PUSD Teacher Evaluation

SY12/13Governing Board Presentation

May 10, 2012

Presentation Overview

Requirements of ARS 15-203 New Legislative Developments

PD and Communication Survey Response

Revisions PUSD Data Input Process Data Requirement PUSD Next Steps

Arizona Revised Statutes§ 15-203(A)(38)

The State Board of Education shall…”on or before December 15, 2011 adopt and maintain a model framework for a teacher and principal evaluation instrument that includes quantitative data on student academic progress that accounts for between thirty-three percent and fifty percent of the evaluation outcomes and best practices for professional development and evaluator training. School districts and charter schools shall use an instrument that meets the data requirements established by the State Board of Education to annually evaluate individual teachers and principals beginning in school year 2012 – 2013.”

HB 2823

Effective June, 2012 Allows governing boards to delay the

implementation of the Teacher and Principal Evaluation data component until SY13-14

Administration recommends we move forward

Framework Requirements

ADE Adopted Model Framework for Educator Effectiveness April, 2011

Classroom observation tool must be: Rubric-based Tied to Arizona Teaching Standards

33% to 50% of the evaluation must be based on student achievement data

PUSD began to make the shift in evaluation practices this year Bringing revisions to current process forward tonight

Professional Development and Communication

Professional Development: Over 50 hours of training for

administrators Teachers trained on the four different

modules Teachers and Administrators surveyed to

solicit feedback on the process and the instrument

Site visits to every school by Deputy Superintendent and Human Resources to every school to help provide understanding around the Framework, the data component, the law, and PUSD processes

PUSD Plans for Continuous Improvement for Current Evaluation Process Reconvened Governing Board appointed

Certified Teacher Evaluation Committee (CTEC) to look at current evaluation tool and system

Committee: Analyzed survey data from both teachers

and administrators Administration is bringing back CTEC’s

recommended changes to the tools and process to the Governing Board for approval this evening

Response to Survey Concern - Length

Minor wording changes based on current research

Deletes Components 3e, 3f, and 3h

Assesses the three reflections written by teachers based on their goals using Component 4a, Reflection on Teaching

Response to Survey Concern - TIME

Non-Continuing Teacher Minimum of TWO classroom observations – one

scheduled, one unscheduled – each semester

Continuing Teacher Minimum of 80 minutes of observation Minimum of TWO observations Added a mid-year conference to collect

evidence on Domains 1 and 4 to be completed prior to February 1st.

Response to Survey Concern- TIME IMT On-Line Application Development Exploring the use of Technology Pilot to began on April 28th

Efficiencies gained

Data Model

PUSD Data Input Process

November, 2011 – Administration Formed Teacher Evaluation Data Committee 80 participants district-wide participated in 5

meetings Developed understanding around the Framework

and the requirements of ARS 15-203 Group A and Group B Valid and Reliable Data Classroom-level Data Data Mining

Made recommendations for percentages for Group A and Group B teachers

Data Percentage Recommendation Committee Recommendation for Data

Group A

Group B

Instructional Practices

Classroom-level Data

School-level Data

Teacher Evaluation: Data Component Next Steps

Created a PUSD Standing Data Committee Committee comprised mostly of

teachersReviewed the Data Committee’s work

and formalized it for Governing Board approval Formulate the data points and process needed

to satisfy ARS 15-203 and the Framework Fair and equitable data components Recommendation regarding use of data in

employment decision making

Data Model Guiding Principles Collaborative thinking Guiding principles

Equity Comprehensive Manageable Choice – Menu Driven Balance Transparency First Year’s Needs Spirit of the Law

Putting it All Together – Group A

Group A – 33/7/40

6 Overall Data Points 33%

4 Choices 2 are mandatory

7% - Surveys Pick 2

1 Survey Mandatory Parent Student

Choices are made at the end of the year 60%- Professional Practices

Danielson/PUSD Framework

Putting It All Together – Group B

Group B – 33/67

5 Overall data points 33%

1 Mandatory – Survey Parent Student

If a valid and reliable data point exists, that is mandatory

Choices are made at the end of the year 67% Professional Practices-

Danielson/PUSD Framework

How is This Data Used?

Administration recommends no employment decisions be made using the data component of teacher evaluation in SY 12-13

Development of Classroom-level Data

This Summer – K-12 Curriculum Work English/Language Arts Math CTE (selected pathways) Arts

Assessment Development Math Focus

SY 12-13 Science, Social Studies, Arts, CTE (selected

pathways), Special Areas

How Will This Change Things? This is a journey for PUSD Developing a common vocabulary about

what excellent instruction looks like A common focus and vision for

curriculum, instruction and assessment

Final Thoughts

“Every profession establishes a language of practice, one that captures the important concepts and understandings shared by members of the profession. Similarly, a framework for teaching offers educators a means of communicating about excellence. …A uniform framework allows those conversations to guide novices as well as to enhance the performance of veterans.”

Charlotte Danielson

Questions on Teacher Evaluation