2 Criteria Solid/Research-based Instructional Framework 1Unsatisfactory2Basic3Proficient4DistinguishedCriterion 1Criterion 2Criterion 3Criterion 4Criterion 5Criterion 6Criterion 7Criterion 8Cut Score that Promotes growth and prevents stagnationDistinguishable and ScoredSolid/Research-based Instructional FrameworkFinal Summative Evaluation1Unsatisfactory2Basic3Proficient4DistinguishedFinal Summative DescriptorsTeachers do not demonstrate the necessary content knowledge, pedagogical competence, and professional practice required to improve student learning. Does not meet standardTeachers demonstrate a basic level of content knowledge, pedagogical competence, and professional practice to improve student learning. Teachers in this category also engage in activities designed for improvement and growth towards becoming proficient.Teachers rated in this category consistently demonstrate a proficient level of content knowledge, pedagogical competence, and professional practice to improve student learning.Teachers rated in this category consistently demonstrate an exceptional level of content knowledge, pedagogical competence, and professional practice to improve student learning.
3 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Student Growth Data Section 1, 2(b) (f) (g) Section 1, 6 (g): Student Growth Data that is relevant to the teacher and subject matter must be a factor in evaluations and must be multiple measures.It must be used in at least three of the eight teacher and principal evaluation criteria (Must be a “substantial factor.”)May include the teacher’s performance as an individual or as a member of a team.Student and teacher input may be used – silent on parent input.
4 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Student Growth - What does it mean?Student growth - Growth between two points in timeMultiple measures – can include classroom, school, district or state-based measuresLocal decisions about which measures are usedLocal decisions about if team’s student growth data may be used in evaluation. Must be “appropriate and relevant.” (4th grade team, math team, PLC scores, school scores, etc)Local decisions about using student teacher, and parent input
5 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Student Growth - What does it NOT mean?Not Required to use student achievement (one data point)Not required to use state test scores (not calibrated, can’t measure true growth)Not required to use value added modelsNot required to use grouped student growth data. Can’t use if not “appropriate and relevant.”Not required to use student, teacher, or parent input
6 TEACHER EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. Centering instruction on high expectations2. Demonstrating effective teaching practices3. Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs4. Subject matter knowledge5. Fostering a safe, positive learning environment6. Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning7. Communicating with parents and school community8. Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learningTEACHEREVALUATIONCRITERIA
7 Teacher Evaluation Criteria EvidenceCentering instruction on high expectations for student achievement2. Demonstrating effective teaching practices3. Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs4. Providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum5. Fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment6. Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning7. Communicating with parents and school community8. Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning
8 Criterion 6 Using Multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning 6.1 Data Driven InstructionAssessment of instruction is infrequent, not used to inform instruction, and may not align with learning target.Teacher uses assessment, but it may not accurately measure the lesson or learning target. Formative assessment is not used to further student learning.Teacher uses a variety of assessment tools to collect data on effectiveness of lessons and to determine whether to re-teach, practice, or move forward with instruction.Teacher uses a variety of assessment tools and types of data to reflect on effectiveness of lessons differentiate instruction, and to determine whether re-teaching, practice, or moving forward with instruction is appropriate at both the group and individual level.6.2. Assessment of Student LearningEvaluation and grading practices lack clarity. Grades and progress measurements are superficial and lack critical components to guide further instruction and learning.Assessment records exist but information is not current, is missing or does not accurately reflect student learning. Teacher uses summative data when provided to help inform instructional decisions.System for maintaining information on student progress is clear, accurate, and current. System allows for ease of communication with students and families. Assessments appropriately assess learning targets. Assessment engages students in demonstrating evidence of understanding, not just recall.Systems for maintaining information on student progress is aligned with standards, accurate, current, and provides information to assist in planning instruction. Assessments require students to demonstrate conceptual understanding of the learning target. Students examine assessment results and set learning goals.6.3 Establishing student growth GoalsTeacher does not write a growth goal for students, or the growth goal is not measurable and aligned to standardsTeacher writes student growth goal(s) for students that are time bound which are measurable and aligned with standardsTeacher writes student growth goal(s) for students that are time bound, measurable, aligned with standards, and is determined by student need.Teacher writes student growth goal(s) targeted at specific students, are time bound, measurable, aligned to standards, determined by student need and connected to data.6.4 Achievement of student goalsFew students meet the learning goalsSome students meet the learning goalsMost students meet or exceed the learning goalsNearly all students meet or exceed the learning goals.
9 Measures of Evidence A System of Evaluation ObservationsArtifactsImpact on LearningProfessional ContributionSelf AssessmentReflective PracticeTeaching Standards 8 CriteriaGoal SettingPlan DevelopmentMultiple Measures of Evidence drives performance RatingUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientDistinguished
10 Scoring Criteria Section 1, 2 (c) : Must score the 8 criteria and must use the four labels (Unsatisfactory, Basic, Proficient, Distinguished) Must come up with final summative score using the same labels:CriteriaUnsatisfactoryBasicProficientDistinguishedScoreCriterion 1Component 1XComponent 2Component 3Criterion 2Criterion 3Criterion 4Criterion 5Criterion 6Criterion 7Criterion 8Final Score
11 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Final Summative Score Section 1, 2 (c) : OSPI adopt rules prescribing a common method for calculating the final summative score (including focused evaluation), consider weighting criteria and maximizing rater agreement across the three frameworks.Pilots are using 7 different ways to determine a final summative score. WEA will need to be deeply involved in this process.Three Instructional Frameworks Section 1, 2 (e) : Sept 1, 2012, OSPI determine three research-based instructional frameworks. Must adopt a process for modifications and/or adaptations.(No waivers)Charlotte Danielson ModelRobert Marzano ModelU.W. CEL 5 Dimensions + ModelDanielsonU.W CEL 5D+Marzano
12 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Not Deemed Satisfactory / Change of Cut Line Section 1, 4 (a)Level 1 – Unsatisfactory orLevel 2 - Basic - If the classroom teacher is on a continuing contract with more than five years of teaching experience and if the level 2 has been received two years in a row or two years within a consecutive three-year period.
13 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Probationary Period - Section 1, 4 (b)A probationary period of 60 school daysDays may be added if deemed necessary to complete a program of improvement as long as the probationary period is concluded before May 15Probationary period may be extended into the following school year if the probationer has five or more years of teaching experience and a final summative rating as of May 15 of less than level 2
14 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Probation - Request for Support - Section 1, 4 (b)The probationer may request that an additional certificated employee evaluator become part of the probationary process and the request must be granted.Assigned by the ESD and selected from a list of evaluation specialists compiled by the ESDIf procedure error occurs, it does not invalidate the probation unless the error “materially affects the effectiveness of the plan or ability to evaluate the probationer’s performance.”
15 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Removed from Probation/Discharge - Section 1, 4 (b) (c) (d)Must be removed from probation if shows improvement to the satisfaction of the evaluator in the areas prescribed as deficient.Must be removed if a teacher with 5 or fewer years of experience scores a level 2 or above and a teacher of more than five years scores a level 3 or above.Continuing contract employee with 5 or more years of experience receives a final summative score below level 2 (level 1) for two consecutive years, the school district shall implement the employee notification of discharge.If no improvement during the probationary period, the employee may be removed from current assignment and placed in alternative assignment or paid leave of absence.
16 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Phase in of New System - Section 1, 7 (c)Must start new evaluation system by 2013 – 14 school year and be fully operational by school year.All provisional and probationary classroom teachers on comprehensive evaluation first year and beyond.
17 Need to consider what happens with a two system approach Comprehensive EvaluationFocused EvaluationLong formShort formPGOTwo tiered systemFour tiered systemSome on an instructional frameworkSome on no frameworkSome teachers working together for a scoreSome not working togetherSome receiving a final score one waySome receiving a final score another wayTwo different triggers for probation in the same school/districtTwo kinds of supports - In one system, request an external evaluator and it must be granted, in the old system, it doesn’t
18 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Pilot Districts Continue their work Section 1, 7 (e)Develop a report (July 1, 2016) on practices and recommendations regardingInform district human resource and personnel practicesPractices to scale up the state-wide implementationGuidance on student growth data (responsibly with integrityRefining evaluation toolsProfessional development programsevaluator training programs (emphasis on inter-rater reliability)Reviewing emerging researchReview impact of demographic characteristics have on objectivity, reliability, validity, and availability of student growth dataInform state policies regarding how to obtain continuing contract status
19 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Human Resource Decisions - Section 1, 8 (a)Human Resource Decisions: Beginning in the school year, evaluation results must be used as one of multiple factors in making human resource and personnel decisions.“Nothing in this section limits the ability to collectively bargain how the multiple factors shall be used in making human resource or personnel decisions, with the exception that evaluation results must be a factor.”
20 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Comprehensive Evaluation Section 1,12 (a) (b)All classroom teachers shall receive a comprehensive summative evaluation at least once every four years. The comprehensive evaluation assesses all eight evaluation criteria and all criteria contribute to the comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating.Who gets a comprehensive evaluation?All provisional classroom teachersAny classroom teacher not on level 3Classroom teachers on level 3 or above once every four years
21 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Focused Evaluation (previous PGO) Section 1,12 (c)If not on a comprehensive evaluation and if scored a 3 or better the previous year, teachers are required to complete a focused evaluation. Have to select at least one of the eight criteria and have professional growth activities linked to the selected criteria.Must be approved by the principalGroup of teachers may focus on same evaluation criteria and share professional growth activitiesCan be transferred back to comprehensive evaluation at the request of either the teacher or principalAnyone currently on a PGO may rollover into the new system and comply with all new evaluation requirements
22 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Principal Training - Section 2,2 and Section 3,2Principals must be trained on the new evaluation system before implementing the new system. Professional development must include inter-rater reliability training.
23 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Changes to Higher Ed Programs- Section 4Principals preparation programs must include aspects of the new teacher evaluation system (research, four tiers, conferencing, student growth, instructional frameworks, observations, support plans, on-line tools, etc)Professional Educator Standards Board – shall incorporate in-service training or continuing education on the new evaluation system as a requirement for renewal of continuing or professional level certificates.
24 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill State-wide Professional Development - Section 5This section is all about OSPI’s responsibility to provide professional development and training “Subject to funds available”
25 ESSB 5895: Language In New Evaluation Bill Provisional Status - Section 7, 1 (b)Teacher who has received an evaluation rating below level 2 on the third year of employment shall remain on provisional status until the teacher receives a level 2 or higher or dismissed.
27 Summary - Language In New Evaluation Bill Student Growth Data: Used in at least three of the eight teacher and principal evaluation criteria. Can include the teacher’s performance as an individual or as a member of a team. Did not require state test scores only student growthStudent, Teacher, and Parent Input: May be included but not required. Local decision and bargainablePhase in: Must start by and must be completed by School yearScoring: Must score the 8 criteria and must use the four labels (Unsatisfactory, Basic, Proficient, Distinguished)Cut Line: After five years in the system, must be proficient. Two years in Basic or below or two out of three years equates to not being satisfactory.Final Summative Score: OSPI develop a common method for calculating the summative scoreFrameworks: Three frameworks for teachers and principals
28 Summary - Language In New Evaluation Bill Waivers: No waivers OSPI has the ability to accept minor adjustmentsPilots continue work: (Implementation issues, refine system tools, practices, student growth data, recommendations, HR and personnel decisions, etc)Frequency:All teachers and principals must receive a comprehensive evaluation at least once every four years.New teachers and principals (first 3 years) must receive an annual comprehensive evaluation as well as principals who are in their first full year at a new school district.Teachers or principals receiving a Level 1 or Level 2 rating in the previous year must receive an annual comprehensive evaluation.Focused Evaluation (Professional Growth Option): A focused evaluation must be performed in any year that a comprehensive evaluation is not scheduled. (both teachers and principals)
29 Summary - Language In New Evaluation Bill Human Resource Decisions: Beginning with the school year, evaluation results for certificated classroom teachers and principals will be used as one of multiple factors in making human resource and personnel decisions.staff assignment, reduction in force, transferEvaluation results must be a factor but details go through the collective bargaining processProfessional Development & TrainingPrincipals and administrators must receive professional development prior to evaluating teachers and principalsBeginning 2016, renewal of professional and continuing level certificates will require training on the evaluation system.
31 Teacher and Principal Evaluation Local and State Decisions ItemsState DecisionsLocal DecisionsNotesNew Evaluation SystemESSB 589528ADefined by stateNo changes to ESAs and classified staff evaluation continue to locally bargainFor Classroom teachers and building principals and assistant principals. Does not impact ESAs and Classified staffAdoption Date and TransitionSection 1, 7 (c)All districts must begin implementation in school year and be fully implemented by 2016Requires provisional or probationary teachers, and principals with fewer than 3 years of experience, unsatisfactory performance, or new to the district to be transitioned first. Nothing prevents earlier transition.CriteriaSection 1, 2 (b)8 Criteria (Principal and Teacher)Must score the 8 criteriaMust use exact wording and labels (unsatisfactory, basic, proficient, distinguished). Evaluations assess all 8 criteria