According to Glickman, Gordon and Ross-Gordon (2014) teacher evaluation systems should contain aspects of both summative and formative evaluations. Summative evaluations alone do not lead to the improvement of instructional practices of teachers. Following this type of protocol in teacher evaluation can also cause negative feelings and lack of participation by teachers. It is important that the teacher evaluation process fosters trust and open communication between teachers and evaluators (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2014).
Although utilizing both formative and summative evaluations are an important aspect of teacher evaluation, they must also be kept separate with the purposes of each being clearly defined. One way to separate the two …show more content…
The tool distinguishes between different levels for teachers: Initial (1-3 years of experience and requires four observations), Intermediate (4-5 years of experience and requires 2 observations) and Advanced (6 or more years of experience and does not require observations). The first step in online evaluation process is the self-reflection. Our principals require that this is completed within the first few weeks of school. The next step is to complete goals, for teachers and school counselors complete two student impact SMART goals. This step is required to be completed by around October 1 of each year. The third step is to provide evidence for the five teaching standards. The fourth part of the process is teacher observations to provide a view of the teacher’s practice and to collect data to evaluate the teacher’s performance. This section on the school counselor evaluation is not required. Based on information from the self-reflection, goal setting, evidence and observations at the end of the year prior to June 15 the principal meets one on one with the educator to go over the online evaluation. At this time we discuss our progress, whether we have met our goals and the principal rates us as distinguished, accomplished, emerging or unsatisfactory. The administrator makes notes and we then have to go in the system and “accept” our evaluation and these evaluations are …show more content…
According to Glickman, Gordon and Ross-Gordon (2014) teacher self-evaluation is an important part of the teacher evaluation process. Types of self-evaluation tools are video recordings, surveys or questionnaires, interviews, journals of reflecting teaching, teaching portfolios, etc. Teacher portfolios are a popular form of self-evaluation and include several sections. Section one contains information on the teacher’s self-assessment during the first few weeks of school and includes data from peer observation, student work and achievement. Section two includes a plan for individual improvement to be implemented throughout the remainder of the school year and includes improvement goals and actions necessary to meet those goals as well a plan for evaluating results of those actions. Section three is developed over the rest of the school year and includes entries on reflections of improvement activities, measures of growth, etc. Section four discusses the teacher’s year-end summary on progress toward goals. Self-evaluation is titled such because the teacher has complete control over what her or she plans and includes in the evaluation (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon,
Although utilizing both formative and summative evaluations are an important aspect of teacher evaluation, they must also be kept separate with the purposes of each being clearly defined. One way to separate the two …show more content…
The tool distinguishes between different levels for teachers: Initial (1-3 years of experience and requires four observations), Intermediate (4-5 years of experience and requires 2 observations) and Advanced (6 or more years of experience and does not require observations). The first step in online evaluation process is the self-reflection. Our principals require that this is completed within the first few weeks of school. The next step is to complete goals, for teachers and school counselors complete two student impact SMART goals. This step is required to be completed by around October 1 of each year. The third step is to provide evidence for the five teaching standards. The fourth part of the process is teacher observations to provide a view of the teacher’s practice and to collect data to evaluate the teacher’s performance. This section on the school counselor evaluation is not required. Based on information from the self-reflection, goal setting, evidence and observations at the end of the year prior to June 15 the principal meets one on one with the educator to go over the online evaluation. At this time we discuss our progress, whether we have met our goals and the principal rates us as distinguished, accomplished, emerging or unsatisfactory. The administrator makes notes and we then have to go in the system and “accept” our evaluation and these evaluations are …show more content…
According to Glickman, Gordon and Ross-Gordon (2014) teacher self-evaluation is an important part of the teacher evaluation process. Types of self-evaluation tools are video recordings, surveys or questionnaires, interviews, journals of reflecting teaching, teaching portfolios, etc. Teacher portfolios are a popular form of self-evaluation and include several sections. Section one contains information on the teacher’s self-assessment during the first few weeks of school and includes data from peer observation, student work and achievement. Section two includes a plan for individual improvement to be implemented throughout the remainder of the school year and includes improvement goals and actions necessary to meet those goals as well a plan for evaluating results of those actions. Section three is developed over the rest of the school year and includes entries on reflections of improvement activities, measures of growth, etc. Section four discusses the teacher’s year-end summary on progress toward goals. Self-evaluation is titled such because the teacher has complete control over what her or she plans and includes in the evaluation (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon,