Differentiated Supervision – Because Students Are Not the Only Ones with Differences!

4,641 views

Published on

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

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Comment
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • thank you ...
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total views
4,641
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
240
Comments
1
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Differentiated Supervision – Because Students Are Not the Only Ones with Differences!

  1. 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 bothmeaningful and purposeful?•How can school leaders respond to evaluations tomake key decisions regarding teacher needs?•How will differentiated supervision ultimately benefitteachers and students?
  2. 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. 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. 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. 5. Decisions, Decisions…Key decisions regarding teachers arerarely 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. 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. 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. 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 teachers school year. professional performance, both instructional and non-instructional.
  9. 9. Tool Options for Evaluations (Goe, Bell & Little, 2008) Description Strengths CautionsClassroom Measures observable Provides information Important to choose a classroom processes. about classroom valid and reliableObservations 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. 10. More Options… Descriptio Strengths Cautions nTeacher Reports of classroom Can measure Still need a validated activities/goals; unobservable factors; instrument to increaseSelf-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’sSurvey 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 classroomAdded contributions to test methods; little burden effects; not useful forModel score gains. at school level; useful formative purposes; for identifying measure only teachers’ outstanding teachers. contributions to test scores, not other measures
  11. 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. 12. Danielson’s Framework: Domain FocusDomain 1 – Planning and Domain 2 – The ClassroomPreparation 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 responsibilitiesengage students in learning. and behavior in and out of the classroom.
  13. 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. 14. “Typical” Evaluation ProcessBasis for Data is ResultEvaluation 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 19. Differentiated Actions forAchieving and Excelling TeachersTeachers achieving Teachers who excel can acceptable fall tostandards typically still the wayside if they are have notroom 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. 20. Group Discussion How does Differentiated Supervision Ultimately Benefit Teachers and Students?Please also share concerns and
  21. 21. ReferencesEckert, 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_eckertElliott, 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.phpHinchey, 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-rightSartain, 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=143Weisberg, 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

×