Achievement Gap Oversight Committee Aug 3 … and having an executive committee with 2 legislators...

Achievement Gap Oversight Committee Aug 3

Location: Highline E.R.A.C. Offices (Board Room)

15675 Ambaum Blvd SW Burien, WA 98166.

Oversight Committee website: http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/default.aspx

Charge for the Committee:

1. Identify, research and Inform: Identify, share and advocate for strategies that work to reduce the achievement

gap, with a cultural competence lens.

2. Examine and recommend: Review and recommend policy and strategies to the State Legislature, OSPI, PESB,

and SBE in the following areas:

Supporting and facilitating parent and community involvement and outreach;

Identifying data elements and systems needed to monitor progress in closing the gap

Enhancing the cultural competency of current and future educators and the cultural relevance of

curriculum and instruction

Expanding pathways and strategies to prepare and recruit diverse teachers and administrators

Recommending current programs and resources that should be redirected to narrow the gap

Making closing the achievement gap part of the school and school district improvement process

Exploring innovative school models that have shown success in closing the achievement gap

Health and wellbeing

Post-secondary education and job training

Early Learning – seamless birth to 20 support continuum

3. Monitor: Follow-up with recommendations made to State Legislature, OSPI, PESB, and SBE by the committee.

Deadlines:

December 2010 – New recommendation to OSPI, SBE, PESB.

January 2011 – Report to Governor’s Office and Legislature

Requested Resources:

Achievement Oversight and Accountability Report and Recommendations

http://www.k12.wa.us/Cisl/pubdocs/AgapLegReport2010.pdf

Education Trust report on the Achievement Gap

http://www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/NAEP%20Gap_0.pdf

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/default.aspx

http://www.k12.wa.us/Cisl/pubdocs/AgapLegReport2010.pdf

http://www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/NAEP%20Gap_0.pdf

Time Agenda Item Process/Products Staffing

8:30

Pragmatics, networking and coffee

Room set up and networking opportunity Coffee and Tea are provided by Erin Jones

8:45 Meeting Opens Introductions of Committee Members and Key Staff

8:50 Member Briefings

Quick 2 minute reports by committee members regarding conversations with their organizations and communities

9:30 OEO Data Results

Power point presentation of data results from OEO. OEO is writing their final report and would like to inform committee members of collected data.

9:40 Civil Rights Legislation

House Bill 3026

9:55 Committee Updates

Review of: AGOAC legislation

10:20 Break

10:30 Governance Structure and by-laws

Open public meetings Public notification Quorum Designees/voting Open for comment

11:00 Work plan Work plan for AGOAC QEC feedback

12:00 Lunch Break for lunch Lunch prepared and provided by CISL staff

1:00 Work plan Work plan for AGOAC continued

1:30 Content Briefings

PESB – Adopted cultural competence standards Teacher/Administrator evaluation QEC Parent Involvement Coordinator District and School Improvement – CISL Initiative

3:15 Break

3:30 Debrief/Wrap Up

Agenda items for next meeting

4:00 Schedule Future Meetings/Schedule

4:30 Meeting Close

1

Achievement Gap Oversight and Accountability Committee DRAFT Notes:

August 3, 2010

8:30-4:30 p.m.

Highline E.R.A.C. Office in the Board Room

Members in Attendance:

Adie Simmons

Assistant Superintendent Erin Jones

Superintendent Randy Dorn

Wanda Brown-Billingsly

Frieda Takamura

Fiasili Savusa

Rep. Sharon Tomiko-Santos

Sen. Curtis King

Rep. Kevin Parker (call in)

Lillian Ortiz-Self (for Ricardo Iniquez)

Members not in Attendance:

Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe

Sen. Claudia Kaufman

Rep. Dave Quall

Bernie Thomas

The meeting was chaired by Sen. Curtis King, as recommended by Rep. Sharon Tomiko-Santos.

Dec, 9, 2009 Minutes- Addressed and Adopted

http://www.k12.wa.us/CISL/Pubdocs/12.09notes.pdf

May 7, 2010 Minutes-Addressed and Adopted

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Notes5-7-10.pdf

May 19, 2010 Minutes-Addressed and Adopted

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Notes-5-19-10.pdf

The members began the meeting by giving updates.

Erin Jones has been working with ELL, Highly Capable and Quality Education Council (QEC) Committees.

She has been collaborating with Tonya Middling in School and District Improvement Assistance (DSIA) on

family engagement and ELL strategies

Superintendent Randy Dorn shared that he worked very hard on the Race To The Top (RTTT) application

and was disappointed that Washington wasn’t selected.

Adie Simmons has been working with the Quality Education Council (QEC) on the family engagement

coordinator description. She is hosting focus groups to give input on the position and the QEC model.

Wanda Brown-Billingsly shared the work of the Committee with Dr. Paul Ruiz from the Education Trust

at the Black Education Roundtable. She also shared that Seattle Public Schools is working on a pilot

program with the Response to Intervention model.

Fiasili Savusa utilized the work from the Committee in the grant application for the Promise

Neighborhoods grant for White Center.

http://www.k12.wa.us/CISL/Pubdocs/12.09notes.pdf

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Notes5-7-10.pdf

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Notes-5-19-10.pdf

2

Lillian Ortiz-Self is the interim representative from the Commission on Hispanic Affairs until another

representative is found. She has been working on the data regarding graduation rates as represented

on school district websites and would like for the data to be more accurate and longitudinal so you can

track cohorts of students.

Frieda Takamura attended the Data Governance Committee meeting as the interim representative from

the Committee. She reported that the Commission on Asian and Pacific American Affairs is working on a

civic engagement project.

Rep. Santos has been working with Mea Moore from the Professional Educator’s Standards Board (PESB)

on improving WA Teachers Project, which engages high-risk students in exploring the teaching

profession. She is concerned with students who have exited formal education and are being provided

educational services by community based organizations, rather than receiving basic education.

Rep. Parker (on the phone)- no comments, but appreciated Rep. Santos comments and the Race To The

Top (RTTT) process.

Sen. King shared about a Junior Achievement facility in Yakima that provides assistance to minority

students and families.

Office of the Education Ombudsman Presentation

Presenter: Adie Simmons, Director

Presentation: http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/OEO8-03-10.pdf

Discussion Notes:

The Committee discussed the geographic breakdown of the OEO case data. Other issues discussed were

the online school programs used as alternative programs for students, the process for formal discipline

hearings, free and reduced lunch qualifications and processes.

Civil Rights Legislation- House Bill 3026- Superintendent Randy Dorn, Rep. Santos and CeCe Clinch

(Counsel to House Education Committee)

When House Bill 3026 was proposed, concerns were raised around the term “enforcement” and its

meaning as it would pertain to the Office of Equity and Civil Rights within the Office of the

Superintendent of Public Instruction. The intention was to give the other protected classes the same

level of protection as gender equity. Superintendent Dorn and Rep. Santos discussed the bill and had

the same concept of creating the same protections as already in place with gender equity under Title IV.

Discussion Notes:

The clarification of the process for filing a complaint was discussed, including the consequences for a

school district if it is found in non-compliance. Each school district that receives federal funding has to

have non-discrimination policies and procedures and sign assurances to OSPI and U.S. Department of

Education that it is compliance with civil rights laws. OSPI’s role is to determine if the school district has

a policy, and procedures to support the policy (technical assistance) and monitoring of compliance. The

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/OEO8-03-10.pdf

3

options of filing a complaint with the Office of the Equity and Civil Rights within OSPI and with the

federal Office of Civil rights can be confusing to parents and students. There are multiple doors to the

same outcome for complaint resolution, with the Office of Civil Rights having a different, more legal

approach.

New Tasks for the Committee

Presenter: Rudi Bertschi

Presentation:

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/NewTasks810Committee.pdf

There are multiple sub-committees within the Building Bridges workgroup, list will be provided by Erin

Jones.

Representative Santos moved that the Building Bridges workgroup provide opportunities for the Ethnic

Commissions to be engaged in the workgroup. Motion seconded, motion passes.

The Committee discussed representation on other committees and work groups:

Representatives to the Quality Education Council workgroup- Adie Simmons, alternate is Sally

Brownfield

Representative to the Building Bridges workgroup- Sen. Curtis King

Representative to the Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) workgroup- Rep.

Sharon Tomiko-Santos.

Representative Santos moved that the STEM workgroup provide opportunities for the Ethnic

Commissions to be engaged in the workgroup. Motion seconded, motion passes.

Decision Making Model and Meeting Protocols

The Committee originally chose to operate by consensus and to be facilitated by John-Paul Chaisson-

Cardenas. The Committee discussed making changes to the decision-making model and the way

meetings are run. Several options were discussed as possibilities, including a Chair/Co-Chair model,

hiring an outside facilitator, having bi-partisan, bi-cameral chairs from the legislative education

committee and having an executive committee with 2 legislators and 1 representative from the ethnic

commissions.

Sen. King asked if there was consensus in not having an outside facilitator, and it was agreed that there

would not be an outside facilitator, due to concerns about funding.

Consensus was reached on creating a 3 person executive committee (bipartisan leadership) with 2 chairs

and 1 member from the community (Ethnic Commissions).

The members of the executive committee will be discussed at the next meeting.

Consensus was reached that the Committee will allow enough time for discussion of issues and will take

votes, recording the number of votes for each position. Minority reports will be allowed.

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/NewTasks810Committee.pdf

4

Work Plan for the Achievement Gap Oversight and Accountability Committee

The work plan for the Committee was discussed and it was determined that CISL staff would create a

status report of recommendations issued by the Committee and the progress made on the items. The

status report will be discussed at the next meeting.

Open Public Meetings Act

Presenter: Rudi Bertschi, Center for the Improvement of Student Learning (CISL), OSPI

Rudi review the Open Pubic Meetings Act, reminding the Committee that they are liable, and to be

careful not to have accidental meetings. Committee members are to review the act and ask any

questions or concerns.

Quorum has not been established for the Committee and there are no written by-laws for the

Committee yet.

Rep. Santos recommended that the Committee executive Committee work with the Office of the

Attorney General to review the Open Public Meetings Act.

Quality Education Council (QEC) Parent Involvement Coordinator

Presenter: Shawn Lewis, OSPI

Shawn Lewis reminded the Committee that December 1, 2010 is the deadline to recommend funding

allocations to close the achievement gap and improve graduation rates to the Quality Education Council

(QEC).

Added to the essential classified staffing in the model is the position of parent involvement coordinator.

After the new funding formula is developed by the QEC, it will go into effect next year. It identifies 4

prototypical school sizes and identifies how many teachers, counselors, classified and certificated staff

would be assigned to each prototypical school and school district.

Recommendations from the QEC will be shared with the Committee.

Committee Budget Overview

Presenter: Shawn Lewis, OSPI

The Committee has been appropriated $100,000 per fiscal year, will have a budget reduction if directed

by Governor Gregoire. There are currently restrictions on contracting and travel, which require 6-8

weeks for the Office of Financial Management (OFM) to review and approve exemptions to the

restrictions.

Administrative costs in the past have been paid out of the Center for the Improvement of Student

Learning (CISL) budget. Committee will need to factor in the administrative costs of convening and

providing support for meetings.

Budget will be provided in the next meeting.

5

Professional Educator Standards Board (PESB) update

Presenter: Mea Moore

Presentation: http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/PESB8-3-10.pdf

Discussion Notes:

The Committee discussed the need to incorporate cultural competency standards beyond pre-service

and pro-cert teachers, but to have it be a continuum for teachers in different stages of their careers.

Partnering with higher education institutions (Colleges of Education) was discussed, to better prepare

teachers on cultural competence. Cultural competency standards for principals and superintendents

have not been addressed yet.

Principal and Teacher Evaluation Pilot Presentation

Presenter: Erin Jones, OSPI

Presentation: http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/TeacherPrincipalEval8-3-

10.pdf

Discussion Notes:

The Committee discussed how to evaluate and rate teachers fairly and equitably, including utilizing

summative and formative assessments throughout the academic year. Utilizing student assessment

data for evaluation was discussed, as well as performance pay for student achievement. Teachers are

currently compensated based on their educational qualifications and years of teaching experiences.

The Committee requested that more information on the Principal and Teacher Evaluation Pilot be

presented at the next meeting.

Next Steps:

The Committee requested that the following items be addressed in the next meeting:

Status Report of Committee recommendations- CISL/OSPI staff

Committee Budget-Shawn Lewis, OSPI

Revisit discussion and identification of executive Committee

Develop a work plan based on the status report

Presentation on Principal and Teacher Evaluation Pilot program

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/PESB8-3-10.pdf

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/TeacherPrincipalEval8-3-10.pdf

http://www.k12.wa.us/AchievementGap/meetings/Aug2010/TeacherPrincipalEval8-3-10.pdf

Office of the Education Ombudsman

2009 – 2010 Report

www.waparentslearn.org

1-866-297-2597

http://www.waparentslearn.org/

87

317

473

844

FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010

Number of OEO Cases per Fiscal Year

OEO handled 844 requests for services in 2009-2010. 759 were full

interventions and 85 were consultations from educators, family members,

community professionals.

OEO will function with an annual budget of $586,000 in the 2010-2011

fiscal year.

0

50

100

150

200

250

Who referred callers to OEO?

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Number of Calls to OEO Per Month 2009-2010

Legal Guardian/Parent

Legal Guardian/Other Relative

Foster Parent

Student

Community Professional

Educator

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Caller's Relationship to the Student

Who contacted OEO?The vast majority of contacts

were made by phone by the

parent or relative of a student.

6%7%

7%

78%

2%

Contacts to OEO

FAX Mail Ombudsman Clinics Phone Walk-In

0

20

40

60

80

100

Student Grade level Count by Grade

320

1

438

Gender Female Female To Male

Male

Student Gender Breakdown

Students Served

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Aft

er

Sch

oo

l …

Alt

ern

ati

ve …

Att

en

dan

ce

Bilin

gu

al

Bu

llyin

g

Dis

cip

lin

e

Dis

cri

min

ati

on

En

rollm

en

t

Fam

ily …

Hig

h S

ch

oo

l …

Hig

hly

Cap

ab

le

Ho

me S

ch

oo

lin

g

Info

rmati

on

…

Mu

ltip

le Issu

es

Sch

oo

l R

eco

rds

Sch

oo

l S

afe

ty

Sp

ecia

l E

du

cati

on

Tit

le 1

Tru

an

cy

Tu

tori

ng

WA

SL

Nu

mb

er

of

Cases

Comparison of number of cases by issue: 08-09 and 07-08 Fiscal Years

08-09 Fiscal Year

07-08 Fiscal Year

18 11 1042

154

4

87

13

53

20 8 425 19 10 19 14

227

5 4 1 10

Number of cases by issue Fiscal Year 2009-2010

Primary

Issues

Issues within Special Education cases

Special Education cases are complex and interventions can be lengthy. Besides

the student’s disability and the primary issue, there may be a host of other

contributing issues. Examples:

Primary Issue

Transportation

School placement

Safety

Academic progress

Suspension/Expulsion

Accommodations

Student Disability

Autism

Asperger

Bipolar Disorder

PTSD

ADD/ADHD

Dislexia

Hearing impaired

Contributing Issues

Bullying

Discrimination

Parent disability

District’s Non-compliance with federal/state law

Lack of parent access to the school, the classroom, information

Untrained school staff

School culture

Lack of school-parent communication

Parent-school official(s) personality conflict

School districts with the highest number of cases (by primary

issue):

District # of cases Main Primary Issues

Seattle 117 Special Education, Enrollment, Suspension, Expulsion

Wapato 36 Bilingual Program

Yakima 31 Special Education, Enrollment, Bullying

Renton 26 Suspension, Expulsion

Highline 21 School lunches

Tacoma 19 Special Education, Suspension, Expulsion, Bullying

Federal Way 16 Suspension, expulsion, Special Education

Kent 16 Special Education, Suspension, Expulsion, Bullying

Olympia 15 Special Education, Bullying

Northshore 14 Special Education, Bullying

In 2009-2010 OEO worked with:

144 School Districts

130 Superintendents

289 District Administrators

720 Principals

887 Parents

Case Results

Ombudsmen Rate of Success

Enrollment Cases

Student allowed to enroll in school……………………………………..92%

Suspension/Expulsion Cases

Student readmitted to school followed suspension…………………….. 89%

Student expulsion was lifted………………………………………………. 72%

Student back on track to graduate………………………………………..80%

Academic Progress Cases

Student provided alternative learning opportunities……………………..98%

Student able to participate in extra-curricular program………………….98%

Student able to participate in desired or needed class………………….96%

Student allowed to graduate……………………………………………….60%

Bullying/Harassment Cases

Student safety was improved…………………………………………….. 95%

Victim allowed to transfer to another school………………………………78%

Parents/School Officials

School District changed position and considered new options for resolution………………….….89%

Parent changed position and considered new options for resolution………………………………94%

Parent dropped legal options against the district while working with the Ombudsman…………...85%

Parents and school officials learned to communicate better with each other………………………99%

Support for Educators and Parents

OEO staff conducted:

• Professional development for schools and school districts on

topics related to: Cultural Competence, Preventing and Resolving

Conflict, Family Involvement in Education.

• Institutes for parents and family members to learn how to better

understand the public school system and advocate for their

children.

• Ombudsman Clinics to educate and inform diverse parents.

• Conflict Prevention and Resolution classes for the

Principal Preparation program at Seattle University.

OEO is Examining Processes

On-line schools – A number of on-line schools exist in WA State hosted by school

districts such as Marysville, Okanogan, Steilacoom/Monroe/Omak (WAVA). These schools

are tuition free. Contractors manage the schools and Instruction is delivered by certificated

teachers. Currently there are over 14,000 students enrolled from all over the state. When

problems arise --which policies apply to students? Their home district policies? The on-line

school policies? The host district policies?

Timing of HSPE and Parent notification - Students not able to attend graduation

ceremony if they have not passed 1 component of the High School Proficiency Exam

(HSPE). Reading, Math, Writing, Science testing is in March/April. Students find out results

in May, graduation ceremonies are in early/mi-June. Re-takes in August. Parents not

aware of timing or process.

Language access for high-stake situations – Lack of professional interpretation for

families of ELL student involved in situations that impact student academic success.

Expulsions/ Suspensions- Fair appeal processes that include close and timely

collaboration with parents, uniform guidelines for emergency expulsions, educational

opportunities for expelled students.

Calibrated Standards Incorporating

Cultural Competency

AGOAC Meeting – August 3, 2010

Supporting Materials

• The PESB is making a conscious effort to conserve

resources. All materials related to the work of the

Cultural Competency Work Group (SB 5973),

including this PowerPoint are available electronically

by visiting the PESB website www.pesb.wa.gov .

• Under “What’s New” Click on Cultural Competency.

• The Power Point is listed as AGOAC Presentation

8/3/10

http://www.pesb.wa.gov/

Legislative Charge

• SB 5973 – Identify a list of model standards for

Cultural Competency… make recommendations on

the strengths and weaknesses of those standards.

• HB 2261 – Incorporate standards for Cultural

Competency along Washington’s continuum of

teacher preparation, induction and career-long

professional development.

Work Group MembersIdalia M. Apodaca - WEA representative

Cherry Banks - WACTE representative

Susanne Beauchaine - Equity and Civil Rights, OSPI

John-Paul Chaisson-Cardenas - Equity and Civil Rights, OSPI

Robert Harkins - Deputy Superintendent, OSPI

Erin Jones - Center for Student Improvement, OSPI

Karen Johnson - AWSP representative

Mindy Meyers - Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession

Mea Moore - PESB

Heidi Schillinger - ReachOut for New Futures

Jim Smith - City University

Adie Simmons - Achievement Gap Oversight and Accountability

Committee representative, Office of the Education Ombudsman

Steve Zuber - Office of the Education Ombudsman

Work Group Methods

• Review national and state model standards related

to cultural competence

• Recommend model standards aligned with

Washington’s continuum of teacher preparation,

induction and career long professional development

• Rate model standards for their strengths and

weaknesses

Results

Note: All documents related to the Cultural Competency

Work Group Reports and Recommendations are available

on the PESB website: www.pesb.wa.gov

The Cultural Competency Work Group completed the following:

Survey of state and National models and standards;

Comprehensive review of research and literature related to standards for Cultural Competence;

Model standards identified and rated;

Identified main components of Cultural Competence as they relate to the continuum of teacher preparation;

Results, continued

Provided Achievement Gap Oversight and Accountability Committee with progress updates

Provided progress updates to PESB and Education Committees of the Legislature;

Provided PESB with final recommendations as part of HB 2261 Report to the legislature (January 7, 2009);

Incorporated recommendations with Calibrated Standards for PESB adoption at July 21, 2010 PESB meeting.

Comments

Please contact:

Mea Moore- [email protected]

Model Standard Components

Component 1.0- Professional Ethics within a Global

and Multicultural Society

• 1.1 Human Rights

• 1.2 Social Justice

Component 2.0- Civil Rights and Non Discrimination

Law

• 2.1Civil Rights Law

• 2.2 Safe Schools

Model Standard Components, continued

Component 3.0 -Reflective Practice, Self Awareness and

Anti Bias

• 3.1 Societal Advantages

• 3.1.a Cosmology, Spirituality, Creed and Religion

• 3.2 Understanding Culture and Identity

Component 4.0 - Repertoires of Practice for Teaching

Effectiveness for Culturally Diverse Populations

• 4.1 Culturally Responsive School/Classroom

• 4.1.a Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment: Equity

Pedagogy

• 4.1.b Language

• 4.1.c Funds of Knowledge

• 4.2 Partnerships with Families and Communities

Teacher/Principal Evaluation PilotOffice of Superintendent of Public InstructionTeacher/Principal Evaluation PilotOffice of Superintendent of Public Instruction

AGOAC BriefingTeacher/Principal Evaluation

August 3rd, 2010

Teacher/Principal Evaluation PilotOffice of Superintendent of Public Instruction

NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Teacher/Principal Evaluation


The Wisdom of Practice

“After 30 years of doing such work, I have concluded that classroom teaching…is perhaps the most complex, most challenging, and most demanding, subtle, nuanced, and frightening activity that our species has ever invented…The 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


Focus on What Matters

• America’s central educational challenge is to dramatically improve student performance.

• Teachers drive student performance; therefore, we need a systemic approach to ensure the most effective teacher in every classroom.


5

Why Measure Teacher Effectiveness?

• There are many valid reasons, both formative and summative, to measure teacher effectiveness

• But the ultimate goal of all measurement of teacher effectiveness should be…

to improve teaching and learning

• An evaluation system should be designed to improve teaching, not “rate” or “rank” teachers


A Holistic and Systematic Approach


WASHINGTON STATE

Teacher/Principal Evaluation


Parts of 6696

• Part 1 – Accountability

• Part 2 – Teacher and Principal Evaluation• Part 3 – Seattle principal tenure provision

• Part 4 – Preparation Programs

• Part 5 – Requires public colleges to offer alternative routes

• Part 6 – Requires teacher prep programs to administer assessment to pre-service candidates

• Part 7 – Authorizes OSPI to provisionally adopt Common Core Standards


Background and Rationale

Pilot was created in E2SSB 6696 – Race to the Top legislation• Requires OSPI, in collaboration with teachers, principals, administrators

and parents, to improve principal and teacher evaluation systems Creates new evaluation criteria for both classroom teachers and

principals Requires a four-level rating system Requires OSPI to create a pilot with school districts in the 2010-11

and 2011-12 school year Requires all districts to adopt new systems in the 2013-14 school

year It also:

▪ Increased the length of the provisional status for new teachers▪ Requires school district to send to OSPI information on the current

evaluation systems for all employee groups


2010-11Pilot districts develop “models” to use in implementing the new evaluation standards. These models will likely include indicators, rubrics and protocols.

2011-12The pilot districts will use the new models.End of 2011-12Superintendent Dorn is charged with analyzing the work of the pilots and choosing one or more of the models as his own.

2012-13All districts will do the preparation work needed to use the new models.

2013-14All districts will use the new models as the basis for evaluating their teachers and principals.


SIGImplement rigorous,

transparent and equitable evaluation systems for teachers and principals which are developed with staff and use student growth as significant factor.

Identify and reward school leaders and teachers who have increased student achievement and graduation rates; identify and remove those who, after ample opportunities to improve professional practice, have not done so.

Implement such strategies as financial incentives and career ladders for recruiting, placing and retaining effective teachers.

E2SSB 6696The four-level rating system used to evaluate the certificated classroom teacher must describe performance along a continuum that indicates the extent to which the criteria have been met or exceeded. When student growth data, if available and relevant to the teacher and

subject matter, is referenced in the evaluation process it must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. As used in this subsection, "student growth" means the change in student achievement between two points in time.

Evaluation Requirements for SIG Schools for Teachers and Leaders


Talk About Teaching Charlotte Danielson

Of all the approaches available to educators to promote teacher learning, the most powerful (and imbedded in virtually all others) is that of professional conversation. Reflective conversations about practice require teachers to understand and analyze events in the classroom. In these conversations, teachers must consider the instructional decisions they have made and examine student learning in light of those decisions.


Evaluation

conversations


Creating a Culture

Ensuring School Safety

Planning with Data

Aligning Curriculum

Improving Instruction

Managing Resources

Engaging Communities

Closing the Gap

PRINCIPALEVALUATIONCRITERIA


Centering instruction on high

expectations

Demonstrating effective teaching practices

Individualizing instruction

Subject matter knowledge

Fostering a safe, positive learning

environment.

Use student data to modify

instruction

Communicating with parents and

school community.

Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices

TEACHEREVALUATIONCRITERIA


Centering instruction on high

expectations

Demonstrating effective teaching

practices

Individualizing instruction

Subject matter knowledge

Fostering a safe, positive learning

environment.

Use student data to modify

instruction

Communicating with parents and

school community.

Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices

TEACHEREVALUATIONCRITERIA


1.Please send along your feedback to Jim or Michaela2. Please sign up for our TPEP listserve: [email protected]. Visit our OSPI website:http://www.k12.wa.us/EdLeg/TPEP/default.aspx

Thank You


Contact Information

• Dr. Jim KovalTeacher/Principal Evaluation Project Director

OSPI

[email protected]

360. 725.6116

• Michaela MillerTeacher/Principal Evaluation Project Manager

OSPI

[email protected]

360.725.6116

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Achievement Gap Oversight Committee Aug 3 … and having an executive committee with 2 legislators...

Documents

Transcript of Achievement Gap Oversight Committee Aug 3 … and having an executive committee with 2 legislators...