1. Differentiated Supervision Because Students Are Not the Only Ones with Differences!Presentation for Teachers and Administrators in theNew Canaan Public Schools, New Canaan, CTWhat is differentiated supervision?Why is it necessary?How do we make teacher evaluations bothmeaningful and purposeful?How can school leaders respond to evaluations tomake key decisions regarding teacher needs?How will differentiated supervision ultimately benefitteachers and students?

2. What is Differentiated Supervision? Differentiated Supervision iseffectively using evaluationsto inform meaningfuldecisions on teacher needs. Itoccurs when school leadersrecognize teachers varygreatly in their readinesslevels, their skill sets, and intheir confidence, resulting insignificant variation inteacher effectiveness. 3. Why is Differentiated Supervision Necessary? Teachers who excel are not recognized or rewarded.Research concludes theU.S. suffers fromLow-performing institutionalteachers are indifference to frequently retainedvariations inand continue to failteacher practiceour students. (Weisberg,Sexton, Mulhern& Keeling, 2009,The majority of teachers, p. 6). those who fall in themiddle, are not given the differentiated support they need to grow professionally. 4. Teachers are NOT all the Same!The Widget Effect, asdescribed in a research reportby the New TeacherProject,is defined as the failure ofour schools to recognize thatteachereffectiveness is not thesame from classroom to classroom; teachersare not interchangeable parts. 5. Decisions, DecisionsKey decisions regardingteachers arerarely based on teacherperformance: Tenure is typically grantedafter a predetermined numberof years of service. Salary advances are based onyears of service and educationlevel. Professional development isoften random or fad-basedrather than tied to observedteacher effectiveness. Evaluators typically decide that 6. Change Required Effective Differentiated Supervision requires a cultural shift administrators and teachers must adjust how they have historically viewed the evaluation system.It must be understood that the core purpose of evaluation must be maximizing teacher growth and effectiveness (Weisberg, Sexton, Mulhern & Keeling, 2009, p. 9). Teachers must stop viewing a positive rating as the singular goal of an evaluation, but instead view it as an opportunity to receive constructive feedback and differentiated 7. Where to Begin? Differentiated Supervision begins withpurposeful, meaningful, objective analysis ofoverall teachereffectiveness. Researchers agree that one single tool shouldnot be used to evaluate teachers, but thatmultiple instruments andframeworks should be utilized. It is critical that evaluators aretrained in the use of observationand data-gathering protocols. (Hinchey, 2010) 8. Observation and Evaluation Whats the Difference?Observation Evaluation is muchrefers to seeing,broader; it refers tohearing, making judgmentsrecording, based uponreviewing, and informationanalyzing teacheraccumulated on allperformanceaspects of thethrough theteachersschool year. professional performance, both instructional and non-instructional. 9. Tool Options for Evaluations(Goe, Bell & Little, 2008)Description Strengths CautionsClassroom Measures observable Provides informationImportant to choose aclassroom processes.about classroom valid and reliableObservationsactivities and behaviors.protocol; raters must beCan be used for bothtrained. Cannot assessformative and teacher beliefs,summative purposes. intentions, or outcomesof lessons.Instructional Protocols used toCan be good measure of Limited research onanalyze/measureinstructional quality. reliability and validity.Artifacts quality of lesson plans, Practical and feasible Training scorers can berubrics, student work, measure. costly.etc.Portfolio Used to document Can measure aspects of Time-consuming andarray of teachingteaching not seen in difficult to standardize.behaviors andsingle observations. Typically represents aresponsibilities. Used Good tool for teacherteachers exemplaryto assess beginningself-improvement.work.teachers/teachercandidates. 10. More OptionsDescriptio Strengths CautionsnTeacher Reports of classroom Can measure Still need a validatedactivities/goals;unobservable factors; instrument to increaseSelf-Report obtained through provides teachersreliability/validity. Thissurveys, instructional perspective. Feasible method should never belogs or interviews.and cost-efficient. primary measure.Student Student opinions Can offer formative Students are not able toabout teaching information to help comment on teachersSurveypractice.teachers improve. content knowledge, curriculum use or professional activities.Value-Formula used toMeasure of studentCannot separate teacherdetermine teacherslearning vs. teaching effects from classroomAdded contributions to testmethods; little burdeneffects; not useful forModel score gains. at school level; useful formative purposes; for identifying measure only teachers outstanding teachers. contributions to test scores, not other measures 11. So How do we Evaluate and Differentiate? In a nutshell, a good evaluation system is used as afoundation for responses to varying teachereffectivenessan evaluation is not an end in and ofitselfit is not a document to be stuffed away in afile. Charlotte Danielsons Framework for Teaching andTAP (The System for Teacher and StudentAdvancement) are examples of systems in which theteacher evaluation process is inherently tied to theschools responses, including decisions to mentor,coach, provide professional development, changeteacher assignments, and/or reward, advance ordismiss. 12. Danielsons Framework: Domain FocusDomain 1 Planning andDomain 2 The ClassroomPreparationEnvironment What a teacher knows and All aspects of teaching that does in preparation for lead to a culture for learningteaching. in the classroom.Domain 3 Instruction Domain 4 Professional ResponsibilitiesWhat a teacher does to Professional responsibilitiesengage students in learning. and behavior in and out of the classroom. 13. Evaluation Outcomesnot just a score or rating Both Danielsons Framework and TAP ensure thatevaluations are not the equivalent of jumpingthrough a cursory, bureaucratic hoop (Eckhert,2010). Instead, they are the basis of support forinterventions for low performing teachers,continued growth options for teachers in themiddle, and advancement opportunities forteachers who have demonstrated expertise. Research indicates that the use of suchframeworks are successful in identifying morelow-performing teachers and that they areeffective in identifying teachers in need ofadditional supports (Sartain, Stoelinga & Krone, 14. Typical Evaluation ProcessBasis for Data is ResultEvaluationGathered Cursory Rubric Score Administrativ analysis of a Writtene dutyteachersSummaryabilities as Maybe aan instructorconversation based onone or twoobservations. 15. Differentiated Evaluation ProcessBasis forDataResultsEvaluation Gathered Quality of Objective information Determinatioabout quality of n of requiredteacher teacher instruction,instruction, workinterventionsteacherproducts andprofessionalism, Direction forprofessionalism student engagement,professional Assessment of work productsgrowthactive Information about Determinatiolearning/DI student progress withn of retention,regard to statetenure, Student overall standards.progress on Information about new dismissalbenchmark and teacher needs, Teacherstate readiness levels.assignmentassessments Identified areas ofor New teacher concern andadvancementassessmentweaknesses at Pay raises,individual and staff Teacher request level. bonuses orfor assistance or May include stipendsinput evaluation options for Colleague,advanced staff 16. Differentiated Supervision for New Teachers Beginning teachers need special attention and tailored response to evaluations! 1st year of teaching should not be a game ofeducation survivor. Supervisors should provide individualizedattention. Teacher self-efficacy and learning needs shouldbe assessed. Mentors strengths should match new teachersneeds. Targeted observations should be conducted and 17. Differentiated Interventions forStruggling Teachers Professional Development directly linked to observedweaknesses. Peer/Instructional Coaching. Mentors or Supervisors to model effective instructionor co-teach lessons. Use of technology (video lesson reviews, bug-in-eartech, webcam/Skype for frequent check-ins). Teachers who have received fair and comprehensive evaluations, and who still fail to meet performance standards despiteindividualized support should be dismissed. End of story. 18. Help! I Need Somebody!Supervisors should remembertoalways focus on contexts inwhichteachers are most likely to feelunprepared. Research indicatesthisincludes: Beginning teachers Teachers of students withbehavior issues Teachers of students withlearning disabilities Teachers learning to use datato inform instruction(Elliot, Isaacs & Chugani, 2010) 19. Differentiated Actions forAchieving and Excelling TeachersTeachers achievingTeachers who excel canacceptablefall tostandards typically still the wayside if they arehavenotroom for improvement: recognized andcontinually Provide professionalchallenged:growth opportunities. Schedule Advance them to rolesopportunities toas mentors or masterobserve exemplary teachers.teachers. Train advanced Assign to data teams, teachers to work withcurriculumsupervisors as teachercommittees and/or evaluators. 20. Group DiscussionHow does Differentiated Supervision Ultimately Benefit Teachersand Students?Please also share concerns and 21. ReferencesEckert, D. J. (2010). More than widgets, TAP: A systemic approach to increased teachereffectiveness. The TAP System for Teacher and Student Advancement Created byLowell Milken. Retrieved fromhttp://www.tapsystem.org/resources/resources.taf?page=ffo_rpts_eckertElliott, E. M., Isaacs, M. L., & Chugani, C. D. (2010). Promoting self-efficacy in earlycareer teachers: A principals guide for differentiated mentoring and supervision. FloridaJournal of Educational Administration & Policy, 4(1), 131-146.Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: Aresearch synthesis. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. Retrievedfrom http://www.tqsource.org/publications/teachereffectiveness.phpHinchey, P. H. (2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn from research. National Education Policy Center | School of Education, University of Colorado at Boulder. Retrieved April 03, 2011, from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/getting-teacher-assessment-rightSartain, L., Stoelinga, S. R., & Krone, E. (2010). Rethinking teacher evaluation: Findingsfrom the first year of the excellence in teaching project in Chicago public schools(Policy brief No. 978-0-9814-6047-5). Retrieved fromhttp://ccsr.uchicago.edu/content/publications.php?pub_id=143Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J., & Keeling, D. (2009). The widget effect: Ournational failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. TheWidget Effect. Retrieved from http://widgeteffect.org/downloads/TheWidgetEffect.pdf