1. Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR)
Joint Education Committee Meeting
December 12, 2012

2. Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR) A research-based instrument to evaluate teacher effectiveness
M-STAR’s Goal: To improve teacher practice and
positively impact student learning
M-STAR:
provides a reliable and valid process based on common standards,
includes multiple measures,
indentifies areas of strength and challenge, and
helps track educational progress to improve the performance of teachers.

3. The National Perspective:
Research and Reports
Research confirms that teachers and leaders matter most to students’ achievement.
Recent studies find current educator evaluation systems are deficient in three key ways:
Lack sufficient connection to goals for student learning and growth
Do not provide educators with adequate feedback for improvement
Fail to differentiate educator effectiveness
Talking Points:
In the 2009 McKinsey Education report, “Shaping the Future: How Good Education Systems Can Become Great in the Decade Ahead,” the central importance of good teaching and school leadership in student outcomes is widely acknowledged.
Over a 3 year period, learning with a high-performing teacher instead of a low-performing teacher can make a 53-percentile difference for two students who start at the same achievement level.
Replacing an average principal with an outstanding principal in an average school can increase student achievement by over 20 percentile points.

4. Trends in Teacher Evaluation
Inclusion of student achievement growth data represents a huge “culture shift” in evaluation
Focus on models and measures that help teachers/schools/districts improve performance
Policy is way ahead of the research in teacher evaluation measures and models

5. U.S. Department of Education Priority for Identifying Effective Teachers
Method for determining and identifying effective and
highly effective teachers:
Must include multiple measures
Effectiveness evaluated, in significant part, on the basis of student growth
Supplemental measures may include multiple observation based instruments
Talking Points:
One of the most important things school systems can do to promote student achievement is to ensure that all students have effective teachers.
Over the years, research has shown that many of our traditional methods of ensuring teacher effectiveness, such as requiring particular credentials, experience, or education, are not strongly related to teachers’ effectiveness in promoting achievement. In response, policymakers are looking at alternative measures of teacher effectiveness.

6. Defining Teacher Quality
“Highly qualified teacher” status:
Bachelor’s degree
Full state certification
Demonstrated knowledge of assigned subject(s)
“Highly effective teacher” status:
Student academic growth
Other measures

7. Defining Teacher Quality
Stakeholder engagement
Mississippi Teachers of the Year
State Teacher Evaluation Council (STEC)
Meetings with Teachers and Principals
Teacher Focus Groups (2,000 Teachers)
Teacher Organizations
Mississippi Association of School Superintendents
Contract with American Institutes for Research (AIR) to streamline and redesign instrument

8. Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) in Mississippi
Five Year Federal Grant
Awarded September 2010
$ 10.7 Million Award for MS
Serves 10 schools in 7 districts
Multi-strategy approach to school improvement
Here are the basics of the MS TIF grant.

9. Five TIF Project Components for
Multiple Strategies
Five TIF Project Components for
School Improvement
Educator Evaluation
Student Growth Data
Professional Development
Career Ladders for Teachers
Performance Based Compensation
TIF proposes that there are multiple strategies for school improvement, not just financial incentives. Even though financial incentives gets the most publicity, it is not the magic bullet.

10. DOMAINS, STANDARDS, PERFORMANCE LEVELS, AND RATINGS
M-STAR
DOMAINS, STANDARDS, PERFORMANCE LEVELS, AND RATINGS

11. M-STAR Why a standardized process?
Increases the validity of the evaluation and the reliability of the evaluation instruments
Ensures teachers are evaluated fairly, using consistent criteria
Ensures that scores are based on evidence, not on personal judgment or bias
Strengthens evaluative decisions
Explain:
“M-STAR will ensure that teachers are being evaluated fairly. It will also increase the reliability and the validity of the performance level.”

12. How is M-STAR Different?
Traditional Observations
Evidence-Based Observations
Single time point for classroom observation
Multiple time points for classroom observation
Use of “checklist” tools (strength/weakness, yes/no)
Use of rubrics that define instructional improvement on a continuum
High performance ratings given to almost all teachers
Variations in performance ratings among teachers
Does not include student outcomes
Links teacher effectiveness to student performance

13. Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR)
Five domains (weighted equally)
Planning
Assessment
Instruction
Learning Environment
Professional Responsibilities
20 Standards
Four levels of effectiveness:
Unsatisfactory
Emerging
Effective
Distinguished

14. Professional Practice: 50%
A teacher’s summative rating is based on two components: Professional Practice and Student Outcomes.
Professional Practice: 50%
M-STAR: 30%
2 formal observations
5 informal observations (walkthroughs)
Professional Growth Goals: 20%
Self-evaluate, receive feedback, and progress toward goals
Student Outcomes: 50%
Individual Growth
State tested areas OR
Student Learning Objectives
Non-tested areas
AND
School-wide Growth
Tested and Non-tested
Explain that these percentages are tentative.

15. Formal Observation Cycle
Review lesson plan,
understand context,
& ask clarifying questions
Key Questions:
What are students learning?
What is the evidence of this learning?
Pre-Observation Conference
1-2 days prior to observation
Observation
Post-Observation Conference
Within 1 week of observation
Follow up Walkthrough
Within 2 weeks of post-observation conference
This slide diagrams the Formal Observation Cycle.
Explain:
“This slide diagrams the Formal Observation Cycle. Notice the four steps of the cycle including the timeline and also the importance of feedback.”
Effective, concrete feedback &
next steps are critical.
Observe feedback
in action

16. Scoring Process
Teachers will receive a rating (on a point scale) for each standard
4 points
3 points
2 points
1 point
Within each domain, the points will be averaged.
The averages from each domain will be weighted equally to arrive at a summative rating.
Explain:
“For each standard, teachers will receive a rating. The teacher will receive 4 points for distinguished, 3 points for effective, 2 points for emerging, and 1 point for unsatisfactory. The points are averaged within each domain. The averages will be weighted equally to get a summative rating.”
Have participants refer to pages of the process manual as you proceed through the scoring slides.

17. M-STAR Ratings
A teacher’s performance will be appraised in accordance with a four-level rating scale:
Level 4 Distinguished: indicates that the teacher’s performance consistently exceeds expectations.
Level 3 Effective: indicates that the teacher’s performance meets expectations.
Level 2 Emerging: indicates that the teacher’s performance inconsistently meets expectations.
Level 1 Unsatisfactory: indicates that the teacher’s performance does not meet expectations.

18. Example: Summative Observation Rating
Domain
Domain Score
Weight
Weighted Rating
I: Planning
2.75 x
.55
II: Assessment 4
.80
III: Instruction
2.5
.50
IV: Learning Environment
3.5 x
.70
V: Professional Responsibilities
Summative Classroom Observation Rating
3.05
Explain:
“The evaluator would multiply each domain score by .20 in order to obtain a weighted rating. Each domain counts 1/5 of the overall summative classroom observation rating.”
( ) 5

19. Implementation Timeline
MS Teacher Evaluation System
Implementation Timeline
Pilot Implementation (TIF) Statewide Training on New System July 2012 – July 2013 Field Test the System Full Implementation

20. M-STAR TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL FOCUS GROUP RESPONSES PRE-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE
Teachers
Clear expectations for both teachers and principals
Specific, timely feedback
Principal awareness of what will occur in the classroom
Teacher/principal communication
Necessity of teacher preparation
Focus on teacher’s strengths and weaknesses
Teacher self-reflection
Prior identification of potential problems
Principals
Clear expectations for both teachers and principals
Opportunity for open dialogue
Information on what administrators want to observe
Easing of teachers’ anxieties
Relationship building with teachers
Opportunity for knowledge gathering
Alerting of principals to special circumstances

21. M-STAR TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL FOCUS GROUP RESPONSES POST-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE
Teachers
Immediate, timely feedback
Dialogue on strengths and areas of improvement
Opportunity for professional development and improvement plans
Self-reflection
Teacher explanations of classroom activities (planned and unplanned)
Principals
Feedback on strengths and areas of challenges
Teacher reflection
Open dialogue
Provision of accommodations and recommendations for improvement
Relationship building
Teacher input regarding professional development needs
Time for teacher/administration collaboration
Opportunity for coaching and professional learning

22. TO IMPROVE
TEACHING
AND
LEARNING!
The ultimate goal
of M-STAR is…