1. Deer River Independent School District August 26, 2013 Teacher Training for Teacher Practice and Student Engagement Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Example Model Pilot “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.” Greg Keith—Director, School Support gregory.keith@state.mn.us (651) 582-8316 Tyler Livingston—Specialist, Educator Evaluation tyler.livingston@state.mn.us (651) 582-8427

2. Agenda, breaks and lunch Chimes Parking lot Handouts and digital copies Welcome and Logistics education.state.mn.us 2

3. Outcomes Understand Model activities—points of contact, individual growth and development plan, peer review, portfolio, self-assessment, summative rating Use the Performance Standards for Teacher Practice to reflect on practice and plan for personal development Analyze student engagement survey items Identify additional sources of evidence of student engagement education.state.mn.us 3

4. Statute (122A.40 & 122A.41) approved in 2011 special session and revised in 2013. Development and evaluation models for teachers in must be implemented in school year 2014-15. Joint agreement is required by Statute. Teacher evaluation work group –Included stakeholder representation –Consulted with Commissioner to build a model –Produced an example model to be piloted in school year 2013-14 Background and Context education.state.mn.us 4

5. Identify –Revisions or changes that need to be made to the Model –Strategies to implement teacher models, including training and ongoing support –Unintended consequences or results of activities –Results for research questions Pilot our training and orientation offerings to support statewide implementation Build best practice guidelines for implementation of educator evaluation systems Make policy and fiscal recommendations to legislature based on pilot findings Learn from practitioners about what works “on the ground” Pilot for Teacher Development and Evaluation Outcomes education.state.mn.us 5

6. Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement funded by the Joyce Foundation Participants—MDE personnel, district leaders, evaluators, peer reviewers, teachers Data sources –Participant surveys (all sites) –Participant interviews (limited sites) –Participant focus groups (limited sites) –Site visits (limited sites) –Artifacts and results (limited sites) –Documentation of resources expended—time, money, personnel CAREI will not collect data from students. Research Plan for the Pilot education.state.mn.us 6

7. Report results that will inform planning and implementation at both the state and district levels Minimize disruptions to normal routines and schedules Remain impartial (Conclusions will be based on data.) Maintain confidentiality of raw data (All results will be summarized and reported in such a way that individuals cannot be identified.) Pilot Researcher Commitments education.state.mn.us 7

8. In order to evaluate practice, evaluators must be able to –Gather relevant evidence –Align the evidence to the rubric –Determine a rating based on evidence –Provide accurate feedback and ratings –Communicate effectively with teachers This Model is primarily a tool for individualized professional development Frequent, accurate, specific, and timely feedback is essential. How feedback is delivered matters. Evaluators and peer reviewers must utilize coaching skills. Foundations for Implementation of the Minnesota Model Evaluator Skills education.state.mn.us 8

9. Teacher Evaluation Model Three Model Components Teacher Practice Student Learning and Achievement Student Engagement education.state.mn.us 9 Page 7 of Model

10. Model Component How is this component defined? How is this component measured? How is this component weighted? Teacher Practice By 4 domains—planning, instruction, environment, and professionalism—in the Minnesota Performance Standards for Teacher Practice and each domain’s associated indicators and elements Using the Minnesota Performance Standards for Teacher Practice rubric and evidence gathered from  Points of contact  Self-assessment and peer review  Optional teacher portfolio 45% Definitions, Measures, Weights education.state.mn.us 10

11. Model Component How is this component defined? How is this component measured? How is this component weighted? Student Engagement As “an organizing framework for examining a student’s commitment to and involvement in learning, which includes academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective components. It is influenced by the context of family, peers, community, and school. Within the classroom, teachers can influence student engagement through their relationships with students and the relevance and rigor of their instruction” Using results of a student survey for 15 percent For 5 percent, using evidence gathered from  Points of contact  Self-assessment and peer review  Teacher portfolio (Optional) 20% Student Learning and Achievement As “student outcomes as measured by the assessments that have the highest levels of confidence and commonality” According to a teacher’s teaching assignment, using combinations of  Teacher value-added data  Class goal results  Targeted-need goal results  Shared-performance goal results 35% Definitions, Measures, Weights education.state.mn.us 11 Not Piloted in Deer River

12. Roles education.state.mn.us 12 RolePrimary Responsibilities Summative EvaluatorsEvaluate and develop teachers by following model definitions and activities; support teachers who are not meeting standards Peer ReviewersDevelop teachers by following model definitions and activities TeachersTake an active role in development and evaluation activities Professional Learning Communities Collaborate to support one another in model activities DistrictsEstablish district priorities and goals, and communicate expectations to stakeholders Page 23 of Model

13. Rubric’s domains and indicators –Define practice and levels of proficiency Teachers use the rubric to –Reflect on their practices –Set priorities –Engage in continuous professional development Evaluators use the rubric to –Anchor evidence of practice to the indicators –Establish consistency and fairness –Provide feedback to teachers about their practice –Evaluate teachers Performance Standards for Teacher Practice Rubric education.state.mn.us 13

14. Mixed teams will have about five minutes at each station to Read the domains, indicators and elements Read previous groups’ evidence Add examples of evidence for that domain Comment or question information added by previous groups Graffiti Activity education.state.mn.us 14

15. 1.Self-assess current practice using the rubric for teacher practice. 2.Consider the district context and priorities. 3.Set at least one goal for personal professional growth. 4.Brainstorm activities and resources that will support the goal. Establish time lines. 5.Consider the impact of the work on student engagement and student learning. Individual Growth and Development Planning Self Assessment and Goal Setting education.state.mn.us 15

16. Provide evidence of teacher practice and a source of growth feedback Must be –Face to face –Documented –Grounded in Performance Measures for Teacher Practice or individual growth and development plan Meant to empower teachers, guide peer reviewers, and provide flexibility Are defined as several activities Have minimal requirements for types and number of contacts Points of Contact education.state.mn.us 16 Pages 12 and 79 of Model

17. Using Evidence in Points of Contact 1.Collect evidence. 2.Align the evidence to domains, indicators, and elements. 3.Use evidence to assess performance for coaching and feedback. education.state.mn.us 17

18. Other Points of Contact Jigsaw Activity What types of growth goals could be supported by different types of points of contact? What evidence could be collected? To which domains and indicators might evidence from the point of contact best align? What are implementation opportunities and barriers? Planning conference Post-lesson conference Curriculum review Review student survey data Review of student learning data Professionalism observation/conference Video lesson review education.state.mn.us 18 Page 17 of Model

19. What feedback would you request of your peer reviewer(s) in order to meet your professional goal(s)? –Which point of contact activities would provide the most relevant feedback? What feedback would you request of your evaluator(s) in order to meet your professional goal(s)? –Which point of contact activities would provide the most relevant feedback? Add points of contact to your draft individual growth and development plan. Individual Growth and Development Planning Points of Contact education.state.mn.us 19

20. Have five-minute conversations as you wander the room. What are your professional goals for the upcoming year? What activities will you pursue to help you achieve your goals? What support do you need? Which point of contact activities are you requesting in your plan? How do these connect to your goal? Individual Growth and Development Planning Peer Sharing and Networking education.state.mn.us 20

21. Is conducted at the end of each year Includes teacher identification of –Areas of strength and of growth tied to teacher practice –Reflections specific to student learning and engagement –Reflections on implementation of Individual Growth and Development Plan Is shared with peer reviewer for peer review and a coaching conversation Is reviewed by the summative evaluator Self-Assessment and Peer Review education.state.mn.us 21 Page 20 and 93 of Model

22. Is optional for any teacher Contains evidence of teacher practice and impact on students that must be considered for a summative evaluation Includes reflection on practice as well as evidence such as lesson plans, videos, and student work samples Provides an opportunity for including evidence in the evaluation that may not be collected through other activities Teacher Portfolio (Optional) education.state.mn.us 22 Page 20 of Model

23. Teacher Practice Component Rating Summative evaluator Examines evidence gathered through activities Uses the rubric Holistically determines ratings in each of the four domains and the component rating education.state.mn.us 23

24. education.state.mn.us 24 Page 30 of Model Teacher Practice Component Rating

25. In order to refine the example model, address research questions, and plan for implementation, CAREI will survey and interview practitioners and anonymously report findings. Today Survey--15 minutes Gathering teacher perceptions about student engagement measures. Long Term 2-3 surveys about the pilot Focus group interviews Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement (CAREI) Pilot Research Study education.state.mn.us 25

26. Student engagement is an organizing framework for examining a student’s commitment to and involvement in learning, which includes academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective dimensions. It is influenced by the context of family, peers, community, and school. Within the classroom, a teacher can influence student engagement through relationships with students and the relevance and rigor of instruction. Component rating is determined based on evidence of student engagement gathered from a valid and reliable student survey and other measures. Component weight is 20% in the state model—15% based on the survey and 5% based on other measures. Component 2 Student Engagement education.state.mn.us 26 Page 32 of Model

27. How well does this survey align to our definitions and its seven constructs? Student levels of engagement –Academic –Behavioral –Cognitive –Affective Teacher impacts on engagement –Relationships –Rigor –Relevance Stakeholder engagement in revision process Student Engagement Survey Development Process education.state.mn.us 27

28. Next Steps Teachers Finalize Individual Growth and Development Plans Leadership Assign peer partners Finalize student engagement survey Student Engagement and Peer Feedback Training— September 25 October 30 education.state.mn.us 28