1. Roland Wilson, David Potter, & Dr. Dru Davison
Tennessee Student Growth Measures System:  Teacher Leadership in the Peer Review Process
Roland Wilson, David Potter, & Dr. Dru Davison
Shelby County Schools
Memphis, TN

2. The Role of Peer Reviewers
Process Overview
Background
Components
The Role of Peer Reviewers
Guiding principles of Scoring Growth
Training and Logistics
Feedback Process
Professional Implications
Norming Example
Reminder- This is peer review of student growth, not observation of teacher practice- Roland

3. What Prompted our Journey?

4. Options For Non-Tested Subjects?
A. Measures of Collective Performance B. Student Learning Objectives Systems C. The Development/Adaptations of Other Assessments
How do you provide measurable data while staying true to the holistic process of the arts?

5. D: None of the Above Actually… A Hybrid Approach
THE GOAL: A holistic and meaningful picture of the value teachers add to students, using the work that is already happening in classrooms.
OUR SOLUTION: A flexible but rigorous portfolio of student work samples that demonstrate growth across standards-based learning domains.

6. Components
Teacher submits 4 evidence collections which include a “purposeful sampling” of students
Each collection contains evidence of student growth (pre and post lesson/unit/year), and learning objectives/targets/supporting evidence
Self-scored, then rated by content specific peer reviewers using consensus scoring protocols

7. Foundational Goals Improve Instructional Practice
Treat Teachers as Experts/Leaders
Increase Student Creativity, Collaboration, Innovation
Flexible method of measuring authentic student learning that yields a spread of effectiveness data.
Combine evaluation with professional growth
Create additional career opportunities for teacher leaders

8. The Role of Peer Reviewers
Principles of Scoring Growth
Application Process
Training and Responsibilities
Norming
Feedback
Professional Implications
Norming Example

9. Evidence Collection Example
HS Band (grades 10-12) working on the Holst First Suite in Eb, 2nd Movement
The first recording is from an early rehearsal run-through after a few days of preparation. The second is from a pre-festival concert performance 5 weeks later. This evidence shows improvement in the areas of tone, balance, vertical alignment, rhythmic accuracy, musicality, tempo, and technique.
Pre Evidence Description- This recording was made after only a few days of rehearsal. It was the first full run made of the second movement. In it, the students are performing drastically under tempo and exhibit an overall lack of confidence. It is apparent that they are still working through many of the technical and timing issues therefore causing a lack of musicality. Post Evidence Description- This recording was made about 5 weeks later. It shows the students performing with much more confidence, correct tempo, improved vertical alignment, better musicality, improved balance, and stronger tone.

10. Principles of Scoring: The Framework
Teacher Effectiveness
Student Growth
Student Achievement as Defined by the Scoring Guide
And Professional Judgment
Student Work (PRE)
Student Work (POST)

11. Scoring: A Balancing Act
Professional Judgment
Scoring Guide and Frameworks

12. Principles of Scoring: The Framework

13. Principles of Scoring: Beyond the Scoring Guide
Using the Scoring Guide and Professional Judgment
Understanding Teacher Context and Student Population
Accounting for High Achievers
Interpreting Imperfect Collections

14. The Role of Peer Reviewers, additional considerations
Application and Screening Process
Training and Responsibilities
Norming and Monitoring
Consensus Scoring Protocols
if the content specific primary peer review score aligns within one point (on a five-point scale) with the teacher self-reported score, that collection is finished with reviews and will be averaged with the remaining scores of the other collections. In the event that the score assigned by the primary peer reviewer is more than one point different than the teacher’s self-score, an additional content specific peer reviewer will conduct a secondary review of the collection and the score will become an average of the two reviews provided the independent reviews are within one point of agreement. If the difference between the two peer evaluators’ scores is larger than one point, a third review (known as an executive review) provides conciliation. If consensus still can’t be reached depending upon the complexity of a given situation, a fourth level of committee review is implemented to make sure every score a teacher receives as part of their evaluation is fair and rigorous.

15. Feedback and Professional Growth
Level I feedback-
This feedback for all teachers is limited to 12 basic dropdown menu choices, meant to provide teacher with a reason for a score not a in-depth or content- specific rationale of growth.
Level II Feedback-
Personal conferences between the teacher and administrator, lead teacher, etc. (someone not directly involved in the scoring) Usually reserved for those that request additional feedback, or are in need of specialized support.
Examples of dropdown menu choices:
Evidence collection demonstrates growth consistent with the assigned score.
Evidence to demonstrate growth was not clearly defined for the domains indicated.

16. Implications for Professionalism
Encourages Teacher Leadership Roles
Recognized as Content Experts
Strategic Compensation Reform
Collaboration between peer reviewer and other users
Grows the Professional Learning Community.

17. Evidence Collection Example (revisited)
Was there more information you would have needed to reach a decision?
Did you have any biases arise while scoring the work?
Do you have any lingering questions?

18. Evidence Collection Example
HS Band (grades 10-12) Holst First Suite in Eb, 2nd Movement
The first recording is from an early rehearsal run-through after a few days of preparation. The second is from a pre-festival concert performance 5 weeks later. This evidence shows improvement in the areas of tone, balance, vertical alignment, rhythmic accuracy, musicality, tempo, and technique.
Pre Evidence Description- This recording was made after only a few days of rehearsal. It was the first full run made of the second movement. In it, the students are performing drastically under tempo and exhibit an overall lack of confidence. It is apparent that they are still working through many of the technical and timing issues therefore causing a lack of musicality.
Post Evidence Description- This recording was made about 5 weeks later. It shows the students performing with much more confidence, correct tempo, improved vertical alignment, better musicality, improved balance, and stronger tone.

19. Development Timeline

20. Additional Information
TN Fine Arts Portfolio Model- Resource Site
TN Fine Arts Portfolio Sample Collections
Additional Information

21. Tennessee Student Growth Measures System:  Teacher Leadership in the Peer Review Process
David Potter,
Roland Wilson,
Dr. Dru Davison,
Shelby County Schools
Memphis, TN