1. Identifying and Using Multiple Measures Bill Bagshaw

2. 2 Identifying Multiple Measures

3. WAIVER - Principle 3 - Supporting Effective Instruction and Leadership Implement teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that meet these six guidelines: 1.Are used for continual improvement of instruction 2.Use at least 3 performance levels 3.Use multiple measures including student growth as significant factor 4.Are used to evaluate on a regular basis 5.Provide clear, timely, and useful feedback 6.Are used to inform personnel decisions 3

4. An educator must meet multiple measures of student growth to be rated as effective, highly effective or the equivalent. SGMs may be any combination of: Locally created assessments Commercial assessments State Assessments (required for grades/subjects tested) LEAs will determine timelines and appropriate levels of rigor when using student growth measures. IPP Summary Rating determined by district (LEA) protocols. Includes multiple areas of educator effectiveness. Inter-rater Agreement is a key component of Observations Use of artifact and evidence Combining IPP and SGM summary ratings Determining Final Summary Rating Kansas Evaluation Systems Include

5. Multiple Measures Recent Developments KSDE Flexibility Waiver High Risk Status removed LEAs provided a list of measures used KSDE has identified a “default list” of measures KSDE provided a “default matrix” to determine educator performance – Use of percentage weighting of SGM & IPP may be problematic 5

6. Final Summative Rating Matrix

7. Multiple Measures Measures may include any combination of:  Locally Created Assessments that meet criteria  Commercial Assessment Products  State Assessments If in grade level or subject area that gives state assessment(s), ONE state assessment must be included in evaluation SGMs 7

8. Teachers and Leaders Co-Construct the Educator Evaluation Multiple Measures District selects measures Significant Student Growth District determines timelines and appropriate levels of rigor when using Student Growth Measures 8

9. Default List of Measures Top 6 SGMs reported for 2014-2015 https://bit.ly/KSDE-SGMDefault For all lists and pie charts

10. 10 Defining Significant

11. Significance Definition The change in student achievement for an individual student between two or more points in time, determined using multiple measures

12. 5th Grade Curriculum Standards 5.00 4.12 4.11 4.10 4.09 4.08 4.07 4.06 4.05 4.04 4.03 4.02 4.01 4.00 AugSeptOctNovDecJanFebMarchAprilMay 85% Grade Level Expectation Assuming 85% of students exiting 4 th grade accomplished 4 th grade curriculum, the expectation would be at least the same amount of growth would occur by completion of the 5 th grade, or on any given measure used. Example: In a class of 24 students, 20 students would be above the Grade Level Expectation line by the end of the Academic Year. 24 x.85 = 20.2 This scenario would indicate significance. Reference: Blue Print for Reform

13. 13

14. Educator Evaluation Model FINAL SUMMATIVE Rating Instructional Practice Protocol Summary Rating Student Learning Content Knowledge Instructional Practice Professional Responsibility Student Growth Measures Summary Rating Student Growth Measure

15. Multiple Measures Summary Must consider state assessments relative to grade level or content area Will include assessment measures currently in use in your district (local & commercial) Significance must be pre-determined for any appropriate measure Districts determine expectations for student growth and met/not met status Time for student growth 1-3 years (based on SGMs selected)

16. An educator must meet multiple measures of student growth to be rated as effective, highly effective or the equivalent. SGMs may be any combination of: Locally created assessments Commercial assessments State Assessments (required for grades/subjects tested) LEAs will determine timelines and appropriate levels of rigor when using student growth measures. IPP Summary Rating determined by district (LEA) protocols. Includes multiple areas of educator effectiveness. Inter-rater Agreement is a key component of Observations Use of artifact and evidence Combining IPP and SGM summary ratings Determining Final Summary Rating Kansas Evaluation Systems

17. Questions What questions do you still have?

18. Contact: Bill Bagshaw, Assistant Director, Teacher Licensure and Accreditation, Kansas State Department of Education bbagshaw@ksde.org 785.296.2198