Presentation for Teachers and Administrators in the New Canaan Public Schools, New Canaan, CT PowerPoint orginally located on TeacherTube.com under the following URL - media2.teachertube.com/files/articles/4290.pptx

1. Differentiated Supervision – Because Students Are Not
the Only Ones with Differences!
Presentation for Teachers and Administrators in the
New Canaan Public Schools, New Canaan, CT
•What is differentiated supervision?
•Why is it necessary?
•How do we make teacher evaluations both
meaningful and purposeful?
•How can school leaders respond to evaluations to
make key decisions regarding teacher needs?
•How will differentiated supervision ultimately benefit
teachers and students?

2. What is Differentiated Supervision?
 Differentiated Supervision is
effectively using evaluations
to inform meaningful
decisions on teacher needs. It
occurs when school leaders
recognize teachers vary
greatly in their readiness
levels, their skill sets, and in
their confidence, resulting in
significant variation in
teacher effectiveness.

3. Why is Differentiated Supervision Necessary?
Teachers who
excel are not
recognized or
rewarded.
Research
concludes the
U.S. suffers from Low-performing
institutional teachers are
indifference to frequently retained
variations in and continue to fail
teacher practice our students.
(Weisberg,
Sexton, Mulhern
& Keeling, 2009,
The majority of teachers,
p. 6). those who fall in the
middle, are not given the
differentiated support
they need to grow
professionally.

4. Teachers are NOT all the Same!
The “Widget Effect,” as
described in a research
report
by the New Teacher
Project,
is defined as the failure of
our
schools to recognize that
teacher
effectiveness is not the
same from
classroom to classroom;
teachers
are not interchangeable
parts.

5. Decisions, Decisions…
Key decisions regarding
teachers are
rarely based on teacher
performance:
 Tenure is typically granted
after a predetermined number
of years of service.
 Salary advances are based on
years of service and education
level.
 Professional development is
often random or fad-based
rather than tied to observed
teacher effectiveness.
 Evaluators typically decide that

6. Change Required…
 Effective Differentiated Supervision requires
a cultural shift – administrators and teachers
must adjust how they have historically
viewed the evaluation system.
It must be understood that “the core purpose of
evaluation must be maximizing teacher growth and
effectiveness” (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern &
Keeling, 2009, p. 9).
 Teachers must stop viewing a positive rating
as the singular goal of an evaluation, but
instead view it as an opportunity to receive
constructive feedback and differentiated

7. Where to Begin?
 Differentiated Supervision begins with
purposeful, meaningful, objective analysis of
overall teacher
effectiveness.
 Researchers agree that one single tool should
not be used to evaluate teachers, but that
multiple instruments and
frameworks should be utilized.
 It is critical that evaluators are
trained in the use of observation
and data-gathering protocols.
(Hinchey, 2010)

8. Observation and Evaluation –
What’s the Difference?
 Observation  Evaluation is much
refers to seeing, broader; it refers to
hearing, making judgments
recording, based upon
reviewing, and information
analyzing teacher accumulated on all
performance aspects of the
through the teacher's
school year. professional
performance, both
instructional and
non-instructional.

9. Tool Options for Evaluations
(Goe, Bell & Little, 2008)
Description Strengths Cautions
Classroom Measures observable Provides information Important to choose a
classroom processes. about classroom valid and reliable
Observations activities and behaviors.
protocol; raters must be
Can be used for both trained. Cannot assess
formative and teacher beliefs,
summative purposes. intentions, or outcomes
of lessons.
Instructional Protocols used to Can be good measure of Limited research on
analyze/measure instructional quality. reliability and validity.
Artifacts quality of lesson plans, Practical and feasible Training scorers can be
rubrics, student work, measure. costly.
etc.
Portfolio Used to document Can measure aspects of Time-consuming and
array of teaching teaching not seen in difficult to standardize.
behaviors and single observations. Typically represents a
responsibilities. Used Good tool for teacher teachers’ exemplary
to assess beginning self-improvement. work.
teachers/teacher
candidates.

10. More Options…
Descriptio Strengths Cautions
n
Teacher Reports of classroom Can measure Still need a validated
activities/goals; unobservable factors; instrument to increase
Self-Report obtained through provides teacher’s reliability/validity. This
surveys, instructional perspective. Feasible method should never be
logs or interviews. and cost-efficient. primary measure.
Student Student opinions Can offer formative Students are not able to
about teaching information to help comment on teacher’s
Survey practice. teachers improve. content knowledge,
curriculum use or
professional activities.
Value- Formula used to Measure of student Cannot separate teacher
determine teachers’ learning vs. teaching effects from classroom
Added contributions to test methods; little burden effects; not useful for
Model score gains. at school level; useful formative purposes;
for identifying measure only teachers’
outstanding teachers. contributions to test
scores, not other measures

11. So How do we Evaluate and Differentiate?
 In a nutshell, a good evaluation system is used as a
foundation for responses to varying teacher
effectiveness…an evaluation is not an end in and of
itself…it is not a document to be stuffed away in a
file.
 Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching and
TAP (The System for Teacher and Student
Advancement) are examples of systems in which the
teacher evaluation process is inherently tied to the
school’s responses, including decisions to mentor,
coach, provide professional development, change
teacher assignments, and/or reward, advance or
dismiss.

12. Danielson’s Framework: Domain Focus
Domain 1 – Planning and Domain 2 – The Classroom
Preparation Environment
What a teacher knows and All aspects of teaching that
does in preparation for lead to a culture for learning
teaching. in the classroom.
Domain 3 – Instruction Domain 4 – Professional
Responsibilities
What a teacher does to Professional responsibilities
engage students in learning. and behavior in and out of
the classroom.

13. Evaluation Outcomes…
not just a score or rating…
 Both Danielson’s Framework and TAP ensure that
evaluations are not the equivalent of “jumping
through a cursory, bureaucratic hoop” (Eckhert,
2010). Instead, they are the basis of support for
interventions for low performing teachers,
continued growth options for teachers in the
middle, and advancement opportunities for
teachers who have demonstrated expertise.
 Research indicates that the use of such
frameworks are successful in identifying more
low-performing teachers and that they are
effective in identifying teachers in need of
additional supports (Sartain, Stoelinga & Krone,

14. “Typical” Evaluation Process
Basis for Data is Result
Evaluation Gathered
• Cursory • Rubric Score
• Administrativ analysis of a • Written
e duty teacher’s Summary
abilities as
• Maybe a
an instructor conversation
– based on
one or two
observation
s.

15. Differentiated Evaluation Process
Basis for Data Results
Evaluation Gathered
• Quality of • Objective information • Determinatio
about quality of n of required
teacher teacher instruction,
instruction, work interventions
teacher
products and professionalism, • Direction for
professionalism student engagement, professional
• Assessment of work products growth
active • Information about • Determinatio
learning/DI student progress with n of retention,
regard to state tenure,
• Student overall standards.
progress on • Information about new
dismissal
benchmark and teacher needs, • Teacher
state readiness levels. assignment
assessments • Identified areas of or
• New teacher concern and advancement
assessment weaknesses at • Pay raises,
individual and staff
• Teacher request level. bonuses or
for assistance or • May include
stipends
input evaluation options for
• Colleague, advanced staff

16. Differentiated Supervision for
New Teachers
 Beginning teachers need special attention and
 tailored response to evaluations!
 1st year of teaching should not be “a game of
education survivor.”
 Supervisors should provide individualized
attention.
 Teacher self-efficacy and learning needs should
be assessed.
 Mentor’s strengths should match new teacher’s
needs.
 Targeted observations should be conducted and

17. Differentiated Interventions for
Struggling Teachers
 Professional Development directly linked to observed
weaknesses.
 Peer/Instructional Coaching.
 Mentors or Supervisors to model effective instruction
or co-teach lessons.
 Use of technology (video lesson reviews, bug-in-ear
tech, webcam/Skype for frequent check-ins).
Teachers who have received fair and
comprehensive evaluations, and who still fail
to meet performance standards – despite
individualized support – should be dismissed.
End of story.

18. Help! I Need Somebody!
Supervisors should remember
to
always focus on contexts in
which
teachers are most likely to feel
unprepared. Research indicates
this
includes:
 Beginning teachers
 Teachers of students with
behavior issues
 Teachers of students with
learning disabilities
 Teachers learning to use data
to inform instruction
(Elliot, Isaacs & Chugani, 2010)

19. Differentiated Actions for
Achieving and Excelling Teachers
Teachers achieving Teachers who excel can
acceptable fall to
standards typically still the wayside if they are
have not
room for improvement: recognized and
continually
 Provide professional challenged:
growth opportunities.
 Schedule  Advance them to roles
opportunities to as mentors or master
observe exemplary teachers.
teachers.  Train advanced
 Assign to data teams, teachers to work with
curriculum supervisors as teacher
committees and/or evaluators.

20. Group Discussion
How does Differentiated
Supervision Ultimately Benefit
Teachers
and Students?
Please also share concerns and

21. References
Eckert, D. J. (2010). More than widgets, TAP: A systemic approach to increased teacher
effectiveness. The TAP System for Teacher and Student Advancement Created by
Lowell Milken. Retrieved from
http://www.tapsystem.org/resources/resources.taf?page=ffo_rpts_eckert
Elliott, E. M., Isaacs, M. L., & Chugani, C. D. (2010). Promoting self-efficacy in early
career teachers: A principal’s guide for differentiated mentoring and supervision. Florida
Journal of Educational Administration & Policy, 4(1), 131-146.
Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A
research synthesis. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrieved
from http://www.tqsource.org/publications/teachereffectiveness.php
Hinchey, P. H. (2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn
from research. National Education Policy Center | School of Education, University of
Colorado at Boulder. Retrieved April 03, 2011, from
http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/getting-teacher-assessment-right
Sartain, L., Stoelinga, S. R., & Krone, E. (2010). Rethinking teacher evaluation: Findings
from the first year of the excellence in teaching project in Chicago public schools
(Policy brief No. 978-0-9814-6047-5). Retrieved from
http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/content/publications.php?pub_id=143
Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Our
national failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. The
Widget Effect. Retrieved from http://widgeteffect.org/downloads/TheWidgetEffect.pdf