Discuss the charge of the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness (MCEE) Summarize the MCEE...

Michigan’s Council on Educator Effectiveness

Educator Evaluation Discussion

Objectives:

Discuss the charge of the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness (MCEE)

Summarize the

MCEE Interim Report

Provide an Overview of the Pilot

MichiganPublic Act 102 of 2011 (HB 4627)

Evaluations› Evaluations must occur annually, must take place at the end

of the year, and be based on “multiple,” rather than at least two observations

› MUST implement that rating system by September 10, 2011 highly effective, effective, minimally effective or ineffective

› Beginning with the 2013-2014 school year, evaluation system for teachers and administrators that is based largely on student growth and assessment data

Student Growth:

2013-2014 school year, at least 25%



Student Growth:

The annual year-end evaluation shall be based on the student growth and assessment data for the most recent 3 consecutive school-year period.

If none available for a teacher for at least 3 school years, the annual year-end evaluation shall be based on all assessment data that are available for the teacher.

Note:

Observations› Shall include review of lesson plan› Shall include state curriculum

standard being used in lesson› Shall include a review of pupil

engagement in the lesson› Observation does not have to be for

entire class period

MichiganPublic Act 102 of 2011 (HB 4627)

Ineffective Ratings

› Beginning with the 2015-16 school year, a board must notify the parent of a student assigned to a teacher who has been ineffective on his or her two most recent annual year-end evaluations.

› Any teacher or administrator who is rated ineffective on three consecutive annual year-end evaluations must be dismissed from employment.

Note:

Districts are not required to comply with Governor’s teacher/administrator evaluation tools if they have an evaluation system that:› Most significant portion is based on student growth and

assessment data› Uses research based measures to determine student growth› Teacher effectiveness and ratings, as measured by student

achievement and growth data, are factored in teacher retention, promotion and termination decisions

› Teacher/administrator results are used to inform teacher of professional development for the succeeding year

› Ensures that teachers/administrators are evaluated annuallyMust notify Gov. Council by November 1st of exemption

Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness(MCEE)

Appointed by Governor Snyder:› Deborah Ball› Mark Reckase› Nick Sheltrown

Appointed by Senate Majority Leader:› David Vensel

Appointed by Speaker of the House:› Jennifer Hammond

(Non-voting Member) Appointed by Superintendent of Public Instruction:

› Joseph Martineau


Advisory committee appointed by the Governor › Provide input on the Council’s

recommendations› Teachers, administrators, parents


No later than April 30, 2012 the Council must submit:

A student growth and assessment tool A value-added model Measures growth in core areas and other areas Complies with laws for students with disabilities Has at least a pre- and post-test Can be used with students of varying ability levels

No later than April 30, 2012 the Council must submit:

A state evaluation tool for teachers (general and special education teachers) Including instructional leadership abilities,

attendance, professional contributions, training, progress reports, school improvement progress, peer input and pupil and parent feedback

Council must seek input from local districts



No later than April 30, 2012 the Council must submit:• A state evaluation tool for administrators

Including attendance, graduation rates, professional contributions, training, progress reports, school improvement plan progress, peer input and pupil/parent feedback

• Recommended changes for requirements for professional teaching certificate

• A process for evaluating and approving local evaluation tools

Interim Report

Vision Statement:

The Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness will develop a fair, transparent, and feasible evaluation system for teachers and school administrators. The system will be based on rigorous standards of professional practice and of measurement. The goals of this system is to contribute to enhanced instruction, improve student achievement, and support ongoing professional learning.

Interim ReportTeacher Evaluation: Observation Tool

Selection Criteria1. Alignment with State Standards2. Instruments describe practice and support

teacher development3. Rigorous and ongoing training program for

evaluators4. Independent research to confirm validity and

reliability5. Feasibility


Systems1. Marzano Observation Protocol2. Thoughtful Classroom3. Five Dimensions of Teaching and Learning4. Framework for Teaching5. Classroom Assessment Scoring System6. TAP


Lesson Learned1. Pilot is essential2. Phasing in3. Number of observations4. Other important components


Challenges1. Being fiscally responsible2. Ensuring fairness and reliability3. Assessing the fidelity of protocol

implementation4. Determining the equivalence of different

instruments

Interim ReportTeacher Evaluation: Student Growth Model

Recognize that student growth can give insight into teacher effectiveness

Admit that “student growth” is not clearly defined

Descriptions of growth vary and include:› Tests› Analytic techniques for scoring› Measures of value-added modeling

Simple vs. Complex statistics VAM


New York: 40% state assessments w/local assessments approved by StateArizona: 33% - 50% of evaluation, locals determine multiple measures, tested subject areas must use State data for one measureColorado: 50% growth on state assessments and “other” measures for non-tested subjectsDelaware: 50% school-wide assessment measure based on State assessment (30%) and student cohort assessment (20%)Florida: 50% on State assessments for teachers in tested subjects (40% if less than 3 years of data) and 30% on State assessment for teachers in non-tested subjects


Challenges1. Measurement error in standardized and local

measurements2. Balancing fairness toward educators with

fairness toward students3. Non-tested grades and subjects4. Tenuous roster connections between students

and teachers5. Number of years of data

Questions Surrounding Student Growth Measures…

Question #1: Should the State evaluation data (i.e. MEAP, MME, etc.) be the only source of student growth data? Why or why not?

Question #2: Should local student growth models be allowed? Why or why not?

Question #3: If you agree that multiple measures should be allowed, what percentage would you give each of the multiple measures?

› For example if educators are permitted to use MME data, a local tool such as an end of course assessment, and a personally developed measure how should those three measures be weighted?

Question #4: How should we measure teachers in non-tested subjects such as band or auto mechanics?

Interim ReportPilot for 2012-2013

12 school districts Pilot the teacher observation tool Pilot the administrator evaluation tool Train evaluators, principals and teachers Provide information on validity Gather feedback from teachers and principals 3 observation tools Student growth model/VAM pilot

Interim ReportTimeline for MCEE Recomendations

Estimated Timeline for Completing Recommendations

Month/Year Recommendation

June 2012 • Observation tool(s)• Details regarding the 2012-2013 pilot year

July 2012 • Other components of teacher evaluation systems

October 2012 • Student growth model

November 2012 • Evaluation tool for school administrators• Details regarding the pilot of administrator

evaluations• District waiver processes and principles

April 2013 • Professional certificate

June 2013 • Review all recommendations and adjust based on new data and information

New Website!

www.mcede.org

http://www.mcede.org/

Discuss the charge of the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness (MCEE) Summarize the MCEE...

Documents

Transcript of Discuss the charge of the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness (MCEE) Summarize the MCEE...