Teacher Evaluation Process Update March 13, 2015 SCASPA Roundtable.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IMPLICATIONS FOR KENTUCKY’S SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS SUPERINTENDENTS’ WEBCAST MARCH 6, 2012 NCLB Waiver Flexibility 1.
Advertisements

ESEA Flexibility U.S. Department of Education 1 INTRODUCTION STATES LEADING REFORM States and districts have initiated groundbreaking reforms and innovations.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER RENEWAL Overview of Proposed Renewal March 6, 2015 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal Requirements SB 290 ESEA Waiver Oregon Framework.
Overview of the New Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework Opening Day Presentation August 26, 2013.
OVERVIEW OF CHANGES TO EDUCATORS’ EVALUATION IN THE COMMONWEALTH Compiled by the MOU Evaluation Subcommittee September, 2011 The DESE oversees the educators’
 Reading School Committee January 23,
Educator Evaluation Regulations, Mandatory Elements & Implementation MTA Center for Education Policy and Practice August 2014.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: RENEWAL PROCESS November 20, 2014.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL PROCESS: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS January29, 2015.
2014 SOAR Update AAEA Fall Conference presented by Ivy Pfeffer, Assistant Commissioner Arkansas Department of Education October 29, 2014.
ADEPT for School Guidance Counselors
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1.
Principal Evaluation in Massachusetts: Where we are now National Summit on Educator Effectiveness Principal Evaluation Breakout Session #2 Claudia Bach,
Agenda Overview of evaluation Timeline Next steps.
Student Learning Objectives 1 Phase 3 Regional Training April 2013.
October 12, College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students 2. State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support.
Interim Joint Committee on Education June 11, 2012.
Education in Delaware: ESEA Flexibility Renewal Community Town Hall Ryan Reyna, Office of Accountability.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
Division of School Effectiveness Office of Instructional Practices and Evaluations.
CLASS Keys Orientation Douglas County School System August /17/20151.
Committee of Practitioners ESEA Flexibility Waiver Review June 25, 2014.
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
STATE CONSORTIUM ON EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS September 10, 2013.
ADEPT A D E P T Assisting Developing Evaluating Professional Teaching.
ESEA Flexibility U.S. Department of Education SECRETARY OF EDUCATION’S PRIORITIES.
Evaluation Team Progress Collaboration Grant 252.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
January 31 & February 1,  Why are we doing this?  What has been done up to now?  What is the timeline for moving forward? 2.
PERSONNEL EVALUATION SYSTEMS How We Help Our Staff Become More Effective Margie Simineo – June, 2010.
ESEA Flexibility: Overview Maryland Accountability Program Presentation 1 of 8.
Pennsylvania’s ESEA Flexibility Proposal May 23, >
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011.
 Development of a model evaluation instrument based on professional performance standards (Danielson Framework for Teaching)  Develop multiple measures.
Ohio Department of Education March 2011 Ohio Educator Evaluation Systems.
No Child Left Behind Waivers: Promising Ideas from Second Round Applications By Jeremy Ayers and Isabel Owen with Glenda Partee and Theodora Chang.
“We will lead the nation in improving student achievement.” CLASS Keys TM Module 4: Professional Growth Plan Spring 2010 Teacher and Leader Quality Education.
Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations 1. Outcomes Understand purpose and requirements of Student Learning and Growth (SLG) goals Review achievement.
ESEA, TAP, and Charter handouts-- 3 per page with notes and cover of one page.
Teacher Effectiveness: All of Your Questions Answered Matt Gill, Tammy Meyer, Robin Curtis 10/15/2015.
Changes in Professional licensure Teacher evaluation system Training at Coastal Carolina University.
Educator Evaluation and Support System Basics. Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal.
March 30, 2012 Marriott Hotel- Charleston, WV Committee of Practitioners Developing Federal Programs of Excellence.
Teacher Evaluation ___________________________ Modified ADEPT Model Assisting Developing Evaluating Professional Teaching
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: EDUCATION STAKEHOLDERS FORUM September 29, 2011 Carmel Martin, Assistant Secretary for Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.
SCDE Expanded ADEPT Advisory Team Meeting April 23, 2015.
Indiana ESEA Flexibility Waiver. Background -Indiana was a part of cohort 1 -Why cohort 1? -USED Approval February Approval through School.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
PADEPP PROGRAM FOR ASSISTING, DEVELOPING, AND EVALUATING PRINCIPAL PERFORMANCE CHANGES FOR 2015 – 2016 SCHOOL YEAR.
Education.state.mn.us Principal Evaluation Components in Legislation Work Plan for Meeting Rose Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education.
Evaluation: An Opportunity to leverage learning at all levels School Board Presentation – May 22, 2013.
Expanded ADEPT Guidance Presentation Office of Educator Effectiveness May 9, 2016.
Diane Mugford – Federal Accountability, ADAM Russ Keglovits – Measurement and Accountability, ADAM Renewing Nevada’s ESEA Waiver Flexibility Request.
Kansas Association of School Boards ESEA Flexibility Waiver KASB Briefing August 10, 2012.
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Teacher Evaluation Timeline
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Five Required Elements
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
KSDE Board Presentation Educator Evaluation Systems Update
State Board of Education Progress Update
Overview of Implementation and Local Decisions
ESEA Waiver Principles
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Instructional Personnel Performance Appraisal System
Presentation transcript:

Teacher Evaluation Process Update March 13, 2015 SCASPA Roundtable

ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER UPDATE

ESEA Flexibility Waiver Update Since reauthorization of ESEA was not on the horizon, the purpose of the waiver was to relieve state education agencies (SEA’s) and local education agencies (LEA’s) of the burden of the “all or nothing” accountability of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) and to allow states and locals to design reforms to improve academic achievement and to increase the quality of instruction for all students. What did SEA’s and LEA’s gain? Relief from the “100% Proficient” requirement by Spring 2014 Flexibility regarding district and school improvement requirements. Flexibility to support school improvement efforts. More funding flexibility Other additional flexibilities were permitted.

ESEA Flexibility Waiver Update What S.C. agreed to do: In Principle 1: College- and Career-Ready Expectations for All Students In Principle 2: State-Developed Differentiated Recognition, Accountability, and Support In Principle 3: Support of Effective Instruction and Leadership In Principle 4: Reduce red tape and unnecessary paperwork.

ESEA Flexibility Waiver Update The S.C. waiver request was submitted and approved by the U.S. Department of Education in The waiver was approved for , , and Now: extension opportunity for up to 3 additional years Several technical and timeline amendments have been made to Principle 2 and Principle 3.

ESEA Flexibility Waiver Update Where are we now? In March of 2014, the SCDE applied for a one-year extension of the waiver for To be approved, the SCDE must adhere to the major requirements of the first three Principles. The amendment for Principle 2 would be extended through With this extension we have an opportunity for a “pause” year.

ESEA Flexibility Waiver Update Where are we now? Principle 3 requires the adoption of a teacher and principal evaluation system that includes student growth as a significant factor in the evaluation system. On June 11, 2014 the State Board approved the Educator Evaluation System that included student growth as a measure. On March 11, 2015, revisions to those guidelines were approved by the State Board.

EXPANDED ADEPT UPDATE

Expanded ADEPT for Classroom-Based Teachers 1.All teachers collect Student Growth evidence each year (after phase in) –Statewide assessment score measures –Student Learning Objectives –30% to 20% - Matrix model 2.All teachers create individual professional growth and development plans every year 3.Observations –All induction contract and annual contract teachers every year –Continuing contract teachers on recertification cycle + –Any teacher at any time at the principal’s discretion 4.All teachers confer with and receive feedback from the school’s instructional leader/designee –SLO conferences (approval, mid-year, evidence) –Goals-Based Evaluation conferences (planning, annual review) –Observation feedback on areas for improvement, guide PD 5.Other evidence of Professional Practice (long-range plans, work samples, reflection, professional review, self-assessment)

Changes Since Initial Posting Student growth – induction and annual use one year; others use multiple (redline 13). Science and High School EVAAS questions (redline 13, 14, 34, 36) Clarify that growth is every year (redline 13). Professional practice – content not specifically divisions into 4 domains (redline 18) Take out implication that induction and annual teachers must receive their EVAAS scores the next fall (redline 25) Revise section on continuing contract teachers with a NI or U (redline 27) – Teacher Employment & Dismissal Act. PADEPP – added emphasis on distributed leadership

Continuing Contract Teachers ADEPTYear 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5 Student Growth (SG) Prof. Growth & Development Plan Observations++++ Feedback Formal/Informal EvidenceGBE SAFE-T District Rating Levels4 Levels Reported to the State (with personally identifiable information (PII) Levels Reported without PII4 + + As required by the district and at the discretion of the principal.

Expanded ADEPT Domains 1.Design and Planning Instruction 2.Instruction 3.The Learning Environment 4.Professionalism 5.Student Growth

PADEPP Principal Professional Standards Vision Instructional Leadership Effective Management Climate School-Community Relations Ethical Behavior Interpersonal Skills Staff Development Principal’s Professional Development Student Growth

Activity“Fall”Mid-YearSpringSummer Train Classroom- Based (C-B) Teachers SY15-16 Induction PK-5 Teachers All Rosters -VAM SY15-16 Induction PK-5 Teachers’ Train & Support Leaders & Evaluators District SLO Orientation All Principals All Evaluators VAM Analysis All Principals All Evaluators VAM Analysis Implement C-B Teachers Induction and PK-5 All Induction Annual – SAFE-T PK-5 Teachers Write SLOs VAM Analysis All Induction Annual – SAFE-T PK-5 Teachers SLO Conference All Induction Annual – SAFE-T PK-5 Teachers SLO Evidence All Rosters-VAM Evaluator Peer Review Train & Support Leaders & Evaluators SLO Draft- Approval Support SLO Mid-Year Conference Support SLO Evidence- Review Support Rosters-VAM Continuous Improvement Debrief-Planning Train C-B Teachers 6-12 Teachers VAM Analysis 6-12 Teachers Principals Evaluators Induction Implement All C-B Teachers C-B Teachers Annual - SLO VAM Analysis C-B Teachers Annual – SLO C-B Teachers Annual - SLO Rosters-VAM Evaluator Peer Review Train & Support Leaders & Evaluators SLO Draft- Approval Support SLO Mid-Year Conference Support SLO Evidence- Review Support Rosters-VAM Continuous Improvement Debrief-Planning Train C-B Teachers Targeted Support Based on Results New Educators Targeted Support Based on Results New Educators Targeted Support Based on Results New Educators Targeted Support Based on Results New Educators

Decision Matrix for Teacher Professional Practice Summative Rating on Professional Practice Unsatisfactory (U) Needs Improvement (NI) Proficient (P) Exemplary (E) 4 Domains 1Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement ProficientExemplary 2Any Needs Improvement ProficientExemplary 3AnyAny except UP or E 4AnyAny except UNI or P or EP or E South Carolina Educator Evaluation Summative Rating Decision Matrix Student Growth Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement ProficientExemplary Professional Practice Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient Needs Improvement Proficient Exemplary Needs Improvement Proficient Exemplary

Decision Rules 1.Any rating of “Unsatisfactory” for Student Growth results in a summative rating no higher than “Needs Improvement.” 2.A summative rating of “Exemplary” requires a rating of “Exemplary” in both Professional Practice and Student Growth. 3.A rating of “Unsatisfactory” in any of the four domains results in overall Professional Practice rating of “Unsatisfactory.” 4.Any two ratings of “Needs Improvement” without an “Unsatisfactory” results in a “Needs Improvement” rating on Professional Practice. 5.No ratings of “Unsatisfactory” and no more than one “Needs Improvement,” but less than 2 “Exemplary,” results in a “Proficient” rating on Professional Practice. 6.At least two “Exemplary” and no ratings of “Unsatisfactory” or “Needs Improvement” results in “Exemplary” on Professional Practice.

SLO IMPLEMENTATION

SLO Implementation Training Fall 2014 Spring 2015 Summer and Fall 2015

Growth vs Proficiency

ED.SC.GOV/SLO SLO Toolkit

SLO Guidebook Focus at Teacher Level Detailed document that explains SLO information including: –Purpose –Benefits –Creation Process and timeline –Various types –Setting Growth Targets –Data Collection –Evaluation and Scoring Includes Sample Templates

PowerPoint Training Module Designed for Teachers

Facilitator Script Accompaniment to PowerPoint Designed for easy use by trainers Step-by-step process of delivery

Points to Consider The Training is a Framework –Build on it to fit the needs of your district Training Time Frame –There is no recommended time for training. We estimate the training will take about 2 hours, however, the time it takes participants to complete activities, participant questions, and additional district information may affect the training time frame Just the Beginning –This is a living document; Over year, “just in time” training modules will be added to assist with implementation.

Next Steps Determine what assessments to use within the SLO process (Consider assessments currently in use that are appropriate, and think about what you may need to add.) Determine decisions that have been made at the district level and decisions that should be made. Think about additional evidence that may be collected to support the SLO measures. Encourage teachers to identify evidence sources. Create/Review your roll out plan.