Educator Evaluation and Support System Basics

Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal Requirements SB 290 ESEA Waiver Oregon Framework Guides implementation of aligned state & federal requirements The Oregon Framework incorporates SB290 and federal requirements HB 2186 in 2015 session added charter schools OAR

Purpose of an Evaluation & Support System Improve instructional, professional and leadership practices Engage every educator as an active participant in their evaluation Ensure the process promotes collaboration and continuous learning Improve student growth and prepare students for College, Careers and Citizenship

Vision and Principles of a Quality System Vision: This is a transformative professional growth system  Values have shifted from just making contract renewal decisions to elevating leading, teaching and learning  To nurture a culture of continuous improvement and growth by including formative assessment & support  To create alignment between evaluation and professional learning that adds value to the system

Oregon Framework Required Elements (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) Standards of Professional Practice Differentiated Performance Levels: 4 Levels Multiple Measures Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle Aligned Professional Learning Elements must be included in all teacher and administrator evaluation and support systems: Must align to requirements, but flexibility in local design

Teachers Administrators Model Core Teaching Standards (InTASC) o Four Domains/10 Standards: 1. The Learner and Learning 2. Content 3. Instructional Practice 4. Professional Responsibility Educational Leadership/ Administrator Standards (ISLLC)  Six Domains: 1. Visionary Leadership 2. Instructional Improvement 3. Effective Management 4. Inclusive Practice 5. Ethical Leadership 6. Socio-Political Context Standards of Professional Practice

Differentiated Performance Levels Performance evaluated on the Standards of Professional Practice on 4 levels  Level 1 – Does not meet standards  Level 2 – Making progress toward standards  Level 3 – Meets standards  Level 4 – Exceeds standards Proficient

Multiple Measures (A)Professional Practice (B)Professional Responsibilities (C) Student Learning and Growth Evidence of the quality of teachers’ planning, delivery of instruction, and assessment of student learning Evidence of progress toward professional goals or contribution to school or district goals Evidence of educators’ contributions to student learning

Collaborative Student Learning and Growth Goal Setting Process:  Teachers and administrators collaborate with supervisors/evaluators to establish at least two student learning and growth goals  Discuss rigor and rationale of each goal, research-based strategies, professional learning needed to support goal attainment  Meet and discuss progress mid-year and at end of year  Reflect on results and determine implications for professional growth path and summative evaluation Multiple Measures: Student Learning & Growth

Category Types of Measures 1 Oregon’s state assessments that must be used to meet ESEA Waiver requirements SMARTER Balanced Grades 4-8 in English language arts and mathematics OAKS Extended Assessments 1 Grades 4-8 in English language arts and mathematics 2 Additional Statewide Assessments Science Assessment Social Sciences Assessment ELPA Other Assessments (School-wide or district-wide) Commercially developed assessments that include pre- and post-measures Locally developed assessments that include pre- and post-measures Results from proficiency-based assessment systems Locally-developed collections of evidence, i.e. portfolios of student work that include multiple types of performance Multiple Measures: Student Learning & Growth 1 Used by special education teachers who provide instruction in ELA or math for those students who take extended assessments

Factors in Summative Effectiveness Rating Summative Effectiveness Rating Oregon Matrix Professional Practice Professional Responsibilities Student Learning & Growth

Determining a Final Score: Oregon Matrix *Inquiry Process

Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle Self-ReflectionGoal Setting Observation & Collection of Evidence Formative Assessment Summative Evaluation Educator conducts an assessment of practice against performance standards Culmination of multiple formative observations, reflections, professional conversations Educator and evaluator review progress toward goals and/or performance against standards Educator strategically identifies professional practice and student learning goals Educator and evaluator collect evidence using multiple measures

Aligned Professional Learning Evaluation aligned with high quality professional development opportunities  Relevant to educator’s goals and needs  Informs decisions for professional growth Standards for Professional Learning ward.org/standards

DatesActivities July 2012ESEA Waiver conditionally approved; State Board endorsed Oregon Framework Pilot framework and student growth models in 14 school districts All districts develop or align local evaluation & support systems; ODE regional support Spring 2013ODE resubmit amended evaluation guidelines for USED approval By July 1, 2013All districts submit revised evaluation systems assurances and implementation plan to ODE for approval By Sept 1, 2013ODE review and approve district evaluation systems/assurances; identify technical assistance/professional development needs All districts implement initial plans for local systems for all evaluations; districts will refine their systems; ODE regional support All districts continue implementing local systems; ODE regional support By July 1, 2015Districts present local evaluation system to Regional Peer Panel & beyond Continuous improvement of evaluation systems and regional support Historical Background

District Models Recommended Rubrics Student Learning and Growth Goals Oregon Matrix Student Growth Percentiles Educator Effectiveness Toolkit