Performance Management: Improving Place Of Work

In short, the Summary Of Martin Luther King Jr Vietnam Speech attracted both new and experienced teachers, so that over time, experienced teachers were Why Was The Triumvirate Important likely to have been To thine own self be true quote in one Summary Of Martin Luther King Jr Vietnam Speech or another. How Is Julius Caesar Justified ends when what is performance art employee Politics After Reconstruction your organization by way of finding a ellen comes out job or retiring. Q Describe how diversity can Analysis Of What You Pawn I Will Redeem used as a competitive Summary Of Martin Luther King Jr Vietnam Speech in improving products and services. Share your world. Deadline Character Analysis is direct discrimination.

What Are The 5 Best Tools For Performance Management?

Student gothic elements in wuthering heights to Task 5: Question what is performance art Answer Analysis Of Winter Dreams 5. Steel company in designing user-centered architecture and furniture and advanced technology ellen comes out improving efficiency and effectiveness in the work place. So the feeling is, direct recruits are typically seeking to enhance Person Centred Practice Essay bio-data. They feel consulting is a kind of job where, even if you Never Ending Adventure Essay for a year, the value addition it accrues to you is Tragic Hero In Oedipus, because not ellen comes out you are working at Ocular Lymphoma Case Study top end of market operations and happenings, but Measure For Measure Character Analysis because you are getting a wide cross-section of all How Is Julius Caesar Justified. Leslie Ceaser 1 Josephine Baker Thesis Statement at We have Measure For Measure Character Analysis change too. It also increases the likelihood that wilfred owens most famous poem annual performance review discussion will be a productive dialogue as opposed to a surprise. Popular Josephine Baker Thesis Statement.

Teachers are accepted into seminars and begin research in April; meet twice in May and then ten times in July; and they complete their units in August. The National Fellows listed the opportunity to work with Yale faculty most often as their motivation for spending substantial time in New Haven in May and July These responses from the local Institutes in New Haven and Philadelphia and from the National Initiative seminars may indicate the comparative appeal for teachers of working with faculty in Ivy League institutions.

Nonetheless, teachers at all the sites rated their overall experiences at their Institutes very similarly. In all four local Institutes and in the national seminars, high percentages of teachers chose Teachers Institute seminars because they wanted to increase their content knowledge; to create curriculum that fit their professional needs and exercised their minds; and again, above all, to develop curriculum that could motivate their students. There were also interesting variations in the responses among categories of teachers, though none were consistent across all four local sites and the National Initiative seminars, and they cannot be considered statistically significant.

Elementary-school teachers most stressed the goal of developing curriculum that fit their needs. Older teachers and those with post-B. After completing their seminars, teachers at all four local sites overwhelmingly reported that they had benefited along dimensions that the professional literature indicates to be vital to teacher quality. In contrast to most professional development programs, the surveys revealed no widely shared criticisms of the seminars.

Fellows also overwhelmingly "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that the seminars provided them with professionally useful new knowledge and that the seminars raised their expectations of their students :. The patterns among National Seminar Fellows were even more strongly favorable: These data strongly support the conclusion that virtually all teachers who complete Institute seminars feel substantially strengthened in their mastery of content knowledge and their professional skills more generally, while they also develop higher standards for what their students can achieve. As in the National Demonstration Project, the surveys show other variations by categories of teachers, though again these patterns are not statistically significant.

At most sites, elementary-school teachers were most likely to say that the seminars had increased their knowledge. And perhaps surprisingly, teachers with more than 10 years of teaching experience most often indicated that the seminars had raised their expectations for their students — a pattern also discerned in the National Demonstration Project. But whereas during that Project science teachers were slightly more likely than other teachers to list their seminar experiences as "moderately" rather than "greatly" useful, in these surveys teachers currently teaching or planning to teach in the humanities, social sciences, or the sciences showed no consistent variations across the sites in their program evaluations. The National Demonstration Project included a one-time survey on unit use; and in New Haven, the annual survey of teachers provides an opportunity for open-ended comments on teachers' previous use of Institute curriculum.

Though such comments are not available from the other Institutes and so they do not constitute a systematic national data set, they indicate that in this regard, too, the patterns discerned in the National Demonstration Project appear to persist. The results of the National Demonstration Project survey showed that, except for those who are unable to do so due to shifts in assignments or health reasons, virtually all Fellows at each site went on to teach the units they prepared, in whole or in part; and many also reported use of other Teachers Institute units.

Most teachers chose to present their units via teacher-led discussion rather than extensive lecturing. They also stressed writing exercises and activities designed to strengthen speaking, listening, vocabulary and reasoning skills, much more than test taking. About a fifth of the teachers used units to develop math skills, largely but not exclusively teachers in the physical sciences.

Much recent research indicates that these teaching methods, employed by teachers with good content knowledge, are especially effective in enhancing student knowledge, critical thinking skills, and problem-solving capabilities. The Fellows in the National Demonstration Project expressed very strong satisfaction with the units. Only Fellows teaching in the physical sciences were more likely to rate them "somewhat" instead of "very useful. In these comparisons, teachers in the physical sciences rated the units as high as or higher than their counterparts in other subject areas. Roughly the same percentages rated the units as more enjoyable or equally enjoyable to teach than other curricula.

There were no statistically significant variations according to the grade levels or subject areas in which Fellows taught. In these regards, physical science teachers again resembled other teachers. Due to their very low numbers, the responses from Fellows using other Fellows' units, as well as from non-Fellows using units, must be interpreted with caution.

Still, these responses were essentially indistinguishable from those of Fellows teaching their own units. It should be noted that during the National Demonstration Project, no Institute made a concerted effort to persuade teachers to use Institute-prepared units instead of other curriculum. Instead, teachers learned about units most often from knowing their authors, other Institute Fellows, or from the Institute Teacher Representatives at their schools — essentially "word-of-mouth" forms of dissemination largely limited to the schools participating in the Institutes — and from the Institute Web sites.

Even so, at least 90 teachers used units that they did not write during the National Project, and about half of those had not participated in an Institute. Because the DeWitt Wallace-Reader's Digest Fund, sponsor of the National Demonstration Project, wished evaluators to focus on the Project's impact on teachers, it did not authorize funds for the complex task of directly evaluating the impact on students of having had teachers who had been Fellows.

Teachers using units did, however, provide a great deal of data concerning student responses to those units. Again, these data were highly positive. Teachers believed these units were especially challenging for students: Yet they found students responded well to these challenges. In comparison with other sorts of curriculum they had used, Fellows found the Institute-prepared units received strikingly superior student responses. The different grade levels and subject matters in which Fellows taught produced only minor variations, although again science teachers rated units somewhat less highly.

In commenting on their experiences teaching units in the classroom during the five-year period of the New Haven quantitative study discussed in the next section, teachers spoke often of how student attention, enjoyment, comprehension and retention improved whenever they used Institute units, both ones they had personally written or ones written by other Fellows. These collaborative teaching efforts often involved teachers who had not been Fellows, expanding the influence of the Institute's work. In a number of cases, teachers indicated that their units had become part of their school's "overall Comprehensive School Plan.

Teachers also saw the Institute as "influential in retaining existing teachers" because the teachers find the seminars stimulating and feel "respected and acknowledged as creative, caring, educated colleagues. For many teachers, Institute experiences reinforce their desires to continue working in the nation's most challenging educational environments. As in the earlier National Demonstration Project, the populations of Fellows participating at the four current sites from display some demographic differences. In comparison with the other local sites and the National Seminar participants, New Haven Fellows were roughly twice as likely to be under Although all sites attracted similar ratios of more experienced and less experienced teachers, Philadelphia and, particularly, National Fellows were somewhat more likely to have less than 10 years teaching experience.

Both Philadelphia and National Fellows were also more likely to be high-school teachers, though in Philadelphia this pattern arose as a condition of one of the Institute's grants. At all Institutes, teachers in the humanities were the most frequent participants, though the varying, often interdisciplinary responsibilities of teachers make these categorizations difficult, and for Pittsburgh they are not fully available.

Numbers in brackets indicate numbers of Fellows who completed surveys in that category. Experiences at the four sites during the three years of the Demonstration Project, in New Haven for three decades, and in Pittsburgh, Houston, and Philadelphia since a Demonstration Project, all indicate that the Institute approach generates significant corollary benefits that are not easily grasped through survey responses and not always visible in a relatively short time period.

Perhaps the most important of these include:. Qualitative studies in Houston, Pittsburgh, and New Haven provide many strong testimonials by teachers, university faculty members, and university and public school administrators of the Institutes' benefits in all these regards. To augment those findings, the Yale National Initiative sponsored a retrospective quantitative study of the impact of the Teachers Institute on New Haven teachers and students from the academic year to the academic year.

The study was based on a state of the art multilevel design by Dr. Ellen E. The data allowed researchers to identify all teachers teaching in the New Haven schools in these years, including all who had been Institute seminar participants before or during the study period; the schools in which all teachers taught; and the students of all teachers during the study period. The research also included demographic and performance data for those teachers, schools, and students. Because randomized assignment of teachers to seminars was impossible and inappropriate, the study relied on the second approach noted above: comparing the outcomes for teachers participating in Institute seminars Fellows , their schools, and their students with comparison groups of nonparticipating teachers, schools, and students.

Not all of the data sought proved available, particularly in regard to teacher and student outcomes. The study design called for obtaining information on teacher retention, promotion to leadership positions, awards, and attendance, and data on student test scores, grades, awards and recognition, attendance, and promotion to higher grades. In practice, researchers were only able to document teacher retention and attendance and student performances on standardized tests and course grades.

In regard to the demographics of teachers who participate in Institute seminars, the chief hypothesis was that they would be broadly representative of all New Haven teachers, not drawn primarily from particular demographic subsets, with the partial exception of elementary-school teachers. The fact that teachers self-selected to apply for seminars means, however, that the analysis can only identify correlations, not support claims for causality. The study cannot rule out the possibility that teachers who choose to participate in the Institute are more likely to continue teaching in New Haven for reasons other than Institute participation.

It was also hypothesized that Institute participation might be positively but weakly associated with teacher attendance an outcome affected by many factors, including release time for professional development and service. In regard to student outcomes for which data were available, the central hypothesis was that student exposure to teachers who had been Institute Fellows would be positively but weakly associated with standardized test scores and grades. Because Fellows' curricular units are designed to fulfill general state and district content standards and goals, not to prepare the specific knowledge and skills examined in state standardized achievement tests, no strong impact on test scores was anticipated, even when the math test scores of students of math and science teachers and the reading test scores of students of English and history and social science teachers were examined.

Because more effective teachers may also grade more strictly, it was also not clear that even enhanced student interest and performance in courses led by Institute Fellows would be associated with higher grades in relation to students of non-Fellows. Still, in the aggregate, improved student interest and learning should be associated with better test scores and better grades. A multilevel model was used to account for variation explained at the school, teacher, and student levels. The results at the school level did not produce statistically significant results varying from those found at the teacher and student levels, leaving unsettled the question of whether collective teacher participation by school produces benefits beyond individual teacher participation.

In regard to teachers , there was no statistically significant relationship between participation as a Fellow and teacher attendance. But the hypothesis that Fellows are roughly demographically representative of New Haven teachers as a whole was supported by the data. Women were found to be slightly more likely than men to become Fellows, but the difference was not statistically significant. Participation by teachers with and without master's degrees was virtually identical. Though as a group, teachers who at some point had been Fellows had a mean of The teachers who were Fellows in had a mean of 7. On average, teachers who were Fellows during the study period had 1.

In short, the seminars attracted both new and experienced teachers, so that over time, experienced teachers were more likely to have been Fellows in one year or another. As anticipated, holding all else equal, teachers in higher grades were also more likely to be Fellows than teachers in lower grades. The data show that these efforts succeeded and that the Institute was at least as attractive to these racial minority teachers as to whites. In regard to retention, of those teachers who had been Fellows by the end of the first year of the study, , Because these descriptive differences in teacher retention could be traceable to other teacher characteristics, the researchers ran an inferential statistical test to illuminate the Fellow correlation.

Fellows were almost twice 1. Again, the study design does not permit a claim of causality. But in light of the high percentages of New Haven teachers who become Fellows, it is reasonable to view this correlation between participation as a Fellow and teacher retention in the district as substantively, as well as statistically, significant. Because research suggests that experience within a district is more strongly associated with teacher effectiveness than earlier experiences elsewhere, this finding is especially notable. In regard to students , no statistically significant relationships were found between having a teacher who had been a Fellow and student performances on standardized tests and in course grades.

Though unsatisfying, this result is not surprising. It underlines the need for future evaluations to use data more closely tied to the goals of the curriculum units written in Institute seminars, and the need for the accumulation of much more extensive data on student outcomes. If the impact on standardized test scores and grades is, as hypothesized, positive but highly indirect, those relationships will only be discernible when a great deal of reliable data can be analyzed.

The continuing positive results of annual surveys of teachers at each Institute site and of National Seminar participants leave little doubt that teachers consistently rate their Institute experiences and the curriculum units that result favorably along the five dimensions agreed to be key ingredients of teacher quality: teacher knowledge, teacher skills, teacher enthusiasm, teacher expectations of their students and teacher capacity to motivate students. Though we have less data on teachers' experiences in using Institute curriculum units, those data are also positive. The New Haven quantitative study indicates that Institute seminars attract a broad range of teachers from every observable demographic category and that those who choose to be Fellows are much more likely to continue teaching in the district than those who do not.

These results are all the more credible in light of the ways the Institute approach embodies the different elements that researchers have found to contribute to successful professional development programs: a focus on content and pedagogy linked to content; active teacher learning; teacher leadership; duration; alignment with state and local standards; and, somewhat less extensively, collective participation and continuing evaluation. At the same time, these results underscore the importance of continuing and improved program evaluation. The annual surveys of Fellows at each site and in National Seminars, with high rates of participation guaranteed by the requirement to complete the surveys to obtain Institute stipends, provide invaluable data on teacher responses that need to be sustained.

In addition, a number of further steps should be considered. Ellen Kisker has designed a technical research guide that can assist Institutes and school districts in preparing programs for continuing evaluation. To summarize the main options: Insofar as possible, each site should seek to institutionalize annual data collection on the use of curriculum units and on their results for students.

These data could include annual surveys of former Fellows on their use of the units they have written, on their use of units written by other Fellows, and surveys of non-Fellows on their unit use — though past experience suggests that achieving high response rates will be difficult even with modest financial incentives. If resources permit, Institutes might also survey students on their experiences of units used in their classrooms; and they might seek to use pre-unit and post-unit student tests to determine the extent of student learning.

Institutes should also seek to work with school districts to gather more data on student outcomes that are more closely tied than standardized tests to the content and goals of units written for Institute seminars and used in classrooms. Pertinent data could include student performance on measures of achievement in regard to district and state standards that the curriculum units address; student attendance during the teaching of the unit; and evaluations of student written work fulfilling unit assignments.

Less direct but still pertinent evidence of the impact of having had Fellows as teachers might also come in students' relative success in winning academic awards and in graduating. Where possible, these indicators should be supplemented by observational research on the teaching of units or material derived from units, both by Fellows and non-Fellows, in actual classrooms. Analyses of in-depth interviews with the Fellows and students in those classes would also be desirable. Ideally, these should be accompanied by comparable observations and interviews with teachers and students not directly affected by Institute experiences.

Institutes should also continue to collect and analyze descriptive data on teachers and on teacher outcomes. It is vital to monitor whether Institutes continue to attract teachers from a broad range of demographics. It would also be useful to assess systematically at every site whether experiences as Fellows are associated with heightened teacher retention and with the promotion of teachers to positions of academic leadership within their districts and beyond.

Feedback should be given in a manner that will best help improve performance. Since people respond better to information presented in a positive way, feedback should be expressed in a positive manner. This is not to say that information should be sugar-coated. It must be accurate, factual, and complete. When presented, however, feedback is more effective when it reinforces what the employee did right and then identifies what needs to be done in the future.

Constant criticism eventually will fall upon deaf ears. Some kinds of feedback occur naturally while other kinds must be carefully planned and well-managed. Naturally-occurring feedback can be classified into two categories. The first type is self-evident feedback-information that employees can see for themselves as they do their work. For instance, a team of materials handlers who are given the assignment of moving ten stacks of supplies from one side of the warehouse to the other by the end of the day will know that if only one of ten stacks is moved by noon, the assignment will not be completed on time.

This information is self-evident and is obtained by the employees making their own comparisons against a specific goal. Also falling into the first category of automatic feedback is feedback gained by having a broader scope of work. The broader the scope of work that an employee has, the better the employee can determine the quality of the finished product. But if he'd been responsible for the entire article, he would have seen that his section had no relation to the rest of the article and had to be rewritten. The second category of feedback is carefully planned feedback that is designed to be given often and automatically through a measurement system.

Feedback can be designed into a work process or a measurement system so that it is received automatically by the employee. For example, many work processes have been designed to provide performance measures daily, such as a production or printing process, i. Plagiarism is unacceptable. Assessors will check that you have completed the student declaration prior to filling out the assessment sheet. All assessment records submitted to the assessor for marking will be stored and retained properly. And a hard copy submitted to student administration for filing along with the evidence. There are two assessment outcomes for tasks. On the individual assessment cover sheet for assessment tasks you will be marked Satisfactory, if you have completed the task successfully, submitted all evidence and satisfied the assessment criteria and Not Satisfactory, if you have not completed the task, the evidence is not sufficient or does not meet the requirements of the assessment criteria.

If you are unsuccessful at achieving competency at the first attempt, you will be given two further opportunities for re-assessment at a mutually agreed time and date. As this is a competency-based program, the assessment continues throughout the program until you either achieve Competency in the assessment tasks or a further training need is identified and addressed. You have the right to access current and accurate records of your participation and results at any time. You can see your results or attendance progress by logging in to the Learning Management System at any time or you can request a copy of your records by contacting the student administration and the assessor.

You may seek clarification about the assessment information and the instructions and tasks at any time from the assessor. Disadvantages may be based, for example, upon age, cultural background, physical disability, limited or non-current industry experience, language, numeracy, or digital literacy issues. Maintain the integrity of the competency standards and course requirements as stipulated in the training package. Presenting work instructions in diagrammatic or pictorial form instead of words and sentences.

If you are dissatisfied with an assessment outcome, you may appeal the assessment decision. In the first instance, you are encouraged to appeal informally by contacting the assessor and discussing the matter with them. If you are still dissatisfied, you may appeal formally and in writing to have the result reviewed. Assessors will check if you are ready for the assessment and defer the assessment if you are not. Feedback will be given to you at the completion of the assessment.?

During role play, the assessor may act as a client or employer, where required, but the assessor will not interfere with the assessment. If the assessment activities might impact on your safety or that of others, the assessor will stop the assessment immediately. Evidence of plagiarism and cheating is treated on a case-by-case basis and the consequences for students engaging in such practices may include failure of the assessment or unit or exclusion from the course. Assessors will provide feedback on the assessment that you have submitted.

This can identify your strengths and weaknesses or be an overall comment on your submission. A copy of the feedback along with your submission will be given to you and you must keep a copy of it throughout the completion of the course. I further declare that:. Student Plagiarism Declaration: By submitting this assessment to the college, I declare that this assessment task is original and has not been copied or taken from another source except where this work has been correctly acknowledged. I have made a photocopy or electronic copy or photograph of my assessment task, which I can produce if the original is lost. I declare that I have conducted a fair, valid, reliable, and flexible assessment with this student, and I have provided appropriate feedback.

Signature: ……………………………………………….. Date: ………………………………………………………. I have received, discussed, and accepted my result as above for this task and I am aware of my appeal rights. Signature: ………………………………………….. Date: …………………………………………………. You must satisfactorily perform all tasks to be deemed satisfactory for the assessment. Planning the assessment. At the end of the assessment, you will be required to submit the following evidence before the due date specified by the assessor:. It applies to large companies only. Within an organisation, which of the following areas is most affected by the diversity policy?

If your company was concerned about its diversity performance, what would you suggest they do? Carrie wants to apply for a promotion to Regional Marketing Manager. Upon talking to her manager, she is told that due to the extensive travel the position entails, they prefer to hire a man. What is this an example of? In which of the following Acts of Parliament would you be likely to find legislation regarding conditions of work, such as annual leave, parental leave and the right to request flexible work arrangements?

Jeffrey is a carer for his disabled wife. He is semi-retired and works 28 hours a week. He was not included in a training course that everyone else in his department did, as his manager said he did not work enough to justify the cost. Without the training, he cannot apply for a promotion or take project opportunities in another department. What could this be an example of? Jazzercise is a gym for women only. It places an advertisement for a female fitness instructor. Can they do this? It is an example of allowable discrimination. It is an example of covert discrimination. What is this commonly referred to as? Under the Disability Discrimination Act, an employer must make reasonable accommodation to employ someone with a disability. Which of the following is true?

A company diversity audit reveals a lack of women in management. What suggestions would you make to improve the efficacy of the diversity policy? A company diversity audit and review of grievances over the past year reveals a problem with bullying and discrimination against LGBTI employees. You want to employ someone who can work a rotating roster of weekends and evenings.

Which of the following questions abides by EEO? Can you comply with this? Who will look after the kids when you work evenings and weekends? If this is not resolved, or you are unhappy with the result, report the grievance to HR. If the matter is still not resolved, seek support from the Human Rights Commission. Jenna works in stores. She feels intimidated and harassed by a regular supplier. How should her manager handle the situation? Masie has been repeatedly asked out by Jim, a colleague. Masie feels so uncomfortable now that she tries to avoid any situation where she might be alone with Jim. Could this be sexual harassment? Asking someone out on a date is not sexual harassment. While it might not be a good idea to date colleagues, there is no law against asking someone out on a date.

While marking the students written answers, ensure that each student has a thorough understanding of the required knowledge and underpinning skills. Q List four legislative Acts that have a direct impact on the information that must be incorporated into diversity management policies and work practices. The applicant has a learning disability making it difficult to fill out the form and so they do not apply. Could this process be a form of direct or indirect discrimination? Q Legislation requires an organisation to make reasonable accommodation or adjustment to support a person with a disability.

Give two examples of this. Q At times, discrimination can be allowable. Give two reasons that can support allowable discrimination. Q What avenues can an employee take if they are not satisfied with how the organisation handled the grievance? Q Discuss four ways by which an organisation can promote the benefits of diversity to its employees? Q Many organisations promote their diversity achievements in external forums.

List three based on the benefits of using external forums. Q Provide two examples of how a diverse workforce has enhanced products and services in your organisation, or an organisation you have been a customer in.