Connecticut PEAC meeting 2.6.2012 1. 2 Today’s meeting Discussion of draft principal evaluation guidelines (1 hour) Evaluation and support system document.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SEED – CT’s System for Educator and Evaluation and Development April 2013 Wethersfield Public Schools CONNECTICUT ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION Overview of.
Advertisements

North Carolina Educator Evaluation System. Future-Ready Students For the 21st Century The guiding mission of the North Carolina State Board of Education.
Katonah-Lewisboro School District Annual Professional Performance Review Update 5/23/
Sub-heading ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION AND SUPPORT SYSTEM Athletic Program Leader Proposed Adaptations.
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
Van Buren School District Principal Evaluation Pilot District July 2012.
Connecticut PEAC meeting Today’s meeting Recap progress to date Overview of where PEAC is headed Discussion of evaluation components Next.
LAKE COUNTY SCHOOLS System Accreditation Overview of Standards March 3-6, 2013 Susan Moxley, Ed.D. Superintendent Hugh Hattabaugh Chief Academic Officer.
Secondary Education Initiative NJ Department of Education.
Central Office Administrator Development and Evaluation Adaptations for Central Office Administrators.
 Reading School Committee January 23,
Evaluating principal effectiveness Focal Point 2012.
Estándares claves para líderes educativos publicados por
ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL PROCESS: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS January29, 2015.
February 8, 2012 Session 4: Educational Leadership Policy Standards 1 Council of Chief School Officers April 2008.
Practicing the Art of Leadership: A Problem Based Approach to Implementing the ISLLC Standards, 4e © 2013, 2009, 2005, 2001 Pearson Education, Inc. All.
1. 6 leadership standards what are they? 3 2 Teaching & Learning 1 Vision, Mission & Goals 6 The Education System 4 Collaborating with Families and Stakeholders.
1 GENERAL OVERVIEW. “…if this work is approached systematically and strategically, it has the potential to dramatically change how teachers think about.
STRATEGIES AND SUGGESTIONS FOR BEGINNING SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS BY MACARTHUR JONES ROSANNA LOYA MICHAEL SAENZ FALL 2011 A Leader’s First 100 Days.
CONNECTICUT ACCOUNTABILTY FOR LEARNING INITIATIVE Executive Coaching.
Educator Evaluation: The Model Process for Principal Evaluation July 26, 2012 Massachusetts Secondary School Administrators’ Association Summer Institute.
DRAFT Building Our Future 2017 Fulton County Schools Strategic Plan Name of Meeting Date.
Principal Evaluation in Massachusetts: Where we are now National Summit on Educator Effectiveness Principal Evaluation Breakout Session #2 Claudia Bach,
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
Bibb County Schools Standard 1: Vision and Purpose Standard: The system establishes and communicates a shared purpose and direction for improving.
Administrative Evaluation Committee – Orientation Meeting Dr. Christine Carver, Associate Superintendent of Human Capital Development Mr. Stephen Foresi,
Learner-Ready Teachers  More specifically, learner-ready teachers have deep knowledge of their content and how to teach it;  they understand the differing.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation 1.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
ISLLC Standard #1 ISLLC Standard #1 Planning School Improvement Name: Planning School Improvement that Ensures Student Success Workshop Facilitator.
ISLLC Standard #2 Implementation
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
ISLLC Standard #4 ISLLC Standard #4 Monitoring Diverse Needs Name Workshop Facilitator.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
Rhode Island Innovation Evaluation & Support System (RIIESS) for Support Professionals Fall 2013.
Click to edit Master subtitle style New Evaluation Assessment for Principals and School Leaders Jan Hammond Jan Hammond
Educator evaluation lessons learned from other states Connecticut Performance Evaluation Advisory Council
1. Housekeeping Items June 8 th and 9 th put on calendar for 2 nd round of Iowa Core ***Shenandoah participants*** Module 6 training on March 24 th will.
Intro to TPEP. A new evaluation system should be a model for professional growth, supporting collaboration between teachers and principals in pursuit.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report District Accreditation Bibb County Schools February 5-8, 2012.
Bridgeport Public Schools Administrator Evaluation and Support Plan
ISLLC Standard #2 Supporting Teacher Learning Name Workshop Facilitator.
April 29, 2011 Developing Effective Leaders: Principal Evaluation Systems CCSSO – National Summit on Educator Effectiveness.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Program Introduction to Principal Evaluation in Washington 1 June 2015.
ISLLC Standard #6 Monitoring Education Stakeholders Name Workshop Facilitator.
EVALUATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL GROWTH Ohio TIF and OTES.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
 Development of a model evaluation instrument based on professional performance standards (Danielson Framework for Teaching)  Develop multiple measures.
What you need to know about changes in state requirements for Teval plans.
BISD Update Teacher & Principal Evaluation Update Board of Directors October 27,
OCM BOCES Day 2 Principal Evaluator Training 1. Back to the beginning: 2 Nine Components.
ESEA, TAP, and Charter handouts-- 3 per page with notes and cover of one page.
ANNOOR ISLAMIC SCHOOL AdvancEd Survey PURPOSE AND DIRECTION.
Candidate’s Name: Date:.  Candidates who complete the program are educational leaders who have the knowledge and ability to promote the success of.
Washington State’s Professional Certification The Big Picture (reminder : ) Everett Public Schools Pre-Assessment Seminar
ISLLC Standard #3 Planning for School – wide Behavior Management
Staff All Surveys Questions 1-27 n=45 surveys Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree The relative sizes of the colored bars in the chart.
Presented at the OSPA Summit 2012 January 9, 2012.
About District Accreditation Mrs. Sanchez & Mrs. Bethell Rickards Middle School
Understanding Student Learning Objectives (S.L.O.s)
Helping Teachers Help All Students: The Imperative for High-Quality Professional Development Report of the Maryland Teacher Professional Development Advisory.
Kentucky’s Professional Growth and Effectiveness System.
Superintendent Formative Evaluation April 26, 2015.
Education.state.mn.us Principal Evaluation Components in Legislation Work Plan for Meeting Rose Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education.
ISLLC Standard #3 Implementing Effective Meetings Name Workshop Facilitator.
Outcomes By the end of our sessions, participants will have…  an understanding of how VAL-ED is used as a data point in developing professional development.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
DESE Educator Evaluation System for Superintendents
Administrator Evaluation Orientation
Presentation transcript:

Connecticut PEAC meeting

2 Today’s meeting Discussion of draft principal evaluation guidelines (1 hour) Evaluation and support system document (15 minutes) Implementation timeline and working groups (30 minutes) Next steps

3 Discussion of draft principal evaluation guidelines

Great leaders = Great schools Recommended Principal Evaluation Guidelines for CT February 6, 2012

2011 © New Leaders | 5 Overview of Proposed Guidelines

2011 © New Leaders | 6 Weights in Evaluation Models TEACHERSPRINCIPALS Multiple student learning measures45%Multiple student learning measures Whole-school student learning indicators or student feedback 5%Teacher effectiveness outcomes Observations of teacher performance and practice 40%Observations of principal performance and practice Peer or parent feedback surveys10%Staff, community, and/or student feedback surveys

2011 © New Leaders | 7 CT Leadership Standards – Draft 1: Vision, Mission, and Goals: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by guiding the development and implementation of a shared vision of learning, a strong organizational mission, and high expectations for student performance. 2: Teaching and Learning: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by monitoring and continuously improving teaching and learning. 3: Organizational Systems and Safety: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by managing organizational systems and resources for a safe, high-performing learning environment. 4: Families and Stakeholders: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by collaborating with families and stakeholders to respond to diverse community interests and needs and to mobilize community resources. 5: Ethics and Integrity: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students by being ethical and acting with integrity. 6: The Education System: Education leaders ensure the success and achievement of all students and advocate for their students, faculty and staff needs by influencing systems of political, social, economic, legal, and cultural contexts affecting education.

2011 © New Leaders | 8 Centrality of Standards in Evaluation System PRINCIPALS Multiple student learning measures 45% Teacher effectiveness outcomes 5% Observations of principal performance and practice 40% Staff, community, and/or student feedback surveys 10% Standard 2: Teaching and Learning 1: Vision, Mission, and Goals 3: Organizational Systems and Safety 4: Families and Stakeholders 5: Ethics and Integrity 6: The Education System

2011 © New Leaders | 9 Elements of Evaluation

2011 © New Leaders | 10 Student Learning (45%) Half of the student learning element based on the state test Recommended Additional Guidelines: For state test portion of student learning, weight growth measures more heavily than attainment For locally developed measures, establish approved set of options for districts to choose Recommended Guidance from State: Provide guidance to districts to include non-test measures of student graduation or grade progression for secondary schools not demonstrating high graduation rates Provide guidance around using local measures to extend grade levels and subjects covered as possible

2011 © New Leaders | 11 Examples of Approved Measures Potential Local District Measures State tests and end-of-course exams ACT/SAT suites of assessments “Off the shelf” assessments approved for district-wide use (e.g. NWEA, DIBELS) AP/IB/NIC suites of assessments Graduation Postsecondary matriculation, persistence, placement Completion/success in advanced coursework, including dual enrollment 9 th grade to 10 th grade promotion rate / 9 th grade retention rate

2011 © New Leaders | 12 Teacher Effectiveness (5%) Opportunity for district innovation Possible Measures: Growth in the percentage of teachers making adequate growth in student achievement Differing strategies for teachers at differing levels of effectiveness OR increased retention of effective and highly effective teachers Principal success in improving teachers effectiveness (though this can be challenging to operationalize)

2011 © New Leaders | 13 Principal Practice (40%) & Survey Feedback (10%) Based on the six performance expectations in CT Leadership Standards Include a focus on all practices around teacher quality and teacher evaluation 1: Vision, Mission, and Goals 2: Teaching and Learning 3: Organizational Systems and Safety 4: Families and Stakeholders 5: Ethics and Integrity 6: The Education System 40%Observations of principal performance and practice 10%Staff, community, and/or student feedback surveys

2011 © New Leaders | 14 Tools for Principal Practice Evaluation Connecticut Leadership Standards Principal Practice Rubric School Observation Tools Staff, Community, Student Surveys Non-Achievement School Data Including clear examples of evidence 10%40%

2011 © New Leaders | 15 Other Guidelines

2011 © New Leaders | 16 Other Guidelines State model developed as default, with rigorous process for local opt-out 4 rating levels Annual reviews for all principals Evaluations that provide principals with useful feedback and results linked to professional development Strong training for evaluators A statewide committee (like PEAC) that meets regularly to provide implementation guidance Pilot process or staggered implementation

17 Evaluation and support system document

Evaluation and support system requirements 1.4-level rating system 2.High quality observations of performance and practice 3.Multiple student learning indicators 4.Other evaluation components 5.Training for all evaluators 6.Evaluation-based professional development 18

19 Implementation timeline and working groups

JanuaryFebuaryMarchAprilMayJuneJuly Draft Timeline: Winter-Summer State model adopted by state board Working groups begin developing state models and implementation plans Districts apply for voluntary pilot program State board adopts core guidelines for district systems Training for all evaluators

Fall 2012Winter Spring 2013Summer 2013Fall 2013 Draft Timeline: Fall 2012-Fall Additional state training for evaluators February - Working groups convene and begin developing state models & implementation plans through June Districts plans are submitted to CSDE for review/approval Voluntary pilot program begins Full-scale statewide implementation starts Districts not participating in pilot plan and develop local systems

Working groups  Four working groups to be formed in February: 1. Implementation working group to start discussions of voluntary pilot program, evaluator training, state reviews of district applications, etc. 2. Teacher evaluation state model working group 3. Principal evaluation state model working group 4. Pupil services state model working group  Please John to let him know which group you’d like to be on 22

23 Next steps

 Goals for February: → Finalize teacher and principal evaluation core guidelines → Launch implementation working group to start discussions of voluntary pilot program, evaluator training, state reviews of district applications, etc. → Launch state model working groups  Potential dates for next PEAC meeting: February 27 or 28? 24

Contact Information  John Luczak → →  Adam Petkun → →