YRDSB+TPA+Process

=An Overview of the Process=

– written notification to the teacher that he/she will be evaluated during the current school year; – a Pre-Observation meeting; – a classroom observation; – a post-observation meeting; – the completion of a Summative Report including a rating of the teacher's overall performance – the completion of an Annual Learning Plan; and – document processing and retention
 * Evaluation Year**

– Completion of the Annual Learning Plan
 * Non-Evaluation Year**

The rating scale includes two levels of teacher performance: – • Satisfactory – • Unsatisfactory

//From page 8 of the YRDSB manual.// //__**Note:**__ This investigation will not cover the NTIP. This author feels that the TPA process is highly intertwined in the NTIP since 2 classroom visits are conducted. The mentorship aspect is worthy of investigation but will of be the focus of this investigation. For further information on NTIP visit the NTIP pages.//

__**The ALP**__
The YRDSB Document tells us that the Annual Learning Plan (ALP) is:

-teacher authored and directed and is developed in a consultative and collaborative manner with the principal.

-recommended as effective practice, that teachers, in consultation with their principal, consider their school and school board improvement plans and priorities as they identify goals, strategies, and learning opportunities that are aligned with and can be supported within their local school and board context.

-Teachers are encouraged to gather parent and student input in developing, reviewing and updating their ALP each year In the teacher’s non-evaluation year, a meeting is not required with the principal to review and update the ALP but is recommended as “best practice”.

-Teachers who are not in their evaluation year will develop their ALP in collaboration with the principal within 60 school days ollowing the start of the school year (pg 6)

__Discussion on the ALP Process__

While these statements sound good in theory, experience has shown otherwise. This author's experience, consistent with that of her colleagues, has never had an no offer, suggestion or opportunity for collaborative creation with the Principal or VPs. There is no evidence that the principal actually reads the document other than a signature. Often, it is viewed as a piece of bureaucratic paperwork as opposed to a meaningful opportunity for personal professional growth (PPG). The suggestions given are rarely practical considering the size of the schools and the number of responsibilities on both supervisors and teachers.


 * __The Pre-Observation Meeting__**

The purpose of this meeting is for the teacher and the principal to prepare for the classroom observation. Other purposes of the pre-observation meeting are: – to promote professional dialogue between the principal and teacher, while providing opportunities for reflection and collaboration; – to develop a collegial atmosphere in advance of the classroom observation; – to establish procedures in advance; and – to learn about the unique qualities of the teacher's class (pg 13).



__Discussion on the Pre-Observation Meeting__

The guidelines and purpose for this meeting are very clear. It is positive in nature in that it is aiming for collegiality, collaboration & reflection. It also, theoretically, could help to decrease teacher stress because the supervisor would outline procedures and the teacher could explain their lesson. However, this meeting is the first step in a series of "appointments" that are really just providing a snapshot of the teacher's work and not a holistic view. The list of item to bring demonstrates an emphasis on paperwork. It is also a sample and this sample may or may not reflect the true, on-going practices of the teacher. In terms of equity, the last bullet point is problematic because it allows supervisors to request quite a range of items. This means that one teacher may be bringing lots of binders, logs, evidence, paperwork, etc., while other might just need to bring the essentials. The teacher themselves may identify other items to bring but the supervisor may not get a chance to view it. It also fails to recognize the practice of differentiated instruction. Not all teachers are going to have seating plans, for example. Different teachers plan in various ways and may not have as strict a formal plan. Alternately, if the supervisor is viewing a teacher in a non-traditional classroom setting (ex. co-op placement, guidance, student support centre) these items may not apply. While the purpose does state it is about collaboration, the "to bring" list seems to be more about teachers performing a "show and tell" of items. Lastly, the list of involvement means that teachers who, for a plethora of reasons, are not involved in school life beyond what is required of them by the Education Act could be viewed in a negative light. This may or may not in any way reflect their effectiveness as a teacher. One teacher may have a lot of classroom weaknesses but really enjoy being involved in extracurriculars.


 * __The Evaluation__**

The YRDSB manual clearly identifies how teachers will be evaluated on their classroom visit on page 14. The teacher's evaluation is based on all 16 competencies, some of which be evident in the classroom observation, as well as other sources made available to them. Mandatory competencies have a list of performance indicators, referred to as 'Look-Fors'. Dialogue between the evaluator and teacher should focus on how the teacher demonstrates these performance indicators.

There must be at least one classroom observation to evaluate the teacher's skills, knowledge and attitudes. The classroom observation will be used to gather data about the teaching and learning process. Activities during the visit should include obtaining evidence of the competencies with specific emphasis on the competencies the teacher and principal agreed to target, understanding that classroom performance may be assessed against all competencies that are evident in this classroom observation as well as lesson plans, teaching resources, assessment and evaluation practices, student work, dialogue between the teacher and the evaluator and other sources made available to the evaluator.This additional information will be provided by the teacher and/or the principal.

If a principal decides to conduct two classroom observations for one appraisal of a teacher:

• there will be only one Pre-Observation meeting in which both classes will be discussed; • only one Summative Report Form will be completed with reference made to both classes/ lessons observed; and • this process would constitute only one appraisal for the teacher. (pg 15)

__Discussion of the Classroom Visit__

This evaluation again represents only a snapshot of the teacher. It may not truly reflect their on-going professional practice. It puts a lot of pressure on a single lesson to prove a very long list of look-fors. While the document does acknowledge that some items will be gathered from other sources, the majority of the competencies only apply to this single performance. The long list of indictors puts a lot of stress on teachers and means that they will design a lesson to showcase those things, as opposed to demonstrating what their classroom and teaching practice is like o an on-going basis. As such, teachers are not encouraged to take risks because they want to ensure a successful lesson. It also puts stress on the students who are not use to having an administers in their classroom. Consequently, the students may not act as they usually would, skewing the way the lesson may be accepted and consequently viewed by the supervisor. A weak teacher may design a fabulous lesson that goes off without a hitch and a stronger teacher might try something that fails. This single day, or at most two observations, should not determine the value of a teacher. Teaching is a multifaceted job and this evaluation should be more holistic in nature.


 * __The Post-Ob Meeting__**

The principal and the teacher must have a Post-Observation meeting to:

• review the results of the classroom observation; • discuss any other materials, factors and/or incidents that will have a bearing on the performance appraisal; • review the 16 competencies that form the basis for the performance appraisal; • discuss those competencies that had been identified as the focus of the performance appraisal; • discuss the comments regarding competencies that are intended for the summative report; • review the teacher’s ALP, and discuss the professional growth goals and strategies for the teacher to take into account in finalizing his/her Annual Learning Plan for the current year, based on the principal’s recommendations from the performance appraisal

The principal must sign the Summative Report and provide a copy to the teacher within ** 20 school days** after the classroom observation:

• A meeting is not mandatory if the rating is ' // Satisfactory //'. • A meeting is highly recommended if the rating is ' // Unsatisfactory //'’.

It is not mandatory that a meeting be held to share the Summative Report. However, at the request of either the teacher or the principal, the parties shall meet to discuss the performance appraisal after the teacher receives a copy of the Summative Report signed by the principal. It is recommended that a meeting be held to review the Summative Report and any recommendations made. This provides an opportunity for the teacher and the principal to connect the TPA process with the teacher's ongoing professional growth and support of student achievement.(pg 18)

For teachers who receive an 'Unsatisfactory' rating, supervisors are to ensure the teacher receives the support, guidance and monitoring necessary to enable him or her to improve performance within a given time period. (pg 23 ).

__Discussion of the Post-Ob__

This meeting is an excellent opportunity for feedback. It is good that is must be within 10 days of the classroom visit because the feedback is still pertinent. However, the purpose seems very 1 sided. The supervisor is reviewing and discussing. There is no mention of reflection here. Depending on the supervisor this meeting could be very unilateral in nature because the supervisor in question may not encourage reflection or discuss personal professional growth and the teacher may not feel that there is an opportunity to provide these things. The final report does not have to be shared in a meeting therefore the recommendations do not have to be discussed. These recommendations are not done collaboratively. These recommendations may or may not be constructive in nature.

__Final Thoughts__
This process is very clear and defined. It is linear in nature and reflects the notions that supervision is scientific and inspection based. It does of good job of preparing teachers to be evaluated. However, the process contradicts with the purpose outlined by YRDSB of "growth-oriented context for meaningful performance appraisals". This process of evaluation is about teacher competency and subscribes to the TQM theory of supervision in this way. It is evident by the measurable "Look Fors" under the 16 //Competencies//. Embedded even into the language of this manual is tis concept of competency. Yet, it seems that the board desires a growth-oriented, authentic method as evident by the purpose outlined. The goals are about "celebrating" teachers, fostering growth, reaching full potential and yet this system, while clear, defined and mostly equitable, does not actually put into practice these ideals.

This system needs to be revisited if it is going to meet the goals outlined. It needs to make a conceptual shift away from teacher competency and toward personal professional growth. This will require the theoretical frameworks being applied to be changed. It will also require training for both the supervisor and supervisee. This change should not merely be done for the sake of change itself but instead be done in a way that can allow teachers to really demonstrate a 360 degree view of their role as teacher. Differentiation will play a vital role in this new system as should collaboration, reflection and critical thinking.

HOME

//The content of this page is directly referring to the YRDSB TPA manual. Page numbers are provided. The whole manual is available on the Links page//.