An experienced teacher advances from Stage 2 to Stage 3 due to a positive qualitative performance rating and strong student performance data (meeting the highly effective criteria) resulting in a combined overall teacher effectiveness rating of a 4 or 5, along with, an application and interview process. During the beginning of the evaluation (Teacher Reflection) process, the teacher may choose to apply for Stage 3 (if appropriate for the district). The application process includes a teacher created portfolio highlighting evidences of his/her teacher leadership skills (using the “Teacher Leader Model Standards” developed by the Teacher Leadership Exploratory Consortium and adopted by the Tennessee State Board of Education), an interview with a designated Stage 3 Interview Team, and other options as appropriate for the district (i.e. resume, letters of reference, personal beliefs statement, etc.).
Category Archives: Process
I don’t see any mention of scripting within the TIGER model. Is scripting required?
Scripting is not required within the TIGER model. The evaluator may utilize whichever method of documenting “evidences” of the elements observed that best suits his/her style. The primary objective is to observe and record “evidences”. The evaluator’s role is to observe the student reactions and behaviors generated by the teacher’s instruction. Being familiar with the rubric and each level of performance will greatly reduce the need for scripting and allow the observer to indicate a score supported by the evidence.
What is the difference in the 1-4 ratings?
The one through four ratings refer to the levels of performance within the adapted version of Charlotte Danielson’s rubric and are explained fully in the In Depth training module found on the Training page (www.tigermodel.net):
- 4-Distinguished
- 3-Proficient
- 2-Basic
- 1-Unsatisfactory
Is there a “glossary of terms”?
A working draft has been started and can be found on the Resources page of the website (www.tigermodel.net). It is very important that districts make an opportunity to engage in discussions of critical terms within the rubric to ensure that there is alignment and common understanding of terms. This practice will guarantee that teachers are not given mixed messages as they work through the process.
What are the objectives of each Stage?
- Stage 1: To ensure that quality instruction is being provided to all students
- Stage 2: To ensure that quality instruction occurs for all students and that teachers are facilitating their own professional growth
- Stage 3: To ensure that quality instruction occurs for all students, that teachers are facilitating their own professional growth, and helping develop other teachers
Explain the difference between making a “judgment” and making “human capital decisions.”
In purely summative evaluations, an evaluator typically makes a judgment regarding an employee’s performance. Because the TIGER model is designed to help teachers grow professionally, there is a purposeful distinction made between the concepts. Evaluators, coaches, and teachers will be identifying evidences of levels of performance rather than making judgments of performance. However, because the TIGER process ends each year in the required summative conference, summative type decisions shall be made (examples: tenure, retention, promotion, nonrenewal, etc.), as well as, a calculation of the overall teacher effectiveness rating.
The numbers and levels are confusing. Explain each.
Consider that the stages (1-3) refer to “stages of support” within TIGER. Within the rubric, there are four domain levels (1-Unsatisfactory; 2-Basic; 3-Proficient; and 4-Distinguished) of performance. And, finally, Tennessee has determined that there will be five levels (1-Significantly below expectations; 2-Below expectations; 3-At expectations; 4-Above expectations; 5-Significantly above expectations) of teacher effectiveness.
Who determines who the coaches are for Stage 1 teachers and how this will be implemented within a district?
TIGER was designed to be adaptable to varying districts’ resources. Therefore, the district shall determine who will carryout the role of “coach” within the model. Suggestions for personnel who could effectively fill this role are:
- Instructional coaches
- Stage 3 teachers
- Instructional supervisors
- Assistant principals (as long as the AP is not involved in the summative process).
May I modify the TIGER process in my school or district?
No, for fidelity of implementation, districts are asked not to modify the process. However, districts may opt to supplement the model.
What are some of the most important aspects of TIGER that make it different from other models?
- TIGER is both formative and summative, and it is designed to be a growth model of teacher evaluation.
- Both “coaching” and “teacher leadership” is built directly into the process.
- The process does not meant to be judgmental, but instead facilitative. The objective is for teachers to provide quality instruction to all students and facilitate their own professional growth.
- As a result, a research-based rubric (a derivative of Charlotte Danielson’s rubric) is used to guide the discussion between teacher and observer, as well as, to document evidences.