Getting Started: Educator Evaluation in Non-RTTT Districts
description
Transcript of Getting Started: Educator Evaluation in Non-RTTT Districts
Getting Started: Educator Evaluation in Non-RTTT Districts
Please sit with your district or school team members You will be talking with them during today’s workshop
3
What opportunities will this new educator evaluation framework provide for professional growth and student learning in your district or school?
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
3
Question:
4
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
4
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Priorities of the new evaluation framework
Place Student Learning at the Center – Student learning is central to the evaluation and development of educators
Promote Growth and Development – Provide all educators with feedback and opportunities that support continuous growth and improvement through collaboration
Recognize Excellence – Encourage districts to recognize and reward excellence in teaching and leadership
Set a High Bar for Tenure – Entrants to the teaching force must demonstrate Proficient performance on all standards within three years to earn Professional Teacher Status
Shorten Timelines for Improvement – Educators who are not rated Proficient face accelerated timelines for improvement
5We want to ensure that each student in the Commonwealth
is taught by an effective educator, in schools and districts led by effective leaders.Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
6
The ESE Educator Evaluation Team
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
7
Our MissionTo improve professional growth and student learning, ESE is committed to ensuring the
success of the statewide Educator Evaluation framework by providing educators with training materials and resources, meaningful guidance, and timely communications, and by engaging
educators in the development and ongoing refinement of the framework.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Three Key Strategies
8
Teach
Learn
Connect
Teaching the components of the Educator Evaluation framework and sharing implementation resources to build capacity within districts and schools.
Learning from and with educators about their successes, challenges, and needs to ensure educator voices are reflected in Educator Evaluation policies and practices.
Connecting and aligning Educator Evaluation implementation with other state and district initiatives to improve professional growth and student learning; Creating opportunities for educators to connect and share with one another and ESE. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
9
ESE Educator Evaluation Team
Claire Abbott, Evaluation Training Program, Implementation Support, Resource Development
Kathryn Gabriele, Staff & Student Feedback, District-Determined Measures, Data Collection and Reporting
Kat Johnston, Communications, Peer Assistance & Review, Implementation Support
Simone Lynch, Assistant Director, Office of Educator Policy, Preparation and Leadership
Ron Noble, Project Co-Lead, Evaluation System Reviews, District-Determined Measures, Staff & Student Feedback
Samantha Warburton, Project Co-Lead, Evaluation Training Program & Vendors, Implementation Support, Resource Support
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
10
June 2011: MA Board of Education passed new regulations
September 2011: Implementation began in 34 Level 4 schools, 11 Early Adopter districts, and 4 special education collaboratives
January 2012: ESE published the Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation
September 2012: Implementation began in all RTTT districts
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ September 2013: All districts implement educator
evaluation10
Ed Eval Framework: Timeline
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
11
ESE Model System Teacher & Administrator Contract Language School & District Implementation Guides 4 Model Performance Rubrics
ESE Training Materials Modules & Workshops
Additional Resources & Supports Forms, guidance documents, webinars,
presentations, newsletter, approved vendors11
ESE Resources
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
ESE Ed Eval Website More information:
http://www.doe.mass.edu/edeval
Questions: [email protected]
12
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
13
Intended Outcomes Participants will: Know more about the new educator evaluation
system and what it will mean to introduce it to your district over the course of the next year
Know more about available ESE resources, and how to use them back at your district
Be familiar with the implementation timeline for Year 1, including training and reporting requirements
Have at least one clear, agreed upon “next step” for action back in your district
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
14
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets MA apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
14
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
15
Two separate ratings Three types of evidence Four common Standards Educator Evaluation
15
What sets Massachusetts apart?
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
16
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
16
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
17
Every educator is an active participant in the evaluation process
Continuous Learning
Collaboration and Continuous Learning are the focus
Step 1: Incoming ELL students underperformed in Math & ELA; Indicator II.A: Instruction was an area in need of impr. for
ELLs.
Step 2: SLG: ELL students
master content standards
across 3 units. PPG (TEAM):
Identify & pilot 3 instructional strategies for
improving comprehension.
Step 3: Artifacts (lesson plans, team meeting
notes, teacher/parent
communication); student work, pre/post lab
reports, writing assessments,; 4 observations w/
feedback; student feedback survey in mid-spring)
Step 5: Tom was rated Proficient on Standards II,
III & IV, and Exemplary on I,
and met or partially met goals. Overall
Summative Rating:
Proficient.Step 4: Evidence showed rising ELL
student performance + success w/ 2 new
instructional strategies; discussed additional
outreach to parents re: homework.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Step 1: Self-Assessment Educators self-assess their performance
using: Student data, and Performance rubric
Educators propose goals related to their professional practice and student learning needs
18
Part II: School Level Guide (p. 14-22)Module 3 and Workshop 2: Self-Assessment
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Step 2: Analysis, Goal Setting and Plan Development
Educators set S.M.A.R.T. goals: Student learning goal Professional practice goal
(Aligned to the Standards and Indicators of Effective Practice)
Educators are required to consider team goals
Educator and Evaluator develop the Educator Plan
19
Part II: School Level Guide (p. 23-31, Appendix B: Setting S.M.A.R.T Goals)
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Step 2: Analysis, Goal Setting and Plan Development
20
The educator plan is based on S.M.A.R.T. goals.
Step 3: Implementation of the Plan
Educator completes the planned action steps of his/her plan
Educator and evaluator collect evidence of practice and goal progress, including:1. Observations and artifacts2. Multiple measures of student learning3. Additional evidence related to performance
standards Evaluator provides feedback 21
Part II: School Level GuidePages 32-39
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Three Types of Evidence 1. Products of Practice Artifacts related to educator practice
Samples that demonstrate educator performance and impact
Number to collect varies by educator Observations of practice
At least one unannounced Frequent & brief Constructive feedback
22
Module 5 and Workshop 4: Gathering Evidence
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Three Types of Evidence 2. Multiple Measures of Student Learning Evidence of Progress toward educator goals Evidence of Performance associated with one
or more Standards
23
Module 5 and Workshop 4: Gathering Evidence
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Three Types of Evidence
3. Other Evidence Related to one or more Performance Standards Student feedback informs the Summative Performance
Rating of ALL educators
Staff feedback informs the Summative Performance Rating of all administrators
ESE will publish guidance and model student and staff survey instruments by July 1, 2013.
For more information, please contact Kathryn Gabriele at [email protected].
24
Module 5 and Workshop 4: Gathering EvidenceQRG: Staff & Student Feedback
Step 4: Formative Assessment/ Evaluation Occurs mid-way through the 5-Step
Cycle Typically Jan/Feb for educators on a 1-year
plan (formative assessment) Typically May/June for educators on a 2-year
plan (formative evaluation)
Educator and Evaluator review evidence and assess progress on educator’s goals 25
Part II: School Level GuidePages 40-47 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Step 5: Summative Evaluation Summative Evaluation results in:
Individual ratings on each of the four Standards
Assessment of overall goal progress Overall Summative Performance Rating
Evaluator determines the Summative Performance Rating based on: Comprehensive picture of practice captured
through multiple sources of evidence Professional Judgment
26
Part II: School Level GuidePages 48-53 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
27
Multiple sources of evidence inform the summative rating
27
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Determining Your Educator Plan
Summativ
e Rating
Exemplary 1-yr Self-Directed
Growth Plan2-yr Self-Directed Growth Plan
Proficient
Needs Improvement
Directed Growth Plan (1 yr or less)
Unsatisfactory Improvement Plan (30 days to 1 yr)
*Developing Educator Plan: for new teachers & administrators
28
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
29
5 Step Evaluation Cycle
Continuous Learning
Performance Rubrics
Self-Assessment Measurable Goals Brief, frequent
observations Evidence Collection Regular, timely
feedback
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
30
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the
ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
30
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
31
10-minute BREAK
31
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
32
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: How is Massachusetts different? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
32
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Early Learnings Comprehensive, transparent communications
strategies across all educators are critical to implementation success in Year One (Early Adopters & Level 4 districts)
Key stakeholders view new evaluation system positively and believe it is a significant improvement (3rd party evaluator)
Establishing coherence with other initiatives plays key role in making this “meaningful” to educators (Early Adopters & Level 4 districts)
33
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
34
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
34
Opportunity for CoherenceI. Curriculum, Planning, & Assessment
II. Teaching All Students
III. Family & Community Engagement
IV. ProfessionalCulture
A. Curriculum and Planning1. Subject Matter
Knowledge2. Child and Adolescent
Development3. Rigorous Standards-
Based Unit Design4. Well-Structured
Lessons
B. Assessment5. Variety of Assessment
Methods6. Adjustments to
Practice
C. Analysis7. Analysis and
Conclusions8. Sharing Conclusions
with Colleagues9. Sharing Conclusions
with Students
A. Instruction1. Quality and Effort of
Work2. Student Engagement3. Meeting Diverse Needs
B. Learning Environment4. Safe Learning
Environment5. Collaborative Learning
Environment6. Student Motivation
C. Cultural Proficiency7. Respects Differences8. Maintains Respectful
EnvironmentD. Expectations
9. Clear Expectations10.High Expectations11.Access to Knowledge
A. Engagement1. Parent/Family
Engagement
B. Collaboration2. Learning Expectations3. Curriculum Support
C. Communication4. Two-Way
Communication5. Culturally Proficient
Communication
A. Reflection1. Reflective Practice2. Goal Setting
B. Professional Growth3. Professional Learning
and Growth
C. Collaboration1. Professional
Collaboration
D. Decision-making1. Decision-Making
E. Shared Responsibility2. Shared Responsibility
F. Professional Responsibilities3. Judgment4. Reliability and
ResponsibilityMassachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Communications What strategies are you using (or could
you use) to communicate opportunities and expectations to teachers, administrators, union leaders, and school committee members for your district’s implementation?
What’s the success story you want to tell five years from now? 35
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Communications Tips & Strategies
Establish a collaborative Educator Evaluation working group comprised of diverse stakeholders
Commit to regular two-way communications (ex. monthly newsletter, Wiki page, regular and open channels to provide feedback)
Develop a strategic communications plan that includes key messages, timeline, and available resources so educators are continually kept up to date and involved in the process
36
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
37
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
37
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
38
The procedures for conducting educator evaluation are a mandatory subject of collective bargaining in Massachusetts.
ESE Resources: Model Contract Language for Teachers (Unit A) (plus
annotated version) Model Contract Language for School Administrators
(Unit B) District Options: Adopt, Adapt, Revise Districts are encouraged to conduct bargaining
in a way that permits the parties to return to educator evaluation periodically over the next several years.
38
Collective Bargaining & Reporting Requirements
Part IV: Model Collective Bargaining Contract Language (Appendix C and Appendix D)
39
Highlights from RTTT District Implementation RTTT Districts approached contract language
concerning educator evaluation in several ways, including: Detailed process included in collective bargaining
agreements Some process in the contract and some in side letters
or other documents (e.g., guidebooks, manuals) MOU/MOA outlining the districts’ decisions to adopt
the model contract language with little to no modifications
39
Collective Bargaining & Reporting Requirements
RTTT DistrictsAdoption Rate Adaption Rateapprox. 25% approx. 60%
Approximately 85% of RTTT Districts used the model contract language as their starting point.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
40
Highlights from RTTT District Implementation: Benefits to convening joint labor-management
working groups early in the process included: Abbreviated negotiations leading to timely
implementation Consistent understanding and appreciation of the
framework at the district and school levels Districts unable to reach agreement by Fall
2012 found that some elements of the system were compromised or rushed. 40
Collective Bargaining & Reporting Requirements
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
41
Districts must notify ESE of decision to adopt, adapt, or revise
Adapted or revised systems must be submitted for ESE review
Submissions must include: Teacher Contract Language or comparable document Administrator (Unit B) Contract Language or
comparable document School- and District-Administrator Evaluation Protocol Performance Rubrics
Target Submission Date: September 1, 201341
Collective Bargaining & Reporting Requirements
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
42
Key regulatory components subject to review:1. 5-step evaluation cycle2. Standards and Indicators of Effective Practice3. Three Categories of Evidence 4. Four Performance Rating Levels 5. Four Types of Educator Plans 6. Educators rated as having a high, moderate, or low
impact on student learning based on trends and patterns in student performance measures including MCAS and district-determined measures.
Questions? Please contact Ron Noble ([email protected])
42
Collective Bargaining & Reporting Requirements
2-Page Overview of Educator Evaluation Regulations
43
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
43
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Student Impact Rating The Student Impact Rating must be based
on at least 2 years of data across multiple measures: State assessments that measure growth (ex.
MCAS student growth percentiles) District-determined measures
44
Part VII: Rating Educator Impact on Student Learning Using District-Determined Measures of Student Learning
Two Ratings
45
Summativ
e Rating
Exemplary 1-yr Self-Directed
Growth Plan2-yr Self-Directed Growth Plan
Proficient
Needs Improvement
Directed Growth Plan
Unsatisfactory Improvement Plan
Low Moderate HighRating of Impact on Student
Learning
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
District-Determined Measures Definition from the regulations:
“Measures of student learning, growth, and achievement related to the Massachusetts
Curriculum Frameworks, Massachusetts Vocational Technical Education Frameworks, or
other relevant frameworks, that are comparable across grade or subject level district-wide.
These measures may include, but shall not be limited to: portfolios, approved commercial assessments and district-developed pre and post unit and course assessments,
and capstone projects.” 46
603 CMR 35.02
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
District-Determined Measures DDMs should measure growth, not just
achievement.
Assessments should be administered across all schools in the district where the same grade or subject is taught.
Districts must use measures of growth from state assessments where they are available. Only applicable to fewer than 20% of educators
47
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Priorities of the new evaluation framework
Place Student Learning at the Center – Student learning is central to the evaluation and development of educators
Promote Growth and Development – Provide all educators with feedback and opportunities that support continuous growth and improvement through collaboration
Recognize Excellence – Encourage districts to recognize and reward excellence in teaching and leadership
Set a High Bar for Tenure – Entrants to the teaching force must demonstrate Proficient performance on all standards within three years to earn Professional Teacher Status
Shorten Timelines for Improvement – Educators who are not rated Proficient face accelerated timelines for improvement
48We want to ensure that each student in the Commonwealth
is taught by an effective educator, in schools and districts led by effective leaders.Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
District-Determined Measures
49
DDMs may inform both an educator’s summative performance rating and impact rating
Summative Performanc
e Rating
Student Impact Rating
Evidence Products of practice (e.g.,
observations) Other evidence relevant to one or
more of the four Standards of practice (e.g., student surveys)
Multiple measures of student learning, growth and achievement, including:o Measures of student progress
on classroom assessmentso Measures of student progress
on learning goals set between the educator and evaluator
Evidence Trends and patterns in student
learning, growth & achievement At least two years of data At least two measures
Statewide growth measures, where available (including MCAS SGP)
Additional DDMs comparable across schools, grades, and subject matter district-wide
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
District-Determined Measures: Implementation Rollout
In Sept. 2013, districts will report to ESE: Grades and subjects for implementation of DDMs in
2013-2014; Grades and subjects for piloting DDMs in 2013-2014; Grades and subjects that still lack DDMs, for which
districts will research and/or develop measures to pilot in the spring of 2014;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A plan for determining impact ratings based on
DDMs for some educators by the end of the 2014-2015 school year, and all educators by the end of the 2015-2016 school year
50
Quick Reference Guide: District-Determined Measures
District-Determined Measures
What Support is ESE Providing? Identification of “anchor standards” for a
sub-set of grades and subjects Targeted for publication in July 2013
ESE is overseeing the collection and evaluation of quality assessments from MA districts and beyond that will be made available for use as DDMs Exemplar DDMs targeted to be available in July
2013
51
Quick Reference Guide: District-Determined Measures
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
District-Determined MeasuresWhat Support is ESE Providing? Assessment literacy webinar series to build district
capacity to identify and/or develop DDMs All webinars will be archived and posted Webinar series will focus on resulting in useful products for
planning and implementation
Supplemental guidance on the selection of DDMs and the process of determining an Impact Rating Technical Guide A (April 2013) will focus on measuring growth
and selecting appropriate measures Technical Guide B (Summer 2013) will focus on determining a
Student Impact RatingQuestions? Please contact Ron Noble ([email protected])
52
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationQuick Reference Guide: District-Determined Measures
District-Determined Measures
Recommended Next Steps to Creating a District Plan
Identify a team of administrators, teachers and specialists to focus and plan the district’s work on district-determined measures.
Complete an inventory of existing assessments used in the district’s schools.
Identify and coordinate with partners that have capacity to assist in the work of identifying and assessing assessments that may serve as district-determined measures.
53
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationQuick Reference Guide: District-Determined Measures
5454
The two ratings work together
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
55
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
55
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Training “An Act Providing for the Implementation
of Educator Evaluation Systems in School Districts” http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2012/Chapter131
Training Requirement for all evaluators and all
educators who must be evaluated under framework to receive “evaluation training program developed by the department of elementary and secondary education”
56
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
ESE Training Programs
Training Workshops for Teachers and SISP Time: 4 hours (minimum) Content: Orientation + Workshops 1-3 Audience: All educators without evaluator responsibilities Facilitators: school-level educators (administrators or teacher
leaders)www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/teachers/
Training Modules for Evaluators Time: 11 hours (minimum) Content: Overview + Modules 2-6 Audience: Evaluators and School Leadership Teams Facilitators: School- or District-level PD providers; vendors
www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/modules/
57
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Vendor Support
ESE has committed $1 million in RTTT funds to subsidize module training by approved vendors for non-RTTT districts. Subsidies will go directly to approved vendors who then offer services to districts at a proportionately reduced cost.
Information on approved vendors and subsidized services will be available at www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/vendors.
58
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
TrainingReporting Requirements for Non-RTTT Districts: Fiscal year 2014: Districts should designate
some, if not all, of their Chapter 70 foundation budget allotment for professional development and Title IIA funds to subsidize the cost of a training program
October 1, 2013: Districts must publish an educator evaluation training schedule
November 1, 2013: Districts must submit a funding plan for training to ESE via the Title IIA application process
59
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Training Resources ESE Guide to Educator Evaluation Training Requirements (
www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/TrainingRequirements.pdf)
Quick Reference Guide: Training Requirements (www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/)
ESE Training Programs (www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/)
Approved Vendors (www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/vendors/)
Questions? Please contact Claire Abbott ([email protected])
7
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
61
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Training Team Time Wrap-Up
61
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Team Time
Question
Year 1 Strategic Planning & Implementation Worksheet
62
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
63
Welcome & Introductions Evaluation Framework: What sets Massachusetts apart? 5-Step Cycle of Evaluation Guest Speaker: What does this look like on the ground? BREAK Communications: Opportunity for Coherence Training Collective Bargaining and Reporting Requirements District-Determined Measures Team Time Wrap-Up
63
Agenda
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Intended OutcomesParticipants will: Know more about the new educator evaluation
system and what it will mean to introduce it to your district over the course of the next year
Know more about available ESE resources, and how to use them back at your district
Be familiar with the implementation timeline for Year 1, including training and reporting requirements
Have at least one clear, agreed upon “next step” for action back in your district 64
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
65
Plus – DeltaWhat worked? What would
make it better?
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Upcoming ESE Resources Guidance on Determining Summative
Performance Ratings April 2013
DDM Webinar Series March 14, 2013 – December 5, 2013
DDM Technical Guide A April 2013
DDM Technical Guide B August 2013
Exemplar S.M.A.R.T. Goals Summer 2013 66
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
67
Handouts Today’s Powerpoint Presentation 2-page Overview of Key Features of the Regulations Quick Reference Guide: MA Model System for Educator
Evaluation 1- and 2-year Evaluation Cycle Quick Reference Guide: Rubrics Quick Reference Guide: Staff & Student Feedback Rubric-At-A-Glance (Teacher & School Administrator) Quick Reference Guide: Training Requirements Quick Reference Guide: DDMs Strategic Planning & Implementation Worksheet
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education