Littleton School District
June 4, 2012
Contributors to the Plan Design
Tommy Stephens
Alan Smith
Kelly Noland
Rick Bidgood
Sikander Rashid
Linda Leavitt
Claire Lewis
Jennifer Carbonneau
Traci Howard
Tanya Patterson
Emily Platt
Superintendent
Assistant Superintendent/CTC Director
Director of Student Services
Principal
Principal
Assistant Principal
Data Coordinator
Instructional Coach, Union Representative
Instructional Coach, Union Representative
Teacher, Union Representative
Teacher, Union Representative
LHS PD Team and Planning Block Meetings allowed teachers to share their
insights and suggestions during this process.
How Our Plan Has
Been Developed
All Day Trainings
in Manchester or Concord:












October 26 & 27, 2011 Danielson Overview
December 2, 2011 Danielson Overview
December 12, 2011 Turnkey Training
December 13 & 14, 2011 System Design #1
January 9, 2012 Design a System of Teacher Evaluation #2
January 19, 2012 Design a System of Teacher Evaluation #3
January 24, 2012 Intro to the Growth Model #2
February 3, 2012 Growth Model #2
February 6, 2012 Design a System of Teacher Evaluation #4
February 17, 2012 Growth Model Session #3
March 12, 2012 Design a System of Teacher Evaluation #5
March 22, 2012 Growth Model #4
The Danielson Group
 …seeks to advance the understanding and
application of Charlotte Danielson's concepts
in the educational community, connect them
to other areas of knowledge and enhance
professional practices of educators so as to
positively impact student learning.
 Internationally recognized leader
 Elaine Phillips-consultant
The National Center for the Improvement of
Educational Assessment, Inc. (NCIEA)
 Founded to address the changes currently
underway in assessment and accountability
in the United States. The Center’s mission is
to contribute to improved student
achievement through enhanced practices in
educational assessment and accountability.
 12 states including: NH, VT, MA, OH, CA
 Scott Marion=consultant
Work Sessions in Littleton:
 January 31
 February 22
 March 26
 April 3
 April 8
 April 27
 May 30
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH & TEACHER EVALUATION
TIMELINE
MAY
• By May 15 of the year a teacher needs to be recertified, he/she will develop an
Individualized Professional Development Plan (IPDP) for his/her next threeyear cycle, which needs to be reviewed by building principal for professional
staff on an annual basis. Future professional development plans will only be
approved if the IPDP has been approved.
AUGUST
• For opening in-service day, provide supervision/evaluation materials and
review to all professional staff.
• By August 31, administration notifies teachers of timeline for supervision and
evaluation.
SEPTEMBER
• By September 30, all teachers new to the district will submit their IPDP.
• By September 30, all teachers will identify two SLOs
• By September 30, administrators will meet with all teachers to review their
IPDP and approval of their SLOs.
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH & TEACHER EVALUATION
TIMELINE
OCTOBER
• By October 15, completion of first observations of non-continuing contract
teachers.
DECEMBER
• By December 19, completion of second evaluations of non-continuing
contract teachers.
• By December 19, the first documented walk-through for continuing contract
teachers will be completed.
FEBRUARY
• By February 28, completion of third evaluations of non-continuing contract
teachers.
• By February 28, the second documented walk-through for continuing contract
teachers will be completed.
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH & TEACHER EVALUATION
TIMELINE
MARCH
•
•
•
By March 31, principals hand-in nominations for all professional and support staff to
the superintendent.
By March 31 of a recertification year, professional staff is responsible for providing
evidence of fulfilling his/her three-year IPDP through the submission of the
professional portfolio.
By March 31, continuing contract teachers in a non-recertification year will have
their end of the year professional growth conference.
APRIL
•
•
By April 15, any staff who will not receive a contract of renewal will receive a letter
stating that.
By April 30, school and district goals for the following year are developed and
published.
MAY
•
By May 15 of the year a teacher needs to be recertified, he/she will develop an
Individualized Professional Development Plan (IPDP) for his/her next three-year
cycle, which needs to be reviewed by building principal for professional staff on an
annual basis. Future professional development plans will only be approved if the
IPDP has been approved.
PORTFOLIO DOCUMENTATION
CHECKLIST and GUIDELINES
Based upon: Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching-Charlotte Danielson
Purpose of the Portfolio
• Submitted in March of your recertification year for continuing
contract teachers
• Submitted annually in March for non-continuing contract teachers
• Provides teachers the opportunity to demonstrate their professional
growth and focus for annual professional growth conference
• Contains the evidence of Domains 1 and 4 of the Danielson
Framework to be used as part of your summative evaluation
• See Page 50, 51, and 52 of the Professional Growth and Evaluation
Plan
New Hampshire Task Force on Effective Teaching:
Elements of the Blueprint Crosswalk:
The Definition of Effective Teaching and Danielson
Framework for Teaching
Appendix E includes Summative Evaluation Rubrics for Teachers, Library/Media
Specialists, School Counselors, and School Nurses adopted from The Danielson
Framework for Teaching.
The Learner and Learning. Effective
teachers:
Set and maintain high expectations for
learning and achievement for all
students
Framework for Teaching
1b: Knowledge of Students
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes
1f: Designing Student Assessments
2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning
3a: Communicating with Students
Engage all students as active learners
3b: Questioning and Discussion
Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
Create an environment of mutual respect 2a: Creating an Environment of Respect
and caring
and Rapport
2c: Managing Classroom Procedures
2d: Managing Student Behavior
Engage students in collaborative
3b: Questioning and Discussion
learning
Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
Content Knowledge. Effective teachers:
Demonstrate extensive knowledge of
content, standards, competencies, and
connect them to relevant local and global
issues
Model and encourage innovation,
creativity, critical thinking and inquiry
processes
Communicate their expertise and skills
through authentic, accessible, and
meaningful learning opportunities aligned
to content, standards and competencies
Framework for Teaching
1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content
and Pedagogy
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes
1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
1e: Designing Coherent Instruction
3a: Communicating with Students
4d: Growing and Developing Professionally
2b: Establishing a Culture for Learning
3a: Communicating with Students
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
4d: Participating in a Professional
Community
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes
1e: Designing Coherent Instruction
4e: Growing and Developing Professionally
Instructional Practices. Effective
teachers:
Facilitate personalized learning through
intentional, flexible and research-based
strategies
Framework for Teaching
Incorporate multiple forms of assessment
to evaluate student learning and adapt
instruction accordingly
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
Integrate technology as a tool for
education and assessment
1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
4b: Maintaining Accurate Records
3a: Communicating with Students
3b: Questioning and Discussion Techniques
3c: Engaging Students in Learning
3d: Using Assessment in Instruction
2e: Organizing Physical Space
Professional Responsibility. Effective
teachers:
Framework for Teaching
Contribute collaboratively to their
school’s academic progress and culture of
growth
Engage in learning communities and their
own professional growth
4d: Participating in a Professional
Community
4e: Growing and Developing Professionally
4a: Reflecting on Teaching
4d: Participating in a Professional
Community
4e: Growing and Developing Professionally
Uphold professional and ethical standards 4f: Showing Professionalism
of practice
Engage parents and the community as
partners to support learner success
4b: Maintaining Accurate Records
4c: Communicating with Families
New Hampshire Principals Task Force on Principal
Evaluation
Educational Leadership
Effective Principals:
Promote the success of all students by facilitating the
development, articulation, implementation and stewardship of a
vision of learning that is shared and supported by the school
community.
School Culture and Instructional Programs
Effective Principals:
Promote the success of all students by advocating, nurturing and
sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to
student learning and staff professional growth.
School Management
Effective Principals:
Promote the success of all students by ensuring management of the
organization,
operations, and resources to support a safe, efficient, effective and
positive learning
environment.
School and Community
Effective Principals:
Promote the success of all students by collaborating with families and
community
members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and
mobilizing
community resources.
Integrity and Ethics
Effective Principals:
Promote the success of all students by acting with integrity
and fairness, and in an ethical manner.
Social and Cultural Contexts
Effective Principals:
Promote the success of all students by understanding,
responding to, and influencing the larger social, economic,
legal and cultural context.
Local District Goals
Effective Principals:
Promote and implement the district goals, collaboratively
develops and implements building level goals, and develops
professional goals which are in concert with and support district
and school level goals.
Student Growth
Effective Principals:
Promote student growth using multiple sources of evidence.
Pilot for Next Year
Planning & Preparation
Classroom Environment
Instruction
Professional Responsibilities
25%
25%
25%
25%
An adoption of Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching.
Danielson’s
Framework for Teaching
 Domain One
 Domain Two
Planning and
Preparation
Page 1
 Domain Four
Professional
Responsibility
Page 71
The Classroom
Environment
Page 27
 Domain Three
Instruction
Page 49
Planning & Preparation
Instruction
SLOs
Classroom Environment
Professional Responsibilities
Shared Attribute
20%
10%
20%
20%
20%
10%
20%
5% NECAP math
5% NECAP reading
Shared Attribute
 District-wide all teachers receive the
same rating
 NECAP District Proficiency Level
Reading
 NECAP District Proficiency Level Math
 Baseline measure established with Fall
of 2013 scores
Student Learning Objectives
 Based on essential learnings, academic expectations,





course competencies
May be related to school or district goals
Created by a teacher or team(s) of teachers
Measured with appropriate tool to demonstrate
student growth over time
Approved by administrators
Training and development opportunities will be
provided during PD days during the 2012-2013 school
year
Teachers with Continuing Contracts
Teachers without Continuing Contracts
Teacher Leaders
Teachers on an Improvement Plan
Teachers with Continuing Contracts
Professional Growth Years (Year 1 & 2 of Recertification Cycle)
 Teacher will…
 focus on professional development based on IPDP &
Three-Year Summative Evaluation
 develop and maintain a professional portfolio
reflecting Domains 1 and 4 of Danielson’s
Framework for Teaching
 compile evidence of professional growth throughout
the three-year cycle in their professional portfolio
 Evaluators will…
 complete at least two documented walk-through
observations each year (to be defined at the end
of our district-wide book study)
 provide an end of year conference for teachers to
summarize and reflect on professional growth
activities and progress report toward meeting
his/her SLOs
Evaluation Year (Recertification Year)
 Teacher will…
 submit three-year portfolio reflecting Domains 1 and 4 of
Danielson’s Framework for Teaching
 Evaluators will…
 complete at least one formal observation (45 minutes or
more)
 complete at least two documented walk-through
observations (to be defined at the end of our district-wide
book study)
 write a summative evaluation at the end of the year
documenting the level of performance in all four domains
of Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (inclusive of all
indicators) and the aggregate of their SLO ratings
Teachers without Continuing Contracts
 Teacher will…
 develop, maintain, and submit a professional portfolio
reflecting Domains 1 and 4 of Danielson’s Framework for
Teaching submitted annually
 Evaluators will…
 complete three formal observations (45 minutes or more) per
year, every year
 complete two documented walk-through observations (to be
defined at the end of our district-wide book study)
 write a summative evaluation at the end of each year
documenting the level of performance in all four domains of
Danielson’s Framework for Teaching inclusive of the
following indicators:
Domain 1:
c. Selecting Instructional Outcomes
e. Designing Coherent Instruction
f. Designing Student Assessment
(years 4-5)
Domain 4:
a. Reflecting on Teaching
d. Participating in a Professional
Domain 2:
a. Creating an environment of
respect and rapport
b. Establishing a Culture for
Learning
c. Managing Class Procedures
d. Managing Student Behavior
e. Organizing Physical Space
Domain 3:
b. Using Questioning and
Discussion Techniques
c. Communicating with Families
c. Engaging Students in Learning
d. Using Assessment in
(year 4-5)
Instruction (years 4-5)
Community
 District and School Goals
 Individual Professional Development Plan (IPDP)
 Recertification Verification Forms
 Family Contact Log
 School and District Contribution Log
 Student Feedback Sample Form
 Portfolio Documentation Checklist and Guidelines
 Student Learning Objective Template
 Pre-Observation Conference Guiding Question
 Post-Observation Conference Guiding Questions
 Classroom Walk Through Analysis
Domain 1:
Planning and Preparation (20%)
Domain I
Planning
and
Preparatio
n
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Distinguished
Teacher’s plans
reflect little
understanding of the
content, the students,
and available
resources.
Instructional
outcomes are either
lacking or
inappropriate;
assessment
methodologies are
inadequate.
Teacher’s plans
reflect moderate
understanding of the
content, the students,
and available
resources. Some
instructional
outcomes are suitable
to the students as a
group, and the
approaches to
assessment are
partially aligned to
the goals.
Teacher’s plans
reflect solid
understanding of the
content, the students,
and available
resources.
Instructional
outcomes represent
important learning
suitable to most
students. Most
elements of the
instructional design,
including the
assessments, are
aligned to the goals.
Teacher’s plans,
based on extensive
content knowledge
and understanding of
students, are
designed to engage
students in
significant learning.
All aspects of the
teacher’s plans –
instructional
outcomes, learning
activities, materials,
resources, and
assessments – are in
complete alignment
and are adapted as
needed for individual
students.
Domain 2:
Classroom Environment (20%)
Domain 2
The
Classroom
Environmen
t
Unsatisfactory Basic
Proficient
Distinguished
Classroom
environment is
characterized by chaos
and conflict, with low
expectations for
learning, no clear
standards of student
conduct, poor use of
physical space, and
negative interactions
between individuals.
Classroom
environment
functions smoothly,
with little or no loss of
instructional time.
Expectations for
student learning are
high, and interactions
among individuals are
respectful. Standards
for student conduct
are clear, and the
physical environment
supports learning.
Students themselves
make a substantive
contribution to the
smooth functioning of
the classroom, with
highly positive
personal interactions,
high expectations, and
student pride in work,
seamless routines,
clear standards of
conduct, and a
physical environment
conducive to highlevel learning.
Classroom
environment
functions somewhat
effectively, with
modest expectations
for student learning
and conduct, and
classroom routines
and use of space that
partially supports
student learning.
Students and the
teacher rarely treat
one another with
disrespect.
Domain 3:
Instruction (20%)
Domain 3
Instruction
Unsatisfactory Basic
Proficient
Distinguished
Instruction is
characterized by poor
communication, lowlevel questions, little
student engagement or
participation in
discussion, little or no
use of assessment in
learning, and rigid
adherence to an
instructional plan
despite evidence that it
should be revised or
modified.
All students are
engaged in learning as
a result of clear
communication and
successful use of
questioning and
discussion techniques.
Activities and
assignments are of
high quality, and
teacher and students
make productive use of
assessment. The
teacher demonstrates
flexibility in
contributing to the
success of the lesson
and of each student.
The students are
highly engaged in
learning and make
material contributions
to the success of the
class through their
participation in
discussions, active
involvement in
learning activities, and
use of assessment
information in their
learning. The teacher
persists in the search
for approaches to meet
the needs of every
student.
Only some students
are engaged in
learning because of
only partially clear
communication,
uneven use of
discussion strategies,
and only some suitable
instructional activities
and materials. The
teacher displays some
use of assessment in
instruction and i``s
moderately flexible in
adjusting the
instructional plan and
in response to
students’ interests and
their success in
learning.
Domain 4:
Professional Responsibility (20%)
Domain 4
Professional
Responsibilities
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Distinguished
The teacher demonstrates
low ethical standards and
levels of professionalism,
with poor record keeping
systems and skills in
reflection, little or no
communication with
families or colleagues, and
avoidance of school and
district responsibilities
and participation in
activities for professional
growth.
The teacher
demonstrates
moderate ethical
standards and levels
of professionalism,
with rudimentary
record-keeping
systems and skills in
reflection, modest
communication with
families or colleagues,
and compliance with
expectations
regarding
participation in
school and district
projects and activities
for professional
growth.
The teacher
demonstrates high
ethical standards and a
genuine sense of
professionalism by
engaging in accurate
reflection on
instruction,
maintaining accurate
records,
communicating
frequently with
families, actively
participating in school
and district events, and
engaging in activities
for professional
development.
The teacher’s ethical
standards and sense of
professionalism are
highly developed,
showing perceptive use of
reflection, effective
systems for recordkeeping
and communication with
families, leadership roles
in both school and
district projects, and
extensive professional
development activities.
Where appropriate,
students contribute to the
systems for record
keeping and family
communication.
Overall Danielson Rating (80%)
Highly Effective=
Rated Distinguished in three Domains of Danielson and Proficient in the other.
(Score of 4)
Effective=
Rated Proficient or better in all Domains of Danielson.
(Score of 3)
Approaching Effective=
Rated Proficient in three Domains of Danielson and Basic in the other.
(Score of 2)
Ineffective=
Rated Unsatisfactory in one or more Domains of Danielson or rated Basic in two or more.
(Score 1)
Shared Attribute Component (10%)
District Teacher Rating Scale Math
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Decrease in percent No change in
Increase in percent
of students
percent of students of student
proficient
proficient
proficient
Distinguished
5% increase in
percent of student
proficient
District Teacher Rating Scale Reading
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Decrease in percent No change in
Increase in percent
of students
percent of students of student
proficient
proficient
proficient
Distinguished
5% increase in
percent of student
proficient
Shared Attribute Rating (10%)
Shared Attribute Rating
District
Reading
Rating
Distinguished
No Score
Proficient
Basic
Proficient
Proficient
Distinguished
Basic
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Proficient
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Basic
No Score
Proficient
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Distinguished Distinguished
Proficient
District Math Rating
Distinguished
Student Learning Objective
Component (10%)
Student Learning Objective Rating
Student
Learning
Objective 1
80% Exceeded
No Score
Proficient
Distinguished
Distinguished
Basic
Proficient
Proficient
Distinguished
60%
Approaching
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Proficient
Did not meet
Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory
Basic
No Score
70% Meet
Did not meet
60%
Approaching
70% Meet
Student Learning Objective 2
80% Exceeded
Student Learning Objective
Component (10%)
Student Learning Objective Rating
Student
Learning
Objective 1
Additional
(3+) SLO
Met
Met
No Score
No Score
Distinguished
Distinguished
Basic
Proficient
Proficient
Distinguished
Did not
Meet
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
No Score
Did not
create
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Basic
No Score
Did not
create
Did not Meet Met
Student Learning Objective 2
Additional
(3+) SLO Met
Overall
Growth Component Rating (20%)
Overall Growth Component Rating
Shared
Attribute
Distinguished
No Score
Proficient
Score 3
Distinguished
Score 4
Distinguished
Score 4
Basic
Score 2
Proficient
Score 3
Proficient
Score 3
Distinguished
Score 4
Basic
Unsatisfactory
Score 1
Basic
Score 2
Proficient
Score 3
Proficient
Score 3
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Score 1
Unsatisfactory
Score 1
Basic
Score 2
No Score
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Proficient
Student Learning Objective
Distinguished
Pilot Year 2012-2013
Highly Effective=
Rated Distinguished in three Domains of Danielson and Proficient in the other.
(Score of 4)
Effective=
Rated Proficient or better in all Domains of Danielson.
(Score of 3)
Approaching Effective=
Rated Proficient in three Domains of Danielson and Basic in the other.
(Score of 2)
Ineffective=
Rated Unsatisfactory in one or more Domains of Danielson or rated Basic in two or more.
(Score 1)
2013-2016*
Danielson
Component
Score
(Weighted
90%)
4
3.7
3.8
3.9
4
3
2.8
2.9
3
3.1
2
1.9
2
2.1
2.2
1
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1
2
3
4
Student Growth Component Score
(Weighted 10% Student Learning Objective)
*Until the CCSS assessment replaces the NECAP and is calibrated, Student Growth will be measured by the
Student Learning Objective Rating only. The Shared Attribute will be calculated but not applied to teacher’s
final rating during the assessment transition.
2017 (Full Implementation)
Danielson
Component
Score
(Weighted
80%)
4
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
3
2.6
2.8
3
3.3
2
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
1
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1
2
3
4
Student Growth Component Score
(Weighted 20%)
Teacher Effectiveness Rating
Teacher Rating
Score Range
Highly Effective
3.70 – 4.00
Effective
3.00 – 3.69
Approaching
Effective
Ineffective
2.00 – 2.99
0.00 – 1.99
•
•
•
Share with district teachers and LTA
Share with School Board and School Attorney
June 30th DOE Revised Submission Due
•
•
•
Evaluator Training in Littleton for all evaluators
Educational Impact On-Line Lessons offered to all
district teachers as Professional Development hours
SLO Training arrangement for the six professional
development days through the school year and
embedded in PLC work
Working Draft Meetings
 Proposed Open Meeting Dates:
•October 5th
•January 22nd
•March 18th
•June 14th