Teacher Evaluation Overview CREC Magnet Schools Teacher Academy - 2015

Agenda Welcome Overview of the CREC Plan Examine each Category of the Model Welcome and introductions, announcements, and housekeeping:   • Feedback Chart / Parking Lot for questions • Reminder to put cell phones on silent/vibrate so as to minimize disruptions • Review start/end times (and lunch!) Set goals by reviewing outcomes: Ask participants to take a moment to review outcomes to see if it matches with their expectations. Debrief if necessary.

Outcomes Understand the Guidelines for Educator Evaluation and Support Recognize the design principles and requirements for educator evaluation Identify the specific categories of educator evaluation Understand how you will be evaluated this year   Set goals by reviewing outcomes: Ask participants to take a moment to review outcomes to see if it matches with their expectations. Debrief if necessary.

When teachers succeed, students succeed. Research has proven that no school-level factor matters more to students’ success than high-quality teachers and leaders. The final report from the MET project sought to answer important questions from practitioners and policy-makers about how to identify and foster great teaching. First must know how to identify them. Simply naming the key dimensions of teaching and measuring them are difficult. The Met Study is the first large-scale study to demonstrate, using random assignment, that it is possible to identify great teaching. teaching is effective when it enables student learning. The research shows-that more effective teachers not only caused students to perform better on state tests, but they also caused students to score higher on other, more cognitively challenging assessments in math and English. “Teaching is complex, and great practice takes time, passion, high-quality materials, and tailored feedback designed to help each teacher continuously grow and improve,” said Vicki Phillips, Director of Education, College Ready – U.S. Program at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Educator Evaluation Design Principles Based on multiple standards-based measures of performance Promote both professional judgment and consistency Foster professional dialogue about student learning Aligned to effective, evaluation-based professional learning, coaching, and feedback to support teacher growth and development Teaching is too complex for any single measure of performance to capture it accurately. Identifying great teachers requires multiple measures.

Teacher Evaluation Categories As we talk about the Teacher evaluation we mean any person who serves in a position requiring certification but not an 092. Teachers need to know they are being observed by the right people, with the right skills, and a sufficient number of times to produce trustworthy results. Teacher refers to any person who serves in a position requiring teacher certification but not an 092.

Illustration of Core Requirements of Teacher Evaluation Student Growth and Development (45%) Whole-school Student Learning Indicators (5%) Observations of Performance and Practice (40%) Parent Feedback (10%) Teacher Practice Rating (50%) Student Outcome Rating (50%) All of these factors are combined to reach your final annual rating (as described in the Connecticut guidelines).

Teacher Evaluation Process  Orientation on process  Teacher reflection and goal-setting  Goal-setting conference  Review goals and performance evidence to date  Mid-year conferences  Teacher self-assessment  Scoring  End-of-year conference Goal-Setting & Planning Mid-Year Check-in End-of-Year Review By October 15 January/February By June 2* *If state test data may have a significant impact on a final rating, a final rating may be revised by September 15 when state test data are available. *Target date for End-of Year is one week before the last student day (must be completed by June 30)

Teacher Evaluation Process: Setting and Planning Goals Orientation Process- teachers provided with information about the evaluation process Teacher Reflection and Goal Setting- Teacher examines student data, prior year evaluation and survey results and Framework for Teaching (Danielson, 2013) and drafts proposed practice goal, a parent feedback goal, & student learning objectives for the school year. Goal-setting Conference- Administrator and teacher discuss proposed goals and arrive at a mutual agreement.

Teacher Evaluation Process: Mid-year check-ins Evaluators and teachers review progress toward goals/objectives at least once during the school year. Review may result in revisions to strategies or approach being used. A mutually agreed upon mid-year adjustment of student learning goals may be made.

Teacher Evaluation Process: End-of-year Summative Review Teacher Self-assessment Reviews data/evidence collected and submits self-assessment to evaluator Scoring Category ratings generate final summative rating End-of –year Conference Evaluator and teacher meet to discuss all evidence and discuss category rating. Teachers are encourage to bring evidence to support achievement of goals Following conference evaluator assigns summative rating and generates summative report. Teacher has a responsibility to collect evidence of student growth and teacher practice.

Guidelines and CREC Model Guidelines for Educator Evaluation Goal-Setting Observation of Teacher Performance & Practice (40%) No required goal/area of focus Parent OR Peer Feedback (10%) No required goal Student Growth and Development (45%) At least 1 but no more than 4 goals/objectives with multiple IAGDs Whole-School Student Learning Indicators and/or Student Feedback (5%)No required goal CREC Observation of Teacher Performance & Practice (40%) One Area of Focus based on Danielson Framework for Teaching Parent Feedback (10%) 1 Goal Student Growth and Development (45%) 2 Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) with at least one IAGD each Whole-School Student Learning Indicators (5%) No goal SEED Handbook 2014 - Each SLO must include at least one IAGD but may include multiple, differentiated IAGDs where appropriate. Teachers whose students take a standardized assessment will create one SLO with an IAGD(s) using that assessment and one SLO with an IAGD(s) based on a minimum of one non-standardized measure and a maximum of one additional standardized measure. All other teachers will develop their two SLOs with IAGDs based on non-standardized measures. The summary reflects SEEDS requirements for teacher goal setting. Districts can choose to require more than the minimum. Ask participants to look at their district plans to see the goals required within their own district. For districts that require one goal, multiple IAGDs are required. It was always an option in the Guidelines and further clarified in the flexibility.

Category # 1 Teacher Performance and Practice Forty percent (40%) of a teacher’s evaluation shall be based on observation of teacher practice and performance Sample Sources of Evidence: Observations Artifacts, Conferences, Reviews of Practice

Danielson Framework for Teaching Teacher Practice

Area of Focus Domain 1 Planning for Active Learning Domain 2 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 Domain 1 Planning for Active Learning Domain 2 Classroom Environment 2a Creating an Environment of Respect & Rapport 2b Creating a Culture of Learning 2c Managing Classroom Procedures 2d Managing Student Behavior 2e Managing Physical Space Domain 2 Classroom Environment 2a Creating an Environment of Respect & Rapport 2b Creating a Culture of Learning 2c Managing Classroom Procedures 2d Managing Student Behavior 2e Managing Physical Space Domain 2 Classroom Environment Area of Focus Domain 4 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 Domain 4 Engaging in Professional Responsibilities and Teacher Leadership Domain 3 Instruction 3a Communicating with Students 3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c Engaging Students in Learning 3d Using Assessment in Instruction 3e Demonstrating Flexibility & Responsiveness Domain 3 Instruction 3a Communicating with Students 3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c Engaging Students in Learning 3d Using Assessment in Instruction 3e Demonstrating Flexibility & Responsiveness Domain 3 Instruction Overview and Structure of the Framework: Review the charts created by participants – reinforce the “observable” domains (what you can see and hear in the classroom); point out that “student engagement” is different than “busy.” Domains 1 and 4 are the “off stage” components and Domains 2 and 3 are the “on stage” components. [Review the Smart Card] NOTE FROM CHARLOTTE: Make the following points about the Framework: • It’s a framework for teaching, not school nurses, etc. – need own frameworks • Teaching is complex in multiple ways: physical, emotional, intellectual: teaching is a thinking person’s job – hundreds of decisions daily, literally. This has implications for mentors, coaches, and supervisors – if teaching is a cognitive activity, then conversations about teaching have to be about the cognition. • Components are interrelated – give illustration, then analogy with a theatre in the round; the components of the FFT are like the lights – it is, then, an analytical tool. • Anything not in the framework? – mention common themes • All equally important? In all settings?

Levels of Performance BELOW STANDARD DEVELOPING PROFICIENT EXEMPLARY Lack of Unsafe Harmful Unclear Unaware Poor Unsuitable Inconsistent Partial General Attempts Awareness Moderate Minimal Consistent Frequent Successful Appropriate Clear Positive Smooth Solid Seamless Subtle Skillful Preventative Leadership Students • Compare your words with those selected by the Danielson Group,… are they similar? Discuss. Click on slide again to show one distinction between the Proficient and Exemplary can sometimes be the difference between teacher directed and student directed. In addition, note performance can vary, according to: whether it’s May or October, if a teacher has a new assignment – moving from fifth grade to second, for example. When an entire school is implementing a new program, they may all be at a developing (i.e., inexperienced) level for a while. TEACHER DIRECTED SUCCESS STUDENT DIRECTED SUCCESS 16 16

Number of Observations Year   First and Second year teachers: at least 3 formal, in-class observations; 2 of which include a pre-conference and ALL of which require a post-conference. Developing /Below Standard teachers: at least 3 formal in-class observations; 2 of which include a pre-conference and all of which include a post-conference. Proficient/Exemplary Teachers: At least 2 formal observations or reviews of practice; 1 of which must be a formal in-class observation.

Definition of Formal/Informal Observations Formal: Observations or reviews of practice that last at least 30 minutes and are followed by a post-conference, which includes both written and verbal feedback. Informal: Non-scheduled observations or reviews of practice that last at least 10 minutes and are followed by written and/or verbal feedback.

Category # 2- Parent Feedback Ten percent (10%) of a teacher’s evaluation shall be based on parent feedback, including surveys. Process focuses on: Conducting whole-school parent survey Determine school-level parent focus area based on survey feedback Teacher and evaluator identifying one related parent engagement goal Measure progress Determine teacher’s summative rating

Parent Feedback Goal Examples: School-Based Goals for Parent Feedback Individual Teacher Goals which support School-Based Goals Increase the percentage of parents who say “Always” to the statement “My child's teacher communicates with parents,” from 68% to 90%. I will send home progress reports for math with each child every two weeks. Every other Friday, my 6th grade students will use their work folders to write a brief letter to their parents summarizing their progress in reading and math.

Illustration of Core Requirements of Teacher Evaluation Student Growth and Development (45%) Whole-school Student Learning Indicators (5%) Observations of Performance and Practice (40%) Parent Feedback (10%) Teacher Practice Rating (50%) Student Outcome Rating (50%) All of these factors are combined to reach your final annual rating (as described in the Connecticut guidelines).

How do SLOs fit into the evaluation system? SLOs fit here A teacher’s summative rating will be determined by combining as follows: Teacher Practice Related Indicators score – is calculated by combining the Observation of Teacher Performance and Practice score and the Parent Feedback score. Student Outcomes Related Indicators score- is calculated by combining the Student Growth and Development score and Whole-School Student Learning or Student Feedback score. Final Summative Rating- is determined using the Summative Matrix (see the SEED Handbook).

Student Learning Objectives Measure a teacher’s impact on student learning within a given interval of time Are grounded in and built on teacher practice Measure students’ academic growth Are standards-based

Overview of the Process of Setting Student Learning Objectives SLO Phase I Learn about this year’s students SLO Phase II Set Goals for Student Learning SLO Phase III Monitor Students’ Progress Assess student outcomes relative relative to goals SLO Phase IV Insert dates

Illustration of Core Requirements of Teacher Evaluation Student Growth and Development (45%) Whole-school Student Learning Indicators (5%) Observations of Performance and Practice (40%) Parent Feedback (10%) Teacher Practice Rating (50%) Student Outcome Rating (50%) All of these factors are combined to reach your final annual rating (as described in the Connecticut guidelines).

Illustration of Core Requirements of Teacher Evaluation Student Growth and Development (45%) Whole-school Student Learning Indicators (5%) Observations of Performance and Practice (40%) Parent Feedback (10%) Teacher Practice Rating (50%) Student Outcome Rating (50%) All of these factors are combined to reach your final annual rating (as described in the Connecticut guidelines).

Scoring for Summative Category Score Multiplier Points (Score x Multiplier) Observation of Teacher Practice   40 Parent Feedback 10 TOTAL TEACHER PRACTICE Student Growth 45 Whole School Learning Indicator 5 TOTAL STUDENT GROWTH

Support and Development Professional Learning Opportunities/Examples Targeted professional development External learning opportunities Differentiated career pathway Coaching Assisting peers Leading data teams Leading professional development Leading book study groups  

www.crec.org/P21

For more information or technical assistance please contact: School Administrative Team School Complimentary Evaluators TEAM Mentor Grade Level Team Members School Peers