Teacher Evaluation Training Divisions across the state are working to fully implement the state requirements around teacher evaluation. This is Year 2 in Henrico’s plan. Our goal for the 2013-2014 year is to apply the committee suggestions, implement the selected online tool, continue revisions as needed, and bring everyone online for the upcoming year. The goal is not to just do it…but to do in a way that meets the requirements and supports teaching and learning as best as we can. We understand that this is no small task, and it cannot be done in isolation. 2013-2014

THANKS A message from Mandy Baker, Director of Human Resources... The dedication and support of individuals serving on the teacher evaluation committee are most appreciated. Through their efforts and your input great strides have been made. However, there is still work to be done. Your continued insights are valued and will help us refine our process for individual and collective growth. We welcome questions and suggestions at any point as you work through the process.

PGEP: The Same Timelines Overall process for Probationary & Continuing Contract Continuing Contract on a three-year cycle – C1, C2, & C3 Observation Requirements Use of Student Growth Measures (SGM) The importance of discussion, collaboration, and measurement in the growth process for students and staff Highlighting the parts of the process that are the same to diminish some concerns around change. The final bullet is still the meat of the process no matter how we capture it. The growth occurs here.

PGEP: The Same The paper system will be used to close out last year’s PGEP process. All staff not aligned with teacher Performance Standards will utilize the paper system. Counselors CARS ITRT Librarians Support staff There will be a link on the Teacher Evaluation Site to the paper copies from last year. If anyone is interested in serving on the input committees, please send their names in when requested.

PGEP: The Changes Documents now reflect the Seven Standards with our PQ&IRs embedded. Professional Knowledge Instructional Planning Instructional Delivery Assessment of/for Student Learning Learning Environment 6. Professionalism 7. Student Academic Performance Highlight the Seven Standards. They will scroll in. The sample shows the format, which is the change. The PQs & IRs have been distributed under the Seven Standards but did not change in expectation. Notice 1-5 are instructional responsibilities, 6 is a professional quality & 7 encompasses the growth measures.

PGEP: The Changes Progress in two growth measures is used in evaluating performance. Last year, as an introductory year, two growth measures were selected, but only one was used in the Performance Evaluation. As it was last year, no targets have been set; however, all students must show growth. If growth is not noted in the selected measures, either alternative evidence of growth is shared or an explanation is noted to receive performance credit in this area. Administrators collaborate with instructors to determine appropriate additional measures. The specialists will be updating the growth measures. There are buttons on the Teacher Evaluation website showing all measures. Any changes will be highlighted for ease in identifying the differences. While a portfolio is not expected for students not meeting growth measures, it is important to discuss what additional evidence may be used (report cards, other assessments, work samples, RtI progress monitoring data…) or explanations that are appropriate (medical issues, excessive absences, extreme family circumstances, enrolled after Oct 1,...). Beginning with the 2013-2014 school year, administrators should keep a list of these names (staff & students), as exceptions will be reviewed at the district level. Teachers would want to carefully monitor classes where excessive alternative evidence is used or little growth is noted, and seek support in analysis for improvement. FYI—Student Growth Percentiles will NOT be used K-12 due to the requirement of having 40 students in a class for comparison. **This may be a good time to have teachers share what evidence they used if necessary, and how they are storing documentation if the are a C1 or C2 preparing for Year 3 in the cycle.

PGEP: The Changes There are four ratings for each Performance Standard, with accompanying appraisal rubrics. Exemplary Proficient Needs Improvement Unacceptable **Exemplary status requires the teacher to provide supporting documentation in the appropriate standard category for the final PGEP meeting. This is the biggest change. Last year, you may remember we had a binary system-meets or does not meet,. We now have a 4-pronged system. Please pay special attention to the exemplary status. A teacher may work toward exemplary status in all, one, or none of the standard areas 1-6. Seven does not have an exemplary status. A sample rubric will follow this slide for clarity.

PGEP: The Changes Notice the point value. This is used in the calculations for the summative evaluation, and will be identified on each rubric. The major difference between Exemplary and Proficient is the effect beyond the classroom. The teacher serves as a model and leader. Teachers seeking this status, should discuss some possible opportunities with their principal. This can occur throughout the year. At the final PGEP meeting the teacher would provide evidence to support their Exemplary status based on the standard(s). There are no set requirements for evidence. **At the first Quarterly Meeting there will be time to discuss the types of evidence that might support exemplary.

Proficient & Exemplary Proficient starts with “PRO”--You are a professional, meeting the highest of expectations. This rating reflects excellence in the classroom. Exemplary represents excellence in and beyond the classroom.

PGEP: The Changes Each of the first five Performance Standards carry equal weight- 6pts for a total of 30pts. The sixth standard is valued at 30pts. The seventh standard is valued at 40pts, with each SGM assessed at 20pts each. This reflects a total of 100 possible points. Performance Standards Professional Knowledge Instructional Planning Instructional Delivery Assessment of/for Student Learning Learning Environment 6. Professionalism 7. Student Academic Performance Once this information is shared, click to previous slide and review point value in context. The teacher’s score on each performance standard is added together to create a summed total score.

Summative Calculation Instructional Responsibilities-Standards 1-5 30 pts (6pts X 5 standards) Professional Qualities-Standard 6 30 pts Student Academic Progress-Standard 7 40 pts (SGM #1=20 pts + SGM #2=20pts) Total 100 pts

PGEP: The Changes Summative Evaluation Scale Exemplary 92-100 PTS Proficient 80-91 PTS Needs Improvement 70-79 PTS Unacceptable 69 PTS or Fewer Link to Teacher Evaluation This chart reflects the possible point distribution based on performance in each Standard. Exemplary is achieved by going above and beyond the high expectations in place for proficient teachers, and is really about being a leader in the school and not just in the classroom. Proficient reflects strong performance and high expectations. Needs Improvement highlights the need for support and growth in selected areas during a finite amount of time. Unacceptable is self explanatory, performance needs significant, sustained improvement. The teacher will receive a “has met” if Exemplary or Proficient and “has not met” if Needs Improvement or Unacceptable. There are specifics forms and support if a “has not met” is earned.

PGEP: The Changes TalentEd, an online evaluation system, will be implemented creating an electronic record of the growth process. Forms will be available using this tool, and documents will be archived. Principals have been trained, it is not a complicated tool. However, we recognize it is new and there will be a learning curve. **For principals: Observation tools are not currently available in TalentEd. The ones you use can be uploaded to be archived in the teachers documents. We will be working to address this during the year. There will be more information on this and supporting documentation, such as letters at a later time.

Teacher Evaluation Website Link to Teacher Evaluation Website TalentEd access, training materials, forms, help, and a place for input will be housed on the Teacher Evaluation Website…including forms to closeout last year’s process or for those remaining on the paper process one more year. Once you and/or teachers access the site, click Help for Teachers & the training video (7 min) is below the Teacher Quick Guide. Teachers can then peruse through the site. Please note the frequently asked question section and the button to provide feedback. They can submit question/thoughts now if they have them. You may want one staff member to enter for your school. We will have someone monitoring the site to answer questions & make appropriate changes as soon as possible.