Teacher Evaluation System LSKD Site Administrator Training August 6, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Understanding Student Learning Objectives (S.L.O.s)
Advertisements

Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR)
Copyright © 2003 Pearson Education, Inc. Slide 1 Computer Systems Organization & Architecture Chapters 8-12 John D. Carpinelli.
Author: Julia Richards and R. Scott Hawley
Properties Use, share, or modify this drill on mathematic properties. There is too much material for a single class, so you’ll have to select for your.
UNITED NATIONS Shipment Details Report – January 2006.
Quality Education Investment Act of 2006 (QEIA) 1 Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) of 2006 County Superintendents Oversight and Technical Assistance.
1 RA I Sub-Regional Training Seminar on CLIMAT&CLIMAT TEMP Reporting Casablanca, Morocco, 20 – 22 December 2005 Status of observing programmes in RA I.
California Preschool Learning Foundations
Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation Pilot September 1, 2011 – September 30, 2012 NJ State Board of Education, July 13, 2011.
1 DPAS II Process and Procedures for Teachers Developed by: Delaware Department of Education.
Training for Teachers and Specialists
Targeted Assistance & Schoolwide Programs NCLB Technical Assistance Audio April 18, :30 PM April 19, :30 AM Alaska Department of Education.
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
Teacher Keys Effectiveness System
REVIEW: Arthropod ID. 1. Name the subphylum. 2. Name the subphylum. 3. Name the order.
1 SESSION 5- RECORDING AND REPORTING IN GRADES R-12 Computer Applications Technology Information Technology.
The SCPS Professional Growth System
In August, the historic CORE district waiver was approved allowing these districts to pursue a new robust and holistic accountability model for schools.
The Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation Training Module 4: S.M.A.R.T. Goals and Educator Plan Development August 2012 I. Welcome (3 minutes)
Pennsylvania Value-Added Assessment System (PVAAS) High Growth, High Achieving Schools: Is It Possible? Fall, 2011 PVAAS Webinar.
Overview of the Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System KY Council of Administrators of Special Education Summer Conference July 9th, 2013.
VOORBLAD.
Evaluation Orientation Meeting Teacher Evaluation System
Promoting Regulatory Excellence Self Assessment & Physiotherapy: the Ontario Model Jan Robinson, Registrar & CEO, College of Physiotherapists of Ontario.
Santa Rosa County District Schools Evaluation Systems.
Basel-ICU-Journal Challenge18/20/ Basel-ICU-Journal Challenge8/20/2014.
SEED – CT’s System for Educator and Evaluation and Development April 2013 Wethersfield Public Schools CONNECTICUT ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION Overview of.
Wethersfield Teacher Evaluation and Support Plan
1..
FAFSA on the Web Preview Presentation December 2013.
Model and Relationships 6 M 1 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
The Design and Implementation of Educator Evaluation Systems, Variability of Systems and the Role of a Theory of Action Rhode Island Lisa Foehr Rhode Island.
Analyzing Genes and Genomes
Yukon-Koyukuk School District Kerry Boyd, Superintendent August 12 th, 2013.
©Brooks/Cole, 2001 Chapter 12 Derived Types-- Enumerated, Structure and Union.
1 Phase III: Planning Action Developing Improvement Plans.
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.
PSSA Preparation.
SLG Goals, Summative Evaluations, and Assessment Guidance Training LCSD#7 10/10/14.
Essential Cell Biology
Weekly Attendance by Class w/e 6 th September 2013.
Osceola School District’s Classroom Instructor Evaluation The Ins and Outs of Our Classroom Instructor Evaluation
Gwinnett Teacher Effectiveness System Training
Professional Development and Appraisal System Teacher Orientation.
Annual UMES Summer Institute “Making the Adjustment” Student Learning Objectives :
SMART GOALS APS TEACHER EVALUATION. AGENDA Purpose Balancing Realism and Rigor Progress Based Goals Three Types of Goals Avoiding Averages Goal.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation August 20, 2014 Elizabeth M. Osga, Ph.D.
Teacher Evaluation New Teacher Orientation August 15, 2013.
Teacher Evaluation A Metric for Performance
Support Professionals Evaluation Model Webinar Spring 2013.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
1 Literacy PERKS Standard 1: Aligned Curriculum. 2 PERKS Essential Elements Academic Performance 1. Aligned Curriculum 2. Multiple Assessments 3. Instruction.
The Framework for Teaching Charlotte Danielson 4c: Communicating with Families 1 6/12/201 3.
Educator Evaluation: A Protocol for Developing S.M.A.R.T. Goal Statements.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 9, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
Instructional Hours Required Instructional Time / OAR
Student Learning Data The Three R’s: Requirements, Recommendations & Resources 1.
Data, Now What? Skills for Analyzing and Interpreting Data
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER RENEWAL Overview of Proposed Renewal March 6, 2015 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Alaska Educator Evaluation Overview Yukon Koyukuk School District.
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1.
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1 for Districts & Schools for Educators.
PERSONNEL EVALUATION SYSTEMS How We Help Our Staff Become More Effective Margie Simineo – June, 2010.
New Work January 28, 2015 Yukon Koyukuk School District.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Presentation transcript:

Teacher Evaluation System LSKD Site Administrator Training August 6, 2014

LKSD Committee 4 Teachers 4 Principals 2 Classified Staff 2 Board Members 2 District Administrators 2 Facilitators

Evaluation Training Components Background information: NCLB Flexibility Waiver COMPONENT 1: Teacher Performance Evaluation COMPONENT 2: Student Learning Measures COMPONENT 3: Evaluation Outcomes 3

NCLB Flexibility Waiver Adopted by State Board, June 2013 Eliminated AYP Rating system New Standards for Language Arts and Math New Student Assessment System New School Accountability/Rating system o (ASPI Score, Star Ratings, Priority/Focus Schools) New Educator Evaluation system 4

Educator Evaluation System Based on current State Teaching Standards Incorporates State Cultural Standards Addition of ‘Student Learning Measure’ Standard Requires a summary “Level of Support” designation Requires a summary “Overall Rating” for state/federal reporting purposes 5

6

Evaluation Training Components Background information: NCLB Flexibility Waiver COMPONENT 1: Teacher Performance Evaluation COMPONENT 2: Student Learning Measures COMPONENT 3: Evaluation Outcomes 7

Educator Evaluation Requirements *Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments  Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)  Information from parents, students, etc.  Other information (as determined by the district) Information Sources Evaluation Components Results & Actions Professional Learning Focus for district & teacher. ________ Annual Evaluation Alternative for the following school year (as determined by the district) District Support OR Plan of Professional Growth (optional) Plan of Improvement Proficient or higher on 7 standards and basic or higher on 1 standard. __________ Exceeds the districts performance standards (as determined by the district) Basic on 2 or more standards Unsatisfacto ry on 1 or more standard Student Learning Standard Professional Practice Family & Community Learning Environment Assessment Content Knowledge & Instruction Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Cultural Standards Performance Rating on each of the eight ( 8) standards.  Unsatisfactory  Basic  Proficient  Exemplary 8

Performance Evaluation TASK LIST Consider evaluation models ✔ Review/revise Indicators and rubrics ✔ Cross-walk with state teaching standards ✔ Incorporate Cultural Standards ✔ Include evaluation input from teachers, parents, students ✔ Develop ‘rules’ to determine domain ratings ✔ External Validation and Consultation ✔ 9

Evaluation Training Components Background information: NCLB Flexibility Waiver COMPONENT 1: Teacher Performance Evaluation COMPONENT 2: Student Learning Measures COMPONENT 3: Evaluation Outcomes 10

Student Learning Data ✔ Assessments: list of assessments for use ✔ Student Learning Objectives model ✔ Value-Added model ✔ ✔ Develop scoring index, values ✔ ✔ Develop ‘rules’ for calculating Student Learning Data ✔ 11

Student Learning Measures: Guidance Document Placeholder 12

Student Learning Measures Domain 4 of LKSD Evaluation Form Guidance Document in draft form (Dr. Whitely) Key Decisions: o All teachers use 3 measures State Assessment (AMP) District identified normed assessment (ex: MAPS, Aimsweb) Teacher developed or identified curriculum assessments o Teachers who teach in non-tested areas will identify appropriate sub- skill areas in the state assessment that apply to subject. o SLO: the management tool for assessment and data goals o Assessments/SLO’s to include at least 60% of students taught o Attendance rate threshold for inclusion in data calculations 13

SLO forms 14

Evaluation Training Components Background information: NCLB Flexibility Waiver COMPONENT 1: Teacher Performance Evaluation COMPONENT 2: Student Learning Measures COMPONENT 3: Evaluation Outcomes 15

Results vs. Reporting Evaluation Results District Reporting Leads to professional learning, district support, and/or plan of improvement Confidential— between administrator(s) and the individual being evaluated Educator evaluations provide the information the district will use to calculate the overall rating Number and percentage of educators at each overall ratings will be reported to the department by each school district beginning in July 2016 Information will only be made available to the public at levels that maintain individual confidentiality

Linking Levels of Performance to Results & Actions Professional Learning Focus for district & teacher. _______________ Annual Evaluation Alternative for the following school year (as determined by the district) District Support OR Plan of Professional Growth (optional) Plan of Improvement Proficient or higher on 7 standards and basic or higher on 1 standard. ______________ Exceeds the districts performance standards (as determined by the district) Basic on 2 or more standards Unsatisfactory on 1 or more standard Standards Performance Levels EPBU Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Content Knowledge & Instruction Assessment Learning Environment Family & Community Professional Practice Student Learning 17

Overall Rating & Student Learning Data A district will evaluate whether an educator’s overall performance is exemplary, proficient, basic, or unsatisfactory. A district shall include student learning data in teacher and administrator’s overall rating according to the following schedule: o SY 2015 ‐ 16 & SY 2016 ‐ 17, at least 20% o SY 2017 ‐ 18 at least 35% o SY 2018 ‐ 19 and after, at least 50% A district may not give an educator an overall performance rating of proficient or higher if the educator has been evaluated to be performing at a level of basic or lower on one or more of the content standards or other criteria for which evaluation is required. 18

Overall Rating District Reporting School Year & School Year Student Learning Standards Alaska Teacher Standards Student Learning Standard 20% Student Learning Standard  Exemplary  Proficient  Basic  Unsatisfactory Content Standard 80% Alaska Teacher Standards Student Learning Standards Exemplary Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory Proficient or higher on all standards Basic or Unsatisfa ctory on any one standard Professional Practice Learning Environment Assessment Family & Community Understanding Student Needs Content Knowledge & Instruction Differentiation Cultural Standards Rating on each of the 7 Content Standards.  Exemplary  Proficient  Basic  Unsatisfactory 19

Evaluation Summary Form Personnel File (201 file) Training on the ‘mechanics’ of the document 20

21

22

23

Training Example 1 Determine Domain Ratings Determine “Evaluation Summary and Level of Support” 24

Training Example 2 Determine Domain Ratings Determine “Evaluation Summary and Level of Support” 25

Training Example 3 Determine Domain 4 Assessment rating Determine Domain Ratings Determine “Evaluation Summary and Level of Support” 26

Training Examples 4, 5, 6 Determine “Overall Rating” for each of the 3 examples Ex 4: Example 1, page 2 Ex 5: Example 2, page 2 Ex 6:Example 3, page 2 27

Discuss: What are some observations about the ‘Level of Support’ designation? What are some observations about the ‘Overall Rating’ calculations? How do the Level of Support and the Overall Rating differ? 28

LKSD Implementation Plan 29

Priority Tool for data-driven reflective professional growth 30

Performance Rubrics Domains A, B, C on LKSD Evaluation Form Evaluator Calibration/Inter-rater reliability training Pilot Implementation in for all teachers Continued emphasis on SIOP structure Incorporates: State Teaching Standards Elements of Marzano model Elements of Danielson model Cultural Standards Skip-logic design 31

LKSD Implementation Teacher Training Evaluator Training Timelines Inter-rater Reliability training for Evaluators Multiple Evaluators Stakeholder (parents/students) input forms Web-based forms Electronic Observation tools 32

33

34

35

Evaluation Timelines Student Learning Measure Conference: o September 30 Self-Assessment: o September 30 Tenured Teachers: o Minimum of 1 Evaluation cycle per year o Performance Domain evaluations due: February 28 Non-Tenured Teachers: o Minimum of 2 Evaluation cycles per year o Performance Domain evaluations due: December 15 March 31 36

Observations Minimum observations for each evaluation: o 2 walk-through observations (with feedback) o 1 informal observation o 1 formal observation Definitions: o Walk-through Observation: 1-5 minutes, unannounced, feedback (if used for evaluation) o Informal Observation: minutes, unannounced, feedback o Formal Observation: 30 or more minutes, scheduled, pre and post observation conference, feedback Multiple Observer process– Discussion Electronic Observation Tools– Observe4success, Sept 37

Discuss What do I really like about the evaluation system? What do I need more training on? Reflections on the sequencing and pacing of this training package What are my big questions? 38