1. Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Program Introduction to Principal Evaluation in Washington 1 June 2015

2. 2  Introductions  Logistics  Agenda  Introduction  Learning  Implementing  Reflecting  Wrap-Up Welcome!

3.  Know the background, core principles, and purpose of TPEP and the TPEP core components  Understand the multiple measures used to evaluate performance  Understand the principal evaluation criteria and descriptors and identify where these criteria are present in preparation programs  Understand how growth of student learning is a measure of teacher performance  Determine ways to inform candidates about how their preparation links with the evaluation process 3 Overview of Outcomes

4. Learning I: Context, Background, & Key Components Know the background, core principles, and purpose of TPEP and the TPEP core components 4

5. 1. The critical importance of teacher and leadership quality 2. The professional nature of teaching and leading a school 3. The belief in professional learning as an underpinning of the new evaluation system 4. The understanding that the career continuum must be addressed in the new evaluation system 5. The system must determine the balance of “inputs or acts” and “outputs or results” 5 TPEP Core Principles “We Can’t Fire Our Way to Finland”

6. 2012 ESSB 5895 ESEA Flexibility Waiver TPEP Pilot Sites & Steering Cmte Instructional and Leadership Framework Authors Research and Best Practice E2SSB 6696 & Race to the Top Washington State Evaluation and Professional Growth System 2010 – 12 6 Influences on TPEP Development and Legislation

7. 7 TPEP Steering Committee

8. 8 In Washington… A capital “G!” indicates that the guidance represents Washington state law (RCW) or rules (WAC). A lower-case “g” indicates that the guidance represents research-based best practice but is not mandated by law or rules. Educator Evaluation WAC RCW 28A.405.100 8 Criteria - Teachers 8 Criteria - Principals Instructional and Leadership Frameworks Student Growth Rubrics

9. 9 Before & After: A Snapshot BeforeComponentAfter Binary – Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory Tiers Four Tiers – Professional growth & development system Developed over 25 years ago Criteria Describes effective teaching & leadership – developed by stakeholders in 2010 legislative session Two years (prior to SY 2009 – 10) Provisional Status Three years No existing requirement Educator Evaluation Data Evaluation data must be submitted to OSPI, beginning SY 2010 – 11, for all employee groups

10. 10 A Culture Shift: Evaluation Measures Previous vs. Current Previous Evaluation SystemCurrent Evaluation System Observation: YES Student Growth: NOStudent Growth: YES Other Evidence: NOOther Evidence: YES

11. Previous Principal Evaluation Criteria New Principal Evaluation Criteria 1.Knowledge of, experience in, and training in recognizing good professional performance, capabilities, and development 2.School administration and management 3.School finance 4.Professional preparation and scholarship 5.Effort toward improvement when needed 6.Interest in pupils, employees, patrons, and subjects taught in school 7.Leadership 8.Ability and performance of evaluation of school personnel 1.Creating a school culture that promotes ongoing improvement of learning and teaching for students and staff 2.Providing for school safety 3.Leads development, implementation, and evaluation of a data-driven plan for increasing student achievement, including the use of multiple student data elements 4.Assisting instructional staff with alignment of curriculum, instructional and assessment with state and local district learning goals 5.Monitoring, assisting, and evaluating effective instruction and assessment practices 6.Managing both staff and fiscal resources to support student achievement and legal responsibilities 7.Partnering with the school community to promote student learning 8.Demonstrating commitment to closing the achievement gap 11 Changes in Teacher & Principal Evaluation Criteria

12. 12 Five Themes Are Embedded in Criteria

13. Learning II: Instructional Frameworks and Criteria Alignment Understand the multiple measures used to evaluate performance Understand the principal evaluation criteria and descriptors and identify where these criteria are present in preparation programs 13

14. 14 Educator Evaluation Measures: It Takes Many Pieces… Self-Assessment & Reflection Perception Survey Data Student Work Samples Student Learning/ Achievement Data Peer Evaluation Portfolio Assessments Planning Classroom Observation

15.  AWSP’s Leadership Framework  Eight criteria that align to TPEP principal criteria  28 components inside these  Marzano Leadership Framework  Five domains of leadership: A Data-Driven Focus on Student Achievement, Continuous Improvement of Instruction, A Guaranteed and Viable Curriculum, Cooperation and Collaboration, and School Climate 15 Leadership Frameworks

16. Leadership Frameworks in Washington 16

17.  Discussion: Identifying where in our preparation programs principal candidates encounter criteria  Likely in many places  Different labels and names for the same thing  Looking for overlap Let’s look at the criteria again. 17 Where Are the New Criteria in Our Program?

18. 1.Creating a school culture that promotes ongoing improvement of learning and teaching for students and staff 2.Providing for school safety 3.Leads development, implementation, and evaluation of a data-driven plan for increasing student achievement, including the use of multiple student data elements 4.Assisting instructional staff with alignment of curriculum, instructional and assessment with state and local district learning goals 5.Monitoring, assisting, and evaluating effective instruction and assessment practices 6.Managing both staff and fiscal resources to support student achievement and legal responsibilities 7.Partnering with the school community to promote student learning 8.Demonstrating commitment to closing the achievement gap 18 New Criteria for Principal Evaluation

19. 19  AWSP’s leadership framework is directly aligned to the criteria. No crosswalk is needed.  The Marzano leadership framework does have a crosswalk, which includes the domain, performance levels, and possible evidence sources aligned to each criteria. Leadership Frameworks and Criteria Crosswalk

20. Learning III: Understanding Student Growth Measures Understand how growth of student learning is a measure of principal performance 20

21.  Student Achievement: The status of subject-matter knowledge, understandings, and skills at one point in time.  Student Growth (Learning): The growth in subject- matter knowledge, understandings, and skill over time. 21 Defining Key Terms It is student growth, not student achievement, that is relevant in demonstrating impacts teachers and principals have on students.

22. 22 Both E2SSB 6696 and ESSB 5895 contain language around student growth, including:  Student growth data that is relevant to the teacher and subject matter must be a factor in the evaluation process and must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. Student growth means the change in student achievement between two points in time. Changes…  Student growth data must be a substantial factor in evaluating the summative performance of certificated classroom teachers for at least three of the evaluation criteria.  Student growth data elements may include the teacher’s performance as a member of a grade-level, subject matter, or other instructional team within a school when the use of these data is relevant and appropriate. ESSB 5895 Establishes New Definitions Around Student Growth Measures

23.  Includes multiple measures of student learning—not just test scores.  Teachers and principals work together to set appropriate baseline scores and achievement goals.  Goals can be based on grade level, subject area, classroom context.  Measures must demonstrate student learning of content.  Includes measure of collaborative effort to raise achievement across several classrooms, subject areas, grade levels.  Must be aligned with curriculum, measured in a specific time frame, and related to state, district, and school goals. 23 Student Growth

24. 24 Student Growth Data Means… Formal Tests in Core Subjects Only Knowledge and Learning That Can Be Measured All Classroom Learning State-Based Tools District and School-Based Tools Classroom- Based Tools

25. 25  Growth is expected for all students.  Student growth goals are established from multiple sources of data:  Classroom-based tools  School-based tools  District-based tools  State-based tools Establishing Student Growth Goals

26.  The TPEP Steering Committee organizations approved statewide rubrics for student growth to ensure consistency in implementation of the evaluation system across Washington State.  The rubrics for student growth describe both goal setting and outputs of student learning.  OSPI has provided student growth rubrics for each of the three criteria  Principals: 3, 5, and 8 26 Student Growth Rubrics

27.  Three Student Growth Criteria  3. Leading the development, implementation and evaluation of a data-driven plan for increasing student achievement, including the use of multiple student data elements.  Provides evidence of student growth that results from the school improvement planning process.  5. Monitoring, assisting, and evaluating effective instruction and assessment practices.  Provides evidence of student growth of selected teachers.  8. Demonstrating a commitment to closing the achievement gap.  Provides evidence of growth in student learning. 27 Using District, School, and Classroom-Based Data (Principals)

28. 28 The Student Growth Rubric for Use in 2013–2014

29. Implementing: Linking Preparation and TPEP Determine ways to inform candidates about how their preparation links with the evaluation process 29

30. Discussion:  Review where TPEP criteria are present in principal preparation  Check list from our discussion  Integrate aspects of TPEP not included in preparation:  Establishing student growth goals  Creating a personal improvement plan  Participating in an evaluation conference with a superintendent  Other? 30 Explicitly Integrating TPEP

31. Reflecting 31

32.  3 – key points to remember  2 – places of application  1 – lingering question you have before leaving 32 3-2-1

33. 33

34. Thank you! Presenter Name xxxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx 34