Screen Shot 2014-10-20 at 3.45.27 PM.png

Achieving Equity in Teacher Distribution (Kent County Public Schools Teacher Evaluation Systems)

 

Teacher Evaluation and Race To The Top

Since the 2009-2010 school year, a local Teacher Evaluation Committee of teachers and administrators has worked to revise the teacher evaluation system in Kent County.  Having volunteered to be one of the pilot systems for the state teacher evaluation project under Race to the Top, the committee is striving to align the qualitative portion of the evaluation to align with the framework developed by Charlotte Danielson. During the 2012-2013 school teachers from all KCPS schools participated in the new evaluation system.  At the same time, principals have piloted a new system based on the Maryland Instructional Leadership Framework that includes both qualitative and quantitative measures. Throughout the coming year, KCPS staff will fully implement the new teacher and principal evaluation systems, while providing feedback to the local committee to ensure a fair and effective evaluation system.

 

Teacher Evaluation[Descriptor (a)(1)]

Kent County Public Schools has a Board of Education approved teacher evaluation system made up of both observations and an annual evaluation.  Observations are formative and intended to give ongoing and specific feedback as well as provide ideas for professional growth. Observers rate teacher performance under the major categories of planning and preparation, classroom environment, instructional effectiveness, and professional responsibilities. The second part of a teacher’s evaluation is based on the impact of that teacher’s craft on the achievement of their students.  This part of the measure is based on student achievement data of standardized tests and other measures that embedded in Student Learning Objectives. The annual evaluation is summative and includes information from all observations in that time period as well as other relevant information.

 

 

All tenured teachers are evaluated at least once every two (2) years by personnel certified by the State Department of Education and designated by the Superintendent. Tenured teachers may be evaluated on a more frequent basis at the determination of the supervisor and principal or at the request of the teacher. Non-tenured teachers are formally evaluated at least once every semester. Each evaluation includes a conference with the school administrator and the supervisor responsible for the teacher’s area of certification.

 

In cases where the need for a Professional Improvement Plan (PIP) has been identified, a plan is designed in collaboration with an educator and an administrator. The administrator will convene a conference with the educator at a mutually agreeable time to discuss the targeted performance area(s), and to formulate a plan with specific recommendations to assist in improvement. The educator and the administrator will jointly reflect on the area of growth and work collaboratively to improve student learning.

 

How are the teacher evaluation results used regarding professional development?

The results of annual teacher evaluations provide evidence of professional growth as well as areas of need for school-based and system-wide professional development. Kent County Public Schools examine both leading and lagging observation and evaluation data to prioritize professional development needs. Tenured staff develop annual goals related to their written professional plan which includes aspects of teaching that are directly related to their instructional area and in support of improved student achievement. Principals encourage teachers to align their personal professional development goals with needs identified in the School Improvement Plans, student data, and system professional development needs.

 

How are the teacher evaluation results used regarding compensation?

Upon a successful evaluation at the end of the school year, teachers are moved to their appropriate Schedule Step and Class in the negotiated agreement and compensated accordingly.  At times a teacher, despite intensive professional development and support through the Improvement Plan process, may be found ineffective in his or her evaluations.  At that time, a Superintendent may deem it necessary to put a teacher on a second-class certificate, freezing the salary at the current level.

 

How are the teacher evaluation results used regarding promotion?

Evaluations may be considered when teachers apply for administrative and supervisory positions, but are not explicitly required.

 

How are the teacher evaluation results used regarding retention and removal?

Teacher evaluation results are used in both the retention and removal processes. All tenured teachers are evaluated at least once every two (2) years by personnel certified by the State Department of Education and designated by the Superintendent. Tenured teachers may be evaluated on a more frequent basis at the determination of the supervisor and principal or by request of the teacher. Non-tenured teachers are formally evaluated at least once every semester. Each evaluation includes a conference with the school administrator and the supervisor responsible for the teacher’s area of certification. The results of teacher evaluations are also used to retain teachers. Upon successful evaluations for a two-year period, tenure is granted and teachers may move along the corresponding Step and Class in the negotiated agreement.

 

2012-2013 Teacher Performance Levels [Indicator (a)(4)]

 

All KCPS Teachers

New Evaluation System Pilot Data

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Ineffective

2

5%

Developing

15

37.5%

Effective

16

40%

Highly Effective

7

17.5%

Total

40

 

 

Non-Tenured Teachers

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

1

2.6%

Improvement Needed

1

2.6%

Satisfactory

37

94.8%

Total

39

 

 

 

2012-2013 Teacher Performance Levels by School [Indicator (a)(5)]

Galena Elementary School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

0

0%

Improvement Needed

0

0%

Satisfactory

12

100%

Total

12

 

 

 

Henry Highland Garnett Elementary School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

1

5%

Improvement Needed

2

10%

Satisfactory

18

85%

Total

21

 

 

Millington Elementary School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

0

0%

Improvement Needed

0

0%

Satisfactory

17

100%

Total

17

 

 

 

Rock Hall Elementary School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

0

0%

Improvement Needed

3

19%

Satisfactory

13

81%

Total

16

 

 

Worton Elementary School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

0

0%

Improvement Needed

5

25%

Satisfactory

15

75%

Total

20

 

 

 

2012-2013Teacher Performance Levels by School [Indicator (a)(5)]

 

Kent County Middle School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

1

3%

Improvement Needed

2

6%

Satisfactory

34

91%

Total

37

 

 

 

Kent County High School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

3

7%

Improvement Needed

1

2%

Satisfactory

42

91%

Total

46

 

 

Intensive Behavior and Academic Learning Center at Kent County High School

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Teachers

Percentage of Teachers

Unsatisfactory

1

25%

Improvement Needed

0

0%

Satisfactory

4

75%

Total

4

 

 

 

Achieving Equity in Principal Distribution

(KCPS Principal Evaluation Systems)

 

Principal Evaluation[Descriptor (a)(2)]

The Superintendent of Schools evaluates all KCPS principals. The Superintendent conducts both formal and informal observations of the principals as they facilitate school-based professional development, lead School Improvement Team meetings, and supervise staff. The formal principal evaluation is based on the Maryland Instructional Leadership Framework.  This tool is used to evaluate principals on an annual basis. The evaluation process includes the development of a “Principal Portfolio,” showcasing artifacts and data collected as evidence of achieving individual goals. School goals are required to be aligned with system goals and determined primarily by student achievement data (local, state, and national assessments). In completing the evaluation form, the principals are rated by the evaluator as Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, and Ineffective. Principals may be evaluated on a more frequent basis at the determination of the superintendent.

 

How are the principal evaluation results used regarding professional development?

Principal evaluations may indicate a need for specific professional development in one or more of the competency indicators. The Superintendent of Schools will identify appropriate staff development activities to help the principal be more effective in the identified area. If a need exists for multiple principals, the Superintendent may recommend a more systematic approach to providing professional development.

 

How are the principal evaluation results used regarding compensation?

Upon a successful evaluation at the end of the school year, principals are moved to their appropriate Schedule Step and Class in the negotiated agreement and compensated accordingly.

 

Evaluations may be considered when principals apply for other administrative and supervisory positions, but are not explicitly required.

 

How are the principal evaluation results used regarding retention and removal?

Principal evaluation results are used in both the retention and removal processes. The results are used to retain principals by providing them professional development growth and leadership opportunities as well as their placement of the appropriate Schedule Step and Class in the negotiated agreement.  To help retain principals, the evaluation data may also be used to develop a plan of specific activities to assist their professional growth. Principal evaluation results are the basis for the removal or reassignment of a principal based on their performance.

 

2012-2013Principal Performance Levels [Indicator (a)(7)]

 

All KCPS Principals

Performance Rating or Level

Number of Principals

Percentage of Principals

Ineffective

0

0%

Developing

0

0%

Effective

7

100%

Highly Effective

0

0%

Total

7

100%

 

 

PART II: Achievement Outcomes and Evaluation Systems

Directions: Check the appropriate response for questions 1 and 2 to report information for indicators(a)(3) and (a)(6).

 

Citation

Description

Rationale

Indicator (a)(3)

Indicate, for each LEA in the State, whether the systems used to evaluate the performance of teachers include student achievement outcomes or student growth as an evaluation criterion.

Evaluation systems that include student achievement outcomes yield reliable assessments of teacher performance. Knowing if an evaluation system includes these outcomes informs the value of teacher performance ratings.

 

  1. Do your evaluation systems include student achievement outcomes or student growth? (Mark "Yes" or "No")  

 

  1. __X__ Yes, the systems used to evaluate the performance of teachers include student achievement outcomes or student growth as an evaluation criterion.

 

  1. If Yes, please respond (check one):

 

_____ Student achievement outcomes are included as an evaluation criterion.

 

___X__ Student growth is included as an evaluation criterion.

 

  1. _____No, the systems used to evaluate the performance of teachers do not include student achievement outcomes or student growth as an evaluation criterion.

 

Citation

Description

Rationale

Indicator (a)(6)

Indicate, for each LEA in the State, whether the systems used to evaluate the performance of principals include student achievement outcomesor student growth data as an evaluation criterion.

Evaluation systems that include student achievement outcomes yield reliable assessments of teacher performance.  Knowing if an evaluation system includes these outcomes informs the value of teacher performance ratings.

 

  1. Do the systems used to evaluate the performance of principals include student achievement outcomes or student growth as an evaluation criterion?  (Mark "Yes" or "No") 

 

  1. __X___Yes, the systems used to evaluate the performance of principals include student achievement outcomes or student growth as an evaluation criterion.

 

  1. If Yes, please respond (check one):

 

____ Student achievement outcomes are included as an evaluation criterion.

 

__X__ Student growth is included as an evaluation criterion.

 

  1. _____No, the systems used to evaluate the performance of principals do not include student achievement outcomes or student growth as an evaluation criterion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FacebookTwitterLinkedinPinterest

We have 12 guests and no members online

Go to top