Kansas Educator Evaluation Bill Bagshaw Asst. Director Kansas State Department of Education February 13, 2015

The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE TEACHING AND LEARNING Evaluation Systems

Visualizations of Kansas Evaluation Systems

Kansas Evaluation Systems

Three Student Growth Measures Chosen Instructional Practice Protocol FINAL Summative Evaluation Rating SUMMARY RATING #1 SUMMARY RATING #2

An educator must meet multiple measures of student growth to be rated as effective, highly effective or the equivalent. SGMs may be any combination of: Locally created assessments Commercial assessments State Assessments (required for grades/subjects tested) LEAs will determine timelines and appropriate levels of rigor when using student growth measures. IPP Summary Rating determined by district (LEA) protocols. Includes multiple areas of educator effectiveness. Inter-rater Agreement is a key component of Observations Use of artifact and evidence Combining IPP and SGM summary ratings Determining Final Summary Rating Kansas Evaluation Systems

FINAL SUMMATIVE Rating Instructional Practice Protocol Summary Rating Student Learning Content Knowledge Instructional Practice Professional Responsibility Student Growth Measures Summary Rating Student Growth Measure Educator Evaluation Systems

All Evaluation Systems Should Be:  Administratively feasible  Publically credible  Professionally accepted  Legally defensible  Economically affordable

What drives all of this work?

 Implement teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that:  Are used for continual improvement of instruction  Use at least 3 performance levels  Use multiple measures including student growth as significant factor  Are used to evaluate on a regular basis  Provide clear, timely, and useful feedback  Are used to inform personnel decisions WAIVER - Principle 3 - Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership

Student Growth Measures Kansas school districts will include student growth as a significant factor in the evaluation of classroom teachers and building leaders. Student growth measures will document the specific amount of student growth attributable to the teacher or building leader between two or more identified points in time Multiple measures of student growth (more than one) must be met before an educator can be rated as effective or highly effective. State assessments are one possible measure and are a required measure for all grade levels and content areas that give them. Commercially purchased assessments and locally developed performance assessments may also be used, once approved by KSDE. KSDE Guidance for school districts LEAs should use the commercially purchased and locally developed student growth measures they currently have. State assessments are required as given. All grade levels across schools in a district should use the same measures. Local performance assessments should be collaboratively designed, reviewed and used across the district with strict adherence to an inter-rater agreement. Things to Know

 Kansas school districts will include student growth as a significant factor in the evaluation of classroom teachers and building leaders.  Student growth measures will document the specific amount of student growth attributable to the teacher or building leader between two identified points in time.  Multiple measures of student growth (more than one) must be met before an educator can be rated as effective or highly effective.  State assessments are one possible measure and are a required measure for all grade levels and content areas that give them. Commercially purchased assessments and locally developed performance assessments may also be used, once they are approved by the KSDE. Student Growth Measures:

 LEAs should use the commercially purchased and locally developed student growth measures they currently have. State assessments are required as given.  All grade levels across schools in a district should use the same measures.  Local performance assessments should be collaboratively designed, reviewed and used across the district with strict adherence to an inter-rater agreement. KSDE Guidance for school districts:

 Districts will continue to identify student growth measures.  A “default list” of student growth measures posted on the web by May 1, (Done)  Continue to gather evidence of student growth and educator practice.  Begin inter-rater agreement training. Next steps:

Identifying Multiple Measures

 Measures may include any combination of:  Locally Created Assessments that meet criteria  Commercial Assessment Products  State Assessments  At least one State Assessments must be used for grade levels/subjects tested.  State Assessments are not required for grade levels/subjects not tested. Multiple Measures

Default List of Measures Top 6 SGMs reported for Schools or districts may modify at any time by going to the Evaluation Webpages.

Defining Significance

 The change in student achievement for an individual student between two points in time, determined using multiple measures  To include gains and progress toward post-secondary and workforce readiness  To include progress in academic and functional goals in an individualized education program or meeting academic student growth objectives Significance Definition

AugSeptOctNovDecJanFebMarchApril Ma y 4th Grade Curriculum Standards 85% Grade Level Expectation Assuming 85% of students exiting 3 rd grade accomplished 3 rd grade curriculum, the expectation would be at least the same amount of growth would occur by completion of the 4 th grade, or on any given measure used. Example: In a class of 24 students, 20 students would be above the Grade Level Expectation line by the end of the Academic Year. 24 x.85 = 20.2 This scenario would indicate significance. Reference: Blue Print for Reform

Multiple Measures

Matrix Works with or Without Percentages

 Must meet all three SGMs to be considered highly effective or its equivalent for the SGM Summary Rating.  Must meet at least two SGMs to be considered effective or its equivalent for the SGM Summary Rating.  Must meet at least one SGMs to be considered developing or its equivalent for the SGM Summary Rating.  The Final Summative Rating can only be rated one performance level higher than the lowest summary rating.  When both summary ratings are the same, that rating becomes the Final Summative Rating. Matrix Rules

Kansas Evaluation Systems Three Student Growth Measures Chosen Instructional Practice Protocol FINAL Summative Evaluation Rating SUMMARY RATING #1 SUMMARY RATING #2

Record IPP Summary Rating

Record SGM Summary Rating

Record Final Summary Rating

 Bill Bagshaw, Assistant Director,  Teacher Licensure and Accreditation,  Kansas State Department of Education   Contact Information: