1. Connecting the dots: Human Capital Data and ePlan Needs Assessment
2016 ESEA Directors Institute
August 25, 2016

2. Today’s Agenda Why is human capital management important?
Review Human Capital Data Report Part 1
Review Human Capital Data Report Part 2
Connecting to the ePlan Planning Needs Assessment
Questions

3. Why is human capital management important?
Human capital management responsibilities span the entire organization
Schools
Human Resources
Human Capital
School Management
Central Offices:
Principal, Managers, Supervisors, Academics, etc.
We need to…
get the best talent
deploy our talent deliberately
develop our talent purposefully
retain our talent strategically

4. Teacher Leadership and Pathways
The key lever to drive district improvement is the quality of its people
Preparation
Recruitment
Hiring
Evaluation and Development
Compensation
Teacher Leadership and Pathways
We know that teacher effectiveness matters if we want to improve outcomes for all students, and that we must employ the right policies, systems, and programs to support districts in human capital management. It is not enough to simply focus on those teachers currently in the classroom; we must have a holistic view and consider the entire educator human capital continuum. Evaluation data must be an integral part of all strategies to ensure we are making the best decisions about who is teaching our students.
Effective evaluation implementation allows districts to make “smarter” decisions about teacher recruitment, selection, evaluation, development, compensation, and retention.

5. Tennessee Succeeds Project Plan: All Means All
Strategy: Increase equity of access to highly effective teachers
Major Action Steps:
Develop and distribute updated Human Capital Report Cards to districts
Engage districts in understanding local equity gaps
Report equity gaps publicly on online report card by 2017
Targeted Outcomes:
The state will generate equity gap information on an annual basis for districts and for public reporting
Districts will reduce equity gaps in math and reading using human capital strategies 
Educators beliefs about the benefits of RTI and access will improve

6. Tennessee Succeeds Project Plan: Educator Support
Strategy: Support districts in creating greater differentiation of teacher roles, responsibilities, and salaries
Major Action Steps:
Provide technical assistance to districts to support the creation of teacher-leader models/roles that align to instructional priorities
Increase the usage of flexible salary schedules and differentiated pay plans across tiers to align to instructional priorities
Targeted Outcomes:
Districts will provide differentiated compensation to educators based on the state board guiding principles.
Districts will maintain or improve the number/percentage of Highly Effective teachers (Level 4 and 5) retained and decrease the number of Level 1 teachers retained.

7. Human capital data reports created for each district annually
Effective evaluation implementation is integral to making more intentional human capital decisions
Using three years of evaluation data (TNCompass), these tables provide a snapshot of information that help assess human capital performance
Distribution and alignment
Growth and development
Retention of high and low performers
Hiring of high and low performers
Finding out WHY or HOW is the next level of analysis that district leaders can explore
Paired with a self-assessment tool to ensure the data is actionable
These reports were distributed through s from the TDOE and through the CORE offices.
Distribution and alignment data tells us how well we are evaluating teachers using the multiple measures, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
Growth and development data tells us if teachers are improving based on the feedback and resources provided.
Retention data tells how well we are doing to retaining and leveraging top talent.
Hiring data tells how well our processes for selecting and screening candidates is working for us.

8. Human Capital Data Report Part 1

9. General Information
Primarily used data imported into TN Compass
Notes at the end of each table contain definitions and pertinent information
Guiding questions follow each table
Changes from last year’s reports:
Hiring and retention are not compared to current year
Deleted the Section on Observation Hours/Manpower

10. Section I: Evaluation This is Mid-cumberland
Evaluation reliability is the foundation for work in human capital.
In Tennessee, observation data tends to skew higher with less teachers being observed at levels 1 and 2.
QUESTION: What else would you like to see or know here?
TABLE NOTES:
The numbers of teachers with data in each category are similar except TVAAS but not exactly the same because there are always going to be a couple of teachers who got one part of an evaluation but not another.
The percent at each level is of the teachers with that data in the district. So of the 600 teachers with LOEs in this district, 35.0% were rated Level 3.

11. Section I: Evaluation (cont’d)
This is South Central
Good coaching and feedback are essential to seeing improvement in the quality of teaching that student’s receive.
The reports also explore non-differentiating observers. This data is only available for TEAM districts.
QUESTION: How specifically does the district ensure fidelity in evaluation implementation?
TABLE NOTES:
In this example 10 is the number of teachers with misalignment.
The percent is OUT OF teachers with both TVAAS and observation data.

12. Section 2: Growth and Development
This is Mid Cumberland
Identify which group of teachers the district was most effective at growing.
Personalization of learning and professional development
QUESTION: Given the current number of Level 1 and 2 teachers, how should district and/or school resources be allocated to support instruction?
QUESTION: What is working and what is not working?
QUESTION: How can you measure the effectiveness of the support that you are providing the teachers?
TABLE NOTES:
The numbers of teachers given in parentheses in each row should add up to the number in the left column, or the number of teachers who had TVAAS scores at that level in
If you add each column, that should be the number at that level in

13. Section 3: Hiring
TABLE NOTES:
Ideally, the numbers should add up to the total new hires but not necessarily.
More specifically, the LOEs & Newly Hireds in Tennessee will add up to the total new hires, but it might not always because some people were partial year exempt in the previous year or for some reason already working in TN schools but did not receive LOEs the previous year. Those people will be few and far between.
Note: We did not populate this table at the regional level, so this is mock data. Please see individual district reports for your data.

14. Section 4: Retention This is South Central data
A persistently high-performing teacher is defined as a teacher who has individual growth scores of 4 or 5 for each of the last three years.
A persistently low-performing teacher is defined as a teacher who has individual growth scores of 1 or 2 for each of the last three years.
QUESTION: What district strategies are in place to support school administrators who have a high concentration of new or low-performing teachers?
TABLE NOTES:
The number of persistently low and persistently high will NOT add up to the total teachers with 3 individual growth scores because many of those teachers will have received Level 3 scores at some point in the past three years (more), or have had inconsistent scores over the last three years (less).
3 years of individual TVAAS - Regardless of if the teacher was in the district 3 years ago.

15. Section 4: Retention (cont’d)
This is Mid Cumberland data
Note here that we didn’t populate the locations they moved to on the regional reports – see district reports for this data.
The cool thing for us is that we can track where teachers are going if they stay in a TN district. At the bottom of the page, we list the districts that teachers are moving to.
QUESTION: What do you notice about this district?
QUESTION: Nearly 30% of its level 5 teachers are leaving. Why?
TABLE NOTES:
Here, each percentage is OF TEACHERS AT THAT LEVEL the previous year. So usually, each column will add up to about 100%.
The denominator is the number of teachers in that district with that LOE score in the previous year.
92.9% of the teachers rated a Level 2 in stayed in that district in
7.1% of the teachers rated a Level 2 in moved to a different district in
So of all your Level 2 teachers, 1 left.

16. Section 4: Retention (cont’d)
This table looks at internal moves.
QUESTION: Why would this be important? Why do we care about this measure?
TABLE NOTES:
Here, we’re looking at the percentage of teachers who got that level OF TEACHERS WHO MOVED. So if you’re expecting something to add up to 100%, it’s going to be across the row.
The denominator is the total number of movers.
5 Level 3 teachers (or 50.0% of the total teachers who moved schools) within the district in
So of all your movers, 5 were rated level 3 in
Note: We did not populate this table at the regional level, so this is mock data. Please see individual district reports for your data.

17. Human Capital Data Report Part 2

18. Why examine equitable access?
Students scoring below basic in math in 2013 were more likely to score at a higher achievement level in 2015 if they were placed with a highly effective teacher in both 2014 and 2015.

19. 104 Districts had a Part 2 report
First Tennessee - 14 of 17 districts
East Tennessee - 17 of 22 districts
Southeast - 10 of 14 districts
Upper Cumberland - 11 of 17 districts
Mid Cumberland - 14 of 16 districts
South Central - 11 of 16 districts
Southwest-Memphis of 21 districts
Northwest - 12 of 23 districts

20. Key Terms
Highly effective (HE) teachers – teachers who have individual growth TVAAS scores of level 4 or 5.
Effective teaching gap (ETG) =
% advanced students with an HE teacher minus the % of below basic students with an HE teacher
A positive gap means that a greater percentage of advanced students had an HE teacher
A negative gap means that a greater percentage of below basic students had an HE teacher
Note that not all districts had a report… Upper Cumberland - 11 of 17 districts

21. Districts’ varied with respect to their supply of highly effective
Districts’ varied with respect to their supply of highly effective* teachers in math and ELA in 2014.
4-8 Math
4-8 ELA
EOC Math
EOC ELA
*“Highly effective” is defined as having a level 4 or 5 overall TVAAS

22. Most districts had an effective teaching gap in grades 4-8 ELA
Most districts had an effective teaching gap in grades 4-8 ELA. These gaps ranged from -30% to about 40%.
These districts have more advanced than below basic students paired with highly effective teachers.
State avg = 4.4%

23. In grades 4-8 math, the average gap was 9
In grades 4-8 math, the average gap was 9.5%, with district gaps ranging from -30% to 50%.
These districts have more advanced than below basic students paired with highly effective teachers.
State avg = 9.5%

24. Section 1: District Effective Teaching Gaps (Table 1: Grades 4-8 data)
This is South Central data

25. In districts that had enough data to calculate an EOC ELA effective teaching gap, gaps ranged from -35% to 55%.
State avg = 0.8%

26. In EOC math, the majority of districts had a positive gap.
State avg = 10.1%
These districts have more advanced than below basic students paired with highly effective teachers.

27. Section 1: District Effective Teaching Gaps (Table 2: EOC high school data)

28. Section 2: School Effective Teaching Gaps (Table 3: Grades 4-8 data)
Table 3. School-Level Effective Teaching Gaps (ETGs) in Grades 4-8 ELA and Math
School
4-8 ELA ETG
4-8 Math ETG
School Name A
-5.8%
3.1%
School Name B
0.9%
-1.6%
School Name C 0%
1.3%
School Name D
1.0%
-10.4%
School Name E
2.8%
11.8%
School Name F
-16.3%
0.6%
Table Note. Only schools that had at least 4 highly effective teachers, 10 below basic students, and 10 advanced students in are included in district calculations. “N/A” means that the school did not meet one or more of these criteria. If a school is not listed it means that the school did not meet these criteria for either subject.
Note: We did not populate this table at the regional level, so this is mock data. Please see individual district reports for your data.

29. Section 2: School Effective Teaching Gaps (Table 4: EOC high school data)
Table 4. School-Level Effective Teaching Gaps (ETGs) in EOC ELA and Math
School
EOC ELA ETG
EOC Math ETG
School Name A
0.0%
11.1%
School Name C
N/A
46.7%
School Name D
2.4%
8.5%
School Name E
4.2%
57.9%
School Name G
3.2%
84.4%
School Name H
Table Note. Only schools that had at least 4 highly effective teachers, 10 below basic students, and 10 advanced students in are included in district calculations. “N/A” means that the school did not meet one or more of these criteria. If a school is not listed it means that the school did not meet these criteria for either subject.
Note: We did not populate this table at the regional level, so this is mock data. Please see individual district reports for your data.

30. Connecting the data to the ePlan Planning Needs Assessment

31. Where can I find my district’s reports?
Go to LEA Document Library
Click on 2016
Go to Human Capital Data Reports folder

32. New Section in ePlan: Human Capital Data
New section in both LEA and school planning tool
Data and narrative questions are different in LEA and school plans
Allows for analysis and summary of teacher data
Teacher experience
Attendance rates
Teacher evaluation, growth & performance
Recruitment & retention
Responses to the data provided in each section are required in the LEA plan

33. What kinds of questions do we need to answer?
Guiding questions for distribution of scores:
How do the components of evaluation align across the different levels? What is the alignment between teacher practice and student growth? What differences exist at the school level?
How will the district address any discrepancies? Please include strategies or evaluation flexibility (co-observation, surveys, IPI, etc.) options that the district is currently using. Are there any discrepancies that could be addressed?

34. What kinds of questions do we need to answer?
Guiding questions for new hires:
How are new teachers supported in the district? What strategies are currently in place to generate growth among new hires?
What data does the district use to plan for recruitment?
Describe the district’s plan for recruiting teachers to high-needs subjects? Schools? CTE? Related service teachers? What incentives exists to attract teachers?
What interview and selection tools or processes are in place in this district? How are school leaders trained to identify and select effective teachers?

35. What kinds of questions do we need to answer?
Guiding questions for persistently high/low performing teachers:
What retention practices or incentives are in place, specifically for teachers who have demonstrated strong performance over time?
What district strategies are in place to support school administrators who have a high concentration of new or low-performing teachers?

36. What kinds of questions do we need to answer?
Guiding questions for district and school retention:
Are effective teachers retained at higher rates than less effective teachers? If not, what school or district strategies are in place to improve retention of effective teachers?
What might be the primary reasons teachers exit the district? Are exit interviews required?

37. Strategies or best practices
Improving evaluation reliability
Co-observing, norming and inter-rater reliability activities
Student growth portfolio models (PreK/K, 1st Grade, PE, Fine Arts)
Instructional Partnership Initiative
Improving feedback and professional learning
Individual growth plans for Level 1 and 2 teachers
Personalized professional learning plans
Recruiting, selection and staffing
Priority staffing and incentives for schools, subjects, or grades that address effective teaching gaps
Growing and retaining highly effective teachers
Teacher leadership and career pathways aligned to differentiated pay
Performance based compensation and incentives
Leveraging the consolidated funding flexibilities

38. What’s next
Continued partnership with Consolidated Planning and Monitoring to review Human Capital plans in ePlan
New and updated human capital data reports ( ) to be completed in late Fall 2016
ESSA and Educator Support working group

39. Questions? Sylvia.Flowers@tn.gov

40. Excellence | Optimism | Judgment | Courage | Teamwork
Districts and schools in Tennessee will exemplify excellence and equity such that all students are equipped with the knowledge and skills to successfully embark on their chosen path in life.
Excellence | Optimism | Judgment | Courage | Teamwork