Teacher evaluations have been in the news a lot lately, particularly in our state. The idea is that a better teacher evaluation system will help to support and improve teacher quality and more effectively address teachers who may need improvement. A state law passed in 2010 requires school districts to establish a four-tier evaluation system by 2013-14. (That involves moving from a satisfactory/unsatisfactory system to one that has four levels and provides a more complete evaluation.) Eight districts and one consortium of districts are working through OSPI to develop pilot programs now as part of that work. As a result, you may wonder what Lake Washington School District does for its teacher evaluations.
In fact, LWSD is way ahead of most other districts in our state. We have been doing four-tier evaluations for some teachers for about 12 years and have evaluated all teachers in this system since 2008. The four tiers we use are unsatisfactory, basic, proficient and distinguished – the same ones Governor Gregoire recently proposed.
The history of how we developed our Professional Growth and Evaluation (PGE) system and how it works reveals what else is needed for an effective teacher evaluation system. It has taken many years and a lot of energy for us to get to this point, where we are seeing real results in our classrooms.
An important aspect of the Lake Washington evaluation system is that it was developed collaboratively with the Lake Washington Education Association (LWEA), which represents teachers. By working together over the years through issues such as deadlines and requirements, we have a system the teachers’ association stands behind. The details of the evaluation system are part of the contract bargained with the association.
The district and LWEA developed the Professional Growth and Evaluation system using the Charlotte Danielson “Framework for Teaching.” Charlotte Danielson is an international education consultant whose researched-based framework provides clear definition of the components of good teaching. The district and association worked with Ms. Danielson in developing its system. (Danielson’s Framework is one that is being considered in some of the state pilot tests.) We also developed a web-based tool for use by teachers and principals alike to document the steps in the process.
Danielson’s Framework lays out four domains of teaching. They are:
- Planning and Preparation
- Classroom Environment
- Instruction
- Professional Responsibilities
All teachers in the district are evaluated annually in all four domains and the 42 components of the domains. Brand new teachers enter the system as “Level 1” teachers. They progress through a four-year cycle whereby they set professional growth goals in a designated domain of focus. Teachers are expected to continually progress toward proficiency in all components of all domains in their first four years of teaching. Teachers on “Level 1” are informally observed on a regular basis and formally observed by their principal at least twice per year. The formal observation process includes of a pre-observation planning conference, a formal classroom observation by the principal and a reflective post-conference.
Once a new teacher has successfully progressed through “Level 1,” they move to “Level 2” of the PGE system. “Level 2” teachers continue to set annual professional growth goals and gather evidence toward meeting those goals. Teachers in “Level 2” are also informally observed by their principal on an ongoing basis.
Each year, both “Level 1” and “Level 2” teachers complete a self-assessment and work collaboratively with their principal to set their own professional growth goals -- what they want to improve in their teaching and professional practice. Self-reflection is a critical aspect of teacher evaluation and guides teacher improvement and growth. Teachers keep track through the year of evidence that shows their work and its impact on students, such as actual student work, assessment results, documentation of professional learning or other items.
When this system was agreed on for all teacher evaluations in 2008, we took the opportunity to initiate a deep look among administrators into what each of these tiers means in each domain. For example, what does proficient instruction look like? How is it different from distinguished? Or basic? To ensure quality teaching in all of our schools, it was important to have comparable evaluations across our district. Principals and district administrators together watched videos of teaching to practice observation and assessment. These deeper conversations moved principals into examining what students were doing in the classroom, as well as the teacher. How did instruction or classroom environment affect their learning?
Leadership learning walks continued this process. Principals and district administrators visit classrooms in teams to observe and then discuss what they saw. Those visits are not about evaluating the teacher but instead help train principals in observation and evaluation and ensure they agree about what good practice looks like.
The result of the years of work on our PGE system? Teachers know what is expected and how they will be assessed. They know that principals use a consistent framework and set of definitions to do that assessment. Principals have a clear system to follow and a shared language that teachers understand. Everyone is focused on improvement, even those teachers who are rated as distinguished in all four domains. Principals have a tool to counsel out of the profession those teachers who are not getting up to standard and, when necessary, to move them out of district employment.
Teacher evaluations are not simple to do well. They require not only a set of standards but learning on the part of both teachers and principals. Done well, they can improve instruction and learning across a school district. In Lake Washington, we have an evaluation system that is helping us to do that.
Sincerely,
Dr. Chip Kimball
Superintendent
Lake Washington School District