Draft Performance Based Teacher Evaluation
by Doug Powers
Draft Performance Based Teacher Evaluation
Source: Kansas Association of School Boards(KASB)
This evaluation mirrors the responsibilities noted in the Teacher’s Job Description. The job description, in turn, reflects the basic tenet of the state’s Quality Performance Accreditation system: students are to be taught and growth in their learning is to be measured. Teaching and learning are to occur in a safe and orderly environment and are to be done in a manner that respects the state and community stakeholders’ investment of resources. The evaluation also provides the opportunity to include ongoing, personal goals as a stand-alone performance area. By doing so, the evaluation contains a dynamic quality that is essential to evaluation legitimacy. The following explains what is contained in this evaluation instrument and the recommended method for performing the evaluation.
The first item included in this section is a sample teacher’s job description. A good job description is vital to the evaluation process and the individual to be evaluated should be aware of the board-approved job description’s content.
Next is a description of the procedure used for the evaluation of the teacher. Each task is briefly explained on the left and the recommended timeframe for completion is listed on the right. This chart can be used as a quick reference guide so each step of the evaluation is carried out in an accurate and timely manner.
Immediately following the procedure chart is the evaluation instrument. (Both the procedures and the instrument are negotiable.) The teacher should first do a self-evaluation. Two options are presented to the teacher. If the teacher believes he or she has adequately demonstrated the competency, he or she would mark the MET column and explain the evidence that led to that conclusion. If a competency has not been adequately demonstrated, the NOT MET box would be marked, and he or she would explain the evidence leading to that conclusion. Documents should be compiled that help validate the self-evaluation. The teacher would then identify, based on the self-evaluation, no more than four performance areas on which to focus his or her improvement efforts. (Targeting more than four will make it difficult for the teacher to address them adequately. When performance is already at a high level, sustaining performance and refining/replicating achievement become the targeted areas.) The principal should then receive the instrument, summary and the supporting documents. The principal completes the instrument using the documents provided by the teacher and other sources suggested on pages 16 and 17. The principal, using input from the teacher's suggestions, generates no more than four areas of improvement. The teacher and the principal then meet, as soon as possible, to review the evaluation and finalize the target areas.
After reviewing the evaluation and the indicated improvement areas, the teacher completes the Performance Area Contract for Excellence (PACE) with activities/recommendations and an appropriate timeline. The PACE is shared with the principal in one to two weeks. The targeted areas are then incorporated as a performance area for the next evaluation. Meeting those targets becomes a critical part of the next evaluation cycle. The summary report and approved PACE, signed by the teacher and the principal, are then copied and filed in the appropriate manner.
Draft Performance Based Teacher Evaluation
Source: Kansas Association of School Boards(KASB)
