The system offers different processes to new teachers,
teachers having difficulty, and the vast majority of
teachers
who meet or exceed good standards of teaching but need
support for their continued growth. It emphasizes creating
a learning atmosphere in each school for and
between teachers. It provides administrators and teachers
with extensive opportunities for training that underscore
the complexity of the craft of teaching. Hopefully, it
will elevate the level of dialogue about good teaching,
what it looks like, and the connection between good teaching
and student achievement.
Formal evaluations will take the form of detailed narrative
description rather than a superficial checklist. The
competent, experienced teacher will require less frequent
evaluations, emphasizing instead, self-designed opportunities
for professional growth.
Resources exist at the school level and countywide.
The school based will facilitate collaboration between
teachers and will help each teacher develop individual
professional
development plans. Teachers will be given time to work
on professional development activities by means of
allocated
substitute teachers. Professional growth activities
will be considered legitimate team/IRA assignments
at
the secondary level. Job-embedded staff development
provides teachers with time to learn from one another.
Under-performing teachers and those new to the profession
will receive mentoring and support through the Peer
Assistance and Review program. Specially trained will work intensively with new teachers
and those veteran teachers who have been evaluated as
being at risk. The services of the Consulting Teacher
are in addition to the teacher mentoring program already
in place.
Future development will focus on additional ways to
recognize, reward and utilize excellence in teaching.
Non-tenured teachers (first and second year teachers)
will be evaluated at the end of their first and second
year. This is different from the former system, where
these teachers were evaluated twice a year for the
first
two years of employment with MCPS. Tenured teachers
will be evaluated on a 3, 4 or 5 year cycle depending
on years of experience.
This is different from the former system where all
tenured teachers were evaluated
every
three years. If a principal has a concern regarding
the performance of a tenured or a non-tenured teacher,
a special
evaluation may be requested at any time.
A non-tenured teacher must be observed a minimum of
two times a year, and a tenured teacher must be observed
a
minimum of two times a year in his/her evaluation
year. If the final rating for a tenured teacher is
"below standard," the minimum number of observations
is three. At least one observation must be by an individual
other than the immediate supervisor.
Test scores will be one of the many forms of
data used as evidence of claims about teacher competence.
Other
data sources include running records of observations
of teachers, examples of student work, attendance records,
and products of teacher work and professional development
activities that the teacher has undertaken. Test scores
will never serve as the sole source of data for judgments
about teacher competence.
The role of the principal (and other leadership team
members in the secondary school) will remain essentially
the same.
The principal or designated administrator will still
be responsible for all evaluations. IRTs and resource
teachers
will continue to observe the teachers whom they supervise.
However, consulting teachers will be working with teachers
new to the profession, coaching, demonstrating good
teaching
practice, and submitting reports that will be used
in the evaluation of those teachers.
For the past two years, Research for Better Teaching,
a well-respected educational consulting firm located
in
Acton, Massachusetts (under the leadership of Dr. Jon
Saphier) has offered Observation and Analysis of Teaching
(OAT I and II) for administrators and for members of
leadership
teams responsible for observing teachers (secondary
level). Beginning in Fall 2000, a new course, Understanding
Teaching
(UT) will be offered to teachers via inservice classes.
This class is not required, but it is highly recommended
for all MCPS teachers. OAT I and II promote a common
language
about teaching for educators, which is also one of
the objectives of the UT classes. MCPS administrators
in Phase
1, 2 and 3 schools will be looking for additional ways
to introduce teachers to the principles espoused in
Jon
Saphier's The Skillful Teacher.
The Evaluation
Form is very simple. The six performance standards
serve as springboards for detailed
narrative explanations. The narrative includes claims,
evidence, interpretations and judgments. Teachers either "meet" or
are "below" standard.
The draft PDP form is included in the MCPS
Teacher Evaluation Handbook (a draft copy will be distributed
to all teachers and administers in Phase 1 schools).
This evaluation system is still a work in progress!
Such positions as those named above will use the evaluation
form from the old system. However, these professionals
will develop a professional development plan, and their
evaluation cycle will correspond to the new teacher
evaluation
cycle. In addition, next year the evaluation of administrators,
central office personnel and support services will
be
revised.
The teacher's name is referred to the PAR program.
The PAR panel assigns a consulting teacher who will
conduct
observations to determine if the teacher should be
admitted to the PAR program. If admitted, the consulting
teacher
will work intensively with the under-performing teacher
for up to a year. The consulting teacher observes and
provides support for the teacher to develop competencies
to meet MCPS standards. The consulting teacher eventually
makes a recommendation to the PAR Panel at the conclusion
of the academic year. The PAR Panel will either recommend
termination, an additional year in PAR if referred
in
January due to a special evaluation or return to the
formal evaluation year in the multi-year professional
growth
cycle if the teacher has improved sufficiently to be
rated as meeting standard.
One of the most exciting aspects of the MCPS Teacher
Evaluation System is the emphasis on professional growth
activities. Staff development teachers (or IRTs and
resource
teachers with partial staff development allocations)
have been trained to facilitate the development of
these plans.
The development of individual plans must reflect school
and system goals. The plans are written for 3-5 years
(depending on the teacher's evaluation cycle), and
they
are reviewed annually. The professional development
options and strategies provide teachers with more contact
with
colleagues. Samples of options and strategies include
collaboration, independent study, action research,
peer
observation, and special staff development and training
offered within MCPS and outside the county.
Teachers will be able to engage in professional growth
activities because substitute teachers will be provided
at the elementary level as well as designated team
time
or IRA time on the secondary level.
Yes! Feedback from teachers and administrators will
be very important as we begin the first phase of the
program.
Please address questions, concerns and suggestions
to Jean Haven, Office of Human Resources. The teacher
evaluation system is truly a work in progress. Input
is
greatly appreciated and will be seriously considered.
|
