1. STUDENT GROWTH UPDATE VILLA PARK DISTRICT 45 SCHAFER SCHOOL MAY 5, 2015 MAY 7, 2015

2. OBJECTIVES Understand the required components of student growth based on PERA (Student Growth will be included in teacher evaluations beginning in the 2016-2017 school year.) Determine the differences between the types of assessments required for Student Growth Understand the expectations of teacher categories in creating assessments Become informed about plans for summer work to develop assessments Gain an overview of the no-stakes pilot of assessments next year

3. QUESTIONS? After this presentation, there will be time for questions for those who wish to stay 3x5 cards have been provided for questions that will be answered in writing to the staff Contact one of the committee members

4. PERA TIMELINE 2010 Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) approved 2012 Four ratings for teachers and principals Principal evaluations must include student growth Evaluators complete on-line training (modules) 2016 Full implementation by September 1 (80% of districts)

5. D45 PROGRESSION TOWARD COMPLIANCE OF PERA 2012 - 2013 Teacher Evaluation Task Force studied PERA and researched instructional frameworks for effective practices in instruction Evaluators completed on-line training modules Four ratings for teachers and administrators implemented Administrators’ evaluations began to include student growth 2013 – 2014 Task Force began D45 Evaluation Plan revisions and chose to use the Danielson Framework to evaluate professional practice 2014 – 2015 The Danielson Framework was implemented and PD was provided The Teacher Evaluation Student Growth Committee began decision making on recommendations for Student Growth in the D45 Evaluation Plan Organized summer work to develop Type II and Type III assessments

6. HOW DOES STUDENT GROWTH WORK WITH PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE? Professional Practice + Student Growth = 100% Teacher Evaluation Student Growth Committee is recommending: Professional Practice = 70% (Danielson) Student Growth = 30% Each Assessment = 15% (State Default Model = 50% for Student Growth)

7. What is Student Growth? A demonstrable change in students’ knowledge or skills, as evidenced by gain and/or attainment on two or more assessments, between two or more points in time. Note: Comparing students’ knowledge at two or more points in time differentiates student growth from achievement, where only one snapshot of student kno wledge is used.

8. TEACHER CATEGORIES All staff members were placed in a teacher category PERA exempts school service personnel (psychologist, social worker, speech and language pathologist, nurse, counselor) All other categories of teachers except the following will have Student Growth as part of their evaluation in D45. These teachers are exempt because their responsibilities do not include direct instruction to students. Full-time Instructional Coaches Middle School Library Media Specialist Math Coach Assessment List for Teacher Categories - Handout

9. STUDENT GROWTH FINAL RATING CALCULATIONS ASSUMPTIONS: Ratings: Excellent/Higher than Expected Growth = 4 Proficient/Typical Growth = 3 Needs Improvement/Lower than Expected Growth = 2 Unsatisfactory/Unsatisfactory Growth = 1 Professional Practice + Two Assessments = Final Rating PP + A1 + A2 = Final Rating Professional Practice is worth 70% and Assessments are worth 15% each PP x.70 + A1 x.15 + A2 x.15 = Final Rating

10. STUDENT GROWTH FINAL RATING CALCULATIONS Example #1 (Excellent Teacher) PP = 4 (Excellent) A1 = 4 (Higher than Expected Growth) A2 = 4 (Higher than Expected Growth) PP x.70 + A1 x.15 + A2 x.15 = Final Rating 4 x.70 + 4 x.15 + 4 x.15 = Final Rating 2.80 +.60 +.60 = Final Rating 4.0 = Final Rating (Excellent)

11. STUDENT GROWTH FINAL RATING CALCULATIONS Example #2 (Unsatisfactory Teacher) PP = 1 (Unsatisfactory) A1 = 1 (Unsatisfactory Growth) A2 = 1 (Unsatisfactory Growth) PP x.70 + A1 x.15 + A2 x.15 = Final Rating 1 x.70 + 1 x.15 + 1 x.15 = Final Rating.70 +.15 +.15 = Final Rating 1.0 = Final Rating (Unsatisfactory)

12. STUDENT GROWTH FINAL RATING CALCULATIONS Ratings Excellent/Higher than Expected Growth = 4 Proficient/Typical Growth = 3 Needs Improvement/Lower than Expected Growth = 2 Unsatisfactory/Unsatisfactory Growth = 1 Range of Scores for Final Rating Excellent = 3.5 – 4 Proficient = 2.5 - 3.49 Needs Improvement = 1.5 – 2.49 Unsatisfactory = 1 - 1.49

13. STUDENT GROWTH FINAL RATING CALCULATIONS Example #3 PP = 3 (Proficient) A1 = 2 (Lower than Expected Growth) A2 = 3 (Typical Growth) PP x.70 + A1 x.15 + A2 x.15 = Final Rating 3 x.70 + 2 x.15 + 3 x.15 = Final Rating 2.10 +.30 +.45 = Final Rating 2.85 = Final Rating (Proficient)

14. STUDENT GROWTH FINAL RATING CALCULATIONS Example #4 PP = 4 (Excellent) A1 = 3 (Typical Growth) A2 = 3 (Typical Growth) PP x.70 + A1 x.15 + A2 x.15 = Final Rating 4 x.70 + 3 x.15 + 3 x.15 = Final Rating 2.80 +.45 +.45 = Final Rating 3.70 = Final Rating (Excellent)

15. STUDENT GROWTH FINAL RATING CALCULATIONS Example #5 PP = 3 (Proficient) A1 = 1 (Unsatisfactory) A2 = 2 (Lower than Expected Growth) PP x.70 + A1 x.15 + A2 x.15 = Final Rating 3 x.70 + 1 x.15 + 2 x.15 = Final Rating 2.10 +.15 +.30 = Final Rating 2.55 = Final Rating (Proficient) See handout for easy to understand Y-chart!

16. TYPE I AND II ASSESSMENTS - JOINT COMMITTEE TYPE III ASSESSMENTS - TEACHER Type I A nationally normed assessment, scored by non-district entity and is widely administered beyond Illinois. Type II An assessment developed or adopted and approved by the school district, used on a district-wide basis that is given by all teachers in a given grade or subject area. Type III A rigorous assessment aligned with the course's curriculum that the teacher and evaluator determine measures student learning. Examples: MAP (NWEA) STAR (PERA Joint Committee determines Type I assessments) Examples: Commonly developed assessments, curriculum tests, AIMSweb, Fountas & Pinnell (PERA Joint Committee determines Type II assessments) Examples: Teacher-created assessments, assessments of student performance (Teacher and evaluator determine Type III assessment. They may also select a Type I or Type II assessment to be used as a Type III assessment)

17. WHAT DOES STUDENT GROWTH INCLUDE? Two assessments are required for each teacher Each assessment must have a pretest, midpoint check-in, and a posttest Meetings with evaluator Each teacher will have one Type I or II assessment (when possible) and one Type III Some teachers will have two Type III assessments Assessments must align with standards, are valid, reliable, and contain rigor Depth of Knowledge (DOK)

18. EXAMPLES OF ASSESSMENTS BY TEACHER CATEGORY Teaching Category Assessment #1 (required by Joint Committee) Assessment #2 (chosen by teacher and evaluator) Type I or II Type III, Teacher Created Type III Options, teachers may choose additional assessments outside of the lists below Third GradeMAP Reading MAP Math, F&P, Writing, Teacher Created Type III Multi-needs primary X Verbal Behavior MAPP (Milestones and Placement Program), Teacher Created Type III Science 6Create Type II as a department Create Type II as a department, Teacher Created Type III

19. ASSESSMENT PILOT 2015-16 (NO-STAKES) Summer 2015 – Create Type II and Type III assessments (2)* Fall 2015 – All teachers administer (pilot) assessments Pretest Midpoint check-in Posttest Complete posttest no later than March 1 Spring 2016 – Teachers meet to evaluate assessments Quality of assessments Determine growth model Determine cut scores/percentages September 1, 2016 – Full implementation of Student Growth

20. SUMMER ASSESSMENT WORK See attached document: Workshops to Develop Type II and Type III Assessments Who Attends? (See following slide) 2-3 teachers from each Type II teacher category (9 hours) Each teacher from Type III (6 hours) What happens if I can’t attend? Beginning of August workshops What if I’m not in the teacher categories listed and I want to attend the workshops to gain a better understanding of assessments? Anyone is welcome to attend. Unfortunately, only those in the identified categories will receive compensation Express your interest in professional development on an upcoming CCI survey

21. SUMMER WORK: IDENTIFIED CATEGORIES OF TEACHERS WHO WILL CREATE TYPE II AND TYPE III ASSESSMENTS THIS SUMMER CREATING TYPE II ASSESSMENTS Band: Elem/MS Music: Elem, MS Art: Elem, MS PE: Elem, MS Orchestra: Elem/MS Science: 6, 7, 8 Social St: 6, 7, 8 Math: 6, 7, 8 Industrial Arts Explorations Spanish CREATING TYPE III ASSESSMENTS Early Childhood (At-Risk, Instructional SPED, MN, Autism, Bilingual At-Risk Autism: Pri, Interm, MS ELL Resource: Elem, MS Multi-needs: Pri, Intermediate, MS Cross-cat: Pri, Interm, MS Bilingual Cross-cat LEAP

22. TEACHER EVALUATION - STUDENT GROWTH COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP VPEA Martha Cederblad - AR Holly Eichholz - WE Holly Hudecek - ST Lauryn Humphris - JA Kathy Ivey - JE Olga Karwoski - ST Ann Larsen - YC Faith Pasek - NO Susie Scott - SC D45 ADMINISTRATORS Ellen Bruning - YC Shawna Chambers – WE Diane Cody – DuPage ROE John Gibbas - WE Nancy Munoz - CO Kelly Nettleton - CO Renee Reynolds - JA Erin Slater - CO