LWT1 Task 2
The secondary school in which I will be using for my program is a rural school in central West Virginia. The school district includes the entire county. The percentage of Caucasians is 98.4% with all other races at 0.2% or lower, respectively (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). The residents have a low socioeconomic status. According to the West Virginia Department of Education (2014), 58.43% of students are considered economically disadvantaged. The median household income is $29,282 with 22.4% living at or below the poverty level (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014). The most recent unemployment data shows that this county has an unemployment rate of 11.5% (West Virginia Research, Information and Analysis Division, 2014). According to the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission (Reed, 2014), this county has the lowest percentage of high school seniors attending an institution of higher learning at 36.5%.
Procedures to Assess Workforce Engagement
The administration of this educational institution evaluates workforce engagement by conducting an annual review of all teachers using the state adopted educator evaluation system. Teachers are divided into different progressions based on their years of experience. Advanced progression teachers have taught for six or more years, intermediate progression teachers have taught for four-five years, and initial progression teachers have taught three years or less. The evaluation system includes a self-reflection, observations, student learning goals, and school-wide growth in reading and mathematics.
The self-reflection and final annual review are the same rubric. The teacher places themselves in whichever category they feel they belong based on the rubric. The administration conducts observations throughout the year in order to compile data to complete the annual review rubric. The teacher is also required to create two student learning goals, collect data, and evaluate the performance. The school-wide growth in reading and mathematics is based on student test scores on the state standardized test, and the growth is measured by the state department of education.
Results Promote High Performance
Based on their performance, teachers earn a performance level of distinguished, accomplished, emerging, or unsatisfactory. Teachers who earn an unsatisfactory rating are required to complete a corrective action plan that addresses their deficits. The educator evaluator system is successful in that teachers know what performance level they have earned, and can make corrections to be better teachers. This system also requires teachers that score unsatisfactory to focus on their deficits and correct them. If these deficits are not corrected, the teacher is terminated. This requires all teachers be successful and continuously meet the requirements set forth by state code.
Process Improvement The administration meets with each teacher after their observation has been complete. The administration tells the teacher which performance level they have been assigned, but do not explain why. This part of the educator evaluation system could be improved by the administration completing the required rubrics and then explaining why the teacher has been assigned that performance level. Without an explanation and more substantial conversation about the observation, the teacher is unable to make corrections or improve parts of their instruction. If the teacher were provided with this information, the teacher could make the necessary improvements to be a better teacher.
Labor Association Collaboration The school organization’s leadership team does not effectively collaborate with the labor association representatives. The leadership team does not meet with the labor association representative unless a major issue that affects most staff arises; small issues are not addressed through the labor representative.
Several teachers were asked to use their planning periods to cover