1

OCTOBER 10 , 2011

An Update on Educator Effectiveness

Presentation to Professional Standards Council

2

Purpose of Educator Effectiveness Design Team

The charge of the Design Team is to develop: definitions of key guiding principles of a high-quality

educator effectiveness program, model performance-based evaluation systems for

teachers and principals, a regulatory framework for implementation that

includes how student achievement data will be used in context, and

recommendations for methods to support improvement and incentives for performance.

3

Educator Effectiveness Design Team

Leaders from the following groups are working collaboratively on the Design Team.

American Federation of Teachers (AFT) (Bryan Kennedy) Association of Wisconsin School Administrators (AWSA) (Jim

Lynch) Office of the Governor (Michael Brickman) Professional Standards Council (PSC) (Lisa Benz) Wisconsin Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (WACTE)

(Julie Underwood) Wisconsin Association of Independent Colleges & Universities

(WAICU) (Kathy Lake) Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB) (John Ashley) Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators (WASDA)

(Miles Turner) Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) (Mary Bell)

4

Educator Effectiveness Design Team

Workgroup Jim Lynch (AWSA) Julie Brilli (DPI) Beverly Cann (DPI) Jared Knowles (DPI) Kathleen Lyngaas (DPI) Amy Marsman (DPI) Deb Gurke (WASB) Jon Bales (WASDA) Ron Jetty (WEAC) Cheryl Hanley-Maxwell (School of Education, Dean’s

Office)

5

Educator Effectiveness Design Team

Supporting the Design Team: American Institutes for Research (AIR) Great Lakes West (GLW) National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality

(NCCTQ) Wisconsin Center for Educational Research (WCER)

In addition, informing our work: State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness (CCSSO)(28 states collaborating on the policies and practices

that will improve the effectiveness of our nation's educators)

6

Timeline

December – ConvenedJune - SymposiumOctober - Wisconsin educator effectiveness

performance-based framework for teacher and principals

20?? – Fully Developed State Model

7

Design Questions

1. What are the purposes of the systems?2. How will educator practice be

evaluated?3. How will student achievement & other

outcomes be incorporated?4. How will the evaluation process be

administered?5. How will the model be implemented

statewide?

8

Definition of Effective Educators

Effective Teacher: An effective teacher consistently uses educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways.

 Effective Principal: An effective principal shapes

school strategy and educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways.

9

Guiding Principles

An educator evaluation system must deliver information that

Guides effective educational practice that is aligned with student learning and development.

Documents evidence of effective educator practice.

Documents evidence of student learning. Informs appropriate professional development.Informs educator preparation programs.Supports a full range of human resource

decisions.

10

Seamless System

11

Teachers

Foundation for Teacher Practice

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Model Core Teaching Standards

Framework for Teacher Evaluation

Charlotte Danielson Domains and ComponentsDomain 1: Planning and PreparationDomain 2: The Classroom EnvironmentDomain 3: InstructionDomain 4: Professional Responsibilities

12

Principals

Foundation for Principal Practice

2008 Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards

Framework for Principal Evaluation

To be determined

13

Teacher PracticeEach component

should be evaluated on multiple sources of evidence. These could include: Observations of teacher

practice Review of documents Surveys/data Discussions with the

teacher

Principal PracticeEach component should

be evaluated on multiple sources of evidence. These could include: Observations of principal

practice Review of documents Interviews with

stakeholders Surveys/data Discussions with the

principal

Educator Practice

14

System Weights

50%

Educator Evaluation

Models of Practice Student Outcomes

•State assessment (value-added growth)

•District assessment data

•SLOs

•School-wide reading(Elem/Middle)

•Graduation rate(High School)

•District choice

Teachers

•InTASC

•Danielson’s 4 components,22 elements

Principals

•ISLLC

15

Student Outcome Weights

30%

30%

30%

5%

5%

PK-8

State assessment

SLOs

District assessment

School-wide reading (Elem/Mid) (Graduation HS)

Other (district choice)

Student Outcomes(represents 50% of evaluation)

Educator Effectiveness System Matrix

* Asterisks indicate a mismatch between educator’s practice performance and student outcomes and requires a focused review to determine why the mismatch is occurring and what, if anything, needs to be corrected.

Proposed Rating Categories: Developing------Effective-----Exemplary