Educator Effectiveness Summit: SB 191 Into Action

Colorado State Model for Educator Evaluation

March 5, 2012

Toby King Consultant Evaluation and SupportMike Gradoz Consultant Evaluation and Support

Colorado Department of Education

Senate Bill 10-191

• A system to evaluate the effectiveness of licensed personnel to improve the quality of education.

• Improve instruction.• Serve as a measurement of professional growth

and continuous improvement.• Provide a basis for making decisions in the areas

of hiring, compensation, promotion, assignment, professional development, earning and retaining non probationary status, dismissal, and nonrenewal of contract.

Definition of Principal Effectiveness

Effective Principals in the state of Colorado are responsible for the collective success of their

schools, including the learning, growth and achievement of both students and staff. As

schools’ primary instructional leaders, effective Principals enable critical discourse and data- driven reflection about curriculum, assessment, instruction, and student progress, and create structures to facilitate improvement. Effective Principals are adept at creating systems that maximize the utilization of resources and human capital, foster collaboration, and facilitate constructive change. By creating a common vision and articulating shared values, effective Principals lead and manage their schools in a manner that supports schools’ ability to promote equity and to continually improve their positive impact on students and families.

1. Evaluation System Goals

1. Evaluation System Goals

2. Stakeholder Investment and Communication

Plan

2. Stakeholder Investment and Communication

Plan

3. Selecting Measures

3. Selecting Measures

4. System Structure

4. System Structure 5. Evaluators5. Evaluators 6. Data Integrity6. Data Integrity

7. Using Results & Professional Development

7. Using Results & Professional Development

8. System Evaluation

8. System Evaluation

Components of an Effective Evaluation System

Principal Quality Standards

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 state’s quality standards and elements.

• Districts that use their own locally developed standards must crosswalk those standards to the state’s quality standards and elements, and be able to report for each principal and teacher (1) a final performance evaluation rating, and (2) performance results for each quality standard.

Principal EvaluationsI. Strategic leadershipII. Instructional leadershipIII. School culture/equity leadershipIV. Human resource leadershipV. Managerial leadershipVI. External development leadership

Measured using multiple measures on multiple occasions, including tools that capture: (1) teacher input; (2) number and percentage of teachers with each; and (3) number and percentage of teachers who are improving in their performance, in comparison to the goals articulated in the principal’s professional performance plan.

VII. Leadership around student academic growth

Evaluated using the following: (1)data included in the school performance framework; and (2) at least one other measure of student academic growth.

Components of the Principal Rubric

Standard I: Principals Demonstrate Strategic Leadership

Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient Accomplished Exemplary

a. 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.

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.

. . . andEstablishes 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.

. . . andStaff incorporate identified strategies in their instructional plans to assure that students achieve expected outcomes.

. . . andStaff and other stakeholders take leadership roles in updating the school’s vision, mission, and strategic goals.Staff members assume responsibility for implementing the school’s vision, mission, and strategic goals.

Quality Standar

d

Element of the

standard

Rating

levels

Professional

Practices

Examples of Artifacts That May Be Used to Support Rating: Evidence Provided by Artifact:

Unified Improvement Plan*

Teacher Feedback*

Parent Feedback

Student Feedback

Supervisor Feedback

Meeting agendas, minutes, and rosters

Quarterly Reports to SAC

Teacher Lesson Plans

Minutes of Planning Sessions

Teacher Turnover Rates

Emails and memos to staff

Descriptions of processes and procedures

ICAP

Parent newsletters

School vision, mission, and goals

Business and/or community resource agreements

Ratings:(# points per rating at this level)

NE(0)

PP (1)

P (2)

A (3)

Ex (4)

Total Points

0 to 2 points = Not Evident 3 to 6 points = Partially Proficient7 to 10 points = Proficient11 to 14 points = Accomplished15 to 16 points = ExemplaryOverall Rating for Standard I = _________________

a. School Vision, Mission, and Strategic Goals

a. School Improvement Plan

a. Leading Change

a. Distributive Leadership

Total Points

Evaluator Comments:

Response of Principal/Assistant Principal Being Evaluated:

*Artifact is required for all principals and assistant principals.

Evidence provided

by artifacts

Examples of

artifacts

Rating Scale

Rating points

Ratings and point

equivalents

Evaluator’s comments

Principal comment section

Standard I: Principals Demonstrate Strategic Leadership

Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient Accomplished Exemplary

a. 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.

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.

. . . andEstablishes 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.

. . . andStaff incorporate identified strategies in their instructional plans to assure that students achieve expected outcomes.

. . . andStaff and other stakeholders take leadership roles in updating the school’s vision, mission, and strategic goals.Staff members assume responsibility for implementing the school’s vision, mission, and strategic goals.

Not Evident describes practices of a principal who does not meet state performance standards and is not making progress toward meeting them.

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.

The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the outcomes of the principal’s practices, including expectations for staff, students, parents and community members, as a result of practices exhibited under rating levels 2 and 3.

Rubric Rating LevelsStandard

Not Evident Partially Proficient

Proficient Accomplished

Exemplary

Element

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

0Does not

meet state standard and is not making

progress toward

meeting standard.

1Does not

meet state standard but

is making progress toward

meeting standard.

3Exceeds

state standard.

2Meets state standard.

4Significantly

exceeds state

standard.

Definition of Teacher Effectiveness

Effective Teachers in the state of Colorado have the knowledge, skills, and commitments needed to provide excellent and equitable learning opportunities and growth for all students. They strive to support growth and development, close achievement gaps and to prepare diverse student populations for postsecondary and workforce success. Effective Teachers facilitate mastery of content and skill development, and employ and adjust evidence-based strategies and approaches for students who are not achieving mastery and students who need acceleration. They also develop in students the skills, interests and abilities necessary to be lifelong learners, as well as for democratic and civic participation. Effective Teachers communicate high expectations to students and their families and utilize diverse strategies to engage them in a mutually supportive teaching and learning environment. Because effective Teachers understand that the work of ensuring meaningful learning opportunities for all students cannot happen in isolation, they engage in collaboration, continuous reflection, on-going learning and leadership within the profession.

Teacher Quality Standards

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 state’s quality standards and elements.

• Districts that use their own locally developed standards must crosswalk those standards to the state’s quality standards and elements, and be able to report for each principal and teacher (1) a final performance evaluation rating, and (2) performance results for each quality standard.

Teacher EvaluationsI. Mastery of contentII. Establish learning environmentIII. Facilitate learningIV. Reflect on practiceV. Demonstrate leadership

Measured using multiple measures on multiple occasions, including: (1) observations; and (2) at least one of the following: student perception measures, where appropriate and feasible, peer feedback, feedback from parents or guardians, or review of teacher lesson plans or student work samples. May include additional measures.

VI. Responsibility for student academic growth

Evaluated using the following: (1) a measure of individually-attributed growth, (2) a measure of collectively-attributed growth; (3) when available, statewide summative assessment results; and (4) for subjects with statewide summative assessment results available in two consecutive grades, results from the Colorado Growth Model.

Colorado Department of Education

Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students.

Not Evident Partially ProficientProficient

(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.

The teacher:Monitors students for level of participation.Encourages students to share their interests.Challenges students to expand and enhance their learning.

. . . andThe 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.

. . . andStudents:Actively participate in all classroom activities.Monitor their own performance for frequency of participation.Seek opportunities to respond to difficult questions.

. . . andStudents: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.

Quality Standard

Element that

aligns with

standard

Rating levels

Professional

Practices

Components of the Teacher Rubric

Element e: Teachers provide proactive, clear and constructive feedback to families about student progress and work collaboratively with the families and significant adults in the lives of their students.

The teacher:Collaborates with others infrequently or only as required in order to address identify, understand and address student learning needs.Establishes a classroom environment that is not inviting to families and significant adults in the lives of students.

The teacher:Maintains appropriate and respectful relationships with students and their significant adults.Routinely communicates with parents to better understand student needs. Is sensitive to the diverse family structures in all communication to/about the student.

. . . andThe teacher:Provides tools, materials, and guidance significant adults to help students meet education goals.Maximizes the home/school connection by coordinating information from significant adults with colleagues who provide student services.Seeks out services, strategies and resources to meet the diverse needs of students.

. . . andStudents:Take advantage of support services made available to them. In order to deepen their skills and knowledge.

. . . andStudents:Seek out assistance such as tutoring, computer software, advice from specialists, and guidance from fellow students to address learning issues.

Examples of Artifacts that may be used: Evidence of Performance:

Evidence of performance provided by artifact:

Student Achievement Data

Student feedback

Parent feedback

Lesson plans/units of study

Feedback from walkthrough observations

Instructional activities schedules

Student journals/learning logs

Student work

Anecdotal records

Formative and summative assessments of student work

Examples of

Artifacts

Evidence provided

by artifact

Comments (Required for Ratings of “Not Evident” or “Partially Proficient” and recommended for all rating levels). Please indicate the element for which the comment applies if not for the standard as a whole.

Comments of person being evaluated. (Optional)

Evaluator

comments

Teacher comment section

Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students.

Not Evident Partially ProficientProficient

(Meets State Standard)Accomplished Exemplary

Element d: Teachers adapt their teaching for the benefit of all students, including those with special needs across a range of ability levels.

The teacher does not: Design instruction to address individual student learning needs.Collaborate with specialists, colleagues and parents to provide understand student needs.

The teacher:Designs instruction to address specific learning needs of some groups of students (e.g., ELL, LD, special needs, gifted and talented). Challenges all students with the same frequency and depth and monitors the quality of participation.

. . . andThe teacher:Solicits input from parents, colleagues, specialists, and others to understand students’ learning needs.Implements individualized plans for the content and delivery of instruction.Uses multiple strategies to teach and assess students.Adapts instructional strategies to meet student needs.

. . . andStudents:Actively participate in all classroom activities.Articulate an awareness of their learning needs.Reflect about their learning and make adjustments to accommodate their learning needs.

. . . andStudents:Seek out ways to cope with learning differences and apply coping skills to classroom situations.Share coping strategies and with fellow students.

Not evident. This describes practices of a teacher who does not meet state performance standards and is not making progress toward meeting them.

Not evident. This describes practices of a teacher who does not meet state performance standards and is not making progress toward meeting them.

The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what teachers do on a day to day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels.

The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what teachers do on a day to day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels.

The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the impact of the teacher’s practices on student outcomes.

The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the impact of the teacher’s practices on student outcomes.

Rubric Rating LevelsStandard

Not Evident Partially Proficient

Proficient Accomplished

Exemplary

Element

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

Professional Practices

0Does not

meet state standard and is not making

progress toward

meeting standard.

1Does not

meet state standard but

is making progress toward

meeting standard.

3Exceeds

state standard.

2Meets state standard.

4Significantly

exceeds state

standard.

Principal and Teacher Performance Evaluation Ratings

After CDE develops the state model system and an evaluation scoring matrix, the State Board will adopt definitions for each rating.

Content CollaborativeThe Content Collaboratives are a group of educators tasked with creating and disseminating standards-based assessment and instructional materials for use in the classroom. These groups are a key piece in determining how to measure non-state tested subject matter for use in the new educator evaluation system. 

  The Content Collaboratives and Colorado Department of Education, along with state and national experts, will establish examples of student learning measures within each content area. These will be piloted in select districts, undergo revision and then be disseminated to all districts. The National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment will facilitate and support the work and meetings of the Content Collaboratives. A technical steering committee will ensure the technical reliability of the identified assessments.

What’s on the Horizon:January-May 2012: Launch Cohort 1 Content Collaboratives in order to establish measures of student academic growth in Social Studies; Reading/Writing/Communicating; Music; Dance, Drama and Theatre Arts; and Visual Arts

 Summer 2012: Launch Cohort 2 Content Collaboratives in order establish measures of student academic growth in World Languages; Science; Mathematics; Physical Education; and Comprehensive Health

 Fall 2012: Launch pilot of Cohort 1 products in districts participating in CDE’s Educator Effectiveness pilot

 January 2013: Launch pilot of Cohort 2 products in districts participating in CDE’s Educator Effectiveness pilot

 Bank of example measures identified will begin to populate after the first pilot has concluded (Summer 2013)

 For more information about assessments, contact Jo O’Brien, assistant commissioner for assessments, research and evaluation at 303-866-6852.

Pilot then peer

review

NationalResearchers

I: Jan-Mar 2012II: Jun-Aug 2012

I: Feb-May 2012II: July-Nov 2012

I &II: Feb-Dec 2012

I & II: Aug 2012- Aug 2014

I: Aug 2013II: Aug 2014

Researchers gather existing fair, valid

and reliable measures for Consideration.

Technical Steering Committee creates

frameworks and design principles for collaboratives

to use in reviewing and creating measures.

Committee reviews

recommendations of collaboratives.

Piloting and peer review of

measures.

Aug 2012-Aug 2013: Cohort I piloting & peer

review

January 2013-Aug 2014:

Cohort II piloting & peer review

Measures placed in

online Education

Effectiveness Resource Bank for voluntary

use.

Collaboratives use protocol to review

researchers’ measures for

feasibility, utility and gaps.

Prepare to fill gaps.

Provide recommendations

to Technical Steering

Committee.

Cohort I & II: Flow Chart of Work

Colorado Content

Collaboratives

Technical Steering

Committee

Future WorkBank

Pilot Period 2011 - 2013

Principal and teacher rubrics Measures of student academic growth Use of student growth objectives Collecting teacher input for principal evaluations Collecting student and family perception data Aggregating measures to assign final evaluation ratings Costs of implementation Support structures for small and/or rural districts CDE monitoring methods

Contact Information• Katy Anthes

Executive Director of Educator Effectiveness anthes_k@cde.state.co.us

• Michael GradozConsultant for Educator Effectiveness gradoz_m@cde.state.co.us

• Toby KingConsultant for Educator Effectiveness king_t@cde.state.co.us

• Britt WilkenfeldData Specialist wilkenfeld_b@cde.state.co.us

• For more information, please visit: http://www.cde.state.co.us/EducatorEffectiveness/