Michele Winship, Ph.D.  Compliance with HB 153/SB 316 requirements?  Seek out and get rid of “bad” teachers? OR  Improve teaching.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Welcome to Site Management Amy Thompson. Agenda I.Foundation Introductions Setting the Session Agenda II.Site Management Principles III.Site Management.
Advertisements

Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Michigan Education Association Spring 2011.
TEACHER EVALUATION What it is going to look like….
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
Getting Organized for the Transition to the Common Core What You Need to Know.
Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal Requirements SB 290 ESEA Waiver Oregon Framework.
August 15, 2012 Fontana Unified School District Superintendent, Cali Olsen-Binks Associate Superintendent, Oscar Dueñas Director, Human Resources, Mark.
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program May 7, 2013.
Technology Use Plan Mary Anderson 7/29/08 EDTECH 571 click to go to each slide.
SAU #53 Serving the School Districts of Allenstown, Chichester, Deerfield, Epsom, and Pembroke Action Plan
Professional Growth= Teacher Growth
Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1.
Holland Central School District New Teacher Mentoring Program Introduction.
First, a little background…  The FIT Program is the lead agency for early intervention services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
Restructuring Sustaining the Change Sam Redding Center on Innovation & Improvement
State Laws, Recommendations, & NCLB How research becomes policies Janice Kroeger, Ph.D. Associate Professor, TLC, ECED.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
CHEA GENERAL MEETING August 31, 2011 STATE SALARY SCALE Professional Learning Community (PLC) NEGOTIATIONS DPAS II CHANGES STATE SALARY SCALE Professional.
PRESENTED BY THERESA RICHARDS OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AUGUST 2012 Overview of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and.
Compass: Module 2 Compass Requirements: Teachers’ Overall Evaluation Rating Student Growth Student Learning Targets (SLTs) Value-added Score (VAM) where.
Marco Ferro, Director of Public Policy Larry Nielsen, Field Consultant With Special Guest Stars: Tammy Pilcher, President Helena Education Association.
“Current systems support current practices, which yield current outcomes. Revised systems are needed to support new practices to generate improved outcomes.”
Implementation of the North Carolina Read to Achieve Program CCSA March 25, 2013.
SCHOOL ADVISORY COUNCIL TRAINING  A group intended to represent the broad school community and those persons closest to the students who will.
Alaska Staff Development Network – Follow-Up Webinar Emerging Trends and issues in Teacher Evaluation: Implications for Alaska April 17, :45 – 5:15.
Effective Instructional Feedback Mike Miles July 2009.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
Statewide System of Support Looking for Alaina Sam Redding Center on Innovation & Improvement
Teacher and Principal Evaluations and Discipline Under Chapter 103.
Capstone Project Chinook Trail Elementary School Noel Wilson EDLS 643 Regis University May 24 th, 2012.
Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support UPDATE Presented by the Oregon Department of Education November 19, 2012.
OVERVIEW OF SB 290 CHANGES IN LICENSED STAFF EVALUATION WHAT IT MEANS TO YOU SOESD’s Teacher Evaluation & Support System.
2012 – 2013 School Year. OTES West Branch Local Schools.
School Based Teams. Basic Assumptions  All teachers have responsibility for students with special learning needs  All students can be helped by regular.
EVALUATIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL GROWTH Ohio TIF and OTES.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
 Development of a model evaluation instrument based on professional performance standards (Danielson Framework for Teaching)  Develop multiple measures.
What you need to know about changes in state requirements for Teval plans.
PGES: The Final 10% i21: Navigating the 21 st Century Highway to Top Ten.
Ohio Department of Education March 2011 Ohio Educator Evaluation Systems.
TEACHER EVALUATION After S.B. 290 The Hungerford Law Firm June, 2012.
Writing Policy for SBDM Councils. Goals of this Session provide an overview of Senate Bill 1 requirements related to writing provide guidance in reviewing.
Data Report July Collect and analyze RtI data Determine effectiveness of RtI in South Dakota in Guide.
APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
Service Center Presenter’s Name Basic Elements of the Parental Involvement Policy.
August 12-13San Antonio, Texas 2015 Annual Business Meeting IFTA, Inc. Strategic Plan (Release 6) Trent Knoles (IL) and Joy Prenger (MO) IFTA, Inc. Board.
ANNOOR ISLAMIC SCHOOL AdvancEd Survey PURPOSE AND DIRECTION.
Update on the MA Task Force on Evaluation of Teachers and Administrators Presented to the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education Associate Commissioner.
Literacy Partner 2007 – 2008 The literacy partner supports student learning by collaborating with teachers and administrators to model best practices and.
Staff All Surveys Questions 1-27 n=45 surveys Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree The relative sizes of the colored bars in the chart.
Teacher Evaluation MEASURING EDUCATOR IMPACT / / / CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT.
Teacher Evaluation Systems 2.0: What Have We Learned? EdWeek Webinar March 14, 2013 Laura Goe, Ph.D. Research Scientist, ETS Sr. Research and Technical.
CCSSO Task Force Recommendations on Educator Preparation Idaho State Department of Education December 14, 2013 Webinar.
Teacher Incentive Fund U.S. Department of Education.
AT Consideration Overview of Issues & Solutions. P ROCEDURAL ISSUES … Consideration / Assessment / Evaluation Integration into IEP Implementation & Progress.
ELECTRONIC TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL EVALUATION SYSTEM eTPES Evaluation Updates and Requirements August/ September 2015.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
Michele Winship, Ph.D. 2 3  Aligned with the Ohio Standards for the Teaching ProfessionOhio Standards for the Teaching Profession.
1 Rose Hermodson Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education December 13, 2011 Teacher Evaluation Components in Legislation.
OEA Leadership Academy 2011 Michele Winship, Ph.D.
OEA Leadership Academy 2011 Michele Winship, Ph.D.
Note: In 2009, this survey replaced the NCA/Baldrige Quality Standards Assessment that was administered from Also, 2010 was the first time.
Five Required Elements
Co-Teaching in the 21st Century
Overview of Implementation and Local Decisions
Presentation transcript:

Michele Winship, Ph.D.

 Compliance with HB 153/SB 316 requirements?  Seek out and get rid of “bad” teachers? OR  Improve teaching practice and student learning by creating a system that accurately and fairly evaluates teacher performance, provides specific and timely feedback about strengths and areas for improvement and establishes support and resources for continuous professional growth. 2

3

4

5

 Additional Framework Requirements  Multiple measures for student growth and teacher performance  Identification of measures of student growth  Two formal observations of at least 30 minutes and classroom “walkthroughs”  Written report of the results of the evaluation  Credentialed evaluators  Professional development to accelerate and continue teacher growth and provide support to poorly performing teachers 6

 By July 1, 2013, local board must adopt a teacher evaluation policy created in consultation with teachers and aligned with the state framework and meet the effective date of the policy required by law. Policy is operative upon the expiration of any collective bargaining agreement in effect on the effective date ( )***  Student growth measures must include value- added data.  Every teacher evaluated every year, unless the board passes a resolution to allow Accomplished teachers to be evaluated every two years (can also replace one observation with a project) ***Confusion regarding effective dates and contracts expired this summer 7

 Involve teachers from the beginning  Include educators from different buildings, grade levels, subjects and special areas, and district roles  Set up a meeting schedule and provide the necessary release time for everyone to be present  Select co-chairs (administrative and teacher) who can define the work and move it forward  Determine how work will be divided among team members 8

 Develop both internal and external communications systems that allows information to flow in both directions  Utilize technology whenever possible  Create a regular schedule for sharing evaluation development information and soliciting feedback from various stakeholders (Board, administration, teachers, students, community)  Identify the individuals responsible for monitoring and responding to feedback 9

 Board Policy  Current Evaluation System processes, procedures and tools  Collective Bargaining Agreement evaluation language AND THEN…  Conduct the GAP ANALYSIS to determine how much or how little your system will need to changeGAP ANALYSIS  Survey your teachers and administrators to find out what works in the current system, what needs to be changed and what is missing 10

 Review the current state models to determine what is appropriate to adopt, adapt or eliminate  Explore other models from other districts and states for best practice and best fit  Select/design local processes, procedures and tools  Who does what, when, where and how  Record-keeping and data management  Training for teachers AND evaluators 11

 Determine what measures you already have for value-added and vendor assessments  Be sure that all teachers with value-added data receive appropriate training (Battelle for Kids)Battelle for Kids  Identify where assessment “gaps” exist and determine what locally developed measures need to be created  Review state guidance for Student Learning Objects (SLOs)Student Learning Objects  Provide initial assessment literacy professional development for all staff  Create work groups of teachers to select/develop appropriate assessments 12

 Determine appropriate weight of SGMs for each category of teacher  Once developed, pilot SGMs to determine validity and reliability  Provide the methods and technology to collect, analyze and store student performance data  Provide time and training for educators to work together with student data to improve their own instruction 13

 Construct a pilot timeline  Identify volunteer teachers and evaluators for a “no-fault” pilot the system  Review and revise the system based on pilot data from both teachers and evaluators  Train all evaluators and teachers  State credentialing training for all evaluators  Local evaluator training and calibrating for evaluators on local processes, procedures and tools  Training for all educators on local processes, procedures and tools 14

 Collectively bargain your new system, including:  How professional development to accelerate and continue teacher growth and support poorly performing teachers will be provided and funded  What additional peer assistance will be provided for poorly performing teachers  How improvement plans are developed and carried out  How evaluation results will be used for retention and promotion decisions and for removal of poorly performing teachers  The specific processes, procedures and tools (including timelines and definitions)  How comparable evaluations will be determined since seniority cannot be used as a factor in retention 15

 Set up a regular schedule for the district evaluation team to review and assess the effectiveness of the new evaluation system— Is it improving educator performance?  Create evaluation resources and training for new hires and new evaluators  Maintain open lines of communication for both evaluators and educators to provide feedback about the new system  Be flexible to adapt to whatever changes may come from the state or the feds 16

17

 Michele Winship   18