The Connecticut Department of Education today released the UConn Neag School of Education report on the implementation of SEED, Connecticut’s system for educator evaluation and development, in the 10 pilot districts/consortia during the 2012-13 school year.
The 81-page report found that “SEED was implemented with a relatively high degree of fidelity.” It also outlined issues and challenges, including the fact that opportunities for professional growth through SEED were not fully realized. The report called for strengthening the infrastructure and outlined eight recommendations.
- Provide additional opportunities for all educators to learn about SEED.
- Build the skills of evaluators.
- Increase the use of complementary observers.
- Provide additional guidance on Student Learning Objectives and Indicators of Academic Growth and Development.
- Clarify and contextualize SEED to district and school personnel.
- Disseminate promising practices.
- Provide additional assistance to low-performing districts to support SEED’s implementation.
- Continue to track SEED’s implementation and effects.
CEA Executive Director Mark Waxenberg said the report clearly shows the need for flexibility and continuous revisions. “The report reflects many of the concerns and issues teachers have been tackling. We must all continue to work together with the stakeholders to revise the plan and get it done right for the best interest of the students in the classroom.”
Very simply stated; no graph needed. This is all about PROVING not improving.
I believe this is about cleaning up after administrators who allowed sub-par teachers to be tenured. Now EVERYONE has to suffer-I am not learning anything other than to PROVE what I believe I already do.
All I can say about the graph is…duh! Spending so much time on paperwork for SEED that I have very little time for creating lessons for the Common Core. If we taught our kids step d without steps a, b, and c and held them accountable (I.e. Grades), we would be fired. Yet that’s what is happening. We are being held accountable via evaluations for this exact situation!
Epic fail…who do teachers hold accountable for this fiasco? Malloy?
Read here. Stay the course says Pryor with input from “education stakeholders”….hmmm that wouldn’t be teachers would it?
He must have meant SHAREHOLDERS: corporations, policy wonks, foundation malanthropists, hedgeucators, Gates USDOE, etc.
You know the people who have never and will never teach children.
Ok, here’s one request if we continue with this evaluation or any other program. Please clarify and simplify the language. Teachers are intelligent beings who can figure things out, but I believe part of the stress is from the need to develop a new vocabulary to be evaluated when we are already extremely overloaded with actually teaching our students. Our knowledge base stretches from numeracy to quantum mechanics, but I still don’t know what SEED stands for or what it refers to. We could have Teacher Objectives, Student Objectives, and then Evidence for both. I get confused with SLO’s and IAGD’s and feel a little silly saying them.
As always, NEAG is an advertising/Public relations branch for Pryor and his top down reforms. These were T the same people who rubber stamped Vallas’ “program”. They are about as credible as a three dollar bill.
I simply want to teach my students and spend the time I am made to spend writing SLOs, filling out pre and post ob forms and providing artifacts, coming up with innovative and engaging lessons that will help my students learn. I am NOT concerned about SBAC scores, MAP scores and any standardized tests. I am more concerned about the whole student. I refuse to let something as ill-conceived as SEED define me as a teacher!