1. ELECTRONIC TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL EVALUATION SYSTEM eTPES Evaluation Updates and Requirements August/ September 2015

2. Agenda eTPES Evaluation Requirements and Updates Review eTPES set-up Review evaluation requirements Review updated evaluation requirements for teachers and principals (as a result of HB64) 2

3. eTPES log in – User Settings, Password 3 Log-In Screen at www.ohiotpes.comwww.ohiotpes.com

4. Credential 4

5. Set-Up 5

6. 6

7. Rubric Alignment 7

8. Who is evaluated? OTES Any person who is employed under a teaching license or under a professional or permanent teacher’s certificate and who spends at least 50 percent of his/her time employed providing student instruction. This does not apply to a teacher employed as a substitute. This usually excludes: Speech pathologists, occupational therapists Teachers on assignment Nurses, psychologists, guidance counselors 8

9. Who is evaluated? 9 The board may elect not to conduct an evaluation of a teacher or principal who meets one of the following requirements: The teacher or principal was on leave from the school district for fifty percent or more of the school year, as calculated by the board. The teacher or principal has submitted notice of retirement and that notice has been accepted by the board not later than the first day of December of the school year in which the evaluation is otherwise scheduled to be conducted.

10. Who is evaluated? 10 The board shall require at least three formal observations of each teacher who is under consideration for nonrenewal and with whom the board has entered into a limited contract or an extended limited contract under section 3319.11 of the Revised Code

11. Who is evaluated? OPES Focus not on the administrative title, but rather on the role and alignment (if any) to the Principal Performance Rating Rubric (Ohio Standards for Principals) 1. Is the administrator serving as an instructional leader? 2. Do the duties of the administrator fall into at least two of the five principal standards? 3. Does the administrator evaluate multiple staff members? Only those administrators meeting all three criteria above would be evaluated under the principal evaluation system, including student growth measures. 11

12. Who is evaluated? OPES If a superintendent serves in a dual role as a principal- The superintendent role will be able to evaluate teachers The Board of Education will evaluate the superintendent as the superintendent The superintendent should not be set as a principal in eTPES 12

13. Who is evaluated? New teachers New to the profession- full evaluation New to district- full evaluation New to building, but not district- district decision if full evaluation or carry forward Teachers shared among buildings in a district Remains on the roster of each building; one evaluation Evaluators may be added from other buildings Teachers shared among districts Remains on the roster of the employer(s) Employer(s) responsible for the evaluation 13

14. Who is evaluated? Incomplete Evaluations Leave the staff member in eTPES, do not delete Will have less than 100% completion rate 14

15. Implementation 15

16. Use of Forms 16

17. Frequency of Evaluations 17

18. Student Growth Measures 18 “remain average or higher” “Less frequent as long as the teacher’s student academic growth measure for the most recent school year for which data is available is average or higher…”

19. Less Frequent Evaluations Any teacher who does not have any type of student growth measure for the school year is NOT eligible for the less frequent evaluation cycle and must be fully evaluated. 19

20. Less Frequently Evaluated Teachers 2-Year Skilled and 3 –Year Accomplished: Professional Growth or Improvement Plans Observation Conference Student Growth Measures 20

21. Less Frequently Evaluated Teachers 2-Year Accomplished with Board Policy: Professional Growth or Improvement Plans 21

22. Changing the Frequency of Evaluation 22

23. Interval of Evaluation 23

24. Requirements in eTPES Framework Decision 50/50 Alternative (changed in HB64) 50/35/15 Alternative with sliding scale 24

25. Framework Choice 25

26. 26 OTES Original Model

27. OTES Alternative Model 27

28. OPES Model 28

29. Alternative Components HB64 15%- Student surveys* Teacher self-evaluation* Peer review evaluation* Student portfolios* Any other component determined appropriate by the district board or governing authority *may use the tools created/ approved by ODE With the added flexibility districts now have available to select alternative components, teachers will no longer be exempted 29

30. Student Surveys The Ohio Department of Education has provided a list of acceptable surveys from which the district or community school may use. 30

31. Teacher Self-Evaluation 31

32. Peer Review Evaluation 32

33. Student Portfolios 33

34. HB64 Alternative Components (other component) Selected by the district District option to identify multiple alternative components for use within the district A teacher may have only one alternative component rating Produce useful information to advance teacher professional growth/ practice Scored on a 4-point scale (1 being lowest) 34

35. Completing District Set-Up 35

36. Reflection 36 Who is evaluated under OTES? Who is evaluated under OPES? How many observations are required for… teachers earning accomplished rating last year? teachers earning skilled rating last year? teachers considered for non-renewal? new teachers? teachers without student growth measures? principals? What framework choices are available for your district?

37. Administration Tab 37

38. Staff Management 38

39. Administration Tab 39

40. Evaluator Management 40

41. Educator Evaluation 41

42. Completion Status 42

43. Evaluation Forms and Icons 43

44. Evaluation Forms and Icons 44

45. Evaluation Forms and Icons 45

46. Professional Growth Plan 46

47. Professional Growth Plan 47

48. Professional Growth Plan? Above Expected Growth Teachers who make above average or most effective growth with previous year’s students (summative SGM rating in eTPES) Self-directed plan Expected Growth Teachers who make average growth with previous year’s students (summative SGM rating in eTPES) Collaborative plan It is a local decision to place an educator on either the professional growth or improvement plan. 48

49. Improvement Plan? Below Expected Growth 1. Teachers who make approaching average or least effective growth with previous year’s students (summative SGM rating in eTPES) If state assessment value-added scores arrive during the school year, it is a local decision to place the teacher on an improvement plan or a full evaluation when the scores are received; The teacher must be on an improvement plan and must go through a full evaluation the following year. Improvement plans are directed by the evaluator. It is a local decision to place an educator on an improvement plan as needed for additional reasons other than student growth measures. 49

50. eTPES: SGM Student Growth Measures will be entered into eTPES later this school year. 50

51. 600 point scale Original Teacher Evaluation Framework 51

52. 600 point scale Alternative Teacher Evaluation Framework 52

53. Categories vs. Types Type of Student Growth Measure AvailableCategory of Educator State Assessment Data (value-added) Individual teacher report (latest and most complete data available) Principal composite (by state ID) A1, A2 (for teacher); A (for principal) ODE Approved VendorB Local MeasuresC 53

54. HB64 Value-Added Changes for Teachers and Principals Will not use value-added ratings from state tests for 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 school years as part of their evaluations unless districts and educators enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to allow the continued use of these value-added ratings for 2015- 2016 and 2016-2017. 54

55. HB64 Value-Added Changes for Teachers and Principals Will not use value-added ratings from state tests for 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 school years when making decisions regarding dismissal, retention, tenure or compensation unless districts and educators enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to allow the continued use of these value-added ratings for 2015- 2016 and 2016-2017. 55

56. HB64 Value-Added Changes for Principals Districts may enter into an agreement to allow the continued use of Value-Added for principals. However, all principals will continue to utilize student growth measures in OPES. Principals that do not use Value-Added will have other student growth measures available. 56

57. HB64 Value-Added Changes for Teachers When no value-added data are used and no other student academic growth measure is available, the teacher evaluations shall be based solely on teacher performance measures. 57

58. Options for A1 Teachers with Value-Added Data 58 1. A MOU which allows the use of Value-Added data for OTES (in other words, Value-Added data will still be generated and districts can opt-in) 1. Districts can decide locally to use other types of student growth measures for OTES (ODE-Approved Vendor Assessments and Local Measures such as Student Learning Objectives) 1. Districts can use only the teacher performance measures (with two full observation cycles) to determine the overall OTES rating.

59. Options for Principals and A2 Teachers with Value-Added Data 59 1. Principals and A2 teachers will continue to use the student growth measures currently available to them (measures other than the state assessment value added data) for determining their student growth measure for evaluation. 2. Principals and A2 teachers may utilize state value- added if the district has an MOU which allows the use of the Value-Added data for evaluation.

60. Option for Shared Attribution 60 Principals and Teachers May utilize state value-added shared attribution as a local student growth measure if the district has an MOU which allows the use of the Value-Added data as a local measure.

61. Teachers without SGMs 61 TeacherOriginal 50/50 Framework Alternative Framework A1 Teacher with no student growth measures Full evaluation Entire rating is based upon performance measures Full evaluation Rating is based on performance measures and 15% alternative component Teacher with no student growth measures due to less than 6 FTE students Full evaluation Entire rating is based upon performance measures Full evaluation Rating is based on performance measures and 15% alternative component

62. New to eTPES Roster o Added date of birth information to the user profile screen to assist with proper identification of staff member o User last name changes are now automatically processed overnight as soon as ODE records indicate (must make the change with OEDS-R) o Updated the “Forgot my PIN” feature Expanded Forms o Teacher pre-conference form expanded o Informal and formal evaluations have an added text field Print o All completed forms for an educator can now be printed as PDF in a ZIP file 62

63. eTPES Implementation Timeline Fall 2015- eTPES set-up (including rosters) January / February (to be determined): All superintendents must have entered LEA default percentages for teacher and principal student growth measures. Principal Evaluation: preliminary 60 days prior to contract action By April 15 – ODE recommends teachers administer the post- assessment for the SLO, and thereafter complete the SLO Scoring Template for submission to the principal. Principal begins entering vendor and local measures ratings. 63

64. eTPES Implementation Timeline By May 1 – Principals complete the evaluation for each teacher. ORC3319.111(C)(1) By May 10 – Principals provide each teacher with a written report of the results of the teacher’s evaluation. ORC3319.111(C)(1) Prior to June 1 – Notification of renewal or nonrenewal of contracts for administrators. ORC3319.02(C) June 15 (tentative) – eTPES closes for the 2015-2016 school year. Any copies needed from evaluations, reports, etc. must be made prior to June 15. 64

65. eTPES Questions? Please contact Policy questions: etpes@education.ohio.govetpes@education.ohio.gov Technical questions: support@etpes.com or call 1-877-314-1412support@etpes.com User guides are available on the eTPES Help Screen 65