North Carolina School Executive Standards

North Carolina School Executive Standards
Welcome and thank you for your interest in the NCEES online tool. Region 2 PD Lead with the Department of Public Instruction. Tell you a little about my new position. The format of this professional development is interactive. Please add comments and ask questions throughout, as your input is encouraged. Educator Evaluation System (NCEES) Sandhills Leadership Academy August 23, 2012

What are the qualities of an excellent leader?
Leadership What are the qualities of an excellent leader?

The Principal’s Story

Leadership Practices

North Carolina Standards for School Executives As Approved by the State Board of Education December 7, 2006 Public education’s changed mission dictates the need for a new type of school leader -- an executive instead of an administrator. No longer are school leaders just maintaining the status quo by managing complex operations but just like their colleagues in business, they must be able to create schools as organizations that can learn and change quickly if they are to improve performance.

stem : flower :: trunk : leaf tree branch root

parking brake : car :: anchor :
plane train bus ship

Educators may use the NC Educator Evaluation System without training.
True False

School Administrators should complete a self assessment
Every Year By Themselves In the online tool All of the above

During the beginning of the year meeting with evaluator, the following will be decided…
Date of first observation Data and artifacts necessary to complete the evolution If the principal’s license is up for renewal All of the above

Which resources contribute to the Consolidated Performance Assessment?
Drop out data TWC data Record of PD provided to the staff Parent survey results All of the above

The mid-year evaluation meeting between the principal and the superintendent is required.
True False

Veteran school administrators can opt for an abbreviated evaluation
True False

The summary ratings must be an average of the notations on a principal’s rubric from throughout the year. True False

Which resources contribute to the development of the Goal Form?
completed self assessment school data TWC data district initiatives All of the above

Which of the following apply for standard 8?
It applies to all principals and APs School-wide EVAAS data will be used It went into effect with the school year D. All of the above

The Principal/AP evaluation process must be documented inside the online tool (or NC Educator Evaluation System). True False

Additional Resources:

Digging into the School Executive Standards
Number off from 1-7 Like #s collaborate to develop a deeper understanding of the standard and elements that correspond with your assigned number Prepare a brief presentation to share your expertise with the whole group

Ratings for Standards1-7
Consistently and significantly exceeded basic competence Distinguished Exceeded basic competence most of the time Accomplished Demonstrated basic competence Proficient Demonstrated adequate growth toward achieving standards, but did not demonstrate basic competence Developing All of the ratings for the NC Teacher Evaluation Process are defined on page 4 of the manual. On this slide, you will note that we have bolded some of the words. Let’s look at the bolded words as we look at each rating category. For example, a rating of “developing” indicates that the teacher, while showing growth, did not demonstrate basic competence. A rating of “proficient” indicates the teacher demonstrated basic competence. “Accomplished” ratings indicate that the teacher exceeded basic competence most of the time. And a rating of “Distinguished” would indicate that the teacher consistently and significantly exceeded basic competence.

Distinguished Accomplished Proficient Developing
Consistently and significantly exceeded basic competence Accomplished Exceeded basic competence most of the time Proficient Demonstrated basic competence Developing Demonstrated adequate growth toward achieving standards, but did not demonstrate basic competence Sometimes analogies help us better understand the ratings. Some of you have been in our regional training sessions where we discussed growing levels of competency with using a smart phone or the gadgets on a new car. Today, let’s think about how the ratings would apply to baking cakes. As a developing cake baker, you follow the recipe, but your cooking techniques aren’t always successful. Your cake might be dry, the layers may fall apart, or the icing isn’t the right consistency. You demonstrate growth by practicing and your cakes become better, although still not quite right. Look at the picture. This is a cake, and perhaps it is a better cake than the baker’s many previous attempts. However, this cake would still be unacceptable from a professional baker. This reminds us educationally of a teacher who, despite making growth, has not yet reached proficiency. As a proficient cake baker, you follow the recipe and you’ve mastered the basic cooking techniques. You are able to produce a basic layer cake with frosting that tastes good and looks nice. The cake pictured is acceptable by all measures, which reminds us educationally of basic competence with such important matters as instructional strategies or communication. In other words, this cake is acceptable and yet still has room to grow. Let’s look at the next cake from the accomplished baker. As an accomplished cake baker, you have a greater understanding of baking and on most occasions you are able to successfully incorporate additional ingredients and/or flavorings that improve the taste, appearance, and overall quality of your cakes. You’ll note that the cake pictured has multiple flavors, which reminds us educationally of differentiation and multiple instructional strategies. As a distinguished cake baker, you have an in-depth understanding of baking cakes. As such, you know the essential ingredients that must be included in all cakes. Using your knowledge, you are able to begin with the recipe, combining the essential ingredients and other add-ins to tailor your cakes to meet the tastes of the person for which you are making the cake. In other words, you understand the recipe well enough to enhance it. Your talent and skill as a distinguished baker may lead you to decorate exquisitely or even assist others in developing their baking skills. Distinguished truly is the “icing on the cake” so-to-speak. What resources do you have to help you and your teachers better understand the differences between the ratings for teachers and school executives? Your best resources are the rubrics for evaluating teachers and principals/assistant principals. The performance descriptors provided for each element of the performance standards will help you determine the expectation for each rating level. Engage in conversations with colleagues about the differences between the descriptors on the rubrics. It’s also helpful to have a firm understanding of the Standards for Teachers and School Executives. If you need a refresher on the professional standards, consider completing the N.C. Professional Teaching Standards Module and the soon-to-be-released School Executive Standards Module. Cake images Image Credits:

If Rated Not Evident/Demonstrated…
Note: If the “Not Evident/Not Demonstrated” rating is used, the superintendent must comment about why it was used. 2. The superintendent did not have an opportunity to make such observations. adequate progress toward achieving a “Proficient” rating, or 1. The principal did not perform at a level that would provide data to demonstrate competence or

Complete a Self Assessment
Login to the demo site using the URL: Username: principaldemo1 Password:

An area of strength for me is:
Strategic Leadership Instructional Leadership Cultural Leadership Human Resource Leadership Managerial Leadership External Development Leadership Micro Political Leadership

An area I need to develop is:
Strategic Leadership Instructional Leadership Cultural Leadership Human Resource Leadership Managerial Leadership External Development Leadership Micro Political Leadership

Standard 1: Strategic Leadership
Summary: School executives will create conditions that result in strategically re-imaging the school’s vision, mission, and goals in the 21st century. Understanding that schools ideally prepare students for an unseen but not altogether unpredictable future, the leader creates a climate of inquiry that challenges the school community to continually re-purpose itself by building on its core values and beliefs about its preferred future and then developing a pathway to reach it.

Scenario: Standard 1/Strategic Leadership
Mr. Ball is a great strategic leader. He has a very successful School Improvement Team (SIT). Every year, he creates a team that is focused on making certain the district, state and school goals are aligned with the mission. The SIT generates SMART goals and organizes themselves every year to get things done. In fact, Mr. Ball has received the district recognition for his work on the SIT and has been asked by the superintendent to coach his colleagues on the processes he uses. Think about Mr. Ball. What Strategic Leadership Practices are evident? Based on the descriptors in the rubric, what rating would you give Mr. Ball for Standard 1?

I would rate Mr. Ball _________ on Standard 1
Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished Not Demonstrated

Standard 2: Instructional Leadership
Summary: School executives will set high standards for the professional practice of 21st century instruction and assessment that result in a no nonsense accountable environment. The school executive must be knowledgeable of best instructional and school practices and must use this knowledge to cause the creation of collaborative structures within the school for the design of highly engaging schoolwork for students, the on-going peer review of this work and the sharing of this work throughout the professional community.

Scenario: Standard 2/Instructional Leadership
Mrs. Suitt has been an administrator for ten years. She is described by her staff as a person who gets things done. If she does not believe the innovation is best for students, she will not implement it in her school. Everybody knows that Mrs. Suitt runs her school. She just does not like status quo and leads by example. When people heard that she was investing 45% of the state school budget for the purchase of IPADS for a one-to-one initiative for 5th grade students. It became a big issue in the district. This issue is getting more conflicting. Think about Mrs. Suitt. Which Instructional Leadership Practices are most evident? Based on the descriptors in the rubric, what rating would you give Mrs. Suitt for Standard 2?

I would rate Mrs. Suitt _________ on Standard 2

Standard 3: Cultural Leadership
Summary: School executives will understand and act on the understanding of the important role a school’s culture contributes to the exemplary performance of the school. School executives must support and value the traditions, artifacts, symbols and positive values and norms of the school and community that result in a sense of identity and pride upon which to build a positive future. A school executive must be able to “reculture” the school if needed to align with school’s goals of improving student and adult learning and to infuse the work of the adults and students with passion, meaning and purpose. Cultural leadership implies understanding the school as the people in it each day, how they came to their current state, and how to connect with their traditions in order to move them forward to support the school’s efforts to achieve individual and collective goals.

Scenario: Standard 3/Cultural Leadership
Mr. Howard is a second year principal at Dover Middle School. He felt that the school mascot of the past 30 years needed to be updated and aligned with the feeder High School mascot. He consulted with the School Improvement Team about the change. It was voted on by the staff and supported. Students and parents were surveyed and the majority supported the change. A student designed a new mascot and colors that were aligned with the neighboring High School. School uniform shirts that were printed with the previous mascot were not permitted to be worn any longer as part of the shift to a new mascot. Some parents and students were disgruntled by the uniform policy. Mr. Howard held firm in his expectation that uniform shirts featuring the previous mascot could not be worn and justified the policy based on staff, student, and parent support of a new mascot. How would you rate Mr. Howard? Think about Mr. Howard. Which Cultural Leadership Practices are most evident? Based on the descriptors in the rubric, what rating would you give Mr. Howard for Standard 3?

I would rate Mr. Howard _______ on Standard 3

Principal Evaluation Process

The intended purpose of the evaluation process is to assess the principal’s or assistant principal’s performance in relation to the North Carolina Standards for School Executives in a collegial and non-threatening manner. The individual being evaluated will take the lead in conducting the evaluation process through the use of self-assessment, reflection and by gathering input from the various stakeholders with an interest in the leadership in the school. The input and evidence gathered by the principal or assistant principal is not intended to become part of a portfolio. Rather, it should provide a basis for self-assessment, goal-setting, professional development, and demonstration of performance on specific standards. The following steps outline the required elements of the evaluation process.

Step 1: Orientation (the beginning of school)
At the beginning of the school year, the superintendent/designee will conduct a group orientation with all of the district principals and assistant principals. At this orientation, each principal and assistant principal will be provided a complete set of materials outlining the evaluation process.

Step 2: Pre-Evaluation Planning Before your Initial Meeting with Superintendent or Designee
Principals will complete a self-assessment using the North Carolina School Executive: Principal Evaluation Rubric. (pp.16–26) This self-assessment will serve as the basis for the preliminary goals form, which should be completed prior to Step 3.

Step 3: Meeting Between Principal and Superintendent/Designee
Principals will meet individually with the district superintendent or a designee who has been delegated the responsibility to discuss the results of self evaluation, preliminary performance goals and the evidence and data to be gathered for the evaluation process. The principal and superintendent will agree on the data, evidence, and artifacts necessary to complete the evaluation process and confirm the principal’s level of performance.

Step 4: Data Collection Step 4: Data Collection
The principal will collect the data agreed upon in Step 3. These data may include the artifacts listed for each standard on the rubric; feedback from parents, students, and the school community; documentation of professional development completed during the year; and other data to document achievement of performance goals. The district superintendent/designee will visit the school during this period in order to observe the environment and interact with teachers and other members of the school community.

Step 5: Mid Year Conference
Step 5: Mid-Year Evaluation Between Principal/Assistant Principal and Superintendent/Designee Principals/assistant principals will meet individually with the district superintendent or a designee who has been delegated the responsibility to discuss the principal’s/assistant principal’s progress toward achieving his or her annual goals. This mid-year discussion will focus on the status of goal attainment and mid-year adjustments to action plans that must be made in order to achieve goals by the end of the school year

Step 6: Prepare a Consolidated Performance Assessment
The principal/assistant principal will synthesize the information obtained under Steps 4 and 5 in order to prepare a consolidated assessment or comprehensive view of performance throughout the year. This brief summary of the data and artifacts used to judge performance should be provided to the superintendent/designee well in advance of the performance discussion at which final performance levels will be discussed.

Step 7: Summary Evaluation Conference
Step 7: Meeting Between Principal/Assistant Principal and Superintendent/Designee The principal/assistant principal and superintendent/designee will meet at the school to discuss progress in completing the evaluation process. They will discuss the self-assessment, consolidated assessment, and summary evaluation of the principal/assistant principal, which the superintendent/designee prepared in advance of the meeting. Should additional data or artifacts need to be brought into the discussion, the principal/assistant principal will have them readily available to share at that time. At this meeting, the principal/assistant principal and superintendent/designee will agree upon performance goals and recommendations for the Professional Growth Plan.

https://mxweb3.media-x.com/home/ncval/demo/

Accessing Demo Site Login to the demo site using the URL:
Username: principaldemo1 Password: Can pick any username from # 1- 40 If they want to see what teacher sees, can log in as teacherdemo1-40 Same password.

Practices: Standards 1-7 Outcomes: Standard 8
Academic Achievement Leadership

Principal Rating Categories Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support
▲ Principals 8 1 6 5 4 3 2 7 Instructional Leadership Cultural Leadership Human Resource Leadership Managerial Leadership External Development Leadership Micro- political Leadership Academic Achievement Leadership Strategic Leadership For principals, nothing changes about the first seven standards. For standard eight, the rating options are does not meet expected growth, meets expected growth, and exceeds expected growth. 5 Rating Categories 3 Rating Categories Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished Does not Meet Expected Growth Meets Expected Growth Exceeds Expected Growth 12/3/2018 • page 48

Principal Ratings Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ Standards 8 rating will be determined using school-wide EVAAS growth 8 For principals and assistant principals, the eighth standard rating will be based on school-wide EVAAS growth. Yearly Rating Does not Meet Expectations Meets Expected Growth Exceeds Expected Growth School-wide EVAAS Growth 12/3/2018 • page 49

What is the difference between Ratings and Status?
Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ What is the difference between Ratings and Status? 12/3/2018 • page 50

Ratings Status Status ▲
Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ Ratings Status Teachers 6 separate ratings to help teachers grow each year Principals 8 separate ratings to help principals grow each year A single overall status that is determined once a principal or teacher has three years of growth data to populate 6 or 8 Categories for Status An educator status is a more holistic picture of educator effectiveness than any one standard taken alone. Three years of data must be in place before a teacher or administrator can receive a status of in need of improvement, effective, or highly effective. In Need of Improvement Effective Highly Effective 12/3/2018 • page 51

6 6 6 3-Year Rolling Average Teacher 1.0 + .8 + 1.2 3 = 1.0 ▲
Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ Rating from 2 years ago Rating from 1 year ago Rating from this year Standard 6 Standard 6 Standard 6 3 Contribute to Academic Success Contribute to Academic Success On this slide, you see an example of how the rolling average works. Each year, the teacher received a sixth standard rating based on student growth during that school year. The three values roll up into a three-year average that is used as part of the status determination. = 1.0 Met Expected Growth 3- year average rating on standard 6 for determining status 1.0 Met Expected Growth .8 Did not meet Expected Growth 1.2 Met Expected Growth Note: A similar methodology applies to principals as well. 12/3/2018 • page 52

Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ So once an educator has a three-year average rating for Standard 6 or 8, how is status determined? 12/3/2018 • page 53

In Need of Improvement Effective Highly Effective Status
Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ The Three Status Categories are In Need of Improvement Effective Highly Effective 12/3/2018 • page 54

A low evaluation for one standard means a teacher is in need of improvement?
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

/ 1 5 4 3 2 ) ) 3 Teacher Status Standards 1-5 In the year
Rationale - MET Research - Standards 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ In Need of Improvement Effective Highly Effective Standards 1-5 In the year Any rating lower than proficient Proficient or Higher on Standards 1-5 Accomplished or Higher on Standards 1-5 A teacher is in need of improvement if any rating on standard 1 – 5 is developing or not demonstrated, or if the rating for standard 6 is “does not meet expected growth.” Of course, if a teacher is not meeting expected growth, we expect that this will be reflected in one of the other standards. Highly effective is a very high bar. Please remember that proficiency is what we expect for ratings on standards 1 – 5, and meeting expected growth is what we expect for standard 6. Effective teachers are doing what they need to do for their students. Highly effective teachers are those going above and beyond expectations. These are the individuals who can lead PLCs, mentor new teachers, and serve in leadership capacities. 1 5 4 3 2 Demonstrate Leadership Establish Environment Know Content Facilitate Learning Reflect on Practice And/Or And And Standard 6 Three-year rolling average Does Not Meet Expected Growth Meets or Exceeds Expected Growth Exceeds Expected Growth ) / ) 3 2 years ago 6 1 year ago + 6 + This year 6

/ ) 3 Principal Status Standards 1-7 In the year 1 6 5 4 3 2 7
Rationale - MET Research - Standards 6 & 8 - Status - Support ▲ In Need of Improvement Effective Highly Effective Standards 1-7 In the year Any rating lower than proficient Proficient or Higher on Standards 1-7 Accomplished or Higher on Standards 1-7 An administrator is in need of improvement if any rating on standard 1 – 7 is developing or not demonstrated, or if the rating for standard 8 is “does not meet expected growth.” Of course, if an administrator’s school is not meeting expected growth, we expect that this will be reflected in one of the other standards. 1 6 5 4 3 2 7 Strategic Leadership Instructional Leadership Cultural Leadership Human Resource Leadership Managerial Leadership External Development Leadership Micro- political Leadership And/Or And And Standard 8 Three-year rolling average Does Not Meet Expected Growth Meets or Exceeds Expected Growth Exceeds Expected Growth 8 2 years ago 1 year ago This year + / 3 )

North Carolina Educator Evaluation System Evaluation Summary Sheet
Name: Martha Washington School: Independence Elementary School LEA: Freedom County Schools Licensure: Career-Status Overall Status: Needs Improvement Standard One: Teachers demonstrate leadership. Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished Standard Two: Teachers establish a respectful environment. Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished Standard Three: Teachers know the content they teach. Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished DRAFT Standard Four: Teachers facilitate learning for their students. Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished Standard Five: Teachers reflect on their practice. Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished Standard Six: Teachers contribute to the academic success of students. *Only three-year rolling average is used to determine overall status* Year One (2009 – 2010) Year Two (2010 – 2011) Year Three (2011 – 2012) Three-Year Rolling Average* Individual Student Growth: -1.8 School-wide Student Growth: .1 Year One Growth: Individual Student Growth: 1.2 School-wide Student Growth: .5 Year Two Growth: 1.13 Individual Student Growth: .7 Year Three Growth: .68 0.03 Does not meet expected growth Meets expected growth Exceeds expected growth Does not meet expected growth Meets expected growth Exceeds expected growth Does not meet expected growth Meets expected growth Exceeds expected growth Does not meet expected growth Meets expected growth Exceeds expected growth Overall Status: Needs improvement Effective Highly Effective

Measures of Student Learning
Measures of Student Learning are being designed for non-tested subjects for district use to populated Standard 6 for teachers and Standard 8 for principals 12/3/2018 • page 59

Why have statewide Measures of Student Learning? North Carolina has a statewide evaluation system to ensure that every teacher receives a fair and consistent evaluation, regardless of his or her employing LEA Teachers in all content areas should receive a Standard Six rating based on the growth of their own students on their content-specific standards Most LEAs do not have the capacity to design their own assessments for all non state-tested grades and subjects

Intended to gather growth data for every teacher, not to assess every student on every content area Local flexibility in when, how, and who administers Designed by 1,000 NC teachers Replace final exams in high school courses

Guiding Principles NC’s experienced teachers know their students and their content NC teachers are best-qualified to provide input on meaningful assessment of currently non-tested grades and subjects Valid measures of what students know and are able to do will likely exceed traditional multiple- choice assessment So let’s return to the many teachers in NC who teach subjects and grades that are not assessed with state exams? There are three principles that ground this difficult work in the strong expertise of NC’s teachers. 800 teachers from 105 LEAs, 10 charter schools, the NCVPS, and Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention have come together to design statewide Measures of Student Learning. Why statewide? Because this system is fair to both teachers and students. Students deserve to receive a high-quality education in all areas of the curriculum, no matter where they attend school. Also, teachers deserve to be evaluated the same no matter what their LEA - with the same rigorous expectations for all. 12/3/2018 • page 62

Locally Developed Courses
Four Buckets of Assessment A B C D EOCs, EOGs and VoCATS Category One of MSLs With appropriate resources and time, these MSLs can be validated psychometrically Category Two of MSLs With the heavy emphasis on performance, these MSLs cannot be validated psychometrically Locally Developed Courses We can think of the Standard Course of Study in NC in four buckets: Bucket A: Courses and grades with accompanying EOCs, EOGs, and VoCATS Bucket B: Category One of MSLs (World History, Seventh Grade Social Studies, Fourth Grade Science). These are courses that, in some cases, used to have state assessments. Even if it’s not a subject area that has been assessed in a standardized way before, the standards lend themselves to assessments that can be validated psychometrically. Bucket C: Category Two of MSLs (Band, PE). These are difficult to assess content areas, and assessment is made more complicated because the subjects are not taught in a standardized way. For example, some middle school students have art every day for eight weeks and some have it once a month. Fourth D: District Electives (Speech and Debate - WCPSS electives). The NCDPI cannot facilitate the creation of Measures of Student Learning for these content areas, although we will provide guidance to LEAs on potential methods and best practices. 12/3/2018 • page 63

1 2 3 4 Three Phase Process October 2011 Fall 2012
Teachers design item specifications for all currently non-tested grades and subjects Summer 2012 Teachers review open-source items and items generated by external vendor(s) Fall 2012 Teachers create rubrics and guidance for administering and scoring Measures of Student Learning 1 2 3 4 The design process has three phases. The first phase (in the fall) brought the teachers together to complete those feedback protocols. After our vendor (TOPS at NC State University) has generated items based on the teacher feedback, we will bring them back again to review the items. They will return one additional time to help with rubrics and guidance for how to administer and score the Measures of Student Learning. 12/3/2018 • page 64

Phase 1 – Fall 2012 High School Science Courses:
Earth/Environmental Science Physics Chemistry Physical Science High School ELA Courses: ELA I, III, and IV High School Math Courses: Pre-calculus Advanced Functions in Modeling Geometry/Integrated II Algebra II/Integrated III Occupational Course of Study Courses: ELA I, III, and IV Financial Management Intro. to HS math Intro. to Applied Science High School Core Social Studies Courses: World History Civics and Economics US History (old EOC for LEAs not teaching Essential Standards) American History I American History II

Phase 1 – Spring 2013 Grade 3 - 8 Subjects:
Grades 3 – 4 and 6 – 7 science Grades 3 – 8 social studies

Phase 2 – Fall 2013 High School Social Studies Elective Courses:
21st Century Global Geography Psychology Sociology World Humanities American Humanities The Cold War Twentieth Century Civil Liberties/Civil Healthful Living: PE Grade 9 Health Grade 9 High School Social Studies Elective Courses (pending development of Essential Standards): Latin American Studies Geography in Action Economics American Government African American Studies Contemporary Issues in NC History Contemporary Law and Justice

Phase 2 – Spring 2014 Healthful Living:
Health Grades 3 – 8 PE Grade 3-8 More information coming soon on: The Arts World Languages Interim Measures of Growth for Healthful Living ELA & Math, K-2