Leadership Matters September 2014

I then show the participants several additional teaching videos, one of average teaching, one of poor teaching and one of good teaching. In each of these videos we also just look for 3c Engaged Learning but the participants always write additional evidence related to any of the other 21 components because they do not see an excellent lesson. The main point I am trying to convey is that if the teacher evaluator looks for Engaged Learning, the evaluator is concentrating on what students are intellectually learning and this gives them insight into what actual learning is occurring in the classroom Danielson states that this is "minds-on" not "hands- on." It is what students are "learning" not what students are "doing."

"Distinguished" FFT rating according to the rubric. I then ask if we need to collect evidence for any of the Components in Domains 1 and 4. Do we need evidence of content knowledge, pedagogy, child development, learning process, special needs of the students, student skills or knowledge or proficiency, student interests or cultural heritage, setting instructional outcomes, designing coherent instruction, reflecting on teaching, maintaining accurate records, communicating with families, participating in professional learning communities, growing and developing professionally or showing professionalism? They almost always say no when answering this question. They just want to rate the teacher Distinguished/Excellent.

Please encourage your building administrators to attend the IPA Principals Professional Conference. Click here for more information.

25