1. www.engageNY.org Activity Responses Day 1- February 8, 2012 Group: Stonehenge B

2. www.engageNY.org Session 3 Activity 1: Debrief and Gallery Walk 2 Identify the key messages that principals and principal evaluators need to address to ensure the effective implementation of an evidence-based principal evaluation process. Chart your top 3 messages.

3. www.engageNY.org 3 Session 3 Activity 1: Sample Response 1 Where do we start? 1.Affirmation Establish purpose, expectations Trust & rapport 2.Culture Set expectations for collegial conversations focused on improving instruction to improve student achievement 3.Coherence Student achievement data Quality instruction, APPR, and CCLS Culture of leading and learning

4. www.engageNY.org 4 Session 3 Activity 1: Sample Response 2 Key Messages Key to the house (school) Student Achievement Test Scores Behavior Attendance Graduation rates SAT scores AP classes Instruction Test scores % of students passing courses (levels) Rigor (correlation/comparisons with test results) Research-based Best Practices Curriculum Formative assessments Culture Collaboration Staff attendance Community involvement

5. www.engageNY.org 5 Session 3 Activity 1: Sample Response 3 Clear line of: 1.Responsibility for collecting evidence by both the evaluator & the principal…primary responsibility on principal. 2.Clear criteria of what constitutes quality evidence for evaluation (transparency). 3.Expectation that the rubric represents a range of practice and the principal’s responsibility to know how that applies to his/her work.

6. www.engageNY.org 6 Session 3 Activity 1: Sample Response 4 Top 3 Messages Window = Transparency Bricks & Cement = Strong Foundation Rubric Growth Measure Local Measure Tools = Valid & Reliable Yard stick – need to measure correctly Blue print Protractor –what angle do you need to take Bulldozer

7. www.engageNY.org 7 Session 3 Activity 1: Sample Response 5 Top 3 Messages Develop a shared vision of what we value in leadership Make a plan (systemic & systematic) “Let go….the status quo”-stop defending the past

8. www.engageNY.org Session 3 Activity 2: Performance Management and ISLLC Standards 8 A Groups: From the perspective of a school principal, review the ISLLC standard(s) allocated to your group. Identify: ways in which you would fulfill each function the nature and type of evidence you would be able to provide as evidence that you had fulfilled each function B Groups: From the perspective of a principal evaluator, review the ISLLC standard(s) allocated to your group. Identify: the nature and type of evidence you would anticipate that a principal should be able to provide to demonstrate he or she had fulfilled each function what type and range of activities you would wish to undertake as part of the principal evaluation process to verify the evidence provided by the principal. A group join with a B group-compare and contrast your answers

9. www.engageNY.org 9 Session 3 Activity 2: Sample Response 1 Components of an Effective PM Process Tracking Goals Goals Being Met Multiple Measures Multiple Reviewers Ongoing/Consistent Feedback Plan for Gathering Data End Result is Improvement

10. www.engageNY.org 10 Session 3 Activity 2: Sample Response 2 Growth Attributes System change Nurturing new system Structuring & prioritizing Making it meaningful (not just a checklist) Balancing support & accountability Models that are shown to work Resource allocation

11. www.engageNY.org 11 Session 3 Activity 2: Sample Response 3 Actionable Clear criteria for success Transparency for outcomes Research based Meaningful, useful data Efficient/manageable Job embedded

12. www.engageNY.org Session 3 Activity 3: Implementing Effective Performance Management in Schools 12 Pairs/trios: Reflect on Impact of Effective Performance Management. Identify the key decisions and actions which districts need to make/take in order to ensure to proactively support the implementation of effective performance management systems in schools. Be prepared to share these with the rest of your table and the whole group.

13. www.engageNY.org 13 Session 3 Activity 3: Sample Response 1 Tools/Developed Resources Turnkey training on ISLLC standards Deconstruction proved difficult Job embedded & analysis of ISLLC Common vocabulary Varied groups but teams most effective Spent more time on an agreed upon rubric Tough to “put on brakes” to make cultured shift Simultaneous committee for APPR and this

14. www.engageNY.org 14 Session 3 Activity 3: Sample Response 1 Cont’d. Focus on values 1 st then determine if rubric meets those values Sheet on culture (Fullan, Wheatley, et. al) re: relationships Supts had to rate themselves (ONC BOCES) Beginning of phases- focus lenses, e.g. evidence base of rubric, PD, clarity

15. www.engageNY.org 15 Session 3 Activity 3: Sample Response 2 TOOLS Std #1: Survey, committees Std #2: Peer review/observation, instruction/walk-throughs, meetings, data-attendance, discipline Std #3: Safety plans, APPR, emails, reminders, meeting agendas, codes of conduct Std #4: Community relationships Std #5: Data wells, notes from team meetings, surveys, interviews, conversations Std #6: Meeting, functions, surveys

16. www.engageNY.org 16 Session 3 Activity 3: Sample Response 2 Cont’d. TOOLS 1.“What Not To Do”: Compare ISLLC standards and rubrics- disjointed Caused major frustration 2.Lack of alignment between teacher and principal rubrics Similar authorship is more helpful because of common language

17. www.engageNY.org Session 4 Activity 2: Case Study Part A: Individually (15 minutes) Read the case study distributed about Cascades Academy High School. Knowing what you do about performance management and using one of the Principal Evaluation Rubrics, look at the case study to determine the effectiveness of the principal, Dr. Blank. Give evidence to support Dr. Blank’s rating using HEDI against one of the six New York State approved Principal Evaluation Rubrics. Part B: Trios (15 minutes) Compare your findings and reach a collective view on the HEDI rating Part C: Whole Group discussion (15 minutes)

18. www.engageNY.org 18 Session 4 Activity 2: Sample Response 1 Evidence St #1 Ownership, Participation from all stakeholders Survey Committee Participatory Define scope of vision from broad to narrow Responsibility vs authority St #2 Culture etc. Peer review All stakeholders artic. Instructional walks Parallel across system, buildings and individuals Teacher leader meetings Community Participation

19. www.engageNY.org 19 Session 4 Activity 2: Sample Response 1 Cont’d St #2 Continued: Attendance, data, utilizing existing systems St #3 3 B’s Safety plans APPRs Emails, reminders, etc. Documentation of meetings Procedures Resource Management Transferable info/evidence for multiple goals St #4 Encouragement, legitimate authority for shared leadership Community involved/exceptional opportunities

20. www.engageNY.org 20 Session 4 Activity 2: Sample Response 1 Cont’d St #4 Continued: Community Center/genuine perception of welcomness St #5 Data walls, notes from data meetings Knowledge of where “west is” –Code of conduct uniform –Behavioral referrals Fidelity of implementation Lack of grievance RtI & new initiatives School climate surveys Need to treat ISLLC standards as coherent/dynamic & interdependent context of initiative St #6 Attendance at community functions Identify goal & lay standards next & contextualize it!

21. www.engageNY.org 21 Session 4 Activity 2: Sample Response 2 How to turn key Use 3 messages Learn ISLLC Reinforce connections between initiatives *Need more evidence Did not see ownership *”All are developing.” Developing person lacks evidence of results Effective person has some evidence of results Highly effective person has lots of evidence of results *Destination for the process

22. www.engageNY.org 22 Session 4 Activity 2: Sample Response 2 Cont’d *Change mindset: Being a “developing” principal is ok Having the opportunity to grow and make mistakes and learning from them and get better Taking the rubric as a whole is so important→WHOLE PICTURE

23. www.engageNY.org 23 Session 4 Activity 2: Sample Response 2- Cont’d Did the same thing as what they trained teachers to do Review objective evidence, etc. *Deeper dive w/committees, assessments to raise data Focused on Reeves rubric *Wanted more information and evidence of what committees are doing to align better with rubric Too scattered in activities→no results