1. BY MADELINE GELMETTI INCLUDING STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES AND ENGLISH LEARNERS IN MEASURES OF EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS

2. ELL (ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS) & SWD ( STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES ) Both critical subgroups 12% receive special education and 11% are ELL students in the United States, Kindergarten through12th grade Standardized testing and validity differs for these students Both students contribute to teachers practices because they require modified instruction

3. OVERVIEW Addresses the challenges of accounting for SWD and ELL in the evaluation of mainstream teachers Two prominent indicators of teaching quality Classroom observations Value-added scores

4. EXAMPLE OF WEIGHTED EVALUATION SYSTEMS

5. VALUE-ADDED SCORES “Value-added analysis is a statistical technique that uses student achievement data over time to measure the learning gains students make. This methodology offers a way to estimate the impact schools and teachers have on student learning isolated from other contributing factors such as family characteristics and socioeconomic background.” -The System for Teacher and Student Achievement

6. THE “GOOD” OF VALUE-ADDED SCORING It is a standardized, common metric for estimating teacher effects Intended to support causal inferences about a teacher’s impact on student growth Are based on large-scale Are able to be evaluated for validity

7. THE “BAD” OF VALUE-ADDING SCORES English language learners and students with disabilities present unique challenges which effect the quality of these value-added scores. Overall they are not being taken into consideration, pushing them aside in our education system.

8. ISSUE #1-VALIDITY DUE TO INCONSISTENT USE OF TESTING ACCOMMODATIONS Accommodations are intended to remove barriers to students’ ability to access test items BUT they can be inappropriately assigned or ineffective This can increase measurement error and misrepresent students actual academic growth

9. ISSUE #2-LOW PERFORMANCE ON STATE ASSESSMENTS Puts quality into question for teachers with large populations of ELL and SWD Could strike a perception of “unfairness” to teachers

10. ISSUE #3-LINKING STUDENTS GROWTH TO SPECIFIED EDUCATORS General education teachers share responsibility with special educators and ESL teachers Test scores reflect solely off of the general education teacher Academic growth in a given year is dependent on the quality and content of instruction received in all educational settings

11. EXAMPLE OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES AMOUNT OF TIME IN THE GENERAL EDUCATION CLASSROOM

12. OBSERVATION OF CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION “Teacher observation systems are commonly based on a set of theoretical dimensions that are intended to define critical aspects of teaching (e.g., classroom climate, quality of feedback to students); all operate with a working definition of what is called “good teaching”. They are intended to be used in all settings or they are developed for use of specific subject areas.” (Jones, Buzick & Turkan 2013)

13. EXAMPLE OF WEIGHTED EVALUATION SYSTEMS

14. ISSUE #1-EXPECTATIONS ARE NOT ADDRESSED Observation protocols do not outline expectations for the instruction provided to ELL and SWD These subgroups fall into “general terms”

15. ISSUE #2-IT DOES NOT REQUIRE TEACHERS TO “ADDRESS” ELL & SWD There is evidence that instructional needs of ELL and SWD are learned in the general education classroom If they are not representing in the observation system, it may not be an incentive for teachers to adopt these practices

16. INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES THAT BENEFIT ELL STUDENTS BUT ARE NOT ADDRESSED IN OBSERVATION Benefit from a sustained instructional emphasis on vocabulary development, including, for example, the multiple meanings of words in English Effective teaching of ELs goes beyond vocabulary instruction Other subjects Social activities Classroom environment

17. CONCLUSION Our evaluation system in the United State is currently counterproductive to the goal of providing high- quality education to all students. States and districts need to tend to the unique challenges associated with including SWDs and ELs in each of the indicators. Not accounting for these challenges would undermine the validity of inferences about teachers’ effectiveness.

18. ARTICLE CITATION Jones, N. D., Buzick, H. M., & Turkan, S. (2013). Including Students with Disabilities and English Learners in Measures of Educator Effectiveness. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 234-241.