1 Employee Evaluation Board Policy (GCO) 2 nd Reader Presentation to the Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners August 27, 2019 Jessica Papia, Director Employee Effectiveness Dr. Sonja Brookins Santelises Chief Executive Officer, Baltimore City Public Schools Jeremy Grant-Skinner, Chief Human Capital Officer
Employee Evaluation Board Policy (GCO) Employee Evaluation GCO-RA: Employee Annual Board Policy (GCO) Evaluations GCO-RB: Individual Development Plans & Initial Planning Conferences GCO-RC: Mid Year Performance Reviews GCO-RD: Formal Observation of Teacher-Level Certificated Employees GCO-RE: Performance Improvement Plans GCO-RF: Evaluation Review and Update Requests 2
3 Professional Pride, Regularly, we Validation of received feedback Effort from stakeholders on topics that are Level of Connection Support & related to how with Resources, employee Personnel Supportive Decisions evaluations are Relationships Employee experienced, but Evaluations which are not topics policy or regulation can resolve. Clarity of Future Career Role, Interests Manageable Expectations
Policy GCO: Purpose of Employee Evaluations 4 The Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners (“Board”) is • committed to ensuring excellence and equity in education for each child at every level. The Board requires each employee’s professional performance to be evaluated in a manner which reinforces the leadership role which all staff play in connecting with, supporting, inspiring, and challenging students and contributing to their success . Employee evaluation systems should align with those elements • of professional performance that ensure: the equitable access to educational rigor and supports that contribute to a culture of excellence and academic success for each student; the creation of environments that embody mutual respect and safety; and, the success of district initiatives.
Policy GCO: Purpose of Employee Evaluations (cont.) 5 Employee evaluations provide an authentic assessment of • professional performance and impact, and drive a cycle of employee performance management focused on continuous staff improvement in all roles across the district. As part of a cycle of employee performance management, • employee evaluations should inform systemic leadership development and inform an employee’s career development in Baltimore City Public Schools (“City Schools”). A comprehensive system of employee evaluation establishes the • professional criterion and expectations that will distinguish, support, and retain high performing employees at all levels committed to increasing student success.
An Example: Assistant Principal & Principal Resident Evaluations 6 Clarify Board’s purpose for evaluating employees Explicit connections to impact on students and school stakeholders, continuum of performance quality, support development and align with competencies for principal pipeline Clarify Board’s definition of high quality employee performance Shift from Satisfactory, Unsatisfactory to Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, Ineffective Align processes for feedback, conferences, and observations of practice with our current context Leadership Framework Align mid year with Use planning forms for aligns with core principal process: Data goal setting, identify data competencies of role review, self reflection
Stakeholder Feedback Reflected in Draft Board Policy GCO Since Board Policy Committee 7 • Edit purpose statement to list “equitable access to Strengthen focus educational rigor and supports” first on equity and • Clarify that evaluation trend data should be transparency disaggregated by demographic and geographic characteristics Reinforce • Add purpose statement about growth and career trajectory importance of • Create policy standard about opportunities for career and goal setting within evaluations leadership growth • Create new definitions for Teacher-Level Certificated Employees, Formal Observations, Informal Observations; clarify content experts Increase clarity are included as potential Qualified Observers • Include Board Policies BBA, BLA, and GBM
Stakeholder Feedback Reflected in Draft Regulations Since Board Policy Committee 8 GCO-RA: GCO-RB: Initial GCO-RC: Mid Employee Planning Year Performance Evaluations Conferences Reviews Criteria for on/off Data for mid year Clarify IDP goals are evaluation cycles may reviews should be specific performance include strong discussed earlier in and professional goals performance school year Clarify goals are Growth in employee Include guideline informed by historical performance since referring to employee performance and beginning of year as right to appeal (BLA, reflection in order to potential area of COMAR) increase impact feedback
Considering timeline of implementation Themes We Heard: Board and the varying 1 st Reader Discussion stakeholder feedback on GCO-RD The importance of regular, timely feedback Ensuring GCO-RE highlights feedback and reflection within PIP reviews 9
Gathering Input Before 2 nd Reader: Stakeholder Outreach 10 Following Board 1 st Reader, we reached back out to via email to share potential edits with stakeholders who provided feedback earlier in the policy development process. Edits based on Board 1 st Reader comments and discussion. • Include link to materials from July 23 rd meeting, for other • feedback as well. Charter and ASCBC Operator Led SECAC PCAB Advisory Feedback groups (BTRRWG, charters, employees Union Leaders who provided online or in person feedback)
Gathering Input Before 2 nd Reader: Public Feedback Session 11 On August 15 th , we hosted a public feedback session on proposed Board Policy GCO (Employee Evaluations). 46 Board, union, district, school leader, and educator • participants discussed the purpose of employee evaluations and grounded their discussion in GCO-RD (Formal Observations of Teacher-Level Certificated Staff) Acknowledge Benefit of Desire More Appreciation Variability of Immediate Informal of Process School Feedback Observations Climates Concern About Potential Consider Connection to Demonstrating Impacts on Timeline, Pay Increases All Rubric Retention Stress Communication Indicators
We heard from 5 Students & Parent and Community Members. Student: “Highly effective performances include me actually leaving the • school with some knowledge of what they claim was taught. Effective would mean that it left an imprint but it’s not so deep.” We heard from 13 Employees in BTU Affiliated Roles. If observations are to be unannounced they should be very frequent. Anything less • is not going to give a complete picture of a teacher as a professional. They should not be used for administrators to “catch” teachers doing something wrong. Unannounced observations should be for feedback and growth purposes only. Not • held against teachers. I don’t think unannounced should be used because I don’t believe they would be • fair. Unannounced evaluations support authentic teaching daily. Teachers should be • providing effective teaching practices daily anyways...If you are planning and doing right by our children daily, unannounced observations should be ok. We heard from 3 Employees in PSASA Affiliated or GSS Roles. Principal: “If there was a way for highly effective teachers to not be observed 2 • times a year, then principals may have more time to give additional feedback and provide support in other ways” 12
Stakeholder Feedback: What is Reflected Since Board 1 st Reader 13 The proposed regulation for formal observation of teacher-level certificated employees now retains one announced formal observation each year for every teacher. Feedback Edit Location Employee concern “The first formal observation in a school GCO-RD: Guidelines regarding year for an employee will be announced. All B.6 unannounced formal other formal observations conducted in a school observations, and year will be unannounced, in accordance with employee interest in formal observation guidance maintained and opportunity provided communicated by the Office of Human Capital.” by pre-observation Removed “unannounced” from guideline language, GCO-RD: conferences. Guidelines in order to broaden and reflect expectation that B.7.b-c Initial Planning Conferences occur before the first formal observation in a school year, and the Mid Year Performance Review should occur before the second formal observation in a school year.
Stakeholder Feedback: What is Reflected Since Board 1 st Reader 14 Establishing foundational expectation that employees receive ongoing, formative feedback throughout the year. Feedback Edit Location Consistent feedback Include new guideline to explicitly state “ there GCO-RD: Guidelines regarding the should be ongoing informal observations of B.1 importance of and practice ” and “ employees should receive need for more informal feedback based on informal observations of observations of practice ” practice and formative Include new guideline to explicitly state employees GCO-RD: feedback throughout Guidelines will receive formative feedback within a reasonable the year B.2 amount of time of being observed
Recommend
More recommend
