1. Teacher Evaluation Components in Legislation Rose Hermodson Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education May 2, 2012

2. Teacher Evaluation: Work Plan education.state.mn.us Teacher Evaluation What is it???? What does it look like?

3. Teacher Evaluation: Work Plan education.state.mn.us Beginning the work  Agreement on Fundamentals  Clarifying Terminology  Identification of Concepts  Sub-group tasks

4. Teacher Evaluation: Work Plan education.state.mn.us Who is to be evaluated? And how is it to be done?

5. What the law Says #(1) education.state.mn.us Probationary Teachers: (1)must, for probationary teachers, provide for all evaluations required under subdivision 5; Subd. 5. Probationary period. (a) The first three consecutive years of a teacher's first teaching experience in Minnesota in a single district is deemed to be a probationary period of employment, and the probationary period in each district in which the teacher is thereafter employed shall be one year. The school board must adopt a plan for written evaluation of teachers during the probationary period that is consistent with subdivision 8. Evaluation must occur at least three times periodically throughout each school year for a teacher performing services during that school year; the first evaluation must occur within the first 90 days of teaching service.

6. Issues for # (1) education.state.mn.us Probationary Teachers:  First three consecutive years if never tenured.  If tenured, in first year in new district. Board must adopt a plan for written evaluation of teachers consistent with subdivision 8. Evaluation must occur at least three times periodically throughout each school. First evaluation must occur within the first 90 days of teaching service.

7. What the law Says #(2) education.state.mn.us Continuing contract or tenured teachers (2) must establish a three-year professional review cycle for each teacher that includes  an individual growth and development plan,  a peer review process,  the opportunity to participate in a professional learning community under paragraph (a), and  at least one summative evaluation performed by a qualified and trained evaluator such as a school administrator.  For the years when a tenured teacher is not evaluated by a qualified and trained evaluator, the teacher must be evaluated by a peer review;

8. Issues for # (2) education.state.mn.us Continuing Contract or Tenured Teachers: Three-year professional review cycle that includes:  Individual growth and development plan. How is this determined?  Opportunity to participate in a professional learning community. How is this done?  Peer review process. Must be part of plan. Does it count as summative?

9. Issues for # (2) education.state.mn.us Continuing contract or tenured teachers: Three-year professional review cycle that includes:  At least one summative evaluation in cycle.  Performed by a qualified and trained evaluator such as a school administrator. How does one “qualify” (who decides)? Training evaluators? Who does this? Does a school administrator automatically qualify?

10. What the law Says #s (3, 4, 5 & 6) education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract (3) must be based on professional teaching standards established in rule; (4) must coordinate staff development activities under sections 122A.60 and 122A.61 with this evaluation process and teachers' evaluation outcomes; (5) may provide time during the school day and school year for peer coaching and teacher collaboration; (6) may include mentoring and induction programs;

11. Issues for # (3) education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract Based on professional teaching standards established in rule;  Must these be the Board of Teaching Standards?  How is this done? Observations/Formative Evaluations Identifying Performance Measures/Domains Indicators for Measures/Domains Rubrics Evidences

12. Issues for #s (4, 5 & 6) education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract  Coordinate staff development activities with evaluation process and teachers' evaluation outcomes. How is this incorporated into a state model? Will they be teacher specific? What are the costs?  May provide time during the school day and school year for peer coaching and teacher collaboration;  May include mentoring and induction programs; Do we want to require these as part of the state model? What are the costs?

13. What the law Says # (7) education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract (7) must include an option for teachers to develop and present a portfolio demonstrating evidence of reflection and professional growth, consistent with section 122A.18, subdivision 4, paragraph (b), and include teachers' own performance assessment based on student work samples and examples of teachers' work, which may include video among other activities for the summative evaluation;

14. Issues for # (7) education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract Portfolio:  Must be part of the process.  Option for teachers.  Present (to whom) ? In what format?  Demonstrating evidence of reflection and professional growth, consistent with section 122A.18, subdivision 4, (b),  Teachers' own performance assessment based on student work samples and examples of teachers' work, which may include video among other activities for the summative evaluation;  How evaluated?: Use of Performance Measures/Indicators  Can it replace observations? Formative evaluation?

15. What the law Says # (8) education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract (8) must use an agreed upon teacher value-added assessment model. –for the grade levels and subject areas for which value-added data are available and; –establish state or local measures of student growth for the grade levels and subject areas for which value-added data are not available; –as a basis for 35 percent of teacher evaluation results;

16. Issues for # 8 education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract Basis of evaluations: 35 percent  “Teacher value-added assessment model” Does Minnesota have such an “assessment model” Is it Valid? Is it Reliable  Agreed upon (By whom)? Minnesota has no value-added data. MDE can calculate student growth z-scores. Now What???????

17. Issues for # 8 education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract Basis of evaluations: 35 percent  Grade levels and subject areas for which test data are available Reading MCAs Grades 3 through 8 and Grade 10 Math MCAs Grades 3 through 8 and Grade 11 Science Grades 5, 8 and once in high school

18. Issues for # 8 Decisions to be made  What does 35 % mean?  How will it be determined?  Non-tested subjects and areas  Teachers in other assignments  Teachers with multiple assignments  Team-teaching and other non- traditional classroom settings For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract How will it be applied equally?  Non-subject matter teachers Counselors Nurses Librarians  Teachers teaching multiple classes Phy ed Art Music education.state.mn.us

19. Issues for # 8 education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract If no Value-added data available…..  Establish state or local measures Student growth Grade levels in all subject areas K-2, 9-12 Subject areas –All except Reading and Math (Science) –Non-tested areas So...What are the options for student assessments?

20. Issues for # 8 education.state.mn.us For Both Probationary & Continuing Contract  If no Value-added data available….. What are the options? Who will design? What about reliability, validity?  How do these assessment requirements relate to our NCLB Waiver? Proficiency Growth Closing the achievement gap Graduation Rates

21. What the law Says #s (9 & 10) education.state.mn.us (9) must use longitudinal data on student engagement and connection, and other student outcome measures explicitly aligned with the elements of curriculum for which teachers are responsible (10) must require qualified and trained evaluators such as school administrators to perform summative evaluations;

22. Issues for #s (9 & 10 ) education.state.mn.us  Longitudinal data on student engagement and connection How do we define student engagement & connection? How would we measure this?  Other student outcome measures explicitly aligned with the elements of curriculum for which teachers are responsible What does this mean? How do you align with curriculum? What about teachers who do not teach a curriculum?  Require qualified and trained evaluators How do we determine qualified? Who does training? Which school administrators? Required to perform summative evaluations?

23. What the law Says #s (11 & 12) education.state.mn.us (11) must give teachers not meeting professional teaching standards under clauses (3) through (10) support to improve through a teacher improvement process that includes established goals and timelines; and; (12) must discipline a teacher for not making adequate progress in the teacher improvement process under clause (11) that may include a last chance warning, termination, discharge, nonrenewal, transfer to a different position, a leave of absence, or other discipline a school administrator determines is appropriate.

24. Issues for # (11) education.state.mn.us Evaluation Results Teachers not meeting professional teaching standards under clauses (3) through (10)  How do these standards differ from clause (3) alone?  Support to improve through a teacher improvement process. Who and how decided? How detailed in model?  Established goals and timelines. How are goal set? What kind of timelines are appropriate?

25. Issues for # (12) Not making adequate progress What is adequate? Who will decide? Will it require another summative? Will peer review count? May Include: a last chance warning, termination, discharge, nonrenewal, transfer to a different position, a leave of absence, or other discipline a school administrator determines is appropriate. education.state.mn.us Is this consistent with other parts of the statute?

26. How to get the work done? Agreement on Fundamentals  What are the model components?  How many performance categories?  What does the process look like? education.state.mn.us

27. Agreement on Fundamentals education.state.mn.us Components of the Evaluation Model  Observations/formative evaluations (___%)  Student value-added data (35%)  Student engagement and connection-longitudinal data (____%)  Summative Results (by trained evaluators)

28. Agreement on Fundamentals education.state.mn.us

29. Agreement on Fundamentals Component III: Student Engagement & Connections What are options? Surveys?Other? Observations? Components of Summative Evaluation Component I: Observation/Formative Evaluation education.state.mn.us Component II: Assessment Data (35%) What are options? MCA’sEnd of course test Teacher designed NWEAOther tests

30. Agreement on Fundamentals Component I: Observations/Formative What Performance Measures? How many Measures? What are indicators? How many indicators of each? Rubrics for indicators? Evidences? Components of Summative Evaluation What is the process How are observations conducted? Who does observations? What type(s) of observations? Role of Peer Review How often? education.state.mn.us

31. Agreement on Fundamentals Component I: Observations/Formative Performance Measure #1: Establishes a Vision and Mission Focused on Shared Goals and High Expectations Indicators: 1.Engages all stakeholders in the development and implementation of a shared vision of learning, a strong organizational mission and high, measureable goals that prepares every student to succeed in post-secondary learning and to become responsible and contributing citizens. 2.Articulates a vision and develops strategies, for change that results in measurable achievement gains for all students including closing achievement gaps. 3.Fosters a shared commitment to high expectations for student achievement and high standards of teaching and learning in a culturally competent environment where diversity is valued. 4.Establishes rigorous, measureable goals for instructional program decisions and staff learning experiences that are consistent with school’s mission, vision, and core beliefs. 5.Builds a strong and positive sense of community in the school by honoring the important role of race and culture, its traditions, artifacts, symbols, values and norms, as a contributor to student and school success. What do Performance Measure and Indicators look like? education.state.mn.us

32. Agreement on Fundamentals Performance Categories  How Many? What do we name them? Three? Exemplary; Proficient; Unsatisfactory Above Standards; Meets Standards; Below Standards Four? Highly Effective, Effective; Partially Effective; Ineffective Five? Distinguished; Master; Satisfactory; Developing; Unsatisfactory  Descriptors: How to we describe each category? Consistently exceeds standards. Exceeds standards in most areas. Meets standards in all areas. Does not meet standards. education.state.mn.us

33. Agreement on Fundamentals The Process : What is the process?  Timelines  Understanding evaluation (PD)  Pre-meeting with evaluator  Self Assessment  Goal-setting  Evidence collection  Student data decisions  Observations  Summative decisions  Appeals Observations How will observations be done?  Pre-Observation  Observation  Post Observation  Observation types Formal Informal Walk Through/Casual Observations  Peer Observations How selected? education.state.mn.us

34. Teacher Evaluation: Work Plan Clarifying Terminology  Evaluation Formative Summative Evaluated vs. observed  Teacher Definition (Tenure/CC Law, BMS, TRA ) Who is included? Charter school teachers?  Other Issues education.state.mn.us

35. Teacher Evaluation: Work Plan Clarifying Terminology and Other Issues  Evaluation Formative Summative Evaluated vs. observed  Teacher Definition (Tenure/CC Law, BMS, TRA ) Charter school teachers  NCLB Waiver Requirements  Joint Agreement What does this term mean?  Effective dates Tied to contract periods 2014-2015 school year and later. Some provisions apply to all collective bargaining agreements ratified after July 1, 2014 and some after July 1, 2013. education.state.mn.us

36. Teacher Evaluation: Work Plan Identification of Concepts  Observations  Trained evaluators  Three-year professional review cycle  Professional learning communities  Peer review process  “Teacher Value-added Assessment Model”  Portfolios education.state.mn.us

37. Summative Evaluation Performance Results Evaluation by Trained Evaluator, Peer Review or Portfolio Evidence of professional practice gained through observations and other evidences. Student Performance Measures Multiple measures of student performance using available data, including measures of student learning and growth. Student Engagement and Connection Additional evidences related to competencies like student input including surveys. Does Not Improve Improves Highly Effective Consistently exceeds standards of performance. Effective Consistently meets standards of performance. Proficient Demonstrates satisfactory competence on levels of performance Unsatisfactory Does not meet acceptable standards of performance Self-directed growth plan. Eligible for additional roles; responsibilities; Mentor/Coach Self-directed growth plan. One-year improvement plan developed by evaluator. One-year jointly developed growth plan. Discipline per Minnesota Statute 122A.40 or 122A.41 or local district option..

38. Agreement on Fundamentals education.state.mn.us Time to Pick Your Passion!!!!! Which Subcommittee??? What Issues do you want to help resolve????