North Carolina Principals Council Fall 2012 Kimberly Simmons NCDPI Jennifer Preston NCDPI

Agenda: Authentic Teacher Evaluation Share Vision for North Carolina Principals Council (NCPC) Webinars Toolkit for the NCEES Proposed Rubrics

AUTHENTIC TEACHER EVALUATION Where North Carolina is and where we want to go Jennifer Preston and Kim Simmons NC Department of Public Instruction Fall 2012

National Governors’ Association The National Governors’ Association awarded a grant to North Carolina to: –Explore how teacher evaluation results correlate with student growth –Identify barriers to authentic teacher evaluation Grant includes two parts –Quantitative research study –Principal focus groups 4

Research Questions What is the relationship between teacher performance evaluation ratings and annual EVAAS student growth data? What regions and districts have the strongest correlation between these measures? How can this research impact future teacher evaluations in North Carolina? 5

Data and Methods school year 11,430 teachers –EVAAS scores (average across all classes) –Performance evaluation ratings (average across standards) –District, gender, race, years of experience Statistical Analysis –State, Region, District 6

Statewide Analysis Weak correlation statewide Teachers rated “Above Average” by EVAAS have: –An 8% chance of increasing one rating on Standard 4 –A 40% chance of increasing one rating on any standard Combined Implications –100 Most Effective Teachers (3.8 evaluation score) –100 Least Effective Teachers (3.2 evaluation score) 7

Regional Analysis 8

Important Points No one expects a perfect correlation between student growth and teacher evaluation results However, the two indicators should point in the same general direction A number of teachers in NC make no growth with students yet receive ratings of accomplished or distinguished 9

Behind the Data Data analysis cannot identify causes of the trends in NC Only honest dialogue with our administrators can Feedback can inform State Board of Education policy, DPI trainings, and local policies 10

NC Educator Evaluation Process Does the evaluation cycle and process influence your ratings of teachers? Does the online system help or hinder your completion of authentic evaluations? How can DPI improve the process of evaluation to make it more authentic? 11

NC Professional Teaching Standards Do the ratings and elements provide clarity to ensure authentic evaluation? Do you know what it “looks like” when teachers display behaviors and knowledge in the standards? How can DPI improve knowledge around the standards to make evaluation more authentic? 12

Training and Support Have you received the appropriate training to complete authentic evaluations? Are there resources available to you (district or state) to help you complete authentic evaluation? How can DPI improve training and resources to make evaluation more authentic? 13

Policies around Evaluation Do State Board of Education policies support authentic evaluation? Do your local policies support authentic evaluation? What policy changes are needed? 14

Other Barriers or Supports What have we NOT discussed that prevents you from evaluating teachers authentically? What have we NOT discussed that supports you as you evaluate teachers authentically? What else do we need to know? 15

Contact Information Jennifer Preston Race to the Top Project Coordinator for Educator Effectiveness Kim Simmons NC Educator Evaluation System Consultant 16

17

Support for Principals How much is enough? How much is too much? December 5 th Webinar 18

Talk to a neighbor… If you could create a toolkit for the North Carolina Educator Evaluation Process… What would be in it?

Don’t forget: You can copy- paste this slide into other presentations, and move or resize the poll.

One Stop Shop for the NC EDUCATOR EVALUATION SYSTEM

27

28

29

30

31

32

Teacher Evaluation Process

Component 1: Training Before participating in the evaluation process, all teachers, principals and peer evaluators must complete training on the evaluation process. Component 2: Orientation Within two weeks of teacher’s first day, the principal will provide: A. The Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina Teachers; B. Teacher Evaluation Policy ID Number: TCP-C-004 C. A schedule for completing evaluation process. Before Week 3 of School Year STEP 1: Training and Orientation

Component 4: Pre-Observation Conference Before the first formal observation, the principal meets with the teacher to discuss: self- assessment, professional growth plan a written description of the lesson(s) to be observed. Goal: To prepare principal for the observation. Before First Formal Observation STEP 2: Self- Assessment, Goal Setting and Pre- Conference Component 3: Teacher Self-Assessment Using the Rubric, the teacher shall rate their performance and reflect on his or her performance throughout the year.

Component 5: Observations A. Formal observation: 45 min. or entire class period B. Probationary Teachers: 3 formal by principal and 1 formal by peer C. Career Status Teachers: Evaluated annually. During the renewal year: 3 total- 1 must be formal Observations shall be noted using the Rubric. Within the 1 st nine weeks STEP 3: Observation Cycle (Administrati ve and Peer) STEP 3: Observation Cycle (Administrative and Peer) Component 6: Post-Observation Conference The principal shall conduct a post-observation conference no later than ten school days after each formal observation. Discuss and Document strengths and weaknesses on the Rubric

Component 7: Summary Evaluation Conference and Scoring the Teacher Summary Rating Form- A. Give rating for each Element in Rubric B. Comment on “Not Demonstrated” C. overall rating of each Standard D. Provide teacher with opportunity to add comments to the Summary Rating Form E. Review completed Teacher Summary Rating Form with teacher and F. Secure the teacher’s signature on the Record of Teacher Evaluation Activities and Teacher Summary Rating Form. Component 8: PD Plans Individual Growth Plans-“Proficient” or better Monitored Growth Plans-At least 1 “Developing” Directed Growth Plans-“not Demonstrated” or “Developing” rating for 2 sequential yrs. Before the End of the School Year STEP 4: Summary Evaluation and Goal Setting

Inter-Rater Reliability Session #1 (August 2012) ½ Day Rose Carter Case Study Activity with Pre-reading Coaching Opportunities Full Day Coaching Jenna Video Earlene Permenter Case Study Educator Effectiveness Session #2 (September 2012)

Reflective Questions

Recent Updates Professional Development Plan Record of Teacher Activities Summary Rating Form

Planned Enhancements Early Enhancements Itinerant Improvements Observer Only Users View Only Access Admin. Delete Privileges Connect mismatched UIDs Signatures for all tabs of the PDP Forces Password Change Later Enhancements Writable Comments Fields on All Forms Spell Check for all Browsers All User Authentication on Single Log In Observation Form to Accept Manual Entry of Preconference Data Expand and Collapse Observation Rubric

Proposed Rubrics for Validation School Counselor School Psychologist School Social Worker Instructional Technology Facilitator Media Coordinator 49

Training for Validation Process 1. Training for Principals/Evaluators 2 hour webinar that is all inclusive of the 5 (2-6) rubrics. Review the packet- forms are similar 2. Support staff participants/HR/Principals 1 day face to face training with break- out sessions in the am and overview of process in the afternoon –Before Training: send packet and ask that it be reviewed completely before attending –During: content session and process –After: Webinar to answer questions that arise Note: Principals should attend the webinar OR a face to face training. New principals may want to attend both.

Contact Information Kimberly Simmons MSA NCEES Consultant Eliz Colbert Ed. D Lead Professional Development Consultant Robert Sox, Professional Development Consultant