Running Head: TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS 1

Teacher Effectiveness

at Environmental Charter School

Natalie Torti

Gannon University
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
2

Teacher Effectiveness at Environmental Charter School

Using the ASCDs Snapshot Survey of School Effectiveness Factors, I was able to

rethink and renew my vision of our school community. In my analysis, a pattern emerged when

answering questions of consistency across the school or for checklist items that asked about if

someone checks to ensure practices are consistently in place. The lowest scores for question one

and highest scores for question 2 were for these habits: someone checks to ensure that teachers

address essential content, specific achievement goals are set for the school as a whole, clear

rules are procedures pertaining to school-wide behavior have been established (ASCD).

This brought me to the conclusion that the area that needed focused was teacher oversight

and systematization of our practices surrounding teacher effectiveness. This need has been

anecdotally expressed by our school community, but it was eye-opening to see the data indicate

that as well. Our teachers are incredible and the instructional coaching team does a great job of

making sure teachers are supported. Where the system seems to break down is when an

administrative decision is needed especially if that decision will hinder teacher autonomy, or

frankly, make the administrators play bad cop. But in any organization that is a necessary role.

This problem came clearly into focus as I reviewed the research from The New Teacher

Project, and found myself identifying with many of the problematic outcomes of evaluation and

compensation models (Keeling, Weisberg, Saxton, & Mulhern, 2009). I also found myself

researching more information about Pittsburgh Public Schools RISE system of evaluation and

envying the progress they have made through the grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates

Foundation (Fraser, 2015).

TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
3

Gap Analysis

To get a better look at the systems we have in place at Environmental Charter School, I

broke the idea of teacher effectiveness into three parts: evaluation, compensation, and

professional development. These components taken together, create the system of teacher

oversight and support at Environmental Charter School. To investigate these procedures, I

researched through the Environmental Charter Schools 2017-2018 Employee Handbook,

memos/emails concerning compensation models, and meeting notes.

Current State of Evaluation

According to the ECS Employee Handbook, each supervisor is only required to do periodic

performance reviews. The language around this review is vague, and does not get into the

specifics of the requirements for all teachers to have two formal observations, and several walk

through observations before their evaluation each year (ECS, 2017). In an email sent to staff,

each year the building principals explain the evaluation process for the year. For the past several

years it has remained that a teacher creates a professional goal, meets with their supervisors

(principal and coaches) about this goal, and all observations are documented and communicated

through the Danielson framework (Cribbs, 2017).

Desired State of Evaluation

While I appreciate that the ECS Employee Handbook is written for all employees and not

just teaching faculty, I wonder if the inclusion of a more direct description of our evaluation
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
4
policy would be worthwhile for communication. Although the process often changes slightly for

year to year, I believe the more formalized and clear the communication is about the process is,

the better the faculty can access it when they have questions.

While I believe the goal setting with teachers and using Danielson model as a basis for

conversations is a great start, at the end of the process we still receive the same satisfactory or

unsatisfactory mark that drives the indifference described in the Widget Effect (Keeling,

Weisberg, Saxton, & Mulhern, 2009). I agree with the authors, that not only should more

descriptive distinctions be given to teachers. The outcomes should be tied to real results for the

teacher. I hope to implement a model closer to the RISE evaluation and compensation system

Pittsburgh Public Schools has developed. This would allow evaluations to mean new ladders of

opportunity for teachers to grow as well as rewarding teacher excellence (Fraser, 2015).

Current State of Compensation

According to an addendum to the ECS Handbook, the ECS Compensation model is a typical

step scale that increases compensation each year. An unsatisfactory rating on an evaluation

negates the year and does not allow the teacher to move up a step (ECS, 2017). This

compensation model was voted on at the end of last school year through several meetings. The

previous compensation model allowed for teachers to move into different tracks based on

competency, but faculty complained that the documentation of competency fell to them to prove

and the work excluded many who had families or little time to complete the portfolio.

In addition to the salary steps, Merit pay will be awarded for activities that align with the

strategic plan and improve the school in the areas of: outreach, academic excellence, innovative
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
5
teaching, leadership, service to the school, and exceeding expectations . The merit based pay is a

point system which is designed and awarded by a merit committee. The committee awards points

based on applications. The total number of points a teacher receives and divided by the total

points awarded to all faculty then multiplied by $50,000 (ECS, 2017). So if a teacher is awarded

100 merit points, but the faculty total is 10,000, the teachers merit pay would be 500 dollars.

Desired State of Compensation

After reading the Widget Effect and researching Pittsburgh Publics model, I believe ECS

has taken a step in the wrong direction with our new compensation model (Fraser, 2015). The

previous model called Competency Based Growth compensation, really focused on and

rewarded the tenets of good instruction and innovation that we hope to see in our faculty

(McCann, 2017). I personally benefitted greatly from this system, and I know it led to my

professional development in ways I cannot fathom having done another way. The current model

rewards longevity rather than excellence.

Current State of Professional Development

Professional development at ECS is mandated to be 4-5 days at the beginning of the year

usually on topics that the school is focused on for the year, such as training in PBL or

differentiation (ECS, 2017). These topics are selected by principals, coaches, and administration

and usually focus on an area of growth for the school as a whole. The rest of mandated PD is

delivered on one day a quarter that we have inservice and one hour a week after school (ECS,

2017). Before this summer, the weekly PD was delivered in 4 parts. One week was reserved for

whole staff training and meetings, one week was reserved for citizen circles which were
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
6
teacher driven projects or initiatives, one week was for meetings with just content area teachers,

and one week was for your grade level teams to meet.

Desired of Professional Development

Professional development needs an overhaul. We need to differentiate for staff just as we

differentiate for students. Mandated PD should be limited to state requirements and the rest of

the PD agenda should be a menu that perhaps levels different topics to novice and experienced

teachers in each area. This would increase teacher buy-in, still support the novice teacher

population, and allow for middle of the road teachers to grow to excellence (Keeling, Weisberg,

Saxton, & Mulhern, 2009).

During our weekly after school meetings, we have changed the format to have 3 meetings

a month with our content specific team of teachers. This allows us to run a true professional

learning community and use PLC protocols to really dig into teaching strategies, tie our work the

standards, and reflect on our practice. This reflection will lead to growth and collaboration for

our faculty.

Lastly, when teachers struggle in any area of instruction they should be offered support.

This support could look like observing master teachers in that area. It could look like

professional development trainings on or off site. It could even look like online modules or

access to resources around that topic provided by our instructional coaches. As we see with

students, a bad grade is not going to help a student achieve a higher level of understanding. But

support and strategic growth opportunities will.

TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
7

Proposed Solutions

As stated in the desired state section of each topic, I believe teacher effectiveness can

be improved and made consistent at ECS through some strategic shifts. I believe that most

importantly, evaluation needs to be closely tied to compensation and to professional

development. Rectifying the merit based pay to be more heavily used to reward excellence in

teaching could be easily achieved through an overhaul in the merit based pay sub-rules. By

bringing together the fragmented pieces of teacher effectiveness we can create a better system

that is clear, efficient, and support growth. Lastly, we need well documented, clear, and

consistent communication about teacher effectiveness. We need leadership to truly embrace their

role as instructional leaders and to share that responsibility with expert teachers in their

buildings.
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
8
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS
9

References

ASCD. (n.d.). [Snapshot Survey of School Effectiveness Factors]. Unpublished raw data.

Cribbs, M. (2017, August 10). Professional Goal Setting and Observations [E-mail to the author].

Fraser, J. (n.d.). Teachers Matter. Retrieved September 20, 2017, from

http://pittsburghquarterly.com/2017-spring-issue/item/1206-spotlight-shines-on-pittsburghs-bu

mpy-ride-to-teacher-evaluation-reform.html

Keeling, D., Weisberg, D., Saxton, S., & Mulhern, J. (2009). The Widget Effect [PDF]. The New

Teacher Project

McCann, J. (2017, June 13). ECS Compensation Model [E-mail to the author].