Anoka-Hennepin Teacher Evaluation Revision: Updated March 3, 2015
We have made it two-thirds of the way through our first year with the new revisions to our teacher evaluation process. The revisions made to our district’s evaluation plan were created to align to the 2014 state teacher development and evaluation law. Within the revisions there have been many small changes that most teachers don’t notice. The goal was to make the revisions to our program to make it an effective evaluation with teacher development as the center point. It also needed to be user friendly for both teachers and administration.
As of now there have been many positive comments including the scaling back from grading teachers on 66 elements to 22 components, the opportunity to use peer of choice for one of the observations when on high cycle, and the use of a web-based system for the paper work. As this school year comes to a close there will be an evaluation of the program involving both teachers and administrators to see if we need to make any changes that will make the program better.
The union and district continues to work together on checking the program to be sure we are meeting the requirements of the law while trying to improve on the practice of teacher evaluation. Some of the things included in this involve staff development of administrators in the area of teacher evaluation, meetings of union and district to discuss progress, and meeting with other districts to discuss the changes and progress.
Many of the revisions have been built on the success of the implementation of Q-comp during the 2013-2014 school year.
Below you will find the different components of the evaluation law and how we are currently aligned to it.
Joint agreement by school board and teacher union – MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (a)
This happened as a result of a vote by union membership in the spring of 2014.
Includes individual growth & development plan - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(2)
This is a component of both Q-comp and the PAS (professional assessment system) process. One of the main areas this can be found in our program is in the work with student achievement goal (SAG).
Includes 3 year review cycle - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(2)
Starting the 2014-2015 school year teachers have been placed on a schedule to be on high cycle with administrative evaluation every three years once on continuing contract.
Includes 3 evaluations annually for Probationary teachers - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(1) First evaluation done within 90 days of employment - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 5 (a)
This has been the norm for our teacher evaluation process and there are no changes to this.
Aligned with MN Standards of Effective practice for teachers - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(3)
Our PAS system based on Charlotte Danilson’s Framework for Teaching meets this requirement. The biggest change in this area is moving a majority of the teachers from being graded on 66 elements to a focus on 22 components.
Teacher has opportunity to participate in a Professional Learning Community - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (a) and (b)(2)
This has and continues to be a district practice.
Coordinate staff development and teacher evaluation - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(4)
Our program is focused on job imbedded staff development. Teachers have a chance to reflect on practice and focus on areas they would like to grow in. This can be done individually or within groups.
Includes peer coaching / review by trained observers - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (a) and (b)(2)
Administrators, peer evaluators, and peers of choice do observations during the three years.
Includes at least one summative evaluation performed by qualified and trained evaluator during the 3 year cycle - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(2) and (10)
The summative evaluation is completed by a teacher’s administrator during the high cycle year.
Includes option for teacher to develop and present a portfolio for the summative evaluation - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(7)
Teachers may use an optional portfolio to demonstrate evidence of a level of proficiency or better on the PAS components. The portfolio format may be either electronic or in hard copy. The portfolio may include, but not limited to, items such as student work samples, teacher forms, and videos.
Teachers not meeting standards will have support – teacher improvement plan (TIP) – including goals / timeline and discipline if progress not made - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(11) and (12)
The teacher assistance plan of our district clearly shows three different levels and communicates support, remediation, and final resolution(s).
Bases percent of teacher’s evaluation on growth data from assessments that are valid, reliable, and aligned to standards - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(8)
Teachers are working with Students Achievement Goals (SAG) that align with state standards. These SAG as the basis for the growth data are required. This portion will be based on both the student achievement and teacher reflection on the assessments.
Included longitudinal data on student engagement and connection - MN Statute 122A.40, Subd. 8 (b)(9)
This data will be collected through the three-year evaluation cycle. It can be found in a number of the components within the PAS system.