1. OEA Leadership Academy 2011 Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org

2.  The Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession (OSTP)  Gap Analysis Process  Framework  Student Performance Data  OTES Process  Next Steps 2

3.  Ohio has already spent over two years developing the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (OTES) framework with stakeholders and experts  This is the framework that Race to the Top districts have been planning to use to evaluate their current systems or design new ones  The SBOE has hired Education First to “review” the OTES  It is highly unlikely that the OTES will be replaced by a different framework by December 2011 based on the work that has already been done 3

4. 4

5. 5

6. Based On:  Ohio’s Standards for the Teaching Profession (OSTP)  Current evidence and research on assessing effective teaching  Research linking teaching to student learning 6

7. Definition of Teacher Effectiveness:  Understanding of s tudent learning & development  Knowledge of content  Use of varied assessment strategies to inform instruction  Planning & delivery of effective instruction  Creating a learning environment that promotes high levels of learning  Skills of collaboration & communication  Professional growth & responsibilities 7

8. Is Designed To :  Encourage professional dialogue  Foster professional growth over time  Customize teacher evaluation to a teacher’s level of effectiveness (Tiered System)  Propel schools to higher levels of effectiveness through improved teacher performance 8

9. Structure of the Evaluation System:  Evaluation criteria: Ohio’s Standards for the Teaching Profession  Levels of effectiveness that are objective, evidenced-based  Weighting system  Processes for connecting multiple sources of evidence  Standards setting: career stages 9

10. Is Designed To Be:  Fair and equitable  Understandable and easy to use for teachers and evaluators  Adaptable to local conditions and needs  Formative (developmental) and summative (evaluative) 10

11.  Framework for the OTES 1. Self-Assessment Against the OSTP 2. Analysis of Student Data 3. A Process for Regular Observations 4. Formative Assessment 5. Collection of Artifacts and Evidence Indicators 6. Student Growth Data 7. Written Summative Evaluation 11

12.  Tiered system that provides for annual evaluation tailored to teachers at different levels of their careers  Option A—Beginning Teacher  Option B—Career/Continuing Teacher (Non- evaluation year)  Option C—Career/Continuing Teacher (Evaluation year) 12

13.  Weighting  Offers examples of how evidence could be weighted in the three- tiered system—NOT PRESCRIBED  Even in a system where 50% of an evaluation is required to be student performance, state test scores are only part of that 50%  Student performance should be based on multiple data sources 13

14. 1. Identifying Roles & Responsibilities (A,B,C) 2. Self-assessment (A,B,C) 3. Analysis of Student Data (A,B,C) 4. Assessment of Teacher Expertise and Performance 1. Formal Observation (A & C) 2. Goal-Setting Process (B & C) 3. Professional Project (B) 5. Evidence of Professionalism and Communication (A,B,C) 6. Assessment of Student Growth (TBD) 7. Summative Evaluation of Teacher Effectiveness  OTES Improvement and Remediation Plan 14

15.  Gap Analysis and Planning Tool:  Self-assessment based on characteristics of high quality evaluation systems  Generates a report with stages to determine where district falls compared to the Guidelines  Assists districts in developing a scope of work to create high quality teacher evaluation system 15

16.  Individually answer the Gap Analysis and Planning Tool Questions on the form provided.  In groups of 3 review and discuss the answers to your questions, particularly areas in which you have different answers  Report out a summary for each of the six guidelines  Discuss 16

17. Timeline of Activities:  Suggested activities and timelines for districts (2 years) to support redesign of teacher evaluation system Getting Started Workbook:  Examine policies and practices  Engage key stakeholders  Communication  Goals for high quality teacher evaluation  Definition of teacher effectiveness

19.  DISTRICT POLICIES AND RULES  ENGAGING STAKEHOLDERS  DEVELOPING A COMMUNICATION PLAN  FRAMING THE WORK  DEFINING TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS

20. 20

21.  Michele Winship  614-227-3001  winshipm@ohea.org winshipm@ohea.org 21