2014 SOAR Update AAEA Fall Conference presented by Ivy Pfeffer, Assistant Commissioner Arkansas Department of Education October 29, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Overview of the New Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework October 2011.
Advertisements

Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education Updated: July 2011.
Lee County Human Resources Glenda Jones. School Speech-Language Pathologist Evaluation Process Intended Purpose of the Standards Guide professional development.
Teacher Practice in  In 2012, the New Jersey Legislature unanimously passed the TEACHNJ Act, which mandates implementation of a new teacher.
Student Learning Targets (SLT)
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER RENEWAL Overview of Proposed Renewal March 6, 2015 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Alignment of State and Federal Requirements SB 290 ESEA Waiver Oregon Framework.
The Rogers School District is committed to providing an environment of educational excellence where all belong, all learn, and all succeed.
Student Learning Targets (SLT) You Can Do This! Getting Ready for the School Year.
Overview of the New Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework Opening Day Presentation August 26, 2013.
 Reading School Committee January 23,
Educator Evaluation Regulations, Mandatory Elements & Implementation MTA Center for Education Policy and Practice August 2014.
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.
Student Growth Percentiles For Classroom Teachers and Contributing Professionals KDE:OAA:3/28/2014:kd:rls 1.
Enquiring mines wanna no.... Who is it? Coleman Report “[S]chools bring little influence to bear upon a child’s achievement that is independent of.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY RENEWAL PROCESS: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS January29, 2015.
Educator Effectiveness in Colorado State Policy Framework & Approach October 2014.
2012 Secondary Curriculum Teacher In-Service
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation 1.
Prepared by: Scott R. Morrison Director of Curriculum and Instructional Technology 11/3/09.
Education in Delaware: ESEA Flexibility Renewal Community Town Hall Ryan Reyna, Office of Accountability.
1 Orientation to Teacher Evaluation /15/2015.
SB : The Great Teachers and Leaders Act State-wide definition of “effective” teacher and principal in Colorado Academic growth, using multiple measures.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
STATE CONSORTIUM ON EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS September 10, 2013.
Fall 2012 LEP Coordinator Meeting Helga Fasciano Section Chief, K-12 Programs Federal Update.
Assessing Students With Disabilities: IDEA and NCLB Working Together.
WW Why Evaluation?. Evaluation formalizes the shared responsibility of state and LEAs to improve student achievement and close the achievement gap in.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
The Portfolio ProcessThe Portfolio Process. Why do we think portfolios are the right choice?  Teacher developed and driven  Embedded professional development.
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
1 Educator Evaluation Overview Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability.
Setting the Context 10/26/2015 page 1. Getting Students READY The central focus of READY is improving student learning... by enabling and ensuring great.
Release of PARCC Student Results. By the end of this presentation, parents will be able to: Identify components of the PARCC English.
Washington State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project Update 11/29/12.
NCATE for Dummies AKA: Everything You Wanted to Know About NCATE, But Didn’t Want to Ask.
Barren County Schools CERTIFIED EVALUATION PLAN
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA PRINCIPAL’S CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
DISTRICT NAME HERE Using Student Growth Percentiles (Option A)
Learning More About Oregon’s ESEA Waiver Plan January 23, 2013.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COSA LAW CONFERENCE 2015 ODE Update on Educator Effectiveness.
Fidelity of Implementation A tool designed to provide descriptions of facets of a coherent whole school literacy initiative. A tool designed to provide.
Copyright © 2010, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. How Do They Do That? EVAAS and the New Tests October 2013 SAS ® EVAAS ® for K-12.
Standard VI Teachers Contribute to the Academic Success of Students.
Teacher Evaluation Process Update March 13, 2015 SCASPA Roundtable.
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education September 2010.
TESS & LEADS Implementation Awareness for End-of-Year Success Office of Educator Effectiveness Arkansas Department of Education Spring, 2016.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
Lenoir County Public Schools New North Carolina Principal Evaluation Process 2008.
Education.state.mn.us Principal Evaluation Components in Legislation Work Plan for Meeting Rose Assistant Commissioner Minnesota Department of Education.
1 Update on Teacher Effectiveness July 25, 2011 Dr. Rebecca Garland Chief Academic Officer.
Standard VI Teachers Contribute to the Academic Success of Students.
American Institutes for Research
What is Value Added?.
Professional Learning – October 12, 2015
Release of PARCC Student Results
NWEA Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
DESE Educator Evaluation System for Superintendents
Five Required Elements
Kansas Leads the World in the Success of Each Student.
KSDE Board Presentation Educator Evaluation Systems Update
TeachNJ By Heather Perruso.
Teacher Effectiveness and Support for Growth
Michigan’s Educator Evaluations
Wednesday, December 1st Today’s Facilitators: Kim Glow & Cindy Dollman
Quantitative Measures: Measuring Student Learning
Assessing Students With Disabilities: IDEA and NCLB Working Together
Jeanne M. Burns, Ph.D. Louisiana Board of Regents May 22, 2013
Jeanne M. Burns, Ph.D. Louisiana Board of Regents May 22, 2013
Presentation transcript:

2014 SOAR Update AAEA Fall Conference presented by Ivy Pfeffer, Assistant Commissioner Arkansas Department of Education October 29, 2014

Evaluation- it’s more than simply assigning a label to an educator. It is about gathering data, supporting educators to make meaning of data, and empowering them to use the data to make good decisions for the benefit of their students.

TESS Statute (5) Recognize that evidence of student growth is a significant part of the Teacher Excellence and Support System; (7) Require annual evidence of student growth from artifacts and external assessment measures;

ESEA Flexibility One-year extension for flexibility from certain provisions of ESEA. The extension is through the school year. Principle 3 (teacher and leader evaluation systems) has never been approved – U.S. Department of Education’s continued flexibility is subject to Arkansas’ continuing work with local schools and districts to continue their efforts to ensure that LEAs implement teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that will meet the ESEA flexibility requirements.

In Arkansas’ plan for ESEA flexibility, the state committed to implement teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that used multiple measures in evaluating performance, including student growth based on state assessments as significant factor in evaluating educator effectiveness. The initial timeline for the implementation school year. Arkansas requested and received flexibility to extend the timeline for inclusion of student growth in the overall rating.

The U.S. Department of Education has now decided to grant additional flexibility on the implementation timelines for the inclusion of student growth in an educator’s rating under the following conditions: 1.The state agency will calculate student growth data based on state assessments during the transition year for all teachers of tested grades and subjects 2.Each teacher of a tested grade and subject and all principals will receive their student growth data based on State assessments for the school year

Options Options for additional flexibility for Arkansas’ teacher and principal evaluation systems will be considered when states are allowed to submit requests for renewal of ESEA flexibility beyond the school year. Arkansas will seek options for additional flexibility after receiving guidance regarding the renewal process in the fall of 2014.

How Ratings Are Determined Overall Rating Performance Rating: Observations; Artifacts/Evidence; Professional Growth Plan Student Growth: Must meet threshold Professional PracticeStudent Performance Growth is not a % of the overall rating but acts as a trigger to alter the rating if there is a discrepancy between the performance of the teacher and performance of students. 8

Determining the Threshold

SOAR Student Ordinal Assessment Rank

Academic Peers A SOAR Value measures student progress by comparing one student’s progress to the progress of other students with the same performance histories. We refer to these students as “academic peers.”

SOAR SOAR values are a measure of educational progress independent of students’ proficiency levels. SOAR is calculated using Student Percentile Ranks. All students, no matter the scores they earned on past state tests, have an equal chance to demonstrate growth at any of the SOAR percentile values on the next year’s test.

Even though a student may not achieve a score of 278 out of 280 this year, it is possible for a student to have grown at the 99 th percentile from last year to this year. Although a student may perform well below the proficiency mark, that student could potentially have a high growth percentile.

Advanced

Let’s see how Albert’s progress compares to his Academic Peers

A comparison to his academic peers allows us to see that Albert actually performed as well as, or outperformed 70% of students who last year scored at the same level. Albert’s SOAR is 70.

Teacher SOAR

Teachers’ median SOAR values are included in the evaluation as a companion to teachers’ performance ratings on the Danielson Framework. The expectation is for teachers to meet or exceed the established growth threshold. Teachers whose SOAR value does not meet the threshold cannot receive an overall rating of “distinguished.” Teachers whose SOAR values don’t meet the threshold for two consecutive years will have their overall rating lowered a level.

If a teacher’s SOAR value and the teacher’s performance rating do not support similar findings about a teacher’s effectiveness, then additional measures and artifacts may be helpful to the teacher and evaluator to further examine the discrepancy.

Grade Level SOAR Comparison Depicted in this chart are the median SOAR values for 4 th grade literacy in four different schools within a school district.

What Does SOAR really Do? SOAR provides us with data to: – Ask the right Questions – Seek answers to benefit our students.

As more data regarding SOAR is available, the ADE will provide additional information to schools and districts. The ADE is working to develop a training guide for districts to use to help educators better understand SOAR values, the calculation process, and the impact on educator ratings.

What’s Next? Examine course codes for data and school’s coding methods Look at N’s for special education course codes. Look at classification consistency (above/below 30) from one year to the next. Look at stability of teacher median’s from year to year. – One year median SOAR value – Multiple year median SOAR value What other questions/concerns would additional analyses help to inform? Other options for growth measures at a local level