previous and future learning. Outcomes are differentiated to encourage individual students to take educational risks. Guiding Question: How did you develop student learning outcomes to meet the varying needs of your students? Indian Prairie District 204 Professional Evaluation Plan 5/13 Page 23