Danielson Framework for Teaching

Charlotte Danielson’s Enhancing Professional Practice: A

Framework for Teaching (2013 edition), provides BYU-Idaho’s Teacher Education Programs with an instructional framework that serves two important functions. First, it includes a common language for professional conversations and professional development. Second, it offers a structure for teachers to assess their practice and to organize improvement efforts. With this framework in place, faculty and students can conduct conversations about what effective instruction consists of, and where to focus improvement efforts within the context of the framework’s shared definitions and understanding.

The Danielson Framework serves as a guide for coaching and mentoring in the public schools. The framework identifies aspects of a teacher’s responsibilities, which are supported by empirical studies and help to improve student learning. The Danielson Framework provides a rubric for four levels of teaching (ranging from “Unsatisfactory” to “Distinguished”) across four domains. These domains include:

• Planning and preparation
• Classroom environment
• Instruction
• Professional responsibilities

The Danielson Teacher Evaluation Model is approved by the Idaho State Department of Education as its official teacher evaluation tool. Because of this, all of BYU Idaho’s student teacher supervisors, area coordinators, and faculty that oversee a practicum course are required to be Danielson Model certified. The Danielson Model is Idaho’s approved mechanism for proof of performance, which is used for teacher certifications and endorsements.

The state of Idaho is continuing the use of the 2013 edition of the Danielson Framework for Teaching, which is available to download from the Danielson group at FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING EVALUATION INSTRUMENT (download does require a free registration with The Danielson Group).

January 18, 2021

Policies for Tracking Danielson Low Scores

Policies regarding students receiving a 1 in their practicum observations:

1. This policy refers to a candidate who receives a 1 in an indicator on their final Danielson Summative Assessment in their final practicum in a content area (either their senior practicum in their major or their final practicum in their minor).
   
   1. This refers to a 1 on any indicator and not to an overall average in a domain.
2. Ideally the low score would be diagnosed in formative observations before the final summative observation allowing time for the student to remediate before the end of the semester and before the final summative assessment where possible.
3. If the supervisor gives a 1, s/he will be prompted to complete the Improvement Plan Form (See form here***) outlining how the low score can be remedied: retake the class or complete a remediation plan without retaking the class. These candidates will need to complete the improvement plan set forth by the supervisor before moving on to student teaching.
   
   1. Candidates are given the grade earned in the course, however, if the grade is a C- or better and the candidate is required to repeat the course due to receiving a 1 on the Danielson, s/he will not be able to receive financial aid to cover the cost of that course retake.
4. Faculty should inform the Student Teaching Services Office as soon as they become aware that a student is struggling and is at risk for receiving a 1 in their summative observation. STS will note this and follow-up with the faculty as the semester draws to a close. This is particularly important when it occurs the semester before student teaching. This procedure allows the STS to plan for an appropriate placement (such as placing the candidate with a particularly strong mentor teacher) or plan for a possible postponement of the student teaching semester.
5. The STS will include this in their list of things to verify before a candidate is allowed to student teach.
6. Faculty who teach these courses (either a senior practicum in a major, or a course that could be a final practicum in a minor) should put a line in their syllabus informing students of this policy.
7. Rationale - This policy is in place to:
   
   1. Ensure candidates are prepared to student teach.
   2. Ensure a candidate can be certified. If they receive 1’s in any area on a Danielson Summative Observation, we can’t use that as their proof of performance in that content area when it comes to giving them an Institutional Recommendation.
   3. To establish a coherent policy for monitoring student progress in knowledge, PERFORMANCE, and dispositions.
8. Exceptions can be handled with our current petition process that is used for anyone wanting to student teach without passing the Praxis or without having completed all of their coursework (for example, if a candidate passed all courses except for the final practicum in a minor and the candidate has extenuating circumstances that would justify student teaching first in the major area before coming back to repeat a practicum in the minor).

** If the student is counseled out of the program, please see procedures under " Removing a Candidate from the Program or Removing a Candidate from Student Teaching”

**Programs should train clinical adjunct faculty regarding this policy.

Approved by ECC on 7/9/2020

Danielson Training

Those responsible for rating students using the Danielson Framework for Teaching are required to be certified.

• Certification is obtained by completing the online course offered through Teachscape.
  
  • Training is funded at the EPP level and is managed through the Student Teaching Services Office.
  • Raters have 1 year to complete the training and achieve certification through Teachscape. (Training consists of online modules requiring watching video recordings of classrooms and learning what to look for and how to use the rubric.)
  • The training is self-paced.
  • Upon completion of the certification, raters are responsible to provide proof of certification to the Student Teaching Services Office.
• Student Teaching Services maintains the record of all certifications.

Danielson Calibration

Once trained, there is an ongoing need to ensure all raters are providing ratings consistent with the Danielson Framework for Teaching rubric.

• Annual Calibration assessment
  
  • Winter semester each year, raters participate in the calibration exercise.
  • Each rater watches a video and provides ratings based on the evidence provided in the video through a survey tool.
  • Results are gathered and inter-rater agreement calculated
  • Raters with outlier ratings are identified.

Danielson Remediation

Raters identified with outlier ratings (RIOR) are required to participate in a review of ratings with Student Teaching Services.

• All raters are invited and RIOR will be required to participate in calibration exercises held by Student Teaching Services.

Danielson Ratings

As students prepare to become teachers by participating in clinical experiences (practicum and student teaching), Danielson ratings are to provide guidance and assess progress.

• Danielson ratings are recorded by certified raters using a common digital data collection tool.
• Once ratings are gathered, data is summarized and analyzed for patterns and trends to help identify improvement needs at the program and EPP levels.
• Individual reports are provided (via email) to students, raters, and Student Teaching Services, with the opportunity to provide a response as desired.
• Any students receiving an unsatisfactory (1) rating on a summative Danielson rating will make a growth focused improvement plan.
  
  1. Faculty member creates growth focused plan with student.
  2. Plan is clear to student
  3. Plan is saved with the file name: StudentLastName_StudentFirstName_Program and emailed to program director who drops in the Teams->ECC->ImprovementPlans folder.
  4. When placed in the folder an email is sent to Student Teaching Services, EPP, and a record is created in an excel spreadsheet.
  5. Student strives to fulfill necessary growth outlined by the plan with identified support.
  6. At beginning of 2 ^nd semester following date of improvement plan the Office Assistant for the Dean of Teacher Preparation Programs sends reminder to Program directors for follow-up.
  7. Student meets with faculty member to determine if plan has been fulfilled.
     
     1. If plan is fulfilled, then student moves forward in program.
     2. If plan is not fulfilled, then student changes major.
  8. Faculty member updates Improvement plan in teams.

Approved by ECC on 7/9/2020