2009-2010 Elizabeth Public Schools Teacher and Principal Evaluation Results 

 

Introduction

As a means of implementing our Managed Instruction Theory of Action Policy (File Code 6000 a/6010 a) as well as our Evaluation Policy (File Code No.4116), we employ a comprehensive instructional management system, which begins with content standards, performance standards, assessments, and consequences, as are provided by the district and state accountability system 

Confidentiality concerns: To protect the confidentiality of individual evaluations, districts are not required to provide a district-level statistical summary of teacher and principal evaluation outcomes in those cases where there are fewer than 10 teachers or principals in an entire district.  Similarly, districts are not required to provide a school-level statistical summary of teacher evaluation outcomes if there are fewer than 10 teachers in a school.

Teachers and Educational Specialists 

 Section 1 – Description of Teacher Evaluation System

As a means of implementing our Managed Instruction Theory of Action Policy (File Code 6000 a/6010 a) as well as our Evaluation Policy (File Code No.4116), we employ a comprehensive instructional management system, which begins with content standards, performance standards, assessments, and consequences, as are provided by the district and state accountability system.

Elizabeth Public Schools embrace the idea that observing instruction often and in a targeted way enables us to maintain our focus on striving for excellence.  We define excellent educational experiences as those that are rigorous, that is, they “educate all children to high standards and eliminate the achievement gap”.  An effective system of teacher evaluation accomplishes two things:  it ensures quality teaching and it promotes professional learning.  The quality of teaching is the single most important determining factor in student learning.  Through our district work with the Instructional Core (student, teacher, content), we are carefully aligning our walkthroughs, observations and evaluations, and professional development to the Instructional Core.  In order to better evaluate the effectiveness of teachers, we employ discussions with students, collection of artifacts, and informal analysis of student assessment data.  As a tool to communicate the level of practice observed, the Elizabeth Public Schools utilizes an evaluation model based on Charlotte Danielson’s Enhancing Professional Practice.  We have built this tool around four domains:  Planning and Preparation, Environment, Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities.  Danielson’s extensive rubrics have been condensed and modified to reflect the expectations for Elizabeth Public Schools’ teachers, and are shared via the Professional Practice Rubric.  The rubric is used for conducting classroom evaluations, annual performance evaluations, and teachers’ professional development plans.  In addition, we have a correlation document, which shows the direct relationship between the Instructional Core, and the domains and areas indicated in the rubric, evaluation tool, and professional development plan.

Each tenured teaching staff member is observed and evaluated at least once each year by properly certified persons.  This is followed by a summary conference between the teacher and the evaluator and by a written evaluation report.     

Each nontenured teaching staff member is observed and evaluated at least three times each year by properly certified district staff for a duration of one (1) class period in a secondary school and for one (1) complete subject lesson in an elementary school.  This is followed by a summary conference between the teacher and the evaluator and by a written evaluation report.

Section 2 - Evaluation Outcomes Table for Teachers and Educational Specialists

School

Number of Teachers Meeting the District's Criteria for Acceptable Performance (AP)

Total Number of Teachers in School

Percent of Teachers Meeting the AP Criteria

1

93

101

92%

2

60

62

97%

3

56

56

100%

4

59

69

86%

5

52

56

93%

6

73

87

84%

7

37

39

95%

12

64

66

97%

13

42

50

84%

14

60

69

87%

15

26

27

96%

16

40

47

85%

17

76

86

88%

18

50

50

100%

19

53

57

93%

20

34

38

89%

21

14

16

88%

22

55

57

96%

23

66

71

93%

25

46

46

100%

26

45

46

98%

27

67

75

89%

28

54

66

82%

29

66

70

94%

30

65

65

100%

50

22

23

96%

51

21

23

91%

52

24

24

100%

80

48

54

89%

82

83

99

84%

83

108

110

98%

84

61

94

65%

87

53

81

65%

88/89

47

50

94%

Total

1820

2030

90%

    

 

School Administrators

Section 1 – Description of Principal/Vice Principal Evaluation System

The Elizabeth Board of Education believes that effective leaders produce excellent results and are conduits for student success. The Elizabeth Public School District has high expectations for its school leaders and all members of the administrative team. To ensure that established expectations are fully communicated and realized, it is essential that professional practice be meaningfully assessed. The District embraces the belief that trust, risk-taking, and respect are the essential elements of a professional culture in which teachers, students, and administrators engage in the continual processes of growth and learning. These processes are most effective when supported by ongoing professional growth, timely performance feedback, frequent professional dialogue and self-reflective practices. Through our district work with the Instructional Core (student, teacher, content), we are carefully aligning our school visits, observations and evaluations, and professional development to the Instructional Core.

The District’s Principal Evaluation System focuses specifically on professional performance and is designed to shape school leadership practices within a supportive framework that enables our schools to perform at high levels. In order to reach our academic goals for children, we must eliminate the notion that instruction is solely influenced by the teacher, and must include the influence of school administrators, as well as central office administrators. To positively affect the instructional core through the development, support, and evaluation of instructional leadership, the district has implemented two major support systems. The first system, Assistant Superintendent Plan, provides feedback with written observation reports and debriefing with principals focusing on the instructional core. The feedback includes suggestions and recommendations for improvement. The Assistant Superintendents follow up on the feedback to ensure that teaching practices, student learning, and student achievement are improving within a rigorous context. The second system, Teaching and Learning Teams, begins by providing professional development and direct support to the schools with next steps generated from the observation notes taken from school visits. The information gathered is then shared with the Assistant Superintendents and becomes evaluative if a school repeatedly does not address issues or concerns, which have been brought to their attention.

In assessing the professional practice of each administrator, our formal evaluation tool reflects the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium's (ISLLC) "Standards for School Leaders" by providing feedback relative to several domains of administrative effectiveness: Improvement of the School’s Education Program, Supervision and Evaluation of Personnel, Preparation and Administration of the School Budget, Communication of the School Program to the Community, Promotion of the success of all students by acting with integrity, fairness and in an ethical manner, and the influence of the social and cultural context.

For the purpose of providing formal, written performance feedback to the District’s school administrators, and performance of other administrative functions, each standard is comprised of an expectation and performance indicators, which enable the evaluator to rate the school administrator using a rubric, cite commendations, make recommendations, and provide guidance/suggestions for continued professional growth. The final evaluation report serves to shape professional practice, pinpoint relevant professional development, determine professional growth goals, and inform employment decisions.

District policy and Administrative Code establish the requirements for the number of times the formal evaluation process is facilitated with each School Principal and Vice Principal. The process is completed a minimum of three times for non-tenured certified administrators and one time for tenured school leaders during the course of each year.

Section 2 - Evaluation Outcomes Table for School Administrators (Principals/Vice Principals)

Number of Principals/Vice Principals Meeting the District's Criteria for Acceptable Performance (AP)

Total Number of Principals/Vice Principals in District

Percent of Principals/Vice Principals Meeting the AP Criteria

62

75

83%