For easier navigation, questions are grouped into categories. If you don't see your question in any of the categories below, please use the Submit a Question form and we will add it to this page.
A. Overall, the pilot will be the same. The main difference is that we will be piloting the 50% student outcomes for some teacher types. You will find out more about the student outcomes pilot in training prior to the 2012-13 school year. We are also in the process of making modifications to the observation process, student perception surveys, and the Framework for Effective Teaching based on feedback from this year’s pilot.
A. The 2012-13 LEAP pilot will include the same teacher types as this year’s pilot: classroom teachers, specials/electives teachers, intervention teachers and all special education teachers (no special services providers).
A. Similar to this year, teachers will NOT receive an overall rating at the end of the 2012-13 LEAP pilot. However, we are hoping to provide more clarity on how the multiple measures of LEAP will come together to inform a final rating in 2013-14.
A. All teachers who complete the 2012-13 LEAP pilot will automatically receive a “Satisfactory” rating in the pilot. The rating will allow teachers enrolled in ProComp to receive the salary incentive if 2012-13 is their comprehensive performance review year.
A. We are building a remediation process within the 2012-13 LEAP pilot and will not be pulling out teachers.
A. All DPS schools will be in the 2012-13 pilot. There is not a vote.
A. Per state statute, Innovation schools are able to apply for waivers from district evaluation systems. However, these schools will need to put structures in place that comply with the requirements of SB 191. We strongly encourage all DPS schools to take advantage of the work that has been put into making LEAP a fair and reliable evaluation and support system for teachers in DPS. We are working at this moment to determine what flexibilities innovation schools can have in regard to the LEAP system. More information around these flexibilities will be forthcoming. Additionally, we are working on developing the ability for schools, such as Innovation schools, to build their school-based expectations/indicators into the Framework for Effective Teaching. Intensive Pathway schools should talk with their Instructional Superintendent to determine LEAP pilot participation.
A. The 2011-12 LEAP End-of-Year Reflection and Goal Setting Report is intended to be a tool to inform professional growth conversations between principals and teachers. The data in the report will help as teachers reflect on their strengths and set growth goals for the following year. Principals will capture on the report the thinking and reflection that is generated from the end of year conversation. He/she will then provide a copy for the teacher and keep the original on file to be referred to at the beginning of next school year. As agreed upon in the MOU with DCTA, LEAP pilot data cannot be used in remediation or dismissal proceedings.
A. In some of our discussions through the design process, and ultimately as the pilot evolves, one particular question that begs to be answered is "do we need to evaluate and support early career teachers the same way as we do veteran teachers?". That questionhasn't been answered yet. Including experienced teachers in the pilot will help inform any particular needs that might be unique to teacher experience as well as differing professional opportunities to experienced educators in the future by capturing their strengths in the classroom. We've never had a system that could do that before.
A. When the MOU for LEAP was bargained by DCTA and DPS, there is an obligation to participate based on simple majority vote by teaching staff by each school. This was meant to help teachers and principals by not making buildings keep up with two different evaluation systems, and giving both organizations enough data to see how the pilot is working so we can build the best possible system for all teachers, in our efforts to move away from a punitive system to one that is focused on growth and recognizing the complexity of teaching. As per SB-191, all teachers will be evaluated every year, and we have a window of opportunity to build the system thoughtfully.
A. All teachers participating in the LEAP 2011-2012 pilot receive three formal, unannounced classroom observations alternating between a principal and Peer Observer: Observation Window 1: September 12 – November 9 Observation Window 2: November 14 – January 13 Observation Window 3: January 17 – April 13 The first observation includes ratings on all indicators – anywhere between 18-21 depending on if your position is ELA or not. The second observation centers on both School-Wide and Personal Areas of Focus as well as ELA indicators (if applicable) with no ratings. The third observation includes only ratings on Areas of Focus (and relevant ELA Indicators only); with observations conducted by the same observer as in Window 2. This allows for ratings from both principal/AP and Peer Observer during the 2011-12 pilot year. Not a formal observation window, the fourth observation window (April 16-May) will be used by Peer Observers to beta test the revised Framework with approximately 20 teachers each (on a volunteer basis). Feedback from the Peer Observers and teachers will inform summer training on the new Framework and observation process for the 2012-13 pilot year. Principals/APs will conduct End of Year conversations with teachers during Window 4 to discuss: - Review of 2011-12 observation and Student Perception Survey data - Professionalism (no scores) measure of LEAP introduced - Planning around Areas of Focus for 2012-13 PGP (using revised Framework)
A. The same teacher types that participated in the spring 2011 pilot apply: classroom teachers, specials/electives teachers, intervention teachers and all special education teachers (no special services providers). We need all types of teachers to be involved and give input as to how LEAP and the Framework work for their grade/content area. For more questions on this please contact Pam Shamburg.
A. No, the student outcomes portion of LEAP will not be part of the 2011-12 pilot as this component still needs more development and discussion.
A. ProComp teachers who pilot the LEAP system next year will receive CPE credit for a satisfactory evaluation, if it is their regular evaluation year.
A. Yes, you will have the opportunity to vote for your home school for 2011-12.
A. A school will participate in the 2011-12 LEAP pilot if more teachers in the school vote YES than vote NO. In other words, if the majority of the votes for a particular school are YES, the school will be in the pilot.
A. Any teachers with performance concerns will be identified by December 16, 2011 and evaluated using the current system of evaluation and, if needed, remediation.
A. The draft definition states that an effective DPS teacher makes measurable gains in students’ academic and social growth through: Professionalism: Being a productive member of the school community whose professional responsibilities include lifelong learning; collaboration with colleagues, families and community; reflection; providing feedback; and leadership. Planning and Preparation: Identifying key outcomes based on standards, and using data, assessments and students’ backgrounds to create short- and long- term plans. Learning Environment: Creating a positive classroom culture and climate that engages all students through high expectations and effective classroom management. Instruction: Knowing the content they teach and how to teach those subjects to all their students. This definition of effective teaching is being developed and refined by the Teacher Effectiveness Design Team. There is an acknowledgement that teaching is a dynamic, professional practice that falls within a continuum of performance. Based on the recommendation from the Teacher Effectiveness Design Team, DPS has built a Framework for Effective Teaching that captures this continuum and encompasses the following requirements: values the needs of English Language Learners, captures teacher AND student behaviors, provides explicitness in order to support consistency across the district, and is tightly aligned to professional development supports.
A. Research shows that teachers impact student learning more than anything else inside a school. Because of the feedback and support that LEAP will provide to teachers, increasing numbers of students will have access to the high quality learning experiences that effective teachers provide. Consequently, students’ academic achievement levels will increase and students will enjoy increased and improved life opportunities.
A. LEAP will provide teachers with feedback and support to assist them in their ongoing professional growth which will help them increase their effectiveness and help students grow academically. - An improved teacher evaluation process will be more objective and useful. - Teachers will be provided more targeted professional support. - Teaching excellence will be better recognized and rewarded. - School culture will be improved. - The teaching profession will be elevated in practice.
A. This is not completely determined at this point in time. We will use our experiences during the LEAP pilot to further investigate this question. At this point we know that our approach is to provide supports to improve struggling teachers, not dismiss them. It is much more effective for the district to help a teacher improve than it is to dismiss him/her and start over.
A. DPS and a handful of other districts in the country are leading this educator effectiveness work. DPS's approach of teacher and principal involvement is somewhat unique. DPS is committed to having teachers and principals from within the district help design and test the new system prior to district-wide implementation.
A. SB 191 is about our state leaders stating that we need to do a better job of supporting teachers for the students of Colorado. DPS has been committed to educator effectiveness since long before SB 191 came into play. SB 191 is NOT driving out efforts. Our belief in our student's and teacher's abilities and our belief that we as a district need to improve is what is driving our educator effectiveness work here in DPS. LEAP incorporates multiple measures to determine a teacher's effectiveness. One of the multiple measures is "Student Outcomes" which aligns with SB 191's mandate that 50% of a teacher's evaluation be based on student outcomes.
A. Very little extra work for teachers will be added as a result of the LEAP system. The primary addition will be the scheduling of a post-conference to follow all classroom observations. It is anticipated that teachers will receive four observations each semester and the post-conferences are anticipated to take 30 minutes each.
A. No evaluation system is perfect - in teaching or in any other profession. But, LEAP is dramatically better than the old method of evaluation and it will continue to be improved with teacher and principal input.
Great teaching is multi-dimensial and should be viewed through multiple measures, none of which are sufficient to stand alone. Teacher evaluations have historically involved a teacher being rated soley by their principal. We are moving towards creating a body of evidence for a teacher’s practice based on many aspects: - principal observations - peer observations - student outcomes - student perception data - professional collaboration and planning This body of evidence will give us much richer insight as to a teacher’s effectiveness.
A. Empowering Excellent Educators (EEE) is a suite of initiatives within DPS that are dedicated to supporting DPS educators and ensuring excellence in every classroom for all students. The goals of EEE include: - Ensure that every student is taught by an excellent teacher and every school is led by an excellent principal. - Provide teachers and principals with a clear understanding of characteristics of effective teaching and provide regular feedback about how they are performing against those standards. - Provide teachers and principals with the tools, resources and support they need to perfect their craft. - Reward our excellent educators and provide them with leadership opportunities to expand their impact on students and share their expertise across the district.
A. We must close the acheivment gap and increase student achievement. Research has confirmed what we’ve known all along – teachers matter! Study after study has made clear that the most important factor in closing the achievement gap is the quality of teaching. Every student deserve to have a great teacher now. LEAP will provide teachers with more frequent feedback and support and will help them in their quest to continually refine their teaching practice.
A. DPS received a $10M grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which covers the design and development of LEAP, including the technology solution. The 'ongoing' costs associated with LEAP are the Peer Observers. DPS and DCTA feel strongly that the Peer Observer component of LEAP is an important investment in supporting teachers.
A. Peer observation as part of the LEAP system is done by centrally managed Peer Observers who have completed extensive training for their role. Peer observation by teachers within your own school is highly recommended as a way to obtain even more feedback and support but will not be part of the LEAP system.
A. An application process was opened to all Title 1 schools in August of 2010. Once a school applied, surveys were sent out to all teachers to gauge their support of pilot participation. The schools selected for the pilot all demonstrated strong leadership and their survey results showed high teacher interest in pilot participation. Careful consideration was placed on selecting schools that represent a range of locations, grades, and demographics found throughout our district.
A. All teachers in the pilot who are enrolled in ProComp will automatically receive a “Satisfactory” rating in the pilot. Those teachers in the pilot who are on an official review cycle, and not on a remediation plan, will receive the base salary bump associated with this component of ProComp.
A. No one category would result in a teacher loosing non-probationary status or being placed on an improvement plan. When the entire LEAP system is operational, the over-all score would be used to determine these and other decisions. State law says that a non-probationary teacher can only be returned to probationary status after two years of ineffective ratings. That means that non-probationary teachers in the “approaching” category would maintain their status even though their overall rating is not in the “effective” range.
A: Both Principals and Peer Observers are receiving extensive training on the framework, observation skills, and evidence collection. Our goal is to ensure that there is consistency across the district among principals and Peer Observers as well as between a principal and a Peer Observer. Nevertheless, there may be some appropriate discrepancies. For example, if your principal observes you when you are teaching third grade math, your scores might look different from when the Peer Observer rates a literacy lesson. On another occasion the Peer Observer might see a lesson that you have taught many times in the past while a principal observes an approach you are trying for the first time. Eventually, we will have to devise a system for resolving issues at the individual level. At the district level, inter-rater reliability and consistency will be monitored for each person who gives observation scores. Any individual who is not adequately consistent will have to be re-trained and certified before they are able to continue giving scores. Also, principal and Peer Observer scores are not compared. The principal can view all of a teacher’s scores in the LEAP observation tool, as they are the overall evaluator, but the Peer Observers can only see their own scores. The purpose of having two types of observers is not so they agree, but rather to provide additional perspective on a teacher’s practice.
A. Until we test the framework thoroughly in the pilot we don’t know the extent that it will need to be modified for particular circumstances. We do anticipate that there may need to be several different approaches. For example, the on-stage domains may work well for librarians and special educators for the instruction part of their jobs but an additional measure will be necessary to account for those other non-instruction job requirements such as preparing I.E.Ps or maintaining the library collection. For other teachers, such as teachers of students in severe needs center programs, we may find that several of the 18 indicators simply do not work in their classroom context and that there are others that should be added because of the unique needs of the students. We hope we will know considerably more about these situations after the pilot and truly appreciate the pilot teachers who are allowing us to do this research.
A. Ratings need to include cited evidence for the rating. The Framework has purposefully defined the category of “Not Meeting” to describe what indicators looks like at that level. Often times, if something is not observed, it is evidence of a score of 1 or 2. As long as there is evidence that can be cited, the indicator should be scored. If however, there is no opportunity in the time allotted for observation to observe the indicator; observers have professional judgment in scoring that indicator "not-applicable" (N/A). We are using the pilot experience to gather information about which indicators may be difficult to observe in a 30-45 minute observation.
A. All teachers are being observed and evaluated on the same Framework—it was written and designed to be applicable for K-12. However, regarding ECE, there are some minor edits that will be in the 2011-12 version that reflect the particularities of ECE, and possibly an additional reference guide to supplement, not replace, the Framework for observers in those classrooms.
A. The DPS Framework for Effective Teaching sets expectations for effective teaching across the district, not changing the standard according to individual schools or classrooms. It was written with the district’s realities in mind and has been reviewed by many district employees, including teachers and principals, to ensure it sets the bar in a place that is fair and necessary if all DPS students are to be successful. It is our hope that the Framework will help inform school culture and other contextual structures so all students, teachers and schools are set up for success.
A. The expectations for different levels are laid out in extensive detail in the DPS Framework for Effective Teaching. That is the first place to begin. Additionally, we are developing an extensive on-line library of video clips of effective teaching that will be tied to each indicator of the framework. For example, if you wanted to see a teacher use questioning effectively, you would be able to click on the icon for I-4 of the framework and see a real classroom example of questioning at the effective level. The DPS Online Learning Center is currently being built out with these supports.
A. The DPS Framework for Effective Teaching includes both teacher and student behaviors. Some indicators have both, others have only teacher behaviors. These differences occur according to where it is possible to connect student behaviors to teacher behaviors clearly. In the past, only teacher behaviors were observed, though we know that when even the best teacher behaviors don’t yield appropriate student behaviors, student learning and growth is not occurring at the highest levels.
A. In including student behaviors, the framework and the observation process do not expect perfect students. Indeed, we know that students will, at times, not comply; however, the observer will be looking for how the teacher responds to the students’ non-compliance and how effective and appropriate that response is.
A. The Framework for Effective Teaching sets expectations for effective teaching across the district, not changing the standard according to individual schools or classrooms. It was written with the district’s realities in mind and has been reviewed by many district employees, including teachers and principals, to ensure it sets the bar in a place that is fair and necessary if all DPS students are to be successful. It is our hope that the Framework will help inform school culture and other contextual structures so all students, teachers and schools are set up for success.
A. One of the main goals of LEAP is to provide teachers with meaningful feedback on their instructional practice. Post observation feedback meetings will be scheduled after every principal and peer observation with the intention of providing teachers with feedback on their practice as it relates to the DPS Framework for Effective Teaching. In addition to positive feedback sessions, we are also aligning targeted professional development offerings to every indicator on the Framework. So, after a feedback session, a teacher can quickly access a variety of PD that is directly aligned to feedback they received.
A. The observers are trained to capture evidence of what goes on during a classroom observation, including teacher and student behaviors. This means that they will observe what teachers do, but in evaluating the evidence against the framework, may find that teachers did not do things they could/should have to better support student learning. Both will be included in the final rating summary.
A. All observers are trained to be sensitive to the most important thing during an observation—teaching and learning in the classroom. Observers will display discretion and respect while in your room, and will aim to minimize distracting noises or interruptions to your instruction.
A. Peer Observers, in particular, may often make suggestions to the teacher regarding technology, as they are not familiar with what the teacher has access to in their specific setting. However, principals and APs are aware of what is available and their observations can more accurately take into account what is and isn’t accessible to teachers/schools.
A. Student teachers will not be evaluated/observed by LEAP observers. The teacher who is paired with a student teacher could be observed but only if the observer comes at a time where the main classroom teacher is actually the one conducting the lesson.
A. You have the opportunity to discuss your scores with your observer during the post observation feedback meeting and can cite evidence from the observed lesson to support your suggestions for score change. At the end of the feedback conversation, your observer will make a determination about your scores. Keep in mind these scores are only for one observation (of multiple) and comprise only one portion of the total evaluation system. If you disagree with the suggestions that your observer povides for increasing effectiveness, you should also discuss that with the observer during your feedback meeting. Also, keep in mind that LEAP is a work in progress and we highly value teacher feedback along the way. There will be several ways for teachers to actively give feedback during the 2011-12 LEAP pilot (as there has been during the spring 2011 pilot).
A. In our preparation for the pilot, we used the DPS Framework for Effective Teaching in many observations and found that, most of the time, all indicators can be observed in a 30-45 minute period. When an observer realizes that many indicators are not observable, s/he is advised to leave and return at a more appropriate time. However, this is also an area we would like more data on. During the pilot we will be tracking the amount of time each observer spends in every observation to help us determine if there are adjustments needed to be made in order to address all the indicators.
A. After an observation, you will receive an email to set up a time to have the post-observation conference during which feedback will be shared and you and the observer have an opportunity to discuss the lesson observed.
A. This has not beed decided. We will use the pilot experience to inform this decision.
A. These documents may pertain to the offstage component of the framework which is still in development. More information should be available during the pilot.
A. Yes, during the LEAP pilot, the same Peer Observer will observe you both times, barring any reason that makes it not possible.
A. Teachers will receive a copy of their scores after the observation and it will also be uploaded to a website that the teacher can access at any time. This will allow the teacher to see growth and progress in her/his scores over time.
A. Peer Observation is about honest, open feedback to teachers so that they can reflect, understand options for support and make progress in practice with identified focus areas. It is not in isolation from observations done with the principal, but simply adds data points upon which the principal and teacher can review to make decisions about next steps with practice. Peer Observation ratings will serve as one measure in the multiple measure LEAP system. We have not finalized how many observations will be done by principals and how many by Peer Observers.We will use the LEAP pilot to learn more about this.
A. Both Principals and Peer Observers are receiving extensive training on the framework, observation skills, and evidence collection. Our goal is to ensure that there is consistency across the district among principals and Peer Observers as well as between a principal and a Peer Observer. Nevertheless, there may be some appropriate discrepancies. For example, if your principal observes you when you are teaching third grade math, your scores might look different from when the Peer Observer rates a literacy lesson. On another occasion the Peer Observer might see a lesson that you have taught many times in the past while a principal observes an approach you are trying for the first time. Eventually, we will have to devise a system for resolving issues at the individual level. At the district level, inter-rater reliability and consistency will be monitored for each person who gives observation scores. Any individual who is not adequately consistent will have to be re-trained and certified before they are able to continue giving scores. Also, principal and PO’s scores are not compared. The principal can view all of a teacher’s scores in the LEAP observation tool, as they are the overall evaluator, but the Peer Observers can only see their own scores. The purpose of having two types of observers is not so they agree, but rather to provide additional perspective on a teacher’s practice.
A. The Peer Observers are all familiar with the unique challenges faced in DPS classrooms. During the past 5+ months they have spent two days/week co-teaching with new DPS teachers and three days a week in extensive training to prepare for their role. Specific training includes: - DPS curriculum aligned to their content area - Inter-Rater Reliability (observing practice, scoring, and being normed) - The DPS Framework for Effective Teaching - Classroom observation – collecting non-judgmental evidence - Feedback – appropriate approaches, steps, mannerisms, questions - Cultural competency and bias awareness - Interpersonal development to work with a variety of people
A. Peer Observers are hired based on their effectiveness in the classroom, their sensitivity to the role of the teacher and ability to share and respect that perspective, their experience in urban classrooms, and their knowledge of best practice that yields results with students.
A. Peer observations are unannounced. If it is an inappropriate time (e.g. taking a test, substitute, other extenuating circumstances that make it a bad time to observe), the PO will return at another time.
A. Peer Observers are assigned to teachers by content area, and then also refer to master schedules they have for the school and/or teacher, which helps them know if they are walking into Biology I or Physics, for example. They of course also note the environment when they enter the classroom and quickly determine what specific content is being taught.
A. There is no expectation to provide lesson plans to the observers prior to the observed lesson. Because the observations are unannounced, there is no pre-conference. During the post-conference, though, it may be helpful to the teacher and the observer to reflect on the lesson plan as a source of discussion for the observation.
A. This is why we have multiple measures in LEAP and also multiple data points in the observations themselves - there will be several observations over the course of the year, and if one observation indicates a particularly unsuccessful lesson, that aberration will be noted as disrupting the typical trend for that teacher.
A. You have the opportunity to discuss your scores with the Peer Observer (or principal/AP) during the post observation feedback meeting and can cite evidence from the observed lesson to support your suggestions for score change. At the end of the feedback conversation, your observer will make a determination about your scores. Keep in mind these scores are only for one observation (of multiple) and comprise only one portion of the total evaluation system. If you disagree with the suggestions that your observer povides for increasing effectiveness, you should also discuss that with the observer during your feedback meeting. Also, keep in mind that LEAP is a work in progress and we highly value teacher feedback along the way. There will be several ways for teachers to actively give feedback during the 2011-12 district-wide LEAP pilot (as there has been during the spring 2011 pilot).
A. One of the key benefits of LEAP is the additional and ongoing coaching and feedback that teachers will receive as a result of increased observations. As far as time period, in the end, it is up to the teacher but the hope is that teachers will immediately implement suggestions and begin to see their practice improve quickly and also see results in student achievement associated with improved instructional practice.
A. For the spring 2011 LEAP pilot, there are two bilingual Peer Observers on the team of ten. Next year, we plan to increase this number to meet the need of many teachers serving ELA-S students.
A. One of the purposes of the Peer Observer role is to inject objectivity into the observation system. Thus, the Peer Observers will primarily know the teacher’s subject(s) and grade level(s), but not be informed regarding their tenure in the district or specific experience at the school or district level. If these are relevant data, they can definitely be shared with the Peer Observer in the post-observation conference.
A. The Peer Observers will be evaluated by their supervisor using the district’s Employee Performance Management Process (EPMP). This process involves the creation of cascading goals from the superintendent down that apply specifically to the work of Peer Observers. The goals are identified along with appropriate metrics to capture performance towards those ends, and evaluated at the end of the year. Click here to find out more about the EPMP process used in DPS.
A. This is an excellent question and one for which we are still working to develop an answer. We will reflect on pilot school feedback as well as consider input from DPS leadership, DCTA, and the Peer Observer Design Team. Peer Observers have attended district curriculum sessions in their subject area to ensure they are current with district practices and expectations. Also, they spent 40% of their time during the first semester of the school year with a new DPS teacher in order to maintain their teacher perspective and be current with the realities of teaching. Still, going forward, this is a question we know needs to be addressed.
A. Though the Peer Observers are hired and managed centrally, they are peers in the sense that they are recent practitioners and offer a teacher perspective on teaching, instead of a supervisory or management one. They also are peers in terms of their content area, as someone who knows the specifics of your subject area (or one similar) instead of only generalities.
A. The DPS Peer Observers are all K-12 teachers with experience and expertise within grade level band (elementary/middle/high) of the teachers they will be observing. Their areas of expertise include ELD, ELA-S, Highly Gifted and Talented (HGT), science, math, language arts, social studies, and arts/electives. 80% of the Peer Observers were DPS teachers and the other 20% taught in other urban districts. Most (80%) of the Peer Observers have been in the classroom as teachers at least three out of the last five years. They also have a wide range of school and district leadership experience (committees, PD delivery and design, assessment design, SLT’s, curriculum design, etc) and proven results with students (e.g. CSAP growth, transitioning ELA-S students, etc).
A. While it is certainly true that effective teachers have an important role within their school and can influence and support their colleagues, the Peer Observer role is beneficial in that it allows the observer to positively impact many more teachers. This was discussed at great length by the design teams and we believe that each Peer Observer can affect even more students by helping to raise the overall quality of the DPS teaching force. Additionally, the Peer Observers themselves should be even more effective teachers when they return to the classroom.
A. Regarding specific programs/philosophies, Peer Observers who observe teachers from those backgrounds will either be experienced in it or have had training and understanding about it.
A. Peer Observers will send an email introduction prior to observing your classroom. Due to the volume of teachers that each Peer Observer is matched to, it is not possible to schedule in-person meetings prior to observations. You are able to read each Peer Observer's biography (along with photos) on the Peer Observer section of this website.
A. Yes, both the teacher's individual area of focus as well as the school-wide area of focus are loaded into the observation tool used by Peer Observers and principals.
A. Yes, because POs are content-specific, you will most likely see the same Peer Observer each time.
A. Though some districts using peer evaluation have used a rotation model, at this point, it is uncertain how DPS will approach this topic. We are sensitive to the need for Peer Observers to be current and relevant with respect to teaching, and at the same time respect the individual ambitions of talented professionals in our district.
A. There is an acknowledgement that we have to learn about how this will impact the role of the principal. DPS Leadership and the Principal Effectiveness Design Team are currently discussing this matter. The LEAP pilot will also provide insights on the principal role. One hope for the LEAP system is that it supports the identification of teacher leaders and allows educators in DPS to begin thinking about how to build a strong team and capacity within schools to support student achievement. Effective schools have great people coming together to increase student achievement.
A. Anonymous, aggregate student responses available to teachers and principals via SchoolNet approximately 1 month after SPS administration.
A. Yes, the survey measures are mapped to the DPS Framework for Effective Teaching. Teachers will receive their results an estimated one month after administration and will be able to reflect on the results and make any adjustments to their teaching practice (based on their students’ perceptions).
A. Since the student outcomes portion of a teachers’ evaluation will be composed of several pieces of data, the Student Assessment and Outcomes Design Team has recommended that part of the data be from individual sources and part of the data be from school-wide sources. This mesaure of LEAP is still in development.
A. SGO’s are the teacher established growth goals for his/her students. They are still in place this year along with teachers picking an area of focus on the Framework. Student outcomes refers to the 50% of LEAP tied to student assessments and outcomes – NOT part of pilot this year. The student outcomes measure of LEAP is being investigated and determined by the Student Outcome Design Team and AR&E. In the future state of LEAP, the student outcomes measure will be part of LEAP and it is undecided what will happen with SGO’s at that point.
A. There are still many questions related to student outcomes that cannot be answered at this time. DPS is taking a very deliberate and careful approach to determining what this looks like for the many content, grades, and settings in which teachers work with students. What we do know, is that we are researching which assessments are even appropriate to use, that the outcomes will be composed of several types of data (we will not rely on one test for any teacher), how to appropriately match students to teachers and how to calculate data over time in order to have a fair picture of student growth.
A. We are still developing this component of LEAP. Based on recommendations from the Student Outcomes and Assessment Design Team, DPS is looking closely at various measures being included in the 50% of student outcomes portion of LEAP. This may include data from various state assessments (CSAP, CELA, CBLA), data from district assessments, teacher team assessments, and school-wide performance. There is a strong belief and commitment that the 50% of LEAP based on student outcomes should be based on student growth over time.
A. We intend to focus on growth measures (rather than status) because all students should show academic growth. This focus is in accordance with other district policies and metrics of success, as well as SB191.
A: Yes. Teachers, small groups and whole faculties can connect their professional learning work in the Framework to the PDU process.
A. The professional development supports that teachers access on moodle as a result of their observations/feedback are meant to facilitate growth. There are no timelines for completion or maximum number.
Click here for PGP FAQ
A: Yes, via professional learning communities (Networks). It is particulary powerful when teachers with the same professional growth goal in a building work together with support from another teacher already effective or distinguished in that area. Additionally, we will provide framework-specific modules for faculty or small group professional learning this summer (2011).
A. No, there is no cost for teachers to take online courses offered through the DPS's Online Learning Community.
A: Again, this also depends on how your school plans and allocates time for professional learning.
A: During the pilot, PD options will be aligned to framework expectations. We will have PD options that address general strategies and grade-levels. We will also have options specifically connected to some content areas. We will continue to build out PD options that address additional content areas and grade levels over the next 9 months.
A: Yes and no. It will depend on your area of focus and how your specific school plans and allocates time for professional learning.
A: Yes, videos of effective teaching practices will be available and accessible through the PD dashboard (DPS Online Learning Center).
A: Yes. All teachers will have access to a live transcript of their professional development they can access independently.
A: Again, it depends on how your school plans and allocates time for professional learning. In addition to the New Educator Institute in August, there will be 5 “green days’ (professional/planning days) before students arrive in August.
A. When DPS and DCTA created ProComp, we did not have a multi-measure teacher evaluation system, and many of the measures were put in place as proxies for teacher effectiveness. At this point in time, we are not renegotiating or restructuring ProComp. In the future, as we know more about LEAP, we will investigate aligning specific components of ProComp to LEAP, including PDUs, SGOs, and the CPE. Over time, we may need to revisit ProComp, and consider how we can better restructure the performance compensation system so that it can provide significant awards to effective teachers. Any changes to ProComp must be negotiated by DCTA and DPS.
A. Teachers will continue to have the opportunity to take PDUs as an element of ProComp incentives. PDUs can be developed at the school level and aligned to the school’s area of focus or can be developed at the individual level and aligned to the expectation identified by the teacher as their focus area.
A. “Developing” on the new rubric is considered “Satisfactory” under the current ProComp contract and you will continue to get the base salary bump associated with this component of ProComp.
A. The Design Teams will be using the results from the MET project to inform their recommendations on Student Perception Surveys, one of the multiple measures in LEAP.
A. DPS was recently awarded a separate grant to participate in the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) research project from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. During the 2009-2010 school year, we began participating in this groundbreaking two-year national project to develop fair, consistent and reliable measures of effective teaching. The goal of the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) research project is to help educators and policymakers identify and support good teaching by improving the quality of information available about teacher practice. Approximately 3,700 teachers, in a number of districts around the nation, will participate in this project.
A. Yes, the principal effectiveness design team is working now to develop recommendations for a new principal evaluation system aligned to LEAP. The principal evaluation system will be piloted during the 2011-12 school year.
Stay in the loop. Email sign-up:
Unsubscribe
Leave the loop. Email opt-out:
Subscribe
Share with others: