5.3 Program Evaluation
Candidates design and implement program evaluations to determine the overall effectiveness of professional learning on deepening teacher content knowledge, improving teacher pedagogical skills and/or increasing student learning. (PSC 5.3/ISTE 4c)
Artifact: GAPSS Review, ITEC7460.
Reflection:
The Georgia Assessment of Performance on School Standards (GAPSS) review was conducted at the Campbell High School with an administrator helping to rate the items on professional learning on the form. The items were rated as Not Addressed, Emergent, Operational, and Fully Operational. Out of the 17 items, non of them were rated as Not Addressed. 7 were rated Emergent, 9 rated Operational, and 1 rated Fully Operational.
The professional learning standard 1.1 about learning teams was operational as evident in the artifact below. Standard 1.2 on learning community was rated operational as the involvement of the administration was periodic. It was fully operational for the standard 1.3 on instructional leadership and service as the school had representatives on the PBIS committee, and teachers participated in county-wide in-service programs and professional conferences. There was also a local school new teacher mentor program. The school culture for team learning and continuous improvement was also operational. Other standards that were operational were 1.5, 1.6, 2.2, 2.7, 3.1 and 3.2. Standards 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 3.3 and 3.4 were rated as emergent.
The project exposed me to the standards required of Georgia schools on professional learning programs and what the state determines as excellent for all schools to follow. Being a teacher in the school where the evaluation was taken would have offered the opportunity to carry out a little more authentic evaluation of the state of professional learning programs in the school.
The Georgia Assessment of Performance on School Standards (GAPSS) review was conducted at the Campbell High School with an administrator helping to rate the items on professional learning on the form. The items were rated as Not Addressed, Emergent, Operational, and Fully Operational. Out of the 17 items, non of them were rated as Not Addressed. 7 were rated Emergent, 9 rated Operational, and 1 rated Fully Operational.
The professional learning standard 1.1 about learning teams was operational as evident in the artifact below. Standard 1.2 on learning community was rated operational as the involvement of the administration was periodic. It was fully operational for the standard 1.3 on instructional leadership and service as the school had representatives on the PBIS committee, and teachers participated in county-wide in-service programs and professional conferences. There was also a local school new teacher mentor program. The school culture for team learning and continuous improvement was also operational. Other standards that were operational were 1.5, 1.6, 2.2, 2.7, 3.1 and 3.2. Standards 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 3.3 and 3.4 were rated as emergent.
The project exposed me to the standards required of Georgia schools on professional learning programs and what the state determines as excellent for all schools to follow. Being a teacher in the school where the evaluation was taken would have offered the opportunity to carry out a little more authentic evaluation of the state of professional learning programs in the school.