OVERVIEW OF CHANGES TO EDUCATORS’ EVALUATION IN THE COMMONWEALTH Compiled by the MOU Evaluation Subcommittee September, 2011 The DESE oversees the educators’ evaluation process (603 CMR 35) per M.G.L. c.69, §1B and c.71, §38

Introduction New regulations adopted by the DESE on June 28, 2011 New regulations adopted by the DESE on June 28, 2011 The regulations are designed to: The regulations are designed to: Promote growth and development of leaders and teachers; Promote growth and development of leaders and teachers; Place student learning at the center, using multiple measures of student learning, growth and achievement; Place student learning at the center, using multiple measures of student learning, growth and achievement; Recognize excellence in teaching and leading; Recognize excellence in teaching and leading; Set a high bar for professional teaching status; and Set a high bar for professional teaching status; and Shorten timelines for improvement. Shorten timelines for improvement. The DESE’s work is underwritten by RTTT funds The DESE’s work is underwritten by RTTT funds The forthcoming model system (model due out in January, 2012) can be “adopted” or “adapted” by districts. * The forthcoming model system (model due out in January, 2012) can be “adopted” or “adapted” by districts. * The DESE is working with early adopter districts and others to develop the model system, along with training materials, resources, and networks designed to support districts in implementing the new regulations. Similarly, ESE is developing guidelines and resources for identifying and using multiple measures of student performance. * The DESE is working with early adopter districts and others to develop the model system, along with training materials, resources, and networks designed to support districts in implementing the new regulations. Similarly, ESE is developing guidelines and resources for identifying and using multiple measures of student performance. * * Please see last slide for supplemental DESE notes on these issues.

Implementation Time Line All 34 Level Four schools and identified “early adopter” districts All RTTT districts All other districts (This applies to DS.)

DS Implementation Time Line Up Close September 2013 Eval instrument implemented September 2013 Eval instrument implemented Winter 2012-Spring 2013Eval instrument finalized/approved Winter 2012-Spring 2013Eval instrument finalized/approved Spring 2012-Fall 2012MOU Subcommittee revises DS eval instrument Spring 2012-Fall 2012MOU Subcommittee revises DS eval instrument Winter 2011-Spring 2012MOU Subcommittee members review “Model Plan” and research work done by “early adopter” districts Winter 2011-Spring 2012MOU Subcommittee members review “Model Plan” and research work done by “early adopter” districts Fall 2011Eval MOU Subcommittee meets to review new regulations Fall 2011Eval MOU Subcommittee meets to review new regulations Spring 2011Eval MOU Subcommittee initially convenes Spring 2011Eval MOU Subcommittee initially convenes

Impact on DS Question: How and when does this affect DS? Answer: Districts may phase in implementation over 2 years; however, in Year 1, at least half of district educators must be evaluated. Question: What must we have in place by September 2013? Answer: By September 2013, we must adopt “District- determined Measures” permitting comparison of student learning, growth, and achievement for each grade and subject, district-wide. Question:What are “District-determined Measures?” Answer: District-determined Measures shall mean measures of student learning, growth, and achievement related to the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks, Massachusetts Vocational Technical Education Frameworks, or other relevant frameworks, that are comparable across grade or subject level district-wide. These measures may include, but shall not be limited to: portfolios, approved commercial assessments and district-developed pre and post unit and course assessments, and capstone projects.

5-Step Evaluation Cycle Framework (This Evaluation Cycle is part of the parameters for local collective bargaining.)

Statewide Standards Standards for Teachers Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment Teaching All Students Teaching All Students Family and Community Engagement Family and Community Engagement Professional Culture Professional Culture Note: The regulations cite a number of indicators underlying each standard. Districts are expected to adapt indicators to fit the teacher’s role/responsibilities. Standards for Administrators Instructional Leadership Instructional Leadership Management and Operations Management and Operations Family and Community Engagement Family and Community Engagement Professional Culture Professional Culture Note: The regulations cite a number of indicators underlying each standard. Districts are expected to adapt indicators to fit the administrator’s role/ responsibilities.

Current DS Standards Standards for Teachers Knowledge of Curriculum Content Curriculum and Instruction Planning and Assessment Management of Classroom Environment Instruction Expectations for Student Achievement Professional Responsibilities Relationships with Students Note: The instrument in place cites indicators, attributes, and evidence underlying each standard.. Standards for Administrators Effective Instructional Leadership Effective Organizational Leadership Effective Administration and Management Promotion of Equity and Appreciation of Diversity Effective Relationships with the Community Fulfillment of Professional Responsibilities

Statewide Rating Scale vs. Current DS Rating Scale Statewide Scale Exemplary Exemplary Proficient Proficient Needs Improvement Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Current DS Scale Distinguished Distinguished Proficient Proficient Basic Basic Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory

Points of Interest or Consideration with Statewide Scale (1)In rating educators on Performance Standards for the purposes of either formative assessment, formative evaluation, or summative evaluation, districts may use either the rubric provided by the DESE in its model system or a comparably rigorous and comprehensive rubric developed by the district and reviewed by the DESE. (2)The summative evaluation rating must be based on evidence from multiple categories of evidence. MCAS growth scores cannot be the sole basis for a summative evaluation rating. (3)To be rated Proficient overall, a teacher shall, at a minimum, have been rated Proficient on the Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment and the Teaching all Students standards for teachers. (4)To be rated Proficient overall, an administrator shall, at a minimum, have been rated Proficient on the Instructional Leadership standard for administrators. (5)Professional teacher status should be granted only to educators who have achieved ratings of Proficient or Exemplary on each Performance Standard and overall. A principal considering making an employment decision that would lead to professional teacher status for any educator who has not been rated Proficient or Exemplary on each Performance Standard and overall on the most recent evaluation shall confer with the Superintendent by May 1 and before granting PTS. The principal’s decision is subject to review and approval by the Superintendent. (6)Educators whose summative performance rating is Exemplary and whose impact on student learning is rated moderate or high shall be recognized and rewarded with leadership roles, promotion, additional compensation, public commendation, or other acknowledgement.

DESE Points of Clarification Rubrics The regulations require that all districts use rubrics for the standards and indicators contained in the new regulations. Districts can adopt the DESE's model rubric or propose an alternative that is comparable in rigor and comprehensiveness. The DESE has drafted classroom teacher and principal rubrics for use by Level 4 schools and early adopters in By January 2012, the DESE will release updated versions based on feedback received, along with role-specific rubrics (i.e., counselor, caseload educator, superintendent). Model System By January 2012, the DESE will release key components of a "model system" for Implementing the regulations, including revised job-specific rubrics, draft contract language, protocols for principal and superintendent evaluation, and forms, templates, and tools for implementing the protocols. The model system is being developed through the DESE’s ongoing work with Level 4 districts and early adopters, state associations, and in-state and national experts.