I listed these things so that he would feel comfortable in giving me a "4" in at least one of the first four standards (Professional Knowledge, Instructional Planning, Instructional Strategies, Differentiated Instruction). He didn't.
When it came time for me to sign off on the mid-year conference in the TKES platform, I noticed how little he had referenced to our conversation. He only referenced just enough to give me a "3." We don't have any power to change anything, but we can make comments on the platform. Here is what I put in the comment field. It won't change anything, but it made me feel better.
It seems under Performance
Standard 1 several things were omitted. I noted, and supplied data, that
I continually demonstrate extensive (more than I could possibly use in class
for the year) content and pedagogical knowledge, that I enrich the curriculum
through personal creation for the program, and that I guide others in enriching
the curriculum. I continually seek ways to serve as a role model as
mentioned in the conference, that I am currently serving as a mentor to 4
(four) teachers. In addition, I continually
serve as a mentor/teacher leader through the curriculum-enriching involvement
of materials, resources, and interaction of my continually updated website - of
which 382 people reviewed, in December 2018 alone.
In regard
to Performance Standard 2, I have noted that I continually seek and use
multiple data points, real world resources which interact with prior knowledge
and prepare fore knowledge to plan for and meet the appropriate differentiated
needs of my students. The students are held accountable continually
through daily activities and grades, weekly performance assessments, and
regular public performances.
In regard
to Performance Standard 3, my students are continually, every class period, all
class period, are required to use meta-cognition to track their learning and
their skills through assessments to measure their progress in the
standards. They are required, and prompted by direct instruction, to use
higher-order thinking skills (the very nature of the class/subject requires
this), and not only is this knowledge applied in current and relevant ways, it
put on display for the community stakeholders on a regular basis. All of
this is backed by data. I serve as a mentor to 4 teachers in this regard
as well.
In regard
to Performance Standard 4, I continually use appropriate differentiated
instruction through content, process, product, and environment. This is
done continually by student, by instrumentation, by chair order, by class
period, by skill level. All of this is backed by data and evidenced not
only through continuous formative assessments but also through weekly summative
assessments.
Not only
do I continually demonstrate expertise in assessment strategies in regard to
Performance Standard 5, but I continually develop and promote and lead others
(through my 4 mentorships) strategies to help others devise instruments and
assessments that are not only valid and appropriate, but immediately and
effectively demonstrate not only the student's current skill level (from the
students' stand point), but also immediately and effectively informs the
teacher as to the students' ability. This is all backed by data.
