1. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Teacher Evaluation: Professional Practice Compass Update April 2012

2. 2 Objectives: Share findings about Compass rubric from pilot districts Share LDOE’s decisions regarding the teacher rubric in response to these findings Identify LDOE supports for implementation

3. Setting Our Priorities Compass and Common Core are LDOE’s top two priorities. Common Core: Shifting expectations for students Compass: Shifting educator support and evaluation practices to align with these new expectations

4. How Will We Achieve in the Classroom? In order to turn our beliefs into higher student achievement, we will use Common Core Standards and the Compass system as guides. Goal Setting: Teachers in all subjects will set quantifiable achievement goals for each student. Assessment and Content: Teachers in all subjects will select assessments and curricular materials that align with skills students are expected to demonstrate on new Common Core assessment items. Feedback: Principals and other instructional leaders will observe all teachers and will provide feedback based on a Common Core-aligned rubric. Collaboration: Teachers will work in teams to examine student work and to articulate specific changes in instructional practice that will align student performance to Common Core standards. Identifying leaders: Districts will use Compass effectiveness ratings to identify teacher leaders who can take on new responsibilities to support these Core Elements in their schools.

5. Overview 1.What is Compass? 2.Compass Pilot Findings 3.Adapting the Tools 4.Waiver Process & Next Steps 5

6. 6 Compass Elements

7. The Purpose of Compass Compass is intended to ensure: Teachers set meaningful goals for students; Teachers and leaders collaboratively evaluate student progress relative to goals; Teachers receive specific feedback on their performance to drive improvement; and Teachers, administrators, and district leaders have annual effectiveness data to inform decision-making

8. Compass Process & Components Set Goals -For Educators -For Students Evaluate Performance -Student Growth -Prof. Practice Use Data to Inform Human Capital Decisions Observation & Feedback

9. Compass Process & Components Two components of evaluation Student Growth Measures Value-Added Model OR Student Learning Targets Professional Practice Measures Observations

10. LDOE Support Provide a model observation tool, and create a waiver process for LEAs which desire to use alternative tools Provide districts with evaluation guidance and tools for teachers in non-tested grades and subjects Train educators statewide this spring and summer on Compass tools (teacher effectiveness rubric, goal setting process) Assist district and school staff throughout next school year in making the Core Elements part of everyday practice. They will facilitate collaboration among educators; will observe classroom practice and provide feedback; and will review progress with district administrators.

11. 11 Compass Pilot Findings

12. Piloting Compass: Purpose The Compass Pilot served to: 1.Test the tools and process developed by collaboration between LDOE and educators, and 2.Gather feedback from the field on how the tools could be improved prior to statewide implementation 12

13. Compass Pilot: What Did We Learn? 1.Simplify the process. Focus on positions who are responsible for the academic outcomes of a specific group of students (eg, classroom teachers, librarians, and guidance counselors), and End requirements for multiple conferences, streamline the goal setting process, eliminate restrictive timelines 2.Lessen the burden on principals. Expand the group of school-based staff and district teams who can assist teachers in setting targets and conducting observations 3.Revise the teacher rubric to be clearer, more concise, and more directly aligned to the Common Core.

14. Compass Pilot: What Did We Learn? 1.Simplify the process. 2.Lessen the burden on principals. 3.Revise the teacher rubric to be clearer, more concise, and more directly aligned to the Common Core. Redundancies exist within standards and descriptors. Evaluators have had difficulty distinguishing between the top two levels of effectiveness. Focus on core competencies directly aligned to support more rigorous instruction for Common Core

15. Compass Pilot: Recommendations 1.Adopt modified version of Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching, a nationally recognized evaluation and support model. Narrow number of performance standards to focus on core components. Move to a 4 point scale to make effectiveness levels more distinct. Leverage resources available nationally.

16. The Danielson Rubric A good choice for students and teachers: Supports teacher improvement and professional growth −Easy to distinguish standards and performance levels Will align to Common Core Tried and true −Implemented in >15 states −Approved in AR, NJ, NY, OH, PA, WA and major cities nationwide Accompanied by numerous support materials Emphasizes Planning and Instruction

17. D1: Planning and Preparation 1a Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy 1b Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 1c Setting Instructional Outcomes 1d Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources 1e Designing Coherent Instruction 1f Designing Student Assessments D3: Instruction 3a Communicating With Students 3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c Engaging Students in Learning 3d Using Assessment in Instruction 3e Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness D2: Classroom Environment 2a Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport 2b Establishing a Culture for Learning 2c Managing Classroom Procedures 2d Managing Student Behavior 2e Organizing Physical Space D4: Professional Responsibilities 4a Reflecting on Teaching 4b Maintaining Accurate Records 4c Communicating with Families 4d Participating in a Professional Community 4e Growing and Developing Professionally 4f Showing Professionalism The Danielson Rubric

18. 1c Setting Instructional Outcomes 2c Managing Classroom Procedures 3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c Engaging Students in Learning 3d Using Assessment in Instruction These five core components help teachers and leaders focus on: High-impact activities, narrowed and focused from ACEE recommendations Concrete, observable actions to help teachers understand what and how to change Rigor, consistent with Common Core: −1c Setting Instructional Outcomes −3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques −3c Engaging Students in Learning

19. Taking a Closer Look at the Components Setting Instructional Outcomes (1c): Establishing clear, rigorous objectives that describe what students will learn. Managing Classroom Procedures (2c): Establishing a smoothly functioning classroom through the management of instruction and transitions to allow for maximum learning for all students. Using Questioning and Discussion (3b): Strategically using a varied set of questions to engage all students in discussion around rigorous content. Engaging Students in Learning (3c): Asking all students to do work that is rigorous an intellectually challenging. Using Assessment in Instruction (3d): Using clear assessment criteria to drive instructional choices throughout the lesson and at the end.

20. The Danielson Rubric IneffectiveEffective: EmergingEffective: ProficientHighly Effective 1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Outcomes represent low expectations for students and lack of rigor, nor do they all reflect important learning in the discipline. Outcomes are stated as activities, rather than as student learning. Outcomes reflect only one type of learning and only one discipline or strand, and are suitable for only some students. Outcomes represent moderately high expectations and rigor. Some reflect important learning in the discipline, and consist of a combination of outcomes and activities. Outcomes reflect several types of learning, but teacher has made no attempt at coordination or integration. Most of the outcomes are suitable for most of the students in the class based on global assessments of student learning. Most outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. All the instructional outcomes are clear, written in the form of student learning, and suggest viable methods of assessment. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and opportunities for coordination. Outcomes take into account the varying needs of groups of students. All outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. The outcomes are clear, written in the form of student learning, and permit viable methods of assessment. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and, where appropriate, represent opportunities for both coordination and integration. Outcomes take into account the varying needs of individual students. Critical Attributes Outcomes lack rigor. Outcomes do not represent important learning in the discipline. Outcomes are not clear or are stated as activities. Outcomes are not suitable for many students in the class. Outcomes represent a mixture of low expectations and rigor. Some outcomes reflect important learning in the discipline. Outcomes are suitable for most of the class. Outcomes represent high expectations and rigor. Outcomes are related to “big ideas” of the discipline. Outcomes are written in terms of what students will learn rather than do. Outcomes represent a range of outcomes: factual, conceptual understanding, reasoning, social, management, communication. Outcomes are suitable to groups of students in the class, differentiated where necessary. In addition to the characteristics of “proficient,” Teacher plans reference curricular frameworks or blueprints to ensure accurate sequencing. Teacher connects outcomes to previous and future learning Outcomes are differentiated to encourage individual students to take educational risks.

21. Calculating a Teachers Overall Score Averaging the student growth score and the professional practice score provides the final evaluation score. (Each component generates a score between 1.0-4.0.) Score + Score 2 = Final Evaluation Score Professional Practice Student Growth

22. 22 The Compass rubric consists of five components; teachers are assigned a score of 1, 2, 3, or 4 on each of the five components. To calculate a teacher’s overall score on the observation rubric, take the average of his/her scores on each component of the observation rubric (i.e., sum his/her scores on each component and then divide by five to reflect the five components). Calculating Rubric Score Sum of Component Scores Average 51.00 61.20 71.40 81.60 91.80 102.00 112.20 122.40 132.60 142.80 153.00 163.20 173.40 183.60 193.80 204.00 Teachers receiving an average score of less than 1.5 on the observation rubric will receive an overall Compass rating of ‘Ineffective’ Teacher receives a 1 on each of the five components of the observation rubric Teacher receives a 4 on each of the five components of the observation rubric Highly Effective Effective: Proficient Effective: Emerging

23. The Overall Compass Score Teachers will then receive a rating based on their overall COMPASS score. Teacher RatingRule Ineffective Overall COMPASS score of 1.00-1.49 OR Received a score less than 1.50 on either the observation rubric or student growth measure Effective Emerging: Overall COMPASS score of 1.50 to 2.49 AND Did not receive a score less than 1.50 on either the observation rubric or student growth measure Effective Proficient: Overall COMPASS score of 2.50 to 3.49 AND Did not receive a score less than 1.50 on either the observation rubric or student growth measure Highly Effective: Overall COMPASS score of 3.50 to 4.00