State and District Perspectives: Putting Policy into Practice Educator Evaluation and Assessment
description
Transcript of State and District Perspectives: Putting Policy into Practice Educator Evaluation and Assessment
State and District Perspectives:Putting Policy into Practice
Educator Evaluationand
Assessment
Policy & Practice Integration: How it all fits together:
Measures of educator effectiveness and student postsecondary and workforce readiness
Effectiveness ManagementIncrease and support the
effectiveness of all educators
Talent PipelineAttract and develop the best
educators
Strategic Partnerships/ Committees
Strategic Partnerships/ Committees
CDE’s Educator Effectiveness Unit
Policy, Metrics and Monitoring
Recruitment
Educator Preparation
Licensure
Hiring/ Placement Induction
ProfessionalDev.
Evaluation And
Support
Retention
Equity Initiatives
Vision:Effective educators
for every student and effective leaders for
every school
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.
Critical Effects of S.B. 10-191• Requires statewide minimum standards for what it
means to be an teacher or principal• Requires that all teachers and principals be
evaluated at least on the academic growth of their students
• Prohibits placement of teachers
• Makes non-probationary status
“effective”
50 %
forced
“portable”
Critical Effects of S.B. 10-191• Requires evaluation of all teachers and
principals• Changes non-probationary status from one that is
based upon years of to one that
is based upon three consecutive years of demonstrated • Provides that non-probationary status may be
based upon two consecutive years of
annual
earned serviceearned
effectivenesslost
ineffectiveness
Tensions• validity vs. reliability• all students vs. sampling• local scoring vs. outside scoring• summative vs. formative• holistic vs. analytic• stand-alone vs. embedded• one-year’s growth vs. differences in resources (instructional time, etc.)• mandate by edict vs. preparation through professional development
Moving Through Tensions
Guiding principles to assist in making sense of the requirements through practical implementation
Principles of Implementation
• Human judgment – Data should inform decisions, but human judgment will always
be a part of the process – Processes and techniques are recommended to improve
individual judgment and minimize errors and bias
• Embodiment of continuous improvement by monitoring– Pilot and rollout intended to capture what works and what
doesn’t– Changes in assessment practices and tools– Emerging research and best practices
• Providing credible and meaningful feedback with:– Actionable information– Opportunities for improvement– Idea that this is a process and not an event
• Involves all stakeholders in a collaborative process– Families, teachers, related service providers, administration,
school board, etc.
Principles of Implementation
• Takes place within a larger, aligned and supportive system– All components of the system must serve to increase the
number of educators and students who are successful
• Turn and Talk – Why is it important to understand these principles?
Principles of Implementation
STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS
Framework for System to Evaluate Principals
Definition of Principal Effectiveness
I. Strategy II. Instruction III. CultureV.
ManagementIV. Human Resources
VI. External Development
VII. Student Growth
50% Professional Practice Standards 50% Student Growth MeasuresWeighting: How Much Does Each Standard
Count Towards Overall Performance?
Number and Percentage Other Measures of Teachers Aligned with CDE
Guidelines
School Performance Other Measures Framework Aligned with CDE
Guidelines
Weighting:Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards
Result in a Determination of Individual Performance?
Performance Standards
Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
Quality Standards
Principal Quality Standards
I: Principals demonstrate
strategic leadership.
II: Principals demonstrate instructional leadership.
III: Principals demonstrate school culture and equity
leadership.
IV: Principals demonstrate human resource leadership.
V: Principals demonstrate managerial leadership.
VI: Principals demonstrate
external development leadership.
VII: Principals demonstrate
leadership around student academic
growth.
Tensions• validity vs. reliability• all students vs. sampling• holistic vs. analytic• stand-alone vs. embedded• one-year’s growth vs. differences in resources (instructional time, etc.)• mandate by edict vs. preparation through professional development
Moving Through TensionsApplication guidance to assist and/or provide choices in making sense of the requirements
through practical implementation
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.
• Some districts are using their own locally developed standards after completing a crosswalk of their standards to the state’s quality standards and elements. These districts must provide assurances that they are meeting all additional requirements of SB 10-191.
STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS
Framework for System to Evaluate Principals
Definition of Principal Effectiveness
I. Strategy II. Instruction III. CultureV.
ManagementIV. Human Resources
VI. External Development
VII. Student Growth
50% Professional Practice Standards 50% Student Growth MeasuresWeighting: How Much Does Each Standard
Count Towards Overall Performance?
Number and Percentage Other Measures of Teachers Aligned with CDE
Guidelines
School Performance Other Measures Framework Aligned with CDE
Guidelines
Weighting:Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards
Result in a Determination of Individual Performance?
Performance Standards
Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
Quality Standards
Principal Evaluations
50% Professional Practice50% Student Academic Growth
I. 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 RubricStandard I: Principals Demonstrate Strategic Leadership
Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient Accomplished Exemplarya. 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.
. . . and Staff incorporate
identified strategies in their instructional plans to assure that students achieve expected outcomes.
. . . and Staff 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 Standard
Element of the
standard
Rating levels
Professional Practices
Standard I: Principals Demonstrate Strategic Leadership
Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient Accomplished Exemplarya. 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.
. . . and Staff incorporate
identified strategies in their instructional plans to assure that students achieve expected outcomes.
. . . and Staff 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.
STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS
Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers
Definition of Teacher Effectiveness
I. Know Content
50% Professional Practice Standards 50% Student Growth MeasuresWeighting: How Much Does Each Standard
Count Towards Overall Performance?
Observations of Other Measures Teaching Aligned with
CDE Guidelines
State Other Assessments Other Measures Summative for Non-tested Aligned Assessments Areas CDE Guidelines
Match of test to teaching assignments
Weighting:Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards
Result in a Determination of Individual Performance?
Performance StandardsIneffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
Quality StandardsII. Establish Environment
III. Facilitate Learning
IV. Reflect on Practice
V. Demonstrate Leadership
VI. Student Growth
Appeals Process
Teacher Quality Standards
I: Teachers demonstrate mastery of and pedagogical
expertise in the content they teach.
II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive, and respectful learning
environment for a diverse population of students.
III: Teachers plan and deliver effective
instruction and create an environment that
facilitates learning for their students.
IV: Teachers reflect on their practice.
V:Teachers demonstrate leadership.
VI: Teachers take responsibility for
student academic growth.
Tensions• validity vs. reliability• all students vs. sampling• holistic vs. analytic• stand-alone vs. embedded• one-year’s growth vs. differences in resources (instructional time, etc.)• mandate by edict vs. preparation through professional development
Moving Through TensionsDuring the feedback timeline, considerations are collected to
build guidance to assist and/or provide choices in making sense of the requirements through practical implementation
STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS
Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers
Definition of Teacher Effectiveness
I. Know Content
50% Professional Practice Standards 50% Student Growth MeasuresWeighting: How Much Does Each Standard
Count Towards Overall Performance?
Observations of Other Measures Teaching Aligned with
CDE Guidelines
State Other Assessments Other Measures Summative for Non-tested Aligned Assessments Areas CDE Guidelines
Match of test to teaching assignments
Weighting:Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards
Result in a Determination of Individual Performance?
Performance StandardsIneffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
Quality StandardsII. Establish Environment
III. Facilitate Learning
IV. Reflect on Practice
V. Demonstrate Leadership
VI. Student Growth
Appeals Process
Teacher Evaluations
50% Professional Practice50% Student Academic Growth
I. 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.
Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students.
Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient(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
Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students.
Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient(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.
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.
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.
Highly Effective
Effective
Partially Effective
Ineffective
District uses State Scoring Framework Matrix to determine Performance Standard
aggregate measures
Aggregate professional practice scores into a single score on Quality Standards I-V
Aggregate student growth measures into a single score on Quality Standard VI
data collection procedures
Standards I-V: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence
Standard VI: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence
weights
On each Standard I-V districts may weight priority standards more
Standard VI must count for at least 50% of total score
measures
Standards I-V: use observation plus at least one other method
Standard VI: select multiple measures appropriate to teaching assignment
Districts decide…
Denver Public Schools and LEAP
LEAP - Leading Effective Academic Practice
Educator Effectiveness Pilot in DPS
LEAP Overview
• The district and the DCTA have worked in collaboration with DPS teachers and school leaders to develop a new teacher performance assessment system.
• Through their work on Design Teams, teachers and principals applied the guiding principles from the focus groups to develop recommendations for a meaningful system of observation, feedback, support and evaluation for teachers.
LEAP – Multiple Measures
The LEAP Framework• In an ongoing effort to ensure that the Framework for
Effective Teaching is an educator developed and tested tool, a primary goal of this year's pilot was to give DPS educators the opportunity to use the Framework and then provide feedback to guide further refinements prior to the 2012-13 LEAP pilot.
• The revised 2012-13 Framework encompasses the common feedback themes identified throughout the 2011-12 LEAP pilot. The full Framework for Effective Teaching Evidence Guide is available to download on the DPS LEAP website.
Peer ObservationThird-Party Feedback With First-Hand Knowledge
• Peer Observation is the component of LEAP that provides teachers with the opportunity to engage in reflective conversations and receive honest, open feedback with a peer or colleague who has similar teaching experience.
• The Peer Observer role is a new position to DPS but one that has been used effectively in school districts across the country for a number of years. Peer Observers are fellow teachers who have been hired specifically for this role because they are recognized for their experience and expertise in content, classroom instruction, student achievement, and best practices.
Peer Observers• Peer Observers will be matched as closely as possible to the
content or grade level of the teacher they are observing so they can provide feedback and support that is specific and relevant. Peer Observers will provide a third-party, outside perspective combined with first hand experience with the realities of teaching.
• Music Peer Observer classroom video clip:http://youtu.be/H-67UxQsRDQhttp://youtu.be/LnYuIsUYhCA
Music Appendix sample
MASTERFUL CONTENT DELIVERY• I.1 - Refer to indicator • I.2 - Students provide performance rationale
(self and others) - Students answer questions aligned to music• I.3 - Teacher uses music instructional methods
to support the Standards (i.e. Orff, Kodaly, Suzuki, etc.)
Category 1:State-
mandated common
assessment
Category 2:District-
approved common
assessments
Category 3:English
language acquisition
Category 4:Teacher/team
developed assessment
Category 5:School-wide
measure
Purpose:
- Accountability to state- Capture longitudinal growth
Example:TCAP
Purpose:
- Capture incremental growth- Inform instruction
Example:Interim assessments
Purpose:
- Account for collective responsibility- Capture multiple areas of growth
Example:SPF
Purpose:
- Allow for flexibility in the demonstration of student achievement
Example:Core curriculum
Purpose:
- Account for high number of ELLs
Example:CELA
Student Outcomes Components