The Four Components Of The Danielson Model

In addition, the Danielson Framework includes twenty-two components to the evaluation process and 76 subcomponents to help make the expectations and observable behaviors as precise and clear as possible. The components are research-based to align with the appropriate expectations to instruction. The components are also aligned to the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium standards, and grounded in a constructivist view of learning and teaching (Whiteman, Shi, & Plucker, 2011). An effective piece to the Danielson Framework is that the evaluative comments are much easier for teachers to understand what their rating stands for. For example, the four categories to describe teacher attainment include unsatisfactory, basic, proficient,
and distinguished. The four categories include everything that can go into effective teaching practices (Nielsen, 2014). Each category has a clear and precise description as to what each one means exactly. Therefore, teachers can easily gain an understanding of what all the expectations of effective teaching practices include.
There are many other effective systems of teacher evaluation outside from the classroom observations and formal evaluations by an administrator.
However, those have been looked at as accepted ways of measuring and evaluating a teacher’s effectiveness. Reinventing different types of systems will really make a difference, so that everyone in school benefits and teachers and administrators can actually make improvements and learn from the system. For example, a type of evaluation that appears effective is known as the Toledo Peer Assessment and Review (PAR) model (Darling-Hammond, 2014, p. 5). The (PAR) model is a labor-management breakthrough that introduced intensive mentoring and peer evaluation for both novice teachers and struggling veterans, and ensured serious decisions for tenure and continuations. The (PAR) approach is an established evaluation system with a strong research base as well (Mathis, 2014). Another system, is the Greenwich, Connecticut model where there is also teacher goal-setting and continuous feedback which involves teachers in collecting evidence about their practice and student learning. Research shows that student gains are most pronounced where teachers have longevity and work as a team. Collaborative learning among teachers will do more to support student achievement than dozens of the most elaborate ranking systems ever could (Darling-Hammond, 2014,
p.5).
As stated earlier, teachers need to be provided with evaluation options that allow for supporting teachers through professional reflection and development of their instructional strategies. One method incorporates journaling and blogging as a tool for teachers to self-reflect (Nielsen, 2014). This allows teachers to answer the essential questions of “What are students learning, and “How do we know they have learned it”? These questions follow the framework of the Danielson model and allow teachers a stepping stone to start their reflections. If the teacher can answer these questions before prompting from an administrator, then the teacher is more prepared for the conference about their success in the classroom. Having these questions, and the ability to self-reflect allows the teacher to review instructional strategies that work and do not. This allows teachers to not be afraid to try new approaches because they know the importance of being a reflective teacher. This reflective nature causes the teacher to constantly rethink their methods and effectiveness of their instructional practices. This reflection causes conversations among peers to see what they are using in their classrooms (Neilsen, 2014).
There are also several variables that play a crucial role on the professional development and learning activities of teachers. In the article, How to Activate Teachers Through Teacher Evalauation?, there is information on a study that focuses on the influences of formative teacher evaluation which is a model that improves teachers’ practices (Tuytens & Devos, 2014). Most importantly, the study wanted to figure out exactly what variables influence useful feedback to teachers which teachers receive during an evaluation procedure. According to Tuytens & Devos (2014) “Feedback is central in the teacher evaluation process because it is essential for learning and motivation” (Tuytens & Devos, 2014, p. 511). Teacher evaluation outcomes can be influenced by characteristics of the source, the recipient, and the teacher evaluation procedure. The three different categories of characteristics are worth describing more in depth as they each have several different components.