Presentation on theme: "Southeastern Wisconsin Teacher Evaluation Consortium Summer Professional Development Series August 14th, 2012 Julie Brilli, Director Teacher Education,"— Presentation transcript:
Southeastern Wisconsin Teacher Evaluation Consortium Summer Professional Development Series August 14th, 2012 Julie Brilli, Director Teacher Education, Professional Development, and Licensing Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
Overview Brief Overview of State Education Initiatives Wisconsin Framework for Educator Effectiveness A System’s View The Evaluation Process and Elements What About the Data? Are we Ready? Questions
Every Child a Graduate College and Career Ready Standards & Instruction –W–What and how should kids learn? Assessments and Data Systems –H–How do we know if they learned it? School and Educator Effectiveness –H–How do we ensure that students have highly effective teachers and schools? School Finance Reform –H–How should we pay for schools?
New accountability system begins & AYP ends (ESEA waiver) New proficiency benchmarks for WKCE reading & mathematics established Educator Effectiveness system design continues; Act 166 passed New accountability system begins & AYP ends (ESEA waiver) New proficiency benchmarks for WKCE reading & mathematics established Educator Effectiveness system design continues; Act 166 passed 2011-122012-132013-142014-152015-162016-17 New school report cards first issued (2011-12 accountability reports) New kindergarten literacy screener administered statewide DPI provides curricular resources for Common Core State Standards implementation First districts using State Student Information System (SSIS) Developmental pilot of Educator Effectiveness system SMARTER Balanced assessment field testing Educator Effectiveness statewide system pilot SMARTER Balanced assessment field testing Educator Effectiveness statewide system pilot Common Core State Standards fully incorporated into school/district curricula Smarter Balanced replaces WKCE & WAA- SwD in mathematics and English/Language Arts, including reading and writing Educator Effectiveness system implemented statewide ASSETS for ELL assessment in use All districts on SSIS ASSETS for ELL assessment in use All districts on SSIS Higher graduation requirements targeted –needs legislation Timeline for Statewide Initiatives
Replace broken No Child Left Behind requirements with a new state accountability and support system; Replicate best practices from high- performing schools and provide support to improve the lowest-performing schools; Advance a fair and robust educator evaluation system. How do we ensure kids have highly effective teachers and schools? School and Educator Effectiveness
Context of the Educator Effectiveness Work State Superintendent’s Educator Effectiveness Design Team – Diverse Membership, National and State Support and Expertise (formed December 2010) State legislation (Act 166) –Endorses broad parameters of EE Framework –Districts must implement evaluation systems consistent with legislation by 2014-2015 Federal push: (July 2012) ESEA Waiver approval
Educator Effectiveness Timeline Phases 1 & 2 December 2010- June 2012 Framework released Model development Developmental Districts Phase 3 July 2012- June 2013 Voluntary Pilots Development work Evaluator and Educator training System training Phase 4 July 2013- June 2014 Pilot Evaluation Model revisions Training continued Pilot expansion to prepare for statewide implementation Phase 5 July 2014-June 2015 Educator Effectiveness system fully implemented statewide Continuous Improvement Stage 1 Developing Stage 2 Piloting Stage 3 Implementing
Guiding Principles of the System An educator evaluation system must deliver information that: –Guides effective educational practice that is aligned with student learning and development –Documents evidence of effective educator practice –Documents evidence of student learning –Informs appropriate professional development –Informs educator preparation programs –Supports a full range of human resource decisions –Is credible, valid, reliable, comparable, and uniform across districts
Definition of Effective Educators Effective Teacher Effective Teacher: An effective teacher consistently uses educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways. Effective Principal Effective Principal: An effective principal shapes school strategy and educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways.
Teaching is complex… The Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System acknowledges this: Intentional, thoughtful in its design. Credible, valid, reliable, comparable, and uniform across districts.
A System of Seamless Transitions Pre-serviceLicensing License Renewal & the PDP Process Evaluation
Synergistic Partnership Between PK-12 and Educator Preparation Programs
Development of and Ongoing Support for Educators
System Weights Educator Practice Student Growth
Standards for Educator Practice Teacher Practice InTASC Teaching Standards (2011) Framework for Teacher Evaluation Charlotte Danielson’s Domains & Components Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Domain 3: Instruction Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Principal Practice 2008 Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards Framework for Principal Evaluation Subordinate functions of the ISLLC standards
Educator Effectiveness Measures Practice measures District Choice State Assessment (value-added model) District Assessment Student Learning Objectives School-wide Reading (Elementary-Middle) Graduation (High School)
Evaluation Cycles Orientation Self- Reflection and Educator Effectiveness Plan Evaluation Planning Session Observation s and Evidence Collection Pre- & Post- Observation Discussions Rating of Practice Final Evaluation Conference Use of Evaluation Results Orientation Self-Reflection and Educator Effectiveness Plan Evaluation Planning Session Observations and Evidence Collection Mid-Year Review Rating of Practice Final Evaluation Conference Use of Evaluation Results PRINCIPAL TEACHER
Teacher Evaluation Cycle FrequencyDuration 1 announced observation 45 minutes or (2) 20-minute observations 1 unannounced observation 45 minutes or (2) 20-minute observations 3-5 informal and unannounced observations (walkthroughs)At least 5 minutes
Principal Evaluation Cycle A minimum of two observations Observations may include principal’s interactions or principal’s activities (leading a team meeting) relevant to the component being assessed Two to three informal school visits or walkthroughs..
Possible Evidence Sources Classroom observation (live and/or videotaped) Guided teacher reflections or reflection form Lesson and unit plans Samples of class assignments, student work with feedback Logs of family contacts Professional development records and reflections Student surveys Evaluation conversations Teacher Evidence Sources
Possible Evidence Sources Documents –School Improvement Plan –Written teacher evaluations –Leadership team agenda Observations –Leading faculty meeting –Community, school board presentations Surveys –School working conditions/climate Discussions with principal –Evaluator and principal interactions about evidence Principal Evidence Sources
What are SLOs? SLOs are collaboratively established goals for growth in student achievement at the classroom level that are: –Specific and measurable –Aligned to standards and to school improvement plans/district strategic plans (if applicable) –Based on learning needs as determined by data –Established for individual teachers, teams, or schools, and for all students or selected subgroups –Based on rigorous, yet attainable growth goals Teacher SLOs
SLO Process Create SLO Submit SLO for Approval Collect Evidence Review & Score Not Approved Approved
Possible Evidence Sources Many potential sources of SLO evidence: –End of course exams (with appropriate pre-test/baseline measure of student knowledge) –High-quality classroom assessments –Performances/Portfolios of student work (when scored with a rigorous rubric) SLO evidence should generally be kept separate from data used to determine areas of student need, in order to avoid “double-counting” of student outcomes –WKCE is not an appropriate SLO evidence source (measures November-November growth) –Use of benchmark data (MAP, etc.) discouraged, but could be appropriate in limited circumstances SLO Evidence
Multiple Performance Categories Developing: does not meet expectations and requires additional support and directed action Effective: areas of strength and improvement addressed through professional development Exemplary: expand expertise through professional development and use expertise in leadership The initial recommendation of the Design Team included three performance categories. The Coordinating Committee met on July 26, 2012, and determined that five rating categories would be part of the Developmental Pilot as opposed to three.
Educator Effectiveness System Matrix 12345 1** 2* 3 4* 5** Student Outcomes Models of Practice Asterisks indicate a mismatch between educator’s practice performance and student outcomes and requires a focused review to determine why the mismatch is occurring and what, if anything, needs to be corrected.
Gathering and collecting observation data, student-teacher linkage data, mobility, etc. Integrating and managing data longitudinally from a variety of sources Accessing and reporting data Validating for data quality Supporting stakeholders Data Systems Issues
Opportunities for collaboration? Common Assessment development? Understanding of the EE system? Developing leadership skills for supporting this work? Formative Assessment? District Readiness?
Staying Informed and Involved Visit the DPI Website: http://www.dpi.wi.gov/tepdl/edueff.html The Framework, presentations, FAQs, and draft process manuals can be found posted on the website Thank You!