Teacher Expectations and Evaluation

Arizona State Evaluation Model

Inclusion of Ethical and Legal Responsibilities for Teachers

The Arizona State Evaluation Model (ASEM) is primarily an assessment of teachers' effectiveness based on official and peer observations, parent and student surveys, and standardized testing achievement data. The basic inclusions regarding ethical and legal responsibilities of teachers are limited to explanations of the four categories of teacher effectiveness contained within the rubrics.

Ratings and Rubrics

The rating system includes the following four performance classifications:

  1. Highly Effective - Teachers who perform above and beyond expectations
  2. Effective - Teachers who meet the expectations and are considered "good performers"
  3. Developing - Teacher who meets expectations some of the time, but needs to be more consistent in performance
  4. Ineffective - Teacher who requires intervention to meet performance expectations


The rubric contained in this model is extensive and very comprehensive covering the four major domains in the Charlotte Danielson Framework as follows:

  1. Planning and Preparation
  2. Classroom Environment
  3. Instruction
  4. Professional Responsibilities
The rubric is separated into subtopics under each of the four domains. Each subtopic has an explanation, critical attributes, and examples for each performance classification.

Opportunities for Growth in the ASEM

Some opportunities for growth that exist within the ASEM are clear explanations of expectations in the rubric, opportunities for feedback on performance from students, parents, peers, and trained observers, and opportunities to have a guided improvement plan implemented if you receive one of the two lower classifications.

Consequences for Not Meeting Performance Expectations

The consequences contained in the ASEM for not meeting performance expectations and receiving either of the lower two classifications are an initial probationary period lasting one year. Teachers who fall in the ""ineffective" (lowest) classification are given 45 instructional days to complete a Performance Improvement Plan. At the end of this allotment, the teacher is observed again to determine if improvement has been made. Teachers who have been in the lowest two classifications for two consecutive years may be dismissed or given a notice of non-renewal, unless the teacher is in the first two years of employment with the district, or the teacher has been reassigned to a new subject or grade level.

Professional Development

Some professional development options appropriate for teachers in the lowest two classifications would be:

  • observing another teachers in the district that have one of the two highest classifications with instructions on areas of performance to specifically watch for
  • participate in workshops on specific performance areas where the teacher needs improvement
  • attend conferences on specific performance areas where the teacher needs improvement
  • observations completed by teachers with the highest two classification or by the principal to provide feedback to the probationary teacher
  • take classes related to areas of poor performance
  • read books or watch videos about performance areas which need attention
  • be assigned a mentor to guide the teacher in areas of poor performance

References

Arizona Department of Education, . (2015). The teacher evaluation process: An Arizona model for measuring educator effectiveness. Retrieved from http://www.azed.gov/teacherprincipal-evaluation/.


Arizona Education Association, . (n.d.). Know your process:Teacher evaluation. Retrieved from www.arizonaea.org/assets/document/AZ/Evaluation_Book.pdf.