Matrix 101: The Oregon Matrix and Summative Evaluations Spring 2015 Technical Assistance Webinar.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers August 2013 Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for Teachers.
Advertisements

Chad Allison May 2013  1-2 Formal Classroom Evaluations  Drop-in Visits.
Charlotte Danielson’s The Four Domains of Teaching Responsibility
Teacher Evaluation New Teacher Orientation August 15, 2013.
Overarching Question Who does the thinking? Therefore, who does the learning and growing?
C OLLABORATIVE A SSESSMENT S YSTEM FOR T EACHERS CAST
SEED MAT Mentor Training MAT Overview Roles and Responsibilities Internship Realities Internship Rotation Cycles Danielson Frameworks.
Activity: Introducing Staff to Danielson’s Framework for Teaching
Student Learning and Growth Goals 101: Requirements and Recommendations Spring 2015 Webinar.
August 2014 The Oregon Matrix Model was submitted to USED on May 1, 2014 and is pending approval* as of 8/8/14 *Please note content may change Oregon’s.
Artifacts 101: The Role of Artifacts in Educator Support and Evaluation Spring 2015 Webinar.
Ramapo Teachers’ Association APPR Contractual Changes.
UDL and Teacher Evaluation Dr. Katie Novak. UDL Planning: Hotel ADLER DOLOMITI in Val Gardena You want your learners to explore the Dolomitis. In this.
The Framework for Teaching An Overview of the Danielson Model.
Evaluating Teacher Performance: Getting it Right CPRE Annual Conference November 21-23, 2002 Charlotte Danielson
Differentiated Supervision
Teacher Evaluation Ashley Greene 10/29/13.
Meeting SB 290 District Evaluation Requirements
Welcome to... Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements Day 2: Evidence 9/3/2015PBevan, D.ED.
Teachscape Overview John Monahan, Instructional Supervisor
Welcome to... Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements 9/9/2015PBevan, D.ED.
The Danielson Framework and Your Evaluation AK Teaching Standard DP_8c: Engages in Instructional Development Activities Danielson Domain 4e: Growing and.
An Effective Teacher Evaluation System – Our Journey to a Teaching Framework Corvallis School District.
Teacher Induction Program Why you are here The Allegheny Intermediate Unit offers this program for our staff and those in school districts,
Using Student Growth Percentiles in Educator Evaluations
Welcome to... Introduction to A Framework for Teaching 10/12/2015pbevan 1.
THE DANIELSON FRAMEWORK. LEARNING TARGET I will be be able to identify to others the value of the classroom teacher, the Domains of the Danielson framework.
The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers Training Module 2 The Delaware Framework Review and Components 1-5 Training for Teachers.
The Danielson Framework Emmanuel Andre Owings Mills High School Fall 2013.
Using Teacher Evaluation as a Tool for Professional Growth and School Improvement Redmond School District
1 Introducing Danielson’s Framework for Teaching NYCDOE | November
Using Student Growth Percentiles in Educator Evaluations.
Introduction to Kentucky’s Professional Growth and Effectiveness System and Framework for Teaching.
Standards Aligned System What is SAS? A collaborative product of research and good practice Six distinct elements Clear Standards Fair.
Lincoln Intermediate Unit 12 August 11, 2014 Differentiated Supervision: The Danielson Framework.
Teacher Induction Program Why you are here The Allegheny Intermediate Unit offers this program for our teachers and those in school districts,
YEAR 1 INDUCTION Day One Workshop Pennsbury School District.
Student Growth Percentiles Basics Fall Outcomes Share information on the role of Category 1 assessments in evaluations Outline steps for districts.
Teacher Effectiveness Who begins in ? Teaching Specialists Special Education Teachers English as a Second Language Teachers Gifted Teachers.
 Development of a model evaluation instrument based on professional performance standards (Danielson Framework for Teaching)  Develop multiple measures.
BY COURTNEY N. SPEER TECHNOLOGY AS A TOOL SPRING Professional Growth & Self- Reflection.
PGES: The Final 10% i21: Navigating the 21 st Century Highway to Top Ten.
The Framework for Teaching Charlotte Danielson Danielson’s Framework for Teaching Domain 3: Instruction Communicating Clearly and Accurately Using Questioning.
A Framework for Teaching Charlotte Danielson’s Model SHS – Professional Development 14 November 2012 ( Brenda Baker/Marnie Malone)
NYC DOE – Office of Teacher Effectiveness B. Examining the Framework
Introduction to... Teacher Evaluation System Teacher Effectiveness 12/6/
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA PRINCIPAL’S CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations 1. Outcomes Understand purpose and requirements of Student Learning and Growth (SLG) goals Review achievement.
DISTRICT NAME HERE Using Student Growth Percentiles (Option A)
Doing Teacher Evaluation Right: 5 Critical Elements: Evidence.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA LAW CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
FOUR DOMAINS Domain 4: Domain 1: Professional Planning & Responsibilities Preparation Domain 3: Domain 2: Instruction Classroom Environment.
Curriculum and Instruction: Management of the Learning Environment
Welcome: BISD Teacher Evaluation System 8/26/2015 "A commitment to professional learning is important, not because teaching is of poor quality and must.
The Use of Artifacts as Evidence in Educator Evaluation Fall 2015.
Educator Effectiveness: The Danielson Framework Collecting Evidence.
Teacher Evaluation University of New England - EDU 704 Dr. William Doughty Submitted By: Teri Gaston.
DANIELSON MODEL SAI 2016 Mentor Meeting. Danielson Model  Framework with rubrics  Define specific types of behaviors expected to be observed  A common.
Vision: Every child in every district receives the instruction that they need and deserve…every day. Oregon Response to Intervention Vision: Every child.
Laura Maly Bernard Rahming Cynthia Cuellar Rodriguez Explore Explore Explore Math Teacher Leaders October 18, 2011.
NM Teacher Evaluation Planning & Preparation Creating an Environment of Learning Professionalism Teaching for Learning Evaluation.
DECEMBER 7, 2015 Educator Effectiveness: Charter School Webinar.
Welcome to... Introduction to A Framework for Teaching 7/8/2016pbevan 1.
Cohort Training, Phase II November 29 – 30, 2012.
MSBSD Educator Evaluation
Framework For Teaching (FFT)
An Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Changes to the Educator Evaluation System
Student Learning and Growth Goals Foundations
Introduction to Core Professionalism
Presentation transcript:

Matrix 101: The Oregon Matrix and Summative Evaluations Spring 2015 Technical Assistance Webinar

Outcomes Review the role of the Oregon Matrix in the professional growth cycle Understand how to read the Oregon Matrix Identify where the Matrix can be customized Demonstrate calculation of a summative score

Summative Evaluations Based on Multiple Measures Professional Practice (PP) Professional Responsibilities (PR) Student Learning and Growth (SLG) Oregon teacher evaluations must include measures from three categories of evidence: Aligned to the standards of professional practice

*Inquiry Process

Takes place when the Y- and X-axes do not tell the same story Additional evidence gathered prior to a determination of plan and/or summative performance level Inquiry happens collaboratively Educator can also provide additional evidence Inquiry Process

Professional Growth Plans Intersection of the Y-and X-axes determine overall performance level and corresponding professional growth plan ◦ Facilitative ◦ Collegial ◦ Consulting ◦ Directed Part of the evaluation cycle and aligned professional learning Who takes the lead between educator and evaluator in developing professional growth goals

Y-Axis Example: Professional Practice & Responsibilities Example of Rubric Component I. Planning and Preparation II. Classroom Environment III. Instruction IV. Professional Responsibilities 1a. Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy 1b. Demonstrating Knowledge of Students 1c. Setting Instructional Outcomes 1d.Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources 1e.Designing Coherent Instruction 1f.Designing Student Assessments 2a. Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport 2b. Establish a Culture for Learning 2c. Managing Classroom Procedures 2d. Managing Student Behavior 2e. Organizing Physical Space 3a. Communicating with Students 3b. Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c. Engaging Students in Learning 3d. Using Assessment in Instruction 3e. Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness 4a. Reflecting on Teaching 4b. Maintaining Accurate Records 4c. Communicating with Families 4d. Participating in a Professional Community 4e. Growing and Developing Professionally 4f. Showing Professionalism

Y-Axis = PP/PR Rating Add up all component scores for total points possible; Divide by number of components in your rubric; Get a rating between 1 and 4; Use Y-Axis threshold to determine PP/PR level: ◦ = 4 ◦ =3 ◦ 1.99 – 2.8 = 2 * ◦ < 1.99 = 1 *PP/PR Scoring Rule: If the educator scores two 1’s in any PP/PR component and his/her average score falls between , the educator’s performance level cannot be rated above a 1. EXAMPLE District rubric with 20 components Component ratings: ◦ 17 components were rated 3; and 3 were rated 2 = 57 points possible ◦ 57/20=2.85  2.85 = Level 3 PP/PR Rating

X-Axis = SLG Rating SLG performance level based on two goals Two-year cycle select two of four goals Score SLG goals Get a rating between 1 and 4; Use X-Axis thresholds to determine SLG level: ◦ 4 = both goals 4s ◦ 3 = both goals 3s; one goal 3 & one goal 4; one goal 2 & one 4 ◦ 2 = both goals 2s; one goal 2 & one 3; one goal 1 & one 3; one goal 4 & one 1 ◦ 1= both goals 1s; one goal 1 & one 2 EXAMPLE One SLG was rated 2 One SLG was rated 3  X-Axis Rating = Level 2 SLG Rating

X Axis - Scoring SLGs Category 2 goals scored using state SLG Scoring Rubric ODE is developing guidance on using Student Growth Percentiles (SGPs) for measuring Category 1 goals

*Inquiry Process EXAMPLE: Y-axis = 3 & X-axis = 2

What is required… All districts must use the Oregon Matrix to calculate summative scores beginning this year ( ) ◦ Includes established X and Y thresholds All summative scores for teachers and building principals must be reported to ODE Summative information must be used by districts to inform professional growth plans

The performance level labels The Professional Growth Plan’s (PGP) names* Additional details on what each PGP looks like* What “SLG focus” PGP looks like Additional inquiry process ideas Other systemic differentiated supports, such as: Observations Frequency of check-in’s/meetings with evaluators Self-reflection practices *Districts must keep the intent of the “plans” as defined in the Oregon Matrix guidance What can be customized…

Resources Toolkit ◦ Oregon Framework ◦ Oregon Matrix guidance Resources from Districts ◦ Professional Growth Cycle conference materials Additional technical assistance from ODE

Questions?

Contacts Educator Effectiveness Team: Tanya Frisendahl Sarah Martin Sarah Phillips Brian Putnam