1. Materials  Wiki  http://pugetsoundesd-rig2.wikispaces.com/ http://pugetsoundesd-rig2.wikispaces.com/

2. Outcomes 2 As a group, we will:  Create working agreements.  Surface hopes and concerns.  Learn about the background and purpose of TPEP.  Compare the district’s current evaluation system with the new evaluation system components. Identify key decisions to be made.  Begin to map out an action plan, including a communications plan.

3. Agenda 3 Introductions Working agreements Core principles Statewide TPEP information PSESD RIG Taking stock: What is already in place? What decisions need to be made? Communications plan Next steps

4. Agreements 4  Individually write what agreements you would like the group to make in order to create a productive, working environment

5. Possible Agreements--DRAFT  Be present  Participate actively  Ask questions  Share connections  Listen  Invite and welcome contributions of every member  Work together as a community 5

6. Hopes and Concerns 6

7. TPEP Core Principles 1. The critical importance of teacher and leadership quality 2. The professional nature of teaching and leading a school 3. The complex relationship between the system for teacher and principal evaluation and district systems and negotiations 4. The belief in professional learning as an underpinning of the new evaluation system 5. The understanding that the career continuum must be addressed in the new evaluation system 6. The system must determine the balance of “inputs or acts” and “outputs or results” 7

8. Hopes? Concerns? 8 Select two sticky notes. On one, write a hope you have for the teacher and principal evaluation system. On the other, write a concern you have for the teacher and principal evaluation system.

9. Hopes? Concerns? 9 Number off by threes. Share sticky notes with your group by placing them on the chart paper. Identify any common themes that emerge. Share with large group. What do you notice?

10. TPEP Background 10

11. Influences on TPEP Development 11

12. Steering Committee

13. Background Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP) Anacortes Central Valley Kennewick North Thurston North Mason Othello Snohomish Wenatchee ESD 101 Consortium Almira Davenport Liberty Medical Lake Pullman Reardan-Edwall Wellpinit Wilbur

14. 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 StatusThree years No existing requirement Educator Evaluation Data Evaluation data must be submitted to OSPI, beginning SY 2010 – 11, for all employee groups 14

15. Evaluation Components Evaluation ComponentESSB 5895 Criteria (RCW)Stays the same Criteria DefinitionsStays the same Instructional/Leadership Frameworks Three “Preferred” Frameworks OSPI –September 1, 2012 Four-Tiered SystemUnsatisfactory Basic Proficient Distinguished Final Summative Scoring Methodology OSPI –December 1, 2012 Rulemaking has started as of August 21, 2012 Unsatisfactory/Satisfactory Delineation Years 1–5 between 1 and 2 Years 5+ between 2 and 3 Measures and EvidenceObservation* and Student Growth* (*Required in RCW) Artifacts and other Evidence related to Framework Rubrics 15

16. Changes in Teacher & Principal Evaluation Criteria Current Teacher Evaluation Criteria New Teacher Evaluation Criteria 1.Instructional skill 2.Classroom management 3.Professional preparation and scholarship 4.Effort toward improvement when needed 5.Handling of student discipline and attendant problems 6.Interest in teaching pupils 7.Knowledge of subject matter 1.Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement 2.Demonstrating effective teaching practices 3.Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs 4.Providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum 5.Fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment 6.Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning 7.Communicating with parents and school community 8.Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focus on improving instructional practice and student learning Current 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 the 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, instruction 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 16

18. Regional Implementation Grants (RIGs) 18

19. PSESD RIG Cohorts  RIG I (2011-2012) Bainbridge, Bellevue, Carbonado, Eatonville, Highline, Issaquah, Renton, Seattle, Shoreline, White River  RIG II-A (Sept 2012-Jan 2013) Auburn, Bethel, Lake Washington, Orting, Peninsula, Sumner  RIG II-B (Jan 2013-June 2013) Dieringer, Federal Way, Fife, Kent, Mercer Island, Puyallup, Skykomish, Snoqualmie Valley, Steilacoom, Tahoma, Tukwila, Vashon, 19

20. RIG Content Over Five Sessions  Introduction to Educator Evaluation in Washington  Using Instructional and Leadership Frameworks in Educator Evaluation  Applying Multiple Measures of Performance  Including Student Growth Measures in Educator Evaluation  Conducting High-Quality Observations  Providing High Quality Feedback for Continuous Professional Growth and Development 20

21. RIG Work

22. Taking Stock, Looking Forward 22  What components of the new system are already in place, and are a foundation to build upon?  What do we need to do over the next eight months to be ready for implementation in the fall?

23. Communications Plan 23

24. Communicating our Values “Value” is at the root of the word “evaluation.” What we evaluate needs to come from what we value as a community. Student Learning Educator Growth

25. Communication Planning 25  Which stakeholders need to be engaged this month?  What information do they need?  How will that information be communicated?

26. Whip Around and Plus/Delta Debrief  One word summary of the day  Take a few minutes and create at least two sticky notes for the Plus/Delta Chart on your way out.  Plus: What was a real “plus” of today’s session? What went well and should be repeated?  Delta: Where is there room for improvement and change? 26