This free survey is powered by QUESTIONPRO.COM
  1. Surveys
  2. 2012
  3. October
  4. W
  5. Westminster Teacher Evaluation Survey

Westminster Teacher Evaluation Survey

Survey to Assess Westminster's New Pilot Teacher Evaluation Tool and Process
0%
Exit Survey »
 
 
Overview: The Westminster Teacher Evaluation Committee developed a prototype of a teacher evaluation tool and process that we have been piloting this school year for teachers selected to help us test the tool. The purpose of this survey is to help inform the Committee about what aspects of the tool and process are working and what areas still need improvement.

Instructions: The survey refers to the rubric and evaluation tool, so it would be helpful if you printed this document out while you took this survey. It should be attached to the email you received about taking this survey.
 
 
 
What best describes your involvement with the pilot evaluation tool and process:
 
Principal/Assistant Principal using the pilot tool and process
 
Teacher selected to use the new pilot tool and process
 
Teacher NOT selected to use the new pilot tool and process
 
Other (describe below)
 
 
 
Click on the subject that best describes what you teach
 
Elementary School Multiple Subject (e.g. kindergarten teacher)
 
Special Education
 
Physical Education
 
Art
 
English
 
Math
 
History/Social Studies
 
Science
 
Other (please describe)
 
 
 
 
Please indicate which grade level best applies to you:
 
Elementary-primary grades
 
Elementary-upper grades
 
Middle school
 
Other (describe below)
 
 
Overarching Questions Regarding the Pilot Tool and Process: Please rate the new tool and process on the following:
1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Agree to some extent 4. Do not agree N/A
The pilot evaluation tool and process is an improvement over the former system.
Overall, I am satisfied with the new evaluation tool and process.
There are no domains or individual standards that are missing from the rubric.
The rubric is comprehensive, while also being accessible (i.e. it is not overwhelming).
The pilot evaluation tool and process invites positive conversations about continual improvement.
The pilot evaluation tool effectively supports administrators and teachers in setting goals and priorities for improvement.
The evaluation tool and process makes it possible to distinguish different levels of teacher effectiveness.
Student achievement/learning data is fairly used in the evaluation process.
There are multiple measures of teacher effectiveness used in the pilot evaluation tool.
The evaluation tool provided me with useful and timely feedback.
There is support (professional development/guidance) to help teachers develop areas of improvement.
The evaluation tool is a good resource for professional growth.
 
 
If you have any comments on the above section, please list them here:
   
 
 
Standard Specific Questions (#1 Engaging and Supporting All Students in Learning): Please rate the new tool and process on the following:
1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Agree to some extent 4. Do not agree N/A
The rubric accurately and comprehensively defines engaging and supporting all students.
The language about engaging and supporting all students is clear.
There are no missing elements of engaging and supporting all students (if you don't agree please list the missing elements in the comment section below).
The descriptors are effectively differentiated/scaled across the four categories.
The descriptors for the exceeds standards category are feasible, while also establishing high expectations for teachers.
 
 
If you have any comments on the above section, please list them here:
   
 
Standard Specific Questions (#2 Creating and Maintaining Environments for Student Learning): Please rate the new tool and process on the following:
1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Agree to some extent 4. Do not agree N/A
The rubric comprehensively and accurately defines creating and maintaining environments for student learning.
The language about creating and maintaining environments for student learning is clear.
There are no missing elements in this domain (if you don't agree please list the missing elements in the comment section below).
The descriptors are effectively differentiated/scaled across the four categories.
The descriptors for the exceeds standards category are feasible, while also establishing high expectations for teachers.
 
 
If you have any comments on the above section, please list them here:
   
 
Standard Specific Questions (#3 Understanding and Organizing Subject Matter for Student Learning): Please rate the new tool and process on the following:
1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Agree to some extent 4. Do not agree N/A
The rubric comprehensively and accurately defines understanding and organizing subject matter for student learning.
The language about understanding and organizing subject matter for student learning is clear.
There are no missing elements of learning (if you don't agree please list the missing elements in the comment section below).
The descriptors are effectively differentiated/scaled across the four categories.
The descriptors for the proficient category are feasible, while also establishing high expectations for teachers.
 
 
If you have any comments on the above section, please list them here:
   
 
Standard Specific Questions (#4 Planning Instruction and Design Learning Experience): Please rate the new tool and process on the following:
1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Agree to some extent 4. Do not agree N/A
The rubric comprehensively and accurately defines planning instruction and design learning experience.
The language about planning instruction and design learning experience is clear.
There are no missing elements (if you don't agree please list the missing elements in the comment section below).
The descriptors are effectively differentiated/scaled across the four categories.
The descriptors for the exceeds standards category are feasible, while also establishing high expectations for teachers.
 
 
If you have any comments on the above section, please list them here:
   
 
 
Standard Specific Questions (#5 Assessing Student Learning): Please rate the new tool and process on the following:
1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Agree to some extent 4. Do not agree N/A
The rubric comprehensively and accurately defines assessing student learning.
The language about assessing student learning is clear.
There are no missing elements of assessing student learning.
The descriptors are effectively differentiated/scaled across the four categories.
The descriptors for the exceeds standards category are feasible, while also establishing high expectations for teachers.
The rubric effectively includes student learning data of varying degrees into this standard.
 
 
If you have any comments on the above section, please list them here:
   
 
 
Standard Specific Questions (#6: Developing as an Educator): Please rate the new tool and process on the following:
1. Strongly agree 2. Agree 3. Agree to some extent 4. Do not agree N/A
The rubric comprehensively and accurately defines developing as an educator.
The language about developing as an educator is clear.
There are no missing elements of developing as an educator.
The descriptors are effectively differentiated/scaled across the four categories.
The descriptors for the exceeds standards category are feasible, while also establishing high expectations for teachers.
 
 
If you have any comments on the above section, please list them here:
   
 
 
Which of the following best describes how you feel about the inclusion of student survey data into the evaluation?
 
Student and/or parent survey data should not be included in the evaluation.
 
Student and/or parent survey data should be collected, used in the discussion with teachers, but not be considered in the overall assessment of the teacher.
 
Student and/or parent survey data should be collected and considered in the overall assessment of the teacher.
 
Other/Comment
 
 
 
Please describe your satisfaction level with the categories used in the rubric (e.g. does not meet standards, partially meets standards, meets standards, exceeds standards). Any suggestions for how they might be improved are appreciated.
   
 
 
 
The next series of statements address the final evaluation document. The statements have been organized by teachers, administrators and both groups. Please respond to those survey items labeled for your respective group (teachers only or administrators only) and both groups.
 
 
Teachers
Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree N/A
The final evaluation validated me as a professional.
The final evaluation was more meaningful to me than evaluations I have received in the past.
The final evaluation provided me suggestions to improve my teaching.
The final evaluation provided me suggestions to improve student learning.
 
 
Administrators
Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree N/A
The final evaluation provided meaningful feedback to teachers.
The final evaluation provided me the opportunity to address student learning with my teachers.
The final evaluation was less time consuming to complete than the previous evaluation.
 
 
Both teachers and administrators
Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree N/A
The final evaluation accurately reflected the goals I established with my evaluator or teacher during the preplanning and observation processes.
The final evaluation was clear and concise.
The final evaluation form/format met my professional needs as an educator.
Having gone through this process I feel valued as an educator.
 
 
 
The final evaluation:
 
Exceeded my expectations
 
Met my expectations
 
Did not meet my expectations
 
 
 
Please identify areas of concern about the final evaluation:
   
 
 
 
Please identify areas of strength about the final evaluation:
   
 
 
 
The ratings used in each of the standards to evaluate me were of:
 
No value to me
 
Some value to me
 
Great value to me
 
Survey Software Powered by QuestionPro Survey Software