In partnership with
description
Transcript of In partnership with
In partnership with
Background
• Legislated by Act 166– Federal push: part of ESEA flexibility waiver– Fully functional performance-based evaluation
system in place for 2014-15– 50% on process/practice and 50% on
product
• Equivalency option for process/practice– CESA 6/Dr. James Stronge– 6 Performance Standards
Educator Evaluation
Teachers• InTASC standards;• Danielson’s 4
domains and 22 components
Principals• ISLLC standards
--------------------------------
CESA 6 Model• 6 performance
standards for teachers, ed specialists, and principals
• Aligned to Danielson & national standards
Potential Data Sources:
• Statewide assessments
• Districtwide assessments
• Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
• Graduation data
• Other
50% 50%
Models of Practice Student Outcomes
DPI Framework
Process Product
The Research
Research on effective vs. ineffective teachers and leaders clearly indicates there is a great cost to student learning as a result of having ineffective teachers and leaders in our school.
What factor has the largest effect on student achievement?
Mixed Ability Grouping?
Class Size?
Prior Achievement?
The Teacher?
What factor had the largest effect on student achievement?
Mixed Ability Grouping? 4
Class Size? 3
Prior Achievement? 2
The Teacher? 1
Dallas Research: Teacher Quality
Dallas, Texas data: 2800-3200 students per cohortComparison of 3 “highly effective” & 3 “ineffective” teachers (Jordan, Mendro, & Weerasinghe, 1997)
4th Grade Math Achievement
Dallas Research: Teacher Quality
Dallas, Texas data: 2800-3200 students per cohortComparison of 3 “highly effective” & 3 “ineffective” teachers (Jordan, Mendro, & Weerasinghe, 1997)
4th Grade Reading Achievement
Sequence of Effective Teachers
Low
High
52-54percentile
points difference
over 3 years
Low Low
High High
Sanders & Rivers (1996)
Sequence of Effective Teachers
Low
High
13percentile
points difference
Low
High High
Sanders & Rivers (1996)
High
Residual Effect
Two years of effective teachers could not remediate the achievement loss caused by one year with a poor teacher.
Mendro, Jordan, Gomez, Anderson, & Bembry (1998)
Time in the School Year Neededto Achieve the Same Amount of
Learning
Leigh, Economics of Education Review (2010)
0 1/4 1/2 3/4 1
25th Percentile Teacher
75th Percentile Teacher
Years Needed
Time in the School Year Neededto Achieve the Same Amount of
Learning
Leigh, Economics of Education Review (2010)
0 1/4 1/2 3/4 1
10th Percentile Teacher
90th Percentile Teacher
Years Needed
Annual Student Achievement Gains
05
101520253035
Class Size Reduction: 24:1to 15:1
Teacher QualityImprovement: 75 vs. 25 %tile
Pe
rce
nti
le G
ain
Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top. London: McKinsey & Company; Stronge, J.H., Ward, T.J., Tucker, P.D., & Grant, L.W.; Retrieved from: http://www.mckinsey.com/locations/ukireland/publications/pdf/ Education_report.pdf
Teacher Quality Improvement: 25th vs. 75th percentile
Class Size Reduction: 24:1 to 15:1
Spillover Effect
Jackon & Bruegmann, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics (2009)
Student achievement rises across a grade when a high-quality teacher comes on board: one-tenth to one-fifth the impact of replacing the students’ own teacher!
Effectiveness is the goal.
Evaluation is merely the means.
Effectiveness Project
•Teachers
•Educational Specialists
•School Administrators (principals)
Who Will Be Involved?
Effectiveness Project
• What is the basis of the evaluation?
• How will performance be documented?
• How will performance be rated?
What is the basis of the evaluation?
Question 1
Performance Standards
Teacher
• Professional Knowledge• Instructional Planning• Instructional Delivery• Assessment for/of
Learning• Learning Environment• Professionalism
Educational Specialist
• Professional Knowledge• Communication &
Collaboration• Assessment• Program Planning &
Management• Program Delivery• Professionalism
How will performance be documented?
Question 2
Multiple Data Sources at-a-glance
Observations
Documentation Log
Student Surveys
Self-Assessment of Professional Practice
Student Learning ObjectivesEverything is housed in an electronic database: OASYS
Data ManagementMy Learning Plan OASYS
Data Collection Responsibilities
Data Collection Procedure
Evaluator Teacher/Ed Specialist
Observation(formal/informal) X
Documentation Log X
Student Surveys X
Self Assessment of Professional Practice X
Student Learning Objectives X
Observations
May take a variety of forms• Formal observation• Informal observation• Walk-through observation• Announced or unannounced
May occur in a variety of settings• Classroom environment• Non-classroom settings
Formal Observations
• Directly focused on teacher performance standards• Announced or unannounced
• at least 20 minutes in duration
• Teachers observed at least twice per year• Additional observations at evaluator’s discretion• At least one pre-observation conference for teachers
during their first year in district• Evaluator feedback during post-observation conference• Observation forms kept in OASYS database
Documentation Log
• Evidence of performance related to specific standards
• Educator’s voice in the process
• Complements classroom observation
• Includes both specific required artifacts and teacher-selected artifacts
• Emphasis is on quality, not quantity
• Collected throughout the year
• Reviewed by evaluator by mid-year for probationary teachers; by early May for all teachers
• Artifacts uploaded into OASYS database
Teacher Artifact Examples
• Professionalism– Transcript– PD certificate
• Instructional Planning– Differentiation in lesson
plan
• Instructional Delivery– Video/audio of
instructional unit– Sample work
• Assessment– Sample of baseline and
periodic assessments*
• Learning Environment– Student survey
information*– Schedule of daily routine
• Professionalism– PD log*– Parent communication
log** Required artifact
Student Surveys
• Provide students’ perceptions of how teacher is performing -- direct knowledge of classroom practices
• All teachers survey students twice per year• Age considerations for survey• Surveys are anonymous• Actual responses seen only by individual teacher• Teachers fill out Student Survey Growth Plan and
Student Survey Analysis and include in documentation log
Self-Assessment of Professional Practice
• Reflect on effectiveness and adequacy of practice• Based on each performance standard• Consider performance indicators for examples of
behaviors exemplifying each standard• One area of strength per standard• One area of growth, along with strategies for growth,
per standard
Student Learning Objectives
• Detailed, measureable goals for student academic growth
• Set at the beginning of the year• Based on SMART goal format• Individual teacher or group goals• Classroom or subsets of students• Approved by principal/supervisor• Mid-year check point• End-of-year evaluation – how did we do?
How will teacher performance be rated?
Question 3
Interim Evaluation
• All probationary teachers/educational specialists
• Used to document evidence of meeting standards
• Does NOT include rating of performance
Summative Evaluation
• Comes at end of evaluation cycle
• Four point rating scale
• Performance rubric for every standard
• Rating based on “preponderance of evidence”
• Summative evaluation form in OASYS
Evaluations
DistinguishedThe teacher maintains performance, accomplishments, and behaviors that consistently surpass the established standard.
• Sustains high performance over period of time• Behaviors have strong positive impact on
learners and school climate• May serve as role model to others
Category Description Definition
EffectiveThe teacher meets the standard in a manner that is consistent with the school’s mission and goals.
• Meets the requirements contained in job description as expressed in evaluation criteria
• Behaviors have positive impact on learners and school climate
• Willing to learn and apply new skills
Developing/ Needs Improvement
The teacher is inconsistent in meeting standards and/or in working toward the school’s missions and goals.
• Requires support in meeting the standards• Results in less than quality work performance• Leads to areas for teacher improvement being
jointly identified and planned between teacher and evaluator
Unacceptable
The teacher consistently performs below the established standards or in a manner that is inconsistent with the school’s missions and goals.
• Does not meet requirements contained in job description as expressed in evaluation criteria
• Results in minimal student learning• May contribute to recommendation for teacher
not being considered for continued employment
Terms used in Rating Scale
Questionson the
process?
Look Fors & Red Flags
• “Look Fors”– What do we WANT to
see in each standard?– Exemplary behaviors
• “Red Flags”– What should we NOT
see?– What is cause for
alarm or concern?
ACTIVITY
• Groups of 6 – one group per standard• Identify a recorder• 2 minutes at each standard
– Document look fors AND red flags– Rotate to the next standard
• Last reporter at each standard will report out to the large group
Additional Questions?
Thank you!