2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy end-of-year evaluation report.

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Governor's Office of Student Achievement Ryan Pelfrey and Haley Steed
June 2021

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Executive Summary
The Governor's School Leadership Academy (GSLA) provides high-quality leadership preparation and support designed to develop high-capacity school leaders and teachers across Georgia. The program is administered by the Governor's Office of Student Achievement (GOSA) and works to ensure that every Georgia school is led by transformational leaders and teachers capable of maximizing student achievement. GSLA integrates five distinct, yet aligned, programs designed to support and develop educators at different phases in their careers, from induction-level teachers to school and district leaders. These include District Support, Principal Support, Aspiring Principal, Teacher Leader Support and Induction Teacher Support. The overarching goals of GSLA are to:
provide coaching and support for current and future school leaders at all levels of practice, establish a statewide network of school leaders, strengthen Georgia's pipeline of successful teachers and school leaders, and ensure effective instruction and leadership in all Georgia schools.
During the 2019-2020 school year, GSLA completed its second year of the Principal Support Program and the Aspiring Principals Program. The GSLA Teacher Academy was also launched in partnership with Georgia's 16 Regional Education Service Agencies (RESAs) and the inaugural year of the Induction Teacher Support Program was also launched. The Teacher Leader Support Program will complete its inaugural year during the 2020-2021 school year. GSLA also began an initiative of district pilot programs in 2019-2020.
The 2019-2020 programs were impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, limiting the implementation of some components of the programming in the spring 2020 and changing the delivery model of others. The COVID19 pandemic also impacted the collection of data for program evaluation, as educators faced school closures and many pressures surrounding supporting students in the spring 2020. This report relies on survey data and data collected by program coaches across program strands. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, no focus groups were completed, and survey data from the end of the program is limited. This evaluation focuses on the following areas: Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In, Participant Satisfaction and Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools.
Principal Support Program The 2019-2020 Principal Support Program included 82 principals from federally designated schools. GSLA worked in partnership with the Georgia Department of Education's (GaDOE) Office of School Improvement (OSI) to provide in-person training, job-embedded activities that culminate in a data-focused capstone project and coaching for principals working on school improvement efforts. Major findings from the evaluation include the following:
95% of participants would be likely or very likely to recommend the program to others; 94% of participants agreed that the in-person trainings were a good use of their time; 62% of participants agreed that contact with their coach was a good use of their time; 95% of participants agreed that interacting with other members of the cohort and education experts
was valuable; and At least 52% of participants reported that they frequently use skills learned from each major topic
of the GSLA curriculum in their roles.
Aspiring Principal Program The 2019-2020 Aspiring Principal Program included 46 assistant principals, instructional coaches, and teachers from districts with at least one federally designated school. The structure of the program includes in-person trainings, job-embedded activities that culminate in a data-focused action research project, and
ii

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
individualized coaching with an assigned regional leadership coach. Major findings from the evaluation include the following:
100% of participants would be likely or very likely to recommend the program to others; 98% of participants agreed that the in-person trainings were a good use of their time; 91% of participants agreed that contact with their coach was a good use of their time; 100% of participants agreed that interacting with other members of the cohort and education experts
was valuable; and At least 78% of participants reported that they frequently use skills learned from each major topic
of the GSLA curriculum in their current roles.
Induction Teacher Support Program The 2019-2020 Induction Teacher Support Program supported approximately 400 induction-level teachers from districts across the state. GSLA partnered with RESAs to provide in-person training and individualized coaching for teachers in their first three years of practice. Major findings from the evaluation include the following:
An average of 92% of participants agreed that the in-person trainings were engaging; An average of 93% of participants agreed that they learned useful strategies to apply in the
classroom; An average of 89% of participants agreed that they felt more confident in identifying and supporting
the needs of their students; and 92% of RESA coaches agreed they had the resources needed to be a successful coach for induction
teachers.
Teacher Leader Support Program The design work for the Teacher Leader Support Program was completed during the 2019-2020 school year, and this program was implemented for the first time during the 2020-2021school year. Activities completed during this evaluation period included:
establishing a design team consisting of RESA specialists in teacher leader development, developing content for teacher leadership based on current research, establishing partnerships with state agencies to coordinate program content and outcomes, planning content sessions and logistics for initial rollout, and developing facilitation materials for content sessions.
District Support Program During the 2019-2020 school year, GSLA began a District Support Program which was designed to support districts demonstrating readiness and capacity to build or refine internal leadership development systems. Districts were selected based on their expressed interest in evaluating their current practices and their willingness to engage in a collaborative design process with GSLA staff. Activities completed during this evaluation period included:
initial discussions with potential partner districts regarding willingness and readiness to engage in the design process,
establishment of district planning and implementation teams, facilitation of planning and design meetings for district teams, and sharing of content and research resources related to leadership development.
iii

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Future Plans In the 2020-2021 school year, GSLA will continue all four programs. Due to cuts to GOSA's base budget, some RESAs will not continue with the Induction Teacher Support Program, and others will not proceed with starting the Teacher Leader Support Program for the same reason. However, at least 13 RESAs will implement each program. GSLA will adjust the delivery models of all programs as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, with some components now being delivered in a virtual or hybrid setting. Rather than seating new cohorts for the 2020-2021 school year, GSLA will offer extended support to its current and former participants in the Aspiring Principal and Principal Support Programs. Because of the variation among district and school schedules and formats, services for the 2020-2021 school year will be adjusted based on the needs of participants by program strand.
iv

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................II PRINCIPAL SUPPORT PROGRAM..................................................................................................................................II ASPIRING PRINCIPAL PROGRAM.................................................................................................................................II INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM................................................................................................................III TEACHER LEADER SUPPORT PROGRAM.....................................................................................................................III DISTRICT SUPPORT PROGRAM...................................................................................................................................III FUTURE PLANS ........................................................................................................................................................ IV
TABLE OF FIGURES AND TABLES ................................................................................................................... VI TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................................................. VI INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................................1 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................................................3
DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................... 3 EVALUATION COMPONENTS.......................................................................................................................................3 PRINCIPAL SUPPORT PROGRAM .......................................................................................................................5 PROGRAM OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................ 5 PROFILE OF PARTICIPANTS.........................................................................................................................................7 MAJOR FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 ASPIRING PRINCIPAL PROGRAM.....................................................................................................................14 PROGRAM OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................................. 14 PROFILE OF PARTICIPANTS.......................................................................................................................................15 MAJOR FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM ................................................................................................ 22 PROGRAM OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................................. 22 PROFILE OF PARTICIPANTS.......................................................................................................................................23 MAJOR FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 TEACHER LEADER SUPPORT PROGRAM ...................................................................................................... 32 DISTRICT SUPPORT PROGRAM ........................................................................................................................ 33 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................................................... 34 APPENDICES............................................................................................................................................................ 35 APPENDIX A: GSLA GOALS .................................................................................................................................... 35 APPENDIX B: PRINCIPAL SUPPORT PROGRAM/ASPIRING PRINCIPAL PROGRAM COACHING VISIT RECORD SHEET .. 39 APPENDIX C: PRINCIPAL SUPPORT PROGRAM MID-YEAR SURVEY..........................................................................40 APPENDIX D: ASPIRING PRINCIPAL PROGRAM MID-YEAR SURVEY.........................................................................42 APPENDIX E: INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM COACH END-OF-YEAR SURVEY ....................................... 44 APPENDIX F: INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM PROFESSIONAL LEARNING SESSION FEEDBACK FORM ..... 45 APPENDIX G: INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM PARTICIPANT END-OF-YEAR SURVEY ............................. 47 APPENDIX H: INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM CLASSROOM OBSERVATION TOOL...................................49 APPENDIX I: INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM PARTICIPANT SELF-ASSESSMENT......................................51 APPENDIX J: INDUCTION TEACHER SUPPORT PROGRAM PARTICIPANT SELF-ASSESSMENT BEGINNING-OF-YEAR & END-OF-YEAR RESULTS...........................................................................................................................................55
v

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Table of Figures and Tables
Figure 1: Map of Principal Support Program Participants............................................................................ 7 Figure 2: Demographics of Principal Support Program Participants ............................................................ 8 Figure 3: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Likelihood to Recommend GSLA............................ 11 Figure 4: Map of Aspiring Principal Program Participants ........................................................................ 15 Figure 5: Demographics of Aspiring Principal Program Participants......................................................... 16 Figure 6: Induction Teacher Support Program Design Model .................................................................... 22 Figure 7: Map of Induction Teacher Support Program Participants ........................................................... 24 Figure 8: Demographics of Induction Teacher Support Program Participants ........................................... 24
Table 1: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Perception of GSLA .................................................... 8 Table 2: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Value of GSLA Components....................................... 8 Table 3: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Session Topics at In-Person Trainings ........................ 9 Table 4: Aspiring Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Perception of GSLA ................................... 16 Table 5: Aspiring Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Value of GSLA Components...................... 17 Table 6: Aspiring Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Session Topics at In-Person Trainings ....... 17 Table 7: Induction Teacher RESA Coach End-of-Year Survey Responses................................................ 25 Table 8: Induction Teacher Professional Learning (PL) Session Survey Responses ................................. 25 Table 9: Induction Teacher End-of-Year Survey Responses on Relevance of PL Content ........................ 26 Table 10: Induction Teacher End-of-Year Survey Responses on Transferring Content to Practice .......... 27 Table 11: Induction Teacher Classroom Observations Completed by Period ............................................ 27 Table 12: Induction Teacher Classroom Observation Data by Period........................................................ 29

Table of Abbreviations
CCRPI CSI DES GaDOE GaPSC GaTAPP GOSA GSLA OSI PL RESA SES SIG TSI

College and Career Ready Performance Index Comprehensive Support and Improvement District Effectiveness Specialist Georgia Department of Education Georgia Professional Standards Commission Georgia Teacher Academy for Preparation and Pedagogy Governor's Office of Student Achievement Governor's School Leadership Academy Office of School Improvement Professional Learning Regional Education Service Agency School Effectiveness Specialist School Improvement Grant Targeted Support and Improvement

vi

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Introduction
The Governor's School Leadership Academy (GSLA) provides high-quality leadership preparation and support designed to develop high-capacity school leaders and teachers across Georgia. The program is administered by the Governor's Office of Student Achievement (GOSA) and works to ensure that every Georgia school is led by transformational leaders and teachers capable of maximizing student achievement. GSLA integrates five distinct, yet aligned, programs designed to support and develop educators at different phases in their careers, from induction-level teachers to school and district leaders. These include District Support, Principal Support, Aspiring Principal, Teacher Leader Support and Induction Teacher Support. The overarching goals of GSLA are to:
provide coaching and support for current and future school leaders at all levels of practice, establish a statewide network of school leaders, strengthen Georgia's pipeline of successful teachers and school leaders, and ensure effective instruction and leadership in all Georgia schools.
GSLA was created in May 2018 in partnership with Gwinnett County Public Schools and the Chief Turnaround Office (CTO). House Bill 338, passed during the 2017-2018 session of the Georgia General Assembly and signed by Governor Nathan Deal in April 2017, created the Joint Study Committee on the Establishment of a Leadership Academy. The Joint Study Committee, chaired by Gwinnett County Public Schools Superintendent and Chief Executive Officer J. Alvin Wilbanks, recommended the establishment of GSLA in its final report in November 2017.1 During the 2018-2019 school year, GSLA supported its inaugural cohorts of the Principal Support Program and the Aspiring Principal Program.
In its second year, covered in this report, GSLA expanded to establish the GSLA Teacher Academy, encompassing the Induction Teacher Support, Teacher Leader Support and District Support Programs. This expansion builds on the Joint Study Committee's recommendations to increase district sustainability and support educators at all stages of their careers.
GSLA also expanded its partnerships in its second year. The 2019-2020 Principal Support Program worked in partnership with the Georgia Department of Education's (GaDOE) Office of School Improvement (OSI) to support principals through the school improvement process. This partnership was a shift away from the partnership with Chief Turnaround Office and allowed GSLA to support principals serving in any federally identified school in the state without the addition of GSLA staff.
During this reporting period, GSLA has strengthened or formed relationships with additional partners. These partnerships and their benefits to the teacher and leader pipeline are discussed in detail below and include Georgia's 16 Regional Education Service Agencies (RESAs), the Georgia Professional Standards Commission (GaPSC), the Georgia Educational Leaders Association (GAEL), and university departments such as the College of Education at Georgia Southern University, and the Principals Center at Georgia State University.
Significant reductions in funding have required several changes to the financial structure of GSLA, and remaining funds have been leveraged to sustain the full program model. For example, in the original implementation model, stipends of $5,000 were paid to all participants. Stipends were reduced by half in the second year of implementation, and other incentives were explored with the intent of eliminating stipends in the third year of implementation. Additionally, an expanded partnership with GaDOE's OSI allowed GSLA to reduce costs for principal participant travel, as districts were able to use School Improvement funds to support participation.
1 See the full text of House Bill 338 and the 2017 Final Recommendations to Governor Nathan Deal from the Joint Study Committee on the Establishment of a Leadership Academy.
1

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
The 2019-2020 programs were significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020, limiting the implementation of some components of the programming and changing the delivery model of others. The COVID-19 pandemic also impacted the collection of data for program evaluation, as educators faced many pressures surrounding supporting students in spring 2020. This report relies on survey data and data collected by coaches across the program strands. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, no focus groups were completed, and survey data from the end of the program year is limited. This report offers an overview of GSLA for the 2019-2020 school year, including information on the demographics of cohort participants, the structure of the program, and the major findings of the evaluation.
2

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Evaluation Methodology
GSLA's evaluation is carried out by GOSA's Research, Evaluation and Auditing Team. Although the team works with the GSLA team in crafting evaluation tools, it works independently to collect data, perform analysis, and provide feedback to the GSLA team. The primary tools used in collecting data from GSLA participants are online surveys designed to reflect the subject matter specific to each program and its cohorts. The surveys consist of multiple choice, ranking and open-ended questions. Each GSLA program is evaluated independently of the others, with recommendations being made for each specific program strand.
Data Collection & Analysis This section discusses the general types of data collection and analysis carried out as part of the evaluation. Specific data collection instruments will be discussed in the sections on each GSLA program, with examples of data collection instruments provided as appendices. Some data collection processes were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Surveys The primary form of data collection in the evaluation is surveys which include both closed-ended and openended responses. Surveys may be completed by participants, coaches, or partners and might include questions focused on programming feedback or self-evaluation. The Research, Evaluation, and Auditing Team maintains and analyzes the survey data, regularly providing feedback for the GSLA team to guide their planning for each program. These surveys are usually conducted anonymously and shared with the GSLA team anonymously. When not conducted anonymously, participants are informed of which responses may be shared with GSLA staff in an identifiable fashion. Typically, non-anonymous survey responses include demographic information and responses meant to help GSLA staff identify needs of individual participants.
The evaluators process open-ended responses manually. Evaluators identify the major themes of responses and label each response that touches on those themes to identify the frequency of each theme. Responses may also be coded as positive or negative. This frequency analysis is shared with the GSLA team, who can also read the anonymous open-ended responses in their entirety.
Coaching Data Another form of data collection used in the evaluation is data collected and logged by coaches. Coaches have access to an online platform to log their interactions with participants, which may include coaching conversations or observations (see Appendix B). The evaluation team uses this data to determine the quantity of coaching interactions both overall and for each participant. Evaluators regularly share this data with the GSLA team so that they can monitor program implementation.
Other Data Collection The evaluators use various other data points in the evaluation. This includes participation in optional coaching and certification opportunities. In a typical year, focus group or interview feedback would also be included as part of the evaluation, but the 2019-2020 evaluation does not include these components due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Other data points considered in the long-term evaluation of the program include College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI) scores and leader and teacher retention data.
Evaluation Components The evaluation focuses on the following three areas:
Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In,
3

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Participant Satisfaction, and Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools. Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In focuses on whether the program is being implemented with fidelity by the GSLA team and coaches. Data used to measure success in this area include attendance data for in-person training, coaching data, and participant completion of assignments and opportunities. Participant Satisfaction focuses on whether participants perceive the program to be valuable and helpful to their growth as a teacher or leader. Data used to measure success in this area include participant survey responses. This includes surveys focused on feedback for in-person trainings, mid-year and end-of-year surveys focused on general program feedback, and self-evaluation surveys. Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools focuses on how the program is impacting participants and their schools. Data used to measure success in this area include participant survey responses and observation data completed by coaches. Success in this area will also be measured long-term by school performance data and teacher and leader retention data. The evaluation also analyzes progress toward specific unique goals set for each program. The program has one-year, three-year and five-year goals. This evaluation will focus on one-year goals set for the 2019-2020 school year. A full overview of one-year, three-year and five-year goals can be found in Appendix A: GSLA Goals.
4

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Principal Support Program
Program Overview The GSLA Principal Support Program provides professional development and support for principals in Georgia's highest-need schools who are actively implementing school improvement efforts. The design of the program draws on the Joint Study Committee's recommendations, the Rand Corporation study Principal Pipelines,2 and Gwinnett County Public Schools' nationally recognized Quality-Plus Leader Academy.3 The program grounds content and participant expectations on the Leader Assessment on Performance Standards (Georgia's standards for school leaders),4 the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (national standards aligned to GaPSC's Georgia Educational Leader Standards (GELS)),5 and the Wallace Foundation's Five Pivotal Practices,6 focusing on the principalship in the context of chronically under-performing schools. The program consists of in-person training, targeted coaching and support, job-embedded activities that culminate in an individualized Capstone project, and additional resources and opportunities for participants.
In its second year, GSLA partnered with GaDOE's OSI to support principals of schools designated as Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI), Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI), Promise or School Improvement Grant (SIG) schools.7 GSLA worked with the OSI's School Effectiveness Specialists (SESs) and District Effectiveness Specialists (DESs) to align the content of the program to the school improvement process and to coordinate coaching activities.
The program served three regional cohorts aligned to GaDOE's School Improvement Regions (North, Metro and South). These cohorts also included GaDOE SESs and DESs who were present at in-person trainings and the on-site support for participants following cohort sessions. GaDOE staff provided the majority of support for principals in the implementation of their Capstone projects. Throughout the year, principals practiced the school improvement process through job-embedded activities aligned with the expectations of GaDOE's OSI.
The structure of the GSLA Principal Support Program allows participants to collaborate with one another, learn from education experts, and receive individualized feedback and support. Participants attended monthly in-person trainings and had the option to receive individualized coaching. Participants also had the opportunity to complete Crucial Conversations training and access the Solution Tree Global Professional Development Library for additional resources.8
In-Person Training One of the major components of GSLA is in-person training at content sessions designed to build knowledge of research and best practices in school leadership. In-person training also allows for interaction and collaboration between members of the cohort. In June 2019, participants attended a three-day kickoff session at Gwinnett County's J. Alvin Wilbanks Instructional Support Center. This was followed by additional one- to two-day trainings held monthly. These in-person trainings featured sessions facilitated
2 See the 2019 study Principal Pipelines from the Rand Corporation. 3 Gwinnett County Public Schools' Quality-Plus Leader Academy includes leadership development programs for aspiring and current leaders. 4 The Leadership Assessment on Performance Standards are part of the Leader Keys Effectiveness System, Georgia's common effectiveness system for school leaders. 5 The Professional Standards for Educational Leaders are released by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration and the Council of Chief State School Officers. 6 The School Principal as Leader: Guiding Schools to Better Teaching and Learning webpage 7 See GaDOE's Office of School Improvement webpage for more information. 8 See the Crucial Conversations website and the Solution Tree website for more information.
5

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
by GSLA and GaDOE staff as well as by guest speakers, including successful principals, superintendents and other education experts. Major topics covered in the trainings include Stakeholder Management and Communication, Developing Others and Talent Management, Exploring Personal Strengths to Support school improvement, Building Leadership Capacity with Teams, Creating a Climate Hospitable to Education, Removing Common Obstacles to Student Success, Fiscal Management and Responsibility, and Human Resource Management. Due to closures related to the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person trainings were suspended in March 2020, but plans are in place to complete content for participants in 2020-2021. Voluntary support sessions (described in detail below) were offered to all participants after cohort meetings were suspended in an effort to continue supporting principals during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Job-Embedded Practice Participants apply the knowledge and skills gained from in-person training, adapting them to fit their individual roles and circumstances with the support of GSLA staff. The specific expectations of principals receiving support from the GaDOE OSI are embedded in the program, so that principals can apply the content toward their active school improvement efforts.
Participants also complete a Capstone project at their school. They apply content related to goal setting, action plans, and progress monitoring to establish a schoolwide plan for student achievement. Participants typically share their process, progress, and results in a presentation at the close of the year. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting school closures and cancellation of in-person trainings, participants were not able to share these projects.
Coaching and Support Another major component of GSLA is personalized coaching. Participants had the option to receive support from a GSLA regional coach, including both calls and site visits, as well as less formal communication, such as emails or text messages. Since all CSI schools received direct coaching support from an assigned GaDOE support specialist, only two participants opted to receive coaching from GSLA regional coaches.
Other Coaching and Certification Opportunities GSLA provided additional opportunities for cohort members to extend some of the activities introduced during in-person training. All members of the cohort had the chance to take the CliftonStrengths Assessment and participate in an hourlong strengths-focused coaching call with a CliftonStrengths certified coach. During 2019-2020, GSLA discontinued the incorporation of the High Reliability Schools Certification option that had been offered in the first year and chose to focus instead on utilizing internal school climate resources within the GaDOE. The choice to discontinue the former program was based on completion rates for the previous year in relation to the cost for certification. Further, when GSLA staff compared the information from High Reliability Schools surveys and the Climate and Culture Survey administered annually by GaDOE, the cost did not justify its inclusion because of the similarity of information collected by each instrument.
The use of a mirror survey to GaDOE's survey early in the year allowed participants to receive coaching on specific climate and culture issues within their schools with no additional programmatic costs. Participants administered a survey on school climate to certified and classified staff at the beginning of the year that replicated the questions used by GaDOE at the end of the school year. The results of the initial survey were to be compared to data collected in the end-of-year survey to assess if there was a change in staff perception relative to school climate. However, due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic, the end-of-year survey was not consistently administered by GaDOE.
GSLA provided participants with the opportunity to become Crucial Conversations Certified during the 2019-2020 program. This is a program that focuses on positive and effective communication with staff and
6

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
colleagues. Participants were also given access to Solution Tree's Global Professional Development Library, which provided additional on-demand resources which supported program curriculum. GSLA participants also have the opportunity to use the GSLA Portfolio, a platform that allows them to access and share resources and build a portfolio documenting their work. Profile of Participants The 2019-2020 Principal Support Program participants included 82 principals, which were divided into three regional cohorts: Metro, North and South. Participants represented 22 districts, shown in Figure 1. There were also participating principals from the Georgia Cyber Academy, which serves students from across the state, and the Atlanta Area School for the Deaf, which serves students from the metro Atlanta area. Participation in the 2019-2020 cohorts was voluntary, but only principals whose schools were identified as CSI, TSI, Promise or SIG schools were invited to participate to ensure the appropriateness of content specificity and context-alike cohorts.
Figure 1: Map of Principal Support Program Participants9
The largest group of participants (41%) had been in their current role for two to four years. Thirty percent had been in their role for fewer than two years, while 19% had been in their role for five to seven years, and 10% had been in their role for eight or more years. Similarly, the largest group of participants (43%) had been a principal for two to four years. Thirty-one percent had been a principal for fewer than two years, while 11% had been a principal for five to seven years, and 15% had been a principal for eight or more years.
9 Georgia Cyber Academy principals were included in the Metro cohort.
7

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Figure 2: Demographics of Principal Support Program Participants10

Years in Current Principal Role Years of Principal Experience

<2 years 30%
<2 years 31%

2-4 years 41%
2-4 years 43%

5-7 years 8+ years

19%

10%

5-7 years 8+ years 11% 15%

Major Findings
In-Person Training Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using the mid-year survey (See Appendix C). An endof-year survey was not administered due to school closures and additional pressures placed on school leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic. As shown in Table 1Error! Reference source not found., 94% of participants agreed that the monthly trainings were a good use of their time on the mid-year survey. Ninety-seven percent of participants also agreed that the information covered at the trainings was applicable to their roles. Ninety-eight percent of participants found the handouts and resources provided during and after the in-person trainings to be valuable or somewhat valuable, as shown in Table 2.

Table 1: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Perception of GSLA Combined "Agree" and

"Strongly Agree"

Responses

Mid-Year Survey

The in-person monthly trainings are a good use of my time.

94%

Contact with my regional coach is a good use of my time.

62%

I have learned new skills from participating in GSLA.

94%

The information covered at GSLA trainings is applicable to my role.

97%

Table 2: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Value of GSLA Components Combined "Somewhat

Valuable" and "Very

Valuable" Responses

Mid-Year Survey

Content provided at in-person trainings

94%

Handouts and resources provided during and after trainings

98%

Opportunity to interact with other cohort members

95%

Opportunity to hear from and interact with successful principals and field

95%

experts

Opportunity to interact with GSLA coaches at participant's school

66%

10 Percentages for "Years in Current Principal Role" are calculated out of 64 participants. Percentages for "Years of Principal Experience" are calculated out of 54 participants.
8

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Participants also answered survey questions about which aspects of the in-person trainings were most applicable and useful in their roles. Ninety-five percent of participants found the opportunity to interact with other members of the cohort, successful principals, and education experts at the trainings to be valuable or somewhat valuable, as shown in Error! Reference source not found.. When asked what the most beneficial aspect of GSLA was, the majority of participants specifically mentioned interacting and collaborating with other members of the cohort and education experts. Other participants stated that Crucial Conversations was the most beneficial aspect. Of the major topics covered at the trainings, shown in Table 3, participants rated sessions on using school climate data to impact school culture and the sessions with guest speakers as the most applicable to their roles (100% of participants rated both as either somewhat applicable or applicable). At least 97% of participants found each session topic to be applicable or somewhat applicable to their roles.

Table 3: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Session Topics at In-Person Trainings Combined "Somewhat Combined "Frequently"

Applicable" and

and "Very Frequently"

"Applicable" Responses

Responses

Strength-based development sessions

97%

69%

Connecting strengths to influencing others and

97%

74%

making cultural shifts

School climate sessions

98%

84%

Using school climate data to impact school

100%

84%

culture

Self-assessment session: Georgia School

97%

71%

Performance Standards

Understanding personal beliefs and assumptions

97%

74%

Crucial Conversations

97%

89%

Guest Speakers

100%

52%

Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools for this program was measured using the mid-year survey and qualitative survey responses. One hundred percent of participants were able to provide concrete examples of times they used content learned at GSLA in their roles, with examples ranging from using Crucial Conversations in discussions with co-workers to asking others to complete their own CliftonStrengths Assessment. Participants were also surveyed on how frequently they used information learned at GSLA trainings in their roles. As shown in Table 3 above, participants reported using the information learned during Crucial Conversation sessions the most frequently in their roles (89% of participants reported using the information in these areas either frequently or very frequently). At least 69% of participants reported using information learned from each major topic frequently or very frequently except for the guest speaker sessions, for which 52% stated they utilized frequently or very frequently. Many participants also reported redelivering information learned at GSLA to staff members at their school.
Job-Embedded Practice Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In would typically be measured by completion of Capstone projects. All participants turned in a plan for their Capstone project, although participants were unable to complete these projects during the 2019-2020 school year due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

9

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools would typically be measured by the final results of the Capstone projects, showing whether they had an impact on student achievement. However, participants were unable to complete and present these projects due to the interruption of the school year because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Coaching Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In in this area was measured by logged completion of coaching calls and site visits. As noted above, GaDOE's OSI staff, including SESs and DESs, provided the majority of coaching for principals in CSI and TSI schools. Therefore, GSLA coaching support was only provided to principals outside of this group. However, two participants requested to receive coaching calls from GSLA staff, and throughout the year, regional coaches logged two coaching calls for these participants.
Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using the mid-year survey. Normally, this would also have been measured using focus groups or interviews; however, these were not conducted for the 20192020 program due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On the mid-year survey, 62% of participants agreed that contact with their regional coach was a good use of their time, as shown in Table 1. Sixty-six percent of participants agreed that the opportunity to interact with GSLA coaches at their schools was valuable, as shown in Table 2. Sixty-six percent of participants agreed that they were satisfied with the overall level of support that they received from their coaches. Sixty-five percent stated that they were satisfied with the level of contact received from their coaches, and 57% indicated that they received valuable feedback from their coaches.
Other Coaching and Certification Opportunities Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In in this area was measured by logged completion of CliftonStrengths Assessments and coaching sessions and Crucial Conversations Certification. One hundred percent of cohort members completed the CliftonStrengths Assessment, and 17 participants (21%) completed CliftonStrengths coaching calls. Forty-one participants (50%) completed Crucial Conversations Certification.
Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using the mid-year survey. As shown in Table 3, 97% of participants reported that the CliftonStrengths content was applicable or somewhat applicable to their roles, and the same percentage of participants reported that the Crucial Conversation training was applicable or somewhat applicable to their roles.
Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools was measured in this area by logged completion of Crucial Conversations certification and through qualitative survey responses. Sixty-nine percent of participants reported using the content from CliftonStrengths in their roles frequently or very frequently. Eighty-nine percent reported using the content from Crucial Conversations frequently or very frequently. Some participants reported that the content from CliftonStrengths made them more reflective in their practice. Many participants stated that Crucial Conversations training was the most beneficial aspect of participating in GSLA.
Overall Program Participants also reported on their satisfaction with the program overall and its impact on their practice as a school leader.
Participant Satisfaction for the overall program was measured through the mid-year survey and qualitative survey responses. As shown in Table 1, 94% of participants agreed they learned new skills from participating in GSLA. Ninety-five percent of principals said they were likely or very likely to recommend
10

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
the program to other principals, and 2% said they were very unlikely to recommend the program, as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Likelihood to Recommend GSLA
Neither Likely nor Unlikely
3% Very
Unlikely 2%
Likely 24%
Very Likely 71%
As discussed above, when asked what the most beneficial aspect of GSLA was, most participants referred collaborating with other principals from across the state. Many also referred to Crucial Conversations. When asked what the least beneficial aspect of GSLA was, some participants referred to time spent traveling and being absent from their schools.
Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools for the program overall was measured through open-ended survey responses and principal retention data. Participants expressed in qualitative responses that the program provided valuable resources and professional development.
Principal retention will be examined as multiple years of data become available, with the goal that all principals will either stay in a principalship or a district-level support role. Exits from the CSI and TSI Lists and improvements in CCRPI scores will also be examined to determine the long-term impact of program participation.11 Fifteen of the schools served by GSLA have been identified as exit schools for the 20192020 school year.
Progress Toward One-Year Goals and Measurable Objectives By June 2020, the four integrated strands of the GSLA (Principal Support Program, Aspiring Principal Program, Teacher Leader Support Program, and Teacher Induction Support Program) will be fully implemented and operationally effective.
The Principal Support Program was fully implemented and operationally effective in the 20192020 school year.
11 Future evaluations of the program will consider CCRPI scores of schools where the participating principal has remained in their role for three or more years. CCRPI data and CSI and TSI Lists will not be available in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but this data will be examined in future years.
11

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
The Principal Support Program will serve three full cohorts of CSI, TSI, Promise, SIG, or other identified schools (80-85 participants) in partnership with GaDOE to ensure coordinated support for Georgia's highest need schools.
The 2019-2020 Principal Support Program served three regional cohorts with 82 total participants from CSI, TSI, Promise, and SIG schools.
Representatives from GaDOE's OSI staff were involved in content development and review processes for in-person trainings to ensure alignment of content and language for school improvement efforts.
SESs and DESs attended each in-person training with the principals they served to support implementation of skills learned during content sessions.
Based on end-of-program evaluation surveys (June 2020), an average of 85% of participants in all strands agree or strongly agree that the GSLA was a valuable use of time and that they would recommend participation in the program to other educators in similar roles.
A traditional end-of-year survey was not completed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On the midyear survey, 95% of participants reported that they were likely or very likely to recommend the program to others. On the same survey, 94% of participants reported that the monthly trainings were a good use of their time.
By the end of FY20, 90% of participants who began a GSLA program will successfully complete the program.
Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, an average of 98.0% of participants attended each face-to-face content session.
Following each face-to-face content session, 85% of participants will indicate that the GSLA session was a good use of their time and that they developed new, applicable skills and/or knowledge as a result of the training.
An average of 92% of participants indicated that each GSLA session was a good use of their time. An average of 91% of participants indicated that they developed new, applicable skills or knowledge as a result of each training.
Following each face-to-face content session, 90% of participants indicate increased understanding of session content objectives from beginning to end of session.
An average of 96% of participants indicated increased understanding of session content objectives from beginning to end of session.
Recommendations and Plans for Next Year Recommendations for the program based on the evaluation include:
Continue providing Crucial Conversations and CliftonStrengths training. Since only 21% of participants completed a CliftonStrengths coaching call, and regional coaches are trained in this coaching, consider eliminating the opportunity to participate in these external coaching calls. Half of the participants elected to complete Crucial Conversations training. More data would be required to evaluate how valuable they considered this certification in order to consider whether or not it is worth the expense compared to offering the components of the training without the certification.
Emphasize the benefits of obtaining any optional certification opportunities. Clarify available coaching opportunities for participants. Continue to provide opportunities for participants to collaborate and learn from one another.
12

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Due to ongoing challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, GOSA opted not to seat new cohorts for the 2021-2021 school year. Instead, previous participants were offered the opportunity to continue to engage in coaching activities and to attend virtual sessions that were designed around needs identified during the COVID-19 pandemic. All activities related to GSLA's Principal Support Program were optional for the 2020-2021 school year. Participants were able to complete the content from the 2019-2020 programming year, as well as opt in to additional virtual sessions. Sessions were largely designed to meet the current challenges that participants were facing due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, participants opted to attend Problem of Practice sessions, School Team Consultancy Protocol sessions, Crucial Conversation sessions, and Group Coaching sessions.
13

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Aspiring Principal Program
Program Overview The GSLA Aspiring Principal Program provides professional development and support for educators seeking to become school principals. The design of the program draws from the same sources as the Principal Support Program and provides the skill development and context needed to appropriately address the challenges that principals may face in their first year of practice. It also builds knowledge of personal leadership strengths and allows participants to expand their network of support. The program consists of in-person training, one-on-one coaching, job-embedded activities culminating in an individualized Action Research project, and additional resources and opportunities for participants. The structure of the GSLA Aspiring Principal Cohort allows participants to develop professionally in their current roles while also preparing for a future principalship.
In-Person Training One of the major components of the Aspiring Principal Program is in-person training designed to build knowledge of research and best practices in school leadership. In-person training also allows for interaction and collaboration between members of the cohort. In August 2019, participants attended a three-day kickoff session at Gwinnett County's J. Alvin Wilbanks Instructional Support Center. This was followed by additional one- to two-day professional development sessions held monthly in Macon. The trainings featured sessions facilitated by GSLA staff as well as by guest speakers, such as successful principals, superintendents and other education experts. Major topics covered in the trainings include Foundations of Leadership, School Improvement Strategies, School Improvement Systems, Curriculum Alignment and Scheduling, Building Teams and Leadership Capacity, Creating a Culture of Performance Feedback, Stakeholder Communication and Engagement, and Financial and Human Resource Management. As schools began dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020, the program continued to meet virtually, discussing topics such as virtual learning and innovation around issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Job-Embedded Practice Participants apply the knowledge and skills gained from in-person training, adapting them to fit their individual roles and circumstances with the support of GSLA staff. The culmination of the Aspiring Principal Program is the Action Research project presentation, in which each GSLA participant shares their work and successes relative to a focused school improvement goal. Participants receive ongoing coaching support for the development of the scope, goals, and assessment of this project. This coaching constitutes a large portion of the engagement between participants and coaches outside of in-person training. This project is also designed to align with the expectations of official partners offering Tier 1 certification. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting school closures, participants were not able to share these projects.
Coaching and Support The second major component of the Aspiring Principal Program is personalized coaching. GSLA regional coaches provided coaching to all participants through calls and site visits, as well as less formal communication, such as emails or text messages. The coach or cohort member could initiate calls and visits.
Other Coaching and Certification Opportunities Participants had the opportunity to participate in additional CliftonStrengths and Crucial Conversations training and certification to build on skills learned during in-person training. Participants also had the opportunity to enroll in a leadership certification program with the College of Education at Georgia Southern University if they did not hold a Tier I Leadership Certificate. Some of the GSLA program components, such as the Action Research project, counted toward obtaining this certification.
14

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Profile of Participants The 2019-2020 Aspiring Principal Program included 46 assistant principals, instructional coaches, and teachers who were recommended by superintendents in districts with at least one CSI, TSI, Promise, or SIG School. The participants were divided into two cohorts and represented 19 districts, shown in Figure 4. There were also participants from the Georgia Cyber Academy and the Georgia School for the Blind, which serve students from across the state. The GSLA team solicited up to 10 nominations from superintendents of districts with at least one federally designated school, selecting the cohort from that pool after an application and interview process. To be eligible for selection, participants were required to have at least three years of effective K-12 experience, a nomination from their superintendent, and an expressed desire to become a principal.
Figure 4: Map of Aspiring Principal Program Participants
The majority of participants (72%) were assistant principals, while 22% held an instructional coach or other leadership role for at least part of the school day, and 7% were teachers. Half of participants had been in their role for two to four years, while 28% had been in their roles for fewer than two years. Thirteen percent had been in their roles for five to seven years, and 9% had been in their roles for eight or more years. Thirtyfive percent of participants worked in elementary schools serving kindergarten through fifth grade, and another 35% worked in high schools serving grades nine through 12. Nine percent worked in middle schools serving grades six through eight, and 20% worked in schools serving multiple grade bands.
15

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Figure 5: Demographics of Aspiring Principal Program Participants12

Current Role

Assistant Principal 72%

InOstthreurctSico2hn2oa%ol lCLoeaacdheorrTe7a%cher

Years in Current Role

<2 years 28%

2-4 years 50%

5-7 years 8+ years

13%

9%

Grade Cluster

Elementary (K-5) 35%

Middle (6-8) 9%

High (9-12) 35%

Multiple 20%

Major Findings
In-Person Training Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using the mid-year survey (See Appendix D). An endof-year survey was not administered due to school closures and additional pressures placed on school leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic. As shown in Table 4, 98% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the monthly trainings were a good use of their time on the mid-year survey. One hundred percent of participants also agreed that the information covered at the trainings was applicable to their roles and that they had learned new skills from participating in GSLA. Ninety-eight percent of participants found the handouts and resources provided during and after the in-person trainings to be valuable or somewhat valuable, as shown in Table 5.

Table 4: Aspiring Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Perception of GSLA Combined "Agree" and "Strongly Agree"

Responses

Mid-Year Survey

The in-person monthly trainings are a good use of my time.

98%

Contact with my regional coach is a good use of my time.

91%

I have learned new skills from participating in GSLA.

100%

The information covered at GSLA trainings is applicable to my role as an

100%

Aspiring Principal.

12 All categories are calculated out of 46 total participants. "Instructional Coach or Other School Leader" includes two participants who held a part-time leadership role while also teaching part-time.
16

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Table 5: Aspiring Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Value of GSLA Components Combined "Somewhat Valuable" and "Very Valuable" Responses

Content provided at in-person trainings Handouts and resources provided during and after trainings Opportunity to interact with other cohort members Opportunity to hear from and interact with successful principals and field experts Opportunity to interact with GSLA coaches at participant's school

Mid-Year Survey 100% 98% 100% 100%
89%

Participants were also surveyed on which aspects of the in-person trainings were most applicable and useful in their roles. One hundred percent of participants found the opportunity to interact with other members of the cohort, successful principals, and education experts at the trainings to be valuable, as shown in Table 5. When asked what the most beneficial aspect of GSLA was, most participants mentioned interacting and collaborating with other members of the cohort. Many participants also mentioned the Crucial Conversations training as being beneficial.

Of the major topics covered, shown in Table 6, participants rated sessions on Crucial Conversations as the most applicable to their roles. One hundred percent of participants found each session topic to be valuable or somewhat valuable.

Table 6: Aspiring Principal Mid-Year Survey Responses on Session Topics at In-Person Trainings

Combined "Somewhat

Combined

Applicable" and

"Frequently" and "Very

"Applicable" Responses Frequently" Responses

Importance of the Principalship and Five Pivotal

100%

78%

Practices that Shape Instructional Change

Strength-Based Development Sessions

100%

85%

Exploring Talent Sessions

100%

83%

Connection Between School Improvement,

100%

85%

Academic Structures, and Systematic Processes

Self-Assessment: Exploring Personal Beliefs and

100%

80%

Assumptions

Understanding the Impact of Beliefs

100%

82%

Reviewing School Improvement Processes and

100%

85%

the Effectiveness of Improvement Plans

Crucial Conversations Session

100%

91%

Action Research Project

100%

87%

Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools in this area was measured using the mid-year survey and qualitative survey responses. One hundred percent of participants were able to provide concrete examples of times they used content learned at GSLA in their roles, with common examples including using strengthsbased leadership and using the Crucial Conversations training when working with colleagues. Participants

17

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
were surveyed on how frequently they used information learned at GSLA trainings in their roles. As shown in Table 6, participants reported using the information learned from sessions on Crucial Conversations the most frequently in their roles (91% reported using information from Crucial Conversations frequently or very frequently). At least 78% of participants reported using information they learned from each major topic frequently or very frequently.
Job-Embedded Practice Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In would typically be measured by completion of Action Research projects. However, due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic, only 20 participants were able to turn in a completed project.
Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using perception surveys. One hundred percent of applicants found the opportunity to work on an Action Research Project to be somewhat or very valuable, as shown in Table 5.
Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools would typically be measured by the final results of the Action Research projects, showing whether they had an impact on student achievement. However, most participants were unable to complete and present these projects due to the interruption of the school year because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Coaching Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In in this area was measured by logged completion of coaching calls and site visits. Throughout the year, regional coaches logged 285 coaching calls and 183 site visits, an average of six calls and four site visits per participant. The majority of these calls took place before the COVID-19 pandemic, with 62 occurring after schools were shut down March 16, 2020, an average of 1.4 calls per participant. Throughout the year, this is an average of 95 calls per coach and 61 visits per coach. Coaching activities continued during the COVID-19 pandemic as requested by individual participants, and regional coaches remained available to participants via email and phone until an electronic conferencing system was established. Coaching at this point shifted toward leadership in managing school responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using the mid-year survey. Ninety-one percent of participants strongly agreed that contact with their regional coach was a good use of their time, as shown in Table 4. Eighty-nine percent of participants agreed the opportunity to interact with GSLA coaches at their schools was very valuable, as shown in Table 5. Eighty-five percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with the overall level of support that they received from their coaches. Eighty-seven percent agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with the level of contact received from their coaches. Ninety-one percent agreed or strongly agreed that they received valuable feedback from their coaches. Several participants noted in their open-ended responses that they appreciated the personalized nature of the coaching.
Other Coaching Opportunities Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In in this area was measured by logged completion of CliftonStrengths assessments and coaching sessions. One hundred percent of cohort members completed the CliftonStrengths assessment, and 43 participants (93%) completed CliftonStrengths coaching calls. Forty-one participants (89%) completed the Crucial Conversations certification. One participant opted to join the leadership certification program at Georgia Southern University and received six credit hours toward her degree and certification.
Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using the mid-year survey. As shown in Table 6, 100% of applicants found the CliftonStrengths and Crucial Conversations content applicable or somewhat
18

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
applicable to their roles. Many participants mentioned Crucial Conservations when asked what the most beneficial aspect of GSLA was, and several participants also mentioned CliftonStrengths.
Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools was measured in this area using the mid-year survey. Ninetyone percent of participants reported using the content from Crucial Conversations in their roles frequently or very frequently, and 85% of participants reported using the content from CliftonStrengths in their roles frequently or very frequently.
Overall Program Participants also reported on their satisfaction with the program overall and its impact on their practice as a school leader.
Participant Satisfaction for the program overall was measured through perception surveys. One hundred percent of participants agreed or strongly agreed that they learned new skills from participating in GSLA. One hundred percent of participants said they would be likely or very likely to recommend the program to other aspiring principals. As discussed above, when asked about the most beneficial aspect of GSLA, most participants referred to interacting and collaborating with other members of the cohort and learn from current and past principals. Specifically, 31 out of 46 (67%) participants stated that this interaction was the most beneficial aspect of the program. Eleven out of 46 respondents (24%) mentioned Clifton Strengths and Crucial Conversations as the most beneficial aspect of the program.
Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools for the program overall was measured through perception surveys and principal roles gained. Many participants expressed that participating in the program was a positive experience. The number of participants acquiring principal roles was also examined, with the goal that all aspiring principals will be in a principal role within three years of completing the program. As of the time of this publication, 18 previous Aspiring Principal participants have been named to principalships, and four have been promoted to a higher non-principal leadership role. This includes eight members of the 2019-2020 cohort who were named principals and three other members of the 2019-2020 cohort who were promoted to other leadership roles. GOSA will continue to examine the number of participants moving into principal roles in future years.
Progress Toward One-Year Goals and Measurable Objectives By June 2020, the four integrated strands of the GSLA (Principal Support Program, Aspiring Principal Program, Teacher Leader Support Program, and Induction Teacher Support Program) will be fully implemented and operationally effective.
The Aspiring Principal Program was fully implemented and operationally effective in the 20192020 school year.
By the end of FY20, the GSLA will have an established partnership with a USG partner in order to align program outcomes with courses or field requirements for a GaPSC approved program.
The GSLA has established a partnership with Georgia Southern University that allows successful completers of the Aspiring Principal Program to earn up to six credit hours toward a degree in Educational Leadership.
The GSLA has started discussions with Georgia State University to establish a partnership that would allow successful completers of the Aspiring Principal Program to earn up to three credit hours toward a degree in Educational Leadership.
By the end of FY20, the GSLA will have an established partnership with a partnering Tier I provider in order to align program outcomes with content or field requirements for a GaPSC approved program.
19

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
The GSLA is in the process of finalizing a partnership with Middle Georgia RESA that would allow successful completers of the Aspiring Principal Program to receive credit toward a Tier I Leadership Certificate through completion of the Alternate Preparation for Educational Leaders Program.
The Aspiring Principal Program will serve two full cohorts (45-50 participants) of school leaders serving in districts that have at least one federally identified school in order to establish a leadership pipeline for Georgia that supports Georgia's highest need districts.
The 2019-2020 Aspiring Principal Program served two cohorts, with 46 total participants from 19 districts that have at least one federally identified school.
Based on end-of-program evaluation surveys (June 2020), an average of 85% of participants in all strands agree or strongly agree that the GSLA was a valuable use of time and that they would recommend participation in the program to other educators in similar roles.
A traditional end-of-year survey was not conducted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On the midyear survey, 98% of participants agreed that the trainings were a good use of their time, and 91% of participants agreed that the coaching was a good use of their time. One hundred percent of participants said they were likely or very likely to recommend the program to others.
By the end of FY20, 90% of participants who began a GSLA program will successfully complete the program.
Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, an average of 97.5% of participants attended each face-to-face content session.
Following each face-to-face content session, 85% of participants will indicate that the GSLA session was a good use of their time and that they developed new, applicable skills and/or knowledge as a result of the training.
An average of 94% of participants indicated that each session was a good use of their time. An average of 92% of participants indicated that they developed new skills or knowledge as a result of each training.
Following each face-to-face content session, 90% of participants indicate increased understanding of session content objectives from beginning to end of session.
An average of 95% of participants indicated increased understanding of session content objectives from beginning to end of session.
Recommendations and Plans for Next Year Recommendations for the program based on the evaluation include:
Provide more guidance and time for participants to work on their Action Research projects. Continue to provide opportunities for the participants to collaborate with one another and learn
from current and past principals. Continue to expand partnerships with other colleges and universities across the state. Emphasize the benefits of obtaining certification in Crucial Conversations and additional
CliftonStrengths coaching if these opportunities continue to be offered. Evaluate the cost of CliftonStrengths professional coaching sessions relative to participation. Evaluate sessions' focus based on participant feedback and adjust content.
Due to ongoing challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, GOSA opted not to seat new cohorts for the 2021-2021 school year. Instead, previous participants were offered the opportunity to continue to engage in coaching activities and to attend virtual sessions that were designed around needs identified
20

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
during the COVID-19 pandemic. All activities related to GSLA's Aspiring Principal Program were optional for the 2020-2021 school year. Opportunities for small group engagement revolved around topics leadergenerated during the height of the pandemic. Additionally, context-specific support for leaders was offered, including focused sessions on pandemic-related topics, principal interview preparation, and school-based team support sessions around specific challenges.
21

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Induction Teacher Support Program
Program Overview The Induction Teacher Support Program works in partnership with Georgia's 16 RESAs to provide nonevaluative training and coaching for induction-level teachers within their first three years of practice in the classroom. A design team, led by the Program Manager from GOSA and consisting of RESA staff, works to design the programming which is delivered by RESA employees to teachers in participating districts. The program consists of in-person training and classroom observations followed by one-on-one coaching.
Figure 6: Induction Teacher Support Program Design Model

GSLA Induction
Design Team

Designed and developed program content
Trained GSLA RESA Coaches

GSLA RESA Coaches

Facilitated Professional Learning to Teachers
Provided nonevaluative coaching support

GSLA Induction-
Level Teachers

Attended professional learning sessions
Implemented strategies
Engaged in coaching conversations

The structure of the Induction Teacher Support Program allows participants to participate in professional learning sessions that focus on broad topics addressing common challenges for early career teachers but receive individualized coaching in a non-evaluative setting. Following in-person trainings held by RESA coaches, participants receive individualized coaching based on classroom observations.
In-Person Training Induction Teacher Support Program participants received two days of in-person training, known as Professional Learning (PL) sessions, each semester, designed to help them develop strategies for instruction and build knowledge of pedagogy. The topics of the sessions were Creating a Positive Learning Environment, Instructional Design, Formative Assessment, and Data Analysis and Data-Informed Instruction. These topics were selected based on feedback from the RESA Design Team, Georgia Teacher Academy for Preparation and Pedagogy (GaTAPP) Coordinators, and Teacher Preparation Program Providers, as well as review of performance data provided by GaPSC on the Preparation Program Effectiveness Measures, and Georgia's Teacher Keys Effectiveness System (TKES) standards for K-12 teachers. Some RESAs had to adjust the content based on the specific contexts of participants' districts, conforming to district policies around lesson planning and instruction.
The Program Manager and design team created the curriculum and trained RESA coaches to deliver the content to participants. Some RESAs held the trainings in half-days, so each training was divided into two parts for the purposes of obtaining participant feedback.
Coaching The second major component of the Induction Teacher Support Program is non-evaluative coaching based on professional learning implementation targets and classroom observations. RESA coaches carry out observations to see how teachers are incorporating the content from in-person training and to observe their progress in the classroom. Each observation is followed up by a coaching session with the teacher, during which the coach may guide the teacher through the incorporation of strategies and skills from training into his or her teaching practice. The program design includes two observations each semester for every teacher, with the intention that one observation be completed after each in-person training.
22

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Profile of Participants The 2019-2020 Induction Teacher Support Program participants included approximately 400 teachers from participating districts, with approximately 375 teachers completing the full program. Participants represented 38 districts, shown in Figure 7. There were also participating teachers from the Harrell Learning Center, which serves students from multiple school districts. Based on guidance from GOSA and the Induction Design Team, each RESA worked with districts to select teachers to form a cohort of approximately 20 to 30 public school teachers. Districts were asked to select induction-level teachers in their first three years of practice in a K-12 setting. Some RESAs pulled their entire cohort from one district, while others worked with multiple districts. To be selected for participation, teachers were required to agree to engage in the in-person training and coaching. Some districts required nominated teachers to participate in the program, while others made it a voluntary opportunity. As shown in Figure 8, participants represented all grade levels, both general and special education, and a variety of content areas. The largest group of participants (45%) were in their first year teaching, while 34% were in their second year, and 17% were in their third year.13 A small number of participants (3%) reported having more than three years of teaching experience; some of these participants may have been recommended to join the program because they started teaching a new grade band or subject despite being an experienced teacher. The majority of participants (78%) reported having an Induction Certificate, a certificate for teachers in their first three years of professional teaching experience. Five percent reported having a permit to teach in a certain area without being certified.14 Permits are awarded based on a combination of work experience, educational requirements, and assessments. Eighteen percent of participants reported being in a district that has waived teaching certification statutes through one of the Georgia Department of Education's school system flexibility options.15 These districts may set their own standards for teaching requirements rather than following state requirements.
13 Fewer than three percent of participants reported having more than three years of teaching experience. Some participants may have included prior experience teaching in private school, college, or preschool settings, or previous teaching experience on a different certificate. Additionally, some districts did not follow the guidelines in selecting teachers for the program. 14 See the Georgia Professional Standards Commission's Tiered Certification webpage for more information. 15 See GaDOE's School System Flexibility webpage for more information.
23

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Figure 7: Map of Induction Teacher Support Program Participants16

Figure 8: Demographics of Induction Teacher Support Program Participants17

Grade Cluster

K to 2 17%

3 to 5 18%

6 to 8 30%

9 to 12 24%

Multiple 10%

Years Teaching Including 2019-2020

1 year 45%

Content Area

CTAE 5%

ELA 13%

Math 10%

Science 8%

Social Studies
7%

Teaching Certificate Type

Induction Certificate 78%

General vs. Special Education

General Education 77%

2 years 34%
Multiple 43%

3 years 17%

>3 yea...

Other 15%

Permit Waiver

5%

18%

Special Education
16%

Both 7%

16 Harrell Learning Center serves students from Atkinson, Bacon, Brantley, Charlton, Coffee, Clinch, Pierce, and Ware Counties. 17 All demographics are calculated out of 384 total participants using the Self-Assessment taken at the beginning of the program.
24

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Major Findings
In-Person Training Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In in this area was measured by completion of trainings. All RESAs reported completing all four PL sessions. Some RESAs completed the last session virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Program Manager conducted regular site visits during trainings to ensure that the content was being delivered consistently across RESAs.

RESA coaches also completed an end-of-year survey about their experiences carrying out the program (See Appendix E).18 As shown in Table 7, 92% of surveyed coaches agreed that they had all resources they needed to lead the PL sessions. All surveyed coaches agreed or strongly agreed that the content of the program was appropriate for induction-level teachers.

Table 7: Induction Teacher RESA Coach End-of-Year Survey Responses

Combined "Agree"

and "Strongly

Agree" Responses

I had all resources I needed to lead Professional Learning sessions.

92%

I felt the content of the program was appropriate for Induction teachers.

100%

I had all resources I needed to be a successful coach for Induction teachers.

92%

Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using perception surveys. As shown in Table 8, participants took surveys after each training to evaluate the quality and applicability of each session (See Appendix F).19 Participants rated the sessions highly, with an average of 93% of participants agreeing they learned useful strategies to apply in their classrooms. An average of 95% of participants agreed that each session was well organized and that the strategies and resources provided were appropriate for the learning objectives of each session. Of the categories surveyed, participants rated the sessions the lowest in applicability to their content area, with an average of 88% of participants agreeing the session content was appropriate for their content area. Additionally, an average of 89% of participants agreed that they felt more confident in identifying and supporting the needs of their students after each session.

Table 8: Induction Teacher Professional Learning (PL) Session Survey Responses

Percent Combined "Agree" and "Strongly Agree" Responses

PL 1 PL 1 PL 2 PL 2 PL 3 PL 3 PL 4 PL 4

Part 1 Part 2 Part 1 Part 2 Part 1 Part 2 Part 1 Part 2

I learned useful strategies that I can apply in the classroom.

91%

94%

92%

93%

89%

93%

94% 97%

I feel more confident in

identifying and supporting the 82% 90% 85% 88% 89% 91% 92% 95%
needs of my students.

I feel prepared to implement

the strategies I learned today 87% 89% 87% 92% 87% 93% 92% 93%
in the classroom.

The professional learning session was well-organized.

95% 95% 94% 93% 95% 95% 95% 97%

Mean 93% 89% 90% 95%

18 Administration of the end-of-year survey for coaches was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to staff turnover at RESAs, not all coaches from the 2019-2020 program were surveyed. 19 Percentages for the post-PL surveys are calculated out of the total number of responses for each survey (ranging from 288 to 375 responses).
25

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

The content presented in the

Professional Learning Session was appropriate for my grade

89%

90%

89%

89%

87%

90%

90% 93% 90%

level(s).

The content presented in the

professional learning session was appropriate for my

87%

87%

87% 87% 86% 89% 90% 91% 88%

content area(s).

The professional learning session was engaging.

94% 93% 93% 91% 89% 91% 91% 93% 92%

The strategies and resources

were appropriate for meeting the stated objective(s) of the

94%

95%

94%

93%

94%

94%

95% 97% 95%

professional learning session.

The pace of the presentation was appropriate for meeting the stated objective(s) of the professional learning session.

91%

92%

92%

92%

90%

92%

93% 93% 92%

Participants also took an end-of-year survey evaluating their perceptions of the program and how it impacted their instructional practices (See Appendix G).20 Participants were asked to rate how relevant the overarching topics of each of the four PL sessions were to their instructional practice. As shown in Table 9, at least 88% of participants agreed that the content of each session was relevant or very relevant.

Table 9: Induction Teacher End-of-Year Survey Responses on Relevance of PL Content

Combined "Relevant" and

"Very Relevant" Responses

Creating a Positive Learning Environment

89%

Instructional Design

88%

Formative Assessment

91%

Data Analysis and Data-Informed Instruction

88%

End-of-year surveys included open-ended questions which provided an opportunity for participants to share additional perceptions. When asked how they would change the content of the program on the end-of-year survey, a common theme from participants was making the content more specific to different subject areas and grade levels, particularly elementary school and special education; this concern was mentioned by 17% of respondents who provided qualitative feedback.21 Seventeen percent of respondents suggested adding more in-person trainings or making the trainings longer, while a smaller number (5%) suggested condensing them and reducing the number or length of the trainings.

Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools was measured by the participants' end-of-year survey. Participants were asked to rate how confident they were in transferring the information learned from each PL session to their instructional practice. As shown in Table 10, at least 86% of respondents felt confident or very confident in transferring the information learned from each session to their practice.

20 The end-of-year survey was completed by 116 participants. The response rate was likely impacted by pressures on teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic. 21 58 survey respondents provided qualitative feedback on PL content.
26

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Table 10: Induction Teacher End-of-Year Survey Responses on Transferring Content to Practice

Combined "Confident" and

"Very Confident" Responses

Creating a Positive Learning Environment

88%

Instructional Design

92%

Formative Assessment

92%

Data Analysis and Data-Informed Instruction

86%

Coaching Program Implementation and Participant Buy-In in this area was measured by logged completion of classroom observations (see Appendix H) and the end-of-year survey for coaches (see Appendix E). Coaches followed up each observation with a non-evaluative coaching conversation. During the 2019-2020 program, coaches logged 997 classroom observations, an average of 2.6 per participant.22 The Program Manager cited obstacles to completing observations including extended school closures for inclement weather, participating teachers on maternity or sick leave, and scheduling conflicts with school districts. For example, some districts were not able to schedule the first training until well into the first semester, making it challenging for coaches to complete two trainings and observations by the end of the semester. Most RESAs were unable to complete classroom observations in the spring due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic, but two coaches were able to carry out virtual observations. On the end-of-year survey for RESA coaches, as shown in Table 10 above, 92% of surveyed coaches agreed that they had all resources they needed to be successful coaches.

Table 11: Induction Teacher Classroom Observations Completed by Period

Semester 1

Semester 1

Semester 2

Semester 2

Additional

Observation 1

Observation 2

Observation 1

Observation 2

Observation

350

281

256

88

22

Participant Satisfaction in this area was measured using qualitative survey responses. Participants were asked on the end-of-year survey how the coaching impacted their teaching practice. Ninety-seven percent of the respondents who provided qualitative feedback indicated that the coaching experience impacted them positively and provided them with support, resources, or strategies that they found helpful.23 Eighteen percent of participants specifically mentioned that their coach helped them implement instructional strategies. Nine percent specifically mentioned that their coach helped them to become more confident as a teacher. Eight percent specifically mentioned that they appreciated the feedback that their coach provided. One participant noted about their coach, "She was a critical part of my success and confidence this year. She offered a wealth of information and resources. Thus, she encouraged me to step out of the box and be better (different). In addition to the monthly training session, she was a part of my team. I could count on her for encouragement and to challenge me to dig deeper." Another noted, "The support I received from my GSLA coach holds much worth in my teaching career. Not only was he a listening ear, but also offered great advice and suggestions to help me to overcome obstacles that I faced in my year. This program has been a tremendous help to reach my students and I will be able to use the strategies I learned for years to come."
Overall Program Participant Satisfaction for the program overall was measured through qualitative survey responses. Participants were asked on the end-of-year survey if they felt they were in a better position as a teacher

22 Observation data is entered by each RESA coach. The data was cleaned by removing obvious duplicate and blank observations. 23 119 participants provided qualitative feedback on coaching.
27

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
after the program. Ninety-three percent of participants indicated they felt they were in a better position as a teacher.24 Five participants noted on the end-of-year survey that the program felt redundant as they were already enrolled in GaTAPP, a teacher preparation program for degree-holding professionals without an education background, or a district professional development program. One RESA coach with GaTAPP teachers in her cohort anticipated this issue and worked with the GaTAPP coordinator to ensure that the sessions and coaching built on and reinforced GaTAPP content rather than repeating it. Another participant noted they were enrolled in a district program for new teachers that also had similar content to the GSLA Teacher Academy program.
Program Effectiveness and Impact on Schools was measured using qualitative survey responses, beginningand end-of-year participant self-assessments, and classroom observations. Typically end-of-year focus groups or individual interviews would also have been held but were not carried out this year due to pressures on schools and teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Participants were asked on the end-of-year survey how participating in the program impacted their instructional practice. Ninety-four percent of participants were able to provide at least one example of how the program impacted their practice.25 Thirty-one percent (36 participants) specifically mentioned implementing strategies learned during the program.
On the end-of-year survey for coaches, respondents were asked about the impact they observed that the program had on participating teachers. Ninety-two percent of respondents reported that they observed at least some impact of the program on teachers.26 Sixty-seven percent of respondents noted observing teachers putting the strategies learned from the PL sessions into practice during the classroom observations. When asked if delivery of the program was impacted by working with different types of teachers, such as those who completed GaTAPP programs or those who completed traditional teacher preparation programs, 83% of respondents agreed that there was an impact.27 Forty-two percent of respondents noted that teachers who did not complete traditional teacher preparation programs needed more support and coaching.
The classroom observation data completed by RESA coaches shows significant growth from the start of the program to the end of the program, as shown in Table 12. While the number of observations for the end of Semester two is limited, the existing data shows growth in the percentage of teachers considered "on target" in every category from the beginning to the end of the program. Participants made the most growth (40 percentage points) in the category of aligning learning experiences to an appropriate standard.
24 121 participants provided qualitative feedback on this question. 25 117 participants provided qualitative feedback on how the program impacted their instructional practice. 26 12 coaches provided qualitative feedback on this question. 27 12 coaches provided qualitative feedback on this question.
28

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Table 12: Induction Teacher Classroom Observation Data by Period

Percent "On Target"

Semester 1 Semester 1 Semester 2 Semester 2

Observation Observation Observation Observation

1

2

1

2

The learning experience(s)

was/were clearly aligned to

42%

51%

66%

82%

an appropriate standard(s).

There was evidence of a

student-focused learning

40%

50%

63%

78%

target or targets.

The learning experiences

were appropriate for the

42%

54%

66%

77%

content.

The learning experiences

were appropriate for the developmental level of the

44%

55%

67%

78%

students.

Evidence of positive

classroom culture/climate was observed during this

43%

56%

68%

71%

visit.

Evidence of positive

relationships between the teacher and students was

52%

62%

75%

81%

observed during this visit.

Evidence of positive

relationships between the students was observed

47%

52%

63%

76%

during this visit.

The instructional strategy

named above was

implemented to impact

35%

43%

61%

67%

interaction with content and

to engage all students.

"Check(s) for

understanding" was/were

31%

38%

49%

64%

observed.

% Change
40% 38% 35% 34%
28% 29%
29%
32%
33%

Participants took a self-assessment (see Appendix I) at the beginning and end of the program evaluating their skills in organization and procedures, positive relationships, engagement and enjoyment, the culture of thinking and learning, preparing students for new learning, presenting new learning, deepening and reinforcing learning, applying learning, reflecting on and celebrating learning, and professional practice.28 The percentage of participants rating themselves as "Proficient" or "Expert" grew in every category from the beginning to the end of the program (see the full results in Appendix J). The largest increases were in "keeping the flow of activities in the classroom moving smoothly" (an increase of 31%) and "Teaching students how to use strategies on their own, as tools and frameworks for thinking and learning" (an increase of 29%). The lowest increases were in "maintaining a high level of professionalism at all times" (an increase of 8%) and "showing you care about your students as individuals" (an increase of 7%), both areas where a high majority of participants already rated themselves as "Proficient" or "Expert" at the start of the year.

28 The Beginning-of-Year self-assessment had 384 respondents, while the End-of-Year self-assessment had 297 respondents. The smaller number of End-of-Year responses is likely to due to pressures on teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

29

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
GOSA plans to evaluate the long-term impact of the program by tracking the retention of participants as educators in Georgia compared to the state's average teacher retention rate for induction-level teachers. However, this analysis will be limited by availability of data, as only teachers with a certificate number and who remain in the Georgia public school system can be traced. Teachers with a permit or waiver may not be traced in this way. GOSA also plans to evaluate the long-term impact of the program by working with participating school districts to determine the retention and success of induction-level teachers who completed the program compared to those who did not.
Progress Toward One-Year Goals and Measurable Objectives By June 2020, the four integrated strands of the GSLA (Principal Support Program, Aspiring Principal Program, Teacher Leader Support Program, and Teacher Induction Support Program) will be fully implemented and operationally effective.
The Induction Teacher Support Program was fully implemented and operationally effective by fall 2019. The program experienced barriers related to COVID-19 in the spring 2020, and did not fully implement the coaching element of the program during this semester. The design team worked to adapt the program format to again be fully operational in the fall 2020, developing virtual learning modules and preparing for virtual coaching.
The Teacher Induction Support Program will serve 16 cohorts of approximately 30 teachers through a partnership with the RESA Network to support increased teacher efficacy and retention of early career teachers.
All 16 RESAs served a cohort of teachers, but some cohorts were smaller than 30 teachers. Some cohorts were smaller than initially planned due to districts deciding not to participate in the program.
Based on end-of-program evaluation surveys (June 2020), an average of 85% of participants in all strands agree or strongly agree that the GSLA was a valuable use of time and that they would recommend participation in the program to other educators in similar roles.
A traditional comprehensive end-of-year survey was not completed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, on the end-of-year survey that was completed, 93% of respondents suggested that they felt they were in a stronger position as a teacher after participating in the program, indicating that they found the program valuable.
By the end of FY20, 90% of participants who began a GSLA program will successfully complete the program.
Approximately 375 out of 400 participants (94%) completed the program. Data collection in this area was partly hindered by the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020.
Following each face-to-face content session, 85% of participants will indicate that the GSLA session was a good use of their time and that they developed new, applicable skills and/or knowledge as a result of the training.
A traditional comprehensive end-of-year survey was not completed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, on the end-of-year survey that was completed, 94% of respondents suggested that the program impacted their teaching practice, indicating that they developed new and applicable skills.
Following each face-to-face content session, 90% of participants indicate increased understanding of session content objectives from beginning to end of session.
30

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
After each PL session, an average of 93% of respondents reported that they learned useful strategies to apply in the classroom, and an average of 89% of respondents reported feeling more confident in identifying and supporting the needs of their students.
Recommendations and Plans for Next Year Recommendations for the program based on the evaluation are provided below:
Although it is likely impractical to substantially differentiate the content of the program to different grade levels and subject areas, consider adding more differentiated small group content for different grade levels and content areas at the in-person trainings.
Monitor completion of classroom observations and coaching more closely to ensure a higher implementation rate. Require coaches to cite specific reasons why observations could not be completed so that common reasons can be addressed.
Ensure that RESA coaches are tracking data on participants with fidelity, including whether and when participants leave the program.
Encourage districts to consider whether the teachers they select for participation are already in similar professional development programs in order to avoid redundancy.
Encourage coaches who have a large number of GaTAPP teachers in their cohorts to work with GaTAPP coordinators in order to ensure that content is not redundant.
Consider adapting the program to allow participants to continue receiving coaching for a second year on a voluntary basis. This may be impractical due to budget concerns.
The Induction Teacher Support Program will support its second cohort of teachers during the 2020-2021 school year, with content adapted to be delivered in a virtual or hybrid model. Two RESAs opted not to continue the program for the 2020-2021 school year due to budget constraints, deciding instead to focus on the Teacher Leader Support Program.
31

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Teacher Leader Support Program
The Teacher Leader Support Program works in partnership with RESAs to provide training and coaching for teachers looking to take on leadership roles, including those outside of administrative roles. A design team, led by the Program Manager from GOSA and consisting of RESA staff, works to design the programming, which is delivered by RESA employees to teachers in participating districts. The program consists of in-person trainings and one-on-one coaching and focuses on topics including team leadership, data analysis, effective feedback, and the school improvement process.
Goals for the Teacher Leader Support Program are to give teacher leaders the opportunity to engage with other teacher leaders and connect theory and research with their practice, give teacher leaders the opportunity to explore teacher leader career pathways and develop effective and efficient systems of support and implementation to increase their impact on their peers and ultimately, student achievement, and promote and support teacher leadership development in Georgia to positively impact the learning community.
The first Teacher Leader cohort will complete the program during the 2020-2021 school year. Initially, a kickoff for the cohort was planned for spring 2020, with trainings beginning in the summer 2020. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the start of the program was delayed until the fall 2020.
The inaugural cohort will include 280 participants. Initially, 400 participants were accepted, but some withdrew from the program due to outside responsibilities, and some RESAs had to reduce the size of their cohort due to budget issues. Each RESA worked with districts to select teachers to form a cohort of approximately 20 to 30 public school teachers. Districts were asked to nominate fully certified teachers with at least four years of experience who had a role teaching in a K-12 classroom for at least part of the school day. All nominated teachers received an application to apply for the program, and the final cohort was selected after interviews between RESA coaches and applicants.
While the program initially included all RESAs, three RESAs opted not to proceed with the program due to budget constraints, deciding instead to focus on the Induction Teacher Support Program. These three RESAs would have supported an additional 81 teacher leader participants who were selected to participate in the program before the budget reductions.
Progress Toward One-Year Goals and Measurable Objectives By June 2020, the four integrated strands of the GSLA (Principal Support Program, Aspiring Principal Program, Teacher Leader Support Program, and Teacher Induction Support Program) will be fully implemented and operationally effective.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Teacher Leader Support Program was not initiated in spring 2020 as planned. The design team worked to adapt the delivery model and the program was fully functional in the fall 2020.
The Teacher Leader Support Program will be launched in the spring of 2020 to serve approximately 400 Georgia teachers through the RESA Network to retain educators in field and develop effective school leaders in a variety of roles.
Implementation of the Teacher Leader Support Program was delayed until the fall 2020 due to COVID-19. The inaugural cohort will include 280 teachers, a smaller cohort than originally planned due to fewer RESAs participating in the program.
32

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
District Support Program The District Support Program provides guidance and support for districts who have the capacity and desire to build and sustain internal leadership development programs. The primary goal of leadership development is to cultivate the kinds of leaders who sustain change. To enlist and support great leaders, a successful leadership development program should support all leaders at all levels within a school district. The GSLA District Support Program offers an opportunity to build internal capacity and support long-term sustainability of leadership development for districts across the state. GSLA will support and partner with selected districts through a yearlong process of planning, developing, and implementing a sustainable, viable leadership development program. Progress Toward One-Year Goals and Measurable Objectives Three district partnerships have been identified and established to develop and implement internal leadership development programs.
During the 2019-2020 school year, the GSLA District Support pilot coordinator established partnerships with Douglas, Lanier, Lowndes, and Muscogee Counties to begin designing sustainable leadership development projects. Because of challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, Lanier, Lowndes, and Muscogee opted to suspend their planning projects with the intent of restarting in the fall of 2021. GSLA is currently in discussions with Griffin-Spalding to establish an additional partnership during the 2020-2021 school year.
33

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Conclusion GSLA represents one of the State of Georgia's efforts to support and develop educators in all phases of their careers, from induction-level teachers to principals. In its second year, GSLA supported 82 principals, 46 aspiring principals and approximately 400 induction-level teachers. Data from GSLA's second year shows participants were satisfied with the program and that it had a positive impact on participants' practice in their current roles. Ninety-five percent of principals and 100% of aspiring principals reported they would be likely to recommend their programs to others. The inaugural cohort of the Induction Teacher Support program also reported largely positive data. GSLA will continue with all five of its programs and district pilots in the 2020-2021 school year, while also forming new partnerships to support teachers and school leaders across the state. GSLA is adapting its programs to a remote or hybrid model during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure that participants are supported safely. Partnerships are currently being pursued with Georgia State University, Middle Georgia RESA, and additional districts to expand opportunities for program participants.
34

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Appendices

Appendix A: GSLA Goals

1-YEAR GOALS (FY20)
By June 2020, the four integrated strands of the GSLA (Principal Support Program, Aspiring Principal Program, Teacher Leader Support Program, and Teacher Induction Support Program) will be fully implemented and operationally effective.
By the end of FY20, the GSLA will have an established partnership with a USG partner in order to align program outcomes with courses or field requirements for a PSC approved program.
By the end of FY20, the GSLA will have an established partnership with a partnering Tier I provider in order to align program outcomes with content or field requirements for a PSC approved program.

MEASUREABLE OBJECTIVE(S)
Principal Support Program will serve three full cohorts of CSI, TSI, Promise, SIG, or other identified schools (80-85 participants) in partnership with the Georgia Department of Education to ensure coordinated support for Georgia's highest need schools.
The Aspiring Principal Program will serve two full cohorts (4550 participants) of school leaders serving in districts that have at least one federally identified school in order to establish a leadership pipeline for Georgia that supports Georgia's highest need districts.
The Teacher Leader Support Program will be launched in the spring of 2020 to serve approximately 400 Georgia teachers through the RESA Network in order to retain educators in field and develop effective school leaders in a variety of roles.
The Teacher Induction Support Program will serve 16 cohorts of approximately 30 teachers through a partnership with the RESA Network to support increased teacher efficacy and retention of early career teachers.
Three district partnerships have been identified and established to develop and implement internal leadership development programs.
Based on end-of-program evaluation surveys (June 2020), an average of 85% of participants in all strands agree or strongly agree that the GSLA

STRATEGY(IES)
Collaborate with GaDOE to provide ongoing support for principals in high need schools
Collaborate with GaPSC to ensure alignment of programs to degree and certificate seeking programs throughout the state
Collaborate and partner with the RESA Network to scale teacher programs statewide
Collaborate with design and research partners to ensure developmentally appropriate programming for all GSLA strands
Collaborate with the GOSA Evaluation and Policy Team to evaluate the effectiveness and applicability of all GSLA strands
Review and analyze evaluation data from all strands and adjust content appropriately
Actively seek district partnerships for internal systems development and implementation

35

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

was a valuable use of time and that they would recommend participation in the program to other educators in similar roles.
By the end of FY20, 90% of participants who began a GSLA program will successfully complete the program.
Following each face-to-face content session, 85% of participants will indicate that the GSLA session was a good use of their time and that they developed new, applicable skills and/or knowledge as a result of the training.
Following each face-to-face content session, 90% of participants indicate increased understanding of session content objectives from beginning to end of session.

3 YEAR GOALS (End of FY21 2019- June 2022)
By June 2022, the GSLA will have a fully operational system of school and district supports that provides a comprehensive, integrated statewide approach to teacher and leader development and support.
In June 2022, 85% of former GSLA participants continue to work in a Georgia school or district, are in an equal or higher position of leadership, and have shown a higher level of positive impact than non-GSLA completers in the same time frame of practice/role.
By June 2022, with the support of GSLA staff, five partnering school

MEASURABLE OBJECTIVE(S)
All strands of the GSLA will continue or increase at FY20 scale utilizing the following models: o Principal Support Program 3 cohorts/year, fully GSLA developed and facilitated, coaching support provided by GaDOE; and o Aspiring Principal Support Program 4 cohorts/year fully GSLA developed and facilitated, coaching support provided by GSLA; and o Teacher Leader Support Program 16 cohorts of approximately 30 teachers; GSLA supported through a RESA design team; RESA facilitated

STRATEGY(IES)
Collaborate with GaDOE to provide ongoing support for principals in high need schools
Collaborate with GaPSC to ensure alignment of programs to degree and certificate seeking programs throughout the state
Collaborate and partner with the RESA Network to scale teacher programs statewide
Collaborate with design and research partners to ensure developmentally appropriate programming for all GSLA strands
Collaborate with the GOSA Evaluation and Policy Team to evaluate the effectiveness and

36

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

districts have implemented a strategic leadership development and retention plan. By the end of FY22, showcase Georgia's statewide system of supports in 5 national forums.
5 YEAR GOALS (End of FY23 2019- June 2024)
By June 2024, the GSLA will continue to maintain an operational system of school and district supports that provides a comprehensive, integrated statewide approach to teacher and leader development and support.
In June 2024, 85% of teachers who completed the Teacher Induction Support Program are employed by a Georgia school district.
In June 2024, 85% of educators who completed the Teacher Leader Support Program are employed by a

redelivery of content; coaching support provided by RESA; and o Teacher Induction Support Program 16 cohorts of approximately 30 teachers; GSLA supported through a RESA design team; RESA facilitated redelivery of content; coaching support provided by RESA. 5 GSLA supported district programs have been implemented based on internal district capacity and need. 6 MOUs are in place with USG or tiered certification program providers that allows GSLA participants the opportunity to transfer course work or field hours to a degree or certificate seeking program. MEASURABLE OBJECTIVE(S)
All strands of the GSLA will continue or increase at FY20 scale utilizing the following models: o Principal Support Program 3 cohorts/year, fully GSLA developed and facilitated, coaching support provided by GaDOE; and o Aspiring Principal Support Program 4 cohorts/year fully GSLA developed and facilitated, coaching support provided by GSLA; and o Teacher Leader Support Program 16 cohorts of approximately 30

applicability of all GSLA strands Review and analyze evaluation data from all strands and adjust content appropriately Actively recruit partnerships with USGs, RESAs and other degree or certificate providers Review program requirements and individualize agreements and MOUs with degree or certificate providers Actively seek opportunities to showcase Georgia's systematic approach to teacher retention and leadership development
STRATEGY(IES)
ongoing support for principals in high need schools
Collaborate with GaPSC to ensure alignment of programs to degree and certificate seeking programs throughout the state
Collaborate and partner with the RESA Network to scale teacher programs statewide
Collaborate with design and research partners to ensure developmentally appropriate programming for all GSLA strands
Collaborate with the GOSA Evaluation and

37

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Georgia school district

teachers; GSLA

Policy Team to evaluate

and have made progress

supported through a

the effectiveness and

toward the attainment of

RESA design team;

applicability of all

leadership goals

RESA facilitated

GSLA strands

identified in the GSLA

redelivery of content; Review and analyze

program.

coaching support

evaluation data from all

By June 2024, 50% of

provided by RESA; and

strands and adjust

educators who

o Teacher Induction

content appropriately

completed the Aspiring Principal Program have

Support Program 16 cohorts of

Actively recruit partnerships with USGs,

been named to a

approximately 30

RESAs and other degree

principalship.

teachers; GSLA

or certificate providers

By June 2024, principals

supported through a

Review program

who completed the

RESA design team;

requirements and

Principal Support Pro-

RESA facilitated

individualize agreements

gram have shown a

redelivery of content;

and MOUs with degree

greater positive gain on

coaching support

or certificate providers

CCRPI than principals

provided by RESA.

Actively seek

who did not complete the 5 GSLA supported district

opportunities to

program.

programs have been

showcase Georgia's

By June 2024, schools of

implemented based on

systematic approach to

candidates who

internal district capacity and

teacher retention and

successfully complete

need.

leadership development

the Principal Support

6 MOUs are in place with USG or Track and analyze data

Program and have

tiered certification program

on teacher retention for

remained in role for

providers that allows GSLA

all GSLA Induction

three years post-

participants the opportunity to

Support Program

completion have moved transfer course work or field hours to

participants

off the federally

a degree or certificate seeking Track and analyze data

identified lists or schools program.

on participant placement

or have moved to a lower tier of service.

in leadership roles for all GSLA program

By June 2022, with the

completers

support of GSLA staff, 15 partnering school districts have

Track and analyze data on changes in CCRPI for schools with leaders

implemented a strategic

who have completed a

leadership development

GSLA program and who

and retention plan.

have remained in-role

for 3+ years

Provide program review,

implementation and

evaluation support for

districts who have the

capacity and need to

develop internal

leadership development

systems

38

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix B: Principal Support Program/Aspiring Principal Program Coaching Visit Record Sheet GSLA Coach * Date of Visit *
Participant's Cohort * Approximate Length of Visit (in minutes) *
Primary Topic of Visit: * Strength based leadership Clarification of Content from Face-to-Face Sessions Strategies for Implementing Content from Face-to-Face Sessions Action Research and/or Job Imbedded Activity Support (Aspiring Only) Other
Notes on Primary Topic:
Secondary Topic of Call: * Strength based leadership Clarification of Content from Face-to-Face Sessions Strategies for Implementing Content from Face-to-Face Sessions Action Research and/or Job Imbedded Activity Support (Aspiring Only) Other
Notes on Secondary Topic:
Additional Call Topic: Strength based leadership Clarification of Content from Face-to-Face Sessions Strategies for Implementing Content from Face-to-Face Sessions Action Research and/or Job Imbedded Activity Support (Aspiring Only) Other
Notes on Additional Topic:
Coaching Follow-Up Activities Action Steps:
Who: Task: Target Date:
GSLA Follow-Up Activities Action Steps:
Topic/Need: Suggested Follow-Up Activity:
Next Call:
39

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix C: Principal Support Program Mid-Year Survey 1. How many years have you served in your current role?
The questions on this page are intended to help the GSLA team plan for the remainder of the 2019-2020 year in relation to support for participants. Please indicate your preferences in relation to each individual component below.
2. Please consider your overall experience with the GSLA program as you rate whether you agree with the following statements. [Scale: Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree]
The in-person monthly trainings were a good use of my time. Contact with my regional coach was a good use of my time. I learned new skills from participating in GSLA. The information covered at GSLA trainings is applicable to my role as a Principal.
3. Please consider your overall experience with the GSLA program and indicate the value of each GSLA component below. [Scale: Not Valuable At All, Not Valuable in Comparison to Amount of Time Required, Neutral, Somewhat Valuable, Very Valuable]
The content provided at the face-to-face meetings The handouts and resources provided during and after face-to-face sessions The opportunity to interact with members of the cohort at face-to-face sessions The opportunity to hear from and interact with successful principals and field experts The opportunity to interact with GSLA Coaches at my school
4. How applicable was the information from each of these aspects of GSLA to your role during the 20192020 school year? [Scale: Not at all Applicable, Somewhat Applicable, Applicable]
Strength-based development sessions Connecting strengths to influencing others and making cultural shifts School climate sessions Using school climate data to impact school culture Self-Assessment Session: Georgia School Performance Standards Understanding personal beliefs and assumptions Crucial Conversations Guest speakers
5. How often did you use the information learned from each of these aspects of GSLA in your role during the 2019-2020 school year? [Scale: Never, Rarely, Occasionally, Frequently, Very Frequently]
Strength-based development sessions Connecting strengths to influencing others and making cultural shifts School climate sessions Using school climate data to impact school culture Self-Assessment Session: Georgia School Performance Standards Understanding personal beliefs and assumptions Crucial Conversations Guest speakers
6. Please give concrete examples of times that you used the information learned from GSLA in your current role at your school. This will assist us in creating relevant job-embedded assignments for future participants.
7. What do you consider the most beneficial aspects of participating in GSLA?
40

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
8. What do you consider the least beneficial aspects of participating in GSLA? 9. Are there any aspects of principalship that you felt were missing from the GSLA curriculum? 10. Is there any other feedback you would like to give about GSLA? 11. Based on your overall experience as a GSLA participant, how likely are you to recommend this program to other principals? [Very Unlikely, Unlikely, Neither Unlikely nor likely, Likely, Very Likely] 12. Please consider your overall experience with your regional coach as you answer the following questions. [Scale: Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree]
I am satisfied with the overall level of support that I received from my coach. I am satisfied with the level of contact (emails, calls, and site visits) that I received from my coach. I received valuable feedback from my coach. 13. Is there any other feedback you would like to offer regarding the coaching aspect of GSLA?
41

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix D: Aspiring Principal Program Mid-Year Survey 1. How many years, including this one, have you served in your current role?
2. If you do not yet hold a Tier I leadership certificate, is it your intention to apply for the leadership program at Georgia Southern?
3. Please consider your overall experience with the GSLA program as you rate whether you agree with the following statements. [Scale: Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree]
The in-person monthly trainings were a good use of my time. Contact with my regional coach was a good use of my time. I learned new skills from participating in GSLA. The information covered at GSLA trainings is applicable to my role as an Aspiring Principal.
4. Please consider your overall experience with the GSLA program and indicate the value of each GSLA component below. [Scale: Not Valuable At All, Not Valuable in Comparison to Amount of Time Required, Neutral, Somewhat Valuable, Very Valuable]
The content provided at the face-to-face meetings The handouts and resources provided during and after face-to-face sessions The opportunity to interact with members of the cohort at face-to-face sessions The opportunity to hear from and interact with successful principals and field experts The opportunity to interact with GSLA Coaches at my school
5. How applicable was the information from each of these aspects of GSLA to your role during the 20192020 school year? [Scale: Not at all Applicable, Somewhat Applicable, Applicable]
Importance of the Principalship and Five Pivotal Practices that Shape Instructional Change Strength-Based Development Sessions Exploring Talents Sessions Connection Between School Improvement, Academic Structures, and Systematic Processes Self Assessment: Exploring Personal Beliefs and Assumptions Understanding the Impact of Beliefs Reviewing School Improvement Processes and the Effectiveness of Improvement Plans Crucial Conversations Session Action Research Project
6. How often did you use the information learned from each of these aspects of GSLA in your role during the 2019-2020 school year? [Scale: Never, Rarely, Occasionally, Frequently, Very Frequently]
Importance of the Principalship and Five Pivotal Practices that Shape Instructional Change Strength-Based Development Sessions Exploring Talents Sessions Connection Between School Improvement, Academic Structures, and Systematic Processes Self Assessment: Exploring Personal Beliefs and Assumptions Understanding the Impact of Beliefs Reviewing School Improvement Processes and the Effectiveness of Improvement Plans Crucial Conversations Session Action Research Project
7. Please give concrete examples of times that you used the information learned from GSLA in your current role at your school. This will assist us in creating relevant job-embedded assignments for future participants.
42

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
8. Please consider your overall experience with your regional coach as you rate whether you agree with the following statements. [Scale: Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree]
I am satisfied with the overall level of support that I received from my coach. I am Satisfied with the level of contact (emails, calls, and site visits) that I received from my coach. I received valuable feedback from my coach. 9. Is there any other feedback you would like to offer regarding the coaching aspect of GSLA? 10. What do you consider the most beneficial aspects of participating in the GSLA Aspiring Principal Program? 11. What do you consider the least beneficial aspects of participating in the GSLA Aspiring Principal Program? 12. Is there any other feedback you would like to give about the GSLA Aspiring Principal Program? 13. Are there any aspects of principalship that you felt were missing from the GSLA Aspiring Principal Program's curriculum? 14. Based on your overall experience as a GSLA participant, how likely are you to recommend this program to other principals? [Very Unlikely, Unlikely, Neither Unlikely nor likely, Likely, Very Likely]
43

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix E: Induction Teacher Support Program Coach End-of-Year Survey Please complete the brief survey below based on your experiences as a coach during the 2019-2020 school year. Your responses are completely anonymous, but the information from your answers may be included in our annual report, so be sure not to include any information that could identify you. Your responses will be used to evaluate and help improve the program. 1. Please indicate whether you strongly disagree, disagree, are neutral, agree, or strongly agree with the following statements. [Scale: Strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree]
I had all of the resources I needed to lead Professional Learning sessions. I had all of the resources I needed to be a successful coach for Induction teachers. I felt the content of the program was appropriate for Induction teachers. I felt supported at my RESA as a coach. I felt supported by GOSA staff as a coach. 2. How do you think the program supported Induction teachers? 3. Do you feel that you saw the impact the program had on the Induction teachers that you supported? If so, please provide examples. 4. Did you find that the type of teachers you were working with (e.g., TAPP teachers, waiver teachers, teachers from traditional teacher preparation programs) impacted the way you provided PL and coaching? 5. What changes would you make to the program in terms of how coaches are supported? 6. What changes would you make to the program in terms of how Induction teachers are supported?
44

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix F: Induction Teacher Support Program Professional Learning Session Feedback Form
The Professional Learning Session Feedback Forms will provide RESAs with immediate, honest feedback on the professional learning sessions. The feedback forms will also help the RESAs evaluate the effectiveness of the sessions in improving instructional practices.
1. What is your RESA?
2. Who is your RESA Facilitator?
3. Which of the following best describes your current role? Academic Coach/Instructional Support Administrator Teacher - Full Cohort Participation Teacher - Professional Learning Only Other (please specify)
4. Grade Band Taught (check all that apply): K-2 3-5 6-8 9-12
5. Number of Years Teaching (including 2019-2020): 1 year 2 years 3 years Other (Please specify)
6. Please indicate whether you strongly disagree, disagree, are neutral, agree, or strongly agree with the following statements. [Scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Agree]
I learned useful strategies that I can apply in the classroom. I feel more confident in identifying and supporting the needs of my students. I feel prepared to implement the strategies I learned today in the classroom. The Professional Learning Session was well-organized. The content presented in the Professional Learning Session was appropriate for my grade level(s). The content presented in the Professional learning Session was appropriate for my content area(s). The Professional Learning Session was engaging. The strategies and resources were appropriate for meeting the stated objective(s) of the Professional
Learning Session. The pace of the presentation was appropriate for meeting the stated objective(s) of the Professional
Learning Session.
7. What did you like about this Professional Learning Session?
8. What would you change about this Professional Learning Session?
9. What are your next steps? (How will you use what you learned in your classroom?) If you are facing any barriers to implement what you learned, please also list them and how you hope to address them.
45

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
10. Please provide any additional comments you would like to share about the Professional Learning Session. 11. What additional information/or guidance do you need to support your work related to this topic?
46

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix G: Induction Teacher Support Program Participant End-of-Year Survey 1. Please select your RESA.
2. What grade level did you teach during the 2019-2020 school year? Please check all that apply. K-2 3-5 6-8 9-12
3. What content area(s) did you teach during the 2019-2020 school year?
4. PL Content: Creating a Positive Learning Environment How relevant was the information provided to your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] How confident were you in implementing strategies from the session into your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] What additional information or resources could we add to this session? What could we do to improve this session?
5. PL Content: Instructional Design How relevant was the information provided to your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] How confident were you in implementing strategies from the session into your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] What additional information or resources could we add to this session? What could we do to improve this session?
6. PL Content: Formative Assessment How relevant was the information provided to your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] How confident were you in implementing strategies from the session into your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] What additional information or resources could we add to this session? What could we do to improve this session?
7. PL Content: Data Analysis and Data-Informed Instruction How relevant was the information provided to your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] How confident were you in implementing strategies from the session into your instructional practice? [Scale: 1,2,3,4,5] What additional information or resources could we add to this session? What could we do to improve this session?
8. How did the coaching support you received from your RESA GSLA coach impact your instructional practice? Please include any specific examples you would like to share.
9. How did participating in the GSLA Teacher Academy Induction Support Program impact your instructional practice? Please include any specific examples you would like to share.
47

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
10. Do you feel that you are in a better position to design, plan, and implement high quality and effective lessons for your students after having participated in the GSLA Teacher Academy Induction Support Program? Please provide examples or details. 11. Is there anything else you would like to share with the GSLA Teacher Academy Induction Support Program Design Team?
48

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix H: Induction Teacher Support Program Classroom Observation Tool 1. RESA Specialist Name:
2. RESA Specialist Email:
3. School:
4. Teacher Last Name:
5. Teacher First Initial:
6. Grade Cluster: K-2 3-5 6-8 9-12
7. Date of Observation:
8. Class Period or Time of Observation:
9. Observation Label: Semester 1, Observation 1 Semester 1, Observation 2 Semester 2, Observation 1 Semester 2, Observation 2 Additional Observation
10. General Content Area Observed: CTAE ELA Math Science Social Studies Other (Please specify)
11. Instructional Framework Segment(s) observed: (check all that apply) Bell Ringer/Warm-Up Opening/Mini-Lesson Work Session Closing Other (Please specify)
12. Based on your observation, mark which indicator reflects the statement below. [Scale: Not Evident, Approaching, On Target]
The learning experience(s) was/were clearly aligned to an appropriate standard(s). There was evidence of a student-focused learning target or targets. The learning experiences were appropriate for the content. The learning experiences were appropriate for the developmental level of the students.
49

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
13. What type(s) of instructional model(s) was/were used during this observation? (Select all that apply) Independent Practice One-on-one with Teacher or Paraprofessional Pair Small Group Whole Group Other (Please specify) 14. Notes:
50

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Appendix I: Induction Teacher Support Program Participant Self-Assessment 1. Last Name:
2. First Name:
3. RESA:
4. School District:
5. Which grade band(s) do you teach? Select all that apply. K-2 3-5 6-8 9-12
6. How many years have you been teaching (including 2020-2021)? 1 year 2 years 3 years Other (please specify)
7. What content area(s) do you teach? Please select all that apply. CTAE ELA Math Science Social Studies Other (please specify)
8. What is your certificate type? Induction Certificate Permit Waiver
9. Please select your assigned teaching role this year. General Education Special Education Both
10. Please rate yourself on all indicators using the scale below. Novice: I do not do this in my classroom, or my use of the practice is not having positive effects on student learning. Developing: I do this in my classroom, but only notice positive effects on student learning sometimes. Proficient: I do this well and notice consistent positive effects on student learning. Expert: I see this as a strength of mine. I can adapt it to fit my students' needs and notice consistent and significant positive results in student achievement. Not Applicable: This does not apply to my work at my school.
51

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
Organization, Rules, and Procedures: How do you rate yourself at...? 1.1: Organizing classroom space (e.g., seating, resources, technology, decoration) to ensure safety, maximize learning, and meet your overall goals and objectives? 1.2: Keeping the flow of activities in the classroom moving smoothly? 1.3: Establishing a manageable set of classroom rules and procedures and communicating with students about them regularly (e.g., posting them, modeling them, explaining the rationale behind them, discussing their applications in the classroom, and refining them as needed)? 1.4: Providing clear directions for classroom tasks using a variety of modalities (e.g., verbal, visual, physical demonstration) and checking to make sure students understand their roles and responsibilities? 1.5: Developing an effective plan for managing student behavior that includes positive consequences, negative consequences, and an appropriate level of home involvement? 1.6: Managing non-instructional duties (e.g., taking attendance, distributing materials and take-home notices, lunch counts) with minimal disruption to classroom learning? 1.7: Working effectively with other adults in the classroom (e.g., co-teachers, paraprofessionals, aides, student teachers)?
Positive Relationships: How would you rate yourself at...? 2.1: Maintaining a positive and "with it" demeanor that shows students you care about what's going on in the classroom and are committed to the idea that "we're all in this together?" 2.2: Getting to know your students and incorporating their interests, aspirations, and backgrounds into the curriculum? 2.3: Differentiating instruction and assessment so students of all styles and ability levels can experience the joys of success? 2.4: Building a classroom community that insists on respect and mutual support for each student's learning and provides opportunities for students to become familiar with each other? 2.5: Designing learning experiences that call for high levels of collaboration, discussion, and interaction among students? 2.6: Maintaining an open and appropriate level of communication with students and the home? 2.7: Showing you care about your student as individuals?
Engagement and Enjoyment: How would you rate yourself at...? 3.1: Engaging students in diverse forms of thinking (e.g., practical, analytical, creative, exploring feelings and values)? 3.2: Using key "motivational levers" like controversy, choice, competition, challenge, and creativity to increase students' commitment to learning? 3.3: Maintaining a high level of student excitement and on-task behavior using a wide variety of tools and strategies? 3.4: Communicating and maintaining a passion for teaching, learning, and quality work throughout lessons and units? 3.5: Tapping into the power of "selfhood": encouraging students to pursue their own interests, make their own choices, develop their own perspectives, and express their values and dreams? 3.6: Creating a classroom environment that has the capacity to inspire and delight (e.g., through enthusiasm, humor, novelty, color, movement)?
A Culture of Thinking and Learning: How would you rate yourself at...? 4.1: Challenging students' minds with rigorous texts and content and equipping them with the skills they need to handle rigorous content? 4.2: Engaging students in extended, higher-order thinking challenges (e.g., inquiry, investigation, problembased learning, action research projects)? 4.3: Encouraging and challenging students to support their written and spoken ideas with evidence?
52

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
4.4: Probing, extending, and clarifying student responses using effective questioning and recognition techniques? 4.5: Encouraging discussion, dialogue, and debate around important ideas? 4.6: Requiring students to use critical academic vocabulary in their speaking and writing? 4.7: Using technology as a tool for fostering critical thinking, creative expression, and problem-solving? 4.8: Teaching students how to use strategies on their own, as tools and frameworks for thinking and learning (e.g., moving from using Compare & Contrast to teaching students how to conduct their own comparative analyses)?
Preparing Students for New Learning: How would you rate yourself at...? 5.1: Selecting relevant standards that are appropriate to your content and grade level? 5.2: "Unpacking" standards and turning them into clear and measurable learning goals and targets? 5.3: Posing essential questions to guide learning and promote deep thinking? 5.4: Beginning lessons and units with engaging "hooks" - thought-provoking activities or questions that capture student interest and activate their prior knowledge? 5.5: Introducing students to the key vocabulary terms they will need to know and understand to successfully learn the content? 5.6: Assessing students' background knowledge, skill levels, and interests relative to learning goals and targets? 5.7: Helping students develop insights into the products they'll be creating, performances they'll be delivering, and/or tasks they'll be completing to demonstrate what they've learned (e.g., providing models of high-quality work, rubrics, checklists, etc.)? 5.8: Encouraging students to develop personal learning goals and plans for achieving them?
Presenting New Learning: How would you rate yourself at...? 6.1: Designing lessons and units around the way the content is organized (e.g., topic-subtopic, cycle, procedural, comparison, etc.) and breaking the content up into meaningful "chunks?" 6.2: Incorporating multiple sources of information, including multimedia resources, into lessons to help students acquire new knowledge? 6.3: Demonstrating high-quality communication skills (e.g., expressive language, rich vocabulary, proper use)? 6.4: Using a variety of presentation techniques (e.g., visuals, drama, stories, use of imagery, etc.) to make lessons vivid and memorable? 6.5: Using modeling and think-alouds to help students understand the thinking skills, processes, and procedures they'll need to master? 6.6: Using a variety of questions and response techniques (e.g., signaling, surveying, whiteboard-response systems, Think-Pair-Share, provisional writing) to check for understanding in real time? 6.7: Making use of outside resources (e.g., field trips, guest speakers from the community, interactive technology) to make learning authentic? 6.8: Helping students assemble big ideas and important details through notemaking, summarizing, graphic organizers, and/or other forms of linguistic and nonlinguistic representation?
Deepening and Reinforcing Learning: How would you rate yourself at...? 7.1: Identifying critical junctures in the learning sequence, establishing targets that students must achieve at each juncture, and using a variety of formative assessment activities to help students assess their progress toward the targets? 7.2: Engaging students in regular content-based writing that helps them clarify their thinking and deepen their understanding? 7.3: Building in periodic review and guided practice opportunities to help students mater key skills and content?
53

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report
7.4: Providing clear and descriptive feedback to help students refine their use of key skills and/or deepen their comprehension? 7.5: Using heterogeneous and homogeneous groups to maximize student learning (e.g., grouping students according to ability levels, interests, learning styles, etc.)? 7.6: Providing a wide variety of resources (e.g., manipulatives, models, learning centers, multimedia) to enhance practice and learning? 7.7: Providing students opportunities to process new knowledge deeply through questions, discussion, and critical thinking activities? 7.8: Assigning purposeful and grade-appropriate homework for students to practice and reinforce learning?
Applying Learning: How would you rate yourself at...? 8.1: Aligning summative assessments with learning goals and targets? 8.2: Designing culminating assessments that require students to transfer their learning in meaningful ways? 8.3: Developing tasks around the kinds of writing required for college and career readiness (argument, informative/explanatory, narrative)? 8.4: Engaging students in research projects that capture student interest and have relevance in the world beyond the classroom? 8.5: Challenging students to present their findings and defend their ideas? 8.6: Equipping students with the planning, thinking, and self-assessment skills they need to analyze and address task demands? 8.7: Making sure students understand what's expected of them (e.g., examining rubrics, checklists, models of exemplary work, etc.) and providing feedback as they work? 8.8: Differentiating assessment tasks so that students can show what they know in different ways?
Reflecting On and Celebrating Learning: How would you rate yourself at...? 9.1: Celebrating student learning and achievement? 9.2: Providing students with opportunities to look back on the content so they can make generalizations, develop new insights, and/or formulate questions? 9.3: Helping students reflect on their own learning process to identify what they did well and where they'd like to improve? 9.4: Creating an environment that takes metacognition - or thinking about thinking - seriously? 9.5: Helping students review learning goals and targets, assess their level of achievement, and "close the gap" when goals are unmet? 9.6: Working with students to set future performance goals?
Professional Practice: How would you rate yourself at...? 10.1: Self-assessing and working to improve my classroom practice. 10.2: Developing and implementing a professional growth plan. 10.3: Seeking out professional development and continuous learning opportunities. 10.4: Working with colleagues to improve practice throughout the building as part of a professional learning community. 10.5: Maintaining open communication with the entire school community (e.g., administrators, teachers, parents, students). 10.6: Assuming appropriate leadership roles (e.g., mentor, instructional coach, teacher-leader). 10.7: Helping maintain and build a positive school culture (e.g., through athletic coaching, volunteerism, and other forms of non-required participation of contribution). 10.8: Maintaining a high level of professionalism at all times. 10.9: Becoming aware of and adhering to legal responsibilities and current educational policies of the school, district, and state.
54

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

Appendix J: Induction Teacher Support Program Participant Self-Assessment Beginning-of-Year & Endof-Year Results

Self-Assessment BOY versus EOY

Combined "Proficient"

and "Expert" Responses

BOY Self- EOY Self-

Assessment Assessment

1.1: Organizing classroom space (e.g., seating, resources, technology,

decoration) to ensure safety, maximize learning, and meet your

49%

77%

overall goals and objectives?

1.2: Keeping the flow of activities in the classroom moving smoothly?

34%

65%

1.3: Establishing a manageable set of classroom rules and procedures

and communicating with students about them regularly (e.g., posting

them, modeling them, explaining the rationale behind them,

51%

68%

discussing their applications in the classroom, and refining them as

needed)?

1.4: Providing clear directions for classroom tasks using a variety of

modalities (e.g., verbal, visual, physical demonstration) and checking

49%

72%

to make sure students understand their roles and responsibilities?

1.5: Developing an effective plan for managing student behavior that

includes positive consequences, negative consequences, and an

34%

56%

appropriate level of home involvement?

1.6: Managing non-instructional duties (e.g., taking attendance,

distributing materials and take-home notices, lunch counts) with

58%

76%

minimal disruption to classroom learning?

1.7: Working effectively with other adults in the classroom (e.g., coteachers, paraprofessionals, aides, student teachers)?

60%

83%

2.1: Maintaining a positive and "with it" demeanor that shows

students you care about what's going on in the classroom and are

76%

88%

committed to the idea that "we're all in this together?"

2.2: Getting to know your students and incorporating their interests, aspirations, and backgrounds into the curriculum?

58%

82%

2.3: Differentiating instruction and assessment so students of all styles and ability levels can experience the joys of success?

28%

51%

2.4: Building a classroom community that insists on respect and

mutual support for each student's learning and provides opportunities

57%

73%

for students to become familiar with each other?

2.5: Designing learning experiences that call for high levels of collaboration, discussion, and interaction among students?

32%

52%

2.6: Maintaining an open and appropriate level of communication with students and the home?

48%

69%

2.7: Showing you care about your student as individuals?

86%

93%

3.1: Engaging students in diverse forms of thinking (e.g., practical, analytical, creative, exploring feelings and values)?

33%

58%

3.2: Using key "motivational levers" like controversy, choice,

competition, challenge, and creativity to increase students'

29%

57%

commitment to learning?

3.3: Maintaining a high level of student excitement and on-task behavior using a wide variety of tools and strategies?

31%

57%

3.4: Communicating and maintaining a passion for teaching, learning, and quality work throughout lessons and units?

56%

76%

% Change
28% 31%
17%
23%
22%
18% 23% 12% 24% 23% 16% 20% 21% 7% 25% 28% 26% 20%

55

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

3.5: Tapping into the power of "selfhood": encouraging students to pursue their own interests, make their own choices, develop their own perspectives, and express their values and dreams? 3.6: Creating a classroom environment that has the capacity to inspire and delight (e.g., through enthusiasm, humor, novelty, color, movement)? 4.1: Challenging students' minds with rigorous texts and content and equipping them with the skills they need to handle rigorous content? 4.2: Engaging students in extended, higher-order thinking challenges (e.g., inquiry, investigation, problem-based learning, action research projects)? 4.3: Encouraging and challenging students to support their written and spoken ideas with evidence? 4.4: Probing, extending, and clarifying student responses using effective questioning and recognition techniques? 4.5: Encouraging discussion, dialogue, and debate around important ideas? 4.6: Requiring students to use critical academic vocabulary in their speaking and writing? 4.7: Using technology as a tool for fostering critical thinking, creative expression, and problem-solving? 4.8: Teaching students how to use strategies on their own, as tools and frameworks for thinking and learning (e.g., moving from using Compare & Contrast to teaching students how to conduct their own comparative analyses)? 5.1: Selecting relevant standards that are appropriate to your content and grade level? 5.2: "Unpacking" standards and turning them into clear and measurable learning goals and targets? 5.3: Posing essential questions to guide learning and promote deep thinking? 5.4: Beginning lessons and units with engaging "hooks" - thoughtprovoking activities or questions that capture student interest and activate their prior knowledge? 5.5: Introducing students to the key vocabulary terms they will need to know and understand to successfully learn the content? 5.6: Assessing students' background knowledge, skill levels, and interests relative to learning goals and targets? 5.7: Helping students develop insights into the products they'll be creating, performances they'll be delivering, and/or tasks they'll be completing to demonstrate what they've learned (e.g., providing models of high-quality work, rubrics, checklists, etc.)? 5.8: Encouraging students to develop personal learning goals and plans for achieving them? 6.1: Designing lessons and units around the way the content is organized (e.g., topic-subtopic, cycle, procedural, comparison, etc.) and breaking the content up into meaningful "chunks?" 6.2: Incorporating multiple sources of information, including multimedia resources, into lessons to help students acquire new knowledge? 6.3: Demonstrating high-quality communication skills (e.g., expressive language, rich vocabulary, proper use)? 6.4: Using a variety of presentation techniques (e.g., visuals, drama, stories, use of imagery, etc.) to make lessons vivid and memorable?

50%
57% 27% 25% 34% 35% 44% 30% 40%
21%
56% 32% 38% 35% 50% 34%
29%
32% 32%
39% 49% 47%

67%

17%

75%

18%

47%

20%

39%

14%

53%

19%

53%

18%

58%

14%

52%

22%

63%

23%

50%

29%

77%

21%

59%

27%

63%

25%

56%

21%

71%

21%

58%

24%

52%

23%

50%

18%

60%

28%

66%

27%

70%

21%

67%

20%

56

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

6.5: Using modeling and think-alouds to help students understand the thinking skills, processes, and procedures they'll need to master? 6.6: Using a variety of questions and response techniques (e.g., signaling, surveying, whiteboard-response systems, Think-PairShare, provisional writing) to check for understanding in real time? 6.7: Making use of outside resources (e.g., field trips, guest speakers from the community, interactive technology) to make learning authentic? 6.8: Helping students assemble big ideas and important details through notemaking, summarizing, graphic organizers, and/or other forms of linguistic and nonlinguistic representation? 7.1: Identifying critical junctures in the learning sequence, establishing targets that students must achieve at each juncture, and using a variety of formative assessment activities to help students assess their progress toward the targets? 7.2: Engaging students in regular content-based writing that helps them clarify their thinking and deepen their understanding? 7.3: Building in periodic review and guided practice opportunities to help students mater key skills and content? 7.4: Providing clear and descriptive feedback to help students refine their use of key skills and/or deepen their comprehension? 7.5: Using heterogeneous and homogeneous groups to maximize student learning (e.g., grouping students according to ability levels, interests, learning styles, etc.)? 7.6: Providing a wide variety of resources (e.g., manipulatives, models, learning centers, multimedia) to enhance practice and learning? 7.7: Providing students opportunities to process new knowledge deeply through questions, discussion, and critical thinking activities? 7.8: Assigning purposeful and grade-appropriate homework for students to practice and reinforce learning? 8.1: Aligning summative assessments with learning goals and targets? 8.2: Designing culminating assessments that require students to transfer their learning in meaningful ways? 8.3: Developing tasks around the kinds of writing required for college and career readiness (argument, informative/explanatory, narrative)? 8.4: Engaging students in research projects that capture student interest and have relevance in the world beyond the classroom? 8.5: Challenging students to present their findings and defend their ideas? 8.6: Equipping students with the planning, thinking, and selfassessment skills they need to analyze and address task demands? 8.7: Making sure students understand what's expected of them (e.g., examining rubrics, checklists, models of exemplary work, etc.) and providing feedback as they work? 8.8: Differentiating assessment tasks so that students can show what they know in different ways? 9.1: Celebrating student learning and achievement?
9.2: Providing students with opportunities to look back on the content so they can make generalizations, develop new insights, and/or formulate questions? 9.3: Helping students reflect on their own learning process to identify what they did well and where they'd like to improve?

42% 39%
16%
33%
24%
30% 36% 32% 39%
36% 34% 38% 42% 29% 24% 22% 31% 23% 46% 24% 66% 36% 36%

61%

19%

62%

23%

38%

22%

54%

21%

45%

21%

50%

20%

56%

20%

56%

24%

60%

21%

61%

25%

54%

20%

56%

18%

69%

27%

57%

28%

43%

19%

44%

22%

50%

19%

47%

24%

63%

17%

52%

28%

78%

12%

56%

20%

59%

23%

57

2019-2020 Governor's School Leadership Academy End-of-Year Evaluation Report

9.4: Creating an environment that takes metacognition - or thinking about thinking - seriously? 9.5: Helping students review learning goals and targets, assess their level of achievement, and "close the gap" when goals are unmet? 9.6: Working with students to set future performance goals?
10.1: Self-assessing and working to improve my classroom practice.
10.2: Developing and implementing a professional growth plan.
10.3: Seeking out professional development and continuous learning opportunities. 10.4: Working with colleagues to improve practice throughout the building as part of a professional learning community. 10.5: Maintaining open communication with the entire school community (e.g., administrators, teachers, parents, students). 10.6: Assuming appropriate leadership roles (e.g., mentor, instructional coach, teacher-leader). 10.7: Helping maintain and build a positive school culture (e.g., through athletic coaching, volunteerism, and other forms of nonrequired participation of contribution). 10.8: Maintaining a high level of professionalism at all times.
10.9: Becoming aware of and adhering to legal responsibilities and current educational policies of the school, district, and state.

28%
27% 31% 63% 50% 63% 71%
70%
50%
65%
84% 79%

52%

24%

49%

22%

55%

24%

80%

17%

78%

28%

82%

19%

87%

16%

85%

15%

70%

20%

80%

15%

92%

8%

89%

10%

58