General Session: Educator Evaluation-Improving

Instruction for All Students

Janice Poda

Mary Dean Barringer

Irv Richardson

Facilitators

Janice Poda

Mary Dean Barringer

Irv Richardson

State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness (SCEE)

Background and Overview

Changing educator evaluation systems from single observations to multiple data sources is complex and challenging work

Our initial entry into this work was reactive (e.g., Widget Effect, RTTT, waivers)

Like any complex change, there are implementation issues that create “problems of practice”

The good news--addressing implementation issues provides us the opportunity to be proactive with actions and messaging

SCEE States’ Self-Reporting on their Use of the MET Study’s Nine Principles for Using

Measures of Effective Teaching

MEASURE EFFECTIVE TEACHING

Set expectations

Completely 61%

Somewhat 29%

Slightly 11%

Not at All 0%

MEASURE EFFECTIVE TEACHING

Use multiple measures

Completely 68%

Somewhat 14%

Slightly 14%

Not at All 4%

MEASURE EFFECTIVE TEACHING

Balance weights

Completely 39%

Somewhat 27%

Slightly 23%

Not at All 12%

ENSURE HIGH-QUALITY DATA

Monitor validity

Completely 12%

Somewhat 42%

Slightly 27%

Not at All 19%

ENSURE HIGH-QUALITY DATA

Ensure reliability

Completely 15%

Somewhat 31%

Slightly 35%

Not at All 19%

ENSURE HIGH-QUALITY DATA

Assure accuracy

Completely 12%

Somewhat 42%

Slightly 31%

Not at All 15%

INVEST IN IMPROVEMENT

Make meaningful distinctions

Completely 35%

Somewhat 27%

Slightly 12%

Not at All 27%

INVEST IN IMPROVEMENT

Prioritize support and feedback

Completely 39%

Somewhat 39%

Slightly 4%

Not at All 19%

INVEST IN IMPROVEMENT

Use data for decisions at all levels

Completely 35%

Somewhat 31%

Slightly 23%

Not at All 12%

We asked SEA Personnel what they wanted Chiefs to Know about Educator Evaluation…

“As states have redesigned educator evaluations over the past few years, we have learned many lessons.

At this point, what would you like all chiefs to know and understand about educator evaluations?”

SEA Personnel Would Like Chiefs to:

Stay the course, but recognize that design of educator evaluation systems takes time and requires continuous improvement.

Keep the focus on improved teaching practice that results in student growth and learning.

Integrate the evaluation system with other state reforms instead of many seemingly disparate initiatives.

Develop communication pipelines that allow effective delivery of information about evaluation systems to districts.

Help the SEA listen, question and admit when they don’t have the answers.

Activity: Exploring Problems of Practice

Continuous improvement requires proactively anticipating and addressing issues as they arise with effective actions and targeted messaging.

Engage you in an activity will provides an opportunity to explore messaging and actions that address some of the issues states are facing as they roll out the educator evaluation systems.

Steps for the Activity

1. Choose a facilitator who will also serve as the spokesperson for your group

2. A recorder has been assigned to your group

3. Facilitator reads directions and scenario (5 minutes)

4. Discuss scenario (20 minutes)

5. Develop three key message points (5-8 minutes)

6. Develop three action steps the SEA could take to keep the educator evaluation work moving forward (5-8 minutes)

7. Recorder will record your thoughts on chart paper

8. We will be calling on selected groups to report out (15 minutes)

9. All chart pages will be posted for a “Gallery Walk” during the break

Times

9:30 – 10:05Choose facilitator/reporter for the group

Read task and scenario

Discuss issues in scenario and develop:• Three key message points• Three actions the SEA should take now to keep educator evaluation on track

10:05 – 10:20Report out from selected groups

10:20 – 10:30 Observations/Ahas from the Activity

10:30 – 11:00Break and Gallery Walk