Human Resources and Professional Development Contextual Background A series of ESE reviews of the district conducted from 2002-2011 identified several chronic areas of concern related to human resources and professional development. Systems identified as seriously wanting included district policies and practices for the evaluation of professional staff, both faculty and administrators, including the superintendent. Specifically, the need for principals to function as effective instructional leaders was stressed. Reports advocated the need for principals to improve their skills and capacity in teaching and learning and to better manage their time in order to visit classrooms regularly. Further, the reallocation of principals’ time was urged so that principals could focus their attention on observing, providing support and feedback, and engaging in the rigorous, continuous evaluation of their staff. In response to these concerns, in its improvement planning the district prioritized the development and implementation of effective educator evaluation tools, practices, and procedures, as embodied in the Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework, to provide the kind of consistent high-quality feedback that promotes professional growth. In 2013 a work group composed of teachers and administrators from all levels of Fall River Schools joined together to develop a new educator evaluation system for the district. That collaborative committee elected to adapt the state Educator Evaluation Framework. Further, it was determined that it would remain a standing work group in order to monitor and refine, as needed, the evaluation procedures, forms, and processes contained in the new system. Evidence from the current review confirmed that---despite substantial principal turnover in recent years---in general, teachers’ evaluations were timely and complete and the overall quality of teachers’ evaluations was exceptionally high. Teachers’ evaluations were comprehensive, detailed, and evidence based. Evaluations typically provided feedback for improved practice that was specific and actionable and recommendations with the capacity to improve classroom instruction and/or contribute to professional growth. However, the district has not achieved consistency in implementing its educator evaluation system. The evaluations of principals and district administrators, including the superintendent, have not been completed regularly and in the case of school leaders have not been done. A review of evaluative documentation showed that principal evaluations have been not written since the 2014-2015 school year. The full implementation of the Educator Evaluation Framework requires that districts use an evaluation system that appropriately includes other sources of evidence in addition to direct observation and artifacts of practice, specifically student and staff feedback and common assessments of student learning. The district has not taken action to implement these more recent components of the Educator Evaluation Framework.
Human Resources and Professional Development Contextual Background A series of ESE reviews of the district conducted from 2002-2011 identified several chronic areas of concern related to human resources and professional development. Systems identified as seriously wanting included district policies and practices for the evaluation of professional staff, both faculty and administrators, including the superintendent. Specifically, the need for principals to function as effective instructional leaders was stressed. Reports advocated the need for principals to improve their skills and capacity in teaching and learning and to better manage their time in order to visit classrooms regularly. Further, the reallocation of principals’ time was urged so that principals could focus their attention on observing, providing support and feedback, and engaging in the rigorous, continuous evaluation of their staff. In response to these concerns, in its improvement planning the district prioritized the development and implementation of effective educator evaluation tools, practices, and procedures, as embodied in the Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework, to provide the kind of consistent high-quality feedback that promotes professional growth. In 2013 a work group composed of teachers and administrators from all levels of Fall River Schools joined together to develop a new educator evaluation system for the district. That collaborative committee elected to adapt the state Educator Evaluation Framework. Further, it was determined that it would remain a standing work group in order to monitor and refine, as needed, the evaluation procedures, forms, and processes contained in the new system. Evidence from the current review confirmed that---despite substantial principal turnover in recent years---in general, teachers’ evaluations were timely and complete and the overall quality of teachers’ evaluations was exceptionally high. Teachers’ evaluations were comprehensive, detailed, and evidence based. Evaluations typically provided feedback for improved practice that was specific and actionable and recommendations with the capacity to improve classroom instruction and/or contribute to professional growth. However, the district has not achieved consistency in implementing its educator evaluation system. The evaluations of principals and district administrators, including the superintendent, have not been completed regularly and in the case of school leaders have not been done. A review of evaluative documentation showed that principal evaluations have been not written since the 2014-2015 school year. The full implementation of the Educator Evaluation Framework requires that districts use an evaluation system that appropriately includes other sources of evidence in addition to direct observation and artifacts of practice, specifically student and staff feedback and common assessments of student learning. The district has not taken action to implement these more recent components of the Educator Evaluation Framework.