Arizona Education Association

Advocate Fall 2011

Issue link: http://digital.copcomm.com/i/39006

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 16 of 39

Changes in Arizona Teacher Evaluations The Arizona State Board of Education (SBE) Task Force on Teacher and Principal Evaluations, which includes AEA President Andrew F. Morrill, presented the Arizona Framework for Measuring Educator Effectiveness on April 25, 2011. In 2010, state lawmakers passed a law, ARS§15-203(A)(38), requiring the SBE to de- velop a framework for teacher and principal evaluations that includes quantitative data on student academic progress that accounts for between 33 percent and 50 percent of each evaluation outcome. School districts are re- quired to use an instrument that meets the data requirements to annually evaluate teachers and principals beginning in school year 2012-2013. The law also requires professional development and evaluator training. The task force says the framework they have created is an outline for evaluations, and it is not the instrument. Local school districts must develop their own instrument that follows the framework for evaluations. Local associations are encouraged to collaborate with district administration on an evaluation tool that meets the criteria in this framework, addresses the needs of improvement of teachers, and im- proves student academic performance. The instrument should have two major com- ponents – teaching and learning. The teaching component should be demonstrated by the daily practices of the teacher and observed by those with whom the teacher interacts. The learning component is evidenced by quantita- tive data that can include individual classroom data of students and/or larger group data of the school or district. The teaching component will comprise 50 percent of a teacher’s evaluation and is based on observations or evidence of teaching tasks and informed by the following: • Arizona Professional teaching standards (InTASC) • Classroom Teaching Research (Danielson, Marzano, etc.) • Other domains identified in the district’s evaluation instrument • Survey data related to teaching/classroom practices At least 33 percent of the evaluation will come from the learning component, which must be valid, reliable, and aligned to the content taught. It must also come from multiple sources and show growth or progression over time. Sources for this data include the following: • AIMS • SAT 10 • District Developed CRTs • District Instructional System • DIBELS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AEA Advocate ❘ Fall 2011 17

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Arizona Education Association - Advocate Fall 2011