EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS: 1 An Orientation for Teachers August 2015

The purpose of the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System is to help educators grow as professionals in order to increase student learning. 2

The Educator Effectiveness System in Wisconsin DPI has established minimum expectations for educator evaluation. Districts have the authority to add to the system requirements but cannot do less (i.e. A district could require 2 SLOs each year) There are aspects of the EE System that are left to local discretion (Which educators fit the definition of teacher?) 3

Who is in Which Year of the Cycle? 4 Supporting Year 1? Supporting Year2? Summary Year? Educators not in the system?

Continuous Improvement Using Multiple Measures Practice Outcomes

THE EFFECTIVENESS CYCLE 6

First year, and every third year after

MULTIPLE MEASURES 8

Balancing Multiple Measures One Summary based on evidence of Educator Practice One Summary based on evidence of Student Outcomes

Educator Practice The Educator Practice Summary is comprised of scores for each of the components in the Danielson Framework for Teaching or the 6 Teacher Practice Standards in the Effectiveness Project.

11

12 Effectiveness Project Teacher and Ed Specialist Standards

Teacher Observations The Announced Observation and 2 minis must occur in the Summary Year

Collecting Evidence of Practice Observations Typically Danielson Domains 2 & 3 or EP Standards 1, 3, 4 & 5 Evidence acquired during announced and mini- observations Evaluator documents and uploads evidence of practice from the announced and unannounced observations Artifacts Typically Danielson Domains 1 & 4 or EP Standards 2, 4 & 6 Some are mandated forms to be completed in Teachscape or MLP Others can be uploaded by educator or evaluator 14

What is an Artifact? A source of evidence, especially to document effectiveness of components in Domains 1 and 4 or EP Standards 1, 3, and 5 Some artifacts will provide evidence for multiple components or standards Evaluators will use the rubric to identify the performance level that best matches the evidence of practice within the artifact that has been uploaded 15

A Few Considerations… Is there value in aligning some of your artifacts (Unit plan and/or lesson plan that lead to the lesson you teach when you are observed) and a self-reflection of the lesson afterward)? When does an artifact become evidence? If I upload a certificate from a workshop…what does it prove? Consider the value of a short reflection to give meaning to an artifact. 16

Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) 1 SLO Educator self-approves and scores in all years. The SLO is part of the Educator Effectiveness Plan

Creating the SLO Score Educators self-scores his/her SLO annually using the Revised SLO and Outcomes Process and Scoring Guide. The rubric contains 2 criteria: one related to results (Did students meet the goals you set?) and one related to process (Did you engage fully in the SLO process?).

Newly Revised 4- page SLO Process and Scoring Guide New guidance on Value Added use

Using the Revised SLO Scoring Rubric, the evaluator will assign a holistic score (based on a 1-4 scale) after considering all SLOs in the educator’s evaluation cycle. Score is based on the preponderance of evidence from documentation.

In the typical, 3 year Effectiveness Cycle, the educator will have three SLO processes that inform the final holistic score:

Educators in the Summary Year this will have two SLOs that inform the final holistic score at the end of the year.

Reflecting on Last Year What were the positives about your SLO process last year? What do you think you might do differently this year? What questions do you still have? 24

SUMMARIZING THE EFFECTIVENESS CYCLE 25

Final Effectiveness Summary At the conclusion of the Summary Year, the evaluator determines a score for each Danielson component or each EP Standard and also determines one holistic SLO score.

Reporting Scores The component scores (practice) and the holistic SLO score (outcome) are uploaded from Teachscape and/or MyLearning Plan to DPI’s WISEdash secure, where only the educator and his or her administrators will be able to view the results.

Final Effectiveness Summary The scores for the components are combined to result in a final Educator Practices Summary. The holistic SLO score becomes the final Student Outcomes Summary. These scores will be visible to the educator and his/her evaluator in WISEdash secure.

Practice Summary Teachers in the DPI Model: Component scores averaged = Domain Summary Domain Summaries averaged = Practice Summary Teachers in the CESA 6 EP Model: Standards scores averaged = Practice Summary

Effectiveness Summary Graph

Summary Year Overview and Timeline 31

Turn and Talk What are the similarities and differences between the Supporting Years and the Summary Year? 32

Introducing…. Our Educator Effectiveness Coaches!! 33

Local Talking Points Has your district identified: parameters for the number of artifacts an educator may upload or whether certain artifacts will be mandatory? the number of mini-observations (mandated range is 3- 5) and whether or not one or more will happen in the Supporting Years? whether teachers will be directed to write Student Learning Objectives that align to school or district goals? Whether teachers will be asked to align their artifacts (that complete lesson plans be uploaded for the lesson in the Formal Observation)? what the peer review process for those in years 1 & 2 will look like? 34

What is Next? View the Module for Step 4 (DPI Model) Attend additional Teachscape or MLP/OASYS training opportunities Complete “Beginning of the Year” activities 35

CESA #4 Educator Effectiveness Support Billie Finco Want to get all the latest information and updates or just ask a question? Join the CESA #4 Educator Effectiveness Google+ Community: Sherri Torkelson Kaye Henrickson (EP)

For more information and resources related to the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System, please visit the WIEE website at: ee.dpi.wi.gov ee.dpi.wi.gov 37