Educator Effectiveness

Tom Corbett, Governor ▪ Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Education www.education.state.pa.us

Measuring Educator Effectiveness

Educator Effectiveness

1



School Building Data, 15%

Teacher Specific Data, 15%

Elective Data, 20%

Observation/ Practice, 50%

Teacher Observation & Prac-ticeEffective 2013-14 SYDanielson Framework DomainsPlanning and PreparationClassroom EnvironmentInstructionProfessional Responsibilities

School Building DataEffective 2013-14 SYIndicators of Academic AchievementIndicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, All StudentsIndicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, SubgroupsAcademic Growth PVAASOther Academic IndicatorsCredit for Advanced Achievement Teacher Specific Data

PVAAS / Growth 3 Year Rolling Average2013-14 SY2014-15 SY2015-16 SYOther data as provided in Act 82

Elective Data/SLOsOptional 2013-14 SYEffective 2014-15 SYDistrict-Designed Measures and Examina-tionsNationally Recognized Standardized TestsIndustry Certification ExaminationsStudent Projects Pursuant to Local Re-quirementsStudent Portfolios Pursuant to Local Re-quirements

Teacher Effectiveness System in Act 82 of 2012

2



Building Level Data, 15%

Observation/ Practice, 50%

Teacher Observation & Prac-ticeEffective 2013-14Danielson Framework DomainsPlanning and PreparationClassroom EnvironmentInstructionProfessional Responsibilities

Building Level DataEffective 2013-14 SYIndicators of Academic AchievementIndicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, All StudentsIndicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, Sub-groupsAcademic Growth PVAASOther Academic IndicatorsCredit for Advanced Achievement

Elective Data/SLOsOptional 2013-14 SYEffective 2014-15 SYDistrict-Designed Measures and Examina-tionsNationally Recognized Standardized TestsIndustry Certification ExaminationsStudent Projects Pursuant to Local Re-quirementsStudent Portfolios Pursuant to Local Re-quirements

Elective Data, 35%

3



Observa-tion/ Prac-tice 80%

Student Perfor-mance 20%

Observation & PracticeDanielson Framework Domains1. Planning and Preparation2. Educational Environment3. Delivery of Service 4. Professional Development

Student Performance of All Students in the School Building in which the Nonteaching Professional Employee is Employed District-Designed Measures and ExaminationsNationally Recognized Standardized TestsIndustry Certification ExaminationsStudent Projects Pursuant to Local RequirementsStudent Portfolios Pursuant to Local Requirements

Non-Teaching Professional Employee Effectiveness System in Act 82 of 2012

Effective 2014-15 SY

4



Building Level Data

15%Correlation be-tween Teacher PVAAS scores and Teacher

Danielson rating15%

Elective Data/ SLOs

20%

Observa-tion/ Ev-idence

50%

Observation/ EvidenceDomains1. Strategic/Cultural Leadership2. Systems Leadership3. Leadership for Learning4. Professional and Community

Leadership

Building Level DataIndicators of Academic AchievementIndicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, All StudentsIndicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, SubgroupsAcademic Growth PVAASOther Academic IndicatorsCredit for Advanced Achievement

Correlation Data Based on Teacher Level MeasuresPVAAS

Elective Data/SLOsDistrict-Designed Measures and ExaminationsNationally Recognized Standardized TestsIndustry Certification ExaminationsStudent Projects Pursuant to Local RequirementsStudent Portfolios Pursuant to Local Requirements

Principal Effectiveness System in Act 82 of 2012

Effective 2014-2015 SY



School Building Data



Academic Performance Score• The academic performance score for a school is

based upon multiple measures, which define high-performing schools.

• The data elements that are combined to determine this academic performance score represent the building-level data used in the Teacher Effectiveness System.

• The academic performance score is based upon 100 point scale.

7



Academic Performance Score Components

• Indicators of Academic Achievement (40%)• Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap All Students (5%)• Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap Historically Underperforming Students (5%)• Indicators of Academic Growth – PVAAS (40%)• Other Academic Indicators (10%)• Extra Credit for Advanced Achievement (up to

7 Points)

8



Indicators of Academic Achievement (40%)

• PSSA/Keystone Exams Performance

• Industry Standards-Based Competency Assessments (NOCTI/NIMS)

• Grade 3 Reading Proficiency

• SAT/ACT College Ready Benchmarks

9



Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap (10%)

• All Students (5%)Based upon progress in moving all students to proficiency (defined as 100%)

• Historically Underperforming Students (5%)Based upon progress in moving historically

underperforming students to proficiency (defined as 100%)

- Students with Disabilities - English Language Learners - Economically Disadvantaged Students

10



Indicators of Academic Growth/PVAAS (40%)

Uses PVAAS Growth Index for:–Math–Reading –Science–Writing

11



Other Academic Indicators (10%)

• Cohort Graduation Rate• Promotion Rate• Attendance Rate• Advanced Placement or International

Baccalaureate or College Credit Offered

• PSAT/Plan Participation12



Extra Credit for Advanced Achievement(up to 7 Points)

• Percent PSSA/Keystone Exams Advanced – Math

• Percent PSSA/Keystone Exams Advanced – Reading

• Percent PSSA/Keystone Exams Advanced – Science

• Percent PSSA/Keystone Exams Advanced – Writing

• Percent Advanced – Industry Standards-Based Competency Assessments (NOCTI/NIMS)

• Percent of Grade 12 Students Scoring 3 or Higher on an

AP Exam13



Pennsylvania Value Added Assessment System

(PVAAS)



What is PVAAS teacher-specific reporting?

PVAAS teacher-specific reporting estimates the effect of a teacher’s

performance on the academic growth of a group of students.



PDE Guidance• PDE’s policy and guidelines will provide a

framework for LEAs to make sure the right teachers are linked to the right students for the right proportion of time for the right tested course/grade/subject to yield PVAAS Teacher Reporting. Teacher

Student Proportion of Time

Course & Grade/Subjec

t



Which Tested Courses/Subjects?

• PSSA: With/Without Accommodations– Grades 4-8: Reading and Math– Grades 4 & 8: Science– Grades 5 & 8: Writing

• Future: Transition into ELA Assessment• Keystone Exams: With/Without

Accommodations– Algebra I– Literature– Biology



PVAAS Teacher Reporting: 3-Year Rolling Average

• Included in Final Rating Form when a teacher has a 3- year rolling average.

PILOT:SY12-13PVAAS Report

SY13-14PVAAS Report

SY14-15PVAAS Report

SY15-16PVAAS Report

1st PVAAS 3-Year

Average



Until a teacher receives a PVAAS 3-year average, what is

used in place of the 15% for PVAAS teacher-specific

reporting?• The Observation/Evidence will be

used for the 15% portion in lieu of available PVAAS teacher-specific data – a PVAAS 3-year rolling average.

19



Other Variables Under Consideration

• Demographic Variables– Economically Disadvantaged– English Language Learners– Student with IEPs

• SAS EVAAS Analyses for PDE– To determine if there is a need to make any

adjustments based on demographic variables• Using actual PA teacher level data

– To identify and address any unintended consequences



Student Learning Objectives (as demonstrated through:)

• District-Designed Measures and Examinations• Nationally Recognized Standardized Tests• Industry Certification Examinations• Individual Teacher Developed Examinations• Student Projects Pursuant to Local Requirements• Student Portfolios Pursuant to Local Requirements• The SLO process will be used regardless of the

elective tools chosen by the LEA

21



What is an SLO?

• A process to document a measure of educator effectiveness based on student achievement of content standards.

• An SLO statement is an objective developed to guide instruction and examine changes in student mastery and/or growth.

22



Our Goal: Build Quality Control Framework

1. Provide tools for developing, approving, and scoring SLOs.2. Provide training and guidance for the

selection or development of high quality assessments.

3. Train IU, LEA, PDE content advisors and others professionals.

4. Ensure continuous improvement by refinements based on feedback

23



Rating Tool



Alternative Approval Process: Minimum Standards

• Uses multiple student performance measures as follows:– Teacher-Specific

Data, at least 15%– Building-Level

Specific Data, must be greater than 0%

– Elective Data, must be greater than 0%

25

Teacher Observation / Practice, 50%

Building Spe-cific Data, greater than 0%

Teacher-Spe-cific Data, at least 15%

Elective Data, greater than 0%



Alternative Approval Process: Minimum Standards

• Retains four (4) rating categories as follows:– Distinguished;– Proficient;– Needs Improvement; and – Failing

• Retains final performance rating of “Satisfactory” or “Unsatisfactory”

• PDE approval valid for up to five (5) years26



Alternative Approval Process: Technical Advisory Committee

(TAC)• TAC review required when

percentages applied to any student performance measures change from the percentages established in Pennsylvania’s Educator Effectiveness System

27



Differentiated SupervisionPDE supports differentiated supervision as part of a LEA’s supervision system.

• Acknowledges the time commitment for the formal observation process;

• Acknowledges the various levels of experiences of teachers;

• Acknowledges the importance of collaboration for continued professional growth

28



Differentiated Supervision

• PDE has developed guidelines to assist LEAs.

• PDE guidelines will require that a model leads to increased teacher effectiveness and increased student achievement.

• PDE guidelines will require professional staff to cycle back into the formal observation mode.

29



30

Educator Effectiveness

Documents

Transcript of Educator Effectiveness