Welcome Our presentation will begin shortly.

WelcomeOur presentation will begin shortly.

TPEP: Taking it to the next level

Send your questions via chat to be answered in our Q&A session at the end of the webinar.

Dr. Jonelle AdamsExecutive DirectorMember of TPEP Steering Committee

Phil GoreDirector of Leadership Development Services

Today’s featured speakers

This webinar covers the latest rules from OSPI and policy changes for 2013-2014.

Today’s agenda

Shifting thinking

Communicating our values

• “Value” is at the root of the word “evaluation.”

• What we evaluate needs to come from what we value as a community.

Student Learning

Educator Growth

Evaluation components

Evaluation Component 5895

Criteria (RCW) Stays the same

Criteria Definitions Stays the same

Instructional/Leadership Frameworks 3 Approved FrameworksOSPI –September 1, 2012

4-Tiered System Unsatisfactory, Basic, Proficient, Distinguished

Final Summative Scoring Methodology OSPI –December 2012Rulemaking has started as of August 21, 2012

Unsatisfactory/Satisfactory Delineation Years 1-5 between 1 and 2Years 5 + between 2 and 3 (2 years in a row or 2 out of 3 years)

Measures and Evidence Observation* and Student Growth*(*Required in RCW)Artifacts and other Evidence related to Framework Rubrics

Comprehensive Evaluation: Teachers

• Assesses all eight evaluation criteria.• All criteria contribute to the comprehensive summative

evaluation rating.• Student Growth Rubrics embedded in Criterion. (3, 6, 8)• All provisional classroom teachers and any classroom

teacher not on level 3 or level 4 receive comprehensive evaluation.

• All classroom teachers shall receive a comprehensive summative evaluation at least once every four years.

Comprehensive Evaluation: Principals

• Assesses all eight evaluation criteria.

• All criteria contribute to the comprehensive summative evaluation rating.

• Student Growth Rubrics embedded in Criterion. (3,5,8)

• “Due to the importance of instructional leadership and assuring rater agreement among evaluators, particularly those evaluating teacher performance, school districts are encouraged to conduct comprehensive summative evaluations of principal performance on an annual basis.” Section 1, (12 c(v))

Evaluation Summative Scoring Process

Focused Evaluation: Certificated Classroom Teachers• Includes an assessment of one of the eight criterion.• Student Growth Rubrics from one of the three

criterion – If a teacher chooses 3,6 or 8; their accompanying student

growth rubrics will be used.– If a teacher chooses Criterion 1,2,4,5,7, the accompanying

student growth rubrics from Criterion 3 or 6 will be used.

• Approved by the teacher ‘s evaluator.• A focused evaluation must be performed in any year

that a comprehensive evaluation is not scheduled.

Focused Evaluation: Summative Scoring Process

• Includes an assessment of one of the eight criterion.

• Student Growth Rubrics from one of the three criterion – The focused evaluation will include the student growth rubric

row selected by the principal or assistant principal.

• Criterion and Student Growth Rubric Rows must be approved by the principal’s evaluator.

• A focused evaluation must be performed in any year that a comprehensive evaluation is not scheduled.

Focused Evaluation: Principals and Assistant Principals

SUMMATIVE SCORING METHODOLOGY STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES

ESSB 5895 and ESEA Waiver

Summative Rating Process Overview

• ESSB 5895 requires OSPI to determine a summative scoring methodology by December 1, 2012.

• Summative Rating is determined through a “Raw Score” Model.

• Generated from the TPEP Pilot Sites and approved by the TPEP Steering Committee.

• Used for both the teacher and principal evaluation systems.

• Determination of overall criterion score based on both:– Instructional framework rubrics– Student growth rubrics

The RAW Score Model

Evaluators place teachers into preliminary summative rating categories based on score bands. As illustrated above, this teacher would receive a preliminary overall summative rating of Proficient.

Evaluation Summative Scoring Process

Defining key terms

• Student achievementThe status of subject-matter knowledge, understandings, and skills at one point in time.

• Student growth (learning)The growth in subject-matter knowledge, understandings, and skill over time.

It is student growth, not student achievement, that is relevant in demonstrating impacts teachers and principals have on students.

State-based

Tools

District and

School-Based Tools

Class

room

-

based

Tools

Formal Tests in Core Subjects Only

Student growth rubrics

• The TPEP Steering Committee organizations approved statewide rubrics for student growth to ensure consistency in implementation of the evaluation system across Washington state. – The rubrics for student growth describe both goal-setting and

outputs of student learning.

• OSPI has provided student growth rubrics for each of the three criterion: – Teachers #3, #6, and #8– Principals #3, #5, and #8

Using district-, school-, and classroom-based data (teachers)• Five Student Growth Criteria

– 3.1 Establish Student Growth Goals– Re: individual or subgroups of students (achievement/ opportunity gap)

– 3.2 Achievement of Student Growth Goals– Re: individual or subgroups of students (achievement/ opportunity gap)

– 6.1 Establish Student Growth Goals using Multiple Student Data Elements

– Re: whole class based on grade-level standards and aligned to school and district goals

– 6.2 Achievement of Student Growth Goals– Re: whole class based on grade-level standards and aligned to school and district goals

– 8.1 Establish Team Student Growth Goals– Re: Teacher as part of a grade-level, content area, or other school/district team

Student Growth Goal-Setting Score Based on Rubric

Student Growth* Score Based on Rubric

Overall Student Growth Criterion Score

Criterion 3 3 2** 5Criterion 6 2 2** 4

Criterion 8 2 N/A 2Student Growth Score 7 4 11

* Must include a minimum of two student growth measures (i.e., state-, district-, school-, and classroom-based measures).** A student growth score of “1” in any of the student growth rubrics will result in a Low growth rating.

Evaluators place teachers into summative rating categories based on score bands. As illustrated above, this teacher would receive a low student growth rating

OSPI Approved Student Growth Impact Rating Scoring Band

5-12 13-17 18-20Low Average High

Student growth rubric and rating (teachers only)

Combining measures

Summative rating and impact on student learning matrix

24

Student growth: What’s next…

Convening a group of educators to analyze the student growth process and determine next steps with regard to districts implementation of this portion of the TPEP work. It will be an initial step in looking at the implementation in the following areas:1.Assessment Literacy2.Student Growth Rubrics3.Student Growth Measures4.Examples of Student Growth Goals

• OSPI and the TPEP Steering Committee feel it is critical that this process is authentic and relevant to the existing context in districts.

Student growth data examples

• State-Based Tools– e.g., MSP, HSPE, EOCs, SMARTER Balanced

Assessment Consortium (SBAC)• District-Based Tools

– e.g., MAP, AIMS Web, SBAC interim, district writing assessments, fluency checks, RBAs, MBAs

• School-Based Tools– e.g., content area, grade-level or other school team

assessments• Classroom-Based Tools

– Applies to all teachers

Focus on district-, school- and classroom-based tools1. OSPI recommends focusing on four areas:

2. Developing Assessment Literacy in ALL Staff

3. Unpacking Student Learning Rubric Language

4. Student Learning Goal Setting – Questions to Ask:

• Priority of Content: Is the student learning goal focused on the right material? • Rigor of Target: Does the target represent an appropriate amount of student learning for

the specified interval of instruction? • Quality of Evidence: Will the evidence source(s) allow for clear, accurate measurement

of student learning?

5. Determining and Using Measures to Evaluate Student Learning Goals

Bargaining framework

• RCWs

• WACs/Rules

• OSPI Guidance

Criteria 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Raw Score Methodology

Who?

Is in the new system?

What?

Evidence will count for each criteria?

How much?

Evidence will be required and what is the quality?

FLEXIBILITY IS THE KEY!

Calibration is important!

• Districts must provide calibration training for principals and administrators (maximize rater agreement) on:– Observation of Teaching and Leadership Practice– Student Growth Goal Setting and Use of

Measures/Evidence of Student Learning – And suggested….– Goal setting, Self-assessment, Artifacts and Other

Evidence Related to Frameworks– Overall Expectations of Teacher and Leader

Professional Responsibilities

Next steps

• Adopt new policy, procedure and implementation schedule

• Bargain / discuss / watch• Rater agreement strategy• Resolve current probationary cases• Other (i.e., pilot option, consider minor

modifications)

31

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Provisional TeachersFirst Year

17 FTERequired: Comp




Provisional TeachersSecond Year





Provisional TeachersThird Year

8 FTERequired: Comp




Total Provisional 41 FTE 48 FTE 42 FTE 40 FTEProbationaryClassroom Teachers

1 FTERequired: Comp

3 FTERequired: Comp

4 FTERequired: Comp

3 FTERequired: Comp

Non-Provisional or Non-Probationary Classroom Teachers(4 years of satisfactory evaluations)

Total: 378 FTE

Comp: 75Focused: 303

Total: 369 FTE


Total: 374 FTE


Total: 377 FTE


Total teachers on a Comprehensive:

117

161 171 137

Total teachers on a Focused:

303 279 259 293

Sample District: Total Number of Classroom Teachers: 420 Total Student FTE: 8,423

31

Immediate action

• Boards adopt Implementation Plan by June 2013

• Boards adopt Instructional and Leadership frameworks by June 2013

• Start review process of current policy 5240 and procedure 5240 by June 2013

• Boards adopt the new policy by September 2013

TPEP’s name is changing to its new name: Professional Growth and Evaluation System September 1, 2013

Evaluation of staff

Paragraph 1

The board recognizes that the professional growth and evaluation of individual employees is important to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the school district.

Evaluation of staff

Paragraph 2

By September 1, 2013, pursuant to state law implementing the Professional Growth and Evaluation System, the board will establish a revised evaluation process using a four-level rating system for all certificated classroom teachers, certificated principals and assistant principals.

Paragraph 3The evaluation system will use the minimum criteria developed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction. The four-level rating system will describe the performance of certificated classroom teachers, certificated principals and assistant principals along a continuum that indicates the extent to which evaluative criteria have been met or exceeded. Student growth data, defined as the change in student achievement between two points in time, must be a substantial factor in the evaluation process and must be based on multiple measures, including classroom, school, district and state-based tools.

Evaluation of staff

Paragraph 4Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, all certificated classroom teachers, principals and assistant principals will be evaluated on either a comprehensive or focused evaluation using the new state criteria. By the end of the 2016-2017 school year, all certificated classroom teachers on a continuing contract will complete a comprehensive evaluation.

Evaluation of staff

Paragraph 5Beginning with the 2015-16 school year, valuation results for certificated classroom teachers, certificated principals and assistant principals must be used as one of multiple factors in making human resource and personnel decisions. Human resource decisions include, but are not limited to, employee assignment, including the consideration of an agreement to an assignment by an appropriate teacher, principal and superintendent and reduction in force. The district will not be limited in its ability to collectively bargain how the multiple factors will be used in making human resource and personnel decisions, but the evaluation results must be a factor.

Evaluation of staff

Paragraph 6The failure of any evaluator to evaluate or supervise or cause the evaluation or supervision of certificated classroom teachers, certificated support personnel or administrators in accordance with the revised evaluation system, when it is his or her specific duty to do so, will be sufficient cause for the non-renewal of any such evaluator’s contract under RCW 28A.405.210 or the discharge of such evaluator under RCW 28A.405.300.

Evaluation of staff

DEFINITION

Paragraph 1:“Certificated classroom teacher” means an employee who provides academically-focused instruction to students and holds one or more of the certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79-A-140(1) through (3) and (6)(a) through (e) and (g).

Certificated Classroom Teachers


REQUIREMENTS

Paragraph 2:The performance of certificated classroom teachers will be observed twice a year, for a total observation time of not less than sixty (60) minutes. New staff will be observed for the purpose of evaluation at least once for a total observation time of not less than thirty (30) minutes within ninety (90) calendar days after employment. An employee in the third year of provisional status will be observed at least three times for a total observation time of not less than ninety (90) minutes.

REQUIREMENTS

Paragraph 3All certified classroom teachers will receive a comprehensive summative evaluation at least once every four years. A comprehensive summative evaluation assesses all eight evaluation criteria applicable to that certificated classroom teacher and all criteria contribute to the comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating. A certificated classroom teacher who is a provisional employee under RCW 28A.405.220 or who received a comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating of Level 1 or Level 2 in the previous school year, or four (4) years of satisfactory evaluations in the district, will receive an annual comprehensive summative evaluation.


REQUIREMENTS

Paragraph 4In the years when a comprehensive summative evaluation is not required, certificated classroom teachers who received a comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating of Level 3 or 4 in the previous school year will receive a focused evaluation. A focused evaluation includes an assessment of one of the eight criteria selected for a performance rating plus professional growth activities specifically linked to the selected criteria.


REQUIREMENTS

Paragraph 5A certificated classroom teacher whose performance does not meet minimum requirements of the new or existing RCW, whichever is applicable to that staff member, will be notified in writing of the specific deficiencies and afforded a reasonable program for improvement.


Paragraph 1“Certificated principal,” “principal,” and “assistant principal,” mean an employee who supervises the operation and management of a school as provided by RCW 28A.400.100. and holds certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140(4)(a) or (6)(h). Due to the importance of instructional leadership and assuring rater agreement among evaluators, particularly those evaluating teacher performance, school districts are encouraged to conduct comprehensive summative evaluation of principal performance on an annual basis.

Certificated Principals and Assistant Principals

Paragraph 2A comprehensive summative evaluation assesses all eight evaluation criteria applicable to that staff member and all criteria contribute to the comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating. The following will receive an annual comprehensive summative evaluation: 1) principals in the first three consecutive school years of employment as a principal, 2) principals previously employed as a principal by another school district in the state of Washington for three or more consecutive school years and in the first full year as a principal in the school district and 3) any principal who received a comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating of Level 1 or Level 2 in the previous school year.


Paragraph 3In the years when a comprehensive summative evaluation is not required, staff who received a comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating of Level 3 or 4 in the previous school year is required to receive a focused evaluation. A focused evaluation includes an assessment of one of the eight criteria selected for a performance rating plus professional growth activities specifically linked to the selected criteria.


Paragraph 4A principal whose performance does not meet minimum requirements will be notified in writing of the specific deficiencies and afforded a reasonable program for improvement.


Paragraph 1“Certificated support personnel” and “certificated support person” mean a certificated employee who provides services to students and holds one or more of the education staff associate (ESA) certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140(5). ESA certification includes: school speech pathologists or audiologists, school counselors, school nurses, school occupational therapists, school physical therapists, school psychologists, and school social workers.

Certificated Support Personnel

Paragraph 2Certificated support personnel are considered non-classroom teachers for purposes of the Professional Growth and Evaluation System and are not subject to the four-level rating system. The superintendent will establish a revised evaluation process using the minimum criteria for certificated support personnel developed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction: Knowledge and scholarship in a specialized field, Specialized skills, Management of special and technical environment, The support person as a professional, and Involvement in assisting students, parents and educational personnel.

Certificated Support Personnel

Criteria for evaluating classified staff will be based upon the job description of the specific assignment.

Classified Staff

Questions and Answers

Thank you for attending!

Look for a recording of this event and additional TPEP resources on our website available soon.

www.wssda.org

Welcome Our presentation will begin shortly.

Documents

Transcript of Welcome Our presentation will begin shortly.