2013-2014 Weld Re-4 School District Evaluation System
description
Transcript of 2013-2014 Weld Re-4 School District Evaluation System
2013-2014 Weld Re-4 School District Evaluation System
Agenda
• Educator Effectiveness (S.B. 191) Overview• Guiding Principles of Model Evaluation System • Framework for System to Evaluate Educators• Educator Rubrics• What is Weld Re-4 doing?
Guiding Principles of State Evaluation System
1. Data should inform decisions, but human judgment will always be an essential component of evaluations.
2. The implementation and evaluation of the system must embody continuous improvement.
3. The purpose of the system is to provide meaningful and credible feedback that improves performance. (It’s about the conversation!)
4. The development and implementation of educator evaluation systems must continue to involve all stakeholders in a collaborative process. (District Accountability Subcommittee opportunity)
5. Educator evaluations must take place within a larger system that is aligned and supportive.
2. Annual
Orientation
3.Self-
Assessment
4.Review of
Annual Goals and
Performance Plan
5.Mid-Year Review
6.Evaluator
Assessment
7.End-of-Year
Review
8.Final
Ratings
9.Goal-Setting
and Performance
Planning
1.Training
1.Training
Educator Evaluation Cycle
In Certified Handbook – page 6
DO Responsibility Administrator
ResponsibilityTeacher Responsibility
August to October
Gather initial data to share with principals for pre-conferences/goal-setting meetings. Begin review of potential assessments for use in evaluation Determine offerings of potential professional development that aligns with need
Schedule Pre-Conferences and set goals with teachers in building Determine evaluation times for the year and begin evaluations and walkthroughs
Participate in any required training Do Self-Assessment within first two weeks of school Become familiar with current data and building and /or department goals.
December - February
Support buildings with data or professional development Continue reviewing potential assessments and data use for evaluations.
Evaluations and walkthroughs Midyear Conference with Staff
Schedule a Midyear conference with Administrator Review data and goals to determine midyear adjustments
March-May Review process and gather feedback on implementation and determine assessment priorities and/or decisions for the following year Process and collect all evaluations for staff
Evaluations and walkthroughs End of year conference with staff to determine final ratings and final written evaluation
Schedule end of year conference with administrator Discuss your evaluation and data scores with administrator Review data and generate possibilities for goals
Teacher Evaluations
50% Professional Practice
50% Student Academic Growth
Quality Standards I-V:I. Mastery of contentII. Establish learning environmentIII. Facilitate learningIV. Reflect on practiceV. Demonstrate leadership
Evaluated using: (1) observations; and (2) at least one of the following: student perception measures, peer feedback, parent/guardian feedback, or review of lesson plans/student work samples. May include additional measures.
Quality Standard VI:VI. Responsibility for student academic growth
Evaluated using: (1) a measure of individually-attributed growth, (2) a measure of collectively-attributed growth; (3) when available, statewide summative assessments; and (4) where applicable, Colorado Growth Model data.
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 Measures
Weighting: 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 Standards
Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
Quality StandardsII. Establish Environment
III. Facilitate Learning
IV. Reflect on Practice
V. Demonstrate Leadership
VI. Student Growth
Appeals Process
PowerPoint Template
Driving Questions
What do we want students, educators, schools, and districts to know and be able to do?
How will we know if expectations are met?
How will we respond when help is needed and to support continued growth?
Colorado Academic Standards
Assessments
• RTI• PBSI• Targeted interventions• IEPs
Educator quality standards
Educator evaluations
• Induction• Mentoring• Professional development plans• Remediation plans
Performance indicators
School and district performance frameworks
• Unified planning• Priority• Turnaround
Students Students
EducatorsEducators
Schools/DistrictsSchools/Districts
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
Changed to “Basic” in 13-14
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
PerformanceRating Levels
Elements of the Standard
Professional Practices
Teacher Quality Standards
Evaluator Comments
Summary of Ratings for the Standard
Evidence Provided by Artifacts
Teacher’s Response to Evaluation
Examples of Artifacts
= Observable in
Classroom
What is Weld Re-4 Doing?
• Professional Practices 50%– CDE Evaluations used again 2013-2014– Updated rubric posted under Staff Resources, Weld
Re-4 Staff Resources, Educator Effectiveness– Folders available again for schools – The state will be adopting a free evaluation storage
solution this year. We will implement when available. Some schools are choosing to start with Teach Point.
What is Weld Re-4 doing?
• Student Learning Outcomes 50%– All staff will receive ratings based on School
Performance Frameworks this year– Assessment Approval process is being
developed – staff who attended training this summer will be a great resource
– Assessments will go through a district process in order to be used for evaluation purposes (more info coming)
Questions?
• Overall Process – Amy Heinsma, X8028 and District Accountability Members
• Specific Evaluation and Deadlines – see your administrator
• Feedback or general questions – District Accountability subcommittee members