A Summary of Wisconsin’s Educator Effectiveness System for West De Pere

Guiding Principles of the System An educator evaluation system must deliver information that: –Guides effective educational practice that is aligned with student learning and development –Documents evidence of effective educator practice –Documents evidence of student learning –Informs appropriate professional development –Informs educator preparation programs –Supports a full range of human resource decisions –Is credible, valid, reliable, comparable, and uniform across districts

System Balance Educator Practice Student Outcomes

Standards for Educator Practice Teacher Practice Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Teaching Standards (2011) Framework for Teacher Evaluation Charlotte Danielson’s Domains & Components Domain 1: Planning and Preparation Domain 2: The Classroom Environment Domain 3: Instruction Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities Principal Practice 2008 Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards Framework for Principal Evaluation Rubrics adapted and aligned with ISLLC standards

Domain 3 Instruction Domain 2 Classroom Environment Domain 3 Instruction 3aCommunicating with Students 3bUsing Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3cEngaging Students in Learning 3dUsing Assessment in Instruction 3eDemonstrating Flexibility & Responsiveness Domain 3 Instruction 3aCommunicating with Students 3bUsing Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3cEngaging Students in Learning 3dUsing Assessment in Instruction 3eDemonstrating Flexibility & Responsiveness Domain 3 Instruction 3aCommunicating with Students 3bUsing Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3cEngaging Students in Learning 3dUsing Assessment in Instruction 3eDemonstrating Flexibility & Responsiveness Domain 2 Classroom Environment 2aCreating an Environment of Respect & Rapport 2bCreating a Culture of Learning 2cManaging Classroom Procedures 2dManaging Student Behavior 2eManaging Physical Space Domain 2 Classroom Environment 2aCreating an Environment of Respect & Rapport 2bCreating a Culture of Learning 2cManaging Classroom Procedures 2dManaging Student Behavior 2eManaging Physical Space Domain 2 Classroom Environment 2aCreating an Environment of Respect & Rapport 2bCreating a Culture of Learning 2cManaging Classroom Procedures 2dManaging Student Behavior 2eManaging Physical Space Domain 4 Professional Responsibilities Domain 1 Planning and Preparation Domain 4 Professional Responsibilities 4aReflecting on Teaching 4bMaintaining Accurate Records 4cCommunicating with Families 4dParticipating in a Professional Community 4eGrowing and Developing Professionally 4fShowing Professionalism Domain 4 Professional Responsibilities 4aReflecting on Teaching 4bMaintaining Accurate Records 4cCommunicating with Families 4dParticipating in a Professional Community 4eGrowing and Developing Professionally 4fShowing Professionalism Domain 1 Planning and Preparation 1aDemonstrating Knowledge of Content & Pedagogy 1bDemonstrating Knowledge of Students 1cSetting Instructional Outcomes 1dDemonstrating Knowledge of Resources 1eDesigning Coherent Instruction 1fDesigning Student Assessment Domain 1 Planning and Preparation 1aDemonstrating Knowledge of Content & Pedagogy 1bDemonstrating Knowledge of Students 1cSetting Instructional Outcomes 1dDemonstrating Knowledge of Resources 1eDesigning Coherent Instruction 1fDesigning Student Assessment The Danielson Framework for Teaching

Rigorous research background –Content validity –Criterion validity Widespread state and national use State-of-the-art training Aligned with InTASC Standards Why Danielson Framework?

Teacher Practice Evaluation Process OCT. Nov. Nov.-March Feb – End of School Year April -June

Teacher ResponsibilitiesEvaluator Responsibilities Self RatingSchedule and facilitate EEP – evaluation planning session Meet with evaluator to discuss goalsComplete at minimum 1 announce observation of 45 min or 2-20 min observations For formal observations – pre/post observation meetings Complete 1 unannounced observation for 45 min or 2-20 min. Provide evaluator with other evidenceComplete 3-5 informal and unannounced observations for at least 5 min. Prepare for Final Evaluation conference Monitor and review evidence Meet for final evaluation conference and sign off on Professional Practice Rating Prepare, schedule and facilitate Final Evaluation Conference/Assign rating level

Levels of Performance – Teacher Practice Levels of Performance - Teacher Practice Highly Effective (Level 4) Effective (Level 3) Refers to professional teaching that innovatively involves students in the learning process and creates a true community of learners. Teachers performing at this level are master teachers and leaders in the field, both inside and outside of their school. Minimally Effective (Level 2) Refers to successful, professional practice. The teacher consistently teaches at a proficient level. It would be expected that most experienced teachers would frequently perform at this level. Ineffective (Level 1) Refers to teaching that has the necessary knowledge and skills to be effective, but its application is inconsistent (perhaps due to recently entering the profession or recently transitioning to a new curriculum, grade level or subject). Refers to teaching that does not convey understanding of concepts underlying the component. This level of performance is doing harm in the classroom.

Evaluation Schedule New educators (first 3 years in a district)=evaluated annually Struggling educators (those whose summative performance rating is at the lowest level) = evaluated annually Veteran, non struggling educators= evaluated every three years. Although these educators could be evaluated on a subset of performance dimensions each year, with the entire set covered over a three year period. Student and School Learning Objectives will be required of all educators every year.

System Balance Educator Practice Student Outcomes

Student Outcome Detail (50% of evaluation) Student Learning Objectives Models of Practice District Choice

SLO Defined Student/School Learning Objectives which are academic growth goals for entire classrooms or subsets of students that are established by individual teachers or teacher teams based on a review of data, approved by a supervisor (typically the principal), with evidence of increased student outcomes collected throughout the year and evaluated at the end of the year. Classroom Teacher = Student Learning Objectives Principal/School Administrator = School Learning Objectives

Number of SLO’s The number of SLOs an educator is required to set each year is dependent upon the amount and type of other student outcome data available. Three main sources of student outcome evidence: state assessment data, district assessment data, and SLOs, will be weighted equally (15% each) in situations where all three are available.

Number of SLOs - Examples In situations where all three of these sources of student outcome evidence are available, educators will have to develop 1 SLO. –Example: 4th grade teacher in a district which has standardized district assessment data. All 3 sources of student outcome evidence = 1 SLO Where only two of the three sources of student outcome evidence are available, educators will have to develop 2 separate SLOs (with a combined weighting of 22.5% of the overall evaluation score). –Example: 7th grade teacher in a district with no standardized district assessment data. 2 sources of student outcome evidence = 2 SLOs Where neither state nor district assessment data are available, educators will have to develop 3 separate SLOs (weighted at 15% each, for a total of 45% of the overall score). –Example: an elementary art teacher 3 sources of student outcome evidence = 3 SLOs

Student Learning Objectives Process Prepare SLO Educator reviews student data and considers CCSS, 21 st Century Skills, district initiatives, building/district goals, school improvement plans, and/or other content standards to identify a target students population and determine potential SLOs. SLO9s) developed using Selection/Approval rubric Submit SLO for Approval Based upon the availability of other student outcome data, the educator will set 1-3 SLOs and will determine the most appropriate assessment measure that will be utilized to determine if the target is met or not. Collect Evidence The educator collects and monitors student progress to ensure that the target population(s) are making progress toward the objective(s). A mid-year meeting with the supervisor is scheduled, and adjustments to the SLP growth target may be made upon mutual agreement in situations where the goals are either too rigorous or not rigorous enough. Review & Score. The educator submits the final results of the SLO(s) prior to May 15, and the educator and supervisor will collaboratively determine a score for each SLO based upon the 1-4 scoring rubric. Not approved Approved

Technology to Manage System State procurement of Teachscape approved, contract being finalized Teachscape will provide: –Online access to 2011 and 2013 Danielson Framework for Teaching –Online training for evaluators and teachers

Educator Effectiveness Timeline Stage 1 Developing Stage 2 Piloting Stage 3 Implementing Phases 1 & 2 December June 2012 Framework released Model development Developmental Districts Phase 3 DEVELOPMENTAL Sept June 2013 Voluntary Pilots Development work Evaluator and Educator training System training Phase 4 FULL Sept June 2014 Pilot Evaluation Model revisions Continued system training Phase 5 July 2014-June 2015 Educator Effectiveness system fully implemented statewide: Teachers and Principals Continuous Improvement

Resources EE Website: EE Searchable FAQs: