Division of Human Resources
1085 Peoria St., Aurora, CO 80011
Phone: 303-344-8060, Fax: 303 326-1940, www.aps.k12.co.us
Pilot Alternative Teacher Evaluation – Details
2006-07
Development of the Pilot
 The evaluation was developed in cooperation with the Aurora Education Association
 Members of the workgroup – Sue Clark, Facilitator
Dianne Dugan – Principal
Curtis Holmes – Teacher
Tony Van Gytenbeek – Asst Supt, HR
Brenna Isaacs – AEA President
Dennis Hamann – Consultant,
Cathy Wildman – Teacher
Instruction
Concept
 The alternative teacher evaluation is:
 A flexible interactive process in which the teacher
 Selects an evaluation team
 Determines the criteria for evaluation in collaboration with that team
 An online process
Who is eligible?
 Non-probationary licensed staff who met or exceeded standards on their most recent
performance evaluation and who currently work at one of the following schools:
Elementary schools (8)
 Century
 Dalton
 Fulton
 Kenton
 Laredo
 Park Lane
 Quest
 Vassar
Middle Schools (4)
 Columbia
 Mrachek
 South
 West
High Schools (4)
 Aurora Central
 Gateway
 Rangeview
 William Smith
What is the process?
Request & Evaluation Team
 Teachers may request alternative evaluation within three weeks of beginning of
school year
 Upon supervisor agreement:
 Teacher selects an evaluation team
 Evaluator of record must be a current APS licensed administrator
1
How is the evaluation plan developed?
 Within the first quarter the teacher, in collaboration with the evaluation team, will
determine
 Evaluation criteria
 What evidence will demonstrate meeting standards
 How evidence will be collected
 A timeline for collection of evidence and feedback
Evaluation Criteria
 The person being evaluated and the evaluator(s) review the four performance
standards and proficiency indicators and select those that will become the focus of
the evaluation
 At least one indicator for each standard will be selected. These selections may be
changed during the review process by mutual agreement between the person being
evaluated and the chosen evaluator(s).
Standard A - Teaching and Student Learning
The teacher is committed to students and their learning. The teacher knows the
subjects he/she teaches and how to teach those subjects to students.
Indicators:
A1. Demonstrates a thorough knowledge of students as individual learners and
evaluates assessment data for each student by identifying what the student
can do, needs to learn next, and what the teacher will do about it.
A2. Plans high, worthwhile and attainable goals and objectives, selecting rich,
thought-provoking and appropriate resources, and identifying what the
learning looks and sounds like.
A3. Implements learning experiences that are connected to content learning goals
and sequences and structures instruction so students attain the goals.
A4. Generates varied formal and informal evidence to regularly evaluate and
improve student learning
Standard B - Learning Environment
The teacher manages and monitors student learning. The teacher develops an
environment where individuals are encouraged, respected, and challenged
intellectually, academically, and socially.
Indicators:
B1. Develops a classroom where students demonstrate self-confidence and
responsibility for high standards of learning
B2. Ensures that tasks and resources support student growth and proficiency
B3. Creates a safe, secure learning environment where on-going feedback, praise
and positive reinforcement result in high levels of student engagement and
learning
B4. Recognizes individual differences in his/her students and models and teaches
accordingly
Standard C - Professional Development
The teacher thinks systematically about his/her practice and learns from
experience. The teacher commits to improving his/her professional practice in
order to improve student learning.
2
Indicators:
C1. Demonstrates growth in instructional knowledge and skills
C2. Engages in active, collaborative reflection to improve professional
competence
C3. Takes an active role in school-based professional development
C4. Stays current with research and, when appropriate, incorporates new findings
into his/her practice
C5. Regularly analyzes, evaluates, reflects on, and strengthens the effectiveness
and quality of his/her practice
Standard D – Professionalism
The teacher is a contributing member of the learning community.
Indicators:
D1. Clearly and consistently reaches out to parents and other interested adults as
valued partners in the child’s education
D2. Seeks leadership opportunities and shares responsibility to promote school
improvement
D3. Contributes to the effectiveness of the school by working collaboratively with
other professionals
Evidence, Format & Timeline
 The person being evaluated and the chosen evaluator(s) will:
 Mutually define evidence appropriate to each proficiency indicator selected
 Determine methods for collection of evidence to support proficiency indicator(s)
o How collected
o What format and where stored
 Agree on the format and time line for collection of evidence and feedback
Evaluators
 The person being evaluated and the chosen evaluator(s) will:
 Mutually identify evaluator(s) for each indicator selected
 Identify a licensed APS administrator as at least one of the evaluator(s)
Planning Sheet
 A planning sheet will be printed containing:
 Indicators
 Timeline
 Evidence
 Evaluator(s)
 Format
 The person being evaluated will acquire signature of his/her immediate supervisor
approving the use of the pilot evaluation
 Copies of the signed planning sheet will be distributed to the person being
evaluated, selected evaluator of record, all other evaluators and immediate
supervisor.
Evidence
 Teacher collects evidence:
 In specified format
 According to timeline
3
 Examples:
 Teacher reflection on how evidence collected indicates proficiency on standard
o What teaching strategies worked well
o Next steps
 Test scores
 Observation notes
 Student products
 Etc.
Evaluation
 Evaluator(s):
 Develop written analysis of evidence collected for each indicator
 Score each standard according to analysis of evidence collected for indicators in
that area
o Meets Standard
o Growth Needed
Goals
 The employee and the evaluator of record mutually develop written goals
Comments
 Employee develops written reflection on the evaluation
 Content
 Process
 Selected evaluator of record develops written summary of the review
 Content
 Process
Signatures
 Interested parties sign off on evaluation
 Staff member
 Selected evaluator of record
 Immediate supervisor
Filing
 One copy of the signed review is retained at the site
 Another is given to the staff member
 The original signed copy is sent to Human Resources
Next Steps – 4 out of 4
 An employee who earns 4 out of 4 scores of Meets Standard resulting in an overall
score of Meets Standard. Will be evaluated again in the regular cycle
Next Steps – 3 out of 4
 An employee who earns 3 out of 4 scores of Meets Standard resulting in an overall
score of Meets Standard
 May continue with the review the following year, focusing on the standard that was
scored Growth Needed if desired; however, this is not required
4
 Will be evaluated again in the regular cycle
Next Steps – 2, 1 or 0 out of 4
 An employee who earns 2, 1 or 0 out of 4 scores of Meets Standard resulting in an
overall score of Growth Needed
 Continues with this review next year, focusing on the standards that were scored
Growth Needed
 Or chooses to return to the traditional teacher evaluation process for next year
Professional Development for Use of the Pilot
 Directors and principals meeting, June 2006
 Cohort groups form, Fall 2006
 Salary advancement credit for attendance
 Dennis Hamann - Facilitator
 Evaluation plans developed during first quarter
 Evaluations start during second quarter or semester
 Cohort works together through all stages
 Available online www.aps.k12.co.us/hr/pilot
 This overview
 Sample evaluation plan
 Examples of evidence
Review of Pilot
The pilot:
 Will run in the 2006-07 and 2007-08 school years
 May be adjusted for second year
 Will be reviewed by the Performance Evaluation Council each year
 Will return to bargaining teams at the end of two years to determine next steps
Questions
 Direct questions to:
 The Division of Instruction
o Dennis Hamann
o Linda Damon
 The Division of Human Resources
o Kari Allen
o Sheri Charles
o Kathleen Hostetler
Thank you!
5