Evaluation/Appraisal Calibration
Evaluation/Appraisal Calibration
Collegial conversations and reflection on practice are essential for professional growth.
In this assignment, you willwork with your mentor, school administrator, or a peer to calibrate the results ofoneteacher observation and evaluation/appraisal conducted in the Module 2 assignment.
Step 1Write an introduction of the evaluator/appraiser who will conduct the observation/evaluation/appraisal using the Class Observation Tools technique/tool you used in Module 2. Note the appraisers professional position.
Step 2If you have not already done so, provide the evaluator/appraiser the link to theClassroom Instruction VideosLinks to an external site.from the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education website and the particular video they will use as a second appraiser.
They should use the same technique/tool from the Classroom Observation Tools resource that you used. Explain your focus area and the technique and provide ablankcopy of the observation template, chart, or notes document you used.
You will not submit the second appraiser/evaluator notes document so their notes may be a handwritten draft.
Step 3Schedule a time to meet with the other evaluator/appraiser either virtually or in-person and to compare, calibrate, and discuss findings related to the observation, evaluation/appraisal, and the response/feedback to the teacher.
Step 4Conduct the virtual or in-person calibration meeting with the other evaluator/appraiser. Compare, calibrate, and discuss the findings from the two observations. During the meeting:
Identify similarities and differences in the observations and the response/feedback to the teacher.
Engage in professional conversation and
reach a consensus on the findings that would be shared with the teacher and
decide on the response and feedback you would provide to the teacher on performance.
Follow up the exercise with a note of thanks to the person serving as a second appraiser.
Step 5Compose a 2- to 3-page paper introducing the second evaluator/appraiser (Step 1) and summarizing:
the findings and the consensus reached (Step 4),
the response and feedback you would provide to the teacher on performance (Step 4),
two strengths of the observed teacher,
two potential goals for the observed teachers continued growth, and
a conclusion reflecting on the calibration process.
Include an APA-formatted title and reference pages.
Step 6Submit your paper.
PleasereadtheAssignment GuidelinesLinks to an external site.before you begin working.
Rubric
EL5623 Module 3 Teacher Evaluation/Appraisal Calibration, Response and Feedback, Identification of Teacher Strengths, and Performance Goals Rubric
EL5623 Module 3 Teacher Evaluation/Appraisal Calibration, Response and Feedback, Identification of Teacher Strengths, and Performance Goals Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCalibration Findings on Teacher Evaluation/ Appraisal and Consensus on Results 30to >24.0pts
Mastery
The well-organized 2- to 3-page narrative introduces the second evaluator/appraiser who will complete a classroom observation and evaluator/appraiser tool to calibrate one observation and evaluation/appraisal in the Module 2 assignment. Evidence is provided of engaging in in-depth professional conversation and reaching consensus on the findings that would be shared with the teacher. 24to >21.0pts
Proficient
The 2- to 3-page narrative introduces the second evaluator/appraiser who will complete a classroom observation and evaluator/appraiser tool to calibrate one observation and evaluation/appraisal in the Module 2 assignment. Evidence is provided of engaging in professional conversation and reaching consensus on the findings that would be shared with the teacher. 21to >17.0pts
Marginal
Some, but not all, assignment requirements for the calibration findings of the classroom observation evaluation/ appraisal and reaching consensus are met. 17to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
Most assignment requirements for the calibration findings of the classroom observation evaluation/ appraisal and reaching consensus are met. 0pts
No Submission
30pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvaluation/Appraisal Response and Feedback 30to >24.0pts
Mastery
The well-developed 2- to 3-page narrative summarizes the meeting with the second evaluator/appraiser and clearly articulates the feedback that would be provided to the teacher. 24to >21.0pts
Proficient
The 2- to 3-page narrative summarizes the meeting with the second evaluator/appraiser and articulates the feedback that would be provided to the teacher. 21to >17.0pts
Marginal
Some, but not all, assignment requirements for the evaluation/appraisal response and feedback are met. 17to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
Most assignment requirements for the evaluation/appraisal response and feedback are met. 0pts
No Submission
30pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentification of Two Strengths of Each Teacher 25to >21.0pts
Mastery
The well-developed narrative identifies two strengths of each teacher who was observed and evaluated/appraised. 21to >17.5pts
Proficient
The well-developed narrative identifies two strengths of each teacher who was observed and evaluated/appraised. 17.5to >13.5pts
Marginal
Some, but not all, assignment requirements for identification of the strengths of each teacher observed and evaluated/appraised are met. 13.5to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
Most assignment requirements for identification of the strengths of each teacher observed and evaluated/appraised are met. 0pts
No Submission
25pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentification of Two Performance Goals for Each Teacher Observed and Evaluated/Appraised 25to >21.0pts
Mastery
The well-developed narrative identifies two performance goals for each teacher observed and evaluated/appraised. 21to >17.5pts
Proficient
The narrative identifies two performance goals for each teacher observed and evaluated/appraised. 17.5to >13.5pts
Marginal
Some, but not all, assignment requirements for identification of two performance goals for each teacher observed and evaluated/appraised are met. 13.5to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
Most assignment requirements for identification of two performance goals for each teacher observed and evaluated/appraised are not met. 0pts
No Submission
25pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLeading/Participating in Collaborative Activities
(CAEP RA1.1) 10to >8.5pts
Mastery
Detailed information is provided to demonstrate meaningful collaboration with multiple stakeholder groups occurred. Multiple stakeholders are identified, and explicit examples illustrate how stakeholder input informed decisions, plans, or activities to demonstrate collaboration occurred. 8.5to >7.0pts
Proficient
Presents evidence of meaningful collaboration with appropriate stakeholders (peers, colleagues, students, families, or community members). Stakeholders are identified and feedback/input are evident in the assignment or activity to demonstrate collaboration occurred. 7to >5.5pts
Marginal
Stakeholder collaboration is vaguely described or limited. Elaboration is needed to clearly demonstrate stakeholder involvement in decisions, plans, or activities. Descriptions of collaboration need further development. 5.5to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
Collaboration is not addressed in the assignment or activities. Minimal evidence is presented to suggest collaboration occurred. 0pts
No Submission
10pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse and Understanding of Research
(CAEP RA1.1) 10to >8.5pts
Mastery
Demonstrates an insightful understanding of the application and use of research in the professional field. Explicit connections between research and professional work in education are provided. References and citations indicate substantial use of research; includes 5 or more reference listings for current, scholarly, peer-reviewed sources. All sources are cited in the text and were published within the last 5 years except when seminar work is required. 8.5to >7.0pts
Proficient
Demonstrates an adequate understanding of the application and use of research in education professions. References and citations indicate use of research; includes at least 3-4 sources that are related to the topic. The majority of sources are current (within the last 5 years) and from professional and credible publications or organizations. 7to >5.5pts
Marginal
Some understanding of research use is evident. Additional evidence and/or elaboration are needed to demonstrate an adequate understanding of the application and use of research in education professions. References and citations indicate minimal research conducted with few (2 or less) resources included. Sources are outdated or from non-professional or non-credible sources. 5.5to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
In-text citations and/or reference listings are missing or do not match, indicating inadequate research on the topic and/or minimal understanding of how to apply and use research in education professions. 0pts
No Submission
10pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEmploying Data Analysis/Evidence to Develop Supportive School Environments
(CAEP RA1.1) 10to >8.5pts
Mastery
Conducts comprehensive data analyses and insightful, detailed conclusions are presented. Explicit connections between school-based decisions, plans, and actions with supporting data analyses or evidence are clearly presented. 8.5to >7.0pts
Proficient
Applies the use of data or evidence to inform practice. Makes clear and accurate connections between data analysis results and school-based decisions, plans, or actions. 7to >5.5pts
Marginal
Demonstrates limited data or evidence use to inform school-based decisions, plans, or actions. Connections between data and school-based practices are weak and need clarity and elaboration. 5.5to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
Data analyses or using evidence to support school-based decisions, plans, or actions are missing, vague, or illogical. Decisions are not supported by data or evidence. 0pts
No Submission
10pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Format and Writing Mechanics 10to >8.5pts
Mastery
Submission is free of spelling, formatting, and grammatical errors. Submission is well-formatted and professional. 8.5to >7.0pts
Proficient
Submission contains minimal spelling, formatting, and grammatical errors that do not impede the understanding of the concepts and plans. 7to >5.5pts
Marginal
Submission contains multiple spelling, formatting, and/or grammatical errors. Some ideas are unclear due to errors in writing mechanics, or multiple elements of APA format are not followed. 5.5to >0.0pts
Needs Improvement
Submission contains extensive spelling, formatting, and grammatical errors that significantly impede the understanding and presentation of ideas. 0pts
No Submission
10pts
Total Points:150
