Teacher Evaluation Panel - National Center for Education ...

Teacher Evaluation Panel - National Center for Education ...

Teacher Evaluation Panel Tuesday, February 12, 2013 Panelists Glenn McClain Platte Valley School District, Weld Re-7 (CO) Jan Rose Petro Colorado Department of Education Patricia Hardy Pennsylvania Department of Education Linda Rocks Bossier Parish School System (LA) Colorados State Model Evaluation System Glenn McClain, Platte Valley School District, Weld Re-7

Jan Rose Petro, Colorado Department of Education Agenda Colorados Goals and Priorities Guiding Principles of State Model Evaluation System Framework for System to Evaluate Educators Educator Rubrics CDE Model Evaluation System Pilot Timeline for Implementation of S.B. 10-191 Successes and Challenges Together We Can Vision All students in Colorado will become educated and productive citizens capable of succeeding in a globally competitive workforce. Mission The mission of CDE is to shape, support, and safeguard a statewide education system that prepares students for success in a globally competitive world. Successful students Students

Educators Schools/ Districts State GOALS Ensure every student is on track to graduate postsecondary and workforce ready. Increase achievement for all students and close achievement gaps. Ensure students graduate ready for success in postsecondary education and the workforce. Increase national and international competitiveness for all students. Great teachers and leaders Increase and support the effectiveness of all educators. Optimize the preparation, retention, and effectiveness of new educators. Eliminate the educator equity gap. Outstanding schools and districts Increase school and district performance. Foster innovation and expand access to a rich array of high quality school choices for students. Best education system in the nation

Lead the nation in policy, innovation, and positive outcomes for students. Operate with excellence, efficiency, and effectiveness to become the best SEA in the nation. Attract and retain outstanding talent to CDE. PowerPoint Template Driving Question s Students Students Educators Educators Schools/ Schools/ Districts Districts What do we want students, educators, schools, and districts to know and be able to do?

How will we know if expectations are met? How will we respond when help is needed and to support continued growth? Assessments RTI PBSI Targeted interventions IEPs Educator quality standards Educator evaluations

Induction Mentoring Professional development plans Remediation plans Performance indicators School and district performance frameworks Unified planning Priority Turnaround Colorado Academic Standards Expanding Student Learning

Agenda Colorados Goals and Priorities Guiding Principles of State Model Evaluation System Framework for System to Evaluate Educators Educator Rubrics CDE Model Evaluation System Pilot Timeline for Implementation of S.B. 10-191 Successes and Challenges Guiding Principles of State Evaluation System 1. Data should inform decisions, but human judgment will always be an essential component of evaluations. 2. The implementation and evaluation of the system must embody continuous improvement. 3. The purpose of the system is to provide meaningful and credible feedback that improves performance. 4. The development and implementation of educator evaluation systems must continue to involve all stakeholders in a collaborative process. 5. Educator evaluations must take place within a larger system that is aligned and supportive. Continuous Improvement State model

system developed Rules reviewed and revised State Council makes recommendation s Local evaluation systems implemented CDE collects data 1.1. Training Training 2. Annual Orientation 9.

3. Goal-Setting and Performance Planning SelfAssessment 4. 8. Review of Annual Goals and Performance Plan Educator Evaluation Cycle Final Ratings 7. 5.

End-of-Year Review Mid-Year Review 6. Evaluator Assessment Agenda Colorados Goals and Priorities Guiding Principles of State Model Evaluation System Framework for System to Evaluate Educators Educator Rubrics CDE Model Evaluation System Pilot Timeline for Implementation of S.B. 10-191 Successes and Challenges STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS Framework for System to Evaluate Principals Definition of Principal Effectiveness Quality Standards

I. Strategy II. Instruction III. Culture IV. Human Resources 50% Professional Practice Standards Number and Percentage Other Measures of Teachers Aligned with CDE Guidelines V. Management Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard Count Towards Overall Performance? School Performance Other Measures Framework

Aligned with CDE Guidelines Performance Standards Partially Effective VII. Student Growth 50% Student Growth Measures Weighting: Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards Result in a Determination of Individual Performance? Ineffective VI. External Development Effective Highly Effective STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers

Definition of Teacher Effectiveness Quality Standards I. Know Content II. Establish Environment III. Facilitate Learning 50% Professional Practice Standards Observations of Other Measures Teaching Aligned with CDE Guidelines IV. Reflect on Practice V. Demonstrate Leadership 50% Student Growth Measures

Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard Count Towards Overall Performance? State Other Assessments Other Measures Summative for Non-tested Aligned Assessments Areas CDE Guidelines Match of test to teaching assignments Weighting: Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards Result in a Determination of Individual Performance? Performance Standards Ineffective Partially Effective VI. Student Growth

Effective Appeals Process Highly Effective Principal Quality Standards I: Principals demonstrate strategic leadership. II: Principals demonstrate instructional leadership. III: Principals demonstrate school culture and equity leadership. IV: Principals demonstrate human resource leadership. V: Principals

demonstrate managerial leadership. VI: Principals demonstrate external development leadership. VII: Principals demonstrate leadership around student academic growth. Teacher Quality Standards I: Teachers demonstrate mastery of and pedagogical expertise in the content they teach. II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive, and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of

students. IV: Teachers reflect on their practice. The elementary teacher is an expert in literacy and mathematics and is knowledgeable in all other content that he or she teaches. The secondary teacher has knowledge of literacy and mathematics and is an expert in his or her content endorsement area(s). III: Teachers plan and deliver effective instruction and create an environment that facilitates learning for their students. V:Teachers demonstrate leadership. VI: Teachers take responsibility for

student academic growth. Application of Quality Standards Each quality standard includes elements which provide a more detailed description of the knowledge and skills needed for each standard. All districts must base their evaluations on the full set of quality standards and associated elements or on their own locally developed standards that meet or exceed the states quality standards and elements. Some districts are using their own locally developed standards after completing a crosswalk of their standards to the states quality standards and elements. These districts must provide assurances that they are meeting all additional requirements of SB 10-191. Principal Evaluations Evaluated using: (1) teacher Evaluated using: (1) evaluation teacher input; (2) teacher input; (2) teacher ratings;

and (3)evaluation teacher ratings; and (3) teacher improvement. improvement. Quality Standards I-VI: Quality Standards I-VI: I. Strategic leadership I. Strategic leadership II. Instructional leadership II. Instructional leadership leadership III. School culture/equity III. IV. School culture/equity leadership HR leadership IV. V. HRManagerial leadershipleadership

V. Managerial VI. Externalleadership development leadership VI. External development leadership 5 0 % Evaluated using: (1) SPF Evaluated using: SPFone data; and (2) at(1) least data; andmeasure (2) at least one other of student other measure of student academic growth.

academic growth. S t u Professional Practice 50% d e n t A c a d e m i c G Quality Standard VII: Quality Standard VII: VII. Leadership around student VII.academic Leadership

around student growth academic growth Teacher Evaluations Evaluated using: (1) a Evaluated (1) a measureusing: of individuallymeasure of individuallyattributed growth, (2) a attributed growth, (2) a measure of collectivelymeasure of collectivelyattributed growth; (3) when attributed growth; (3) when available, statewide available, statewide summative assessments; and

summative and (4) whereassessments; applicable, Colorado (4) Growth where applicable, Model data.Colorado Growth Model data. Quality Standard VI: VI. Responsibility Quality Standard VI:for student academic growth VI. Responsibility for student academic growth 55 00 % % S t uP dr eo

nf te s As ci ao dn ea ml i cP r Ga Evaluated using: (1) Evaluated using: and (1) (2) at least observations; observations; and (2) atstudent least one of the following: oneperception of the following: student measures,

peer perception measures, peer feedback, parent/guardian feedback, parent/guardian feedback, or review of lesson feedback, or review of samples. lesson plans/student work plans/student samples. May includework additional May include additional measures. measures. Quality Standards I-V: I. Mastery of content

Quality Standards I-V: II. Establish learning environment I. Mastery of content III. Facilitate learning II. Establish learning environment IV. Reflectlearning on practice III. Facilitate V. Demonstrate leadership IV. Reflect on practice V. Demonstrate leadership Agenda Colorados Goals and Priorities Guiding Principles of State Model Evaluation System Framework for System to Evaluate Educators Educator Rubrics

CDE Model Evaluation System Pilot Timeline for Implementation of S.B. 10-191 Successes and Challenges Rubric Alignment Quality Standard Elements Aligned to Standard Professional Practices Components of the Educator Rubrics Rating levels Quality Standard Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students. Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient (Meets State Standard) Accomplished

Exemplary Element c: Teachers engage students as individuals with unique interests and strengths. The teacher: Has low-level expectations for some students. Uses data for instructional decision making on an infrequent basis. Element that aligns with standard The teacher: Monitors students for level of participation. Encourages students to share their interests. Challenges students to

expand and enhance their learning. . . . and The teacher: Asks difficult questions of all students. Scaffolds questions. Gives wait time equitably. Flexibly Groups students. Assumes that all students will meet or exceed expectations. Modifies instruction to assure that all students: Understand what is expected of them. Are challenged to meet

or exceed expectations. Participate in classroom activities with a high level of frequency and quality. Take responsibility for their work. Have the opportunity to build on their interests and strengths. . . . and Students: Actively participate in all classroom activities. Monitor their own performance for frequency of participation. Seek opportunities to respond to difficult questions.

. . . and Students: Select challenging content and activities when given the choice in order to stretch their skills and abilities. Encourage fellow students to participate and challenge themselves. Professional Practices Standard I: Principals Demonstrate Strategic Leadership a. Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient Accomplished Exemplary School Vision, Mission and Strategic Goals: Principals develop the vision, mission, values, beliefs and goals of the school, collaboratively determining the processes used to establish these attributes, and facilitating their integration into the life of the school community. Vision, mission, values, beliefs

and goals of school are: Not evident or familiar to staff and other stakeholders. Developed by school administrators working in relative isolation. Not integrated into the life of the school community. Not Evident describes practices of a principal who does not meet state performance standards and is not making progress toward meeting them. Vision, mission, values, beliefs and strategic goals of school are: Developed through a collaborative process with

staff and other stakeholder groups. Publicly available at the school. Part of routine school communications with staff and other stakeholders. Routinely updated. . . . and Establishes strategic goals for students and staff that are: Focused on student achievement. Based on the analysis of multiple sources of information. Aligned with district priorities. Measurable.

Rigorous. Concrete. The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what principals do on a day-to-day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels. . . . and Staff incorporate identified strategies in their instructional plans to assure that students achieve expected outcomes. . . . and Staff and other stakeholders take leadership roles in updating the schools vision, mission, and strategic goals.

Staff members assume responsibility for implementing the schools vision, mission, and strategic goals. The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the outcomes of the principals practices, including expectations for staff, students, parents and community members, as a result of practices exhibited under rating levels 2 and 3. Principal and Teacher Performance Evaluation Ratings Highly Effective Effective Partially Effective Ineffective After CDE develops the state model system and an evaluation scoring matrix, the State Board will adopt definitions for each rating. Teacher Quality Standards Performance

Rating Levels Elements of the Standard = Observable in Classroom Examples of Artifacts Evaluator Comments Teachers Response to Evaluation Professional Practices Evidence Provided by Artifacts Summary of

Ratings for the Standard Agenda Colorados Goals and Priorities Guiding Principles of State Model Evaluation System Framework for System to Evaluate Educators Educator Rubrics CDE Model Evaluation System Pilot Timeline for Implementation of S.B. 10-191 Successes and Challenges Pilot Period Is used to develop, identify and/or test the following: Principal and teacher rubrics Measures of student academic growth Method to collect teacher input for principal evaluations Method to collect student and family perception data Method to aggregate measures and assign final evaluation ratings CDE monitoring methods Agenda Colorados Goals and Priorities Guiding Principles of State Model Evaluation

System Framework for System to Evaluate Educators Educator Rubrics CDE Model Evaluation System Pilot Timeline for Implementation of S.B. 10-191 Successes and Challenges Timeline of Implementation Year One 2011-12 Development and Beta Testing CDE ACTIVITIES Develop State Model Systems for teachers and principals Beta-testing of rubrics

and tools Develop technical guidelines on Professional Practices and Student Growth Provide differentiated support for districts Populate and launch online Resource Bank Develop state data collection and monitoring system Develop tools for district implementation of system Year Two 2012-13 Pilot and Rollout CDE ACTIVITIES Usability study of rubrics Support pilot districts through resources, training, tools, etc. Convene pilot

districts to share lessons learned Analyze pilot district data and make adjustments as needed Train ALL non-pilot districts that are using the state model Make Recommendations on other licensed personnel (OLP) to State Board of Education (SBE) Year Three 201314 Pilot and Rollout CDE ACTIVITIES Statewide assistance on rollout of evaluation systems Develop evaluation system for other licensed personnel

Support all districts through resources, trainings, tools, etc. Convene pilot districts to share lessons learned Analyze state data and make adjustments to the system as needed Validate teacher and principal rubrics Develop criteria for evaluation training courses for approval by CDE Year Four 2014-15 Full Statewide Implementation CDE ACTIVITIES Finalize statewide implementation of teacher/principal systems Pilot OLP rubrics Continue support to

districts via resources and training Ensure there are evaluator training courses throughout the state Analyze data and make adjustments as needed Make recommendations to SBE this year and all following years for Continuous Improvement Agenda Colorados Goals and Priorities Guiding Principles of State Model Evaluation System Framework for System to Evaluate Educators Educator Rubrics CDE Model Evaluation System Pilot Timeline for Implementation of S.B. 10-191 Successes and Challenges

SEA Successes and Challenges Successes Focus on intent (rather than compliance) Conversations about teaching and learning Flexibility Collaboration with associations Coordination with BOCES to train regions 27 Colorado pilot districts Challenges Variance in capacity at local level Change management (time burden high) Inter-rater agreement across state system users Measuring student learning Attributing student learning LEA Successes and Challenges Successes

Train the Trainer model Administrative team Faculty Previous improvement work is complementary Challenges Time Availability of resources in time to use with staff Comprehensiveness and length of new evaluation System and process unknowns Contact Information Katy Anthes [email protected] Toby King [email protected]

Michael Gradoz [email protected] Britt Wilkenfeld [email protected] Jean Williams [email protected] Dawn Par [email protected] Courtney Cabrera [email protected] Amy Skinner [email protected] Katie Lams [email protected] For more information, please visit: www.cde.state.co.us/EducatorEffectiveness Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor

Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Measuring Educator Effectiveness February 12, 2013 36 Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Project Goal To develop educator effectiveness models that will reform the way we evaluate school professionals as well as the critical components of training and professional growth.

The term educator includes teachers, education specialists, and principals. 37 Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us How Did We Get Here? June 30, 2012, Act 82, Section 1123 of the Public School Code was passed. Permitted use of student achievement data to be used as part of the teacher evaluation system. Established the components and weighting to be included in the new rating tool. 38 Measuring Educator Effectiveness

Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Teacher Effectiveness System in Act 82 of School Building Data 2012 Effective 2013-2014 SY Indicators of Academic Achievement Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, All Students Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, Subgroups Academic Growth PVAAS Other Academic Indicators Credit for Advanced Teacher Achievement Specific Data Effective 2016-2017 SY PVAAS / Growth 3 Year Rolling Average

Building Level Data; 15.00% 2013-2014 SY 2014-2015 SY 2015-2016 SY Teacher Specific Data; Other data as provided in Act 82 15.00% Elective Data/SLOs Optional 2013-2014 SY Effective 2014-2015 SY Elective Data; 20.00% District Designed Measures and Examinations Nationally Recognized Standardized Tests Industry Certification Examinations Student Projects Pursuant to Local Requirements Student Portfolios Pursuant to Local 39 Requirements Observation/Evidence Effective 2013-2014 SY Danielson Framework Domains Planning and Preparation

Classroom Environment Instruction Professional Responsibilities Observation/ Evidence; 50.00% Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Building Level Data PA has developed a School Performance Profile for each school in PA LEAs. Based upon multiple data sources, all of which have been required by PDE in the past no new reports. Includes indicators of Academic Achievement, Closing the Achievement Gap, Academic Growth, and other academic indicators. Each school receives a score based on these factors and their weighting.

40 Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Teacher Specific Data PVAAS data 3-year rolling average to reduce noise 41 Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education Observation/Evidence Effective 2013-2014 Danielson Framework

Domains Planning and Preparation Classroom Environment Instruction Professional Responsibilities Building Level Data Effective 2013-2014 SY Indicators of Academic Achievement Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, All Students Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, Subgroups Academic Growth PVAAS Other Academic Indicators Credit for Advanced Achievement Building Level Data; 15.00% Observation/ Evidence; 50.00% www.education.state.pa.us Elective Data, 35%

Elective Data/SLOs Piloting 2013-2014 SY Effective 2014-2015 SY District Designed Measures and Examinations Nationally Recognized Standardized Tests Industry Certification Examinations Student Projects Pursuant to Local Requirements Student Portfolios Pursuant to Local 42 Requirements Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Non-Teaching Professional Employees: Who Are They?

Dental Hygienist Elementary/Secondary School Counselors Home and School Visitors Instructional Technology Specialist School Nurse School Psychologist 43 Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Non Teaching Professional Employee Effectiveness System in Act 82 of 2012 Effective 2014-2015 SY Observation/Evidence

Danielson Framework Domains 1. Planning and Preparation 2. Educational Environment 3. Delivery of Service 4. Professional Development Student Performanc e 20% Student Performance of All Students in the School Building in which the Nonteaching Professional Employee is Employed District Designed Measures and Examinations Nationally Recognized Standardized Tests Industry Certification Examinations Student Projects Pursuant to Local Requirements Student Portfolios Pursuant to Local Requirements Observatio n/ Evidence 80% 44

Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us Challenges Collecting accurate data from LEAs Building an accurate Student/Teacher/Course linkage system. 45 Measuring Educator Effectiveness Tom Corbett, Governor Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us www.education.state.pa.us

Select Educator Effectiveness Quick Link Educator Effectiveness The Other Half An LEA Data Manager Perspective NCES Forum, February 2013 Linda Rocks, Bossier Parish Schools Remember When Compliance Filling in cells in grant templates FOIA requests Data Use OMG Educator Evaluation

www.louisianabelieves.com/resources/library/ Inception Pilot Inaugural Year Excerpt from LDOE press release Jan 14, 2013 on proposed enhancements to Compass Inaugural Year Excerpt from LDOE press release Jan 14, 2013 on proposed enhancements to Compass Excerpt from LDOE press release Jan 14, 2013 on proposed enhancements to Compass CVR & VAM HCIS Inaugural Year Data PipelineThen & Now State

Program/Policy Office State Data Division LEA Data Managers LEA Administration State Program/Policy Office LEA Administration What they did well Similar design for both CVR & HCIS Single security login for both CVR & HCIS Created state network support teams by region Created local admin roles for both CVR &

HCIS Where it could improve Involvement of SEA/LEA data managers Network support team member with data background Fileswithout Educator ID Data Use OMG IKR

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • March 29, 2008

    March 29, 2008

    Prayer. O God, move through this room. Breathe into us your hopes and dreams for a world filled with justice, love and peace. Unlock a song within your people that we might sing your praises and sing about your generous...
  • Presentación de PowerPoint

    Presentación de PowerPoint

    Labourproductivity in Spain. Labour productivity and the difficulty of creating new jobs have contributed to Spain´s stagnant convergence with advanced economies. Figure 3. GDP per capita and . labour. productivity. Convergence, 1960-2015 (US=100) Source: AMECO, World Bank, EU KLEMS, TCB...
  • Lacedaemonia - Missouri State University

    Lacedaemonia - Missouri State University

    Lacedaemonia Erotas, river god, and Lacedaemonia, his wife Dorians Invaders Descendants of Heracles moved into the Erotas valley and were ancestors of the Spartiate, a small, ruling oligarchy Mountain and Coastal dwellers became 'Perioeci', 'dwellers about', who had no political...
  • ALA Survey Results

    ALA Survey Results

    DNA. I can't speak to that in my location as it hasn't happened since I I started however I can't speak to prior or other office locations. ... The jokes were usually generic, not directed at a particular individual, but...
  • New Jersey Department of Education Office of Career and ...

    New Jersey Department of Education Office of Career and ...

    New Jersey Department of EducationOffice of Career and Technical Education Human Services Information Session. Thursday, January 15, 2015. Camden County College - William G. Rohrer Center
  • http://www.watch-tvseries.net/series34/Prison-Break/season-01 ...

    http://www.watch-tvseries.net/series34/Prison-Break/season-01 ...

    Prison Break Series 1 Episode 1. Michael Scofield gets himself imprisoned in Fox River State Penitentiary as part of an elaborate plan to break out his brother, Lincoln Burrows, who is facing execution for a crime he did not commit.
  • Shawnna Childress, Cognitive Legal Co-Leader

    Shawnna Childress, Cognitive Legal Co-Leader

    Shawnna Childress, Cognitive Legal Co-Leader & Global Business Advisor, Cognitive & Analytics Center of Competency, IBM. Brian Kuhn, ... GuruduthBanavar, Chief Science Office, Cognitive Computing, and VP, IBM Research. Everything you think you know about A.I. is wrong.
  • Kinematic Analysis of Champlain Valley Structures

    Kinematic Analysis of Champlain Valley Structures

    Kinematic Analysis of Champlain Valley Structures ... 50.6º SE Slickenline Trend: 138º Slickenline Plunge: 33º Visual Interpretation Steep Cleavage Faulting Displacement Anticline folding Relationship Between Cleavage, Slickenlines, and the Champlain Thrust Fault Clay Point Model Present ...