Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8


Achieve 26: What Does It Mean For Me?

Non-Tenure Teacher Presentation

Christine Anne McGrath- Migliori

William Paterson University


Achieve NJ Leadership Project

Project Proposal
Based upon a needs assessment presented to the non-tenured members of the school staff; an in-
service professional development will be presented to the staff on the topics of Teacher
Evaluations and Observations, PDP’s: an overview and creating of, and an introduction to
SGO’s and the creation of them. The non-tenured staff members agreed that these are the areas
of greatest concern to them.

Research and Design

The information on the NJDOE web resources was very helpful in developing this presentation.
The Department of Education’s website is full of relevant information in the form of examples,
charts, guidelines, and procedures regarding the topics chosen for this professional development.
The artifacts provided to the recipients clearly outlined the expectations and protocols for
implementation. The memo provided discussed the evaluation component weight changes,
reviewed key dates, and referred them to the appropriate webpages. Additionally, the
information provided in Achieve 2016-17 and Beyond delved deeper into the subject area;
offering more support for the changes.
The research strongly supports that quality instruction is indicated by student performance; thus,
the need for the development of SGO’s. For students; the SGO is a “measure of student learning
that promote reflective and collaborative teaching practices, alignment amongst standards,
instructions and assessment.” (NJ Department of Education. What are Student Growth
Objectives?) For teachers; the SGO is “a method by which teachers can improve their practice
while clearly demonstrating their effectiveness.” (NJ Department of Education. What are Student
Growth Objectives?)
The development of the PDP and the SGO, and the evaluation model used by Paterson support
the theory of Clinical Supervision as presented by Glickman in Supervision and Instructional
Leadership. According to Glickman “clinical supervision in consistent with the formative
evaluation of teaching.” (Glickman, pg. 273) But also supports the development of PDP’s by
providing “nonjudgmental assistance aimed at improving the teacher’s instruction…but goes
beyond by helping the teacher design and implement an action plan to meet instructional goals.”
(pg. 273) PDP’s and SGO’s help a teacher to understand where the students are meeting
instructional objectives and allow them to develop plans of professional development where

there skills may be lacking based on student data, and seek guidance in the improvement of these
identified areas.
Project Implementation
The professional development will be presented to the staff during a Monday Afternoon Staff
Meeting. The members of the teaching staff who will be attending the training will be covered
and released from ninth period to attend the presentation. It is anticipated that the presentation
will last approximately 45 minutes. Only non-tenured staff will be covered to attend the training,
tenured staff will be welcomed to attend the training, already in session, upon student dismissal.
Any staff member who is interested in the PowerPoint can request the information and it will be
forwarded to them. The primary audience will be all non-tenured staff members who were hired
after the beginning of the school year and were not in attendance at the opening days of staff
meetings. This training will be in addition to a training provided by the district and will strive to
support them in their understanding of the teacher evaluation system, PDP’s and SGO’s. It is the
hope that providing additional training they will understand the expectations for evaluations, and
the protocols for the development of PDP’s and SGO’s.
Data collection and evaluation; Submission of results
After the presentation the attending staff was provided with the attached Leadership Project
Evaluation Form. Upon completion of the form they would be provided with a PD Certificate for
one hour. The results from the participants varied, wildly, with some feeling that I covered all the
points and other feeling that more information could be provided. For question one, the theories’
questions I scored low- with most people indicating that I did not refer to the educational
theories. While, I referred, heavily to the NJ Department of Education Website I really did not
address any of the educational theories behind the research. The reason being that I falsely
believed that my audience only wanted to be presented with the facts and not the theories: I was
wrong. Even though I did not address any educational theories my audience did indicate that they
had a better understanding of the evaluation process, PDP’s and SGO’s. The comments that were
left in the Parking Lot indicated that they better understood what was expected of them and were
more prepared to accomplish the tasks. The PowerPoint was successful and most of the
participants felt that the information was relevant to their job. They also responded favorably to a
review of the Teacher Evaluation Handbook. The pages reviewed directly related to the topic
covered by the presentation and allowed them to review the materials covered. This guide is

distributed yearly to all teachers and is reviewed at the beginning of the year PD Days. Since this
group of teachers had start dates from late September to Mid-October, they did not attend those
workshops, and this was their “in house” professional development. For question number four I
scored a four from everyone, but I believe that was more because of the cookies and coffee than
my presentation.
Based on the feedback provided I think that my presentation was informative and engaging.
More theory should have been addressed and I should not have excluded this information. My
audience was more interested than I anticipated. For this learning environment it would be a
good thing to allow more teachers to present professional developments. They seem to value a
presentation from someone other than the principal and seemed more relaxed because
administration was not present at the meeting. Sometimes hearing the same materials in a
different voice is helpful for all learners.

Artifacts: Agenda

Achieve 26: What does it mean for me?

Non-Tenure Teacher Presentation
Date: November 4, 2019 (postponed to November 18th
due to union contract language)
Time: 9th Period (2:25 p.m.)

Type of Meeting: Professional Development Training

Meeting Facilitator: Christine Anne Migliori

Invitees: Non-Tenured Staff Members with a start date after 9/3/2019

I. Introduction of Facilitator: Christine Anne Migliori

II. Topic of Presentation: Achieve 26, Evaluations, PDP’s and SGO’s

III. Distribution of Materials: (Teachers will be served cookies and coffee during meeting)

A. Copies of PowerPoint

B. Copy of Teacher Evaluation, Guidebook provided by Paterson Public Schools,

C. Copy of memo dated August 23, 2019: Evaluation Rubric Weights

D. Artifacts from Achieve NJ Website:

i. Student Growth Objectives

ii. Professional Development and Support

iii. Achieve NJ in 2016-17 and Beyond

iv. Requirements and Resources for Teacher Evaluations

IV. PowerPoint Presentation: 30- 40 minutes with built in reflection time

V. Question/Answer Period: 5 Minutes (Additional questions will be placed in the Parking Lot)

VI. Evaluation Form and PD Certificates

VII. Dismissal

Evaluation Rubric:

Leadership Project Evaluation Form

Presenter’s Name: Christine Migliori Date: 11/4/2019

Dear Participant:

Please evaluate your experience in this presentation and the presenter. Circle ONE (1) score for
your rating:

1-Minimum Effectiveness 2-Partial Effectiveness 3-Highly effective 4-Exemplary

1. The presenter referred to major theories or literature and explained and 1 2 3 4

contrasted the ways in which the theories are connected to the
2. The presenter helped you to better understand theories and how they 1 2 3 4
impact classroom practice today.
3. The presenter used and/or explained a wide range of instructional 1 2 3 4
practices, approaches, and methods, including technology-based
4. Throughout the presentation the presenter was professional and modeled 1 2 3 4
ethical practices.
5. The presenter was prepared to answer questions. 1 2 3 4


Teacher Evaluation Guidebook, Paterson Public Schools :2019-2020

NJ Department of Education. What are Student Growth Objectives?


NJ Department of Education: Notification of Educator Evaluation Rubric Weights for 2019-20

and Back-To-School Reminders:

NJ Department of Education. Professional Development and Support.


NJ Department of Education. Teacher Evaluation and Support.


Glickman, C.D., Gordon, S.P. & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2018). Supervision and instructional

leadership: A developmental approach (10th edition). New York, NY: Pearson

Education, Inc. ISBN 9780134449890