Professional Growth Plan
Pending ratification by Monroe County Teachers, educators will have an opportunity to use a new Professional Growth Plan in place of the IPDP. This plan is aligned with the new evaluation instrument. The Professional Growth Plan enables the teacher to identify his or her area(s) of focus, the student data to be used, and allows the teacher to write his/her own measurable goal to indicate improvement in student achievement. Teachers will have guidance in writing SMART goals for their students, goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, results oriented, relevant and include the realistic time frame of one instructional year. This proposed Growth Plan is designed so that teachers select the focus of their professional growth from Charlotte Danielson’s Four Domains of Professional Practice. This instrument authorizes the teacher to identify the domain focus that will most benefit his/her students. In the case of a teacher needing assistance, administrators have the authority to identify a teacher’s area(s) of focus on the Professional Growth Plan. If ratified by the teachers of Monroe County, this Professional Growth Plan will replace the IPDP in the future and will be weighted as 30% of a teacher’s final evaluation rating. For 2011-2012, teachers may choose to use either the Professional Growth plan or the IPDP. All of the Professional Growth Plan instruments may be viewed on the EPIC portion of the www.keysschools.com website in the “Professional Development Instruments” folder. If you have any questions prior to the ratification vote on May 21, 2012, please contact a member of the EPIC committee.
IMPORTANT EPIC News March 5, 2012
Since the implementation of the EPIC Committee (Educational Performance Incentive Compensation) in January 2011, significant research, planning, and design of the Monroe County School District Teacher Evaluation plan has been developed. The EPIC plan is ongoing and the committee continues to develop pieces of the plan which meet state requirements. The new MCSD teacher evaluation rubrics/ instruments, based upon the research of Charlotte Danielson, were ratified in November 2011. The new evaluation instruments move away from a one-dimensional model that provides limited or no support to a growth model that requires teacher input; away from subjective evaluations to objective evidence based evaluations. Administrators are currently being trained using the new model. The current training is available for administrators in MyLearningPlan.com – EPIC – Teacher Evaluation Using Charlotte Danielson’s Framework: Looking at Classrooms.
The EPIC plan must include the value added model (VAM) that we have read about. We realize there are many concerns and hope to have more answers as the state hears input from all stakeholders. It is extremely important to remember our EPIC plan consists of much more.
EPIC is currently developing a Professional Growth Plan (PGP) which will ultimately replace the IPDP. The idea of the PGP is to move MCSD teachers toward a more meaningful Professional Development experience that better meets the needs of teachers and their students. For the 2011-12 school year, teachers will have the option to use the IPDP or the Professional Growth Plan. The Professional Growth Plan is available on the EPIC website referenced at the end of this document. The EPIC committee requests you provide input as to how the PGP may be improved before the instrument is presented to the bargaining unit and the school board for ratification.
Also currently under development is the Annual Evaluation Summary Form. This may be accessed via the EPIC website as well. The Annual Evaluation is based upon the overall rating on the new evaluation instruments, (for school year 2011-2012 only Domain 1 and Domain 3 will total 100% of the overall rating) a professional growth plan score, and the assigned value added measure.
All of this information is made available to provide you with the most current and relevant information as we move ahead in this groundbreaking process. Please be sure to examine the EPIC portion of the keysschools.com website available under the “Staff” tab and continue to check back as new information is added. We will continue to keep all employees apprised of changes and additions as they develop.
Comments, Questions, and Feedback
The Monroe County Incentive program is called the EPIC plan (Educational Performance Incentive Compensation) plan. The EPIC plan is designed to offer teachers and school administrators a pathway toward significant incentives for exemplary educational practices. An essential component of the EPIC plan is the Teacher Evaluation Rubric/Instrument that has been developed by a committee composed of teachers, union, and district representatives and based upon the research of Charlotte Danielson.
FAQs - Your Questions Answered
Send your questions/comments/feedback to EPIC@KeysSchools.com
Questions for Domain 1
Q - Will there be help to develop a lesson plan template for effective use when teaching students who are highly individualized? How can we use the IEP goals in the plans and assessments to create one document that will "tell the whole story" Can video modeling or technology be used to provide the evaluator with a comprehensive view of what the students are accomplishing at off campus job sites?
A - Grade Level and Subject Area templates will be made available for teacher use or to serve as models for teachers to create their own. The overall class lesson plan will be used. Individual student lesson plans can be added to portfolio and shared with your principal. Access point and IEP goals can be used to drive student lesson plans. Portfolios to document teacher performance may include a variety of sources including: videos, pictures, and teacher-created supporting documents. These artifacts would be utilized mainly in Domains 1 and 4.
Q - How will these be measured and evaluated? Observation?
A - The observation cycle will include a pre-observation conference and a post-observation conference which include forms with guiding questions.
Questions for Domain 2
Q - 2e-How will we show you the physical space that is used in CBWE session for students who are in the nontraditional classroom setting, students with special needs ages 18-22 who are completing the lesson objectives in a real life setting with a real employer?
A - The physical space of the observation site will be one element of the observation. Unique situations should be discussed as part of the pre-observation conference process.
Questions for Domain 3
Q - 3f-will video and pictorial portfolios be acceptable to assess student performance for students who do not take FCAT or Alternative Assessment? Will students ages 18-22 who do not take traditional assessments, who are evaluated according to the IEP goals with checklists, rubrics and other teacher devised items be looked at? It is frustrating to make the nontraditional student and setting "fit" on paper. This is a wonderful opportunity for us to use a standard procedure for evaluating the students that....video, pictures, teacher made rubrics and Task analysis that many teachers in the county use are wonderful. Can we take the best of the best and agree on a Standard Operating Procedure of evaluation to make everyone’s life easier and not have to recreate what may already exist?
A - Videos, pictures, and teacher-created supporting documents can be included in the portfolio and discussed during pre-observation and post-observation conferences.
Questions for Domain 4
Q - 4a-When I did my National Board teaching certificate, this was the most valuable and the hardest piece to understand and do effectively-the National Board model is great, will it be used and considered as the badge of excellence that it is for those of us who achieved it?
A - National Board completion or recertification could be included in the teacher portfolio the year of completion. This observation instrument is focused on classroom practice. Other elements of the overarching EPIC plan, including career ladder implementation, are yet to be determined.
General Feedback – (Comments/Responses)
C - I am thrilled we are doing this! It will be wonderful to have a standard that is considered good teaching that we all adhere to and agree upon. Sometimes it feels as if we are all trying to obtain a brass ring, then someone moves it and we have to try to find it again!
R - Thank you!
C - I would have appreciated more details on how the evaluation instrument will be tied to our pay. I received training on these 4 frameworks in another district (Pathwise Training). I am wondering if we will be required to keep our own portfolio of evidence as part of our evaluation. Thank you.
R - The nature of the four domains lend themselves to different evidence options. Creation of a portfolio to demonstrate various aspects of teacher practice may be especially helpful in domains 1 and 4.Elements of the EPIC plan include redesigning the teacher evaluation process, performance pay, and a career ladder. The agreement between MCSD and UTM is available on the UTM website, pages 115-117 of the UTM contract. www.utmonline.org
C - It will be important to address the various domains and how they can be efficiently implemented and or adapted for counselors, media specialists and other professionals.
R - Charlotte Danielson has created rubrics to address instructional non-classroom positions. The task force anticipates utilizing the Danielson models for these positions as well.
C - Is there an evaluation instrument for media specialists?
R - Charlotte Danielson's research includes rubrics for media specialists, guidance counselors, etc. that are being reviewed by the EPIC committee.
Newest forms for 2012 -2013 school year and beyond
This folder contains six (6) Instructional Personnel Feddback Forms (previously known as Form C) for ALL employees
This folder contains all six RATIFIED evaluation instruments
This forlder contains summary evaluation forms for both the 2011-2012 school year and for subsequent school years - PENDING RATIFICATION
Pre-Observation and Observation Documents
The PowerPoint presentation regarding ratification for November 2011