9/9/2014

1

Performance Evaluation

Reform Act

PERA

1

Essence of PERA

Are you an effective teacher?

Prove it!

2

A recent newspaper article on

weakened tenure rights for teachers

quoted the Idaho state

superintendent, who said, “Good

teachers shouldn’t be worried.”

3

9/9/2014

2

Why are we here discussing

changes to the way teachers are

evaluated?

Why now?

Illinois statehood = 1818

compulsory education laws since 1900

4

Race To The Top Grant

Ratings Inflation

Business Model

of Accountability

Statewide Assessments

Simplicity of Numbers

Arne Duncan

Professional Sports

5

Survey: “93% of teachers rated

Superior or Excellent while 66% of

students failed to meet State standards.”

Arne Duncan said, “…not including

student achievement in teachers’

evaluations is illogical and

indefensible.”

6

9/9/2014

3

Teachers with:

10 years of experience = hard

20 years of experience = harder

30 years of experience = hardest

7

What are the pros and cons

of using student growth

to evaluate teachers?

Cons first.

8

Even three 45 minute

observations represent only

¼% of a teacher’s work

year. (180 days X 5 hours X 60 minutes = 54,000 minutes)

9

9/9/2014

4

Purposes of Evaluations

Formative: Low Stakes

Pay for Performance: Low Stakes

Summative: High Stakes

Goldhaber

10

Professional Practice or the

Process of Teaching:

Observations & Artifacts

Student Growth or the

Product of Teaching:

Student Assessments

11

Purpose of Article 24A

To improve the educational

services … by requiring that all

certified school district employees

be evaluated on a periodic basis

and that the evaluations result in

remedial action being taken when

deemed necessary.

12

9/9/2014

5

All = all teaching:

art, music, physical education,

special education, etc., but not

school service personnel, such

as social workers, or

occupational or physical

therapists

13

Ratings of teachers and

principals must be either:

Excellent,

Proficient,

Needs Improvement, or

Unsatisfactory. (Probationary teachers too)

14

Implementation Dates:

RTTT/SIG = date specified in grant

Lowest performing 20% by 9-1-15 (using spring 2014 State Test data)

by type (P-8, P-12, 9-12), All others, Cooperatives too, by 9-1-16

15

9/9/2014

6

ISBE Rules shall be

developed through a process

involving collaboration with

the Performance Evaluation

Advisory Council (PEAC).

isbe.net/peac 16

A choice for school

districts:

Bargain your own model

OR

Choose all or part (student

growth part only) of the

State’s default model 17

Each school district shall develop in

cooperation with its bargaining unit

an evaluation plan for all teachers

that incorporates the use of data and

indicators of student growth as a

significant factor (30%) in rating

teaching performance. (phase-in at

25% for first two years)

18

9/9/2014

7

A Joint Committee, composed of

equal representation, has 180

calendar days to reach agreement on

an evaluation plan. If not, then

district shall implement the plan

established by ISBE with respect to

the student growth part and only the

part(s) to which you can’t agree.

19

First meeting of Joint Committee

shall occur no later than

November 1 of the year preceding

implementation. Okay to have

discussions prior to formal

agreement and the beginning of the

180-day clock.

20

State default model shall

establish minimum requirements

for teacher evaluation

instruments and procedures in

which student growth shall

comprise exactly 50% of the

final performance rating.

21

9/9/2014

8

Professional Practice

22

Professional practice: anything a

teacher does (duties and

responsibilities) to promote the learning

of students… must include

consideration of the teacher’s

attendance, planning, instructional

methods, classroom management,

where relevant, and competency in the

subject matter taught;

23

…standards to which that teacher is

expected to conform, and

specification as to the teacher’s

strengths and weaknesses, with

supporting reasons for the

comments made.

24

9/9/2014

9

Districts must adopt an

instructional framework based on

research regarding effective

instruction that addresses

planning, instructional delivery,

classroom management, and is

aligned with the Illinois

Professional Teaching Standards.

25

Plan must take into consideration

student attendance and mobility so

as to best measure the impact a

teacher, principal, school and

district has on students’ academic

achievement.

26

Professional Practice:

The Danielson Framework will

be used to assess the professional

practice component of the State’s

default model. The Framework

must include all domains,

elements, components, and rating

levels. 27

9/9/2014

10

The Framework must include a description

of the four rating categories.

Danielson Framework uses:

Distinguished

Proficient

Basic

Unsatisfactory (Professional Practice ratings may be different.)

28

The district must quantify the relative

importance of each portion of the

Framework to the final rating.

Danielson Framework

Domain I: Planning and Preparation

Domain II: Classroom Environment

Domain III: Instruction

Domain IV: Professional Responsibilities 29

Teacher being evaluated must

receive a copy of the rubric and

standards to be used and a

summary of how student growth

and professional practice relate to

the ratings.

30

9/9/2014

11

Evidence of Professional Practice:

formal observations of a complete

lesson, evidence of planning,

instructional delivery, classroom

management, informal

observations, and any additional

evidence agreed to by the

Joint Committee

31

Formal observations are scheduled,

last for a complete lesson, or

minimum of 45 minutes, or an

entire class period, preceded by a

conference, at which a discussion of

the planned lesson and areas in

which the evaluator should focus

takes place.

32

Formal observations are followed by

a conference at which a discussion

and reflection of the observed lesson

takes place. The evaluator shall

provide feedback about the teacher’s

professional practice and evidence

specific to the area of focus.

33

9/9/2014

12

Informal observations:

no minimum time,

no pre-conference needed,

no post-conference needed,

feedback should be

provided.

34

Probationary teachers (evaluated every

school year) require

a minimum of three observations

(at least two formal).

Tenured teachers (evaluated at least

once very two school years) require

a minimum of two observations

(at least one formal).

35

Beginning-of-year

conference:

teacher and evaluator set

goals for

professional practice and

student growth.

36

9/9/2014

13

A mid-year interim conference:

teacher and evaluator meet to

discuss progress toward

professional practice and

student growth and allows for

an adjustment to instruction,

as needed.

37

Teacher whom evaluator deems to

be on a path toward a Needs

Improvement or Unsatisfactory

rating should receive notification

as soon as the evaluator makes

such a determination.

38

An end-of-year conference

between teacher and

evaluator is held to review

evidence for each part of the

Framework and teacher’s

performance rating.

39

9/9/2014

14

Evidence must be collected

consistent with a rubric aligned to

the Framework and include

evidence without bias or judgment.

Alternate qualified evaluators may

be designated to conduct

observations.

40

Student Growth

41

Student growth is

the change in a student’s

learning, evidenced by gain

on two or more assessments,

between two or more points

in time.

42

9/9/2014

15

Joint Committees shall consider

how certain characteristics, such

as students receiving special

education services, English

language learners, and low-

income populations, impact a

student’s academic achievement.

43

Joint Committees may define student

growth ratings different than the

State’s ratings as long as the final

ratings are the mandated ratings:

Excellent

Proficient

Needs Improvement

Unsatisfactory

44

An assessment is any instrument

that measures a student’s

acquisition of specific knowledge

and/or skills.

45

9/9/2014

16

Type I = Reliable assessments that

measure students in the same

manner with the same items, scored

by a non-district entity, widely

administered in or beyond Illinois.

Examples: NWEA, MAP Tests,

AIMSWeb, Scantron, ThinkLink.

46

Type II = Assessments adopted and

approved by the school district and

used on a district-wide basis, given

by all teachers in a given grade or

subject area. Examples:

collaboratively developed common

algebra test, or grade level test or a

publisher’s textbook test.

47

Type III = An assessment that is

rigorous and aligned with the

course’s curriculum and that the

evaluator and teacher agree best

measures student learning.

Examples: student work samples,

portfolios, projects, teacher-created

assessments.

48

9/9/2014

17

A Type I or Type II assessment may

qualify as a Type III assessment if

it aligns to the curriculum,

measures student learning in that

subject area, and is administered on

a district-wide basis by all teachers

in a given grade level/subject area.

49

At least one assessment from

Type I or Type II and one

from Type III is required,

or if no Type I or Type II,

then both can be Type III.

50

Data points may come from

different assessments as long as the

assessments address the same

content and as long as each data

point falls within

one calendar (12 months) year.

51

9/9/2014

18

Student Learning Objectives

are annual, targeted, goals to

advance student learning.

52

Student Learning Objectives

are based on conversations

between the teacher and the

evaluator that reflect a

thorough review of available

data to set growth targets for

the teacher

53

For example:

Number or percent of students who

reach a pre-determined standard

defining proficiency or achieve

simple growth, the difference

between end score and beginning

score

54

9/9/2014

19

Sample SLOs from New Haven:

5th grade class average of 80%

mastery across all math

standards will increase from

70% of students to 85% of

students on teacher-scored

assessments.

55

9th grade Art: 90% of final

portfolio presentations will

attain the level of “shows

significant improvement” on

rubric at year-end-review.

56

11th grade English: 90% of

students will score at or above

“above expectations” on final

research paper.

57

9/9/2014

20

Special education students:

should receive accommodations

specified in IEPs;

no disincentives for taking special

education students; and

should promote shared

accountability.

58

Joint Committees:

define process for each metric,

how student characteristics, (ELL,

special education, low income) shall

be considered for each assessment,

set growth expectations,

identify a uniform midpoint process ,

and define student growth ratings.

(Not necessarily all students)

59

Final Ratings

60

9/9/2014

21

In the State default model, a

matrix approach may be

used to determine the

summative rating, i.e.,

melding the professional

practice rating with the

student growth rating. 61

E P NI U

E E E P P

P P E P NI

NI P P NI E

U P NI E U

62

If a tenured teacher’s performance

is rated as either “Needs

Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory,”

then the teacher must be evaluated

at least once in school year

following the rating.

63

9/9/2014

22

Tenured teacher rated “Needs

Improvement” must develop, with the

evaluator and within 30 days, a

professional development plan directed

to areas identified as needing

improvement.

Reinstatement to the evaluation

schedule if rating becomes

Proficient or Excellent.

64

Tenured teacher rated “Unsatisfactory”

must develop and commence a

remediation plan, within 30 days,

provided the deficiencies are

remediable.

The plan shall provide for 90 school

days of remediation unless bargained

for fewer. (Remediation process is

outlined in the law.)

65

School districts do not need to

submit their new teacher evaluation

plans or future amendments to

ISBE.

66

9/9/2014

23

Dr. Joseph J. Matula

jmatula@comcast.net

67

Evaluator Training

68

Evaluators must participate in

training on the evaluation of

certified personnel provided or

approved by ISBE prior to

undertaking any evaluation and at

least once during each certificate

renewal cycle.

Bargaining unit members may be

evaluators if bargaining unit agrees. 69

9/9/2014

24

Evaluator’s pre-qualification

program must involve rigorous

training and an independent

observer’s determination that the

evaluator’s ratings properly align to

the 24A requirements.

70

Senate Bill 7

71

Replaces teacher seniority with a

process for filling new and

vacant positions. Filling such

positions will be based on

certifications, qualifications,

merit and ability (performance

evaluations) and relevant

experience. 72

9/9/2014

25

Reduction in Force (RIF)

procedures changed from

seniority to one based on

performance evaluations.

(Notice is now 45 days for

all.)

73