1. Page 1 of 7
Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation: The 2015-16 End of Year Evaluation Report
Background
Baltimore City Public Schools works to provide excellence in education for every child at every level by
delivering quality instruction, managing systems efficiently, and sustaining a culture of excellence and equity.
To do this, City Schools is building systems to strengthen, support and measure the effectiveness of teachers,
school leaders and schools. The Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation was designed, in collaboration with the
Baltimore Teachers Union, to provide an evaluation process that considers the complexities of teaching and
helps to improve student academic outcomes.
The 2015-2016 Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation is designed to provide information about teachers' strengths
and areas for improvement so that school and district leaders can appropriately support teachers' ongoing
professional growth. This year's evaluation includes the same components as last year's to provide further
consistency. For SY 2015-16, improvements to the Student Growth components were made based on
feedback from teachers and other stakeholders in focus groups and survey response.
Components of the Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation Report
Overview
The 2015-16 Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation report displays results for all available components and their
individual measures. For more information about the components, visit City Schools Inside.
Teacher profile
This confirms a teacher's personal information such as school, job title, and supervisor of record.
Professional Practice
When performance data are available for all components in the Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation, Professional
Practice accounts for 50 percent of a teacher's overall evaluation and includes the following weighted
measures:
o Classroom Observations / Instructional Framework (40%)
o Professional Expectations Measure (10 %)
Classroom Observations / Instructional Framework
Teachers are observed on the nine key actions of the Instructional Framework's "Teach" component.
During the school year, teachers receive at least two formal observations completed by qualified
observers. Each formal observation is the average of nine components, and is considered a separate
evaluation measure. The Classroom Observations / Instructional Framework score is the average of a
teacher's formal observation averages (from either two or three formal observations) from the 2015-16
school year. Each formal observation average is on a scale of 1-4 points. As a reminder, teachers must
be formally observed a minimum of two times to support an annual evaluation rating. For more detail on
your classroom observation scores, visit the Employee Performance Management section of the
Employee Self-Service portal on the district website.
2. Page 2 of 7
Professional Expectations Measure
The professional expectations measure for SY 2015-16 includes 16 indicators that are grouped into the
following four competencies: communication, professionalism, professional practice, and district
expectations. Based on non-instructional professional responsibilities, this measure reflects the extent
to which a teacher meets district expectations for compliance with district and school policies and the
extent to which a teacher meets standard skills within professional competencies. Each indicator is
rated on a scale from 1-4 points. For more detail on your professional expectations score, visit the
Employee Performance Management section of the Employee Self-Service portal on the district
website.
Student Growth
When performance data are available for all components in the Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation, Student
Growth accounts for 50 percent of a teacher's overall evaluation and includes the following weighted
measures:
o Student Learning Objectives (35 %)
o School Performance Measure (15 %)
Student Learning Objectives
Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) are specific, measurable academic goals for a particular group of
students in an academic year created by teachers in collaboration with their school leaders. SLOs are
designed to support instruction and measure student progress for teachers in tested and non-tested
grades and subjects. SLOs are scored on a scale of 54-100 points, based on progress towards the
SLO target for teachers who complete the SLO process. For more detail on your SLO score, visit
TSS/Blackboard and select the Teacher SLO Organization. Click on the "SLO Feedback and Scores"
link within the navigation menu on the left-hand side of the SLO Organization Home Screen to access.
School Performance Measure
The school performance measure (SPM) is an aggregate measure of quantitative indicators that reflect
a whole school's year-long performance in terms of the extent to which the school's learning
environment is conducive to student growth. This measure includes two categories that are equally
weighted for schools serving grades 9-12: learning environment and college and career readiness. For
schools serving pre-K through grade 8, only the learning environment category is used for SY 2015-16
as a result of the transition to PARCC. SPM is on a scale of 0-100 points, but for the purposes of the
Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation, no teacher can score lower than 25.
The SPM is a lagged data point based on data from the 2014-15 school year. Teachers are given an
SPM score based on where they were assigned in SY 2014-15. However, if a teacher is assigned to
multiple schools or if a teacher changed schools during the school year, he or she receives a prorated
score that incorporates data from the schools to which he or she was assigned in SY 2014-15.
Teachers new to City Schools in SY 2015-16, teachers on leave for SY 2014-15, and teachers in
district office or alternative schools/programs for SY 2014-15 will not have SPM as an evaluation
component. For more detail about the SPM in general, please visit the School Performance Measure
page at City Schools Inside.
3. Page 3 of 7
Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation Results SY 2015-16
Report Generated on: Jun 30, 2016
Employee name Minicucci, Laura Sharp
Employee number 59279
* School name 0347 - KIPP HARMONY
* Job title Teacher - Elementary
* Principal name Walter, Natalia Ann
* Network id 13
* Details available as of April 14, 2016
Teacher Effectiveness Annual Rating: Highly effective
Composite Score: 91
Teacher Effectiveness Summary
Component Raw Score Scaled Score Weight (in %) Weighted Score
Classroom Observations 3.78 94.44 40 37.78
Professional Expectations 62 96.88 10 9.69
Student Learning Objectives 93 93.00 35 32.55
School Performance Measure 72.00 72.00 15 10.80
Teacher Effectiveness Composite Score 90.82
Teacher Effectiveness Annual Rating Highly effective
4. Page 4 of 7
Component Details : Classroom Observations
Task name Evaluation waiver Average
1st Formal Observation 3.78
2nd Formal Observation 3.78
3rd Formal Observation
Overall Formal Observation Average 3.78
Final Classroom Observation Scaled Score 94.44
Classroom Observations SY 2015-16
Indicator Scores
Teach Indicator FO 1 FO 2 FO 3
Teach1. Communicate standards-based lesson objectives 4 4
Teach2. Present content clearly 3 4
Teach3. Use strategies and tasks to engage all students in rigorous work 4 4
Teach4. Use evidence-dependent questioning 4 3
Teach5. Check for understanding and provide specific, academic feedback 4 4
Teach6. Facilitate student-to-student interaction and academic talk 3 3
Teach7. Implement routines to maximize instructional time 4 4
Teach8. Build a positive, learning- focused classroom culture 4 4
Teach9. Reinforce positive behavior, redirect off-task behavior, and de-escalate
challenging behavior
4 4
Average 3.78 3.78
FO1 Average FO2 Average FO3 Average
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0 3.78 3.78
5. Page 5 of 7
Component Details: Professional Expectations
Competency Area Score
Communication 15
Professionalism 16
Professional Practice 15
District Expectations 16
Professional Expectations Score 62
Final Professional Expectations Scaled Score 96.88
Professional Expectations SY 2015-16
Indicator Scores
A1) Communication. Communicates appropriately with parents and community stakeholders, in a respectful
and efficient manner.
3
A2) Communication. Communicates appropriately with administration and colleagues and keeps them
informed about topics that may affect them and/or impact the school/ department operations.
4
A3) Communication. Communicates appropriately and respectfully with students and reinforces school
message.
4
A4) Communication. Maintains the confidentiality of written and verbal communications. 4
B1) Professionalism. Is conscientious, thorough, accurate and reliable when completing tasks. 4
B2) Professionalism. Maintains a neat and appropriate appearance. 4
B3) Professionalism. At any point in the evaluation period, employee accrues 4 or less absence occasions, as
outlined in the City Schools Attendance Program.
4
B4) Professionalism. At any point in the evaluation period, employee accrues 4 or less latenesses, as outlined
in the City Schools Attendance Program.
4
C1) Professional Practice. Collaborates with colleagues to further the school's School Performance Plan (SPP)
and shared goals.
4
C2) Professional Practice. Takes responsibility for his/her individual role in the work and is open to feedback. 4
C3) Professional Practice. Perseveres through challenges and readily adapts to changing priorities, strategies,
procedures and methods.
3
C4) Professional Practice. Reflects upon professional practice, and learns and applies new skills and methods
to work more effectively.
4
D1) District Expectations. Accurately completes and meets deadlines for submitting progress reports, grades
and attendance data.
4
D2) District Expectations: Follows all other school and district policies and procedures (administers end of
course benchmarks completes.school and district surveys, etc).
4
D3) District Expectations. Attends mandatory faculty meetings, parent-teacher conferences and District
professional development.
4
D4) District Expectations. Strictly complies with all District policies regarding testing integrity, and promptly
discloses to school or District leadership any incidents of cheating or testing impropriety.
4
Total Score 62
Communication Professionalism Professional Practice District Expectations
0
4
8
12
16 15
16
15
16
6. Page 6 of 7
Component Details: Student Learning Objective SY 2015-16
Student Learning Objective Scaled Score
SLO Final Score Definition Highly Effective
Final SLO Score 93.00
Component Details: School Performance Measure SY 2015-16
School Number(s):0347
School Performance Measure SY 2015-16 Scaled Score
Learning Environment 72.00
College/Career Readiness
SPM 72.00
SPM for Evaluation 72.00
