Idaho Teacher

Evaluation
Natalie Berry, Jane Lehto, and
Shannon Lawler

When You Think

of Idaho . . .

When You Think of

Idaho . . .

Education in Idaho

History Behind Framework

Purpose?
to recognize, promote, and help develop effective and successful
educators.
Many changes since 2008
repealed the Student Come First Law and no longer met the
minimum requirements of the ESEA Waiver application.
convened the Evaluation Capacity Task Force

Effective Teachers
Idaho adopted their definition of what an effective teacher looks like from the
state of Colorado:
Idaho's effective teachers have the knowledge, skills, and commitments that ensure equitable
learning opportunities and growth for all students. They strive to close achievement gaps and to
prepare diverse student populations for postsecondary success. They facilitate mastery of content
and skill development, and identify and employ appropriate strategies for students who are not
achieving mastery. They communicate and model high expectations to students and their families
and find ways to engage them in a mutually-supportive teaching and learning environment.

-Idaho State Department of Education

Evaluation Capacity Task Force

-Originated and sustained by the
Charlotte Danielson Framework for
Teaching
-Charlotte Danielson is a former
economist, but currently works as the
advisor for the State Education
Departments and National Ministries
-Her framework is used in over 20 states

Charlotte Danielson Framework

for
Teaching
-consists
of four main groups:
1. Planning and preparation
2. Classroom environment
3. Instruction
4. Professional Responsibilities

1.Planning and Preparation

1a. Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy
1b. Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
1c. Setting Instructional Outcomes
1d. Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
1e. Designing Coherent Instruction
1f. Designing Student Assessments

2. Classroom Environment
2a. Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport
2b. Establishing a Culture for Learning
2c. Managing Classroom Procedures
2d. Managing Student Behavior
2e. Organizing Physical Space

3. Instruction
3a. Communicating with Students
3b. Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques
3c. Engaging Students in Learning
3d. Using Assessment in Instruction
3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness

4. Professional Responsibilities
4a. Reflecting on Teaching
4b. Maintaining Accurate Records
4c. Communicating with Families
4d. Participating in the Professional Community
4e. Growing and Developing Professionally
4f. Showing Professionalism

Who Can Evaluate?

-An individual who has gone through extensive
training in evaluation and can demonstrate
proficiency in observation can conduct these
extensive evaluations.

When Do Evaluations Occur?

-There is a teacher evaluation calendar planned out so
teachers know when they are going to be evaluated
-Evaluations occur three times a year
1. Prior to the start of school (August-September)
2. December
3. June

What are teachers evaluated

for?
Professional Practice:
Planning and Preparation
Classroom Environment
Instruction and Use of Assessment
Professional Responsibilities
Student Achievement:
Performance on Standardized Tests
Student Growth

Evaluation #1:
August/September

-Teacher fills out self-assessment prior to meeting with supervisor

-Teacher sets professional growth goals and creates a professional growth plan, prior to meeting
with supervisor
-Teacher sends their Professional Growth Plan to their evaluator before the Beginning of the Year
Conference, so that he/she has time to review it, prior to meeting with supervisor
-Teacher and evaluator will review the Professional Growth Goals in the Professional Growth Plan
-Determine student growth measures based upon teaching assignment; (ISAT Student Growth
Model, ISAT benchmarks)
-Teachers new to district/charter: determine growth goals for measuring student achievement as
measured by ISAT and other measures

Evaluation #2: December

-Discuss Professional Growth Plan
-Receive feedback on performance
-Professional Growth Plan may be adjusted during this conference if the goals
are not ambitious enough, unrealistically ambitious, or not yielding the
desired outcomes
-Depending on individual development needs and new data, the Professional
Growth Plan can be revisited and adjusted more frequently

Evaluation #3: June

-Discuss Professional Growth Plan
-The teacher and evaluator will reflect on the extent to which the Professional
Growth Goals have been met and determine areas to target for the coming
year based on the current years evaluation results
-Be prepared to discuss parental/guardian input, student achievement
included within the evaluation
-Teacher may respond to written feedback

Rating Scale

3.50-4.00 = Distinguished
2.50-3.49 = Proficient
2.00-2.49 = Basic
1.00-1.99 = Unsatisfactory

Rating Scale
Professional Practice
- 67%

Stu
den
t
Ach
iev
em
ent
-

Un
sati
sfa
cto
ry =
1

Uns
atis
fact
ory
=1

Ba
sic
=2

Pr
of
cie
nt
=3

Dist
ingu
ishe
d=
4

Uns
atisf
acto
ry =
1.00

Un
sati
sfa
cto
ry
=
1.6
7

Ba
sic
=

Pro
ficie
nt =

2.3

3.01

Teachers Rated Unsatisfactory

or
Basic
-Proceed
with district procedures in place for at risk educators; i.e.,
professional development, improvement plans, improvement teams, etc.

-If personnel actions are to take place as a result of the evaluation and the
procedures for implementing these actions; e.g., job status change.
-In the event the action taken as a result of evaluation is to not renew an
individuals contract or to renew an individuals contract at a reduced rate,
school districts should take proper steps to follow the procedures outlined in
Sections 33-513 through 33-515, Idaho Code in order to assure the due
process rights of all personnel.

Pros of the Charlotte Danielson

-There are many opportunities for teachers to set goals for
Framework
themselves

-Because they are being evaluated close to 4 times a year,

teachers have ample opportunities to check-in and see where
they have improved and where they can still improve.
-They are being evaluated on a scale, so if the teacher scores
high in Professional Practice but only reaches proficient in
student achievement, the score will be balanced out.

Cons of the Charlotte Danielson

Framework
-teachers may become overwhelmed by the several

groups that they need to meet in order to receive an

adequate score
-For example, a teacher may be proficient in the first three
categories of planning and preparation, classroom
environment, and instruction but may lack in professional
responsibilities.
-He or she may struggle with reflecting on teacher or
communicating with the community; this would impact
their score greatly.

References
Idaho State Department of Education. (n.d.). Retrieved November 20, 2015, from
https://www.sde.idaho.gov/site/teacherEval/proPractice.htm

Idaho State Department of Education. (n.d.). Retrieved November 23, 2015, from
https://www.sde.idaho.gov/site/teacherEval/framework.htm

Patterson, M. (2012, August 13). Charlotte Danielson, An Expert On Teachers Evaluation, Discusses The Merits Of The
Process. Retrieved November 21, 2015, from http://njmonthly.com/articles/towns-schools/an-expert-discusses/