paetep - Erie EA

Overcoming PA-ETEP Myths and Misconceptions

If you've been teaching here long enough, you know that your performance as a teacher each year is evaluated through an electronic, online application called PAETEP, which stands for Pennsylvania Electronic Teacher Evaluation Portal. But did you know that this portal is actually a two-way street? For many of us, the PA-ETEP portal has come to be something to dread because it's where our Observations and Walkthrough data is collected and given to us. Who among us hasn't clicked on our email after a walkthrough to see how we've been "dinged" this time? And that's so often what it seems to be isn't it?

"Did not have Learning Target on the board."
"Student had his head down the whole time."
"Please show evidence of PLC instructional strategies."

And so on. Is there anything we can do about it?

We believe there is.

An overlooked feature of PA-ETEP is the "Anecdotal Notes" module. This is where most of us see the "Walkthrough" entries our principals make. It's also where most of the anxiety about PA-ETEP comes from: in the form of any number of stupid comments made about a literal fraction of a period within our 7-hour day. We believe we can overcome some of this anxiety by taking back the Anecdotal Notes module.

The strategy we offer is this: We leverage the Anecdotal Notes feature of PA-ETEP to flood the system with irrefutable evidence of our professionalism, our strengths, and our great teaching. YES, IT WILL TAKE SOME EFFORT. But if even half of us begin pumping PA-ETEP with fair, honest, rational, and indisputable examples of what we do, we can control the narrative and move the needle toward the positive in our favor.

At right is a table we offer as "canned comments" (not unlike those we use for report cards) that we offer you. Copy, paste, and publish as you see fit into your ETEP whether in response to a Walkthrough or a comment or any other kind of anecdotal note an administrator should happen to add to your file.

Their Comment	Our Suggested Responses
General Use	Please refer to the May 17, 2016 agreement between the district and the EEA regarding Lesson Plan minimums. I am within the boundaries of that agreement. Note my use of the strategy/ies provided in our most recent PLC and the efficacy of said strategy in my classroom. Because your most recent walkthrough missed this aspect of my instruction, here is evidence of student learning you were unable to gather: (post relevant examples of evidence).
Learning Targets	Research suggests that requiring a learning target is often a performative act that exists as a “box to check” for administrators. Testing demands today have pushed students past worrying about learning targets; they want to know what’s going to be on the test. For many students, cognitive overload is real, and having learning targets on the board can be overwhelming. Research shows that posting a learning target can actually steal that “Aha!” moment from students. I am officially requesting administrative guidance on how to form and post effective Learning Targets.
Support/Lack of Administrative Support	I have asked my administration for support in this area (specific dates here). Please see the number of RTI entries I’ve submitted for this student and advise me on what more I can do.
Administrative Instructions	This was outside the purview of my instructional day. I request clarification as to the time frame in which this is to be performed. I was not properly inserviced on this, thus I cannot implement it with fidelity without further instruction. This seems to be a new mandate or directive. Can you provide me with the narrative behind that (the date the committee approved this and the guidelines)? Please advise as to “best practices” for lag time in waiting for student responses. Is it 5 seconds? 8? 20? A full minute? This entry conflicts with instructions given in our PLC dated ___. Can you please provide clarification with examples?
Contractual Issues	I request clarification as this appears to violate the collective bargaining agreement The contract affords me 24 hours notice before I am required to meet with a parent during the school day. I was not provided a sub and could not leave my classroom unattended. This is a change to the past practice relative to the request. Please refer to Article III H.1 of the CBA that states if a change is made in textbooks, curriculum, materials or programs those must be approved by a committee prior to implementation. I believe this constitutes a change and would like clarification on the dates the committee met and implemented those formal changes. Article V, Section V. states: “A teacher shall not be required to accept additional children into his regular classroom because a substitute teacher was not provided, except in case of emergency.” Article V, Section E. Subsection 2 states, “Teachers shall have a duty-free lunch period for at least thirty (30) minutes. Duty-free shall be considered to mean without any responsibility to assist in the passage of students from one place to another or being required to remain on the school premises.” Article V, Section G. states: “Teachers shall be given the time necessary to use the rest room.”