Florida DOE offers guidance for evaluations of non-classroom instructional personnel
Now that Florida classroom teachers and school administrators are settled in and comfortable with their newly imposed evaluation methods — well, at least they're done for the year, though they still await action on the lawsuit challenging the system — the state Department of Education is ready to move on.
The department this week issued recommendations (a model, really) on how to evaluate non-classroom instructional personnel, such as counselors, nurses and psychologists. Not that they weren't evaluated during 2011-12. Districts simply had to create ways to deal with such questions as how to assign 50 percent for student growth to employees who didn't have students assigned to them full time. The generally adopted and not-so-well accepted idea was to just count all students.
The document notes that up to 20 percent of the student growth measurement can be based on measurable student outcomes specific to the person's role as part of the 50 percent. It then offers guidelines for determining growth in the value-added model:
• Use school VAM data (same as principal) – DO NOT use district-wide data if the professional is assigned to schools. Using district-wide data is inconsistent with the statutory requirement that student learning growth be based on students assigned to the professional and with the requirement that the evaluation system differentiate between levels of performance.
• Use VAM data on students assigned to the professional (include direct and indirect services).
• For personnel assigned to multiple schools, calculate the VAM based on the percentage of time assigned to each school, or the VAM data on students assigned to the professional across school assignments.
• For personnel with district-wide or special assignments (e.g., bilingual assessment team), use district-wide data for the population served (all ELLs) but not all students.
Regardless of which method is used, the district must apply the criteria for determining the value-added component consistently across student services personnel.
School districts now have until August 30 to submit their plans for evaluating non-classroom teachers to the state. Is there a fair way to do this? What are you recommending to your districts?