Achievenj in 2016 and beyond Adoption Peter Shulman Deputy Commissioner Kristen Brown Chief Talent Officer Carl Blanchard Director, Office of Evaluation January 4, 2017

Summary AchieveNJ, developed collaboratively, is currently in its fourth year. We now have a clearer picture of educator effectiveness and have seen significant positive shifts in educational quality. We remain committed to improving the accuracy and value of the system through listening and learning. The proposed enhancements will address some common challenges, provide increased flexibility to engage in high impact best-practices, and promote innovation. The proposed enhancements have been widely well-received by New Jersey’s educators.

Changes to Address Challenges 1. Balancing time between paperwork and working directly with teachers Observation requirements are simplified 2. Prescriptive evaluation of Highly Effective teachers Flexibility for evaluating Highly Effective teachers 3. Misaligned and tight deadlines PDP, CAP, and SGO deadlines are aligned 4. Developing high quality SGOs Administrator training /district policy requirements for SGOs are aligned 5. Complicated/restrictive principal evaluation Principal evaluation is more flexible Our proposals seek to address these challenges, overall simplifying, aligning and providing greater flexibility at the local level

Appendix

` Change 1 Observation requirements are simplified Teacher Evaluation Current New Teacher Status Minimum Observations Non-tenured (1-2 yrs) 2 x 40 min 1 x 20 min (3-4 yrs) 1 x 40 min 2 x 20 min Tenured 3 x 20 min Corrective Action Plan Plus One Teacher Status Minimum Observations (at least 20 minutes each) Non-tenured 3 Tenured 2 Corrective Action Plan Plus One At least one face-to-face post-observation conference is required for tenured teachers (All are face-to-face with non-tenured/CAP teachers) On the whole, these changes constitute a reduction in prescriptiveness. Our aim is to provide districts the flexibility to spend time with staff who need it most in the ways that are most useful. However, many districts have systems in place that greatly benefit growth of their staff. They should not fix what is not broken and we strongly support their continued use of more and longer observations and frequent face to face conferences. Two Observations for Tenured Teachers Challenge – three observations has posted logistical difficulties and paperwork burden, not able to spend as much time on high impact activities with teachers who need the most support Recommendation – districts focus on providing most effective support to teachers possible, may include 3, 4 or 5 observations. But they have flexibility to conduct as few as two when it is appropriate. 20 min observations Challenges – not all teachers need more than 20 min observation for each observation. 20 mins is enough for gauging effectiveness of instruction according to the MET study so this is our minimum, Recommendation - Most districts are doing 40 mins for one or more of their tenured teacher observations despite the 20 min minimum. Districts should be allowed flexibility in this decision and develop a consistent approach that works for them. Face to face post-observation conferences Challenge – we provided the option in 2014 to conduct conferences by email to free up some time for administrators. However, overwhelmingly, our research shows that administrators and teachers want this time to be face to face – this is where the highest value of the observation process resides. With the reduction in observation requirements, we expect some of those time-savings to be spent in these valuable conversations. Recommendation – conferences should be in person as much as possible but all tenured teachers must have at least one in person conference. Non-tenured teachers still must have all in-person conferences. [Multiple observers required for all conferences for non-tenured teachers Challenges - Complex scheduling, communication between multiple observers is difficult and information can get lost between observations, quality of observations varies when conducted by a secondary observer. Recommendation - We know that many districts find great value in using multiple observers. We continue to recommend this as a best practice if districts find quality of observations can be maintained or improved and have an efficient system set up to implement it.] Benefits Administrators will save an average of at least 35 hours 2 a year through this differentiated approach and will have the flexibility to spend more time; working with novice teachers and others who need extra support; engaging in collaborative team work; and, having more targeted professional dialog. Districts always have the option to exceed these minimum requirements, particularly in cases where their systems are working well already. Based on time survey of 341 administrators in Fall 2015. Confidential draft for internal use only

Change 2 Flexibility for evaluating Highly Effective teachers Successful year-long pilot with 18 districts informs this change Highly Effective teachers may have one observation based on a portfolio of practice chosen from a Commissioner-approved list including: Reflective educator practice (videos, student surveys, etc.) Work with student teachers National Board Certification process Optional approach must be agreed to by both teachers and administrators Rationale Currently, Highly Effective teachers must be evaluated with a one-size-fits-all approach that may not be as effective or efficient as a more innovative approach. Educators have called for a process that encourages teachers to take ownership of their evaluations in positive ways. The Department’s Innovation Pilot has been exploring options for better evaluating highly effective teachers. Results from the pilot have been unambiguously positive and all districts should be afforded this opportunity. Benefits Increased flexibility provides more room to innovate and differentiate evaluations for teachers at varying points in their practice. Encourages teachers to take a more active role in their evaluations and develop their practice to even higher levels.

Student Growth Objectives Change 3 PDP updates/CAP and SGO goal deadlines are aligned Student Growth Objectives Current Professional Development Plan Corrective Action Plan June Sep 15 Oct 31 Rationale - The Department’s variety of deadlines adds burden, sometimes unnecessarily, sometimes when there’s a better way for educators. Districts may choose to set goals before this date if that is their preference.

Proposal 3 Align PDP, CAP and SGO deadlines Professional Development Plan Corrective Action Plan Student Growth Objectives New Oct 31 Benefits Teachers gain extra time and information to finalize high quality professional goals for themselves. There is increased flexibility for goal-setting conferences to occur Professional goals and student goals would now be due on one date, simplifying schedules. Districts may choose to set goals before this date if that is their preference.

Change 4 Training /district policy requirements for SGOs are aligned All administrators receive training on the SGO process as well as on other components of the evaluation rubric prior to conducting evaluations Districts develop policies and procedures describing the process of developing and scoring SGOs. Benefits All educators better understand each component of the evaluation rubric prior to the start of the evaluation cycle. Coupled with more flexibility offered in the observation process, increased focus on the SGO process will help increase the quality of goals set and support given to teachers. Rationale - Many districts struggle to implement consistent SGO policy and ensure this process is an accurate measure of teacher effectiveness and/or has value for teachers. While appropriate training for administrators alone is insufficient for solving SGO challenges, it is a necessary first step. Better training plus more energy devoted to setting, monitoring and scoring SGOs equals better quality goals. Districts will be able to use Department-created resources including video to meet this training requirement.

Change 5 Principal evaluation is more flexible Proposed Option 1 Current Recommendation – use option for supporting new principals in teacher evaluation or in cases where rubric adds needed extra emphasis on components of instructional leadership and teacher management. Rationale - Principal evaluation has been on the back burner in many districts and within the Department until recently. A variety of factors have contributed to this and the complexity of the system has not helped. The Evaluation Leadership Rubric is a component designed to help leaders focus on the good implementation of AchieveNJ. However, there is some redundancy in ELR within certain practice instruments, indicating that it is not adding value to some evaluations. Conversely, some districts are still finding value in its use –its simplicity and clarity and focus on important leadership components.

Change 5 Principal evaluation is more flexible Proposed Option 1 New Evaluation Leadership Rubric component is optional Recommendation – use option for supporting new principals in teacher evaluation or in cases where rubric adds needed extra emphasis on components of instructional leadership and teacher management. Rationale - Principal evaluation has been on the back burner in many districts and within the Department until recently. A variety of factors have contributed to this and the complexity of the system has not helped. The Evaluation Leadership Rubric is a component designed to help leaders focus on the good implementation of AchieveNJ. However, there is some redundancy in ELR within certain practice instruments, indicating that it is not adding value to some evaluations. Conversely, some districts are still finding value in its use –its simplicity and clarity and focus on important leadership components. Benefits Making the Evaluation Leadership Rubric optional provides increased flexibility to help districts improve quality of principal evaluation.

Continued Learning and Support The Department continues to support and learn from districts through: Outreach and direct field support to districts and their educators Updated toolkit of best practices Year 2 of Achievement Coaches professional development sessions A spring report on 2015-16 evaluation results following certification of data A greater focus on principal evaluation