Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project

Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project

Teacher & Principal Professional Growth and Evaluation Overview Presentation Jim Koval OSPI Michaela Miller OSPI Follow this presentation www.tpep-wa.org or google tpep 2 The Wisdom of Practice After 30 years of doing such work, I have concluded that classroom teachingis perhaps the most

complex, most challenging, and most demanding, subtle, nuanced, and frightening activity that our species has ever inventedThe only time a physician could possibly encounter a situation of comparable complexity would be in the emergency room of a hospital during or after a natural disaster. Lee Shulman Stanford University Why Assess Teacher & Principal Effectiveness? Quality Assurance Professional Learning Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project Teacher and Principal Evaluation System Overview

Instructional and Leadership Frameworks Definitions of comprehensive and focused evaluations Summative Methodology Criterion Scoring Student Growth within Teacher and Principal Evaluation Support and Resources Rater Agreement Definition/Principal Training eVAL Management System TPEP Core Principles We Cant Fire Our Way to Finland

The critical importance of teacher and leadership quality. The professional nature of teaching and leading a school. The complex relationship between the system for teacher and principal evaluation and district systems and negotiations. The belief in professional learning as an underpinning of the new evaluation system. The understanding that the career continuum must be addressed in the new evaluation system. The system must determine the balance of inputs or acts and outputs or results. TPEP Pilot Sites Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP) Anacortes Central Valley Kennewick North Thurston North Mason

Othello Snohomish Wenatchee ESD 101 Consortium Almira Davenport Liberty Medical Lake Pullman Reardan-Edwall Wellpinit Wilbur Steering Committee E2SSB 6696

8 Teacher Evaluation Criteria 8 Principal Evaluation Criteria 4-Tiered Rating System (2010) SB 5895 (2012) ESEA Waiver (Summer 2012) Summative/Accountability 3 Criteria must include student growth Up to 3 instructional and leadership frameworks

Experienced teachers and principals cannot be basic Evaluations will be used in HR decisions Summative Scoring Formula Separate analysis of Student Growth Criteria Matrix for analyzing summative and student growth scores Options for low student growth scores Formative/Growth Teacher and Principal Evaluation Criteria INSTRUCTIONAL AND LEADERSHIP FRAMEWORKS TPEP Criteria Themes

Frameworks in 2013-14 Framework CEL 5 Dimensions + Danielson Marzano (Instructional) AWSP Leadership Marzano (Leadership) Changes from Framework Modification and Adaptations from Authors Districts NO NO Changes to Rubrics/Adding Indicators May add to Possible Observables

Yes- Danielson 2013 NO Changes to Rubrics/Adding Very Minor Changes to Components Framework May add to Critical Attributes/Examples Available May 2013 NO NO Changes to Rubrics/Adding Components May add to Possible Evidence Yes- AWSP 2013 NO Changes to Rubrics/Adding Very Minor Changes to Components Framework May 2013 May add to possible Measures/Evidence NO

NO Changes to Rubrics/Adding Components May add to Possible Evidence 12 Comprehensive Evaluation Teachers Assesses all 8 evaluation criteria. All criteria contribute to the comprehensive summative evaluation rating. Student Growth Rubrics embedded in Criterion. (3, 6, 8) All provisional classroom teachers and any classroom teacher not on level 3 or level 4 receive Comprehensive evaluation. All classroom teachers shall receive a comprehensive summative evaluation at least once every four years. Comprehensive Evaluation Principals

Assesses all 8 evaluation criteria. All criteria contribute to the comprehensive summative evaluation rating. Student Growth Rubrics embedded in Criterion. (3,5,8) Due to the importance of instructional leadership and assuring rater agreement among evaluators, particularly those evaluating teacher performance, school districts are encouraged to conduct comprehensive summative evaluations of principal performance on an annual basis. Section 1, (12 c(v)) Comprehensive Evaluation Scoring Process Teachers and Principals Evidence Standards Criteria 1

Criteria 2 Criteria 3 Criteria 4 Criteria 5 Criteria 6 Framework s + Student Growth Rubrics

Observation Artifacts Student Growth Other evidence relevant to the frameworks Criterion Rating Summative Rating District determined

process State determined process Distinguished Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory Distinguished Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory Criteria 7

Student Growth Measures Student Growth Impact Ratings: Criteria 8 (From 3 specific criteria) Low, Average, High Focused Evaluation Certificated Classroom Teachers Includes an assessment of one of the eight criterion. Student Growth Rubrics from one of the three criterion If a teacher chooses 3,6 or 8; their accompanying student growth rubrics will be used.

If a teacher chooses Criterion 1,2,4,5,7, the accompanying student growth rubrics from Criterion 3 or 6 will be used. Approved by the teachers evaluator. A focused evaluation must be performed in any year that a comprehensive evaluation is not scheduled. Focused Evaluation Principals and Assistant Principals Includes an assessment of one of the eight criterion. Student Growth Rubrics from one of the three criterion The focused evaluation will include the student growth rubric row selected by the principal or assistant principal. Criterion and Student Growth Rubric Rows must be approved by the principals evaluator. A focused evaluation must be performed in any year that a comprehensive evaluation is not scheduled.

Focused Evaluation Scoring Process Teachers and Principals Standards Criteria 1 One Criterion is chosen and approved by 3 Criteria evaluator Criteria 4 Criteria 5 Criteria 6 Criteria 7 Criteria 8 Criteria 2

Framework Component s + Student Growth Rubrics Evidence Observation Artifacts Student

Growth Other evidence relevant to the frameworks Student Growth Measures (A rating of 1 in the rubric rows triggers a student growth inquiry) Criterion = Summative Rating Distinguished

Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory And now for something much easier to talk about CRITERION SCORING STUDENT GROWTH PROCESS SUMMATIVE SCORING METHODOLOGY Criterion Scoring

1. Guiding Principles 2. Formative Evidence Gathering Matrix (Framework Specific) 3. Summative Criterion Rating 4. Guiding Questions for Criterion Rating 5. Use OSPI Summative Scoring Process for Final Rating Guiding Principles for Criterion Scoring The primary goal of any system of teacher or principal evaluation is to

promote principal, teacher and student learning. Accurate teacher and principal evaluation requires trained observers using a research-based instructional or leadership framework. Trained observers make accurate assessments of practice based on evidence. The value of accurate assessments of practice is to shape the conversations that lead to improved practice. Embedded in each instructional or leadership framework is a system for growth in practice. Reliability and validity of the instructional or leadership framework relies on implementation of the full framework rather than individual components/indicators. (comprehensive) It is imperative to remain in the formative mindset until the final summative rating is determined. Using the Matrix Gather formative evidence of observed practice to enter (a minimum of three pieces or touch point evidence is recommended before each conference). FORMATIVE

Using the rubrics of your districts chosen framework, make a determination that represents the preponderance of evidence that defines the rating for each component/indicator. FORMATIVE Taking the rating generated from the preponderance of evidence and generating a component/indicator score on the four level rating system. MOVING FROM FORMATIVE TO SUMMATIVE. Evidence Evidence means observed practice, products or results of a certificated classroom teacher or certificated principal's work that demonstrates knowledge and skills of the educator with respect to the four-level rating

system. (WAC 392-191A-030) 23 Criterion Scoring 24 Criterion Scoring How do you deal with ? Sample Guiding Questions: What else do I need to see or consider to make a final decision what is available to me? What is the distribution of evidence over time? Has there been demonstrated and consistent improvement? If there was growth, was the growth sustained? What would be the tipping point? If I consistently saw X, I would

feel confident that the performance is Basic if I consistently saw Y, I would feel confident that the performance is Proficient? What is the essence of this criterion? (ie: the big picture) go back and find the key words in the framework/rubric. What does the evidence tell you about the evaluatees performance and growth with regards to this essential aspect of the components/indicators criterion? Is this evaluatee more basic than s/he is proficient, or more proficient than s/he is basic in this area? What is your evidence based in the framework/rubric to support your decision? Know Thy Impact! There is no recipe, no professional development set of worksheets, no new teaching method, and no band-aid remedy. It is a way of thinking: My role, as a teacher, is to evaluate the effect I have on my students. It is to

know thy impact, it is to understand this impact, and it is to act on this knowing and understanding. John Hattie, Visible Learning (2012) 28 Know Thy Impact! This requires that teachers (and leaders) gather defensible and dependable evidence from many sources, and hold collaborative discussions with colleagues and students about this evidence, thus making the effect of their teaching visible to themselves and to others. John Hattie, Visible Learning (2012) 29 Evaluation Measures

Current vs. New Current Evaluation System New Evaluation System Observation Observation YES YES Student Growth Student Growth NO

YES Other Evidence Other Evidence NO YES 30 We have been working hard on the Improvement of Instructional Practice 31 ESSB 5895 Establishes New Definitions Around

Student Growth Measures Both E2SSB 6696 and ESSB 5895 contain language around student growth including: Student growth data that is relevant to the teacher and subject matter must be a factor in the evaluation process and must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. Student growth means the change in student achievement between two points in time. Changes

Student growth data must be a substantial factor in evaluating the summative performance of certificated classroom teachers for at least three of the evaluation criteria. Student growth data elements may include the teachers performance as a member of a grade-level, subject matter, or other instructional team within a school when the use of this data is relevant and appropriate.

Student Growth Theory of Action 33 Defining Key Terms Student Achievement: The status of subjectmatter knowledge, understandings, and skills at one point in time. Student Growth (Learning): The growth in subject-matter knowledge, understandings, and skill between two points in time. It is student growth, not student achievement, that is relevant in demonstrating impacts teacher and principals have on students. sed a b

te- ls a t S Too Dis Sch trict oo a n d lToo Base d ls m oo ools r s T s a

Cl sed ba Student Growth Rubrics The TPEP steering committee organizations approved statewide rubrics for student growth to ensure consistency in implementation of the evaluation system across Washington State. The rubrics for student growth describe both goalsetting and outputs of student learning. OSPI has provided student growth rubrics for each of the three criterion Teachers #3, #6, and #8 Principals #3, #5, and #8 Student Growth Principal Rubric Language SG 8.3 37

Student Growth Teacher Rubric Language SG 3.1 & 3.2 Student Growth Criterion 3: Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs. Student Growth 3.1: Establish Student Growth Goal(s) Unsatisfactory Basic Does not establish student growth goals or establishes inappropriate goals for subgroups of students not reaching full learning potential. Goals do not identify multiple, high-quality sources of

data to monitor, adjust, and evaluate achievement of goals. Establishes appropriate student growth goals for subgroups of students not reaching full learning potential. Goals do not identify multiple, highquality sources of data to monitor, adjust, and evaluate achievement of goals. Proficient Establishes appropriate student growth goals for

subgroups of students not reaching full learning potential. Goals identify multiple, high-quality sources of data to monitor, adjust, and evaluate achievement of goals. Distinguished Establishes appropriate student growth goals for subgroups of students not reaching full potential in collaboration with students, parents, and other school staff. Goals

identify multiple, highquality sources of data to monitor, adjust, and evaluate achievement of goals. Student Growth 3.2: Achievement of Student Growth Goal(s) Unsatisfactory Growth or achievement data from at least two points in time shows no evidence of growth for most students. Basic Multiple sources of growth or achievement

data from at least two points in time show some evidence of growth for some students. Proficient Multiple sources of growth or achievement data from at least two points in time show clear evidence of growth for most students. Distinguished Multiple sources of growth or achievement

data from at least two points in time show evidence of high growth for all or nearly all students. 38 Student Growth/Learning - Teachers Five Student Growth Rubric Rows 3.1 Establish Student Growth Goals Re: individual or subgroups of students (achievement/ opportunity gap) 3.2 Achievement of Student Growth Goals Re: individual or subgroups of students (achievement/ opportunity gap) 6.1 Establish Student Growth Goals using Multiple Student Data Elements Re: whole class based on grade-level standards and aligned to school and district goals 6.2 Achievement of Student Growth Goals

Re: whole class based on grade-level standards and aligned to school and district goals 8.1 Establish Team Student Growth Goals Re: Teacher as part of a grade-level, content area, or other school/district team 39 Student Growth/Learning - Principals Three Student Student Growth Rubric Rows Criterion 3: Demonstrated and measureable improvements in student academic growth readily apparent (whole school data) Criterion 5: Assessment results of selected teachers show measurable and improving academic growth of students (selected subgroup of teachers) Criterion 8 Provides evidence of growth in student learning achievement data related to school and

subgroups (achievement/opportunity gap) 40 Nesting Dolls Student Growth/Learning Goals Defining Key Terms Goal: A Student Learning Goal is a standards-based, rigorous and relevant learning target that teachers set for groups (Criterion 6 & 8) or subgroups of students (Criterion 3). Specific and measureable Based on prior learning data Aligned to state and content standards Aligned to school and district priorities/ SIP Learning Targets: Learning Targets are statements of intended learning that are used to create and carry out the student learning goal.

Student Growth/Learning Goals Grain Size Finding the right grain size for the goal(s) is a major challenge. Some things to keep in mind: There is no perfect grain size, because we are definitely in search of the Goldilocks or just right goal. The grain size should be relevant to the rubric language. (i.e. 3 around subgroups or 6 around whole class) Larger grain size goals might require multiple assessments, while more specific goals could probably be measured with a minimum of 2 performance tasks or other relevant assessment. 43 Creating Growth Goals: First Steps The Goldilocks Approach STUDENT GROWTH GOAL Literacy: Informational Text Writing K-5

6.1 Whole Group Too Narrow JUST RIGHT Too Broad All students (with 100% accuracy) will determine the meaning of the root word when the affix un is added.

In the 2013-2014 year students in my science class will accurately identify, define and use vocabulary appropriate to the rocks and minerals content area. Tier II word use will transfer to other subject areas i.e. observation, properties. This will be measured through a pre-test, formative assessment, think~write~pair~share, reflective writing and a post-test. All of my students will understand and apply grade level vocabulary to content areas. 44 Student Growth/Learning

District Preparation How can districts prepare for implementing the student growth component of the new evaluation system? 1. Goal Setting: Provide support for teachers and principals to set quality, rigorous and aligned (to standards) goals. 2. Data: Provide relevant student growth data for principals and teachers to use prior to September. 2. Measures: In 2013-14 stay close to the classroom, but experiment with school, district and state-based tools. Assessments We need high quality assessments to evaluate the extent to which students have achieved the goals Some thoughts before delving into assessments: Think broadly about assessment (i.e. performance assessments,

project-based and Do not let the assessment drive the goal; the assessment should be used to support learning goals (lets move to enduring understandings) The learning goal and assessment should be things that teachers would use in the classroom as part of good instructional practice Beware of Campbells Law! Determine how students can be incorporated in the goal setting process in order to have them take some ownership of their own learning. 46 Creating Your Own Data Pyramid Annually 2-4 Times a Year Quarterly or end of unit 1-4 times a month

Daily/Weekly 47 Summative Rating Process Overview ESSB 5895 requires OSPI to determine a summative scoring methodology (In WAC 392-191A) Summative Rating is determined through a Raw Score Model Generated from the TPEP Pilot Sites and approved by the TPEP Steering Committee Used for both the teacher and principal evaluation systems Determination of overall criterion score based on both: Instructional framework rubrics Student growth rubrics Teacher & Principal Raw Score Model Sample

Evaluation Criteria * Student Growth- Teachers ** Student Growth- Principals Criterion 1 Criterion 2 */**Criterion 3 Criterion 4 ** Criterion 5 * Criterion 6 Criterion 7 */**Criterion 8 Total Summative Score OSPI Approved Summative Scoring Band 8-14 15-21 22-28

1 2 3 Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Overall Criterion Scores 3 4 3 2 3 2 3 2

22 29-32 4 Distinguished 49 Student Growth Rubric and Rating (Teacher) Student Growth Goal-Setting Score Based on Rubric Criterion 3 Criterion 6 Criterion 8 Student Growth Score

3 2 2 7 Student Growth* Overall Student Score Based on Rubric Growth Criterion Score 2** 5 2** 4 2 N/A 4 11

OSPI Approved Student Growth Impact Rating Scoring Band 5-12 Low 13-17 Average 18-20 High *Must include a minimum of two student growth measures (i.e., state-, district-, school-, and classroom-based measures). ** A student growth score of 1 in any of the student growth rubrics will result in a Low growth rating. Evaluators place teachers into summative rating categories based on score bands. As illustrated below, this teacher would receive a low

student growth rating 50 Student Growth Rubric and Rating (Principal) Student Growth Criterion 3.4 Criterion 5.2 Criterion 8.3 Student Growth Score 3-5 Low Student Growth* Score Based on Rubric 2**

2** 1** 5 6-9 Average 10-12 High *Must include a minimum of two student growth measures (i.e., state-, district-, school-, and classroom-based measures). ** A student growth score of 1 in any of the student growth rubrics will result in a low growth rating. Evaluators place principals into summative rating categories based on score bands. As illustrated below, this principal would receive a low student growth rating Summative Rating & Impact on

Student Learning Matrix Distinguished Proficient Rating Distinguished Rating Summative Rating Student Growth Inquiry Proficient Proficient Rating Proficient Rating

Student Growth Inquiry Basic Basic Rating Student Growth Inquiry Unsatisfactory Rating Unsatisfactory Consequences as a result of Intersection between Summative Rating and Impact on Student Learning Rating Basic Rating

Plan of Improvement Low Average High Impact on Student Learning 52 Student Growth Inquiry Consequences: Within two months of receiving the low student growth score or at the beginning of the following school year, whichever is later, one or more of the following must be initiated by the evaluator: Triangulate student growth measure with other evidence (including

observation, artifacts and student evidence) and additional levels of student growth based on classroom, school, district and statebased tools; Examine extenuating circumstances possibly including: goal setting process/expectations, student attendance, and curriculum/assessment alignment; Schedule monthly conferences with the teacher to discuss/revise goals, progress toward meeting goals, and best practices; and/or Create and implement a professional development plan to address student growth areas. Modules Introduction to Educator Evaluation in Washington Using Instructional and Leadership Frameworks in Educator Evaluation Preparing and Applying Formative Multiple Measures of Performance: An Introduction to Self-Assessment, Goal Setting, and Criterion Scoring Including Student Growth in Educator Evaluation

Conducting High-Quality Observations and Maximizing Rater Agreement Providing High-Quality Feedback for Continuous Professional Growth and Development Combining Multiple Measures into a Summative Rating 54 Principal and Administrator Training RATER AGREEMENT Rater Agreement Background The TPEP project has relied heavily on the growing body of research, the framework authors and the practical input from practitioners in the pilot sites to create a working definition of rater agreement for the 2012-13 school year.

The new law requires that evaluators of both teachers and principals must engage in professional development designed to implement the revised systems and maximize rater agreement. Stages of Rater Agreement y 2-3 Da al tion a d n u Fo g Trainin

Rater g n i o Ong ining a r T t men Agree Support and Resources EVAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM What you need to know

2013 Legislative Session: OSPI requested 30 million to support the following aspects of the project: 1. Continued Evaluator Training 2. Instructional Framework Training for all Classroom Teachers 3. Student Growth District Training 4. Staff time to implement student growth component 60 Final Thought It is the mark of an educated man (or woman).that in every subject he (she) looks for only so much precision as its nature permits.

(Aristotle, 350 BC) 61 When systems align and work together, real progress is made Follow Us http://www.tpep-wa.org Follow us @waOSPI_TPEP Search for TPEP in the iTunes Store for our videos 63

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Bienvenue!

    Bienvenue!

    *4 students per room-two queen beds (no option for single room) ... V. Cell phone use. Students are encouraged to bring cell phones on trip. Chaperone personal numbers will be provided and should be used. ... Russell, Andrew T ...
  • Knowledge Questions Review What are they and why

    Knowledge Questions Review What are they and why

    Some insight from Prof. Crow: "I find the recent TOK Essay May 2014 Question 2 so interesting with regard to KQs: if students can understand the analogy of building & construction, then the idea of KQs should be fairly straightforward...
  • Front desk security and safety

    Front desk security and safety

    Front Desk - Organization's Safety & Security . You meet, greet, screen, direct, soothe, and address the myriad needs of parents, students, staff, vendors, contractors, sales reps, delivery people and countless others who come to the main office each day.
  • ABC's of second grade

    ABC's of second grade

    Media Center- Two books may be checked out at a time in fourth grade. Our class does take scheduled trips to the library, however if your child needs to get a new book they can do so at any time...
  • Find out the definitions of each of the

    Find out the definitions of each of the

    a) 4x + 6 b) 6y + 15 c) 7m - 84 d) x2 + 6x e) 5x3 + 10x2 The number x is an integer. a) Write the next two integers greater than x b) Write an expression for...
  • Figure 10.1 Relationship of Noncomparative Scaling to the

    Figure 10.1 Relationship of Noncomparative Scaling to the

    Summary of Itemized Rating Scale Decisions. 4. Forced versus nonforced In situations where the respondents are expected to have no opinion, the accuracy of data may be improved by a nonforced scale. 5. Verbal description An argument can be made...
  • Prayers that God will Not Hear - onealchurchofchrist.org

    Prayers that God will Not Hear - onealchurchofchrist.org

    Isaiah 59:1-2. 59 Behold, the . Lord 's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: 2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid...
  • Java Applets Section 3.3 (JIAs) Section 4.7 (JIAs)

    Java Applets Section 3.3 (JIAs) Section 4.7 (JIAs)

    Java Basic Concepts Source Code converted to Byte code Byte code -machine code of JVM (Java Virtual Machine) Each real machine must have own JVM Interpretation JIT compilation Direct Execution Java Byte Code consists of 1 Byte opcode 1 or...