Arlington Effective Educator Development System

AKA: Arlington Educator Evaluation System

Ice Breaker!

Hopes and Fears

Make a New Friend!• Write down one hope and one fear you have about the new

Educator Evaluation System on a sticky note (one sticky note for your hope, one for your fear).

• Write legibly because someone else will be reading them!• Find someone you have never met before and introduce

yourself.• Tell your new friend something interesting or unusual about

yourself.• Have them read your hope and fear statements to make sure

they can read your handwriting.• Go back to your seat and spend a few minutes sharing about

your and/or your new friend’s hopes and fears about the new EES.

What did I say I would do?• Attend as many of the Monday Task Force meetings as

possible (16 total)• If you attend at least 13 meetings, you will receive a $750

stipend• Actively participate in the meetings• Collaborate with your colleagues in order to lead 4-5 faculty

meetings on the topic of the new Arlington Effective Educator Development System (AEEDS!)

• Participate in bargaining the portions of the new system that are open to bargaining under the new regulations

• Be a nice person and a kind human being

Just a Little History

Appendix G from current Evaluation Document:

• In 1993, the Education Reform Act was passed by the Massachusetts State Legislature. This Act provided that prior to September 1, 1996, the State Board of Education was to ensure that all school committees file evaluation procedures and performance standards for teachers and administrators with the State Board.

Just a little more history…

• On July 20, 1995, the State Board of Education promulgated the “Revision to Regulations on Evaluation of Teachers and Administrators (603 CMR 35.00) and the “Principles of Effective Teaching and Effective Administrative Leadership”.

• The Arlington Education Association and the Arlington School Committee reached agreement on the Performance Standards for teachers, and these are attached to the evaluation form.

16 Years…

It’s been 16 years since Arlington took a good, long look at the efficacy of our evaluation tool.

Not quite true because there was a study group that worked on updating Arlington’s evaluation tool 2-3 years ago, but then the powers that be decided to give us more guidance!

Why this system, why now?

• Dissatisfaction with previous system• Passive• Ritualistic• “Missing the mark”• RTTT, NCLB Waiver and Federal $$• Failure by districts to implement

comprehensive evaluation systems

Quick Poll DESE

Over the course of your educational career, how useful have evaluations been in improving your practice as an educator?

1. Very useful

2. Somewhat useful

3. Not useful at all

DESE Guide to Implementation

“Poor evaluation practices are a missed opportunity for promoting better leading, better learning, and better schools.”

Priorities of the New Framework

• Place student learning at the Center• Promote Growth and Development

of Educators• Recognize Excellence• Set a High Bar for Tenure• Shorten Timelines for Improvement

Good Teachers Matter!

Principal and teacher quality has been found to account for nearly 60% of a school’s total impact on student achievement.

Marzano, Waters, McNulty, 2005From John D’Auria handout

5 Big Fears Students Have?

And the winners are…

1. Fear of making mistakes2. Fear of looking like a fool3. Fear of having a weakness exposed4. Fear of not being liked5. Fear of failure

John D’Auria presentation 10.15.12

6 Big Fears of Teachers?

And the winners are…

1. Fear of making mistakes2. Fear that errors will erase prior successes3. Fear of having a weakness exposed4. Fear that asking for assistance will

diminish respect5. Fear of looking like a novice6. Fear of conflict

John D’Auria presentation 10.15.12

6 Big Fears of Administrators

And the winners are…1. Fear of making mistakes2. Fear that errors will erase prior successes3. Fear of having a weakness exposed4. Fear that asking for assistance will

diminish respect5. Fear of looking like a novice6. Fear of conflict7. Bad hair?(NOT from John D’Auria presentation!)

New Regulation Twin Goals

1. Supporting and promoting teachers’ and leaders’ professional development

2. Supporting student achievement

“Breakthrough Framework” DESE

Our opportunity and our challenge, will be to make sure that this new tool meets these objectives as we move toward implementing the new system.

John D’Auria calls the new evaluation system potentially useful.

Implementation Is Everything!

New System Attempts to…

• Put the educator in the driver’s seat• Help educators take charge of their own

learning and development

Growth, Not “Gotcha”

Continuous Growth Cycle for Educators and Students

The Four “C’s” of the New EES

Coherence: linking data analysis, self-assessment, goal setting, and evidence collection activities required for educator evaluation is key

Connection: connect individual educator goals to school and district priorities critical to effectiveness of overall plan (all horses heading west!)

Collaboration: between teachers and administrators, between grade level and department teams

Conversation: dialogue and reflection around rubrics, student data, and teaching strategies is at the heart of the new educator evaluation process and will lead to a shared vision of effective practice

Trust – the Final Ingredient

We all understand that we will only be able to achieve these lofty goals if there is a culture of trust and open, honest communication.

Revision Explicitly Built In

• Unlike the current regulations, the new EES regulations explicitly envision modifications

• Annually for at least the next several years

• This Task Force will continue on in some form to monitor and revise the AEEDS as needed

(Sorely in need of a better acronym!)

Tasks for the EES Task Force• Teach ourselves about the new system• Teach our colleagues about the new system• Decide which parts we will ADOPT whole cloth• Decide which parts we will ADAPT (use the DESE

model plan as a starting point, but alter in ways consistent with the regulations)

Non NegotiablesI. 5 Step Cycle: Self-Assessment, Goal Setting and Educator Plan Development, Implementation of the Plan and Evidence Collection, Formative Assessment or Formative Evaluation, Summative Evaluation

II. Four Standards and All Indicators (Districts may add, not subtract): Curriculum, Planning and Assessment, Teaching All Students, Family and Community Engagement, Professional Culture

III. Rubrics (must be comparably rigorous)

IV. Four Educator Plans: Developing Educator, Self-Directed Growth Plan, Directed Growth Plan, Improvement Plan

V. Four Ratings: Unsatisfactory, Needs Improvement, Proficiency, Exemplary (Proficient is the goal)

5 Step Cycle of Evaluation

5 Step Cycle Explained

1) Self AssessmentAlone and in teams educators reflect on and assess their professional practice, analyze the learning, growth, and achievement of their students, and prepare to propose goals for their Educator Plan.

2) Analysis, Goal Setting, and Plan DevelopmentEducators meet with their evaluators to review self-assessments, jointly analyze students’ learning, and develop team and/or individual goals and a plan that encompass both practice and student learning.

3) Implementation of the PlanEducators implement the action steps outlined in their plan and engage in professional development and support needed to be successful. Educators and evaluator collect evidence regarding practice and student learning to inform progress.

5 Step Cycle Continued…

4) Formative Assessment/EvaluationEvaluator and educator review educator’s progress toward goals and/or performance against standards. Evaluator issues formative performance ratings.

5) Summative EvaluationEvaluator assesses the educator’s performance against the standards, attainment of student learning goals and attainment of professional practice goals. Evaluator determines overall summative rating using the point rating scale (Unsatisfactory, Needs Improvement, Proficient, Exemplary) and student learning impact rating using the 3-point scale (Low, Moderate, High).

4 Standards and All Indicators

RubricsUnsatisfactory Needs

ImprovementProficient Exemplary

Limited knowledgeRarely engages

Factual knowledgeSometimes engages

Sound knowledgeConsistently engages

ExpertiseEngages allAble to model

Little/no knowledgeDoes not enable most students

KnowledgeEnables some students

KnowledgeEnables all students

Expert knowledgeEnables all…Significant progress

Plans lessons Not aligned to standards

Designs unitsSome alignment

Designs unitsAligned

Designs integrated unitsAligned + HOTS

Inappropriate instructional strategies

Some appropriate strategies

Challenging, appropriate strategies

Highly engaging, challenging, appropriate

Four Educator Plans

Four Ratings

3 Ratings on Student ImpactNote: Student impact ratings come into play down the road

Note: This is down the road

Up for Discussion…

• Definitions for each of the terms, e.g. who can “evaluate”• Timeline and due dates for each phase of the

plan

Mark McAneny Quote

Goal of Evaluation: Collaborative work that looks at best practices, pedagogy, assessment, and the social/emotional well-being of students and staff

What Does Good Teaching Look and Sound Like?

John D’Auria Webbing Activity

Proficient Teaching

Weebly Website for EESTFhttp://arlingtonevaluationtaskforce.weebly.com/