"Teaching is from the heart!"

After seeing the title of this post, I would be curious of your immediate reaction....  You probably went one of two ways....  "That's right!" or "That's absurd!"

(I hope you make it to the end of this post.)
I heard this statement recently at a conference.  Not only was this statement one of the central tenants, and the implied driving force behind a person wanting to be a teacher and their ability to be effective, but also something I read recently that went to a great number of people, "Teaching is a work of heart."  Two times in one week I've been told that (to be a great teacher, reach children, change the world, etc.) you have to teach from the heart, have a heart of compassion, want to love the children, love them into learning.  Heart is the driving force, the ultimate determining factor of your reason to be in the profession, the guide for your qualifications.  (I would posit that is actually why I became a teacher.)

I would agree with a colleague that has stated, "You teach children, not a curriculum."  I would agree that your motivations for being a teacher might determine your effectiveness in helping your students learn the subject matter.  "If you don't love your subject matter, you're not going to make it as a teacher."  If you loved your curriculum but didn't like children, you're going to have a problem "teaching" because teaching involves a teacher and a student, not a teacher and a curriculum.  This could go on and on, but you get the idea.

What does this have to do with TKES (and the teaching Profession)?  To me, everything.  As you review the TKES evaluation process, the Evaluator's observations, your lesson plans, the 10 TAPS standards, the 72 TAPS elements--for some reason or another, the Government/Legislators did not include anything about our heart, our feelings, our motivations, our caring.  Nothing.  Never have, never will.  Teaching from the heart will not make you an effective teacher, and you could get obliterated by TKES.

It is irresponsible for conference speakers, leaders, and anyone who has a microphone in front of educators to have a throw back to the early 20th century and pull on the "heart strings" of the audience to imply that is what they need, and that is what will make them successful in teaching: just "care" enough.  Tell that to a first year teacher (I have been a mentor for years) and you will see them at the end of each day leaving the school in tears.  (Another reason 50% leave in <5 years.)  Heart has (almost) nothing to do with it!  You have to be prepared, equipped for all aspects of the classroom.

I have previously summed up what I have seen in teacher education over time (40 years) from ever changing Government expectations from highly motivated to highly certified to highly qualified to highly effective.  "Which do you want to be?"  I posed to my audience.

Don't get me wrong.  I believe you must love your subject matter to be an effective teacher.  I believe you must love working with students to guide them to greater learning.  I believe you must love this profession to stay in it, irrespective of the huge imperfections and shifting legislative landscape.  I believe you must have great empathy and concern for each child to reach them where they are so that you can help them meet their needs.  But, I also believe that you must have real tools at your disposal to use, frequently, to be flexible and facilitate the learning process so that your students can learn as much as they can, as quickly as they can, as permanently as they can.  I want my students to be propelled into the future.

Yes, have a huge heart; pray for discernment each day; teach from the innermost of your being with all of the energy and excitement you can muster; walk in to your classroom each day with enormous compassion; "reach for the stars," "dream big dreams."  But also search for and acquire as many of the time-tested, research-based tools that you can possibly get to help your students learn as much as they possibly can, as quickly as they can--you owe them that.  During research on my doctoral study, I was astonished (shocked, alarmed) to find there were so many research-based, effective teaching techniques that have been discovered--that I had not known about.  Why hadn't I been exposed to them?  We were still working (only) out of the "teach from the heart" mentality; TKES is not going to allow that.  To the goal of disseminating quality teaching ideas, I continue to post pamphlets, handbooks, and resources to help you out.  Review and use "75 Instructional Strategies" or "Learning is a process, not an event" or "The Perfect Lesson Plan" or "How to pass all 10 TAPS Standards in one lesson" or "Some ideas for new teachers" or "Instructional Strategies That Work" under "Handbooks and Other Resources" posted at the top of this blog.  Need more?  Review "Links for Teachers."

Respectfully,
Glenn

In: Georgia Milestones (standardized test)---Out: CRCT---In: TKES---Out: Standardized Tests for Evaluating Teacher's Effectiveness for Student Achievement

The use of the standardized test that was to judge Georgia teachers' effectiveness on student achievement and therefore contribute significantly to the calculation for the Teacher Keys Effectiveness System, and ultimately the teachers' annual TEM score, is on hold - at least for one year.

Look at the article reporting on the State School Superintendent's thoughts here: AJC

Testing: Saying there is an overemphasis on test scores, Woods added, “We must aggressively lessen this burden.” He also wants a longer moratorium on using scores from the new Georgia Milestones k-12 tests, which roll out this year, to retain children or evaluate effective teaching. 

We were also presented with this update at our school.

(Sorry for the educational alphabet soup, but...)  

As I understand it; start out: Annual TEM score for teachers calculated through the TKES process which is composed of three parts: 1) calculations of student achievement gains determined through teacher-generated SLOs or standardized test results, 2) teachers receiving scores (1-4) on the 10 Standards and 72 Elements outlined in TAPS, and 3) student survey results.

Not even 12 months into the system, currently: 1) student achievement gains from SLOs thrown out [research indicates SLOs can be considered neither valid or reliable], 2) student achievement gains from standardized tests thrown out [my understanding: GA Milestone tests have not even been field tested for validity and reliability].  I would not be surprised if the TEM is thrown out before the end of the school year; that would leave TAPS and the student survey results.  I'd vote for keeping the TAPS only....

Read This: Your TAPS Evaluation Score is up to You--Not Your Evaluator!

It is becoming apparent that my early predictions a year ago of defending your job by collecting, organizing, and updating evidence in notebooks (called paranoid back then) is becoming reality and possibly a necessity.

Your Evaluator may only look for as much evidence as they want to, take time to, or have time to - and then give you a score.  The score may not be a huge concern to them (even if it is a 2 or 1) because the score is not directly related to their certificate.  The teacher's evaluation score is up to the teacher, not the Evaluator.  Let me explain.

At the mid-year evaluation a friend of mine received a 2 on TAPS #6.  The Evaluator looked at two students' grades in the electronic grade book and out of 9 summative grades, those two students had either turned in none or one.  The Evaluator concluded that the teacher was not assessing well and summarily gave the teacher a 2.

The REAL story is that our of 30 or so students in the class, the Evaluator picked the two students who are ill-behaved, in ISS (in school suspension), frequently absent, and/or are two of the most troubled students in the school.  The Evaluator did not look at the entire class' grades, average, or completion status (which s/he was able to do), only the two "problem children."  Now, to me, that is either trying to be a "gotcha," a vendetta of some sort, ill-trained, or incompetence on the part of the Evaluator.  As people say, "That ain't right."  The TKES/TAPS process has been presented as a "totality of the evidence," but the evidence has to be reviewed first.

As a result, the teacher, in his/her defense (and anxiety) had to spend quite some time point out to the Evaluator other students in the same class.  The project turn-in rate and grades were quite high in fact.  Seeing the data, the Evaluator changed the 2 to a 3.

If you have ever been in a position where you had to regularly defend your job, you know the stress it creates, the morale it devastates, and the decrease in your effectiveness.  It creates a terrible work environment - especially mentally.  That teacher looked defeated.

However, in my mid-year conference, my Evaluator indicated that s/he had reviewed some of the evidence I had uploaded into The Platform (I think I have scanned and uploaded about 300 items).  That sounded good to my ears.  To me, that is an indication that s/he is trying to review the totality of the evidence, is doing his/her due diligence, and if there is a question, we can refer to it during the conference in The Platform.

I urge the effective teachers of this state to collect past and present evidence for the TAPS elements, organize it in some fashion that can be easily accessed, and take the evidence to meetings.  If you need suggestions on how to collect evidence, organize it, present it in notebooks, or uploading it into The Platform online, please see earlier blog posts of mine--also review my blog "How to pass all 10 TAPS in one lesson."  If you are going to the GMEA convention in January, stop by the poster presentation session or the Friday evening concert and let's talk.  We'll talk TKES.

Zero TKES/TAPS Stress Now...

I must say, that after realizing how I could document and pass all 10 standards on a day where I was not even teaching has been very liberating.  I am not going to upload any more documents into The Platform.  I am not going to save copies of any more grade reports or data samples.  I am not going to update my notebooks.  I am not going to worry about any more evidence.

If you have not seen the blog post, handbook, or PowerPoint on what I did, I recommend you take a few minutes to view it--it will save you time.

I incorporated the lesson plan from my doctoral study (Doctoral Study Lesson Plan) with the TAPS Standards and Elements and made notations in my lesson for the Evaluator on how I was meeting each Standard that day.  I think it is comprehensive and convincing.  A friend of mine, who hopes to be a principal soon, said that s/he would use it to help prepare his/her teachers for TKES.

The handbook and PowerPoint can both be found on my website on this page: GC-District Walkthrough-PPT.  I prefer the PowerPoint for viewing...

Respectfully,
Glenn

TKES Conversation-January 2015

If you are going to the Georgia Music Educator's Association state convention in Savannah January 29-31, why not stop by have a conversation, share ideas, and discuss TKES?  I'll be at the poster session presenting the results of my doctoral study: "Activating Prior Knowledge with Ques and Questions as a Key Instructional Strategy to Increase Student Achievement in Low Socioeconomic Middle Schools."  The result was a lesson plan introduction that dramatically increased students' achievement compared to the teachers who did not use the lesson plan.

Using archival data, this ex post facto study found a statistically significant difference using an ANCOVA, F(1, 863) = 35.398, p < .000, for the research question investigating the effect on student achievement when teachers specifically activate students’ prior knowledge before using the LFS model of instruction.

The lesson plan from my doctoral study is used in my TKES lesson as well.

I will have copies of my "Saxophone Handbook" for you to review, "How to pass all 10 TAPS in one lesson," and other items that could assist you in a) teaching, b) TKES, c) saxophone instruction, or d) lesson plans.  All of the information is free.

I will be performing at the Friday night concert as well; it should be a good program of music.

Hope to see you there.

How to pass all 10 TAPS in One Lesson

Refer to this link on my website and view the "GC-Demonstrating all 10 TAPS.pdf" handbook.  It is a summary of the ideas written in this blog dated 11-16-14.

The handbook could be titled: How to demonstrate all 10 TAPS in a single lesson without using further evidence.  See what you think....

Effective teachers, effective strategies, and effective assessments may not get noticed through TKES/TAPS evaluation

There are 2 elements to this post: actual effective teaching through effective instructional strategies and assessments, and documenting effective teaching through effective instructional strategies and assessments for TKES/TAPS.

Actual Effective Teaching: The result of my doctoral study was a research based lesson plan design that was flexible for all subjects, all grade levels, and would help the teacher offset some of the effects of low-socioeconomic situations on middle school students’ learning.  It is a very simple design, and it works.  You can view it here: https://sites.google.com/site/gcason123/lesson-plan-design   Briefly:

Relevant Literature:  As the research base increases, there is an emerging picture suggesting that low-SES factors do affect student achievement, students from low-SES environments are likely to have less prior knowledge than their higher-SES peers do, and prior knowledge is a critical variable for learning new content (Barton & Coley, 2009; Planty et al., 2009; Stewart, 2008; Wyner et al., 2008) .  Past researchers have shown that an effective classroom teacher can offset some of the low-SES effects [emphasis added] (American Psychological Association, 2008; Brown, Anfara, & Roney, 2004; Marzano, 2000, 2003; Marzano et al., 2000; Williams, Kirst, & Haertel, 2005). As Marzano (1998) pointed out, there is a relationship between APK and increasing student achievement for low-SES students [emphasis added]. Marzano (2003) also noted that effective teachers increase student achievement approximately 50 percentage points in 1 school year….  Goodwin (2010) noted that the difference in student achievement in a single school year from a highly effective teacher could be a gain as much as a year and a half  [emphasis added] versus a highly ineffective teacher who could increase student achievement a little as one half year—a potential difference in student achievement of an entire school year.

Results:  (Simply put, the students in the classroom whose teacher APK scored 5 points higher than the other classes with a 99.99% certainty.)  The classes where teachers APK had a statistically significant greater increase in achievement, controlling for the pretest and grade-level effect as indicated by their standardized posttest scores, F(1, 863) = 35.398, p < .000, than the students whose teachers did not APK and only used LFS.  The critical region for the F ratio was 3.86, α = 0.05.

Here are the elements that need to be in the lesson (note that every element is the summation of high quality research findings): 

Assumptions: Expectations must be clear to the teacher and clearly and directly communicated to the students.  Learning goals (concepts, skills, and/or relationships) must be specific and directly linked to prior knowledge.  Students’ prior knowledge must be activated before proceeding with the instructional component.  Explicit classroom behavior, participation, and outcome results must be clear to the teacher, and explicitly and directly communicated to the students.  Identifying similarities, differences, and relationships for new content and as they relate to prior knowledge is the strongest instructional strategy.  Practice/homework provides self-pacing and exploring required concepts and skills.

Components: specific curriculum standard, specific learning goal, specific learning activities, general and specific prior standards, specifically activating prior knowledge, essential question, specific explicit directions, specific learning activity structure (beginning, middle, end), specifically identify similarities, differences, and relationships; specific practice opportunities; specific directions for orderly classroom.

Why do I bring that to your attention?  To demonstrate the absurdity of what a teacher might have to do to document effective teaching for Evaluators, Observers, and Teachers in the TKES/TAPS walkthroughs.

Our school had a district walkthrough this past week.  Principals, TKES Evaluators, Assistant Principals, and the like, walked our hallways, went into classrooms with their clip boards, took notes, and had meetings to provide a “snap shot” of the quality and effectiveness of our school.  In the end, they provided a list of areas that were “glow” and areas of “grow.”

Documenting Effective Teaching: The following sample is what I wrote on the board for the day’s lesson.  I literally read every Standard and Element and typed out how/if it applied to the lesson that day.  Simply put, the students had their weekly Thursday playing test.  Because the students know how the procedure works, I normally would write on the board, “TEST: #49.”  But for those who are not familiar with my procedures, subject matter, and instructional techniques, I wrote it all out so that I would get “credit” for meeting the Standards, Elements, and being a good teacher for our school (obviously, there is more to being a good teacher than just this….)

Go straight to your instrument, straight to you chair, and prepare for your playing test.  You may warm up on your own.

1.      Today you will be demonstrating your prior knowledge of Standards 2 and 7 through individual playing in a formal summative test.  Sixth grade will play the first four measures of #49 (you want to demonstrate mastery of notes), and the seventh and eighth graders will play #82 without the repeat (you want to demonstrate mastery of rhythm).
2.      You all need to have a pencil and paper.  You will grade each other, make a brief note as to what needs improvement, and compare your grade with what I give them.  You may not talk during the test.
3.      Grade yourself as well; if you do not like your grade, practice at home some more, and you play it again for a higher score.
4.      To give the best, accurate grade, identify similarities and differences in what you see on the page and what you hear.  Ask, “How does what I hear compare with what I see?”

Prior knowledge to be graded:
Posture, embouchure, tonguing, fingerings, rhythmic understanding, articulation, tone, air speed, rhythmic accuracy, key signatures, steady beat, counting, time signature, evaluating musical performances, listing strength and weakness of performances, and effectiveness of performances

These exercises will be used to develop your skill for the concert December 18 in the gym at 7pm.  We’ve prepared for this test through a series of similar exercises in the book, so I expect you all to make at least an A—probably a 100.  If you want to take a risk, you can play the exercise (correctly) from memory, I can give you 5 points extra credit.  If we have time, we will work on concert music.

If you are familiar with the TAPS standards, you probably see the Standards and Elements in the lesson; you may have seen how I incorporated findings from my doctoral study.  However, to itemize, here is what each statement addresses—in my estimation:

Go straight to your instrument, straight to you chair, and prepare for your playing test [2.6, 7.2, 8.1, 10.4, 10.5, explicit behavior expectations and orderly classroom].  You may warm up on your own [10.5, specific opening of class, activating prior knowledge; differentiation of process, specific practice opportunities].

1.      Today you will be demonstrating your prior knowledge [specific learning goal] of Standards 2 and 7 [1.1, 2.5, explicit curriculum standard] through individual playing [3.4, 5.6, specific learning activity] in a formal summative test [5.1, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7.2, 9.1, 10.5, learning goal is clear to the teacher; explicit directions communicated to students].  Sixth grade will play the first four measures of #49 [5.1, 5.3, 10.5] (you want to demonstrate mastery of notes) [explicit outcome], and the seventh and eighth graders will play #82 without the repeat [5.1, 5.3, 10.5] (you want to demonstrate mastery of rhythm) [1.4, 1.5, explicit outcome].

2.      You all need to have a pencil and paper [7.2, 10.5].  You will grade each other [explicit participation], make a brief note as to what needs improvement [8.2, 10.1, explicit participation], and compare your grade with what I give them [1.7, 3.1, 6.5, 6.6, 7.2, 7.4, 8.3, 10.1, 10.5, explicit participation, specific learning activity].  You may not talk during the test [7.2, 10.5, explicit participation and orderly classroom].

3.      Grade yourself as well [5.2, 6.7, 7.2, 10.5, explicit participation]; if you do not like your grade, practice at home some more [practice/homework], and you play it again for a higher score [6.7, 8.2, 10.5].

4.      To give the best, accurate grade [6.7], identify similarities and differences in what you see on the page and what you hear [10.5, 6.7].  Ask, “How does what I hear compare with what I see?”  [1.2, 4.5, 6.5, 6.7, identify similarities and differences, specific learning activity]

Prior knowledge to be graded: [2.2, 2.3, 3.2, 6.7, 8.6, learning goal specifically and directly linked to prior knowledge]

Posture, embouchure, tonguing, fingerings, rhythmic understanding, articulation, tone, air speed, rhythmic accuracy, key signatures, steady beat, counting, time signature, evaluating musical performances, listing strength and weakness of performances, and effectiveness of performances

These exercises will be used to develop your skill [1.4, 2.3] for the concert December 18 in the gym at 7pm [1.3, 3.8, 6.4].  We’ve prepared for this test through a series of similar exercises in the book [2.2, 2.3, 3.2, learning goal specifically and directly linked to prior knowledge, general prior standards], so I expect you all to make at least an A—probably a 100 [1.6, 4.6, 5.5, 8.5].  If you want to take a risk, you can play the exercise (correctly) from memory [10.5], I can give you 5 points extra credit [1.6, 2.1, 4.1, 4.2, 4.6, 5.2, 5.6, 7.2, 8.5, 8.6, 8.7].  If we have time, we will work on concert music [2.3].

The point?  I make an effort to be a highly effective teacher through research based instructional strategies, techniques, lesson plan design, assessments, paying close attention to the engagement and understanding of my students (formative assessments) etc. on a daily basis,  But, if I were to put “TEST: #49” on the board and proceeded with the test in the manner I did, I would probably have failed the observation walkthrough for that day (and received a “grow”) because the Evaluator/Observers did not understand the depth of what was actually going on.  My attention to detail is driven by the number of 2s given out to teachers, and the vast differences in Observer's and Evaluator’s recording of minutia (to the teacher’s detriment) or omission of details (also to the teacher’s detriment).  It appears that if the teacher does not make everything explicit, it may get overlooked.

I am planning on creating a detailed description (such as the first example above) to go on the board for each walkthrough and observation—especially when the Evaluator is looking for all 10 Standards in a single lesson.  I probably will label the statements with each Standard and Element (such as the second example) and give a copy to the Evaluator when they enter the room.

2s, 2s, 2s....

Please pardon the informality, but in my neck of the woods, they are passing out 2s like candy at Halloween.  I am under the impression that I am to be observed again soon, this time with the emphasis on Section 10: Communication.  I looked through my book to see what I had, when it was used, and the current relevance of my material.  I decided to keep what I had, but  update several areas.  I now have 51 pieces of evidence for Standard 10.  The type of evidence varies based on the Element.

I believe that there are administrators who are judging the teachers without ever asking for, or searching for, evidence; it appears some administrators are going to only judge what they see in the classroom.  I decided to update the material for Section 10 this week, update my table of contents, print out the new TOC, add it to the notebook, and upload it into the TLE Platform.  In addition, I e-mailed my evaluator to let him/her know that I had new evidence located in my notebook and s/he could review the summarized TOC when they came in.  I received a reply of, "Thank you."

It is my understanding that some evaluators will never ask for evidence and never look into the Documentation section of the TLE Platform.  This willful omission and oversight could cause a problem for teachers.

I believe that many of the teachers who received 2s probably did not have evidence/documentation ready or nearby or did not notify their administrator, but I do not know that for a fact.  Perhaps teachers are taking this lightly and thinking that they are "highly qualified" and will do just fine.  It is my recommendation that you keep your evidence current, applicable, and uploaded into The Platform.  If nothing else, it will serve as dated and timed evidence if you ever have to rebut a low score.

In my current estimation (and the way I feel), it is not about highly qualified or even highly effective anymore; it's about highly documented.

Effectively Organizing the TLE Platform

I am very good at doing things twice: first the cumbersome way and then a better way; I've discovered that long-term "learning style" again through uploading documents into The Platform.  My initial uploads seemed precise to me, and then after reviewing them, they were overly complicated and unclear (and probably would irritate the Evaluator).  I offer this procedure:

1.  When you upload a document, you have to specify which Performance Standard with which it will be associated before you are allowed to upload the document.  In the description section on the left, I put the section and element number and the descriptor, "Section 2.3: Plans instruction effectively for content mastery, pacing, and transitions."  Under that, I put the exact titles from my table of contents from my notebook (copy and paste).  It looks like this:

Section 2.3: Plans instruction effectively for content mastery, pacing, and transitions.

Lesson Plans (dated 8/30/13) showing sequential process for section assessment

Lesson Plans (dated 9/9/13) showing integration of curriculum to long-term goals

Example of all Essential Questions for the year for each lesson with mastery items underlined

Essay: §3.4.2 Understanding the Content and Mastering the Skills Through Research-Based Instructional Strategies

Then, click the check box for Standard 2 from the right side of the window, and then click, "Done."  This will create a section on the right that has a tab, "Attach File."  Like other "attach" tabs, it will open a "choose file" where you can select the document, then click, "OK" and it uploads.  You can upload electronic documents from your computer or scanned files.  Use electronic documents if you have them.  I had many samples of handouts I created for class as well as TKES essays - that had identifying titles - and loaded those into The Platform.  The titles of the documents load into The Platform.  

This is where it gets a little odd: I have scanned many documents (300+) into my computer to upload into The Platform.  Each scan automatically gave it a scan number (Scan0235).  I did not rename each file - that would take too long.  To help organize The Platform, I attached the scanned documents in scanned order with the associated Element descriptor in order of the scanned documents.  Meaning: if the Evaluator wanted to see the, "Example of all Essential Questions for the year for each lesson with mastery items underlined," s/he would look at the third scanned document under Section 2.3.

I have documents in my computer in folders such as, "Teaching Techniques," "Handouts," "GC-Publications," and "GC-TKES."

2.  What do you do with all of those scanned documents?  I occurred to me that I file them somewhere for safe keeping.  So, I created a folder, "GC-TKES/TLE Upload Documents/TO DO."  These files were scanned in order from my notebook, so as I use my table of contents from my Word document, I can put them in the right section of The Platform.  I did not scan all of my documents; only the clear, precise ones that showed excellent evidence.

3.  What do you do with the scanned files after you upload them?  They are still located in your, "TO DO" subfolder.  I decided to create a subfolder entitled: "GC-TKES/TLE Upload Documents/Section 1" then one labeled, "Section 2," etc.  That way, if I need to go back and double check a scan/file, I can find it easily.  I know now which scans have been uploaded into what section and what scans I still have to upload.  It looks like this:

GC-TKES

TLE Upload Documents

Section 1

Section 2

etc...

TO DO

Table of Contents

You may recall that I decided to enter my entire table of contents (TOC) into each Standard to show the totality of my evidence.  (You would be correct in inferring that I have a, "preponderance of the evidence" philosophy with this new system.)  I will reload the TOC as my evidence notebook changes.

Instruction during an Observation--preview

From talking with other teachers in different schools, there is a vast difference in the amount of "intensity" for the TKES/TAPS process--for the evaluator and the teacher; this is true of any teacher evaluation system--past, present, and future.  If your schools has promoted a "be calm" atmosphere, that is fantastic; mine has not.  I know of one teacher where the school has put him/her on very close scrutiny and another school where a teacher passed all 10 TAPS Standards with a Level III and did not have to provide any additional documentation.  If you have been observed, or the climate in your school is of particular interest to others, please let me know (e-mail), and I will share your experience anonymously.

Up to now, I had been concentrating on each element in the standards to ensure the Evaluator would observe and document that I had completed the particular performance standard.  While I do not think that is a bad approach, it may not be all inclusive and there may be an easier and better way.  Instead of focusing on the details, it may be more beneficial to focus on the big picture.

The rubric for Performance Standard 3: Instructional Strategies, Level IV indicates that

In addition to meeting the requirements for Level III; The teacher continually facilitates students' engagement of metacognitive learning, higher-order thinking skills, and application of learning in current and relevant ways.  (Teachers rated as Level IV continually seek ways to serve as role models or teacher leaders.)

 and the rubric for Level III indicates

The teacher consistently promotes student learning by using research-based instructional strategies relevant to the content to engage students in active learning, and to facilitate the students' acquisition of key skills.

Now, this is my 22nd year teaching.  I had in my teaching area the elements of Standards 3 & 7 typed up so that I could address each one (as seen in post dated September 9); that was stressing me out.  I think I found a better way.

Ignore the elements.  Teach.  Check for student learning.  Specifically:

• promote student learning by using research-based instructional strategies (I do that)
• engage students in active learning (I do that)
• facilitate the students' acquisition of key skills (I do that)
• students' engagement of metacognitive learning (I found a great way to do that this year)
• higher-order thinking skills (I use my DOK questions for that)
• application of learning (I do that)

I think that this approach will keep me focused on the main thing, student learning, and less on trying to pass off the checklist of elements--hoping the students learn while I perform my teaching.  Now, if they will just stop by and observe me!

Observation Preparation--upon further review

I do not like uncontrolled variables that affect me (or my certificate).  I do not want documents uploaded into The Platform if at all possible.  It was my assumption that I would have my first 20 minute observation this past week, potentially Thursday, then Friday; I was not observed.  However, during that time, I decided that one variable that could slip past was my Evaluator not looking into the cabinets were my lesson plans and evidence were located even though I had informed him/her where the materials were.  To remedy that, I put both on the table where s/he would observe me (I did not have the lesson plans standing up like that; I did that for the picture.)

I also learned something about the teaching process, student interaction process, and the communication process in anticipation for my observation - as I had 12 class periods to anticipate being observed.  I will post that information soon.

Observation Preparation

A colleague of mine was observed the other day.  The Evaluator did not see the lesson plans for the day, which were printed and in a notebook a few feet away.  When the observation was over, the Evaluator requested a copy of the lesson plans (i.e., "evidence," "proof") so that s/he could load them in to The Platform online.

Because we have not gone through this process before, I am still very skeptical and leery of The System.  It has been made clear to us (through meetings & document from the Ga DOE) that if the Evaluator does not see something, then we can submit evidence within 24 hours and it will be uploaded into The Platform.  To me, that automatically implies (a year from now when someone is reviewing your file) that you didn't do something in real time, were told to submit proof so that you could received a good score, you prepared some sort of document, sent it to the Evaluator, and s/he uploaded it to The Platform so that they could backward-document your performance on that element.  I don't think that will look good....

Now, thinking ahead a couple of years...  If I were an Administrator and were to look at a file in The Platform and saw that someone had multiple documents loaded into The Platform for many of the elements, that would be "a red flag" to me that many of the elements were not being demonstrated in real time--the teacher had to keep providing proof that they were doing their job!  Even if the evidence was appropriate, it would be a red flag.  I have been in the legal field as an Administrator, and after reading a bazillion resumes (pardon the slang), I have noticed that some patterns tend to reveal how people really are--not how they say they are.

I suggest to you that all the evidence you have collected and your lesson plans be located in close proximity to the Evaluator's location, AND that the materials be labeled clearly.  We have been told that the Evaluator has the opportunity to review evidence while they are still in the classroom and if they see the documentation, then they do not have to ask for it later, and it will not have to be loaded into The Platform.  Translation: if they observe the behavior in real time &/or see it in your notebook while they are in the room, then they don't have to upload it into The Platform.  This should keep The Platform clean and simple (i.e., you are a good teacher in real time.)

To that end, here is what I sent to my Evaluator today:

Information for my observation/evaluation: all paperwork/evidence for your review is located in the tall wood cabinet to the left of the main door near the "panic buttons."  On the shelf are: daily lesson plans, TAPS evidence for standards 1-10, and extremely detailed lesson plans for 6th grade as they relate/correlate with the Georgia Performance Standards and the Nation Standards.  Notebooks with evidence have table of contents with brief definitions so that you can discern the purpose of that evidence.

I intend that when he enters my room, I will either formally (verbally) or informally (through gestures) ensure that he has located the lesson plans, the TAPS notebooks (Volume 1 & 2), and my National Standards correlation.

Pre-Evaluation Conference

Today I had my pre-evaluation conference.  I had the opportunity to have one in a group meeting or one-on-one with my Evaluation and Assessment Coordinator (EAC, a new job position for our county who is in charge of organizing the TKES process - and probably the new standardized tests).  I requested a one-on-one after our meeting because I heard in the meeting that the administrators/evaluators had actually reviewed our TKES/TAPS self-assessment and would use that information in working with us--that caught my attention, and I decided I wanted to know how my self-assessment would impact me.

After our conference, I got every impression that the self-evaluation would serve as areas of "strengths" and "weaknesses" for them to review as part of their observations.  In addition, I got every impression that the observers would be very careful to notice each and every aspect of the 72 TAPS (Teacher Assessment on Performance Standards) indicators - even though they are not a checklist!  (so they say....)  As we were discussing the impending initial observations, whether they had to printed & in a notebook or could be available on the SmartBoard when requested, it became evident that I should show my EAC what my lesson plans looked like.  She had indicated that "if it isn't in the lesson plan and isn't seen, then the observer would have to ask for further documentation" (I think there is a 24 hour window there to provide documentation).  She reviewed my lesson plan for today, I showed her the different elements, and she seemed like everything the observer would need to see was in there.  When she had a question about, "Where is the differentiation ____?" I showed her where it was, and she seemed satisfied.

I've added about 5 more documents for my notebook (today), will add the summative assessment results from tomorrow to show "data to support differentiation," and will add a couple more articles from research organizations re: 1) Does requiring more math classes each day help kids who struggle with math?  (Answer, No.), 2) Has requiring more math and science classes in the high school increased America's rank in math/science & preparation for the high-tech job market?  (Answer, No.)

Summary: take this very seriously; document everything, put a number on the back of each paper indicating which indicator(s) it will satisfy (i.e., 9.5); create or use a comprehensive lesson plan that has each TAPS element you can put in there.  If you need suggestions, look here or e-mail if you need one specifically for you....

Thanks for checking in.  If you have specific questions, please feel free to e-mail me at: gcason123@gmail.com and I'll get to you as soon as I can.

For those drowning in education acronyms, let me add this in what I believe is hierarchical form:

• TKES: Teacher Keys Effectiveness System is the entirely new evaluation system passed by the Georgia legislature that will be used for all Georgia teachers of record.  It replaces GTOI....oops, sorry: the Georgia Teacher Observation Instrument  :-)
• TAPS: Teacher Assessment on Performance Standards is the set of 10 Standards and 72 Elements/Indicators (not to be used as a checklist) that outline an effective teacher's actions.
• EAC: Evaluation and Assessment Coordinator is a new position in our county, barely similar to the "Instructional Lead Teacher" (ILT) from years ago, that helps coordinate the TKES training, SLO administration, and coordination between the administrators, county, and teachers.  If you don't have one specifically, who is helping you out?
• SLO: Student Learning Objectives is the set of concepts &/or skills (written &/or performed), written by your county teachers, given in a pre-test/post-test format to gauge the amount of student achievement under a specific teacher's direct instruction in non-standardized testing subjects (Connections, non-academic classes, non-CRCT classes, etc.)  The number and amount of student achievement gain will have a significant impact on a teacher's year end evaluation.

If you think I could be helpful to you, your teachers, or your administrators, please feel free to contact me.

This is important, but it won't matter...

If you have read the previous blogs, you should notice that there are practical, real concerns in developing and administering the S.L.O.s (student learning objectives) as part of the new Georgia TKES (Teacher Keys Effectiveness System).  If you haven't read them, please take a moment to do that now....  I'll wait....  Researchers have now compiled evidence that should be taken notice by those in charge (although it is too late for that).  The following statements are from a recent article released by the IES (Institute of Education Sciences); if you haven't signed up for their automatic e-mail notices, you should - it's good stuff - it's the real deal.  I have put a copy of this article in my TKES/TAPS notebook (a picture of my notebook can be seen in a previous blog).

So, from: Gill, B., English, B., Furgeson, J., & McCullough, M. (2014).  Alternative student growth measures for teacher evaluation: Profiles of early-adoption districts.  (REL 2014-016).  Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic.  Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs:

SLOs can be used for teacher evaluation in any grade or subject, but require substantial effort by teachers and principals, and ensuring consistency is challenging [emphasis added].

Use of alternative growth measures that do not depend on state assessments is recent, and little is known about their validity and reliability [emphasis added] or about how they are being used. 

I have subtly raised concerns about the reliability of our SLOs - it is assumed that the teacher will provide a substantial performance task(s) (based on the end of the year expectations) that will show student growth, but because of time limitations, lack of preparation, lack of knowledge, etc., it is conceivable that it may not have happened - it is an unknown variable.  Thus, to me, the reliability of our SLOs is in question....

I have an excellent article, but it is in my TKES/TAPS notebook at school; I'll bring it home and give you the information soon.  The researchers show that SLOs really shouldn't be used in teacher evaluations at all....  It is from the same research institute.

If you have comments or questions, let me know....  gcason123@gmail.com; online portfolio is: https://sites.google.com/site/gcason123/