© 2013 ESD 112. All rights reserved. Putting Evidence Into Context, Trainer

Learning Target: To have the skills, knowledge and confidence to use eVAL to support the integration of multiple measures of evidence into educator evaluation

Essential Questions: How do different types of measures and evidence fit into an evaluation cycle? When submitting artifacts as evidence, why is it important to provide information about those artifacts to the evaluatee or evaluator? How does the eVAL tool support multiple measures of evidence?

Important Principles About Evidence 1.The requirement for multiple measures of evidence over time (more than one). 2.Importance of quality over quantity 3.Based on naturally occurring documents and materials. 4.The importance of selecting artifacts that measure growth as described in your district’s adopted instructional framework.

Types of Measures Source: OSPI, 2013

Evaluation…from beginning to end 1.Self-assessment 2.Goal-setting 3.Evidence gathering 4.Formative feedback 5.Repeat Steps 3 & 4 6.Summative scoring Source: OSPI, 2013

To Prepare for Scoring Evaluatee’s self-assessment Goal-setting conference Gathering of formative evidence against the framework (shared responsibility) Conference with formative feedback Repeat cycle of gathering formative evidence, conferencing and feedback SUMMATIVE SCORING FINAL Observations (2) Student growth (>1) Other artifacts that provide evidence of criteria, using the instr or ldrshp framework Source: OSPI, 2013

Evidence vs. Artifacts Evidence: Something that furnishes proof instructional/leadership and professional practice ● student growth Artifact: 1.Something created by humans usually for a practical purpose. 2.Something characteristic of, or resulting from, a particular human institution, period, trend, or individual (evaluatee). Source: Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Observations vs. Artifacts Observations are appropriate for classroom or leadership-based activities, or other live professional activities.

STATE CRITERIA #CRITERIA 1 Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement. 2Demonstrating effective teaching practices. 3 Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs. 4Providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum. 5Fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment. 6 Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning. 7Communicating and collaborating with parents and the school community. 8 Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning.

Observations vs. Artifacts When observations won’t produce the required evidence, artifacts may be used as an alternate demonstration of growth or in the state’s criteria.

STATE CRITERIA #CRITERIA 1 Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement. 2Demonstrating effective teaching practices. 3 Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs. 4Providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum. 5Fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment. 6 Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning. 7Communicating and collaborating with parents and the school community. 8 Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning.

Multiple measures of evidence (more than one required for each area of growth identified) Teacher communicates frequently with families about the instructional program and conveys information about individual student progress. Teacher makes some attempts to engage families in the instructional program. Information to families is conveyed in a culturally appropriate manner.

Essential Questions: How do different types of measures and evidence fit into an evaluation cycle? When submitting artifacts as evidence, why is it important to provide information about those artifacts to the evaluatee or evaluator? How does the eVAL tool support multiple measures of evidence?