Faculty Evaluation: A Framework Process (rev. 2014)
This is a system I have developed and used over the past several years for faculty evaluation. This system is based on a modification of the frameworks outlined in Charlotte Danielson's Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching. (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1996; used with permission), along with her The Framework for Teaching: Evaluation Instrument (2013 edition; Princeton, NJ: The Danielson Group) with information from other sources as listed on the first page of the Complete Set of Components.
Other educators may feel free to modify these as resources for your own schools. I simply ask that you reference this site as your source.
I have completely revised these documents from my original work, in order to use the insights from Danielson's 2013 revisions, and in order to align the format with the mission statement at my current school (Cherokee Christian School, Woodstock, GA). Those who wish to use these materials in other schools may find it helpful to arrange the various components in terms of those schools' mission statements, so as to bring teacher supervision and evaluation explicitly in line with the overall mission of the school.
There is much more to effective faculty supervision and evaluation than can be found in these forms alone -- merely using a particular form is not, in itself, going to guarantee effective evaluation. However, I do hope these will be helpful.
I have also asked for input from parents and students. This is sometimes controversial, especially with student input. However, there is no one who observes a teacher more regularly and consistently than the students, and I believe it is vital to get their perspective on the teacher's work. To be sure, that feedback must be taken judiciously, since students are by definition immature. But they can often provide administrators and teachers with valuable insight into specific areas of the teacher's effectiveness. And parents, although they often have contact with teachers only secondhand through their students, can also provide helpful input into the effectiveness of the teacher. The parent form is mailed out to all parents of students of the teachers being evaluated that year, with appropriate name and class at the top. The student form is handed out by teachers in their class, but is collected by the office.
Although I haven't had time to incorporate into this system, you might also check out another helpful resource. Kim Marshall has written a book, Rethinking Teacher Supervision and Evaluation (2009; Jossey-Bass), which covers many of the same ideas. I also ran across a PowerPoint presentation tied to Marshall's work which addresses some of the same concerns I have had. It is online here.
I hope this is helpful. If you have any questions, feel free to e-mail me.
Other educators may feel free to modify these as resources for your own schools. I simply ask that you reference this site as your source.
I have completely revised these documents from my original work, in order to use the insights from Danielson's 2013 revisions, and in order to align the format with the mission statement at my current school (Cherokee Christian School, Woodstock, GA). Those who wish to use these materials in other schools may find it helpful to arrange the various components in terms of those schools' mission statements, so as to bring teacher supervision and evaluation explicitly in line with the overall mission of the school.
There is much more to effective faculty supervision and evaluation than can be found in these forms alone -- merely using a particular form is not, in itself, going to guarantee effective evaluation. However, I do hope these will be helpful.
- The centerpiece of the system is the complete Standards for Effective Christian Teaching. Other evaluation forms in the system are based on these components.
- The explanation of the system will give you an overview of the rationale behind this system of rubrics.
- The overview document outlines the process of supervision and evaluation followed throughout the year, along with the three-track system.
- The Classroom Observation Record is used for scheduled, full-period observations, and is based on the Standards.
- There are three Summative Report Forms, used for year-end evaluations. The complete form is used for most teachers (those in Track II). There are separate forms for teachers in Track I (new teachers) and Track III (teachers with significant weaknesses).
I have also asked for input from parents and students. This is sometimes controversial, especially with student input. However, there is no one who observes a teacher more regularly and consistently than the students, and I believe it is vital to get their perspective on the teacher's work. To be sure, that feedback must be taken judiciously, since students are by definition immature. But they can often provide administrators and teachers with valuable insight into specific areas of the teacher's effectiveness. And parents, although they often have contact with teachers only secondhand through their students, can also provide helpful input into the effectiveness of the teacher. The parent form is mailed out to all parents of students of the teachers being evaluated that year, with appropriate name and class at the top. The student form is handed out by teachers in their class, but is collected by the office.
Although I haven't had time to incorporate into this system, you might also check out another helpful resource. Kim Marshall has written a book, Rethinking Teacher Supervision and Evaluation (2009; Jossey-Bass), which covers many of the same ideas. I also ran across a PowerPoint presentation tied to Marshall's work which addresses some of the same concerns I have had. It is online here.
I hope this is helpful. If you have any questions, feel free to e-mail me.