Professional Pathways for Teachers: 2018-2019 Appraisal Results for Career and Technical Education Instructors
Comparisons between CTE and non-CTE instructors and between CTE endorsements were examined in the context of PPfT and CTE’s overlapping goals of quality instruction and professional learning. CTE instructors had significantly higher summative scores than did non-CTE instructors. Almost twice as many CTE as non-CTE instructors earned a distinguished rating. Results supported key indicators of CTE high-quality instruction (i.e., prepared and effective program staff, engaging instruction, work-based learning opportunities, and standards-aligned and industry-based curriculum and instruction).
The purpose of this report is to help stakeholders of Professional Pathways for Teachers (PPfT) understand and refine the methods used to measure program implementation and outcomes. This report also contains summative data on the progress of PPfT, which just completed its third year. PPfT first launched district-wide in AISD in the 2016–2017 school year, and since then the concept behind the program has been refined to that of empowering teachers and improving the quality of teaching through a multi-measure appraisal and compensation system.
Professional Pathways for Teachers (PPfT) is a human capital system that blends three primary components: appraisal, compensation, and professional development (PD) opportunities. The purpose of PPfT is to build the capacity of Austin Independent School District (AISD) teachers through a comprehensive system of supports and compensation with the ultimate goal of having a positive impact on teacher retention and student achievement. The current evaluation document presents descriptive analyses of the 2017–2018 PPfT appraisal and compensation data.
The purpose of this Professional Pathways for Teachers (PPfT) evaluation was to examine the measurement validity and reliability of PPfT appraisal data from the 2017–2018 school year. The PPfT appraisal is a multi-measure system that covers three areas: instructional practices (IP), professional growth and responsibilities (PGR), and two student growth measures: a teacher-level student learning objective (SLO) measure and a campus-level school-wide value-added (SWVA) measure.
This report presents a question-driven exploration of growth and achievement data using SAS EVAAS reports. The purpose of this exploration was to bring additional data, information, and ways of thinking about student growth to ongoing district conversations about the measurement of campus-level student growth.