North Thurston Public Schools Presented by Conni Van Hoose and Ryan Akiyama

 Trusting Work Culture ◦ Respectful ◦ Collaborative ◦ Optimistic ◦ Transparent ◦ Accountable  Committed to Excellence: Providing every student the academic and life skills necessary to succeed in a diverse world.

 Norms for Collaboration ◦ Speak openly ◦ Confidentiality ◦ Let’s work toward better teaching and learning ◦ Safety in the room ◦ Agree on what to communicate out ◦ Assume positive intentions ◦ Titles don’t matter- treat each other as equals ◦ Agree on what consensus is before making decisions

 Team Creation ◦ Joint communication and selection process  Team Leadership ◦ Project Director = Administrator ◦ Project Facilitator = Teacher  Communication ◦ Site visits to all schools  Raj Manhas – NTPS Superintendent  John Bash – NTPS Chief Operations Officer  Conni Van Hoose – NTEA President

Teacher Evaluation K-12 Teacher Representatives from 21 NTPS schools 6 Principal Representatives (K-12) NTEA President and WEA Rep. Leadership & Travel Project Director & Project Facilitator Drawn from both Teacher & Principal Evaluation committees Principal Evaluation NTPS Executive Directors of Elementary and Secondary Education Elementary, Middle, and High School Principal Representatives

Potential Negative Consequences In their concern to “look good” on the rubric, especially if the stakes are high: Teachers become “legalistic,” parsing the words, defending their performance Teachers adopt a low-risk approach, not willing to try new approaches Teachers are unwilling to accept challenging students in their classes Teachers may be reluctant to share materials, expertise, etc. (Charlotte Danielson, Assessing Teacher Effectiveness)

Potential Positive Consequences Ideally an effective evaluation system will result in: Training for teachers and assessors encourages them to better understand good teaching Results of the assessment provide specific feedback for teachers on where they should focus their improvement efforts The assessment procedures themselves can promote professional learning (Charlotte Danielson, Assessing Teacher Effectiveness)

NTPS is one of nine pilot sites in the state: this is all in a “first draft” phase Our model has been influenced by the work of Charlotte Danielson, Kim Marshall, and Robert Marzano as well as other evaluation systems currently in use We value this work because… The work itself instigates meaningful professional growth for all involved We see the potential for this project to have a powerful effect on teaching and learning in this state for many years to come

NTPS Model WA TPEP Steering Committee NTPS Teachers NTPS Principals NTPS Parents & Community

 Step 1: Decide on a Rating Scale ◦ 6696 requires a 4 Tier system ◦ We reviewed other 4 Tier evaluation and assessment models and agreed to the following… Level 4: Distinguished Level 3: Proficient / Effective Level 2: Emerging / Needs Improvement Level 1: Does Not Meet Expectations

 Step 2: Create and Sort Elements for Each Criteria ◦ Each criteria assigned to a subcommittee and broken down into 5-9 elements (AKA sub-criteria or components) ◦ Common language / Glossary ◦ Duplication analysis ◦ After revision we currently have 2-3 unique elements per criteria

 Step 3: Create the Performance Levels ◦ Began by composing our summative statements for each performance level (AKA the 10,000 foot view) ◦ Wrote Level 3 (Proficient/Effective) first ◦ Completed the writing and revision process for our summative statement of performance level 3 before moving on to level 1,2,4 ◦ Followed the same procedure to create the first draft of the rubric for our model

 Next Steps ◦ Continue revision and development of the rubric for our model based on work with the Steering Committee/other Pilot sites ◦ Investigate and select Evidence and Measures ◦ Increase our engagement with Community and Parent stakeholders ◦ Evaluator and Evaluatee selection / training

Conni Van Hoose President NTEA Ryan Akiyama NTPS TPEP Project Facilitator