Measuring teachers' contributions to student learning in the non-tested

subjects and grades

Laura Goe, Ph.D.Research Scientist, ETS, and Principal Investigator for the National

Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality

Webinar PresentationSupporting OSDE Teacher Leader Effectiveness

Initiatives

June 26, 2012

2

Laura Goe, Ph.D.

• Former teacher in rural & urban schools

Special education (7th & 8th grade, Tunica, MS)

Language arts (7th grade, Memphis, TN)

• Graduate of UC Berkeley’s Policy, Organizations, Measurement & Evaluation doctoral program

• Principal Investigator for the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality

• Research Scientist in the Performance Research Group at ETS

3

The National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality

• A federally-funded partnership whose mission is to help states carry out the teacher quality mandates of ESEA

• Vanderbilt University• Learning Point Associates, an affiliate of

American Institutes for Research• Educational Testing Service

4

The goal of teacher evaluation

The ultimate goal of all teacher evaluation should be…

TO IMPROVE TEACHING AND

LEARNING

5

Measures and models: Definitions

• Measures are the instruments, assessments, protocols, rubrics, and tools that are used in determining teacher effectiveness

• Models are the state or district systems of teacher evaluation including all of the inputs and decision points (measures, instruments, processes, training, and scoring, etc.) that result in determinations about individual teachers’ effectiveness

6

A non-tested subject example (1)

Industrial Technology 1: Working in small groups and independently, students will rotate through several units that emphasize the use of computer technology in a guided hands-on approach to learning.  The units cover flight, drafting, wood projects, metals, geometric design using plastics and mousetrap vehicles.  Each unit is designed to reinforce the core curricular areas of Math, Science, and History while having fun. First Avenue Middle School, Arcadia, California http://fa.ausd.net/modules/cms/pages.phtml?pageid=163324&SID

7

A non-tested subject example (2)

The Great Depression: Describe the causes and effects of the Great Depression and give examples of the government’s response to conditions and events. Analyze the impact of New Deal programs and explain how the role of government changed during the 1930s. [Standard Indicators: USH.4.4, USH.4.5, USH.4.6, USH 4.8]Indiana’s Core Standards

http://www.in.gov/edroundtable/files/SocStudies_FINAL3.pdf

4 types of musical behaviors:

Types of assessment

1.Responding

2.Creating

3.Performing

4.Listening

1. Rubrics

2. Playing tests

3. Written tests

4. Practice sheets

5. Teacher Observation

6. Portfolios

7. Peer and Self-Assessment

A non-tested subject example (3)

Slide used with permission of authors Carla Maltas, Ph.D. and Steve Williams, M.Ed. See reference list for details.

9

Oklahoma State Department of Education Priority Academic Skills (PASS) District Arts Assessment

Report http://ok.gov/sde/arts#Assess

10

Validity

• Measures don’t “have” validity—depends on how the measure is used

• There is still considerable work to be done in validating measures for teacher evaluation Multiple measures may serve as a means of

triangulating teacher effectiveness results

• Herman et al. (2011) state, “Validity is a matter of degree (based on the extent to which an evidence-based argument justifies the use of an assessment for a specific purpose).” (pg. 1)

11

Recommendation from NBPTS Task Force (Linn et al., 2011)

Recommendation 2: Employ measures of student learning explicitly aligned with the elements of curriculum for which the teachers are responsible. This recommendation emphasizes the importance of ensuring that teachers are evaluated for what they are teaching.

12

Measuring teachers’ contributions to student learning growth: A summary of current models

Model Description

Student learning objectives

Teachers assess students at beginning of year and set objectives then assesses again at end of year; principal or designee works with teacher, determines success

Subject & grade alike team models (“Ask a Teacher”)

Teachers meet in grade-specific and/or subject-specific teams to consider and agree on appropriate measures that they will all use to determine their individual contributions to student learning growth

Content Collaboratives Content experts (external) identify measures and groups of content teachers consider the measures from the perspective of classroom use; may not include pre- and post measures

Pre-and post-tests model Identify or create pre- and post-tests for every grade and subject

School-wide value-added Teachers in tested subjects & grades receive their own value-added score; all other teachers get the school-wide average

13

School-wide VAM illustration

SS1

SS2

Sci1

Sci2

Sped FL PE ELL

Math

1

Math

2ELA

1ELA

20

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Obs/SurvVAM

14

Differentiating among teachers

• “It is nearly impossible to discover and act on performance differences among teachers when documented records show them all to be the same.” (Glazerman et al., 2011, pg 1)

15

What assessments are states using for the non-tested subjects and grades?

• Existing measures Curriculum-based assessments (come with packaged

curriculum) Classroom-based individual testing (DRA, DIBELS) Formative assessments such as NWEA Progress monitoring tools (for Response to Intervention) National tests, certification tests (but these lack pre-tests)

• Rigorous new measures created for subject/grade standards (by teachers, districts, SEAs, etc.)

• The 4 Ps: Portfolios/products/performance/projects• Student learning objectives• Any measure that demonstrates students’ growth

towards proficiency in appropriate standards

16

Tennessee approved assessments for non-tested subjects & grades

17

Who approves measures?

• Teachers may select (and in some states create) measures but in all cases, there is an approval process for use of the measure for evaluation purposes

• Approval process varies Delaware: state must approve measures New York: district must approve measures Washington DC, Rhode Island, most other

states: building principal approves measures

18

The 4 Ps (Projects, Performances, Products, Portfolios)

• Yes, they can be used to demonstrate teachers’ contributions to student learning growth

• Here’s the basic approach Use a high-quality rubric to judge initial

knowledge and skills required for mastery of the standard(s)

Use the same rubric to judge knowledge and skills at the end of a specific time period (unit, grading period, semester, year, etc.)

19

Collect evidence in a standardized way (to the extent possible)

• Evidence of student learning growth Locate or develop rubrics with explicit

instructions and clear indicators of proficiency for each level of the rubric

Establish time for teachers to collectively examine student work and come to a consensus on performance at each level- Identify “anchor” papers or examples

Provide training for teachers to determine how and when assessments should be given, and how to record results in specific formats

20

Colorado Content Collaboratives

“…are P-12 educators from around the state coming together to identify and create high-quality assessments, which are aligned to the new Colorado Academic Standards and may be used in the context of Educator Effectiveness evaluations. The Collaboratives are a four-year initiative. The first year of work will focus on the reviewing and creation of fair, valid and reliable measures of student learning (see flow chart below). Those measures will then be piloted and peer reviewed for their utility in educator effectiveness evaluations.”http://www.cde.state.co.us/ContentCollaboratives/index.asp

21

Washington DC IMPACT:Instructions for teachers in non-tested

subjects/grades

“In the fall, you will meet with your administrator to decide which assessment(s) you will use to evaluate your students’ achievement. If you are using multiple assessments, you will decide how to weight them. Finally, you will also decide on your specific student learning targets for the year. Please note that your administrator must approve your choice of assessments, the weights you assign to them, and your achievement targets. Please also note that your administrator may choose to meet with groups of teachers from similar content areas rather than with each teacher individually.”

21

22

Rhode Island’s SLO language

• “Student Learning Objectives are not set by educators in isolation; rather, they are developed by teams of administrators, grade-level teams or groups of content-alike teachers and, are aligned to district and school priorities, wherever possible.” (pg 12)

From Rhode Island’s “Guide to Measures of Student Learning for Administrators and Teachers 2011-2012” http://www.ride.ri.gov/educatorquality/educatorevaluation/Docs/GuideSLO.pdf

23

Rhode Island student learning objectives: Administration & scoring

• Administration & Scoring: The teacher should explain how the evidence

used to assess the objective will be collected and reviewed. The teacher should include detail about how assessments will be administered and scored. The teacher and evaluator should determine the most accurate, fair, and objective scoring process possible.

24

Rhode Island student learning objectives: Results

• Results At the end of the interval of instruction, the

teacher should explain the results of all sources of evidence used to assess the objective. The results should be expressed numerically and in relation to the previously set targets. If any official score reports are available for the sources of evidence used (especially for common assessments) they should be submitted to the evaluator prior to the End-of-Year Conference.

25

Rhode Island student learning objectives: Scoring

• Scoring The evaluator should review all the available evidence

related to Student Learning Objectives, noting the degree to which the objective was met on the form. Evaluators will informally rate each objective as Not Met, Met, or Exceeded. The evaluator may provide additional comments about the scoring. These informal ratings will serve as the basis for the holistic scoring. Using the Student Learning Objective scoring guidelines, evaluators will look at the whole body of evidence across all objectives and assign an overall Student Learning Objective rating.

26

Rhode Island student learning objectives: Rubric for final score

Score Description

Exceptional Attainment (5)

Evidence across all Student Learning Objectives indicates exceptional student mastery or progress. All objectives are exceeded. This category is reserved for the educator who has surpassed expectations described in their Student Learning Objectives and/or demonstrated and outstanding impact on student learning.

Full Attainment (4)

Evidence across all Student Learning Objectives indicates superior student mastery or progress. This category applies to the educator who overall has nearly met the majority of the expectations described in their Student Learning Objectives and/or who has demonstrated a notable impact on student learning.

Considerable Attainment (3)

Evidence across all Student Learning Objectives indicates significant student mastery or progress. If an objective was not met, evidence indicates that is was nearly met. This category applies to the educator who overall has nearly met the majority of the expectations described in their Student Learning Objectives and/or who has demonstrated a considerable impact on student learning.

Partial Attainment (2)

Evidence across all Student Learning Objectives indicates some student mastery or progress. Educator may have met or exceeded some objectives and no met other objectives. Educator may have nearly met all objectives. This category applies to the educator who has demonstrated an impact on student learning, but overall has not met the expectations described in their Student Learning Objectives.

Minimal or No Attainment (1)

Evidence across all Student Learning Objectives indicates little student mastery or progress. This category applies to the educator who has not met the expectations described in their Student Learning Objectives and has not demonstrated a sufficient impact on student learning. This category also applies when evidence of objectives is missing, incomplete, or unreliable or when the educator has not engaged in their in the process of setting and gathering evidence for Student Learning Objectives.

27

Questions to ask about each measure used

• How will using this measure in the teacher evaluation system impact teaching and learning in classrooms and schools?

• How will the use of this measure look different in low-capacity vs. high-capacity schools?

• How will reporting on results from this measure be done (to provide actionable information to teachers, principals, schools, districts, teacher preparation programs, and the state)?

• How will we know if this measure is working as we intended?

28

Resources and links

• Colorado Content Collaboratives http://www.cde.state.co.us/ContentCollaboratives/index.asp

• Indiana RISE http://www.riseindiana.org/ • New York State Evaluation http://engageny.org/administrators/ • Rhode Island Department of Education Teacher Evaluation – Student

Learning Objectives http://www.ride.ri.gov/educatorquality/educatorevaluation/SLO.aspx

• Tennessee Teacher Evaluation http://team-tn.org/ • Washington DC Impact Teacher Evaluation System http://

www.dc.gov/DCPS/impact

29

References

Glazerman, S., D. Goldhaber, et al. (2011). Passing muster: Evaluating evaluation systems. Washington, DC, Brown Center on Education Policy at Brookings.

http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2010/1117_evaluating_teachers.aspx Herman, J. L., Heritage, M., & Goldschmidt, P. (2011). Developing and selecting measures

of student growth for use in teacher evaluation. Los Angeles, CA: University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).

http://www.aacompcenter.org/cs/aacc/view/rs/26719 Linn, R., Bond, L., Darling-Hammond, L., Harris, D., Hess, F., & Shulman, L. (2011). Student learning,

student achievement: How do teachers measure up? Arlington, VA: National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

http://www.nbpts.org/index.cfm?t=downloader.cfm&id=1305

Malta, C., and Williams, S. (January 27, 2010). Meaningful assessment in the music classroom. Presented at Missouri Music Educators Association Conference, Jefferson City, MO.

http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/curriculum/fa/AssessmentintheMusicClassroom.pptx

30

Questions?

31

Laura Goe, Ph.D.609-619-1648lgoe@ets.orgwww.lauragoe.comhttps://twitter.com/GoeLaura

National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality1000 Thomas Jefferson Street, NWWashington, D.C. 20007www.tqsource.org