1. Matrix 101: The Oregon Matrix and Summative Evaluations Spring 2015 Technical Assistance Webinar

2. Outcomes Review the role of the Oregon Matrix in the professional growth cycle Understand how to read the Oregon Matrix Identify where the Matrix can be customized Demonstrate calculation of a summative score

3. Summative Evaluations Based on Multiple Measures Professional Practice (PP) Professional Responsibilities (PR) Student Learning and Growth (SLG) Oregon teacher evaluations must include measures from three categories of evidence: Aligned to the standards of professional practice

4. *Inquiry Process

5. Takes place when the Y- and X-axes do not tell the same story Additional evidence gathered prior to a determination of plan and/or summative performance level Inquiry happens collaboratively Educator can also provide additional evidence Inquiry Process

6. Professional Growth Plans Intersection of the Y-and X-axes determine overall performance level and corresponding professional growth plan ◦ Facilitative ◦ Collegial ◦ Consulting ◦ Directed Part of the evaluation cycle and aligned professional learning Who takes the lead between educator and evaluator in developing professional growth goals

7. Y-Axis Example: Professional Practice & Responsibilities Example of Rubric Component I. Planning and Preparation II. Classroom Environment III. Instruction IV. Professional Responsibilities 1a. Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy 1b. Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 1c. Setting Instructional Outcomes 1d.Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources 1e.Designing Coherent Instruction 1f.Designing Student Assessments 2a. Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport 2b. Establish a Culture for Learning 2c. Managing Classroom Procedures 2d. Managing Student Behavior 2e. Organizing Physical Space 3a. Communicating with Students 3b. Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c. Engaging Students in Learning 3d. Using Assessment in Instruction 3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness 4a. Reflecting on Teaching 4b. Maintaining Accurate Records 4c. Communicating with Families 4d. Participating in a Professional Community 4e. Growing and Developing Professionally 4f. Showing Professionalism

8. Y-Axis = PP/PR Rating Add up all component scores for total points possible; Divide by number of components in your rubric; Get a rating between 1 and 4; Use Y-Axis threshold to determine PP/PR level: ◦ 3.6 - 4.0 = 4 ◦ 2.81-3.59 =3 ◦ 1.99 – 2.8 = 2 * ◦ < 1.99 = 1 *PP/PR Scoring Rule: If the educator scores two 1’s in any PP/PR component and his/her average score falls between 1.99- 2.499, the educator’s performance level cannot be rated above a 1. EXAMPLE District rubric with 20 components Component ratings: ◦ 17 components were rated 3; and 3 were rated 2 = 57 points possible ◦ 57/20=2.85  2.85 = Level 3 PP/PR Rating

9. X-Axis = SLG Rating SLG performance level based on two goals Two-year cycle select two of four goals Score SLG goals Get a rating between 1 and 4; Use X-Axis thresholds to determine SLG level: ◦ 4 = both goals 4s ◦ 3 = both goals 3s; one goal 3 & one goal 4; one goal 2 & one 4 ◦ 2 = both goals 2s; one goal 2 & one 3; one goal 1 & one 3; one goal 4 & one 1 ◦ 1= both goals 1s; one goal 1 & one 2 EXAMPLE One SLG was rated 2 One SLG was rated 3  X-Axis Rating = Level 2 SLG Rating

10. X Axis - Scoring SLGs Category 2 goals scored using state SLG Scoring Rubric ODE is developing guidance on using Student Growth Percentiles (SGPs) for measuring Category 1 goals www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3475

11. *Inquiry Process EXAMPLE: Y-axis = 3 & X-axis = 2

12. What is required… All districts must use the Oregon Matrix to calculate summative scores beginning this year (2014-15) ◦ Includes established X and Y thresholds All summative scores for teachers and building principals must be reported to ODE Summative information must be used by districts to inform professional growth plans

13. The performance level labels The Professional Growth Plan’s (PGP) names* Additional details on what each PGP looks like* What “SLG focus” PGP looks like Additional inquiry process ideas Other systemic differentiated supports, such as: Observations Frequency of check-in’s/meetings with evaluators Self-reflection practices *Districts must keep the intent of the “plans” as defined in the Oregon Matrix guidance What can be customized…

14. Resources Toolkit www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3759 www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3759 ◦ Oregon Framework ◦ Oregon Matrix guidance Resources from Districts www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3853 ◦ Professional Growth Cycle conference materials Additional technical assistance from ODE

15. Questions?

16. Contacts Educator Effectiveness Team: Tanya Frisendahl tanya.frisendahl@state.or.us tanya.frisendahl@state.or.us Sarah Martin sarah.martin@state.or.us sarah.martin@state.or.us Sarah Phillips sarah.phillips@state.or.us sarah.phillips@state.or.us Brian Putnam brian.putnam@state.or.us brian.putnam@state.or.us