CO Pilot of the State Model Evaluation System ...

CO Pilot of the State Model Evaluation System

Communications and Stakeholder

Engagement for SIG Schools

Colorado Department of Education Katy Anthes, Ph.D. Executive Director of

Educator Effectiveness

September, 2012

WE ARE PILOTING OUR EVALUATION SYSTEM RIGHT NOW WITH…

OUR EVALUATION SYSTEM LOOKS LIKE…

OUR PROBLEM OF PRACTICE IS…

POP for Communication Strategies with SIG schools and Educator Evaluation Systems

POP- Problem of Practice •  How do we engage and give intense and meaningful support to our

highest need districts at the right time? Current thinking: •  Pilots– One SIG district is included •  Integration Steering Committee (RTTT) & Roll-out cross-unit support

teams moving forward, once systems are a little bit more concrete. •  Communication strategy is through performance managers And •  Our full-scale, state wide communication strategy and toolkit

9

Educator Evaluation in Turnaround: Design and Implementation

September 5, 2012 Teacher Quality Center Conference

Intended Outcomes Participants will: ê Learn, through the example of turnaround,

how the design and implementation of new evaluation systems can accelerate a reform agenda

ê Develop a shared understanding of ways an SEA can provide targeted assistance for evaluation implementation

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

9

What are we trying to accomplish? Evaluation to Accelerate a Reform Agenda


10

MA Context ê ESE Mission: Build district capacity

ê 2011 – Educator Evaluation Regulations ê Turnaround Schools required to implement in Year 1 ê District-wide in Year 2

ê 2010 – New “Turnaround” Law ê New authorities for districts to turnaround lowest

performing “Level 4” schools ê Clear consequences for not meeting 3-year targets


11

Background – Level 4 Schools ê 2010-2011: Year 1 of Turnaround

ê New School Leadership Teams ê Turnaround Plans Written and Finalized ê Turnaround Strategies Underway

ê Extra Funding for Level 4 Schools ê 11 of 34 received SIG funding (~$500k per school) ê 23 of 34 received Bridge Grants (~$110k per school)

ê Targeted Assistance ê Level 4 Schools Network Activities ê Office of District and School Turnaround Capacity Building

– District Liaison support, technical assistance etc.


12

2010-11 Results: Overview ê 22 of 34 Level 4 Schools Improved Significantly

ê  Gains of 5% or more in ELA and math for students scoring proficient

ê 10 of the 34 Gained Rapidly ê Gains of ~10 CPI points in both subjects

ê 10 of the 34 Stayed Flat or Declined ê Significant declines in performance in one or more

subjects


13


14

35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80

2009

2010

2011

2010-11 Results – Rapid Gains (Math CPI)

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

2009

2010

2011


15

2010-11 Results – Rapid Gains (ELA CPI)

What are these schools doing? ê Commissioned Report: Emerging Practices in

Rapid Achieving Gain Schools ê Compared 10 fastest improving with 10 least

improving

ê Guiding Question:

ê Are there particular strategies or practices observed in the rapid achievement gain schools that could explain how schools have been able to accelerate students’ academic growth?


16

Sources of Evidence for Report ê 2010 Monitoring Site Visit Reports

ê Assess progress in implementing Conditions for School Effectiveness through ê 2.5 Day Site Visit (Classroom Observation, Focus Groups,

Interviews with district and school staff) ê Document/Data Review and Analysis

ê SIG and Turnaround Plans ê Descriptions of strategies employed and

benchmarks of progress


17

Findings… Emerging Practices 1. The school has an instruction- and results-oriented principal

who has galvanized both individual and collective responsibility for the improved achievement of all students through a variety of deliberate improvement structures, expectations, practices, and continuous feedback.

2. The school has created instruction-specific teaming and

teacher-specific coaching for pursuing ongoing instructional improvement.

3. The school has developed a well-orchestrated system of

ongoing data collection and analysis that informs a continuously responsive and adaptive system of tiered instruction directly attentive to students’ specific academic needs.

(INSTLL, Page 5)


18

Findings…Foundational Elements 1. Active Use of Data and Assessments: In rapid

achievement gain Level 4 schools, teachers and coaches are actively using a wide array of formative and summative assessments to inform the instructional strategies employed in their classrooms, and to provide responsive Tier II and III interventions. Low achievement gain schools have data, but are not using the data nearly as effectively.

2. Safe and Respectful School Climate: Improving, rapid

achievement gain Level 4 schools are predominately characterized by a safe, orderly, and respectful school environment for students and teachers. Some comparison L4 schools continue to have significant challenges in developing a safe and respectful climate to the extent that school climate has undermined positive efforts to improve classroom instruction.

(INSTLL, Page 5)


19

Implementation with “Sophistication”

ê What didn’t make the difference (the what ): ê Turnaround Model (replace 50% staff, keep staff, etc.) ê Funding (3 of 10 received SIG) ê Specific Educational Programs – many of the same

strategies and the same partner organizations

ê What did make the difference (the how ): ê Foundational Conditions – data and school climate ê Culture of Continuous Improvement – leadership,

instruction, and professional development


20

Driving Question ê How can implementation of the new teacher

evaluation system build district capacity to ensure that these “promising practices” are taking place in our turnaround schools?

ê What will teachers need to do differently? ê What will principals/APs need to do differently? ê What will central office administrators need to do

differently? ê How can the state support this?


21


22

How can Evaluation Accelerate Turnaround? Evaluation to Accelerate a Reform Agenda

23 23

5 Step Evaluation Cycle

ê Foundation for the Framework & Model

ê Every educator is an active participant in an evaluation

ê Process promotes collaboration and continuous learning


Massachuse(s Department of Elementary and Secondary Educa7on

24

Promising Practices ê Leadership

ê The school has an instruction- and results-oriented principal who has galvanized both individual and collective responsibility for the improved achievement of all students through a variety of deliberate improvement structures, expectations, practices, and continuous feedback.

ê Targeted Teaming and Coaching ê The school has created instruction-specific teaming and teacher-

specific coaching for pursuing ongoing instructional improvement

ê Effective Data Use ê The school has developed a well-orchestrated system of ongoing

data collection and analysis that informs a continuously responsive and adaptive system of tiered instruction directly attentive to students’ specific academic needs.


25

Evaluation to Accelerate Turnaround

Highly Effective &

Continuously Improving Classroom Instruction

School Leader supports

“Promising Practices” in Turnaround

District supports

School Leaders in

Implementing “Promising Practices”

How can Evaluation Drive this Process?

26 26


Evaluation to Accelerate Turnaround

Highly Effective & Continuously

Improving Classroom Instruction

School Leader supports

“Promising Practices” in Turnaround

District supports School

Leaders in Implementing

“Promising Practices”

Promising Practices ê  Leadership

ê  Targeted Teaming and Coaching ê  Effective Data Use

Foundational ê  Data

ê  Culture


27

How can States Support Evaluation for Turnaround? Evaluation to Accelerate a Reform Agenda


28

ESE Assistance to Districts on Educator Evaluation

Build District

Capacity

Tools and Guidance

Networking & Sharing of Best

Practices

Connections to Experts for

Support

On-the-Ground Implementation

Support


29

ESE Assistance to Districts on Educator Evaluation ê Tools and Guidance – “Model System”

ê Templates, Forms, Rubrics, Modules ê Implementation Guide ê Model contract language and job-specific rubrics

ê Networking Districts ê Workshops, webinars and best practice sharing

ê Implementation Support Partners ê To assist with planning and implementation ê Partners vetted and networked ê Subsidized partnerships

ê On-the-Ground Implementation Support


30

Closing Thoughts

ê  Districts Vary in their “Readiness Spectrum”

ê  The Lure of Compliance – we are all guilty ê  You Can’t Fire your Way to Excellence

ê  Be Realistic about the SEA Role ê Seize Policy Windows

The Effective Use of Data to Inform the

Professional Development Needs

of Priority Schools

TELL

KENTUCKY

TEACHING, EMPOWERING,

LEADING AND LEARNING

This training references results from the 2011 TELL Kentucky Survey available online at www.tellkentucky.org.

The intent is to begin discussion among staff on whether certain

teaching conditions are present in their school and to ensure data is used in school improvement planning.

32

� Considerations for TELL Data Use

� Teaching conditions are an area for school improvement, not accountability.

� Teaching conditions are not about any one individual and require a community effort to improve.

� Perceptual data are real data. � Conversations need to be structured and safe. �  Identify and celebrate positives in addition to considering

areas for improvement. � Create common understanding of what defines and share

teaching conditions.

� Uses of Data

•  as a baseline for improvement

•  as a way to measure improvement

•  as a way to help us prioritize our school culture needs to inform our school improvement plan

34

� Data Drill Down

� What is the data telling us? � What is the data NOT telling us? � What are causes for celebration? � What are areas for improvement?

� What are the next steps?

� Plus/Delta/Issues Bin

+ What is going well?

What are areas for improvement?

Issues Bin: What are barriers to student achievement?

� Table 3. PD Needs and Offerings

2011 TELL Kentucky Survey Questions District 180 Priority Schools

– Cohort 1

State

In which of the following areas (if any) do you need/had professional development to teach your students more effectively?

Need Had Need Had

Special education (students with disabilities) 60% 30% 56% 20% Special education (gifted and talented) 56% 16% 53% 9% Differentiating Instruction 66% 56% 62% 52% English Language Learners 33% 10% 36% 7% Closing the Achievement Gap 69% 44% 64% 45% Your content area 42% 66% 39% 57% Methods of teaching 51% 63% 42% 51% Student assessment 53% 62% 45% 63% Classroom management techniques 47% 34% 35% 26% Reading strategies 52% 50% 48% 45% Integrating technology into instruction 60% 42% 62% 47%

�

Please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements about professional development in your school.

East Carter Senior High

All KY High

Schools Carter

County Kentucky a. Sufficient resources are available for professional development in my school. 45 70.3 69.8 75.1 b. An appropriate amount of time is provided for professional development. 61.3 77.8 82.3 81.9

c. Professional development offerings are data driven. 63.6 79.3 77.3 84.4 d. Professional learning opportunities are aligned with the school's improvement plan. 70.9 88.4 84.8 91.3 e. Professional development is differentiated to meet the needs of individual teachers. 24.6 54.2 47 60 f. Professional development deepens teachers' content knowledge. 43.3 57.9 64.7 72.1 g. Teachers have sufficient training to fully utilize instructional technology. 41.7 67.7 61.1 70.9

h. Teachers are encouraged to reflect on their own practice. 80 85.1 87.5 87.8

i. In this school, follow up is provided from professional development. 39.3 58.8 64.2 66.8

j. Professional development provides ongoing opportunities for teachers to work with colleagues to refine teaching practices. 57.6 67.2 71.3 72.7 k. Professional development is evaluated and results are communicated to teachers. 34.5 50.8 57.2 56.7

l. Professional development enhances teachers' ability to implement instructional strategies that meet diverse student learning needs. 50.8 73.1 70.2 80.3 m. Professional development enhances teachers' abilities to improve student learning. 67.2 77.6 78.6 84.6

� Data Drill Down

� What is the data telling us? We are not getting the PD we need for each content area; We are below the state high school percentages in all questions; All responses are lower than the other high school in our county!!!; We do not get as much follow-up as other schools in state or district;

� What is the data NOT telling us? Why we are lower than the other high school in our district - are we being treated differently?; Do we have the same resources for PD than other schools?; Why our data is so low?;

� � What are causes for celebration? We have high

percentages in teacher reflection, appropriate time for PD and PD is aligned to school improvement plan; We have no where to go but up!;

� What are areas for improvement? Differentiated PD by departments; all areas with percentages below 60%; have follow-up on PD; evaluate all PD and give us results;

� What are the next steps? Begin addressing the individual and departmental needs of staff; Give time to implement; give us follow-up and feedback on implementation.

Data Drill Down

40

� Plus/Delta/Issues Bin

+ What is going well?

What are areas for improvement?

•  Differentiated PD for our department – first time ever!

•  The small group setting for training. •  Job-embedded PD •  Modeling and team teaching with

ER staff •  Content specific strategies that will

work for SS and our kids

•  More time for implementing the PD •  Need to observe other teachers who

do it well •  More time to discuss strategies with

each other – PLC time •  Too much information at one time •  Need common planning time with

department

Issues Bin: What are barriers to student achievement? •  Having time to plan effective lesson that use the information from our PD

CO Pilot of the State Model Evaluation System ...

Documents

Transcript of CO Pilot of the State Model Evaluation System ...