5.3 Program Evaluation
Candidates design and implement program evaluations to determine the overall effectiveness of professional learning on deepening teacher content knowledge, improving teacher pedagogical skills and/or increasing student learning. (PSC 5.3/ISTE 4c)
ITEC 7460
GSAPS Review/Current Reality
Action/Evaluation Plan
In ITEC 7460, I conducted a GSAPS Review which assessed the current reality of our curriculum teams and the administrative efforts to support them. Then, through a SWOT analysis, I decided what opportunities we had as a school to improve our performance and outlines the roadblocks to our progress. Next, I outline an action plan that seeks to convert some of the low assessed items on our GSAPS Review to higher scores. Finally, I lay out an evaluation plan that measures the success of each goal we undertake in the process of improving. The entire set of documents is put together in a paper for review at our school.
In the first phase of the analysis of my school’s performance, I assess our current performance according to the standards listed in the Georgia School Assessment of Performance Standards (GSAPS) rubric. What I found is that teachers had a clear idea of what the school’s LSPI was, and they understood that communicating high expectations for student learning was necessary for student progress. Further, teachers were aware of cultural differences and the respect for students with various needs. So, our school rated at least “Operational” in two categories. However, our school needed practice in getting the right kind of professional learning for teachers and making sure that teachers felt supported in the implementation of new ideas. We only scored “emerging” in these categories. In fact, this theme rang through nearly all of my work for the Capstone and Coaching projects in the coursework I did for this degree: teachers are simply not going to buy into professional development when it a) doesn’t address the actual problems they have and b) takes them too many steps to implement or rearranges too much of their environmental control in the process. So, I found out specifically from this review that gaps in the provision of precise or needed professional development were directly related to the Weaknesses, Threats, and Opportunities we faced in making changes to improve our performance as a school.
When I performed the SWOT analysis, I discovered that teachers were actually fearful of making changes to their programming because they were being evaluated on the was their students performed on standardized tests. Since they had nearly all reached “average or better” performance - a good thing! - they had stopped innovating or listening to professional development. They were, in a sense, scared to change what was already working well enough. The Action Plan, therefore, outlines a better approach to deepening teacher content knowledge: instead of planning professional development without asking teachers, it suggests forming cohorts around interest and levels in each department to deepen content knowledge as needed. Then, to increase student learning, teachers must feel supported by the administration when they extend themselves and take risks to push students to standards they might initially fail to achieve. The teachers must have confidence that their administrators will not evaluate them until the teachers themselves are comfortable with what they have achieved. This might involve adjusting evaluation schedules and maybe even adding a lead teacher to play a role of practice evaluator before the admin does the real job.
In completing this artifact, I learned, unfortunately, that a division exists in my school between the teachers and administrators. The gap is wide. Teachers resent not being listened to when they ask for help in certain areas. Then, resentment grows when they have to use their own time to adopt practices they don’t want to solve problems they don’t have. Administrators have to watch out for the progress for the school, but they forget that teachers operate out of fear of salary loss if they don’t perform well in our county. Administrators in our school get high ratings for being fair, actually, but they are not rated well for listening to the faculty’s desires for the types of professional development we receive. In order to improve student progress at our school, teachers, who operate on the ground level, need personable support and encouragement when trying out new things that they choose to work on.
In performing the GSAPS review, SWOT, and the Action and Evaluation Plan, I identified areas of performance that we could work on as a faculty to improve our relationship with administration and teachers. To best serve our students, teachers are going to have to feel as if they are supported in risk-taking. The action plan, which resulted from identifying the gaps, name two major steps we can take that are not about achieving standards, for once. Simply, we can ask teachers which problems need solving, and then we can have peer teachers lead some of the charge in helping others to achieve at high levels.
GSAPS Review/Current Reality
Action/Evaluation Plan
In ITEC 7460, I conducted a GSAPS Review which assessed the current reality of our curriculum teams and the administrative efforts to support them. Then, through a SWOT analysis, I decided what opportunities we had as a school to improve our performance and outlines the roadblocks to our progress. Next, I outline an action plan that seeks to convert some of the low assessed items on our GSAPS Review to higher scores. Finally, I lay out an evaluation plan that measures the success of each goal we undertake in the process of improving. The entire set of documents is put together in a paper for review at our school.
In the first phase of the analysis of my school’s performance, I assess our current performance according to the standards listed in the Georgia School Assessment of Performance Standards (GSAPS) rubric. What I found is that teachers had a clear idea of what the school’s LSPI was, and they understood that communicating high expectations for student learning was necessary for student progress. Further, teachers were aware of cultural differences and the respect for students with various needs. So, our school rated at least “Operational” in two categories. However, our school needed practice in getting the right kind of professional learning for teachers and making sure that teachers felt supported in the implementation of new ideas. We only scored “emerging” in these categories. In fact, this theme rang through nearly all of my work for the Capstone and Coaching projects in the coursework I did for this degree: teachers are simply not going to buy into professional development when it a) doesn’t address the actual problems they have and b) takes them too many steps to implement or rearranges too much of their environmental control in the process. So, I found out specifically from this review that gaps in the provision of precise or needed professional development were directly related to the Weaknesses, Threats, and Opportunities we faced in making changes to improve our performance as a school.
When I performed the SWOT analysis, I discovered that teachers were actually fearful of making changes to their programming because they were being evaluated on the was their students performed on standardized tests. Since they had nearly all reached “average or better” performance - a good thing! - they had stopped innovating or listening to professional development. They were, in a sense, scared to change what was already working well enough. The Action Plan, therefore, outlines a better approach to deepening teacher content knowledge: instead of planning professional development without asking teachers, it suggests forming cohorts around interest and levels in each department to deepen content knowledge as needed. Then, to increase student learning, teachers must feel supported by the administration when they extend themselves and take risks to push students to standards they might initially fail to achieve. The teachers must have confidence that their administrators will not evaluate them until the teachers themselves are comfortable with what they have achieved. This might involve adjusting evaluation schedules and maybe even adding a lead teacher to play a role of practice evaluator before the admin does the real job.
In completing this artifact, I learned, unfortunately, that a division exists in my school between the teachers and administrators. The gap is wide. Teachers resent not being listened to when they ask for help in certain areas. Then, resentment grows when they have to use their own time to adopt practices they don’t want to solve problems they don’t have. Administrators have to watch out for the progress for the school, but they forget that teachers operate out of fear of salary loss if they don’t perform well in our county. Administrators in our school get high ratings for being fair, actually, but they are not rated well for listening to the faculty’s desires for the types of professional development we receive. In order to improve student progress at our school, teachers, who operate on the ground level, need personable support and encouragement when trying out new things that they choose to work on.
In performing the GSAPS review, SWOT, and the Action and Evaluation Plan, I identified areas of performance that we could work on as a faculty to improve our relationship with administration and teachers. To best serve our students, teachers are going to have to feel as if they are supported in risk-taking. The action plan, which resulted from identifying the gaps, name two major steps we can take that are not about achieving standards, for once. Simply, we can ask teachers which problems need solving, and then we can have peer teachers lead some of the charge in helping others to achieve at high levels.