1. 1 Dara Bass, KSBA Director of Policy ServicesJodie Zeller, KDE Integrated Design Team

2. 2

3.  All policies of the Board are binding on employees of the District...  Employees who fail to comply with Board policies may be subject to disciplinary action. 3

4. Supervisors shall : Endeavor to establish an atmosphere of cooperation and professional courtesy. Direct employees under their supervision in keeping with Board policies, administrative procedures and other legal requirements. Assist employees in solving problems that arise in the workplace in a timely and supportive manner. Monitor employee performance to document training needs and share this information with the Superintendent/designee. 4

5. Any employee who participates in or encourages activities that disrupt the educational process, whether on school property or at school-sponsored events and activities, may be subject to disciplinary action... including conduct that:  Threatens the health, safety, or welfare of others;  May damage public or private property, including the property of students or staff;  Is an illegal activity;  Interferes with a student's access to educational opportunities or programs, including ability to attend, participate in, and benefit from instructional and extracurricular activities; or  Disrupts delivery of instructional services or interferes with the orderly administration of the school / school-related activities /operations. 5

6. All employees are expected to use sound judgment in the performance of their duties and to take reasonable measures to protect the health, safety, and well-being of others, as well as District property. 6

7. Development of System The Superintendent shall recommend for approval of the Board and the Kentucky Department of Education an evaluation system, developed by an evaluation committee, for all certified employees below the level of District Superintendent, which is in compliance with applicable statute and regulation.(KRS 156.557, 704 KAR 3:345) 7

8. 8 Purposes The purposes of the evaluation system shall be to: improve instruction, provide a measure of performance accountability to citizens, foster professional growth, and support individual personnel decisions.

9. 9

10. Kentucky’s current evaluation system does not utilize student performance data as a measure of educator effectiveness. The evaluation processes used across the state vary from district to district. 10

11. Research supports a statewide common evaluation system. Systems need to do a better job as the primary mechanism for measuring effectiveness. Current systems provide little information about teacher performance impact on student achievement. 11

12. Evaluations perfunctory and infrequentPrimary use to identify incompetenceAll expect highest possible ratingDo not yield meaningful feedbackProfessional development not aligned to evaluationAdministrators poorly trained to evaluate; process not a priorityFeedback for improvement - feeling singled out, often unfairly 12

13. 13 Only 1-2 classes per year (minor % of performance) Classroom responsibilities only Insufficient emphasis on formative evaluation and resulting assistance provided Subject to evaluator bias Focus on process versus outcomes Inspector model Source: James H. Stronge, 2011

14. 14

15. 15

16. Multi-year Process of System Redesign Teacher Effectiveness & Principal Effectiveness Steering Committees Design Team Synthesizes District Focus Teams/Steering Committee Feedback Limited Testing 2010-2011 (23 districts) Expanded Field Testing 2011-2012 (31 additional districts) Full State Implementation by 2014-2015 State-wide Pilot 2012-2013 16

17. 17  October, 2011  Defining Multiple Measures  Content Validity Process  Selection Criteria for Teachers in the Field Test  MET Tools  November, 2011  Content Validity results reported to steering committees  Volunteer district training  Tool developed and framework alignment to support defined multiple measures  Teacher & Leader Effectiveness components recommended by steering committees  Inter-rater Reliability training (MET videos & tools) 17

18. 18  December, 2011  Inter-rater reliability training continued  Field test training developed  January, 2012  Field test training implemented  Final preparation for field test  February – April, 2012  Field testing with volunteer districts  Field test process evaluation  May, 2012  Field test evaluation report  Identify needs for Fall 2012 pilot implementation  June/July, 2012  Correlation studies with multiple measures June KBE Meeting Approve regulation for evaluation system 18

19. KEY ASSUMPTION Teachers are the KEY school determinant for driving student achievement. KEY QUESTIONS How to evaluate teacher/ principal effectiveness? How to continuously improve effective teaching/ administrative leadership? 19

20. 20 Which teacher a student happens to get within a school matters more than which school the student happens to attend. Source: Nye, Konstantopoulos, & Hedges, 2004

21. Change how teachers and principals are evaluated. Change how they are supported to:  Continuously improve their professional practice;  Enhance their effectiveness; and  Drive increasingly high levels of student achievement. 21

22. Annual evaluations for all certified personnel except for tenured staff with no performance issues. Moving from primarily COMPLIANCE to expanded emphasis on GROWTH. A revised, uniform (statewide) system unless a waiver is granted (validity and reliability standards must be met – at district expense). 22 Implications?

23.  Re-examine the purpose and focus of the formative phase.  During the post-formative conference, evaluator should work with employee to clarify expectations:  What is to occur during the year – including planning and systematic collection of data.  What the supervisor will look for during the subsequent observations. 23

24. 24 DOMAIN STANDARD PERFORMANCE LEVELS KY TEACHER STANDARDS/ ISLLC (PRINCIPAL) EVIDENCE & ARTIFACTS DESCRIPTORS

25. 25 IneffectiveDevelopingAccomplished Exemplary

26. Multiple-measures of teacher/ principal evaluation, including student growth, will be part of the future of K-12 education. Implications? 26

27. 27 Teacher Effectiveness Framework Observation Protocols Artifacts & Evidence Professional Growth Student Growth Analysis & Reflection Student/Parent Voices Principal Effectiveness Framework Observation Protocols/ Val-Ed 360 Artifacts & Evidence Professional Growth Student Growth School Goals Student/Parent Voices

28. Instruction Learning Climate Leadership & Professionalism 28 Videos Lesson/Unit Plans Student Work Products Learning Logs Video/Audio Tapes Office Referral Data Student Feedback Attendance Data Parent Communication Mentoring/Coaching PD Logs SBDM Committee Work PD Presentations

29. 29

30. Designs and implements instruction that meets the needs of all diverse learners. Research- based Practices Assessment of Learning Student Friendly Learning Targets Data Informed Planning Technology Integration Demonstrates understanding of current standards and principles by incorporating effective practices, strategies and technologies that support student learning. 30

31. Creates a safe, supportive, respectful, and engaging learning environment where each student has the opportunity to grow and learn according to his/her individual needs. Safe Learning Environment High Expectations Effective Use of Resources 31

32. Provides professional leadership within the classroom, school and community, takes responsibility for professional growth and student academic success and works collaboratively through professional learning experiences in the pursuit of professional excellence. Leadership Activities Professional Growth Plan Professional Collaboration 32

33. Contributes to overall school success and the academic growth of all students, regardless of demographics (e.g., socioeconomic status, ethnicity, gender, disability, prior achievement). Contributes to student academic growth and overall school success. 33

34. 34 At present only teachers are principals will be evaluated under the new system. Other certified staff (guidance counselors, central office administrators, etc.) will remain under the district’s current evaluation system.

35. 35 At present, there is no universally accepted definition of good teaching. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has shown that pupils themselves are remarkably good judges of effective instruction.

36. “We’ve never had a meaningful evaluation system that identifies the dimensions of great teachers so we can transfer the skills to others.” Key predictors of how much kids will learn:  Does the teacher use class time well?  When students are confused, does the teacher help get them straightened out? 36

37. 37