At the meeting held on October 19, 2005, the Board authorized the Superintendent to pursue the acquisition and implementation of a competent evaluation and appraisal system for instructional personnel that would serve to replace the Performance Assessment Comprehensive Evaluation System (PACES) currently utilized by the district. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was distributed to various qualified vendors on January 23, 2006.  The Board subsequently authorized the Superintendent during the June 14, 2006 Board meeting (Agenda Item B-2) to negotiate and enter into a contractual services agreement with Teacher Quality Resources, pursuant to Request for Proposals No. 070-FF10 – professional consulting services for development of an instructional assessment and appraisal system.

In collaboration with United Teachers of Dade (UTD), three design teams were established representing the following instructional personnel categories: classroom teachers, student services personnel (e.g., school psychologists, guidance counselors, social workers) and instructional support personnel (e.g., curriculum support specialists, library/media specialists, teachers on special assignment).  The teams include corresponding practitioner representatives and district, region and school-based administrators. Team members adhered to a consensus building approach in their work that allowed them to progress through the developmental phase effectively and efficiently.  Each design team met a total of seven times from March 20, 2006, through May 18, 2006, to develop recommendations for the design of the new performance evaluation system called the Instructional Performance Evaluation and Growth System (IPEGS).

Performance standards were developed for teachers, instructional support personnel, and student services personnel with sample indicators.  A performance appraisal rubric with a four-level rating scale was developed for each performance standard.  Information sources include observation, learner/program progress goal setting, required documentation and parental input as tools to conduct the performance evaluation. The IPEGS handbooks explain the tools and procedures.  The following overview provides additional information regarding the evaluation system tools:

Observation:  Annual contract employees will have a minimum of two formal observations a year.  Professional service and continuing contract personnel will have at least one formal observation a year.  An observation lasts a minimum of 20 minutes. 

Learner/Program Progress Goal Setting:  Instructional personnel will document learner/program benchmarks established at the beginning of the year, set forth strategies to build on strengths, address weaknesses, assess progress at mid-year, and document gains at the end of the year.  This approach reflects a contemporary research-based instructional strategy that can yield impressive results in student learning.  The process incorporates professional development as a component of the goal-setting, thereby alleviating the need for a separate individual professional development plan.

Required Documentation:  A portion of the data used to provide insight on performance can be collected by instructional personnel.  Specific items that may not always be observable in an instructional setting may be submitted to demonstrate progress in meeting instructional personnel performance standards.  The ability to provide to the assessor relevant evidence, such as a list identifying professional development activities undertaken, encourages instructional personnel to actively participate in ongoing self-assessment tied to established performance standards.

Parental Input: Parental input is gathered through the use of the School Climate Survey, the Educational Excellence School Advisory Council (EESAC)participation and the Open House Parent Academy Survey in schools, as applicable. Professionals show evidence of communication with parents as reflected on their communication log.    

A four-level rubric depicting a continuum of effectiveness is tailored to each of the performance standards.  The levels are:  exemplary, proficient, developing/needs improvement, and unsatisfactory.  The design teams crafted rubrics that are tailored to each performance standard.  Achievement of the performance standard that describes an acceptable level of performance is equivalent to proficient.

A pilot of IPEGS was conducted during the 2006-2007 school year. Thirty-one school sites participated. A series of professional development sessions were provided to principals and their leadership teams (e.g. expert teachers, UTD Stewards) to support the implementation of IPEGS. Additionally, pilot schools received year-round implementation support through site visits by the staff of Leadership Development and UTD staff, web-based resources, and daily e-mail and telephone assistance.

The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation comprised of M-DCPS and UTD personnel met throughout the year to discuss concerns regarding the pilot; monitor and analyze pertinent data, and issue recommendations for modifications and/or amendments, using a collaborative decision-making process. A sub-committee reviewed the handbook to clarify procedures for professionals in need of performance improvement.

At the end of the pilot year, selected original design team members and others convened to address specific needs identified during the pilot year. Their recommendations were reviewed both by the M-DCPS and the UTD leaderships who then approved the revisions to the IPEGS handbooks. During the 2007-2008 school year, an additional 15 school sites were added to the pilot.