Southeastern Wisconsin Teacher Evaluation Consortium Summer Professional Development Series August...
Transcript of Southeastern Wisconsin Teacher Evaluation Consortium Summer Professional Development Series August...
Southeastern Wisconsin Teacher Evaluation Consortium
Summer Professional Development Series
August 14th, 2012
Julie Brill i, DirectorTe a c h e r E d u c a t i o n , P ro f e s s i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t , a n d
L i c e n s i n gWi s c o n s i n D e p a r t m e n t o f Pu b l i c I n s t r u c t i o n
Overview
• Brief Overview of State Education Initiatives
• Wisconsin Framework for Educator Effectiveness• A System’s View• The Evaluation Process and Elements
• What About the Data?
• Are we Ready?
• Questions
Every Child a Graduate College and Career Ready
Standards & Instruction– What and how should kids learn?
Assessments and Data Systems– How do we know if they learned it?
School and Educator Effectiveness– How do we ensure that students
have highly effective teachers and schools?
School Finance Reform– How should we pay for schools?
New accountability system begins & AYP ends (ESEA waiver)
New proficiency benchmarks for WKCE reading & mathematics established
Educator Effectiveness system design continues; Act 166 passed
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17
New school report cards first issued (2011-12 accountability reports)
New kindergarten literacy screeneradministered statewide
DPI provides curricular resources for Common Core State Standards implementation
First districts using State Student Information System (SSIS)
Developmental pilot of Educator Effectiveness system
SMARTER Balanced assessment field testing
Educator Effectiveness statewide system pilot
Common Core State Standards fully incorporated into school/district curricula
Smarter Balanced replaces WKCE & WAA-SwD in mathematics and English/Language Arts, including reading and writing
Educator Effectiveness system implemented statewide
ASSETS for ELL assessment in use
All districts on SSIS
Higher graduation requirements
targeted –needs legislation
Timeline for Statewide Initiatives
• Replace broken No Child Left Behind requirements with a new state accountability and support system;
• Replicate best practices from high-performing schools and provide support to improve the lowest-performing schools;
•Advance a fair and robust educator evaluation system.
How do we ensure kids have highly effective teachers
and schools?
School and Educator Effectiveness
Context of theEducator Effectiveness Work
• State Superintendent’s Educator Effectiveness Design Team – Diverse Membership, National and State Support and Expertise (formed December 2010)
• State legislation (Act 166)– Endorses broad parameters of EE Framework– Districts must implement evaluation systems
consistent with legislation by 2014-2015
• Federal push: (July 2012) ESEA Waiver approval
Educator Effectiveness Timeline
Phases 1 & 2December 2010-
June 2012Framework released
Model developmentDevelopmental Districts
Phase 3July 2012- June
2013Voluntary
PilotsDevelopmen
t workEvaluator
and Educator training System training
Phase 4July 2013- June
2014Pilot
EvaluationModel
revisionsTraining
continuedPilot
expansion to prepare for statewide
implementation
Phase 5July 2014-June
2015Educator
Effectiveness system fully implemented
statewide
Continuous Improvement
Stage 1Developing
Stage 2Piloting
Stage 3Implementing
Guiding Principles of the System
An educator evaluation system must deliver information that:– Guides effective educational practice that is
aligned with student learning and development– Documents evidence of effective educator
practice– Documents evidence of student learning– Informs appropriate professional development– Informs educator preparation programs– Supports a full range of human resource
decisions– Is credible, valid, reliable, comparable, and
uniform across districts
Definition of Effective Educators
Effective Teacher: An effective teacher consistently uses educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways.
Effective Principal: An effective principal shapes school strategy and educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways.
Teaching is complex…
The Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System acknowledges this:
• Intentional, thoughtful in its design.
• Credible, valid, reliable, comparable, and uniform across districts.
A System of Seamless Transitions
Pre-service
Licensing
LicenseRenewal & the
PDP Process
Evaluation
Synergistic Partnership Between PK-12 and Educator Preparation Programs
Development of and Ongoing Support for Educators
Development of and Ongoing Support for Educators
System Weights
Sales
50% 50%EducatorPractice
StudentGrowth
Standards for Educator Practice
Teacher PracticeInTASC Teaching Standards (2011)
Framework for Teacher Evaluation
Charlotte Danielson’s Domains & Components
Domain 1: Planning and PreparationDomain 2: The Classroom
EnvironmentDomain 3: InstructionDomain 4: Professional
Responsibilities
Principal Practice2008 Interstate School
Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards
Framework for Principal EvaluationSubordinate functions
of the ISLLC standards
Educator Effectiveness Measures
15%
15%
15%
2.5%2.5%
50%
PercentPractice measures
District Choice
State Assessment (value-added model)
District Assessment
Student Learning Objectives
School-wide Reading (Elementary-Middle)Graduation (High School)
Evaluation Cycles
Orientation
Self-Reflection and Educator Effectiveness
Plan
Evaluation Planning Session
Observations and Evidence
CollectionPre- & Post-Observation Discussions
Rating of Practice
Final Evaluation Conference
Use of Evaluation
Results
OrientationSelf-
Reflection and
Educator Effectivenes
s Plan
Evaluation Planning Session
Observations and
Evidence Collection
Mid-Year Review
Rating of Practice
Final Evaluation Conference
Use of Evaluation
Results
PRINCIPALTEACHER
Teacher Evaluation Cycle
Frequency Duration
1 announced observation 45 minutes or (2) 20-minute observations
1 unannounced observation 45 minutes or (2) 20-minute observations
3-5 informal and unannounced observations (walkthroughs)
At least 5 minutes
Principal Evaluation Cycle
• A minimum of two observations Observations may include principal’s interactions or principal’s activities (leading a team meeting) relevant to the component being assessed
• Two to three informal school visits or walkthroughs.
.
Possible Evidence Sources
• Classroom observation (live and/or videotaped)• Guided teacher reflections or reflection form• Lesson and unit plans• Samples of class assignments, student work
with feedback• Logs of family contacts• Professional development records and
reflections• Student surveys• Evaluation conversations
Teacher Evidence Sources
Possible Evidence Sources• Documents
– School Improvement Plan– Written teacher evaluations– Leadership team agenda
• Observations– Leading faculty meeting– Community, school board presentations
• Surveys– School working conditions/climate
• Discussions with principal– Evaluator and principal interactions about
evidence
Principal Evidence Sources
What are SLOs?
SLOs are collaboratively established goals for growth in student achievement at the classroom level that are:
– Specific and measurable– Aligned to standards and to school improvement
plans/district strategic plans (if applicable)– Based on learning needs as determined by data– Established for individual teachers, teams, or
schools, and for all students or selected subgroups
– Based on rigorous, yet attainable growth goals
Teacher SLOs
SLO Process
Create SLO
Submit SLO for Approval
Not Approved
Approved
Possible Evidence Sources• Many potential sources of SLO evidence:
– End of course exams (with appropriate pre-test/baseline measure of student knowledge)
– High-quality classroom assessments– Performances/Portfolios of student work (when
scored with a rigorous rubric)
• SLO evidence should generally be kept separate from data used to determine areas of student need, in order to avoid “double-counting” of student outcomes– WKCE is not an appropriate SLO evidence source
(measures November-November growth)– Use of benchmark data (MAP, etc.) discouraged, but
could be appropriate in limited circumstances
SLO Evidence
Multiple Performance Categories
Developing: does not meet expectations and requires additional support and directed action
Effective: areas of strength and improvement addressed through professional development
Exemplary: expand expertise through professional development and use expertise in leadership
The initial recommendation of the Design Team included three performance categories. The Coordinating Committee met on July 26, 2012, and determined that five rating categories would be part of the Developmental Pilot as opposed to three.
Educator Effectiveness System Matrix
1 2 3 4 5
1 * *
2 *
3
4 *
5 * *
Student Outcomes
Mod
els
of P
ract
ice
• Asterisks indicate a mismatch between educator’s practice performance and student outcomes and requires a focused review to determine why the mismatch is occurring and what, if anything, needs to be corrected.
• Gathering and collecting observation data, student-teacher linkage data, mobility, etc.
• Integrating and managing data longitudinally from a variety of sources
• Accessing and reporting data• Validating for data quality• Supporting stakeholders
Data Systems Issues
• Opportunities for collaboration?
• Common Assessment development?
• Understanding of the EE system?
• Developing leadership skills for supporting this work?
• Formative Assessment?
District Readiness?
Staying Informed and Involved
Visit the DPI Website:http
://www.dpi.wi.gov/tepdl/edueff.html
The Framework, presentations, FAQs, and draft process manuals can be found posted on the website
Thank You!