Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Lorna's Goal

Here is the goal that I am planning to use this year.  I say "planning" because  Westside is one of the schools working with William and Mary to pilot the goals for the state this year.  Mr. Williams approved my goal contingent upon the staff from William and Mary's approval.  We are waiting to hear whether they feel that mentors need to use student data (just like the teachers) or if the teachers count as our students.  So.... here is my brainstorm.  I'll let everyone know if we get any feedback from William & Mary.

What is everyone else thinking about using?


Goal Setting for Student Progress Form
Roanoke City Public Schools


Teacher’s Name: ______Lorna Myers____________________________________ 
Evaluator’s Name: _______________Seydric Williams___________________________ 
Subject/Grade: ________coach/mentor_______     School Year: __11__ -_12___
Initial Goal Submission (due by 9/30 to the evaluator)

I. Setting (Describe the population and special learning circumstances)
I work at a Pre-K – 5 urban school with 46 classroom teachers.  21 of those teachers are within their first 3 years of teaching and are therefore on my mentoring caseload.  7 of those teachers are Probationary 1, 9 are Probationary 2, and 5 are Probationary 3.

II. Content/Subject/Field Area (The area/topic addressed based on learner achievement, data analysis, or observational data)
RCPS Teaching Standard 3:  Planning, Delivery, & Assessment of Instruction. 

III. Baseline Data (What is shown by the current data?)
7 probationary teachers will complete the RCPS Rubric for Assessing Teaching Behaviors as a self assessment during September, January, and March. Total of 36 possible points.
Of these 7 teachers  ______ self assessed their practice as an average of 3 (Proficient:23 – 32 points ) and ______ self assessed their practice as an average of 2 (emerging:14 – 22 points). 

 Data attached
IV. Goal Statement (Describe what you want learners/program to accomplish)
For the 2011-2012 school year all teachers will make measureable progress in Standard 3 teaching behaviors as measured by self assessments on the RCPS rubric for teaching behaviors.  Teachers who self assessed as an average of 2 (emerging) will be at least an average of level 3 (proficient).
V. Means for Attaining Goal (Strategies used to accomplish the goal)

Strategy
Evidence
Target Date
Mentor/Mentee discussions of indicators and ways to move practice forward throughout the year.
Notes on self assessment rubric about strategies and differences between levels.  CALs.  Blog or reflection journal.
3/10/12
Mentor/Mentee Observations of peers to examine and reflect upon teacher practices.
Observation notes.



3/10/12
Design informal and formal P.D. for teachers based upon weaknesses indicated in self assessment rubric.
Presentations, PD360 course work, collaboration notes, grade level agendas.
3/10/12
Modeling/ co-teaching with a focus on teaching practices for mentee.
Observation notes form mentee, lesson plan for modeled lessons.
3/10/12





Approval of Goal
Goal Setting Rubric
Level of Performance
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Proficient
Exemplary
Not Applicable
CANNOT MOVE FORWARD
Not Applicable
CANNOT MOVE FORWARD
Student learning and academic achievement goals are rigorous, attainable and reflect acceptable growth during the course or school year
Student learning and academic achievement goals are rigorous, attainable and reflect extraordinary growth beyond expectations during the course or school year
Student learning and academic achievement goals are unrelated to identified student needs.
Student learning and academic achievement goals are related to identified student needs, but S.M.A.R.T. process needs refining.
Comments:






Signatures
Sign form after formative feedback has been provided and goal has been revised, if necessary.
Teacher’s Signature _____________________________________________        Date                             
Evaluator’s Signature ____________________________________________       Date                             

VI. Mid-Year Review (Describe goal progress and other relevant data)
Mid-year review conducted on____________

Initials:         _____(teacher)     _____(evaluator)


                                                                                      


 Data attached



Teacher’s Signature _________________________________________  Date _____________________
Evaluator’s Signature ________________________________________ Date _____________________


End-of-Year Review 

 Appropriate Data Received   

Strategies used and data provided demonstrate appropriate Student Growth      Yes   No

Evaluator’s Signature ________________________________________ Date _____________________

3 comments:

  1. Thanks for sharing Lorna. This looks great and it is along the lines I was thinking of when I suggested using BT self-assessments to guide our objectives and evaluations. The BTs at my home school are all very strong according to their self-assessment and observations, so I was playing around with the idea of choosing specific standards depending on the specific data for each teacher, but I don't know if that will fly. OK, I am tired and am not feeling very articulate or coherent, so I will end this here for now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for sharing Lorna. I am concerned about the self-assessment being the only tool we use since I have some teachers who have rated themselves very well. My principal expressed a concern as to whether real growth is shown if the self-assessment and principal assessment are very different. I had use the Teacher Performance Assessment (full form) as a self-assessment. I was trying to do all the standards but maybe I should pick just one (perhaps the one they self-assess as the lowest) and then use the mid-year principal evaluation as well as a final self-assessment to show growth. I will try to attach the goal I have written like Lorna did.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I also used the full Teacher Performance Assessment form as the self-assessment and was going to allow the BT to self-select the standard they wanted to focus on which of course should be a standard they saw as a weakness and had room for growth. I too am concerned about possible discrepancies between self-assessment, mentor assessment and administrator assessment, but this could also be an opportunity for rich discussion and reflection because in an ideal world, if we are all talking the same language and measuring performance objectively using the same standards then our observations and evaluations should be similar at the very least. Last year I used to schedule time to do "walk-throughs" with my administrators so that we could debrief after the mini-observation about what we saw to ensure that we were seeing the same thing in the same way. This helped me to know what my BTs should focus on in regard to what administrators were looking for when they completed formal and informal observations. I need to take the next step and write mine down in the form, but I like this discussion and your willingness to share, thanks Beverly and Lorna!

    ReplyDelete