Educator Evaluation Self-Reflection and Evidence Webinar February 28th, 2013 [LISA / ROBERT] Thank you for joining us for the second in a series of webinars as we move forward toward full statewide implementation of the new educator evaluation system. We have a very large group that registered, and we are very excited that you have joined us. Please note that the webinar is being recorded and will be uploaded to the WV Department of Education website. The PPT will also be uploaded. Additionally, there will be a time provided for questions at the end of the webinar. In order reduce background noise during the webinar, we ask that you mute your phones unless you are directing a question to a webinar presenter or contributing directly to the webinar discussion. Introductions of all in the room. (Next slide)

80% 15% 5% Evaluation System for Teachers Four Performance Levels Distinguished Accomplished Emerging Unsatisfactory Advanced Progression 6+ years Intermediate Progression 4-5 years Initial Progression 1-3 years Self Reflection (standards/rubrics) **Due October 1st** 80% Observation (2) Observation (4) None Required* Evidence [LISA/ROBERT] During the last webinar we focused upon the online “tool” which is used to document each of the components of the evaluation. Today, we will be focusing upon Self-Reflection and Evidence. Let’s quickly review the revised Educator Evaluation System The system is based upon the WV Professional Teaching Standards, a student growth standard, and a professional conduct standard It includes four performance levels (distinguished, accomplished, emerging and unsatisfactory) There are three progressions (for educators with 1-3 years of experience, 4-5 years, and 6 plus years of experience) 80% of the evaluation is based upon educator performance 15% of the evaluation is based upon student learning goals 5% of the evaluation is based upon school-wide growth The final summative evaluation is completed by the evaluator at the end of the academic year (June 1st). Today we will look at how each academic year begins---self-reflection and the evidence to support the performance levels 15% 2 Student Learning Goals 5% School-wide Growth - Reading School-wide Growth - Mathematics

Why Do Educators Self- Reflect? Take Ownership of Professional Growth Establish an Understanding between Evaluator and Educator. What are the expectations set for the educator? Has the educator met those expectations at the end of the year? [TRENT] The Self-Reflection conducted by the educator is one of the opportunities within the Educator Evaluation System to be a pro-active participant in your evaluation. Through Self-Reflection, you are taking ownership of your own professional growth. Since the principal reviews the Self-Reflection upon its completion, the Self-Reflection enables the evaluator and educator to establish an understanding going in to every school year as to what the professional expectations are for a teacher. This mutual understanding benefits both the evaluator and the educator as both now understand what needs to be accomplished within the school year. (No “End of Year GOTCH YA”)

Understanding the 4 Performance Levels [TRENT] The 1st step for any educator about to complete a Self-Reflection is to fully understand the 4 performance levels. As these are the levels educators will use to rate themselves in their self-reflection, it is important to understand what each level signifies. Lets take a moment and review the 4 Levels of Performance. The 4 Levels are: Distinguished, Accomplished, Emerging and Unsatisfactory. So what is important to understand about this information? Distinguished level is rare but certainly achievable Accomplished level is the expectation for educators Emerging level is a place from which educators can grow Unsatisfactory level is unacceptable, doing harm It’s not about the teacher its about the teacher’s performance*

Educator Self-Reflection [TRENT] Here we can see an enhanced view of Standard 2 (The Learner and the Learning Environment), and the Elements and Ratings buttons for Standard 2. We will focus on Element 2.2 (entitled: The teacher establishes and maintains a safe and appropriate learning environment) and explore how a teacher may rate themselves within Self-Reflection for this element. In order to rate ones self in any of the Standard Elements, you will want to employ the use of the provided rubric. (Change Slide)

Observations An opportunity for evidence collection. Provide another occasion for communication between evaluator and educator. [TRENT] Observations are an opportunity for the collection of evidence. They provide yet another occasion for the evaluator and educator to communicate and collaborate on the instructional practices in the classroom. (CHANGE SLIDE)

Educator Evidence What is Evidence? When should Evidence be Collected? Materials / Data that support the determination of a rating When should Evidence be Collected? Throughout the school year, but must be completed by Evaluation Conference. [GEORGIA] What is evidence? Evidence is a collection of materials and/or data that support the determination of performance level ratings for the professional standards. When should evidence be collected? Evidence may be collected throughout the school year, but must be complete by the evaluation conference.

Educator Evidence Who Collects the Evidence? Both the Evaluator and the Educator may collect evidence. Is the Educator Required to Provide Evidence? When a “Distinguished” Rating is Given If Principal and Teacher disagree on a Rating When an “Unsatisfactory” Rating is Given [GEORGIA] Who collects the evidence? Both the evaluator and the evaluatee may collect evidence. Is the educator required to provide evidence? Evidence is necessary in three instances: If an educator self-reflects as distinguished, or if the evaluator determines the performance rating is distinguished, evidence is required. If the educator’s self-reflection differs from the opinion of the evaluator, the educator is afforded the opportunity to provide evidence to support his/her self-reflection rating. If he/she chooses not to provide evidence, the evaluator determines the rating. If an unsatisfactory rating is given, evidence should be noted in the system.