Curtis Sonneman, North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Angela Kirby-Wehr, PaTTAN Harrisburg (Pennsylvania Department of Education) Jennifer Facciolini, SAS, Institute

 Began in 2008 (prior to Common Core) with Blue Ribbon Commission on Testing and Accountability and Framework For Change ◦ Result was Accountability and Curriculum Reform Effort (ACRE)  Designed to determine and implement  New curriculum  New assessments aligned to new curriculum  New accountability model to replace ABC’s

NC SBE Approval Date CurriculumImplementation Year May 2008English Language Development Essential Standards September 2009IT Skills Essential Standards February 2010Science Essential Standards June 2010English Language Arts and Mathematics Common Core State Standards Winter 2010Social Studies, World Languages and Healthful Living Essential Standards May 2011CTE Essential Standards ACRE Curriculum Reform

 New summative assessments created aligned to curriculum (First administered ) ◦ ELA Grades 3-8 EOG and English II EOC (Common Core)  Change from English I to English II  Includes constructed response in English II  Technology enhanced items in online format ◦ Math Grades 3-8 EOG and Math I EOC (Common Core)  Include gridded response in grades 5-8 and Math I ◦ Science Grades 5 & 8 EOG and Biology EOC (Essential Standards)  Includes technology enhanced items in online format

 Transition from ABC’s model used since mid- 90’s  Updated to include additional measures at high school ◦ The ACT ◦ ACT WorkKeys ◦ Cohort Graduation Rate ◦ Higher level math success (Graduates pass Algebra II)  Referred to as Math Course Rigor  Incorporate EVAAS Value-Added Growth Model

 ACRE website ( )  READY webpage (2011-current)  ACRE Online module “The Call For Change”  Summer Institutes ◦ Conducted by NCDPI staff from various divisions ◦ Ongoing since 2011 ◦ Regional trainings provided to district/charter leadership team (up to 18 members) including central office staff, school administrator or teachers  Webinars on implementation of curriculum and accountability model

North Carolina Summer Institutes Learning Path WHAT Focus: Internalizing a new SCOS HOW Focus: Planning how instruction needs to change IMPROVING PRACTICE Essential Standards Focus: Reflecting, adjusting and improving after year one of implementation Summer Institutes

 Creation of Regional Coordinators focused on implementation of new reforms ◦ Work with other regional staff already in existence ◦ Created and Lead Regional Roundtables ◦ Focus on Professional Development  Professional Development throughout each year facilitated by NCDPI and regional Professional Development Staff ◦ 8,000 educators face-to-face ◦ More than 23, 000 virtually

Summer Institute Formative Support Formative Support Formative Support Formative Support Formative Support Formative Support RESA Session July Aug Sept Oct Dec Nov Jan Feb Mar April May June Annual Professional Development Cycle RESA Session Additional Support Wikis Chats Forums Blogs Professional Development Cycle Visit WikiCentral at ncdpi.wikispaces.net/NCDPI+Wiki Central+Page ncdpi.wikispaces.net/NCDPI+Wiki Central+Page

 Awarded Race To The Top Grant and received ESEA waiver from NCLB sanctions ◦ Allowed flexibility in implementation of new accountability model ◦ Educator Effectiveness System  Included in both RTTT and ESEA waiver

 Focused on preparing teachers for shift in common core and essential standards and the impact on assessment results from shift ◦ Creation of additional assessments used to evaluate educator effectiveness in “Non-Tested Areas”  NC Final Exams  Analysis of Student Work  CTE Post-Assessments

 Webinars with EVAAS team focused on how staff will continue to get value-added data with a change in standards ◦ Understanding the EVAAS system of value-added growth ◦ Conversion of assessment data to Normal Curve Equivalents (NCE’s) ◦ Understanding the use of assessments in various growth models

 Documentation created and posted on web and made available to State Board of Education  Teacher Evaluation System created to collect data on multiple standards including one based on growth measured by assessment (Standard 6)  During transition and initial roll out tried to emphasis growth knowing that proficiency would be an issue with the new standards.

We have a total of 6 standards in our teacher evaluation system. All standards, 1-6, are of equal value. Our goal is to use this system to: Identify our strongest teachers and explore their methodologies, and Support teachers who need to increase their effectiveness North Carolina Educator Evaluation Process Teachers Establish Environment Know Content Facilitate Learning Demonstrate Leadership Reflect on Practice Contribute to Academic Success

 Webinars posted to NCDPI Educator Effectiveness webpage and sent to leadership organizations like North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE)  Encouraged teachers to review EVAAS reports and focus on student growth in coming years  Implemented EVAAS Roster Verification System to allow stakeholders to validate students included in individual educator growth measures

Educator Effectiveness  Designed to reform the way we evaluate school professionals  Identify and support the critical components of training and professional growth 17

18

 Realigned PIMS to EE Data Needs ◦ Student-Teacher Data Linkages  Students  Staff  Courses  % Instructional Responsibility ◦ PVAAS Account Creation  PDE PIMS Help Desk  PIMS PVAAS Reports ◦ To illustrate to Supt/Assist Supt what data for Student-Teacher Data Linkages will go from PIMS to PVAAS Rosters – by state assessment

 Communication from PDE Deputy Secretary ◦ As soon as regulations were final  SY13-14 Implementation Guide for LEAs ◦ How-to Steps  Summer 2013 Statewide Webinars ◦ For District/School Admins ◦ For Tech Staff/PIMS Admins ◦ For SIS Vendors

 3 Statewide Account Management webinars  6 Account Management mini-webex recordings  Excel files to LEAs with all active PVAAS user accounts

 16 three-hour statewide trainings for admins ◦ Webinars/Archived ◦ Face to Face Sessions ◦ Videoconferences  Session Content ◦ Roster Verification Defined ◦ Roles/Responsibilities ◦ Timelines ◦ How-to Use the Online System

 All Key Resources  Links to Professional Development ◦ PPTs with Training Notes ◦ Archived Webinars ◦ Online Modules

 Sections for Teachers  Sections for School Admins  Sections for District Admins

 1:1 calls to LEAs and/or IU Sessions by PVAAS Statewide Team ◦ 25 largest LEAs ◦ Called/Presented to all 499 School Districts

 Onsite meetings with Deputy of Teacher Effectiveness and PIMS/Data Staff  Weekly Planning Calls  Feedback on SDP Communications, Training, Implementation Documents  Conference calls with SAS EVAAS and SDP Data Team  Conferenced into session with Regional Assistant Superintendents

 RV Checklists ◦ Teachers ◦ School Admins ◦ District Admins  RV FAQs  Sample Scenarios for Instructional Responsibility

 Modified signature, with information on how to get support

 12 LIVE Virtual Help Desk Q&A Sessions during RV weeks  SAS EVAAS Help Desk  PVAAS Statewide Team for PDE Help Desk

 “Smart” RV Help Menu System – Role and Context Specific

 Team Training  Demo Site for Reference During Support  Template Replies for all common Help Desk replies ◦ For SAS EVAAS and PVAAS Statewide Team ◦ 150+ responses ◦ Significant resource to handle HIGH Volume of support

 Weekly conference call through all weeks of RV  2 live full day/open/online Q&A sessions with SAS EVAAS and PVAAS Statewide Team  1 Live session with PVAAS team for district- wide teacher support day in May  Added a new protocol to “push” Phila support desk tickets to high priority

PVAAS Hotline: (717) Team Fax: (717) Kristen Lewald, Ed.D. PVAAS Statewide Director for PDE (717) Jennifer Ross, M.A. PVAAS Statewide Core Team Member (717) Joan Perekupka PVAAS Statewide Core Team Member (717) Jennifer Kurtz PVAAS Support Associate (717)