Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Michigan Education Association Spring 2011.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Presented by Hardy Murphy, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools Evanston/Skokie School District 65 Professional Appraisal System.
Advertisements

Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation Pilot September 1, 2011 – September 30, 2012 NJ State Board of Education, July 13, 2011.
Training for Teachers and Specialists
1 Career Pathways for All Students PreK-14 2 Compiled by Sue Updegraff Keystone AEA Information from –Iowa Career Pathways –Iowa School-to-Work –Iowa.
Performance Appraisal Systems
Kara Hanges, Martha Slamer, Maribeth Pennekamp, Debbie Dye, Rhonda Parker, and Kim Davidson.
Discuss the charge of the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness (MCEE) Summarize the MCEE Interim Report Provide an Overview of the Pilot.
Educator Effectiveness System November 5, Agenda – Town Hall Meeting Community Builder/Video (OPTIONAL) Today, we will be presenting an overview.
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education Updated: July 2011.
Wethersfield Teacher Evaluation and Support Plan
DPAS II Jessica Baker & Cheryl Cresci MED 7701 Dr. Joseph Massare.
By the end of this session we will have an understanding of the following:  A model for teacher evaluation based on current research  The FEAPs as a.
SLG Goals, Summative Evaluations, and Assessment Guidance Training LCSD#7 10/10/14.
Update on Teacher and Principal Evaluation Implementation of ARS
Simpson County Schools: New Teacher Support Program A Proposal.
Teacher Practice in  In 2012, the New Jersey Legislature unanimously passed the TEACHNJ Act, which mandates implementation of a new teacher.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 9, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
Briefing: NYU Education Policy Breakfast on Teacher Quality November 4, 2011 Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor NYC Department of Education.
Teacher Evaluation Model
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
Getting Organized for the Transition to the Common Core What You Need to Know.
Teacher Evaluation & Developing Goals Glenn Maleyko, Executive Director, Ph.D Haigh Elementary September 8, 2014.
Student Growth Measures in Teacher Evaluation
OVERVIEW OF CHANGES TO EDUCATORS’ EVALUATION IN THE COMMONWEALTH Compiled by the MOU Evaluation Subcommittee September, 2011 The DESE oversees the educators’
Ramapo Teachers’ Association APPR Contractual Changes.
TSDL Teacher Student Data Linkage Data Collection Review: 3 General Collections 1 Special Ed Collection 2 Early Childhood Collections 2 CTE Vocational.
Module 1: PERA Illinois Administrative Code Part 50
EDUCATOR CERTIFICATION UPDATE Michigan Association of School Personnel Administrators Conference December 3, 2010 Flora L. Jenkins, Director Office of.
March, What does the new law require?  20% State student growth data (increases to 25% upon implementation of value0added growth model)  20%
March 28, What does the new law require?  20% State student growth data (increases to 25% upon implementation of value0added growth model)  20%
Making Demonstrable Improvement: Request for Feedback (Updated) July 2015 Presented by: Ira Schwartz Assistant Commissioner of Accountability.
Collective Bargaining Retreat for Management Discussion of the Impact of Measuring Teacher and Leader Effectiveness on Collective Bargaining August 17,
Duke Ellington “A problem is a chance for you to do your best.”
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
Student Learning Objectives: Approval Criteria and Data Tracking September 17, 2013 This presentation contains copyrighted material used under the educational.
South Western School District Differentiated Supervision Plan DRAFT 2010.
Maine Teacher Effectiveness Status.  Maine approved a teacher evaluation law during in the 2012 Legislative sessions.  The rules were determined in.
Factoring Growth Models Into Administrator and Teacher Performance Evaluations -- a presentation for -- Henderson, Mercer, and Warren Counties Regional.
1 Educator Evaluation Overview Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability.
Teacher and Principal Evaluations and Discipline Under Chapter 103.
Educator Effectiveness Evaluation MERA Fall 2013 Conference November 25-26, 2013 Frankenmuth, Michigan.
Section 6: Assessment – Participation and Provisions Podcast Script Laura LaMore, Consultant, OSE-EIS August 4,
TEACHER EVALUATION After S.B. 290 The Hungerford Law Firm June, 2012.
Writing Policy for SBDM Councils. Goals of this Session provide an overview of Senate Bill 1 requirements related to writing provide guidance in reviewing.
Learning More About Oregon’s ESEA Waiver Plan January 23, 2013.
Update on the MA Task Force on Evaluation of Teachers and Administrators Presented to the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education Associate Commissioner.
Community School Sponsor Evaluation Advisory Panel Final Recommendations.
Teacher Evaluation MEASURING EDUCATOR IMPACT / / / CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT.
DATA POINTS For Boards to Measure Success!. Our Mission Statement The School District of Fort Atkinson is committed to delivering the quality opportunities.
CCSSO Task Force Recommendations on Educator Preparation Idaho State Department of Education December 14, 2013 Webinar.
Teacher Incentive Fund U.S. Department of Education.
2013.  Familiarize staff with parent involvement requirements  Learn process to involve parents in the development of activities and policies  Learn.
Wisconsin Administrative Code PI 34 1 Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction - Elizabeth Burmaster, State Superintendent Support from a Professional.
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education September 2010.
Priority School District Capacity Review Process and Results Oklahoma State Department of Education March 29, 2012.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
Education.state.mn.us Principal Evaluation Components in Legislation Work Plan for Meeting Rose Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education.
 Mark D. Reckase.  Student achievement is a result of the interaction of the student and the educational environment including each teacher.  Teachers.
Michele Winship, Ph.D.  Compliance with HB 153/SB 316 requirements?  Seek out and get rid of “bad” teachers? OR  Improve teaching.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Evaluation of Tenure-Accruing Faculty
Wethersfield Teacher Evaluation and Support Plan
Michigan’s Educator Evaluations
Wednesday, December 1st Today’s Facilitators: Kim Glow & Cindy Dollman
Schoolwide Programs.
Title I Annual Meeting Pinewood Elementary, August 30, 2018.
Willow Elementary School
Presentation transcript:

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Michigan Education Association Spring 2011

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance The Michigan Revised School Code closely links teacher evaluation ( )and pay for performance ( ) together. Pay for performance depends, in part, on a teacher’s evaluation which must be tied to student growth. The link to student growth has created the greatest challenge to local implementation.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How has teacher evaluation changed: – Teachers and school administrators must be evaluated annually (*note that the language states evaluated not observed) – The evaluation process must have multiple rating categories – The evaluation must provide timely and constructive feedback, and multiple opportunities for improvement

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How has teacher evaluation changed: – Student growth must be considered as a “significant factor” (*note that MDE now takes the position that this must be defined locally through the collective bargaining process) in the evaluation and determined using national, state, and local assessments, or other objective criteria. The language of the law provides a good deal of flexibility to implementation.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How is the new teacher evaluation process to be used by the districts? – The law states that evaluations should be used to help make decisions about--- The retention and promotion of teachers In recommending tenure and advanced certification Helping teachers improve in their teaching practices, particularly when there are deficiencies by proving ample opportunity to improve To provide for pay for performance

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How does the MEA suggest a local association implement the student growth requirement? – While it is the decision of the local association and district on how to define student growth, the MEA suggests that the greatest weight should be placed on local assessments, such as end-of- course tests, pre and post testing, teacher developed tests, student artifacts (projects, portfolios, etc.). State assessments, such as the MEAP or ACT/MME, are better suited to a whole school application rather than individual teachers.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How much weight should student growth be given in the overall evaluation process? – The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) has taken the position that the definition of student growth is a local decision reached through the collective bargaining process. The MDE recognizes that it has no authority in law to determine what “significant factor” means and, therefore, will not offer any further guidance.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Is there a reasonable approach to defining student growth? – The MEA suggests the following distribution of weight be given to the components of student growth: State Assessments no more than 15 % Locally selected standardized tests no more than 35% Locally developed assessments about 50% – This may include student achievement case studies

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance What percentage of the overall teacher evaluation should be attributed to student growth? – The MEA suggests that 20-25% of the overall weight of a teacher’s evaluation should be determined from student growth. The remaining 75-80% of weight should be determined from the locally agreed upon evaluation method which may include an observation of the teacher’s performance.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How will the MDE link student achievement to a teacher? – Beginning this fall the MDE will return to districts reports which link student achievement on state assessments to any teacher the student had throughout the year. This means at the high school level all 6 or 7 of a student’s teachers will receive a report on how the student performed on the ACT/MME.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How will the MDE reports impact middle school and elementary teachers? – Middle school and elementary teachers will be linked to the performance of the previous year’s students on the current MEAP test. For instance a third grade teacher will receive a report on how the previous year’s third graders assigned to that classroom performed on this year’s test.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How will the linkage between the teacher and the student be made? – At the end of this academic year each district will report to the MDE the link between the teacher and the student by providing the student’s schedule. It is very important that teachers have an opportunity to verify the list before it is sent to MDE to avoid discrepancies in the returned report. Errors can and will be made.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How will the performance status of each student be reported by MDE? – The MDE will not be reporting a numerical value for each student’s performance on the state assessment, rather one of the following status indicators will be reported for each test taken: Significant increase Increase Maintaining Decline Significant decline

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Does the MDE suggest how the reported data may be used at the district level? – The MDE has taken the position that it is only obligated to report the information back to the district. How the information is used, if at all, at the district level is a local decision. The manner in which the data is reported back will make it difficult to determine use at the individual teacher level but may be useful in the aggregation at the whole school level.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance What considerations should be taken when determining the use of state reports at the school level? – As with any set of data on student achievement some consideration must be given to students who should be excluded from the final weight placed on student growth. For instance, students who were not enrolled in the school for a full year, students with poor attendance records, students who have had extensive periods of suspension, or who have been expelled, etc. These exclusionary considerations should be the subject of bargaining.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Are the reports sent to the district able to be accessed by the public? – There is no absolute answer to whether the reports will be available through a FOIA request. However, the MDE plans to take steps to lessen the availability of the reports to the public by including the names of the students linked to each teacher in the report and protect the information under FERPA. Each report will also be considered a draft report not assured of complete accuracy which may prevent a successful FOIA request.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Are there other reporting requirements regarding teacher evaluation? – Beginning in Spring 2012 each district must report to the MDE the evaluation status of all teachers employed by the district. Each teacher must be rated as highly effective, effective, or ineffective as required by federal legislation (the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Act of 2009). Districts which use other multiple rating categories must align the district terms to the state’s terms.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Will this information be released to the public? – The MDE must send a report to the federal government identifying the percent of teachers in each category. The MDE report will be an aggregation of the data sent in by districts and will have no names attached. However, the information sent to the MDE from the districts will name teachers and could be subject to a FOIA request at the local level.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Has the MEA developed a model for teacher evaluation? – The MEA, AFT-Michigan, MASSP, and MEMSPA collaborated together to develop a guide to implementing the new teacher evaluation process. The document is known as the “Framework for Educator Evaluation” (FEE) which has been endorsed by the Michigan Department of Education. It is a collaborative approach to evaluation between the building administrator and the teacher.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance How does collaboration occur in the FEE model? – The model relies on identified school improvement goals at the district level and building level as well as some organization of staff into professional learning communities, grade level committees, or departmental committees. Every teacher is expected to be a member of a committee and develop improvement goals for the team and from there develop individual goals. The building administrator and teacher agree on an individual professional growth plan where the goals are implemented.

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Remember to strive to develop an evaluation plan that is – Rational and Defensible

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance What does the law require relative to teacher compensation? – Section 1250 (1)(MRSC) “…The assessment of job performance shall incorporate a rigorous, transparent, and fair evaluation system that evaluates a teacher’s or school administrator’s performance at least in part based upon data on student growth as measured by assessments and other objective criteria.” Hence the link between evaluation and pay for performance.