Roland Wilson, David Potter, & Dr. Dru Davison Tennessee Student Growth Measures System:  Teacher Leadership in the Peer Review Process Roland Wilson, David Potter, & Dr. Dru Davison Shelby County Schools Memphis, TN

The Role of Peer Reviewers Process Overview Background Components The Role of Peer Reviewers Guiding principles of Scoring Growth Training and Logistics Feedback Process Professional Implications Norming Example Reminder- This is peer review of student growth, not observation of teacher practice- Roland

What Prompted our Journey?

Options For Non-Tested Subjects? A. Measures of Collective Performance B. Student Learning Objectives Systems C. The Development/Adaptations of Other Assessments How do you provide measurable data while staying true to the holistic process of the arts?

D: None of the Above Actually… A Hybrid Approach THE GOAL: A holistic and meaningful picture of the value teachers add to students, using the work that is already happening in classrooms. OUR SOLUTION: A flexible but rigorous portfolio of student work samples that demonstrate growth across standards-based learning domains.

Components Teacher submits 4 evidence collections which include a “purposeful sampling” of students Each collection contains evidence of student growth (pre and post lesson/unit/year), and learning objectives/targets/supporting evidence Self-scored, then rated by content specific peer reviewers using consensus scoring protocols

Foundational Goals Improve Instructional Practice Treat Teachers as Experts/Leaders Increase Student Creativity, Collaboration, Innovation Flexible method of measuring authentic student learning that yields a spread of effectiveness data. Combine evaluation with professional growth Create additional career opportunities for teacher leaders

The Role of Peer Reviewers Principles of Scoring Growth Application Process Training and Responsibilities Norming Feedback Professional Implications Norming Example

Evidence Collection Example HS Band (grades 10-12) working on the Holst First Suite in Eb, 2nd Movement The first recording is from an early rehearsal run-through after a few days of preparation. The second is from a pre-festival concert performance 5 weeks later. This evidence shows improvement in the areas of tone, balance, vertical alignment, rhythmic accuracy, musicality, tempo, and technique. Pre Evidence Description- This recording was made after only a few days of rehearsal. It was the first full run made of the second movement. In it, the students are performing drastically under tempo and exhibit an overall lack of confidence. It is apparent that they are still working through many of the technical and timing issues therefore causing a lack of musicality. Post Evidence Description- This recording was made about 5 weeks later. It shows the students performing with much more confidence, correct tempo, improved vertical alignment, better musicality, improved balance, and stronger tone.

Principles of Scoring: The Framework Teacher Effectiveness Student Growth Student Achievement as Defined by the Scoring Guide And Professional Judgment Student Work (PRE) Student Work (POST)

Scoring: A Balancing Act Professional Judgment Scoring Guide and Frameworks

Principles of Scoring: The Framework

Principles of Scoring: Beyond the Scoring Guide Using the Scoring Guide and Professional Judgment Understanding Teacher Context and Student Population Accounting for High Achievers Interpreting Imperfect Collections

The Role of Peer Reviewers, additional considerations Application and Screening Process Training and Responsibilities Norming and Monitoring Consensus Scoring Protocols if the content specific primary peer review score aligns within one point (on a five-point scale) with the teacher self-reported score, that collection is finished with reviews and will be averaged with the remaining scores of the other collections. In the event that the score assigned by the primary peer reviewer is more than one point different than the teacher’s self-score, an additional content specific peer reviewer will conduct a secondary review of the collection and the score will become an average of the two reviews provided the independent reviews are within one point of agreement. If the difference between the two peer evaluators’ scores is larger than one point, a third review (known as an executive review) provides conciliation. If consensus still can’t be reached depending upon the complexity of a given situation, a fourth level of committee review is implemented to make sure every score a teacher receives as part of their evaluation is fair and rigorous.

Feedback and Professional Growth Level I feedback- This feedback for all teachers is limited to 12 basic dropdown menu choices, meant to provide teacher with a reason for a score not a in-depth or content- specific rationale of growth. Level II Feedback- Personal conferences between the teacher and administrator, lead teacher, etc. (someone not directly involved in the scoring) Usually reserved for those that request additional feedback, or are in need of specialized support. Examples of dropdown menu choices: Evidence collection demonstrates growth consistent with the assigned score. Evidence to demonstrate growth was not clearly defined for the domains indicated.

Implications for Professionalism Encourages Teacher Leadership Roles Recognized as Content Experts Strategic Compensation Reform Collaboration between peer reviewer and other users Grows the Professional Learning Community.

Evidence Collection Example (revisited) Was there more information you would have needed to reach a decision? Did you have any biases arise while scoring the work? Do you have any lingering questions?

Evidence Collection Example HS Band (grades 10-12) Holst First Suite in Eb, 2nd Movement The first recording is from an early rehearsal run-through after a few days of preparation. The second is from a pre-festival concert performance 5 weeks later. This evidence shows improvement in the areas of tone, balance, vertical alignment, rhythmic accuracy, musicality, tempo, and technique. Pre Evidence Description- This recording was made after only a few days of rehearsal. It was the first full run made of the second movement. In it, the students are performing drastically under tempo and exhibit an overall lack of confidence. It is apparent that they are still working through many of the technical and timing issues therefore causing a lack of musicality. Post Evidence Description- This recording was made about 5 weeks later. It shows the students performing with much more confidence, correct tempo, improved vertical alignment, better musicality, improved balance, and stronger tone.

Development Timeline

Additional Information http://team-tn.org/non-tested-grades-subjects/fine-arts/ TN Fine Arts Portfolio Model- Resource Site https://sites.google.com/site/tnfineartsportfoliomodel/home TN Fine Arts Portfolio Sample Collections http://scsfineartsportfolio.weebly.com/index.html Additional Information

Tennessee Student Growth Measures System:  Teacher Leadership in the Peer Review Process David Potter, POTTERD@scsk12.org Roland Wilson, WILSONRR@scsk12.org Dr. Dru Davison, drudavison@gmail.com Shelby County Schools Memphis, TN