Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program 1993 Advisory Committee Members Sheila Barefield Teacher, Elementary Muscogee County Schools Columbus, GA Dan Cochran Director, Evaluation & Certification Cobb County Schools Marietta, GA Joyce Carreker Special Programs Director Sumter County Schools Americus , GA Mamie Crawford Teacher, Middle School Butts County Schools Jackson, GA Harold Chapman Assoc. Professor of Education Fort Valley State College Fort Valley, GA Suzanne Daughtry Teacher, Elementary Gwinnett County Schools Norcross, GA Leontine Espy Principal, High School Bibb County Schools Macon, GA Faye Fox Teacher, Primary School Dalton Public Schools Dalton, GA Garland Gordon Teacher, Elementary Thomasville City Schools Thomasville, GA Gale Hulme Asst. Superintendent, Instructional Services Gwinnett County Schools Lawrenceville, GA Margaret Hunt Director Chattahoochee-Flint RESA Americus, GA Jeanie Jones Assoc. Superintendent, Instructional Services Cobb County Schools Marietta, GA Agatha Kent Curriculum Director Screven County Schools Sylvania, GA Joann McAleer Learner Support Strategist Cobb County Schools Marietta, GA Joseph Murphy Dean, School of Education Augusta College Augusta, GA Mary Sue Murray Asst. Superintendent, Instruction Douglas County Schools Douglasville, GA Lynda Nix-Waller Teacher, High School Douglas County Schools Lithia Springs, GA Walter Pierce Principal, High School Clayton County Schools Morrow, GA Jim Puckett Director, Training & Board Development GA School Boards Association, Inc. Lawrenceville, GA Alexander Rainey Principal, High School Gilmer County Schools Ellijay, GA Judy Reiff Assoc. Professor, Elementary Education University of Georgia Athens, GA Alicia Roberts English Department Chair, High School Atlanta City Schools Atlanta, GA Gwen Rountree Asst. Superintendent, Personnel & Staff Development McDuffie County Schools Thomson, GA Ed Smith Band Director, High School Troup County Schools LaGrange, GA Earl Swank Secondary Education Chairman Valdosta State College Valdosta, GA Saint Thomas Principal, Middle School Decatur County Schools Bainbridge, GA Michael Thompson Teacher, High School Bacon County Schools Alma, GA Dennis Whittle Principal, Elementary Forsyth County Schools Alpharetta, GA Patricia Wingate Teacher, Elementary Dougherty County Schools Albany , GA John Yates Executive Director GAEL Dahlonega, GA GEORGIA TEACHER EVALUATION PROGRAM EVALUATION MANUAL Werner Rogers State Superintendent of Schools GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION July 1993 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to express our appreciation to the many people who have contributed to the development of the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Evaluation Manual (Revised July 1993) and training program. The components of the program and the evaluation manual were prepared through collaborative efforts of the Georgia Department of Education, the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Project at Georgia State University, the Performance Assessment Laboratory at the University of Georgia, and consultants from school districts, state agencies, colleges and universities. Through questionnaires, interviews, evaluation documentation, debriefing sessions, and other m~ans of formal and informal communication, teachers and administrators in every school system in Georgia have provided information vital to the production of the teacher evaluation program. Historically, a bias review committee composed of teachers selected by pilot districts and an advisory committee composed of educators nominated by professional organizations, districts, colleges and universities provided the project staff with valuable guidance related to the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program. The information and insights gained from participants in the pilot and field-test programs are reflected in the content of the GTEP: Evaluation Manual and training program. Georgia educators continue to provide guidance to the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program through participation on advisory committees and surveys completed by evaluators and teachers throughout the state. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................iii Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 Philosophy and Purposes .......................................................................................... 1 Procedures for GTEP Implementation ....................................................................... 2 Evaluation Instruments ............................................................................................. 2 Re~uirements for Training ........................................................................................ 3 Responsibility for Evaluation .................................................................................... 3 Georgia Teacher Evaluation Process ...................................................................... 4 Orientation .......................................................................................................... 5 Pre-Evaluation Conference ................................................................................. 5 Observations....................................................................................................... 5 Annual Evaluation Requirements .................................................................. 5 Standard Evaluation Process ........................................................................ 7 Formative Evaluation Process ....................................................................... 8 Observation Guidelines ................................................................................. 8 Extended Phase ............................................................................................ 9 GTOI: Scoring and Written Comments ............................................................. 10 GTDRI: Notification and Documentation ........................................................... 10 Post-Observation/Notification Conference ........................................................ 11 Annual Evaluation Summary Report ................................................................. 11 Annual Evaluation Conference ......................................................................... 17 Professional Development Plan ........................................................................ 17 Records ................................................................................................................. 19 State Salary lncrements ...... ;.................................................................................. 19 Confidentiality ......................................................................................................... 19 Complaints .............................................................................................................20 Synopsis of Reliability, Validity, and Related lssues .............................................. 21 Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument. .............................................................. 25 Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Instrument.. ................................... 63 Appendix ................................................................................................................... 69 Teacher Job Description ........................................................................................ 71 Standard Process- GTOI Observation Record: Standard Form ............................. 73 Formative Process- GTOI Observation Record: Standard Form ........................... 75 GTOI Observation Record: Extended Form ........................................................... 77 Annual Evaluation Summary Report ...................................................................... 79 Notification and Documentation Record ................................................................. 81 Professional Development Plan ............................................................................. 83 Bibliography ........................................................................................................... 85 Selected Readings ................................................................................................. 89 v INTRODUCTION The Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program (GTEP) was developed in response to the Quality Basic Education (QBE) Act. The OBE Act requires that all personnel employed by local units of administration (LUA) shall have their performance evaluated annually by appropriately trained evaluators. Certified professional personnel who have deficiencies and other needs shall have professional development plans designed to mitigate such deficiencies and other needs as may have been identified during the evaluation process. (O.C.G.A. 20-2-210) The information contained in this manual is intended to provide all teachers and administrators in Georgia with a description of the evaluation instruments and a summary-of procedures for the GTEP. The instruments and procedures are described further in a training program for evaluators and in an orientation session for teachers. This manual includes three major sections: (a) procedures for GTEP Implementation, (b) the Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument (GTOI), and (c) the Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Instrument (GTDRI). PHILOSOPHY AND PURPOSES Teacher evaluation is an integral component in the process of improving teaching and learning. An effective evaluation program results when teachers are treated as professionals and evaluators are successful in using evaluations to reinforce effective practices and to improve teaching. The purposes of the annual performance evaluation are: 1. to identify and reinforce effective teaching practices; 2. to identify areas where development can improve instructional effectiveness; and 3. to identify teachers who do not meet the minimum standards so that appropriate action can be taken. 1 PROCEDURES FOR GTEP IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS The Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program (GTEP) includes the use of two instruments-the Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument (GTOI) and the Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Instrument (GTDRI). These two instruments shall be used for the annual evaluation of teaching personnel employed for 120 days or more, who are employed at least half-time, and are required to have a teaching certificate. Exceptions to this rule include the following: 1. The local unit of administration (LUA) will determine which evaluation program is appropriate for teaching personnel who are required to have a teaching certificate but who are serving in multiple roles, such as teacher-leadership, teacher-counselor, etc. Only one evaluation program will be used for each individual. The individual will receive an orientation to the appropriate program. 2. Special groups of teachers, such as hospital/homebound, in-school suspension, and migrant teachers, who do not hold regular classroom teaching roles will be evaluated using the applicable portions of the GTDRI and appropriate additional criteria as specified by the local unit of administration. The teacher~ receive a written statement of the criteria and an orientation to them prior to their use in the evaluation of the teacher. 3. Teachers who are employees 0. portion of the year~. at a minimum, be evaluated with the GTDRI. The local unit of administration will determine whether the GTOI will be used with teachers employed fewer than 120 days and with those teachers who are employed less than half-time. The local unit of administration will decide the appropriate number of observations if the number of days taught is less than 120. Teachers~ receive an orientation to the GTEP process and a statement of the criteria on which they will be evaluated. All teachers evaluated using any portion of the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program must receive a copy of this GTEP: Evaluation Manual and must receive an Annual Evaluation Summary Report according to the guidelines in this manual. 2 REQUIREMENTS FOR TRAINING Evaluation activities ~ be conducted by trained evaluators. A trained GTEP evaluator is defined as an individual who has attended all state-approved, required GTEP training sessions including conferencing and Professional Development Plan (PDP) training segments, a school-based practice activity, any required update training, and has met state-adopted evaluator proficiency requirements. RESPONSIBILITY FOR EVALUATION The sct-rool principal is responsible for the management of all teacher evaluation activities. The principal must review and sign the Annual Evaluation Summary Report on each teacher. The principal~ conduct a minimum of 10 GTOI classroom observations annually unless this number is higher than the total number of observations required in a school. Priority for these observations should be for teachers in their first year at the school and for teachers believed to be at-risk of receiving an unsatisfactory annual evaluation report. In the event the principal is unable to conduct evaluation activities for reasons such as illness, late employment, or not yet meeting training requirements, the local unit of administration ~designate a trained evaluator to perform these activities. If an evaluator leaves during the year, previous evaluation records that have been produced by that individual remain in effect. Teacher evaluations may be conducted only by system-level and school-based administrators, system-level instructional supervisory personnel, and school-based instructional leadership staff. Local system personnel may be assigned GTEP evaluation responsibilities only tor periods when such persons do not have regularly scheduled, direct student instructional responsibilities. 3 GEORGIA TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS ORIENTATION w PRE-EVALUATION CONFERENCE (if requested) ~ w GTOI: CLASSROOM OBSERVATION(S) w GTDRI: ONGOING OBSERVATIONS SCORING AND WRITTEN COMMENTS w POST-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE (if requested) w ' / WRITTEN NOTIFICATION, DOCUMENTATION AND A CONFERENCE w ANNUAL EVALUATION SUMMARY REPORT w - ANNUAL EVALUATION CONFERENCE (optional if satisfactory in formative evaluation process) w PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 4 GEORGIA TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS There are eight basic steps in the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Process. See the diagram on page 4 for an overview of this process. Step 1 - ORIENTATION (Required for New Teachers) All teaching personnel~ receive an orientation to the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program prior to their initial evaluation observation. During the orientation session the teachers ~ be provided a copy of this GTEP: Evaluation Manual. An overview of the GTEP procedures, the content and 4ferminology in the GTOI and GTDRI, and information about the supplementary GTEP orientation materials will be discussed. These orientation materials are to be in every school in a convenient location for teachers. All teachers ~ have access to the supplementary materials including an Orientation Guide, transparencies, and an accompanying videotape of sample effective teaching practices. For teachers who have previously received a GTEP orientation, an update on any changes in procedures and content of the GTEP shall be conducted. Step 2- PRE-EVALUATION CONFERENCE (Required if Requested) A pre-evaluation conference is not required as a routine procedure, but one ~be conducted at the request of either the teacher or the evaluator. This conference is designed to provide an opportunity for (a) further clarification of the GTEP content, evaluation procedures, or scoring criteria; (b) sharing of background information concerning the students and/or classes which may be observed; (c) sharing of other information which may have an impact on the teacher's evaluation; and (d) review of the past year's Professional Development Plan, if appropriate. Step 3- OBSERVATIONS Teachers~ be notified of the evaluation process and guidelines under which they will be evaluated. Annual Evaluation Requirements The teacher evaluation program in Georgia consists of classroom observations for scoring the Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument (GTOI) and ongoing school-wide observations for scoring the Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Instrument (GTDRI). The items on the GTDRI describe expectations for teachers in addition to the teaching tasks outlined in the GTOI. Evaluation of the performance of these duties and responsibilities is based on school-wide observations throughout the year and is handled by exception. 5 DIAGRAM OF STANDARD EVALUATION PROCESS . . . 1 2 3 DIAGRAM OF FORMATIVE EVALUATION PROCESS ~ ~ DIAGRAMS OF REQUIRED EXTENDED PHASE 5 or more Nls I EXTENDED OBSERVATION(S) (may continue during Stnd. Obs.) . 2 . 3 . 4 5 or more Nls I IOTBNS.D. TOBNSD . . 1 2 EXTENDED OBSERVATION(S) (may continue during Stnd. Obs.) . 3 . 4 . 1 5 or more Nls IOTBNS.D. TOBNSD. .I 2 3 EXTENDED OBSERVA TION(S) (may continue during Stnd. Obs.) 5 or more Nls SOTBNSD. . 1 TOBNSD. . TOBNS.D.I 2 3 EXTENDED OBSERVATION(S) (may continue during Stnd. Obs.) . 4 6 Standard Evaluation Process The standard evaluation process for the evaluation of classroom teaching with the GTOI regujres a minimum of 3 unannounced classroom observations of at least 20 minutes each. Results of each observation are recorded on the GTOI Observation Record: Standard Form designated for the Standard Process and returned to the teacher within .5. working days. (A copy of the Standard Process-GTOI Observation Record: Standard Form is contained in the Appendix, page 73.) The standard evaluation process shall be used to evaluate the following groups of teachers: -(1) Teachers with fewer than three years of teaching experience. (2) Teachers with three or more years of teaching experience who are newly employed with an LUA. (3) Teachers not in categories (1) or (2) whose previous year's performance was unsatisfactory under the standard evaluation process. (4) Teachers eligible for the formative evaluation process who are placed into the standard evaluation process as determined by the principal. (5) Teachers with three or more years of experience who are not newly employed with the LUA and who have a satisfactory Overall Evaluation Summary rating following two years in the formative process. The LUA will determine the observation time lines for all teachers with the following exception. Teachers employed at the beginning of the school year who are new to a system or who have less than three years of teaching experience .rrl.US, have their first observation prior to November 15. To the extent possible, standard observations should be distributed to provide for a sample of teaching behaviors at the beginning, middle, and end of lessons, at different times of the day, on different days of the week, and over a number of months. Standard observations for a given teacher~ not occur prior to the teacher's receiving a Standard Process-GTOI Observation Record: Standard Form for a previous observation and an opportunity to request and have a conference. Teachers in the standard evaluation process will be evaluated on the GTDRI according to guidelines in this GTEP: Evaluation Manual. 7 Formative Evaluation Process The formative evaluation process shall consist of a minimum of 1 unannounced classroom observation of at least 20 minutes. The results of this observation are recorded on the GTOI Observation Record: Standard Form designated for the Formative Process and returned to the teacher within .5. working days. (A copy of the Formative Process-GTOI Observation Record: Standard Form is contained in the Appendix, page 75.) This observation is formative in nature and is used for diagnostic purposes only; therefore, it~ DQ1 be used when determining the overall annual evaluation rating. The following group of teachers shall be eligible to be evaluated with the two-year formative evaluation process. Teachers with three or more years of teaching experience who are not newly employed with the LUA and whose most recent overall GTEP rating was satisfactory under the standard evaluation process. Following two years of satisfactory performance in the formative evaluation process, teachers are placed in the standard evaluation process according to guidelines. Teachers eligible for or currently in the formative evaluation process may be placed into the standard evaluation process as determined by the principal. The decision to place a teacher into the standard evaluation process should be based on performance during the unannounced GTOI observation of at least 20 minutes or other evidence as determined by the principal. Standard evaluation process guidelines must be followed for these teachers. The GTOI observation conducted while in the formative evaluation process cannot serve as one of the 3 standard observations required in the standard evaluation process. Teachers in the formative evaluation process will be evaluated on the GTDRI according to guidelines in this GTEP: Evaluation Manual. Observation Guidelines For teachers in either the standard or formative evaluation process, it is both impossible and undesirable to write rules for every evaluation situation. In order to be effective, evaluators must use a common sense approach to evaluation. Observations for evaluation using the GTOI should take place during teacbing situations which provide appropriate opportunities for interaction of either a student-focused or teacher-focused nature. In cases where the students are engaged in appropriate noninteractive learning activities, such as silent reading, independent writing, or listening to a story, evaluators should not score the lesson with the GTOI. Evaluators should not score exams, videotapes, films, guest speakers, or similar classroom activities. Evaluators are encouraged to use professional discretion in the selection of observation times. 8 Extended Phase The extended phase is reguired in the standard evaluation process when a teacher has accumulated 5 or more Needs Improvement (NI) scores and has not participated in the extended phase during the current school year. The extended phase begins with a required conference to plan for the extended phase observation. The conference is followed by an announced, full class/lesson observation. The results of this observation are recorded on the GTOI Observation Record: Extended Form and returned to the teacher within .5. working days. (A copy of the GTOI Observation Record: Extended Form is contained in the Appendix, page 77.) -A conference to discuss the results m.u.st be held after this observation. The scores from the extended observation are used for diagnostic purposes only and ~ !lQl be used to determine any rating on the Annual Evaluation Summary Report. If all of the scores from the extended observation are satisfactory, standard observations are resumed. If the scores indicate improvement is needed, assistance should be planned and provided promptly. If necessary, the plan for assistance should be formulated as a Professional Development Plan and implemented immediately. After a reasonable amount of time, standard observations~ resume until a total of 4 standard observations are accumulated. The extended phase may continue during the time that standard observations have been resumed. For teachers who have entered the extended phase, the annual evaluation results will be based on the best 3 of 4 standard observations. (See the diagram of the GTOI observations on page 6.) Extended observations can be used with teachers in either the standard evaluation process or the formative evaluation process for diagnostic purposes. Extended observations are an option any time a teacher or an evaluator wishes to collect information about teaching skills from announced full lesson/class observations. Announced extended observations are an important diagnostic tool and are encouraged for use at any time but may not be used as part of the Annual Evaluation Summary Report. Extended observations are recommended when an evaluator or teacher wants more detailed information about the teacher's instructional skills as they relate to the dimensions on the observation instrument. 9 Step 4- GTOI: SCORING AND WRITTEN COMMENTS GTDRI: NOTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION GTOI: Scoring and Written Comments Classroom observations are scored for each dimension and comments mus1 be written for each of the three teaching tasks on the GTOI observation records. These comments should address the program purposes of identifying and reinforcing effective teaching practices and identifying areas where development can improve instructional effectiveness. The dimensions on the GTOI are scored Satisfactory (S) or Needs Improvement (NI) with one exception. Building for Transfer (Task 1: Dimension C) may be scored Not Applicable (NA) during Student-Focused Content Development. Content Development (Task 1: Dimension B) may be scored by observing either teacher-focused interactions or student-focused interactions or both. All teachers shall receive a copy of each GTEP observation record within ~ working days of the observation. A conference to discuss each observation shall occur if requested by either the teacher or the evaluator within .1Q working days of receiving the results and shall be held within .1Q working days of this request. Any written comments submitted by the teacher within .1Q working days of receiving the results or within .1Q working days of the conference shall be attached to the observation record or Annual Evaluation Summary Report. GTDRI: Notification and Documentation Items in the Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Instrument (GTDRI) are scored by exception. All items shall be scored as satisfactory on the annual evaluation summary unless prior to the annual evaluation summary the teacher has: been notified in writing; received written documentation on each incident serving as the basis for the unsatisfactory annual evaluation summary; and had a conference concerning the unsatisfactory performance . An unsatisfactory annual evaluation summary for the GTDRI can occur if both of the following conditions have been met: (1) The employee has failed to perform a duty or responsibility which is a part of the employee's job description under O.C.G.A. 20-2-211 (d) and local board of education policies; .QI committed an act prohibited ur~er local board of education or State Board of Education rules .QI where the employee had received written notification that the act was prohibited prior to committing the act which is the subject of the GTDRI written notification. 10 (2) The employee has had opportunity of remediation activities, has failed to remediate the conduct which was the subject of the GTDRI deficiency and has received notification of the subsequent deficiency. For purposes of this rule, remediation shall be deemed to have occurred if the employee has continuously performed in an appropriate manner the duty or responsibility previously identified as deficient for the remainder of the annual evaluation cycle. The annual evaluation cycle is from the date of completion of the annual evaluation summary for one year to the date of completion of the following year's annual evaluation summary. A copy of an optional form which could be used for notification and -documentation is contained in the Appendix on page 81. Step 5- POST-OBSERVATION/NOTIFICATION CONFERENCE Post-Observation Conference A post-observation conference to discuss the results of a GTOI observation is reguired if requested by either the teacher or the evaluator. Formal and informal conferences to discuss instruction are encouraged. A post-observation conference is reguired after each extended phase observation. Notification Conference A notification conference is reguired anytime a teacher receives written notification and documentation for each new incident on the GTDRI. The purpose of the conference is to: explain the deficient area; discuss the subject of concern; clarify action(s) required; and discuss the time frame for corrections. Step 6 - ANNUAL EVALUATION SUMMARY REPORT (Required) The Annual Evaluation Summary Report provides an Overall Evaluation Summary as well as summary information on areas of strength, areas for improvement, and areas for professional development. The following rules and procedures are used for completion of the Annual Evaluation Summary Report. (The letters and numbers in the following instructions correspond to the labeled example of an Annual Evaluation Summary Report on page 12.) 11 A(1) A(~) A(~) poRT CONFIDENTIAL GEORGIA TEACHER EVALUATION PROGRAM: ANNUAL EVALUATION SU VIMARY RE (Refer to back foc instructions) Teacher's Name SyAim School State Code State Code Il IIL Teecher's Race/Ethnlclty Q American Indian, Alaskan NatNe B~ O 0 Asian Pacific Islander 0 Non-H . Hispanic ISP8IliC 0 Wli Q White, Non-Hispanic racial Lalt 4 Digits TMCherSSN I I I Teec:her's Sex OMale 0Fernale System School ~=- Date MO I DAY I YR III I I I I I CUrrent Year Status (darken only one) For teac11ers with- than 3 - experience: Standard Year 1 Standard Year 2 _.,..,,_ For taachara with 3 or mooe 'je8nl 10 sysan: O For taachara with 3 or mooe years_.,..,, Formative Year 1 FormatM! Year 2 Standard Year 3 Standard Standard Evaluation ~mmary Georgia To~ ;IT~ Georgia eacher ~and Re~ 'bilities E~~n Sumn ry 0Satislactory Instrument 0Salisfactory 0 Satisfactory 0 Unsati&faclory 0 Not Applicable (Formative Only) 0 Unsatisfactory 0 Unsatislactory GEORGIA TEACHER OBSERVATION INSTRUMENT SUMMARY COMMENTS MARK ONLY AREAS FOR REQUIRED PDP ~ ~ ~ ~ -D ~ ' t"-.. ......... "" "" ~ """""" GEORGIA TEACHER DUTIES AN~BIUTIES INSTRUMENT SUMMARY COM TS "" ' A. lnstructionall.ellel 0 B. Content Dellelopment 1. Teacher- Focused 0 2. ShxMnt- ;~ C. Building foc Transfer ........... B A. Promoting Engagement 0 I ~--J c.=: Student D. Supporting ShxMnts 0 I A. Use of Time 0 B. Physical Setting 0 C. Appropriate Behavior 0 IDENTIFY GTDRI AREAS FOR REQUIRED PDP (REFER TO I~NT FOR CODES) -- E ... ..... ~ ~TOR: (SIGNATURES! TEACHER: PRINCIPAL: Teacher's Comments: DATE DATE -""..........r--.... c Sign and return copy to principal's office. Signature acknowledges receipt of form, not neces sarily concurrence. Written comments may be - _orovided and/or attached. Initial and date here if hed. Revised 93/94 12 - ------- --- --- ... STANDARD PROCESS A. Evaluation Summary Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument A(1) If the teacher has fewer than 5 Nls across 3 standard observations, Satisfactory is marked in the GTOI column. If the teacher has participated in the extended phase and has 5 or more Nls on the best 3 of 4 standard observations, Unsatisfactory is marked in the GTOI column. Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Instrument A(2) Mark Satisfactory on the Annual Evaluation Summary Report if: the teacher's performance was consistently acceptable; or the teacher's unsatisfactory performance was remediated and performance was acceptable; or the teacher had not received written notification, documentation, and a conference for each new incident serving as the basis for the unsatisfactory performance. Mark Unsatisfactory on the Annual Evaluation Summary Report if both of the following conditions have been met: (1) the teacher has failed to perform a duty or responsibility which is part of the employee's job description and local board of education policies; or the teacher committed an act prohibited under local board of education or State Board of Education rules; or the teacher had received written notification that the act was prohibited prior to committing the act which is the subject of the GTDRI written notification; and (2) the teacher has had an opportunity for remediation, has failed to remediate the conduct which was the subject of the GTDRI deficiency and has received notification of the subsequent deficiency. Overall Evaluation Summary A(3) If the teacher received a Satisfactory Evaluation Summary on both the GTOI and the GTDRI, a score of Satisfactory is marked for the Overall Evaluation Summary. If the teacher received an Unsatisfactory Evaluation Summary for either the GTOI or the GTDRI, an Unsatisfactory is marked for the Overall Evaluation Summary. 13 FORMATIVE PROCESS A. Evaluation Summary Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument A(1) If the teacher is in the Formative Process, Not Applicable (Formative Only) is marked in the GTOI column. In the formative process, only one GTOI observation is required and is not sufficient to make an annual evaluation summary decision. Georgia Teacher Duties and Responsibilities Instrument A(2) M~rk Satisfactory on the Annual Evaluation Summary Report if: the teacher's performance was consistently acceptable; or the teacher's unsatisfactory performance was remediated and performance was acceptable; or the teacher had not received written notification, documentation, and a conference for each new incident serving as the basis for the unsatisfactory performance. Mark Unsatisfactory on the Annual Evaluation Summary Report if both of the following conditions have been met: (1) the teacher has failed to perform a duty or responsibility which is part of the employee's job description and local board of education policies; or the teacher committed an act prohibited under local board of education or State Board of Education rules; or the teacher had received written notification that the act was prohibited prior to committing the act which is the subject of the GTDRI written notification; and (2) the teacher has had an opportunity for remediation, has failed to remediate the conduct which was the subject of the GTDRI deficiency and has received notification of the subsequent deficiency. - Refer to pages 10 and 11 or page 65 for the GTDRI section of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) Rule 160-3-1-.11. 14 Overall Evaluation Summary A(3) If the teacher received a Satisfactory Evaluation Summary on the GTDRI, a score of Satisfactory is marked for the Overall Evaluation Summary. If the teacher received an Unsatisfactory Evaluation Summary on the GTDRI, a score of Unsatisfactory is marked for the Overall Evaluation Summary. B. GTOI Dimensions for a Required Professional Development Plan (PDP) If the teacher has all Nls in any dimension across 3 standard observations, oo that dimension ~ marked, thereby indicating that a PDP is required in that area. If the teacher has 1 or 2 Nls in any dimension across 3 standard - observations, the evaluator ID.a mark that dimension with the decision based upon its significance to the teacher and students. In cases where dimensions have only 1 or 2 Nls, the decision about which dimensions to mark should be made with the teacher. However, the administrator makes the final decision. If the teacher's evaluation summary for the GTOI is overall Unsatisfactory, one or more dimensions~ be identified as areas for a required PDP even if only 1 or 2 Nls were received in any dimension. C. GTDRI Areas for a Required Professional Development Plan (PDP) If a teacher's evaluation summary for the GTDRI is overall Unsatisfactory, the evaluator will identify the area(s) of deficiency by using the numbers and letters of the item(s) on the GTDRI. This coded identification indicates that a PDP is required in that area. If a teacher's evaluation summary for the GTDRI is overall Satisfactory and the teacher has received notification, documentation, and a conference for a deficiency on the GTDRI, the evaluator may identify that area for a required PDP. D. Summary Comments for the GTOI and the GTDRI For teachers in the standard evaluation process, at least one comment ~ be written for each evaluation instrument. If the teacher has a required PDP, a specific comment~ be written which addresses the area(s) in which the teacher needs improvement. For teachers in the formative evaluation process, at least one comment .!!l.U.S1 be written for the GTDRI. If the teacher has a required PDP, a specific comment~ be written which addresses the area(s) in which the teacher needs improvement. E. Signature Section The form .!!l.U.S1 be signed and dated by the primary evaluator, the teacher, and the principal. If additional documentation or comments are attached, the teacher should initial and date the appropriate space. 15 CONFIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ANNUAL EVALUATION PROGRAM: DGLEI DGTOI OGTDRI 0 Other Evaluatee: School: Check one of the following: A System, RESA. or Psychoeducational Center: 0 Optional Plan for Enhancement Ooptional Plan for Specific Needs Development 0 Required Plan for Specific Needs Development Specific Objectives for Improvement: I I I 8 I I I I ! Activities and Time Line: I c I I Criteria for Measurement of Progress: D Record of Participation in Recommended Activities: E Record of Performance on Specified Criteria: F ... (~ EVAWA: ~ EVALUATEE: Evaluatee's comments: ReviRd 93/94 DATE: DATE: 16 Evaluatees signature acknowledges receipt of form. not necessarily concurrence. Written comments may be provided below and/or ,.;-, evaluators copy. Initial and date here if comments ar. Step 7- ANNUAL EVALUATION CONFERENCE For teachers in the standard evaluation process, an Annual Evaluation Conference ID.I.lS1 be conducted with each teacher at which time a summary of the results on the GTOI and GTDRI is presented. For teachers in the formative evaluation process, an Annual Evaluation Conference is regujred if the teacher's performance was determined Unsatisfactory on the GTDRI. At this conference the results of the Annual Evaluation Summary Report shall be presented. Teachers in the standard and formative evaluation processes must be provided with a copy of the completed Annual Evaluation Summary Report. Any written statements concerning the annual evaluation summary which are submitted by the teacher within 1Q. working days of the Annual Evaluation Conference or within 1Q. working days of receiving the Annual Evaluation Summary Report must be attached to the summary report. The Annual Evaluation Conference is designed to provide an opportunity: (1) to communicate the overall evaluation results for the school year; (2) to review specific areas of strength and areas identified for improvement; and (3) for the teacher and the primary evaluator to sign, date, and receive copies of the Annual Evaluation Summary Report. The principal will also review and sign the Annual Evaluation Summary Report. This conference may also be used as the time for discussing the content of a Professional Development Plan. Step 8- PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Professional Development Plans (PDP) are encouraged for all teachers. The PDP is part of continuing staff development for the benefit of the individual teacher. At a minimum, teachers whose Overall Evaluation Summary results are Unsatisfactory or who demonstrate other needs according to criteria on page 15, sections B. and C. and who are offered a subsequent contract must have a PDP. In addition to these requirements, principals have the authority to require POPs as needed throughout the year. For teachers whose performance is Unsatisfactory, measurement of progress on the PDP is required as part of the next year's annual evaluation. The plan includes specific objectives for improvement, activities and a time line for meeting these objectives, criteria for measurement of progress toward meeting the objectives, a record of participation in recommended activities, and a record of performance on specified criteria. (A copy of the Professional Development Plan is contained in the Appendix, page 83.) 17 The following rules and procedures are used for completion of a Professional Development Plan. (The letters in the following instructions correspond to the labeled example of a PDP on page 16.) A. Professional Development Plan Categories OPTIONAL PLAN FOR ENHANCEMENT is checked if the Overall Evaluation Summary score is Satisfactory and no dimensions on the GTOI are marked for a required PDP on the Annual Evaluation Summary Report. OPTIONAL PLAN FOR SPECIFIC NEEDS DEVELOPMENT is checked if the Overall Evaluation Summary score is Satisfactory and a dimension on the GTOI or an area on the GTDRI which is not marked for a required PDP is selected for improvement. REQUIRED PLAN FOR SPECIFIC NEEDS DEVELOPMENT is checked if a dimension on the GTOI or a deficient area on the GTDRI is marked for a required PDP on the Annual Evaluation Summary Report. B. Specific Objectives for Improvement Specific objectives for improvement should address deficiencies, needs, or areas identified for enhancement. C. Activities and Time Line Activities for meeting the objectives and a time line for participating in the activities should be described. D. Criteria for Measurement of Progress Specific criteria for measurement of progress on the PDP should be described. Measurement of progress involves keeping a record of successful completion of activities and determining whether or not the teacher's performance has improved in the targeted areas. "Improvement in targeted areas" means previously marked areas have been judged to show improvement. The evaluator makes this judgment. For teachers who have received a required plan for specific needs development, progress toward completion of the PDP shall be evaluated during the next evaluation cycle if the individual is employed in the same school system. E. Record of Participation in Recommended Activities and Record of Performance on Specified Criteria - Comments, such as notes about participation in activities and progress checks with the teacher, are written in this section. F. Signature Section The form .[]lYS1 be signed and dated by the evaluator and the evaluates. If additional documentation or comments are attached, the teacher should initial and date the appropriate space. 18 RECORDS Observation records, required POPs, Annual Evaluation Summary Reports, and any documentation related to the GTDRI, including teacher comments attached to any of these records, shall be maintained as part of the evaluatee's personnel evaluation file and shall be confidential. The length of time that records are kept is governed by the Records Retention Act. STATE SALARY INCREMENTS (APA Rule 16031.11, Effective: July 1, 1993) Discretionary state salary increments above the minimum salary base shall be determined by individual experience and length of satisfactory service. Advancement to the next step on the state salary schedule shall be recorded on the Certified Personnel Information (CPI) report to the state. (1) Individuals at a step requiring one year of credited service shall move to the next step on the state salary schedule if creditable experience requirements have been met, except as follows. An individual receiving two consecutive unsatisfactory annual evaluations shall remain at his or her current step until he or she receives a satisfactory annual evaluation. Upon receipt of a satisfactory annual evaluation, an individual shall be placed on the state salary schedule on the step where that individual would have been placed if the years of unsatisfactory evaluations had not been received. (2) Individuals at a step requiring two years of credited service shall be entitled to move to the next step on the state salary schedule if creditable experience requirements have been met and if the individual received a satisfactory annual evaluation in at least one of the two years on that step. If both years of service, on the same step, are unsatisfactory the individual shall remain at that step until a satisfactory annual evaluation is received. Upon receipt of a satisfactory annual evaluation, that individual shall be placed on the state salary schedule on the step where that individual would have been placed if the years of unsatisfactory evaluations had not been received. CONFIDENTIALITY All aspects of the evaluation process and results are confidential and are to be shared only with appropriate personnel. Within the same school district, official evaluation records, documentation, and attachments may be transferred. However, they must not be transferred to other school districts, organizations, or individuals without written permission of the teacher. Administrators have the option of using appropriate school employees to assist in the preparation of forms and records; however, administrators ~ provide them with clear instructions regarding confidentiality and control of records. 19 COMPLAINTS Guidelines for contract nonrenewal or termination during the contract term are governed by the Fair Dismissal Law (O.C.G.A. 20-2-940 through 20-2-947). For example, an official notice of nonrenewal given to a tenured teacher~ include a copy of this law. Further, any use of the results of the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program as part of contract decisions should be in compliance with this law. In cases where the action taken is not applicable under the Fair Dismissal Law and the teacher disagrees with the evaluation procedures or results, complaints may be registered in the following manner: (1) All teachers shall receive a copy of each GTEP observation record within .5. working days of the observation. A conference to discuss each observation shall occur if requested by either the teacher or the evaluator within .1Q working days of receiving the results and shall be held within .1Q working days of this request. Any written comments submitted by the teacher within .1Q working days of receiving the results or within 1Q working days of the conference shall be attached to the observation record or Annual Evaluation Summary Report. (2) In cases where observations are conducted by evaluators other than the principal and the complaint concerns an alleged violation of GTEP procedures and is not resolved in the conference with the evaluator, the teacher shall be permitted to request a conference with the principal within .1Q working days of the conference with the evaluator. Any requested conference shall be held. (3) Teachers who wish to continue to pursue alleged violations of the GTEP procedures shall follow the appropriate procedures established by the local unit of administration. In cases where there are no identified established procedures, teachers shall pursue the issue directly with the local superintendent or designee. The request for review shall be filed within 1Q working days of the occurrence or receipt of the observation record or Annual Evaluation Summary Report and shall include the reasons for the complaint and copies of all supporting documentation. Within 2Q working days of receiving the request for review, the superintendent or designee shall consider the request and provide a written decision. Local decisions are not appealable to the Georgia Board of Education. 20 SYNOPSIS OF RELIABILITY, VALIDITY, AND RELATED ISSUES Establishing the credibility of an evaluation program is an essential part of program development and implementation. Credibility issues involve the evaluation process, content of the evaluation instruments, and the outcomes of the evaluation. These issues translate to equity, validity, and reliability. Equity considerations include issues such as fairness and consistency in the evaluation process. Validity questions involve establishing what is being evaluated and documenting the significance for its intended use. Reliability issues include interobserver differences, internal consistency of the evaluation instruments, stability of scores, and dependability of summative evaluation decisions. Equity+.;sues Equity has been a major concern throughout the development and implementation of GTEP. Prior to implementation, the GTEP Steering Committee, the Bias Review Committee, and participants (teachers and evaluators) in the pilot and field tests provided information for use in the development and modification of the instruments, evaluation process, and the evaluator training program. Systematic feedback from these groups in the form of questionnaires, interviews, demographic information and evaluation documentation, debriefing sessions, and other means of formal and informal communication helped establish guidelines for matters such as the number and length of observations which should be required for annual evaluation of teachers, teaching situations that are appropriate for annual evaluation of teachers, and the design of the training program that is required for all evaluators. Surveys were used to solicit feedback from teachers and evaluators regarding adherence to GTEP guidelines and procedures and attitudes towards GTEP and various components of the assessment process. During the field test and the first year of implementation, external evaluators also conducted school visits to gather information and obtain feedback about GTEP from teachers and administrators. Widespread involvement of practitioners has contributed to a fair program which is reflected in the credibility and acceptance of the evaluation instruments, process, and training program. Validity Information The initial development of the GTOI was based on a review of teacher effectiveness research. The GTOI dimension statements and effective practices were drawn from well-documented research in this area. (Pertinent research is summarized for each dimension in the GTOI section of this manual.) The initial GTDRI was developed from a review of teacher duties/responsibilities as described in teacher evaluation instruments used in Georgia and other states. Teachers and administrators on the GTEP Steering Committee, members of the Bias Review Committee, and the thousands of participants in the pilot and field tests provided information that was used in the development and revision of the evaluation instruments and procedures. Information for the initial content validation of the1986 pilot draft of the evaluation instrument was gathered during a job analysis survey of Georgia teachers. Revisions in the Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program based upon data from this study, and pilot test information, resulted in the field-test edition of GTEP. During the pilot test years (1986-87 and 1987-88), numerous surveys were conducted which addressed participants' attitudes toward and experiences with the teacher evaluation program. 21 During the 1988-89 statewide field test, affirmations of the validity of the GTOI dimension statements were obtained from Georgia teachers through surveys administered at critical points throughout the year. Each of these surveys included items related to program validity (e.g., whether or not a specific GTOI dimension or GTDRI duty/responsibility is routinely performed and important for effective teaching; whether or not GTOI dimensions and/or GTDRI statements should be a component of the annual teacher evaluation process, etc.). Responses to items related to the validity of the GTOI were strongly supportive and those related to the validity of the GTDRI statements were generally positive. Program evaluation of the first year of GTEP implementation (1989-90) included an orientation survey, in-depth surveys, and an end-of-year survey. Validity-related questions on these surveys included, among others, whether or not 1) the GTDRI duties/responsibilities are representative of job requirements, 2) the GTOI dimension behaviors are routinely performed, 3) the GTOI dimensions and GTDRI statements should be required as part of the annual evaluation process, 4) the two instruments together address the most important teaching behaviors that should be assessed for annual evaluation, and 5) GTEP is a fair and reasonable program for annual evaluation. Approximately 95,000 surveys were returned; analyses of these surveys indicated strong validity-related support for GTEP. During the 1990-91 school year, a limited validation study was conducted to augment the 1988-89 statewide field test validation study. Every GTOI dimension and GTDRI statement received positive support from the total group of survey respondents. Additionally, a teacher summary survey that contained, in part, validity-related items, was sent to approximately 400 teachers sampled from throughout the state. More than three-fourths of the respondents agreed that GTOI and GTDRI are appropriate as components of annual teacher evaluation, the GTOI and GTDRI together address the most important teaching behaviors that should be assessed, and GTEP is a fair and reasonable annual evaluation program. The GTEP evaluation cycle of formative and standard observations was implemented in 1991-92. A sample of more than 1,000 teachers from throughout the state were mailed the GTEP Summary Survey; 72% of the surveys were completed and returned. Approximately 85% of the respondents agreed that evaluation using the GTOI and GTDRI is appropriate. Approximately three-fourths of the respondents felt that the GTOI and GTDRI together address the most important teaching behaviors that should be addressed for annual teacher evaluation and that GTEP is a fair and reasonable annual teacher evaluation program. Reliability Information The most common reliability concerns, consistency among evaluators and instrument interpretation, are checked at two points during evaluator training. Instrument _ interpretation is checked as part of an evaluator's proficiency requirements through the use of written tests (using descriptions of teaching situations) and scoring agreement (using videotapes of teaching situations). Trainees, in a group with a trainer, also participate in a field-based training activity that requires the evaluation of a classroom lesson. 22 Evidence for the reliability of the GTOI has been investigated, beginning with the 1987-88 extended pilot test. Studies have examined both interobserver agreement in scoring decisions among evaluators observing the same behavior, as well as the generalizability of GTOI scores across evaluators, dimensions, and occasions. lnterobserver agreement was reasonably high in studies conducted during the 1988-89 field test. Generalizability coefficients, limited by the lack of variance in GTOI scores due to the generally high performance levels of teachers, are moderate. Dependability results indicate the probability of an error in scoring resulting in a false denial is relatively low. The Georgia Department of Education continues to monitor program equity, validity, - credibility, and reliability through the use of surveys, analyses of the evaluator training program, and analyses of teacher evaluation forms. For the results of data analyses and additional information regarding GTEP, refer to Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Tabular Results of 1991-92 Program Evaluation Activities, 1992; Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Results of 1990-91 Program Evaluation Activities, 1992; Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Results of 1989-90 Program Evaluation Activities (Vols.1- 2 ), 1991; Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Results of the 1988-89 Statewide Field Test (Vols.1 - 2), 1991; Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Evaluation of the 1988-89 Field Test Training Program, 1990; Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Validity Evidence for the 1988-89 GTEP Instruments, 1990; Implementation of the 1987-88 Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program in Twenty Pilot Districts, 1989; Georgia Teacher Evaluation Instrument: Evaluation of 1987-1988 Training Sessions, 1988; Georgia Teacher Evaluation Instrument: Summary Report of the 1986-19871mplementation, 1987; and Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program: Technical Manual (1986-90), 1991. 23 Georgia Teacher Evaluation Program GEORGIA TEACHER OBSERVATION INSTRUMENT 25 GEORGIA TEACHER OBSERVATION INSTRUMENT Organization and Explanation of Content and Terminology The Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument (GTOI) is organized into three broad areas of teaching performance called "teaching tasks." These three tasks are : I. Provides Instruction II. Assesses and Encourages Student Progress Ill. Manages the Learning Environment Each task is described by a set of measurable components referred to as "dimensions." These dimensions are the decision-making units of the systematic evaluation of teaching performance. Some of the dimensions have been divided into "subdimensions" which provide for a more detailed description of teaching behaviors. There are two observation forms : a Standard Form used for short unannounced observations and an Extended Form used for full-lesson announced observations. The Standard Form is used for teachers in both the Standard Evaluation Process and the Formative Evaluation Process and is designated for the appropriate process. Ten dimensions comprise the Standard Form, and 16 dimensions and subdimensions comprise the Extended Form. A summary of the dimension statements for both forms follows on pages 27- 29. Additional components of the GTOI which are part of the full instrument are the sample effective practices. Effective practices are examples of specific behaviors associated with successful performance of a dimension or subdimension. They are not intended to be all inclusive nor are they intended to be scored individually. The GTOI also includes research/rationale statements, examples, and questions to ask for each dimension and subdimension. These components provide additional informatio.n to descri~e .the teaching prin~iples used as the basis !or the GTOI. Th~ complete Instrument IS mtended as a tra1mng resource, as a sconng and conferenctng resource for observers, and as an interpretive resource for teachers and others who wish additional explanation and enrichment of the instrument content. 26 GTOI DIMENSION STATEMENTS: EXTENDED FORM I I TEACHING TASK 1: PROVIDES INSTRUCTION Dimension A: Instructional Level-The amount and organization of the lesson content are appropriate for the students based on their abilities and the complexity and difficulty of the material. Dimension B: Content Development 81: Teacher-Focused Content Development-Content is explained, discussed, or reviewed in an appropriate sequence through techniques such as using definitions, examples, demonstrations, and modeling or through teacher-guided group activities. 82: Student-Focused Content Development-Student-focused activities provide appropriate opportunities for students to practice or extend previous content or to generate new content. Dimension C: Building for Transfer C1: Initial Focus-Initial activity focuses students' attention on lesson objectives and the learning context. C2: Content Emphasis-Content is made easy to learn and remember through emphasizing major features, critical attributes, or other distinguishing parts of the learning. OR Content Linking-Content is made easy to learn and remember by linking it to relevant life experiences, to prior or future learning or through associations. C3: Summaries-Learning is reinforced with appropriate summaries. I !TEACHING TASK II: ASSESSES AND ENCOURAGES STUDENT PROGRESS Dimension A: Promoting Engagement-Instructional engagement is promoted through stimulating presentations, active participation, or techniques which promote overt or covert involvement. Dimension B: Monitoring Progress-Progress, understanding, and bases of misunderstanding are assessed by interpreting relevant student responses, contributions, performances, or products. Dimension C: Responding to Student Performance C1: Responding to Adequate Performances-Students are provided content-related reinforcement on performances which are adequate and information on why they are adequate when appropriate. C2: Responding to Inadequate Performances-Students with poor performances or incorrect responses are given specific content-related feedback or correctives such as prompts or cues. OR No inadequate performances occur. Dimension D: Supporting Students-Support for students is conveyed by using techniques such as providing encouragement, lowering concern levels, dignifying responses, and by using language free of sarcasm, ridicule, and humiliating references. 28 I !TEACHING TASK Ill: MANAGES THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT Dimension A: Use of Time A1: Non-instructional Tasks-Instructional time is maximized by techniques such as providing clear and complete directions and using efficient methods for transitions, materials distribution, and other routine matters. A2: Instructional Time-Use of instructional time is optimized by techniques such as focusing on objectives and providing sufficient instructional activities. Dimensit>n B: Physical Setting-The physical setting allows the students to observe the focus of instruction, to work without disruption, to obtain materials, and to move about easily; and it allows the teacher to monitor the students and to move among them . Dimension C: Appropriate Behavior C1: Monitoring Behavior-Appropriate behavior is maintained through techniques such as monitoring the behavior of the entire class, establishing clear and consistent expectations, and providing positive feedback when appropriate. C2: Intervening-Appropriate behavior is maintained by providing appropriate feedback or interventions when learners are off-task or disruptive. OR Behavior is appropriate. 29 30 TEACHING TASK 1: PROVIDES INSTRUCTION Dimension A: Instructional Level Research/Rationale: To provide effective learning experiences, the teacher must match the difficulty of content to the students' current achievement levels and needs (Brophy & Evertson, 1976; Tyler, 1965). The quality of instruction affects achievement, success rates, and the time students need to learn (Bloom, 1976; Brophy & Evertson, 1976; Lyle, 1985). Selecting appropriate tasks for students increases success rates during seatwork assignments (Brophy & Evertson, 1976). Both the selection of and the presentation of content are important. Presenting new or difficult material in small steps so students can attend to all the information allows students to effectively process the material and reduces possible confusion (Rosenshine, 1986; Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986; Rowe, 1982). The amount of information that should be presented at one time is dependent upon the age and maturity of the students and the difficulty of the material. With younger students or more difficult material, instruction should be presented in smaller steps followed by more practice than would be necessary with older students or less difficult material (Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986; Rowe, 1982). Teaching in small steps, providing active practice during initial learning, and checking for understanding at each point before proceeding to the next step helps students assimilate unfamiliar content (Cummings, 1980; Rosenshine, 1986). The less familiar the content, the more quickly short-term memory becomes saturated. Immediate practice at each step of instruction helps students process new learning and facilitates its movement into long-term memory so that the short-term memory can receive additional information (Rosenshine, 1986; Rowe, 1982). Examples of Dimension A: An English teacher guides middle school students through the process of writing a term paper (selecting topics, locating resources, developing an outline, taking notes, organizing notes, and documenting sources) as opposed to assigning the term paper as an independent project. A physical education instructor introduces basic strokes in tennis and practices backhand/forehand before going on to more difficult game skills. 31 TEACHING TASK 1: PROVIDES INSTRUCTION Dimension A: Instructional Level The amount and organization of the lesson content are appropriate for the students based on their abilities and the complexity and difficulty of the material. Sample Effective Practices: principal's office. Signature ac tarm. net ....--~y concwrence. TEACHER: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DATE"------ Wntrdillaeini.c..:a..m,HmcenoimSmmayenb ts .e . a~ llachnold/.ar ----- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ T~sComments: Revised 93/94 73 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS For scoring section that is to be bubbled, use pencil or ball point pen. Comments and other information may be typed or written in pencil or ball point pen. Erase completely any marks you wish to change. Make no stray marks on the last copy. Do not fold or staple the last copy. CODING INSTRUCTIONS Record teacher's name, system, and school at the top of the form. Record beginning and ending time and notes on the focus of the lesson. TEACHER'S SYSTEM STATE CODE: Enter the three digit state code for the teacher's system (Example - Appling County 601 ). TEACHER'S SCHOOL STATE CODE: Enter the four digit state code for the teacher's school (Example - Altamaha 1050). LAST 4 DIGITS TEACHER SSN: Enter the last four digits of the teacher's social security number. (Example- If teacher's SSN is 987-65-4321, enter 4321.) LAST 4 DIGITS OBSERVER SSN: Enter the last four digits of the observer's social security number. (Example - If the observer's SSN is 123-45-6789, enter 6789.) DATE: Enter the numerical date (month, day, and year) of the observation (Example- 1O-Q4-93). OBSERVATION NUMBER: Enter the number of this observation. (Example- If this is the teacher's second observation in the Standard Process, enter the number.'-.) TOTAL MINUTES: Enter the two digit number corresponding to the total number of minutes the teacher was observed (Example - 20 or 35). LESSON SEGMENT: Circle the letter corresponding to the segment of the lesson observed. (Examples: If the a. observation included the beginning of the teacher's lesson, circle the letter If the observation included the middle but neither the beginning nor the end of a lesson, circle the letter M. If the observation included the end of the lesson, circle the letter f.. If the observation included the end of one lesson and the beginning of another, circle the letter Q.) SCORING DIRECTIONS Darken the bubble which corresponds to the score for each dimension or subdimension. Use the following key in marking your scoring decisions: Nl = Needs Improvement S = Satisfactory NA = Not Applicable PROCESSING DIRECTIONS Forward the second copy to your system contact person to be mailed to: Performance Assessment Laboratory University of Georgia 115 Sycamore Drive Athens, GA 30602-91 01 74 FORMATIVE PROCESS CONFIDENTIAL GTOI OBSERVATION RECORD: STANDARD FORM (Refer to back for instructions) Teacher's Name Teacher's System lstaie Code I I Teacher's School State Code ll I Last 4 Digits Teacher SSN I I I Last 4 Digits Observer SSN I I I Date MOIDAYI YR J IIII Focus of Lesson: System Beginning Time: Ending Time: School Total Minutes _IT] Lesson Segment (Circle One) B M E 0 TEACHING TASK 1: PROVIDES INSTRUCTION Comments: TEACHING TASK II: ASSESSES AND ENCOURAGES STUDENT PROGRESS Comments: MARK SCORES FOR EACH DIMENSION A. Instructional Level @0 B. Content Development 1. Teacher-Focused @0 and/or 2. Student-Focused C. Building for Transfer and/or e 0 @ 0 @) 0 A. Promoting Engagement @ B. Monitoring Progress @0 C. Responding to Student Performance @0 TEACHING TASK Ill: MANAGES THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT Comments: D. Supporting Students @0 A. Use of Time @0 a Physical Setting 0 C. Appropriate Behavior @0 (SIGNATURES) OBSERVER: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DATE _ _ _ _ _ P O S I T I O N : - - - - - - - - - - - Sign and return copy to principal's office. Signature acknowledges receiPt of form. not necessarily concurrence. TEACHER: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OAT...__ _ _ _ _ aWnrdittdeantecohmermeeinj tcsommamyebnetsparroeviadtetadcahnedd/.or aHached.lnilial - - - - - Teacher's Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Revised 93/94 75 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS For scoring section that is to be bubbled, use pencil or ball point pen. Comments and other information may be typed or written in pencil or ball point pen. Erase completely any marks you wish to change. Make no stray marks on the last copy. Do not fold or staple the last copy. CODING INSTRUCTIONS Record teacher's name, system, and school at the top of the form. Record beginning and ending time and notes on the focus of the lesson. TEACHER'S SYSTEM STATE CODE: Enter the three digit state code for the teacher's system (Example - Appling County 601 ). TEACHER'S SCHOOL STATE CODE: Enter the four digit state code for the teacher's school (Example - Altamaha 1050). LAST 4 DIGITS TEACHER SSN: Enter the last four digits of the teacher's social security number. (Example- If teacher's SSN is 987-65-4321, enter 4321.) LAST 4 DIGITS OBSERVER SSN: Enter the last four digits of the observer's social security number. (Example- Hthe observer's SSN is 123-45-6789, enter 6789.) DATE: Enter the numerical date (month, day, and year) of the observation (Example- 10-04-93). TOTAL MINUTES: Enter the two digit number corresponding to the total number of minutes the teacher was observed (Example - 20 or 35). LESSON SEGMENT: Circle the letter corresponding to the segment of the lesson observed. (Examples: If the .e.. observation included the beginning of the teacher's lesson, circle the letter If the observation included the middle but neither the beginning nor the end of a lesson, circle the letter M. If the observation included the end of the lesson, circle the letter f.. If the observation included the end of one lesson and the beginning of another, circle the letter Q.) SCORING DIRECTIONS Darken the bubble which corresponds to the score for each dimension or subdimension. Use the following key in marking your scoring decisions: Nl = Needs Improvement S = Satisfactory NA = Not Applicable PROCESSING DIRECTIONS Forward the second copy to your system contact person to be mailed to: Performance Assessment Laboratory University of Georgia 115 Sycamore Drive Athens, GA 30602-91 01 76 CONFIDENTIAL GTOI OBSERVATION RECORD: EXTENDED FORM (Refer to back for instructions) Teacher's Name Teacher's System ~tate Code I I Teacher's School State Code L1 J Focus of Lesson: Last 4 Digits Teacher SSN LI I La~ SSN I I I Beginning Time: I Date MO _I DAY YR 1_1 ILL System School Extended Observation # Total Minutes 1 -is external to school, NCOid -aaslgnedcodes: Syabtm State Code School Slate Code J 1m I I I I IIII Ending Time: TEACHING TASK 1: PROVIDES INSTRUCTION Comments: TEACHING TASK II: ASSESSES AND ENCOURAGES STUDENT PROGRESS Comments: TEACHING TASK Ill: MANAGES THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT Comments: MARK SCORES FOR EACH DIMENSION A. Instructional Level @ 0 B. Content Development 1. Teacher-Focused @0 and/or 2. Student-Focused and/or @ 0 C. Building for Transfer 1. Initial Focus 0 2. Content Emphasis orUnking 3. Summaries 0 0 0 A Promoting Engagement @ B. Monitoring Progress @ 0 C. Responding to Student Performance 0 1. Responding to Adequate Performances @ 0 2. Responding to @ Inadequate Performances NJ D. Supporting Students 0 A Use of Time @ 0 1. Non-Instructional Tasks 2. Instructional Time @ 0 B. Physical Setting 0 C. Appropriate Behavior 1. Monitoring Behavior 2. Intervening @ 0 @ 0 (SIGNATURES) OBSERVER: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D A T E - - - - P O S I T I O N : - - - - - - - - - Sign and return copy to principal's office. Signature acknowledges receipt of form, not necessarily concurrence. Written comments may be provided and/or T E A C H E R : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DATE - - - - - attached. Initial and date here if comments are attached. _ _ _ _ __ Teacher's Comments: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Revised 93/94 77 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS For scoring section that is to be bubbled, use pencil or ball point pen. Comments and other information may be typed or written in pencil or ball point pen. Erase completely any marks you wish to change. Make no stray marks on the top copy. Do not fold or staple the top copy. CODING INSTRUCTIONS Record teacher's name, system, and school at the top of the form. Record beginning and ending time and notes on the focus of the lesson. TEACHER'S SYSTEM STATE CODE: Enter the three digit state code for the teacher's system (Example - Appling County 601 ). TEACHER'S SCHOOL STATE CODE: Enter the four digit state code for the teacher's school (Example - Altamaha 1050). LAST 4 DIGITS TEACHER SSN: Enter the last four digits of the teacher's social security number. (Example - If teacher's SSN is 987-65-4321, enter 4321.) LAST 4 DIGITS OBSERVER SSN: Enter the last four digits of the observer's social security number. (Example- Hthe observer's SSN is 123-45-6789, enter 6789.) DATE: Enter the numerical date (month, day, and year) of the extended observation (Example - 1