Teacher Evaluation Work Group November 15, 2012 Implementation and LEA Support Sub-Committee Report: Survey Results

Survey Background Recommendation for Survey from July 30 Meeting: What is the current status of MN Teacher Evaluation? Do districts plan to use the State Model? Develop their own? What do districts need now? How can MDE support the transition to comply with the new law? Completed Jointly by District Superintendents & LEA Union Rep. Between Oct. 4 – Oct. 20 197 MN School Districts Completed the Survey

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation 77.3% reported having a formal written Teacher Evaluation process in place (p. 4) Of all survey respondents: 38.1% for more than 10 years 29.6% from 5 – 10 years 11.6% from 3 – 5 years 20.6% for less than 3 years

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation Details specified in the process: (p. 11) 97.3% Who Will Be Evaluated 94.7% Who Will Conduct the Evaluations 92.9% Frequency of Classroom Observation ---------------------------------------- 52.2% Standards of Teaching 38.9% Training of Evaluators

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation Components included in the process: (p. 14) 95.2% Direct, Systematic Observation 88.2% Informal Observation 73.7% Teacher Reflection or Self-Assessment --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19.9% Student Achievement Data 19.4% Peer Ratings of Teacher Performance 3.2% Student/Family Ratings

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation Trained Evaluators: 67.2% Require Training (p. 22) 18.4% Include an Assessment for Trainers Prior to Evaluation of Teachers (p. 26) 46.5% Include Requirement for Ongoing Training After Initial Training (p. 26)

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation Effectiveness of Current Teacher Evaluation Process: (p. 27) Somewhat Effective in all categories **Indicates readiness for change

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation 58.9% of Responding School Districts Have Not Begun to Revise or Develop Their Teacher Evaluation Process in Response to Minn. Stat. 122A.40/41 (p. 33)

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation Effectiveness of Potential Components Toward Professional Growth (p. 28-29) To a Great Extent: Admin. Observation (Both Formal and Informal) with Feedback Self-Reflection Professional Learning Community Feedback Peer Observation

Current Status of MN Teacher Evaluation Effectiveness of Potential Components Toward Professional Growth (p. 28-29) Somewhat: Student Achievement Data for Individual Teachers School-Wide Achievement Data or Other Measures of Collective Performance Teacher Portfolio Peer Coaching

Do Districts Plan to Use the Default Model? 5.6% foresee their district adopting the state default model 48.9% foresee their district adapting or revising the state default model Planned Changes to Current System: Question 45 Chart 36.1% foresee their district designing their own model independently of the state default model 9.4% plan to continue with current process which already meets the law (p. 34)

What Do Districts Need: Areas in Which District is Lacking Capacity to Implement: Question 41 Chart Resources Needed to Comply with Legislation: Question 42 Chart

Considerations for MDE/Work Group Considerations for MDE & Work Group in Moving Forward: Question 47 Chart

Considerations for MDE/Work Group Analyze Feedback Relevant to Your Sub-Committee’s Focus Validate and/or Revise Your Recommendations

For Further Results Lori VanderHeiden Contact: Park Elementary Assistant Principal St. Cloud State University Doctoral Candidate lori.vanderheiden@hutch.k12.mn.us