1. Principal Performance Review: 2012-13
Principal Performance Review 2012-13
End-of-Year Summary
Principal’s Name: Lori Anne DiMarco-Evanko
School Name:I.S. Henry Hudson DBN:08X125
Date:June 24-2013
This is to be completed by you, the principal. To complete:
1. Copy each goal from your Principal Performance Review (PPR).
2. Provide a summary of the progress you have made in reaching each goal in the space provided.
3. Provide a summary of the progress you have made in addressing Parts B and C of your PPR in the space
provided.
4. Save the document and email it to your superintendent by Friday, June 28, 2013. If you need additional
time to complete this summary, please reach out to your superintendent.
The table will expand as you type.
Goal 1: PPR Goals
Goal 1:
Continue to deepen teacher pedagogy by utilizing Danielson’s Framework for Teaching for Informal
Formative Feedback to support teachers’ growth that is focused and aligned to school goals and
promotes student needs as outlined in the Common Core Learning Standards.
Measurable Target:
Teacher performance was measured using three measurement systems: 1) Formal observations of
classroom practice using Kim Marshal Teacher Evaluation Rubric approved by New York
State/DOE, 2) teaching, “work samples” and performance assessments or decisions in granting
tenure or movement on the career ladder, and 3) Danielson Framework for Teaching formative,
frequent walkthroughs.
Summary of Progress:
Formal observations support teachers growth in the Workshop Model and Reading and Writing for
Emergent students. CCLS tasks show rigorous work with growth progression that is tied to Formal
Teacher observations and Danielson Framework for Teaching. Two teachers were granted tenure
this year. Three teachers were extended Probation. All three teacher have made significant
Improvements in pedagogy and planning and preparation.
In addition, DRP, CCLS Tasks and Regents results show significant gains in student learning due to
increase in teachers pedagogical skill and knowledge about students reading abilities and
emergent reading.
Goal 2: All teachers in Math, ELA, Science and Social Studies will implement one performance task
in the Winter of 2012 (December deadline) and one performance task in the spring (April 2013
deadline). Cluster teachers will work with one or several content area teachers.
The performance measured student’s capacities, including depth of understanding, writing and
research skills, numerical understanding, and complex analysis skills etc… The initial assessment
was used to compare the summative assessment at the end of the performance task unit. The data
advised teachers, students, parents and leaders of the students levels of understanding by
identifying strengths to build upon, or limitations that need improvement according to the CCLS.
Summary of Progress:
1

2. Principal Performance Review: 2012-13
Teachers have used performance task data to successfully differentiate lesson planning and
academic tasks. Lesson planning was a priority as the tool and vehicle to allow entry to all tasks.
Using DOK questions teachers ensured that they were providing students with rigorous skills and
critical thinking. Throughout the CCLS teachers used material at different reading levels to give all
students access to rigorous work and complex text. Results show significant growth from pre to
post CCLS Task Assessment. Implementation and follow through of Data conversations with
administrators was successful in targeting student needs.
Goal 4: Instruction through diagnosis and intervention
Summary of Student Progress:
We have made significant gains in reading;
:
· Use the DRP to assess all 6th, 7th and 8th (January) Grade students in September 2012,
January 2013 and May 2013 to measure growth over time.
· Determine the students’ independent reading level from the first DRP assessment analysis
and determine cut-off score used to do further evaluations, including the screeners recommended
by the MSQI team.
· independent reading levels were determined and teachers provided texts that students could
read with a 90 percent comprehension level.
• Small reading groups differentiated students reading further and the use of reciprocal
reading in all content areas.
· Degrees of Reading Power Results for 6th
and 7th
Grade;
October 2012:: 45% of students below grade level/ 21% of students at risk/ 21% of students on
grade level/ 13% above grade level
February 2013: 41% of students below grade level/ 22% of students at risk/ 18% of students on
grade level/ 19% above grade level
June 2013: 30% of students below grade level/ 26.5% of students at risk/ 13.5% of students
on grade level/ 29.5% above grade level
Highlights of Results: 15% reduction in below grade level reading in 9 months and 16.5 increase in
above grade level reading in 9 months.
Regents Scores:
US History: 26 students took the Regents and 24 Passed the regents
students Passes
Algebra: 27 students took the Regents and all 27 passed the regents.
Liv.Environment: 25 students took the Regents and 25 students passed the regents
Summary of progress:
2

3. Principal Performance Review: 2012-13
Goal 2:
Summary of progress:
Goal 3:
Summary of progress:
Goal 4:
Summary of progress:
Goal 5: (If necessary)
Summary of progress:
Summarize the progress you have made in meeting the expectations for Part B: Attention to
populations with special needs:
From our last DRP report (February) we had significant increases in our ELL and Special Education
Population. We are awaiting our results for the last DRP report for June.
Summarize the progress you have made in meeting the expectations for Part C: Compliance with
Legal Mandates/key DOE policies:
We have complied with all legal mandates bar any technical/ computer issues or staffing situations that are not in our
control.
3