CORE Principle 1 Peer Review Day LAX Westin Tuesday, April 21, 2015

Our Goals for Today 1.Agree on Principle 1 Operating Norms 2.Discuss and Reach Consensus upon Peer-Review Scores for Principle 1 3.Finalize District Peer-Review Scores for Principle 1 4.Discuss/ Generate Peer-Review Final Comments

Confluence Site

Our Peer Review Operating Norms Individuals who participate in the Principle 1 self- and peer-review process agree to: 1.Use the rubric to guide self-review, peer feedback and scoring to avoid bias 2.Provide concise context and/or annotation for each piece of evidence 3.Seek clarification when needed. “Check it out when in doubt.” 4.Choose high-quality evidence that best illustrates points of the narrative 5.Provide feedback that supports LEA improvement and considers impact on students 6.Ensure that the appropriate people are properly prepared and included in the self- and peer review process  Are there any additional topics that we need to address for today’s process?  In your group, discuss and present out.

Additional Operating Norms for Peer- Review Day

Our Objective: Resolving Score Discrepancies Both reviewers do not need to have the same score if both agree that the domain has or has not reached the cut- point. Only discrepancies related to cut-points must be reconciled because they require a specific action (i.e. a development plan).

Reporting Scores Final Summary Reports will include all 3 scores (self-and peer scores) for district internal use. Oversight Panel report designs are under development.

Process for Today: Step 1 Process (Develop a Session Time Use Plan) Each triad will plan your time together using the following steps. 1.Retrieve agenda and slides for session here: Confluence link to be added … 1.Each triad has approximately 2 hours and 40 minutes (including time to for a working lunch) to finalize scores for all LEAs 2.The Score Finalization Protocol (below) calls for spending no more than 25 minutes per expectation under review. 3.Decide the order of district review. Which LEA will go first, second, third? 4.Set timing goals based on the Peer-Review scores. Time prioritization should be given to score discrepancies. Focus on discrepancies related to the rubric expectation cut-points. 5.Triads may consider allowing time for discussion of agreed upon problems of practice or consultation with one another on development planning. Scoring reconciliation, however, should be the first priority. 6.Select group roles a.Timekeeper b.Recorder (Use google doc links for discussion notes)

District Work Spaces Return to the space where you uploaded self-assessments to retrieve scoring sheets.

Discussion Record Triad 1: LAUSD/SFUSD/OUSD: cuqZpFZvXo2alZh9gilHkc4/edit?usp=sharing Triad 2: FUSD/LBUSD/SAUSD: 17pWPQR2F102v7db058PdUmVbfrXo/edit?usp=sharing Use this link to record discussion and decisions:

Protocol Protocol (Up to 25 min. per expectation in question) This protocol is a stricter process to support Principle 1 district triads as you discuss clarifying question, produce further evidence and reach consensus on final peer review scores for each other. 1.Retrieve scoring sheets and reviews from confluence: 1.District under review lists all expectations to be discussed. Each expectation should be allocated approximately 25 minutes for discussion. 2.For each expectation discussed, the follow the steps listed below: a.Reviewer Rationale (4 min.) See prompts below. i.Reviewer 1 states rationale for score (2 min.) ii.Reviewer 2 states rationale for score (2 min.) b.Submitting district responds (6 min.) c.Triad discusses responses and arrives at final score (up to 15 min.) d.Reviewers revise score sheets for that expectation as needed. e.If consensus cannot be reached at the end of 25 minutes, please move to discussion topics or planning time as determined by group. [1] [1] Both reviewers do not need to have the same score if both agree that the domain has or has not reached the cut-point. Only discrepancies related to cut-point must be reconciled because they require a specific action (i.e. a development plan).

Prompts Discussion Prompts The following prompts may be used to facilitate discussion and reaching consensus. Prompts for Stating Reviewer Rationale:  What aspect of the narrative led you to your conclusions?  Was there particular evidence or lack of evidence that influenced your decision?  Point to comments or clarifying questions if relevant. Prompts for Responding to Rationale:  Was there a misinterpretation of the rubric or the narrative that can be easily resolved? If so, explain.  Have you provided additional evidence if requested in the preliminary review? If so, identify the additional evidence and review (please make sure it is also uploaded).  Do you have clarifying questions for your reviewers or for CORE staff? Triad Consensus:  Have discrepancies been adequately addressed? o If yes, move to final scoring o If no, what steps does the group recommend? (e.g. more discussion time, site visit, additional evidence, CORE staff review)  Are both reviewers in agreement on final scores? o If yes, record final scores o If no, can both scores stand or is a cut-point involved? o If a cut-point is involved, what are the recommended next steps? (e.g. more discussion time, site visit, additional evidence, CORE staff review)

Recording Final Scores Step 1: After group discussion, each district must retrieve their preliminary score sheet. Step 2: Save the form as: FINAL with any changes, being sure to highlight the phrase “final” at the top of the form as well.

District Work Spaces Return to the space where you uploaded self-assessments to retrieve scoring sheets.

Wrap-Up 1.Plus/Delta 2.Process/Tools Review