KRISTI SHIREMAN: We will spend the next few minutes looking at the four domains within the framework.
Each of these domains will be discussed in greater detail throughout the remainder of today. There are four major domains within the framework.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Domain one, planning and preparation. Domain two, the classroom environment. Domain three, instruction. And domain four, professional responsibilities.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Domain two and three involves the direct observation of the skills within the therapy session, while domains one and four,
while critical for effective instruction, occurs behind the scenes. Kristin had talked about these this morning as onstage and offstage.
The components are found in artifacts provided by the therapist, such as home communication letters, team planning notes, and lesson plans.
You saw some examples of this earlier this morning during our mock pre- and post-conference. The meal mat and data collection system were examples of artifacts. In addition, Yvonne shared information
about home communication and her lesson plan activities. These types of discussions that occur during the pre- and post-observation offer some additional artifacts.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Domain one, planning and preparation.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Domain one has six components.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Demonstrating knowledge of content and pedagogy, demonstrating knowledge of students, setting instructional outcomes,
demonstrating knowledge of resources, designing coherent instruction, and designing student assessments.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Again, typically these components are discussed prior to the observation. And again, the therapist would talk about specifics related to planning
and perhaps things such as visual supports, AT programming, any types of activities that the SLP does in preparation for instruction.
And again, several of those examples were demonstrated during the mock pre-observation. Domain two is the classroom environment, and there are four components in this domain.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Creating an environment of respect and rapport, establishing a culture for learning, managing classroom procedures, and managing student behavior.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: And as we mentioned before, domain two would be what's considered onstage, or hands on. Some of the skills
that might be targeted within this domain include things like the SLP's interactions with students, the student interactions with each other if the SLP is providing a small group
or a large group instruction, looking at the rapport between the SLP and the children, looking at management of instructional groups, transitions and how transitions occur and are managed.
Behavior management strategies, management of materials, and safety and accessibility of the physical space. Domain three is instruction with five components.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Communicating with students, using questions and discussion techniques, engaging students in learning, using assessment in instruction, demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Again, domain three is onstage, or directly observable in the framework. And this domain is really the meat of the therapist's instruction,
so you're looking at things like how does communication occur within the instruction. What are the questioning techniques that are used? Is the therapist using low-level questioning?
Are they offering open-ended questions? How is the therapist engaging the students in learning? And how are the children interacting and engaging each other within the instructional process?
Also looking at the kinds of feedback the therapist provides the children, monitoring the progress.
How is the therapist adjusting the lesson and how is the therapist responding to the students? And again, in the mock post-observation, you would have seen us having that dialogue.
I was trying to tease out from her her reflection on her instruction. Domain four is professional responsibilities with six components.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Reflecting on teaching, maintaining accurate records,
communicating with families, participating in a professional community, growing and developing professionally, showing professionalism.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Again, domain four is the offstage component, and this is typically demonstrated during the pre- or post-conference or with artifacts. In our mock post-conference,
Yvonne talked quite a bit about communication with families, so that with some artifacts that she was providing me that I was taking notes on, that would fall into this component.
Also, although we didn't talk about it at the mock post-conference, information such as how is the therapist involved in professional community activities,
the types of things that Kristin and Allie talked about.
This is a component where those rich conversations as a therapist you can provide your supervisor so that you're supervisor understands more of those other responsibilities
that you do each and every day that they are not necessarily going to see in an observation. Are you part of a professional community? You know, what are you doing?
Perhaps you provide an opportunity out in the community. I know that in our preschool program, we have therapists who go out and provide community support on speech development in a library series.
Those kinds of activities your supervisor isn't going to know about directly. They're not going to see that happening when they come to observe you,
but this component I see is the one where you can really provide a lot of rich artifacts and conversation about
all those things that you do professionally that encompass other job responsibilities. In terms of the day-to-day work, maintaining accurate records.
Well, we know that as SLPs, you have a multitude of record keeping, so your timeliness in that, your development of ERs and IEPs, progress reports, MA billing,
whatever the case may be. All of that falls under this behind the scenes component. Each domain has four levels of performance.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Failing, needs improvement, proficient, distinguished.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: So the rubric for each domain is aligned with these four levels of performance. And the rubric allows the therapist to see where his
or her performance falls within each component. So the rubric helps to structure and guide the therapist in terms of professional improvement.
And each of these domains will be looked at with examples specific for speech pathologists. So let's begin by looking at domain one. Kristin?
KRISTIN SZEWCZYK: Thank you. Yes?
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: Excuse me. If I could just make one announcement before we go into the segment.
This is the segment now throughout the rest of the workshop where we need your help on the workshop eval form.
So if you want to go back and forth during the next set of presentations, two before lunch, two after lunch, that we need your help on positive examples.
So on this next set of slides, you're going to see proficient examples of speech and language to the Danielson framework.
And if you have printed the framework, you're going to see some not so positive ones, and so we need many more positive ones.
And that'll help complete the workshop eval so that way you don't need to do it all at the end of the day. Okay, now Kristin. Thank you.
KRISTIN SZEWCZYK: Thank you. Okay, so I am going to be reviewing domain one. So if you don't mind to find that,
that will be very easy to find in our supplemental document since it starts with the first page. And domain one is planning and preparation, which is an offstage domain.
So we're going to break this down into each individual component.
And I do want to note whenever we were developing these examples as a group because we address a large age range as far as students are concerned.
We can serve students anywhere from birth to age 21, so we made these examples non-grade or non-population specific as to the best of our abilities.
But that is why we need your feedback as well pertaining to this rubric and the examples that we composed. Also, I do want to reiterate it's a draft. Okay, so we need your feedback.
So looking at 1A, which is knowledge and pedagogy, okay, our examples that we have here are all proficient.
Okay, so when we look from the teacher perspective, the teacher can identify important concepts of their discipline and their relationships to one another.
So the SLP proficient example we have that coincides with that is the SLP plans to use an alternative -- I'm sorry,
an augmentative alternative communication system consisting of voice output devices, picture communication board,
and sign language for a lesson for a student who is nonverbal. That is what we consider to be a proficient example that coincides with that component.
Moving down to the teacher consistently provides clear expectations of the content. Again, through the SLP lens, a proficient example of that could be,
in teaching students with both articulation and language disorders, the SLP works on skills from each disorder within the session. So those are our proficient examples for this component.
But if you refer to your supplemental handout, looking at our examples for failing, needs improvement, and then distinguished, can you see, you know, the variations among those levels?
So just for example, the failing portion of this says the SLP plans to focus only on articulation during the lesson, while language and fluency are also documented areas of need.
So they're only addressing one discrete area when there are other areas that are documented. Or an example in the area of needs improvement,
the SLP plans a lesson on phonemic awareness without linking the activities to literacy, because we do have a strong supportive role in the area of literacy. Yes?
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I just have a comment.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: With certain students, you can't always do all areas that are on the IEP in one session because of student's attention issues,
KRISTIN SZEWCZYK: Sure.
just different things that you deal with. If you have your justification of why you're not doing those other areas, can that be supported?
KRISTIN SZEWCZYK: Absolutely, and that is -- yes, these are just examples. Right. Whenever I reviewed the first portion this morning was that these are examples.
It's not the end all, be all, but that is the purpose too of the pre-observation conference or more likely with this situation the post-observation conference,
where that, as you and I, as -- you know, in the supervisory roles that we have or in the supervisory relationship, we could discuss that. And you could support that with evidence.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Because I'm trying to think, you know, I have some kids that are going to [inaudible],
so I see them for about ten minutes. Well, you're not going to do every targeted area they have in their IEP in those ten minute that you're working.
KRISTIN SZEWCZYK: Sure, sure. Absolutely. Very good point, thank you. Okay. So moving on to the component 1B, demonstrating knowledge of students. Again, these are proficient examples.
So the teacher also purposefully seeks knowledge from several sources of student's backgrounds, cultures, skills, language proficiency, interests,
and special needs, and obtains this knowledge about groups of students.
So we're using this knowledge of students to guide our planning and preparation for our instruction.
So an example from the speech pathology lens that we just derived was the SLP maintains a student information sheet in his or her logbook for each student that contains information
regarding special needs, medical issues, language proficiency, and culture. So we're using that information to plan and prepare for our lessons.
Moving down to the next bullet under the teacher section, the teacher understands the active nature of the student learning and obtains information about levels of development for groups of students.
So the SLP example for that could look like the SLP plans a lesson containing visual supports, such as a picture communication board, a picture schedule, work system, et cetera,
to promote communication in students diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.
So again, proficient examples, snapshots of what that could look like, but it's not the end all, be all because it is an example.
Okay, moving next to 1C, which is setting instructional outcomes. The component -- most outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline.
An SLP example of that could be the SLP uses assessment information and considers corresponding grade-level academic standards when developing IEP goals because, as John said earlier,
we're making the connection to the general ed curriculum. Then outcomes take into account the varying needs of groups of students, so the SLP sets instructional outcomes
for the student in the area of stuttering based on the types of stuttered words or parts of words. So some examples of what proficient could look like for that component.
And before we progress within the Danielson framework, we are supposed to -- proficient is the level that we need to attain. You know, as it was discussed this morning,
that you can have areas -- you know, you may have needs improvement, you may have some areas of distinguished, you know, but overall we need to have an average of proficiency or proficient.
So moving on to 1D, which that component states demonstrating knowledge of resources.
The component for teachers, the teacher expands knowledge with professional learning groups and organizations. So an example of that for the SLP,
the SLP independently conducts research regarding the use of augmentative alternative communication with students diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders to expand his or her knowledge in this area.
Then moving down to the next teacher component, the teacher pursues options offered by universities,
while the SLP example states the SLP shares effective strategies to address stuttering in the regular education classroom or general education curriculum with colleagues.
So you're planning and preparing to use these resources. And from a proficient standpoint, that you're sharing these with your colleagues as well.
Okay. Moving on to 1D, which that is designing coherent instruction. Okay, the teacher component
states the teacher coordinates knowledge of content of students and of resources to design a series of learning experiences aligned to instructional outcomes and suitable to groups of students.
An SLP example is the SLP allots an appropriate amount of time to address all of the components of the speech and language lesson plan.
For example, providing an introduction with a stated learning objective, providing opportunities for guided and independent practice of the established speech
and language support goals, and then closure for the lesson.
Another teacher component would be the lesson or unit has a clear structure with appropriate and varied use of instructional groups. An example is the SLP creates instructional plans
that are instructionally sound based on the diagnosed speech and language problem, and allow the student to make progress. So again, the component on the left side of the screen or of the handout,
those were taken directly from Danielson, while the examples are what we came up with as our workgroup. Okay, just wanted to clarify that as well.
Okay. 1F, designing student assessments. For teachers, the teacher plan for student assessment is aligned with instructional outcomes,
so an example of that through the lens of an SLP would be the SLP consistently collects assessment data from a variety of sources,
including progress monitoring data, teacher input, parent input, diagnostic assessments, and classroom-based assessments.
So we're not looking at one single aspect of data here. We're looking at multiple sources of data from multiple environments as well.
Then from the teacher component, assessment criteria and standards are clear. The teacher has a well-developed strategy for using formative assessment,
and has designed particular approaches to be used. The SLP example for this could be the SLP consistently reviews student data and adjusts their plans for lessons accordingly.
Okay. And as we go through the day, you know, I want you to take the opportunity too to take a look at all of the examples. You know, we have our proficient examples here,
but take a look at what we came up with for failing, needs improvement, and distinguished as well. Okay. All right. John is going to provide some feedback as well.
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: And at this point, we're going to take a few of the questions. We have many. We'll just take a few now, the rest after lunch,
where we'll see how our time goes. But just to clarify some terminology, we do have some questions on terminology. Where on the slides, as you can see, it says teacher,
that does refer to us in speech and language because, under the current certification system, we are teacher. Not classroom teacher perhaps, but we are considered a teacher.
And so where it says teacher on the sides as we're going through now, and on the rubric it says teacher, that refers to us.
And also the Danielson component is what -- is our understanding as to what we will be assessed on. Now we are providing, and we hope you give us a lot more, examples of how it might look.
So for example, in an actual situation, if I was doing it, and this is just an example, I take a look at the one that was just on our screen of formative assessment. That's the Danielson component.
So a teacher, including us, is expected to use formative assessment. Well, how does that look in speech and language? We have the example on the right side of the slide of how that might look.
So other examples may include developmental checklists or some rubrics for communication skills.
And the point is that, when we hear the words formative assessment as an indicator of what a teacher ought to be doing via the Danielson model,
we take from that in speech and language that we need to be doing more than standardized assessment,
which is one of -- which is a common criticism of us, if you will, as we make our way, you know, throughout the state. So we use both forms of assessment.
And then we take a look at that other one up there, the plan for student -- on 1F that says the student assessment is aligned with instructional outcomes.
And so many times, in a general sense, we do an assessment in speech and language and we plan accordingly for the student. And we might be a little weak, or I'll use myself,
I may be a little weak in making that connection to the general education curriculum or to the standards or to something that needs to be learned in the school setting.
And so we're expected to do those items, and you might have other examples of how that might look. So as we go through, we do want to understand that we are teacher, speech and language,
and the criteria -- this is just an awareness session, but the criteria that will be used to evaluate us is the Danielson components -- are the Danielson components.
And we hope to provide, along with your help, numerous examples for those different evaluators, mostly who do not have a speech and language background,
who will be evaluating us, but we understand that those are examples and that the criteria is the component in Danielson.
Now before we move on to another domain, we do have a couple -- those were a couple questions that came in, in a general sense,
in summary, but here are some very specific ones. How are -- how many observations are required or expected? And one of our colleagues has helped us answer here.
It's one if tenured and two if it's on instructional one. And that probably is not a difference in many organizations from the way it's always been.
Let's see here. In the pre-observation interview, have you requested to see the IEP of student? This would seem to help assess the clinician's skills in developing functional and measurable goals.
It would also help to determine if the lesson correctly reflects goals. And if collected -- if data's collected properly, is this part of the practice?
And of course, that would be up to the individual organization, but my personal experience in reviewing IEPs is that IEPs that most of us write and IEPs
that the classroom special education teachers write are not specific in themselves, in and of themselves, to give us the information to meet these criteria.
It typically needs additional information than the IEPs that I've reviewed, though that might be different where you are, but that's been my experience.
Is this evaluation framework performed for each child on the caseload? No. This evaluation framework is us. It's an evaluation of us as a teacher, as a speech and language pathologist.
Will a recording of this presentation be available on PaTTAN for supervisors in our districts to access? We don't know that answer yet.
And as you know, in the past, years gone by, we used to record all these sessions and have DVDs and so forth,
but since most of our presenters are national presenters, that's not been possible because they make their living this way.
So as you know, in the last four or five years, we've not been able to do the posting on a website or the DVD.
Now though, today, since it's us, and that's no demeaning of us, our presenters are just as qualified as the national presenters,
but since we're from organizations within the public domain in our state, we're going to be doing something. We're not sure yet if it'll -- it's not going to be full DVD,
but certain segments perhaps we just might be able to put onto the PaTTAN website. And when we do, we'll send everybody an email who registered today,
whether it was preregistration or onsite, and then we will -- that'll be a link to access, much the way we did back on December 18th, as many of you recall, when we had technical problems.
Okay. So now I think I'm watching my schedule here in time. We are running a little bit ahead of schedule. And -- but that's okay. We have information here.
So now let me get my terms. We're ready for domain -- is it domain four? I think we're back with domain four. Is that right?
And so, yes, Kristi and Yvonne from the Capital Area IU are coming now to go domain -- we did domain one, Kristin did that. Now we're going to domain four.
Let me get my terms right. The ladies will give me the right terms because they're more up on this than I am. We're doing one and four first because those are --
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Offstage.
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: Offstage, they tell me. Okay.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Hello again. All right. We are going to look at domain four, professional responsibilities.
And as John said, we've chosen to group that with domain one because domain one and domain four are both the offstage domains.
So on the screen, you're looking at -- or you will be looking at 4A, reflecting on teaching.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: We're back.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Now we are. 4A, reflecting on teaching. And looking at the proficient rating,
the Danielson content would indicate the teacher makes an accurate assessment of a lesson's effectiveness and the extent to which it achieved its instructional outcomes.
And also, the teacher makes a few specific suggestions of what could be tried another time the lesson is taught.
So in terms of speech and language examples, we're looking at, in a proficient realm, the SLP consistently assesses the lesson's effectiveness and degree to which outcomes are met
and can cite evidence to support the judgment, in addition to the SLP offers specific suggestions for lesson improvement.
So let's take a look at that last example, the SLP offers specific suggestions for lesson improvement.
So at a proficient level then, that might look, let's say, the therapist is doing an articulation session,
and so they're able to offer some suggestions for improvement at the next therapy session. If I were going to extend that to the distinguished area,
because your rubric offers looks and examples for both failing, needs improvement, proficient, and distinguished, if I took that idea and took it to the distinguished level,
that might mean that the therapist is able to not only come up with those additional strategies to improve the effectiveness of that articulation session next time,
but at a distinguished level, she's able to do that during the current session. So she's able to embed those additional strategies coherently within the current session.
Looking at your rubric in terms of needs improvement,
the SLP would be able to share some global strategies in the post-conference about understanding that, yes, there are some improvements needed in that session,
but really wouldn't be able to give specific strategies such as perhaps, you know, increasing tactile, visual, verbal supports, that type of thing.
And a speech and language example for the failing area performance might be that the supervisor would recognize that the session content and strategies
were not appropriate or at all effective during that session, but the SLP was not able to recognize this or unable to offer any strategies to improve instruction.
Looking at the component 4B, maintaining accurate records, the Danielson content, teacher system for maintaining information on student completion of assignments, student progress and learning,
and non-instructional records is fully effective. And the speech and language examples might include SLP meets all timelines, consistent data collection is evident for progress monitoring,
and progress reports include specific student data toward annual goals.
And we have talked about that earlier this morning. We know the amount of paperwork involved. At a proficient level, we're looking at all of those types of paperwork systems and requirements.
The timelines are met, the specificity is in the paper process, the progress monitoring data is specific, it's coherent, it's as it needs to be. Proficient.
In terms of a distinguished example, I might suggest that, in our mock pre- and post-observation today, I asked Yvonne to share the data collection system that she had developed.
If she shared that with our program and we incorporated that within our program and colleagues were utilizing that system, and this is just my way of thinking,
that would be an example of moving from proficient in this area to distinguished because not only is Yvonne doing what she needs to do to be timely and appropriate in her paperwork,
but she's offering above and beyond in that area to support her colleagues and the program in developing a system.
And then certainly needs improvement, there would be inconsistencies in that area. And in terms of failing, obviously the timelines would not be met and the paperwork would be incomplete.
Looking at 4C, communicating with families. At the proficient level,
the Danielson content indicates teacher communicates frequently with families about the instructional program and conveys information about individual student progress.
Also, information to families is conveyed in a culturally appropriate manner and the teacher makes some attempts to engage families in the instructional program.
In terms of speech and language examples at the proficient level, the SLP consistently initiates responses to families to inform the parent or guardian about the student
and the instructional program, and the SLP contacts are consistently culturally appropriate. Moving that into the distinguished area, I would look at that in terms of communication with families.
Perhaps the therapist, again, goes above and beyond to develop a communication system with the family, ensuring developing that system with the family initially,
not just assuming that the communication notebook that Yvonne sends home and which is certainly proficient in providing information to families,
but recognizing that perhaps the family has other means of communication that they would prefer
or some other need that would anticipate needing a different type of communication system. So the therapist would have that conversation with the family upfront
and actually develop that communication system specific to that family's individual needs. I would see that being an example of distinguished.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: And an example of that might be, just like we talked about, the videoing because a lot of our families now like to have that.
And we had the advantage at our IU that we were able to get Flip video cameras for all of our classrooms, so we frequently will use those to do Flip videos
and then to be able to send them home with the families or with the child so the families can observe because it's obviously a lot easier to understand it when sometimes --
when you can see it than just when we write our quick notes and trying to describe it very quickly to a family how we were encouraging that child to do that skill.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Under needs improvement in that area, an example might be that the SLP responds inconsistently to the parent inquiries in regard to the instructional program,
or the information that the therapist provides is not specific to the individual. So maybe in the communication notebook, although I know you don't do this, Yvonne,
but in the communication notebook, perhaps rather than being specific about the child's goals and activities and outcome from your session that I observed,
which was proficient in that home communication, perhaps if she just wrote, I saw --
YVONNE SHREFFLER: I saw. Circled, I saw the child.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: I saw the child today. That might be an example of needs improvement. There's some information provided, but the specificity is lacking. And then, of course, under failing,
I would think that the SLP fails to respond to the parent inquiries and does not provide any feedback regarding programming, and is inappropriate or insensitive to cultural differences.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Excuse me.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Mm-hmm?
AUDIENCE MEMBER: So what I'm thinking of a lot of things that you're saying I just take for granted in my job, but I need to start being advocate for myself.
Like a lot of times at lunchtime, I'll have a parent just stop by at lunch. I'll come down, I'll grab the student, and I'll show you what we're doing in therapy.
Or sometimes I'll even take my iPhone and I'll call myself and I'll put volume on speaker and I'll say, okay, I just want you to hear what we're doing in therapy and stuff.
But I don't write all those little things down, but I need to start doing that to be an advocate to show, yes, I'm going above and beyond. And like some parents, I know how the parents are,
I just call them in the middle of the session and say -- and she goes, oh, my gosh, thank you much. Now I totally understand what you want me to do at home.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: And that's a great example -- that's a great example of that conversational piece that you will have with your supervisor.
Those are evidence or artifacts that you can provide when you're having that discussion.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Yeah, I think that's great.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Right, we really have to toot our own horn, but we have to show how we're tooting it, you know, if that makes sense, so.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: [inaudible]
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Yeah, so that's evidence. Okay.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: Anything else on that? The next one we're going to look at professional responsibilities, domain four, and that's 4D, and participating in a professional community.
As we talked about, under the component for this is teacher's relationship with colleagues are characterized by mutual support and cooperation.
Teacher actively participates in a culture of professional inquiry.
Teacher volunteers to participate in school events, and in school and district projects, making a substantial contribution. So not just attending, but contributing.
Under some SLP examples, the SLP is open in sharing expertise and materials with the colleagues.
The SLP volunteers for professional community opportunities and actively participates in the content discussion and outcomes determined.
Basically, the SLP is willing to share their materials and ideas. The SLP may volunteer to engage in community activities, kind of like what the example
Kristi gave earlier about speaking at the local library on speech and language development for preschoolers.
I know my situation, there's several of us that take turns and rotate throughout couple of our local libraries to their little parents and peanuts programs.
And we go out and present on the different levels of either communication, we do -- we hit all areas. So and that's been a huge success.
Looking at the distinguished, the SLP takes a leadership role in supporting colleagues' growth such as participation in the mentor program
or providing opportunity for graduate externships or participating in our local or state organizations. Under the needs improvement, the SLP has wonderful ideas,
but is hesitant to share these -- to share their ideas. I kind of refer to them as they're a little self-serving. They attend the required meetings,
but don't actually contribute actively during the meeting, those that we see maybe sitting at the meeting and looking at their phones or bring their computers
to the meetings and browse -- do their emails. And we know that we're all under time restraints, but you know, we need to give our utmost attention to the speakers.
And then, of course, under the failing is the SLP is negative or self-serving in attitude and relationships with colleagues. It's kind of those person -- that person you kind of try to avoid.
They're just a downer. The SLP refuses to participate in activities which promote professional communities with their colleagues. They're the ones that, you know, you ask them
to attend something and, boy, you know, what am I going to get out of this? Or I'm sorry, I can't do that today or I can't do that next week, I can't work that into my schedule.
Under the next one is under professional responsibilities, domain four. 4E is growing and developing professionally. And again, we looked at this at the proficient level.
The Danielson content would be that the teacher seeks out opportunities for professional development to enhance content knowledge and their skills.
The teacher welcomes feedback from colleagues either when made by their supervisor or when opportunities arise through professional opportunities or collaboration.
And the teacher participates actively in assisting other educators.
Some speech and language examples would be that the speech language pathologist actively seeks training reflecting of current caseload.
You know, they look at their caseload. It's not the same trainings they're going to over and over again.
They really look at, well, this year I have a lot of children that have assistive technology needs, so I really want to attend some conferences related to that.
They actively use feedback to develop skills and improve their own practice. So maybe they attended one of those trainings.
And when Kristi comes out, she actually sees one of those new techniques or one of the new materials being used.
And under the -- again, under the proficient is that the therapist is considered proficient when they actively seek out the trainings relevant to their caseload,
like I said, and they really use -- maybe ask a peer and ask them to come out and really observe.
I know for myself, I have the opportunity to share an office -- well, offices with different therapists, so I kind of have -- I can pick everybody's brain.
And I love that because then I get new little techniques and strategies to use across the board. And then I also try to share those opportunities.
And then under the distinguished, the SLP makes a substantial contribution to the school or program. This might look like chairing a professional or a study group, let's say for example on apraxia,
with their peers within the program. Or they're broadening the program initiative in the area such as, like I said, assistive technology.
Under needing improvement, the SLP attends the required program professional development, but doesn't seek out opportunities to grow knowledge and application within the area of speech and language.
Those are those ones that I always look at that are frantically looking for their either ASHA hours and they'll attend anything just so they can get them, so you know, just to get the hours,
not about necessarily looking at their caseload. And then the failing, the SLP does not actively participate in any professional organizations
or seek to grow in skills which will support the children's instruction.
Under 4F, showing professionalism, under the proficient, the Danielson content is the teacher displays high standards of honesty, integrity,
and confidentiality in their interactions with colleagues, students, and the public.
This was a big key one for us when we talked about this. It was either you're -- you maintain confidentiality or you don't. There's no gray area in there.
The teacher is actively active in serving students, working to ensure that all students receive a fair opportunity to succeed.
Teacher complies fully with school and district regulations. Teacher maintains an open mind in team or departmental decisions that are made.
Some SLP examples would be that the -- again, the SLP demonstrates professional behaviors at all times, and confidentiality is maintained.
I would hope that we all know what professional behavior looks like and sounds like. A therapist is considered to be proficient when they demonstrate professional behaviors at all time,
which may include their dress, manners, attitude, conversational skills, and, of course, maintaining confidentiality.
A distinguished SLP would demonstrate a leadership in advocating for the children and the families.
An SLP would need to improve if they need to be reminded about the dress code and the -- maybe the language. However, they maintain confidentiality.
I can't stress that enough. An SLP would be considering failing, as you can kind of fill in the blank, is if they breach confidentiality or display any unprofessional behaviors.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: I have to apologize. John has been in the back of the room holding up a sign,
and he forgets that I am now old and cannot read from that distance, so I'm not sure what he's been asking of us.
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: Well, anyway, you're not old.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Was it a question?
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: It was. I should have written it a little bolder. Yeah, we had a question here and a comment in the live audience.
Kristi answered it from upfront here, where our speech and language person said that, I do these kinds of things, it was in domain, it was in your earlier slides,
and Kristi confirmed that maybe I need to be a little more explicit in, you know, defining them or going about them. I think that was what you were getting at, right?
KRISTI SHIREMAN: Yes.
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: And so what I wanted to comment on, but I'll have time to do that, that's what I wanted to do. I don't want to take away, but thanks for calling me up here.
YVONNE SHREFFLER: No, it's wonderful.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: I'd be happy to finish for you, but I just had to let you know that I could not see what you were so desperately trying to show us.
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: I'll be back when you're done.
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: Yes, this part wasn't rehearsed, but I'll come back when you're -- or are you finished?
YVONNE SHREFFLER: We are.
KRISTI SHIREMAN: We are finished.
JOHN DELLEGROTTO: Then I'm back. All right. Okay. Couple of questions we want to answer here from our participants in the other locations. And also too, in just about a minute
or two, we'll take questions from the live audience. You know, we're stressing, stressing, stressing you can't see the screen that goes out, but every couple minutes, they put up an email
that says send your questions to this email, pattan@witf. But here, you know, we don't give you that chance, so we'll give you the chance to ask questions orally in just a couple minutes.
So where we are now is that we've had our main domains in Danielson, main applications to speech and language in a general sense.
These last two sections on domains one and four, a more explicit connection to Danielson. And in doing so, here's what's going on in my estimation.
Because like a lot of us would be thinking, well, I do this and I do that. It's just assumed that I do a good IEP. It's assumed that I provide good instruction that lets the kids progress.
And the dilemma is this. It's in all of teaching. So a framework like Danielson, and there are others there, and the state has chosen
to work with Danielson, this framework is breaking out teaching so that way we can literally find out what good teaching is, what good instruction is, what good assessment is,
and so forth. And in doing that, then we have a better opportunity to make us all, every one of us, go towards the proficient, distinguished.
And it's very similar to years ago, most people are familiar with Bloom's taxonomy as one of the first venues where someone tried to break out the teaching act
into different elements. And most of us are pretty familiar with that in education. And that was the first attempt. There have been many since, many good ones.
And now we have one that's linked to the evaluation process in more than a general sense because so many of the evaluation processes
or products out there, both maybe within our state and I know nationally for sure, have -- are general. They're very general.
And so because they're general, then it's hard to make the distinguish -- not the distinguished level.
It's hard to make the differentiation between this level and that level and then tie it all into student -- how the students do. So that's what this -- in my estimation, I try to keep that in mind.
And so now it gives us an opportunity in speech and language is what I'm getting at. We have an opportunity in speech and language in these examples to -- and ones that you hopefully give us
to lay out what is good practice, what is bad practice. We don't want to lay that out too much. What is good practice in speech and language.
And in doing so, then we could target because, as you know, in our state, we do not have a set of guidelines, if you will, that are just speech and language.
They're -- we're wrapped into the special education, regular education, and that's the way it is, and it's been that way for many years.
So now our organization, our national organization, ASHA, has many indicators of what are effective practices in speech and language pathology. And in my estimation,
they might come up on the short end on schools because when they do them, they try to make it more eclectic, if you will, to all settings. And in doing that, it's a dilemma somewhat.
So I really think we have an opportunity here, and that's why I'm prepping us up to, before we go to lunch here,
if you would turn over the backside of the evaluation form and take a look at domains one and four and just start to think about what you might add to what we have.
And I'm going to give you two examples. There's a question coming in here, and actually, in the question is something that -- let's see.
I'm not sure where Kelly's from, but Kelly, if you're still with us there, we need to get this as input for us. Okay.
It says, does the example of focusing on articulation and language really relate to providing clear and consistent explanations of content?
Would not a better example be to provide examples of how SLPs plan to demonstrate articulation placement, or explain and demonstrate a fluency shaping strategy?
There's two examples that we could -- Kelly, you could -- please enter those on your form because those will fit as two additional examples for us.
And here's another. This is Mary, Mary Anne Katel, if you're still with us there. Enter this please to help us out.
An early intervention, we're often providing direct instruction to the teacher or a family member who is then going to be the person who is directly interacting with the child, a la coaching.
This coaching technique is direct instruction to another adult, not just communicating with the other adult. So there's one that goes in -- that could probably go in any domain.
My guess is domain one or four at this point. So those are two examples that would add to our compendium of examples, and there's many, many, many that we can use this as an opportunity.
Now, questions that we can take orally from the live audience? We must have piqued something here.
Now we didn't prep the live audience, so we'll just wait those eight seconds, you know, for questions. Eight-second wait. Oh, here's one.
But it's not from the live audience. Thank you. Oh, come on, live audience. We'll give you eight more seconds.
Oh, it was shared earlier in the presentation that speech pathologists would be using a lesson plan format as suggested.
Where can one access? Is there a draft of the lesson plan to be used by all teachers? Our understanding is, at this point in time,
to our knowledge, there are no -- there is no set of forms to be accessed. Now since this is not the formal training
on the actual instrument, those may appear, they might not appear, whenever your organization receives its formal training.
We just don't know that. There are items out there. You can -- there's items out there by other organizations who use Danielson and so on and so forth,
but from our perspective, we're at the awareness level today, and we'll wait and see what happens with the formal training.
So now live audience, any questions? That's a terrible thing to say, is any questions out there? We appreciated your comments and your question from earlier.
And live audience is hinging on when all 1,200 of us go for lunch. And so -- and so what we're going to do is, at this point, we know we're going early.
We're going to go ahead and go to lunch because we want to stay with our domains, the other two domains this afternoon.
And there are about 20 more questions that have been coming in, and we greatly appreciate that.
And so what we're going to do is -- please, though, get the start on filling out the backside of the workshop evaluation form so that way,
when we do end, then you don't have to sit and fill it in for 15, 20 minutes after we end. So if you please take the time to do that now,
and then we will return from lunch as planned. So please fill out -- complete, give us some feedback and/or examples, and then we'll return with the presentation.
You are here:
Students are an intrinsic part of the information sharing process. They can reflect on their learning and be involved in a number of ways.
Student-led conferences are an increasingly common way for schools to carry out some of their information sharing with parents. They give students an opportunity to share with their growth as a learner with their parents. Find out more about student-led conferences below:
Student reflection in written reports
Students can reflect on their learning as part of the school’s written reporting process. Students could write a letter to their parents or complete a template to insert into the report.
The letter or template could include some reflection stems such as:
- I feel good about…
- I used to… but now I…
- Two things I will remember about what I have learnt over the last 6 months are…
- A strategy that really helped me learn better is…
- If I could do something again differently, I would…
- One thing I will remember to do in the future is…
- One thing I really want to learn is...
Students could complete six-monthly self-assessments that are related to their important learning goals. They could develop criteria with the teacher and then assess themselves at two time points using a tool such as the one below.
These assessments could also be shared with parents during student-led conferences, through portfolios or through inserting them into written reports.
Download a template of this diagram here.
Template Student self assessment of learning dispositions (Word 2007 78 KB)
Return to top
Effective reporting involves each child in taking increasing responsibility for his or her own learning. Students need to be clear about: what they have learnt, which learning strategies were successful, what they need to focus on next and why it is important. (Principle 4)