1. Arkansas Teacher Excellence Support System (TESS) TESS Law and Process for Administrators January – March 2013

2. WHY?
Current system of evaluation provides little or no feedback to teachers
Inconsistency among districts across the state
Over 80% of districts in the state use checklists for their evaluation instrument – expectations are unclear
Act 1209 of the 2011 Legislative Session
Federal waiver from NCLB requirements

3. Instruments and Rubrics SOME CURRENT INSTRUMENTS………
Unsatisfactory
Basic
Proficient
Distinguished
3b. Teacher uses appropriate questioning techniques and prompts in discussion x

4. Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Distinguished
3b: Using questioning / prompts and discussion
Teacher’s questions are of low cognitive challenge, single correct responses, and asked in rapid succession.
Interaction between teacher and students is predominantly recitation style, with the teacher mediating all questions and answers.
A few students dominate the discussion.
Teacher’s questions lead students through a single path of inquiry, with answers seemingly determined in advance.
Alternatively the teacher attempts to frame some questions designed to promote student thinking and understanding, but only a few students are involved.
Teacher attempts to engage all students in the discussion and to encourage them to respond to one another, with uneven results.
While the teacher may use some low-level questions, he or she poses questions to students designed to promote student thinking and understanding.
Teacher creates a genuine discussion among students, providing adequate time for students to respond, and stepping aside when appropriate.
Teacher successfully engages most students in the discussion, employing a range of strategies to ensure that most students are heard.
Teacher uses a variety or series of questions or prompts to challenge students cognitively, advance high level thinking and discourse, and promote meta-cognition.
Students formulate many questions, initiate topics and make unsolicited contributions.
Students themselves ensure that all voices are heard in the discussion.

5. What? Arkansas Teacher Excellence Support System (TESS)
Provide a transparent and consistent teacher evaluation system for public school districts and public charter schools
Provide an evaluation, feedback, and support system that encourages teachers to improve their knowledge and instructional skills to improve student learning

6. What?
Provide an integrated system that links evaluation procedures with curricular standards, professional learning activities, targeted support, and human capital decisions
Support teachers' roles in improving students' educational achievements
Inform policymakers regarding the benefits of a consistent evaluation and support system to improve student achievement across the state

8. Who?
Licensed teachers will be evaluated under the new system--including guidance counselors and media specialists.
Specialist Rubrics Available on website
“Teacher” includes a non-licensed classroom teacher employed at a public charter school granted by the state board.
Pre-school teachers are not required to be evaluated under this system; however, a district/co-op can choose to include them.

9. Who?
Any administrator who evaluates teachers MUST pass the certification test; central office administrators must complete the training but are not required to test unless they also evaluate teachers.
Central office staff used as secondary (back-up) evaluators must pass the certification test.
ALL teachers are required to complete training; however, there is no assessment.

10. Who?
Licensed, credentialed administrators must complete summative evaluations of teachers; charter school administrators are the only exception for licensure.
Instructional facilitators, math/literacy coaches, etc., may perform formative observations to support and assist credentialed administrators.
All administrators (superintendents, assistant superintendents, etc.) must attend the ADE one-day training for administrators about law, process, etc.

11. Arkansas Teacher Excellence
Support System (TESS) Training Timeline – Revised March 2013
Evaluator Support Training
150 participants chosen by co-ops and large districts
3 Day Training
Administrator/Evaluator Training
One Day Face-to-Face
Training for administrators was focused on law, training and evaluation process, certification test, and the Teachscape software.
Teacher Support Training
One Day Face-to-Face & 1/2 Day in Buildings
One person from each school building will attend a 1 day face-to-face training at their local co-op to prepare for facilitating group sessions using modules of the Teachscape software at their school.
Full Implementation
All teachers must be evaluated using the
TESS model
Jan – Mar 2013
Mar-April 2013
December 2012
Summer 2013
Year
Full Implementation
Support in local districts and cooperatives.
FFTPS training and proficiency test will be completed by December 31, 2013.
Teachers must complete ½ day training and begin online training in FFTES by August 31, Schools may use the school year to complete the training for all teachers. Schools are encouraged to provide group facilitated sessions led by the trainers through the modules and additional focus on the Framework in faculty meetings and other trainings. Teachers must complete the Teachscape modules by May 31, 2014.
*Central office staff are not required to pass the certification test; however, they are required to complete training.
*Summative evaluators of teachers must pass the certification test; current evaluators must pass by December 31, 2013.
*Teachers must complete ½ day training by August 31, 2013, and Teachscape modules by May 31, 2014.

12. When?
Evaluators and administrators may begin training in the teacher evaluation system from January-March 2013.
For current evaluators and administrators, training must be completed by December 31, 2013.
Evaluators and administrators hired after July 1, 2013, must complete training by December 31, 2013.

13. When?
By August 31, 2013, districts/schools must provide teachers the ½ day and begin training on Danielson Framework using Teachscape’s Framework for Teaching Effectiveness Series (FFTES).
By May 31, 2014, teachers must complete training on the Danielson Framework using FFTES.

14. When?
ADE is supporting a pilot involving 11 schools during the school year.
There will be a statewide pilot of TESS during the school year.
The first full year of implementation is
Data will be reported on the 2017 School Performance Reports.

15. Where?
Administrator trainings will be delivered multiple times at the co-ops throughout the state and in the Little Rock area for the Tri-District.
Charter schools may choose to attend trainings through the co-ops or those delivered by APSRC.
Co-ops and districts will develop plans for implementation of training and support based on needs.

16. Where?
Every SCHOOL may send a person to the teacher support training delivered by ADE at co-ops and in the Little Rock area for the Tri-District.
The ADE trained individuals are expected to provide the ½ day face-to-face training at their local schools and also facilitate group training sessions using FFTES software.

17. TRAINING FOR ADMINISTRATORS
How?
TRAINING FOR ADMINISTRATORS
Teachscape software (FFTPS/FOCUS) is the tool used to deliver the content training for Framework for Teaching.
FFTPS/FOCUS contains modules on the domains and components with videos to help evaluators apply their knowledge of the rubric.
Co-ops and districts will develop implementation plans for training and support for administrators.

18. TRAINING FOR ADMINISTRATORS
How?
TRAINING FOR ADMINISTRATORS
Administrator support trainers may facilitate group sessions with evaluators using the videos to elicit feedback and high-level responses regarding the components and the application of the evaluation process.
Evaluators may complete a portion of the modules individually; however, group sessions may be offered to assist administrators in learning from colleagues.

19. How? TRAINING FOR TEACHERS
FFTES is the online tool used to deliver content of the Framework for Teaching.
Teachers may individually complete some module content and/or also utilize group sessions.
Districts/schools may choose the best method for delivery of the modules (When, how, and what modules).
A hybrid of individual and group learning is the most effective based on information from pilots

20. How? TRAINING FOR TEACHERS
Districts/schools that have been implementing the Danielson rubric as their evaluation instrument may not need to complete all training modules with teachers.
Decisions about training should be based on previous professional learning and/or a needs-assessment.
Districts/schools are cautioned about omitting training modules on components that have not been provided to teachers in previous professional learning opportunities.

21. How? Implementation Performance Ratings
Distinguished
Proficient
Basic
Unsatisfactory
Scoring – Each domain and a summative
Three tracks for evaluation cycle (see handout)
Track placement is determined by summative ratings.

22. Interim Teacher Appraisal Process Intensive Support Status
Track 2
Interim Teacher Appraisal Process
Track 1
*Probationary/
Novice
AR-TESS
Teacher Tracks
Year 3
Summative Evaluation on all components; formative observations can focus on targeted growth areas, PGP reviewed following first formative evaluation and revised if necessary. PGP revised at end of year.
2A: Summative Evaluation
Summative evaluation on all components once every three years; formative observations can focus on targeted growth areas. PGP is used throughout the year. PGP may be revised after formative evaluation.
Track 3
Intensive Support Status
Summative Evaluation on all components.
Intensive Professional Learning Plan
Multiple formal and informal observations
Multiple conferences between teacher/evaluator
May remain in Track 3 for 2 semesters. 2 additional semesters may be added if improvement is observed.
Year 2
Summative Evaluation on all components; formative observations can focus on targeted growth areas, PGP reviewed following first formative evaluation and revised if necessary. PGP revised at end of year.
2B: Interim Appraisal Process
2B2:Observations focus on targeted areas of PGP.
A modified evaluation is based on specific components of the rubric included in the PGP over the two year cycle.
2B1: Observations focus on targeted areas of PGP.
A modified evaluation is based on specific components of the rubric included in the PGP over the year.
Year 1
Summative Evaluation on all components; formative observations can focus on targeted growth areas, PGP developed following first formative evaluation. PGP revised at end of year.
*A first year teacher will be considered both a novice and probationary teacher.
*"Probationary teacher" means a teacher who has not completed three (3) successive years of employment in the school district in which the teacher is currently employed. A teacher employed in a school district in Arkansas for three (3) years will complete the probationary period.
*An employing school district may, by a majority vote of its directors, provide for one (1) additional year of probationary status.
*District Policy is required to place all new employees incoming to the district from another district /state on a one-year probationary status.
TESS does not conflict, nor is it meant to replace the Arkansas Teacher Fair Dismissal Act (ATFDA).
Revised 8/22/13 **

23. How? Implementation Professional Growth Plans (PGPs)
PGPs are the foundation of all teachers’
growth - especially for teachers in the interim appraisal process.
Relevant and meaningful PGPs are a
crucial factor in the TESS system.
PGPs are an ongoing part of professional learning for teachers.
PGPs are developed as a result of summative ratings.

24. How? Changes in Professional Learning Elimination of one size fits all
professional learning – individualized
learning based on teachers’ needs
Need systemic changes to current
prescriptive professional learning requirements
Artifacts collected to reflect performance
Domains 1 & 4 from off-stage evidence
Domains 2 & 3 from observations
Quality not quantity
Samples of possibilities on ADE website

25. Summative Evaluation Formal Observation
Only one is required for Tracks 1 (each year) & 2A.
It covers all Domains and Components (evidence may be gathered in Formative Observations).
It includes a Pre-Conference, Observation, & Post Conference and review of artifacts.
Observation is a minimum of 45 minutes for regular classes and 75% of block periods.

26. Summative Evaluations and Scoring
How?
Summative Evaluations and Scoring
A summative evaluation must be completed by a credentialed, licensed administrator.
Summative evaluations require a rating for each of the four domains and a summative rating – growth measures will be a part of the summative rating.
Currently pilot schools are utilizing two different options of scoring to provide feedback on the best option—current process may need revision.

27. Summative Ratings/Growth Models
How?
Summative Ratings/Growth Models
Currently a decision has not been made on a growth model.
For the pilot year, growth measures will be determined at the district level.
Teachers who do not meet the threshold for
growth cannot receive a “Distinguished” rating.
Teachers not meeting the threshold for
growth for two consecutive years will be
lowered one performance rating.

28. How?
Growth Models
The current models being reviewed will apply to grades 4-8 math, literacy, and Algebra I.
Growth measures for non-tested grades/areas are addressed in rules and regulations. Districts may choose from this list of options.
Policy decisions will be made concerning growth: co-teaching, teachers on extended leave, types of growth measures used for non-tested areas.

29. How?
Growth Models
ADE is currently working with a Teacher Evaluation Advisory Committee (TEAC) to consider alternate measures of student growth. The state will continue to collect information from emerging systems to see how others are proceeding.

30. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS
Pilot Year – Leadership teams plan the pilot implementation in their districts.
Districts can vary strategies for implementation within the district:
Number of teachers in the pilot
Method of placing teachers in tracks
Whether to have two evaluation systems running simultaneously OR discuss with PPC adopting Danielson rubric as the evaluation instrument for the school year
Talk about considerations of partial piloting

31. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS
Immediate need – Training everyone
Complete training modules and test over Domains 2 & 3; 1 & 4 released on January 31, 2013—not tested but very important
TESS requires systematic, continuous professional learning opportunities for everyone, not just a one-time event.
Consider book studies on 2007/2011 Framework for Teaching.

32. Fall 2013 and Ongoing Coaching for teacher conferencing PGP training
Deeper understanding of Framework for
Teaching – PLCs, Grade Level, Faculty
Meetings, etc.
Focused training based on principals’ and teachers’ needs
Connections between teacher evaluation, principal evaluation, professional
learning, teacher/leader prep programs, and
Common Core

33. ADE Website arkansased.org
Interactive Forms
PGP and Sample
Timelines
Coaching Questions
Rules
Teachscape Demo Site
Danielson Group Link
CHECK OFTEN FOR UPDATES!
If time allows, it would be good to show them how to access this.

34. Contacts