Basic Teacher Expectations

PBS Teaching Standards

Professional Development Plan

Evaluation Calendar

Professional Growth Cycle Overview

The Professional Growth Cycle involves three distinct stages over a three-year period.  These stages are: the Evaluation Stage, the Reflection Stage, and the Implementation Stage.  Teachers will continue with this cycle, beginning anew at the end of the Implementation Stage, throughout their tenure as a PBS faculty member.  The purpose of this process is to build and maintain faculty excellence.  The goals are to engage faculty in ongoing dialogue about their practice with administration, to provide faculty with multiple lenses and feedback loops from administration and colleagues, and to be strategic and targeted with professional growth opportunities.  Furthermore, the evaluation process is based on and therefore reinforces the PBS Teaching Standards.

Evaluation Stage

The purpose of the Evaluation Stage is to live out the guiding principles of the PBS mission in our work as adults in a professional learning community.  In this year, the teacher and the Associate Head of School will co-construct goals for the teacher based on dialogue framed by the PBS Teaching Standards.  Observations and ongoing follow-up meetings throughout the year will focus on these goals.  The teacher will receive a formal written summary of the routine feedback he/she has received throughout the year.  The intention of this stage is to give each teacher the opportunity to work closely with an administrator in assessing areas of strength and areas for continued professional growth.  As part of this stage, teachers will gather evidence of their work towards meeting their goals.

Teachers in their first two years at PBS will participate in the Evaluation Stage before the Reflection Stage.

Reflection Stage

The Reflection Stage provides an opportunity to interact with the Head of School to respond to the self-assessment and feedback of Evaluation report.  The teacher will utilize the Professional Development Plan to:

  • establish new and refined goals,
  • build support structures,
  • utilize resources for professional growth.  
In addition to ongoing dialogue with the Head of School, a teacher in this year may collaborate with peers by:
  • inviting for purposeful observation and constructive dialogue,
  • reviewing video,
  • checking student work for understanding,
  • discussing specific articles or books, workshops, and/or other professional development opportunities pertaining to the outlined goals.  

While there is no formal Evaluation Report at the end of this stage, the feedback opportunities will be ongoing from multiple sources – administrative and peers.  It is the teacher’s responsibility to maintain documentation of this feedback.

Implementation Stage

While teachers are expected to implement practices learned from professional development opportunities and to respond to feedback with timely action on an ongoing basis, the Implementation Stage is intended for the teacher to assess the impact of the reflection and action steps.

In this Stage, the teacher will have the opportunity to demonstrate accountability for the professional growth by sharing with the faculty community his/her area of research and growth.  Furthermore, when a teacher is in this stage, he/she should be available to be a peer observer, who provides feedback for a colleague in the Reflection Stage.

Special Administrative Review

At any point in this cycle, the Head of School in consultation with the Associate Head of School may determine that a teacher should enter a year of special administrative review due to significant concerns about one or more areas of job performance.  The Head of School will meet with the teacher to discuss those issues and implications for continuing employment at PBS.  Benchmarks may be set that will have to be met in order for a contract to be offered for the following year.  Any employee in this administrative review process can expect to receive written feedback from the Head of School regarding the benchmarks for improvement, the timeline for decision-making, and the Head’s assessment of progress toward those benchmarks.

June, 2012