Delaware Performance Appraisal System II (DPAS II)
Last updated January 27, 2012
Click here for the state's DEEDS web site (Delaware Educator Data System), where you will find a link to the state's official evaluation web page for DPASII (Delaware Performance Appraisal System verions II).
Feb. 1, 2012 - Yesterday's News Journal story about Component 5 this year got some key points wrong. Click here to read that news story.
News Journal:
For this year, the only teacher evaluations that will have a tie to student test scores are certain grade levels in math, reading, social studies, and science – areas that are tested on the state’s Delaware Comprehensive Assessment System.
THE FACTS
For this year, Component 5 will not count as part of the summative rating for any teacher. Summative ratings will only be based upon components 1-4. DOE will calculate a score for Component 5 for DCAS educators in Reading/ELA and Math in grades 3-10 (not social studies and science) in order to determine those educators who would be deemed "highly effective" and would be eligible for the recruitment and retention incentives included in DOE's RTTT plan. Even though DOE is calculating the score for Component 5 for these educators, the score will not be factored into their summative rating this year.
News Journal:
The change is only applicable for the current school year, and it will only be used to award merit pay increases.
THE FACTS
Merit pay does not exist in Delaware’s Race to the Top Plan. For this year, Component 5 scores will be used to determine those DCAS educators who will be eligible for the recruitment and retention incentives to stay in or transfer to yet-to-be-determined high-need schools. DOE has yet to share the other details about the recruitment and retention incentives (There's more to receiving the incentives than just being rated "highly effective.”). Once we have this information we'll share it with everyone.
January 26, 2012
FACTS ABOUT COMPONENT 5 - IN A NUTSHELL
Great news: Agreement reached on Component 5 of DPASII-Revised
We have an agreement with the Dept. of Education and the Governor's office on Component 5 for this year, as well as some confirmation information about future years. The agreement we have reached goes a long way towards meeting our goals of establishing an evaluation system that is fair, valid, reliable, and based in common sense.
Secretary Lowery will be sending out an email message to all educators about these decisions, and I urge you to read it carefully.
Beginning next year, as most of you have heard, there will be no use of school-wide student scores to evaluate any teacher or specialist. As identified by you and your members, this was our top priority for Component 5, since effective evaluations must reflect the work and contributions of individual educators. Teacher evaluation should be based on the difference teachers make for the students they teach in the subject they teach. It is our expectation that when Component 5 is run next year, it will include a full range of “multiple measures” for all educators and specialists.
Secondly, for most educators there will be no Component 5 rating for this year. Only those educators of the two DCAS-tested subjects will receive a Component V score this year. This will allow some DCAS teachers to be eligible for a Highly Effective summative rating, and therefore eligible for incentive and retention bonuses. Details on the incentive/retention program will be finalized and announced later this spring.
For the 2011/12 school year, educator summative ratings will be determined without use of Component V except to identify Highly Effective teachers in Reading, English Language Arts and Mathematics. We were able to modify the Summative Ratings for this year as follows:
- 3 or 4 satisfactory components = Effective
- 2 satisfactory components = Needs Improvement
- 0 or 1 satisfactory components = Ineffective
We have made huge strides working together. Thank you! We will continue to work for the policies and conditions necessary for student success, effective teachers and great public schools.
FACTS ABOUT COMPONENT 5 - DPASS II-REVISED
Component 5
- No school wide scores. School wide scores will not be a part of Component 5 this year, next year or beyond.
- Component 5 will not count toward overall summative rating for 2011-2012 school year for anyone. This year overall summative ratings will be based on Components 1 through 4 only.
- For 2011-2012 only DCAS educators can be eligible for recruitment and retention incentives. Due to the delay in development of Component 5, only DCAS Educators (grade 3 through 10 math and ELA) will be eligible for recruitment and retention incentives this year. DCAS educators will receive a Component 5 rating only to determine eligibility for incentives. Component 5 will not be used for overall summative ratings.
- Non-DCAS educators will not receive a Component 5 rating for 2011-2012. Non-DCAS Educators will only be evaluated on Components 1 through 4.
Overall Summative Ratings
- Highly Effective Rating will not be used this year. Due to delay in development of Component 5, the “Highly Effective” overall summative rating will not be used this year. Component 5 will only be used to determine eligibility of DCAS educators for recruitment and retention incentives. Component 5 will not be used to determine overall summative ratings.
- Overall summative ratings will only be based on Components 1 through 4. For 2011-2012, overall summative ratings will be determined as follows:
- 3 or 4 satisfactory components = Effective
- 2 satisfactory components = Needs Improvement
- 0 or 1 satisfactory components = Ineffective
- Secretary of Education Lowery told a meeting of the Joint House and Senate Education Committee members that school-wide scores (based DCAS mathematics and English Language Arts tests) would NOT be used to evaluate educators, beginning in the 2012-2013 school year. You may remember that this was DSEA’s top priority, as echoed over and over by members and local association presidents.
- For this current year, 2011-2012, evaluations will only be based on Components 1-4, what you do.
Component 5, however, will be run in order to collect data about its implementation and to determine those few educators who might be eligible for monetary “incentives,” i.e., teachers eligible to earn additional compensation by agreeing to move to high-needs schools and/or who teach difficult-to-fill subjects. - As a result of these announcements there are still several critical open issues for the current year that need to be addressed in further conversations with DOE and the Governor’s Office:
- DPAS II Guide for Teachers - published 8/4/11 - revised 8/30/11 (August Revisions)
- Teacher Forms
- Teacher Rubrics
- State Code
- Administrative Code
- DPAS II Guide for Specialists - published 8/18/11 - revised 8/30/11 (August Revisions)
- Specialist Forms
- Specialist Rubrics
- State Code
- Administrative Code
- The beginning of a “Pattern of Ineffective Teaching”
- The requirement of an Improvement Plan*
- A new teacher not being able to earn a Continuing License following their third year.
- school wide DCAS scores
- scores from a group/"cohort" of students, and or
- teacher-specific measures, if they have been approved.
- If only Part I and Part II are available to you, schoolwide measure will be 30%, and cohort measure will be 70% of Component V.
- If only Parts I and III are available, schoolwide = 30%; content specific = 70%.
- If only Part I is available, then the schoolwide measure is 100% of Component V next year.
- No more than ten working days to elapse between Post-Observation Conference and receipt of the Formative Feedback Form [previous timeline was 15 days]
- Observations can begin after the students have been in attendance for five full days and must be completed before the last five full days of student attendance at the conclusion of the school year. (This is clarifying language.)
- Yes, grievances were filed related to what causes an Improvement Plan; student test scores going down resulted in an resulting in an Improvement Plan;
- Teachers and specialists felt that more information/training is needed for new teachers so that they are confident knowing when the DPAS II process is or is not being compromised;
- More training is also needed on appropriate goal-setting;
- More meaningful training for specialists, with specific information about their rubrics; and
- Training will be needed for educators hired after the beginning of the school year.
January 12, 2012, Dover, DE....Huge gains made on Component 5, thanks to your voices
Yesterday afternoon we made huge progress in our efforts to make the professional evaluation system for Delaware teachers and specialists fair, reliable and based on common sense.
How will Components 1 – 4 be used to determine overall summative ratings this year?
In how many areas of each Component will you need to be rated Satisfactory in order to obtain an overall Summative rating of Effective?
and
How will eligibility for RTTT incentive programs be determined this year?
We should know more on these important open issues within the next week or so. As we learn of developments we will share them with you at www.dsea.org/Accountability/DPASII.html , on our Facebook page at www.facebook.com/dseafan, at www.twitter.com/dsea1, and through subsequent “Member Matters” e-mail newsletters. We will also continue to be in close contact with your local association presidents.
Many of them were in Legislative Hall yesterday to attend the hearing in support of their organization and fair, effective evaluations for all. President Jenner will continue to communicate and consult with them often.
DoE, Governor hear your stories about Component 5;
Sec. Lowery
proposes significant changes in Parts II and III for non-DCAS tested teachers and specialists
That's about all we can say at the moment, but it is obvious, from a very recent meeting with DoE that they have heard your stories about how so much of Component 5 just doesn't meake sense for many teachers and specialists.
Local E.A. presidents weigh in
DSEA leaders have just finished meetings with local E.A. presidents in all three counties, and sent a response to Sec. of Education Lillian Lowery based on the feedback from the presidents. Says DSEA President Frederika Jenner, "We're making progress."
Stay tuned.
DSEA is still on record has opposing any use of schoolwide DCAS scores to measure individual teacher effectiveness.
It is most likely that no measures of student assessment beyond the DCAS English/Language Arts and Mathematics tests will be available this year.
DSEA's position is that, until the problems with the DCAS test are corrected (that its floor and ceiling are too narrow to measure progress for many students; that it was administered in many buildings too late, that there are significant technical hurdles to overcome, etc.), these scores should not be used to evaluate anyone's effectiveness.
Stay tuned for news about our efforts to change Component 5 (teacher effectiveness) of DPASII, both this year and for the long-term. Your efforts continue to help:
Tell your story about how Component 5, as currently defined, just doesn't make sense.
Your stories are making a difference! Keep letting members of the Education Committees in the General Assembly how Component 5 as currently defined will not measure your effectiveness as a teacher, your effectiveness to do the job you were hired to do!
For a list of names and contact information, click here.
Click here for the current Power Point that DSEA staff and leaders are using in building presentations up and down the state so that all teachers and specialists are armed with the most up-to-date information.We strongly urge members to contact their local leaders or UniServ director to schedule an information session so that everyone can benefit from the questions and answers and general discussion around this ever-changing subject.
Work on developing student assessments for Part III of DPASII-Revised continues
Work does continue, of course, on building a list of tests from which teachers and specialists may choose.
Cohort 3: Business/Finance & Marketing, Family & Consumer Science, Technology Education, Health Sciences, Agriculture, Skilled & Technical Science, and Driver’s Ed
Cohort 4: Counselors, Librarians, Educational Diagnosticians, Physical & Occupational Therapists, Psychologists, Speech/Language Pathologists, Social Workers, Visiting Teachers, and Special Education working with DCAS Alt.
These volunteers will meet and work with DoE staff at the Dover Sheraton on these dates:
December 14 and 15, 2011
January 11 and 12, 2012
February 14, 2012.
Heard anything outrageous about DPASII-Revised in your building? during training? Click here for DSEA's version of Urban Legends! There are a lot of rumors and false information circulating. Click here to get the truth.
We strongly advise every teacher and specialist to download their DPASII Guide and read it. You will want to know what your evaluator is required to do, look for, etc. during your evaluation. These guides are official documents. To keep up to date on changes to DPASII, please also know that the Dept. of Education will post what are called "non-regulatory guidance" documents. These are also official, and can be found on the DoE web site under "supplementary information." This is where official updates will be made to Component 5 - Student Progress.
There is valuable information here, including the evaluation rubrics that were not included in last year's guides. It is imperative that members know what their evaluators will be evaluating them on. This guide includes much more detail than its predecessor, detail that DSEA fought for in order to have something official to determine if an evaluation was conducted properly or not.
(from DEEDS web site)
DPAS II For Teachers
What's new in DPASII for 2011-2012?
1. An assessment criterion has been added in Components 1 (Planning and Preparation) and 3 (Instruction) for teachers and specialists
2. Component 4 (Professional Responsibilities) will be assessed throughout the evaluation process
3. Rubrics will be used during the evaluation process:
The DPAS II rubrics can be found in Section II of each DPAS II Guide. These rubrics provide a focus for conference discussions between the teacher and evaluator. This allows both parties to reach a common understanding of the specialist’s performance.
Evaluators should use the rubrics as a guide to organize relevant evidence of teacher performance when writing DPAS II documentation.
Teachers should also use the rubrics as a reflective and self assessment tool.
4. DoE will monitor the quality of DPASII documentation
Conducted by DoE staff in collaboration with the districts' "expert evaluators."
All information strictly confidential; no evaluation documents will leave the site or be specifically referenced.
Review criteria will help ensure evaluation documents provide: objective, specific, and relevant evidence of teacher performance and areas for recommendation; and supportive, specific and actionable guidance, including timelines, for any recommendations and/or expectations to improve performance.
5. There are new, interim procedures/regulations now in place for Component 5 - Student Progress section.
Evaluation ratings to be fairer, more logical than proposed by DoE
September 8, 2011....Pending approval by the State Board, the ratings for teacher and specialist evaluation for 2011-2012 will remain the same as currently written, under these conditions:
“Unsatisfactory Student Growth” in Component 5 will NOT result in -
* Improvement Plans will be required for “Needs Improvement” ratings in Components 1-4.
As you may have read in the September 2011 issue of DSEA ACTION! (see page 8), DSEA questioned DoE about their decision to raise the bar for the current school year, the “interim” year of DPAS-II Revised, beyond what will be expected for the school year 2012-2013.
As mentioned in ACTION!, DSEA leaders asked to meet with Secretary Lowery to discuss this issue. She and her staff listened carefully, heard what we were saying, and agreed that the Rating system for the current interim year should be as originally intended.
In EIGHT OF NINE ratings areas, the original rating system treats educators more fairly than in the ratings plan submitted by the Secretary. That is why we argued for keeping the rating system as already adopted. It is still a problem, one we must watch-dog tenaciously this year.
That one area is where you will be rated "Needs Improvement" if Component 5 is Unsatisfactory, but you are successful in Components 1, 2, 3 and 4. This is a big problem. It assumes, we would argue, that if you do everything right (Components 1-4), the result could be that Component 5 is not satisfactory. And we can predict that most teachers and specialists will fall into this category. We also know that most teachers and specialists won't have student measures tied directly to their subject matter or specialty. So it is very possible, some would say likely, that a good number of teacher will be rated "Needs Improvement" when their school scores and/or student cohort scores don't measure up.
You can control Components 1-4. You cannot control Component 5 for students you don't have. So we expect many members, if teachers/specialists are rated in Component 5 this year, will be given a "Needs Improvement" rating. That rating, by the way, by state statue, is considered Satisfactory.
Small comfort. It is important that we be able to show the lack of logic and fairness with this rating system, so that we have amunition to fight it. Masking it this year with an Effective rating, when it will be Needs Improvement in 2012-2013 won't help us fix the system, or be fair to teachers and specialists when 2012-2013 rolls around, their rating is threatened, and we have no information to show why it does not reflect a teacher's ability to teach.
Given the lack of fair ways to measure student growth this year, we have been adamant that there be no Improvement Plans issued or "Patterns of Ineffective Teaching" established this year because of a negative rating in Component 5.
Secretary Lowery did indeed recognize the need for 2011-2012 to be a “development” year since Component 5 is not yet complete. As a result, whatever your rating in Component 5, it will not begin a “Pattern of Ineffective teaching,” require an Improvement Plan, or negatively affect a newer teacher’s ability to earn a continuing license following his/her third year of successful teaching.(A" new teacher" is a teacher who began teaching in 2010-2011 or 2011-2012.)
To see a two page-chart which explains the Summative Ratings for this current iinterim year (pending State Board approval), click here.
Adds DSEA President Frederika Jenner, “As has been DSEA’s position, we wanted to avoid both short-term and long-term negative effects of an Unsatisfactory rating in Component 5 this year. Let’s continue the rating system as it is, collect our members’ experiences with the Component 5 rating system for this interim year, keep developing assessment tools, and then we’ll see where we are for next year. The more we are learning about problems with training, problems with how the Work Groups are not being llistened to, we may change our position. But for now, it is imperative that teachers and specialists share ”
Our goal: a fair and reliable evaluation system
August 11, 2011....As you know, there are new regulations for teachers, specialists, and administrators in DPAS II (revised) which go into effect in the 2011/12 school year. The critical work related to Component 5 and multiple measures is not complete and will continue through the next school year.
June 16, 2011...
Teachers and Specialists:
What you need to know about changes to the evaluation system for next year, 2011-2012 -
an interim year
Nuts and bolts regulation changes, at-a-glance
Print out a pdf version of this information about DPASII-Revised here.
Print out a Word document of this information about DPASII-Revised here.
These changes require multiple measures of student growth for every discipline and subject area, measures which are not yet completely developed and approved. Since that work will continue next year, DoE is proposing what they are calling an interim or developmental year, whereby student growth will be determined by using a combination of three types of student growth measures:
Why implement a system before it is completely ready?
According to DoE, it is because some form of student growth measure tied to student assessment is required by both our regulations and Delaware’s Race to the Top application.
The Secretary of Education has agreed that, given this situation, there will be no negative consequences for any teacher or specialist because of a negative rating in Component V. What this means is that no Improvement Plans will be required next year based on Component V. Improvement Plans for components I-IV will still be applicable.
Each of the five components of DPASII-Revised is still worth 20% of the total evaluation.
All teachers, specialists and administrators will be trained during the 2011-2012 year in all components of DPASII-Revised, not just Component V.
In order for an administrator to evaluate you, he/she is required to participate in the DOE sponsored DPAS II training, but must show that his/she understands it, including completing all tests,demonstrating knowledge of how to correctly use the rubrics, and therefore, demonstrate that he/she can effectively and faithfully evaluate staff. Your evaluator must in fact be "calibrated" (the term DoE uses) in order to evaluate you.
The difference between Effective and Highly Effective ratings are being redefined now. The current regulations link Effective and Highly Effective ratings to "a year's worth of student growth" and "more than a year's growth," which are impossible to define. Stay tuned.
What will Component V look like?
During this interim year -
30% - school-wide average DCAS result
30% of Component V will be a school-wide average DCAS result in either mathematics or English Language Arts (whichever score is better) and will be used for all teachers and specialists (called Part I).
20% - student cohort measure
20% of Component V will be a "Student Cohort Measure" for all teachers and specialists in both DCAS and non-DCAS areas (called Part II).
For educators in DCAS-tested areas, the cohort will include all students that the educator teaches in that tested content area.
For educators in non-DCAS-tested subjects and areas, with agreement of building administrator, these teachers and specialists will identify a DCAS-tested area from which to select a cohort of students that they work with regularly. The identification of the cohort should be supported by data analysis for the educator’s/specialist’s specific school.
50% - Content-area specific assessment measure (not DCAS)
50% of Component 5 will be a content-area specific assessment measure (not DCAS), if available (called Part III). Very few have been approved by DoE to date. Development work continues next year.
Is this a value-added type of evaluation?
No. “Value Added” systems predict student growth. They predict the amount of growth your students should achieve based on previous performance, and then assess your performance based upon the amount of student progress made toward that predicted target. The Delaware system is designed to evaluate you based on actual student growth between two designated points in time.
Interim Plan Year does mean interim, not permanent
The interim plan is just for school year 2011-12. Next year, DSEA leaders, staff, and members will continue their work to determine the elements of Component V for 2012-13 and beyond. DSEA leaders and staff are not pleased with the student cohort measure. We believe that once the content/subject specific multiple measures are developed and approved, the student cohort measure should be eliminated.
The current percentages attached to the three parts of Component V also need to be reconsidered. Lowery, dated 5-19-2011: “These percentages (for student growth measures) are recommended for the first year of implementation ONLY. Once operational information informs further discussion, it is possible that the percentages in future years may warrant rebalancing based on stakeholder input. Further development and approval of Part III measures will also necessitate additional discussion and development of policy for the 2012-2013 school year and beyond.”
Your feedback next year is essential
Please share your experiences with the revised DPAS II system with your local leaders. Let them know what is working well and what needs to be improved. With this information, DSEA can work with DOE to correct situations that are unfair or unworkable.
For example, please monitor the selection of your student cohort. DOE has defined the teacher’s cohort as “all the students they teach in that content area to include reading and math, grades 3-10.” For specialists or non-core tested subject areas, the cohort will include students that the specialist/non-core teacher regularly sees. The scores for these students in a DCAS test area will be used. According to DOE, “The size of the cohort will likely be a minimum of 25 students; but administrators will determine exceptions to the guideline as necessitated by educator assignment.”
If you were working in Delaware when DPAS II was first adopted, you may remember that it was piloted for two years, in Appoquinimink and Caesar Rodney, with improvements made that came directly from feedback from teachers and specialists.
Please document and share your experiences throughout the 2011-12 school year. Your concrete examples and feedback will help us to secure an evaluation system where educator accountability is based upon fair and reliable measures of their performance.
Nuts and Bolts of DPASII Regulations for 2011-2012 implementation
Appraisal Cycles
If you are rated Highly Effective, you will have a minimum of one announced observation/year, with summative evaluation done every two years.
If you are an experienced “Effective” teacher, you will have a minimum of one announced observation/year, and one Summative evaluation per year.
If you receive less than four Satisfactory ratings, you will be placed on an Improvement Plan, during which time you will receive one announced and one unannounced observation.
Novice teachers will have a minimum of two announced observations/year, one unannounced/year, with a Summative written each year.
Your license
Continuing license: You must have had two out of three years of Satisfactory performance. After next year, a Satisfactory rating in Component 5 student achievement must be achieved.
Tenure/Due Process Rights: If you were hired prior to 2009-2010, your due process rights remain the same, even if you change districts. If you were hired after 2009-2010, you have to have at least two years in the same district, with two of three years of Satisfactory ratings in Component 5. The years in the same district do not have to be consecutive years.
Reminder: “Tenure” guarantees you due process rights if your school board decides to terminate your services. Having due process rights (the ability to face your accuser, defend yourself, call witnesses) means that you cannot be fired "at will."
"Tenure" in DE does not mean your job is guaranteed. In fact, the word tenure is not part of Delaware law.
Ratings
"Highly Effective" shall mean that the teacher has earned a Satisfactory Component rating in four of the five Appraisal Components and that the teacher's students on average achieve high rates of student growth (yet to be defined)
"Effective" shall mean that the teacher has received a Satisfactory Component Rating in at least three Appraisal Components including the Student Improvement Component, and the teacher’s students have not achieved high rates of student growth (yet to be defined)
"Needs Improvement" shall mean that the teacher has received one or two Satisfactory Component Ratings including a Satisfactory rating in the Student Improvement Component; or the teacher has received three or four Satisfactory Component Ratings, and the teacher has received an Unsatisfactory rating in the Student Improvement Component.
"Ineffective" shall mean that the teacher has received zero, one, or two Satisfactory Component Ratings out of the five Appraisal Components, and the teacher has received an Unsatisfactory Component Rating in the Student Improvement Component.
If a teacher's overall Summative Evaluation rating is determined to be "Needs Improvement" for the third consecutive year, the teacher's rating shall be re-categorized as "Ineffective."
“A pattern of ineffective teaching” shall be based on the most recent Summative Evaluation ratings of a teacher using the DPAS II process. Two consecutive ratings of "Ineffective" shall be deemed as a pattern of ineffective teaching. Two consecutive years of Ineffective, or any combination of Needs Improvement and Ineffective each of three consecutive years will result in a “Pattern of Ineffective Teaching” which can lead to termination.
Improvement Plans
An Improvement Plan shall be developed for a teacher who receives an overall rating of "Needs Improvement" or "Ineffective" on the Summative Evaluation or a rating of Unsatisfactory on any Appraisal Component in the Summative Evaluation regardless of the overall rating (except related to Component V next year).
An Improvement Plan shall also be developed if a teacher's overall performance during an observed lesson is unsatisfactory. This unsatisfactory performance shall be noted by the evaluator on the Formative Feedback form by noting "PERFORMANCE IS UNSATISFACTORY" and initialing the statement.
Challenge process
Your evaluator must meet with you and his/her supervisor, both of whom must be certified evaluators, i.e. "calibrated."
January 7, 2009....
DPAS II - Yes, you alone set your goals
The Dept. of Education has sent out several letters to district superintendents and other administrators regarding clarifications about DPAS II.
Here's the gist of the latest letter:
1. The purpose of this new evaluation system is "enhancing skills and knowledge for all educators through professional growth, continuous improvement and quality assurance." The letter continues: "The process has been carefully designed to fulfill that purpose, so it is essential that everyone continue to follow the process and procedures as outlined in the Guides and in other resources available online."
2. Goal setting: By this time of year (January), a personal, measurable goal has been set by each educator, focused on improving student achievement. More than one goal is allowed, but only one goal is required. That's right: the teacher or specialist sets his/her goal(s), not your administrator. Refer to this letter or to the Guide to back you up. We have had more calls about this new part of DPAS II than any other issue.
** You have had by now a conference with your evaluator "to review how the teacher/specialist-developed goal(s) fit under the umbrella of the school goals, and how the measurable outcomes would be determined.
**
You are now gathering data to substantiate the progress toward your goal(s).
**
You are monitoring your goal(s) and making adjustments during the year, if necessary.
3. Formative observations: Rich discussions have taken place during the pre and post observation conferences with your evaluator. The "Formative Feedback Form's" content should simply be a verification of what was observed and then discussed at your Post Observation Conference.
4. Professional Responsibilities Reporting: All forms are to be completed and submitted to your evaluators no later than January 31.
5. For teachers hired mid-year: Upon completion of the required Frameworks and DPAS II Process and Procedures Training, it is up to the individual districts to make the determination as to the amount of the process that must be completed by the spring of the year in which those teachers/specialists were hired.
6. New teachers: All teachers holding an Initial Licence must receive two out of three effective ratings in a Summative Evaluation in order to be issued a Continuing License.
Because of this extenuating circumstance, those hired in mid-year may request an extension of this Initial License until the end of their third full year. So, it is appropriate for mid-year hires to receive their first Summative Evaluation at the end of their first full year. Adds DoE: "It is highly appropriate and strongly suggested that at least one Formative Observation be held during their initial months of hire."
Assistance available from the Dept. of Education
DPAS II Process and Procedure Refresher Sessions
These sessions provide additional opportunities for discussion and honing of skills of those who are DPASII trainers within their district. Administrators may also send additional staff members to expand their existing teams of trainers.
Improvement Plan Workshops
These workshops are designed for any administrator who has yet to attend a DoE workshop to build a common understanding of the improvement plan process.
Transitioning from DPASI to DPASII - special considerations
July 16, 2008.... DPAS II, the second version of the Delaware Performance Appraisal System, will be implemented in all public schools (including charter schools) for teachers, specialists and administrators this fall.
DOE is collaborating with DSEA and DASA (DE Association of School Administrators) to put the finishing touches on changes to the DPAS II evaluation system for teachers, specialists and administrators.
The districts that used the new statewide evaluation system this past year were surveyed, interviewed and participated in focus groups this spring, and their input was heard loud and clear!
As a result, a few substantive changes will be made to the system before it rolls out to all districts this fall, in addition to a number of editorial changes.
Substantive changes to DPAS II for 2008-2009
Timelines
No more than ten working days to elapse between observation and Post-Observation Conference [no timeline existed before]
Individual Improvement Plans
1. Clarified that entire lesson must be unsatisfactory for an IIP to be triggered by the observation.
2.
Modified Formative Feedback Forms to reflect those clarifications
3.
Deleted the Recommendations for Individual Improvement Plan Form which was to be filled out before the Improvement Plan Conference by both teacher/specialist and evaluator. All parties felt this was awkward and cumbersome.
Professional Responsibilities Form
Radically modified to more closely align with the criteria for the component and respond to educators’ concerns about the seeming requirement for extra-curricular activities.
You can print these regulation changes to the Guides (Go to the DoE DPASII web site.) and then insert them in your Guide if you want. We expect that most districts will do the same and make them available so that everyone has updated Guide by the beginning of the year.
Though important, DoE, DSEA and DASA feel that the changes will not represent a problem for those who have already been trained in the process. They largely represent clarifications or they make parts of the DPAS II process less cumbersome.
How did it go in 07-08?
Appoquinimink E.A. leaders report that there were problems with the timing of some post-observation conferences, and situations where there have been concerns about whether an Improvement Plan was implemented properly.We communicated to DoE that the period between observations and post-observation conferences needs a specific timeline that allows for the challenge process to take place before the imposition of an improvement plan
Also of note:
##
