1. Educator Effectiveness Teacher Quality Standards Expert Office Hours
4/9/2017
Educator Effectiveness Teacher Quality Standards Expert Office Hours
Colorado Department of Education, Dept. of Higher Education and Educator Effectiveness
Fall 2013

2. Goals Students Educators Schools/ Districts State Successful students
4/9/2017
Goals
Successful students
Prepare students to thrive in their education and in a globally competitive workforce.
Ensure every student is on track to graduate postsecondary and workforce ready.
Increase achievement for all students and close achievement gaps.
Ensure students graduate ready for success in postsecondary education and the workforce.
Increase national and international competitiveness for all students.
Great teachers and leaders
Ensure effective educators for every student and effective leaders for every school and district.
Increase and support the effectiveness of all educators.
Optimize the preparation, retention, and effectiveness of new educators.
Eliminate the educator equity gap.
Outstanding schools and districts
Build the capacity of schools and districts to meet the needs of Colorado students and their families.
Increase school and district performance.
Turnaround the state’s lowest performing districts and schools.
Foster innovation and expand access to a rich array of high quality school choices for students.
Best education system in the nation
Build the best education system in the nation.
Lead the nation in policy, innovation, and positive outcomes for students.
Operate with excellence, efficiency, and effectiveness to become the best SEA in the nation.
Attract and retain outstanding talent to CDE.
Students
Educators
Schools/ Districts
State
CDE is prioritizing their work through focused goals at the student level, the educator level, the school and district level, and finally, the state level.
Let’s look at CDE as the state education agency. CDE has a strategic plan, all work happening in the organization must be linked to the strategic plan and progress is reported monthly. More than ever, CDE is committed to becoming more of a SUPPORT arm than purely a compliance driven organization.
At the school/district level, CDE is supporting districts in the UIP process and working closely with districts and schools to ensure that priority and turnaround schools get the assistance they need to become high-functioning buildings for all the kids they serve.
And, at the Educator level, CDE recognizes how complex the teacher and principal roles are and, as they work on implementation of the new educator evaluation requirements, they are focused on supporting educators every step of the way. We know that having great teachers and excellent school leaders are the most important school-based factors in student achievement and CDE is working with educators from across the state to build a Model Evaluation System that is based on professional growth and meaningful feedback for all educators.
At the student level, CDE is supporting districts as they implement the new Colorado Academic Standards… building tools and resources for educators which help to simplify implementation and ensure success with students. CDE also works carefully with districts with RTI, interventions and IEP’s.

3. Objectives To be aware of the 2013 updates to the teacher rubric
To use recent pilot data to determine courses that might offer support for Colorado educators

4. It’s important because...
4/9/2017
It’s important because...
…out of 178 school districts and 12 BOCES
160 districts/12 BOCES are using the State Model System for teachers and principals
10 districts are using a hybrid system that includes the State Model for evaluating teachers OR principals and a local system for the other group
7 districts have developed their own evaluation systems for teachers and principals
For more information:
This comes from the recently released Assurances memo and can be found on the web
Hybrid = Mapleton 1, Adams-Arapahoe 28J, Walsh RE1, Buena Vista R-31, ECS, JeffCo, Montrose County RE-1J, Rangely RE-4, Woodland Park RE-2, and Falcon 49.
Locally-developed Systems = Boulder Valley RE-2, Denver County 1, Douglas County RE-1, Harrison 2, Academy 20, Kim Reorganized 88, and Granada RE-1.

5. Agenda Updates and changes to the Colorado Teacher Rubric
4/9/2017
Agenda
Updates and changes to the Colorado Teacher Rubric
Professional practices
Scoring
Data from the pilots
Collaborative planning and design
Share Out

6. Revised Teacher Rubric
4/9/2017
Revised Teacher Rubric
What’s changed in the rubric as a result of feedback from the field?
The current rubrics have been shortened in response to feedback from nearly all participants that it felt overwhelming and intimidating due to its size.
The language of the professional practices has been made more specific in order to be clearer and more concise in setting performance expectations.
Redundancies have been eliminated.
Most non-observable professional practices (in the teacher rubric) have been eliminated from Standards 1, 2, and 3 because many of the pilot site participants indicated they believed them to be biased or unfair.
The lowest category on the rubric has been changed to “Basic.”

7. Revised Teacher Rubric
4/9/2017
Revised Teacher Rubric
The language of the professional practices has been made more specific in order to be clearer and more concise in setting performance expectations. 7

8. 4/9/2017
BEFORE
In this example before there were more practices in the first column and the language is made clearer and more concise in each of the professional practices highlighted in yellow
AFTER 8

9. Revised Teacher Rubric
4/9/2017
Revised Teacher Rubric
Redundancies have been eliminated.
Example: Data is now represented in Std. IV, Element a.
The next revision to the rubrics we’ll highlight is the elimination of redundancies. In this example, you’ll note that data is now represented in Std. 4, Element a where before you might find data under several different elements. 9

10. Revised Teacher Rubric
4/9/2017
Revised Teacher Rubric
Most non-observable professional practices have been eliminated from Standards 1, 2, and 3 because many of the pilot site participants indicated they believed them to be biased or unfair.
Standard & Element
# of non-observables BEFORE
# of non-observables
NOW 1a 1 1c 2 2d 3 2e 10 6 3a 3b 3d 3h 4
Total 28
16 (42% fewer)
Here we took note of the number of non-observables in the previous rubric and recorded the difference in the latest rubric. Notice that we have 42% fewer non-observables in the rubric. 10

11. Revised Teacher Rubric
4/9/2017
Revised Teacher Rubric
The lowest category on the rubric has been changed to “Basic.”
The final revision to the educator rubrics we will highlight is that the lowest category on both rubrics has been changed from “not evident” to “basic”. Let’s take a look at the previous rubric structure and rating level focus and then compare that with the revisions. 11

12. Rubric Structure and Rating Level Focus
BEFORE
Based on feedback from the field, the Not Evident column was causing some confusion as it was worded in the negative and all other rating levels were worded in the positive. That meant checking for something that wasn’t there in Not Evident and then checking for something that WAS there in all other levels. That also had implications for the scoring procedure. So now let’s see the revisions to the rubric structure and rating level focus.
Not evident. This describes practices of a teacher who does not meet state performance standards and is not making progress toward meeting them.
The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what teachers do on a day to day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels.
The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the impact of the teacher’s practices on student outcomes.

13. Rubric Structure and Rating Level Focus
NOW
The focus of the Basic rating is the educator whose performance does not meet state quality standards. The educator rated as Basic is typically performing at a foundational level. Every educator is expected to perform Basic professional practices in their day-to-day work.
Step Out: Review the structure of the rubric: 5 rating levels contain discreet professional practices that, collectively describe teachers’ day-to-day work and expected student outcomes. Ask the participants to reflect on how this structure connects to the Gallery Walk activity that was presented earlier.
Each of the practices, even those in the “Basic” column, is a research-based strategy or practice that is foundational to a teacher’s practice. While the “Partially Proficient” column contains good practices, those included in that column are insufficient on their own for the teacher to demonstrate proficiency on the state standard. When combined with the practices included in the “Proficient” column, there is enough evidence to conclude that the teacher meets proficiency.
Point out the differences in focus as one moves across the rows – from the fact that a teacher does not meet standard and is not achieving at expected levels to things the teacher does to achieve proficiency (“Partially Proficient” and “Proficient”) to the expected outcomes for students and/or families.
Link this back to the “Gallery Walk” activity to show that the focus on what the teacher does and the focus on student outcomes are what they participants discussed early in the morning.
The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what educators do on a day-to-day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels.
The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the outcomes of the educator’s practices, including expectations for staff, students, parents and community members, as a result of practices exhibited under rating levels 2 and 3.

14. Understanding the Scoring “Business” Rule
So let’s review the business rule for scoring the rubric:
Look for the first unchecked professional practice.
Move one column back to identify the rating for the element.
The rating for each element is the lowest rating for which all professional practices are marked. As illustrated, the teacher would be rated as Proficient for Standard 1, Element a.
Look for the first unchecked professional practice.
Move one column back to identify the rating for the element.

15. Definition of Teacher Effectiveness
Effective teachers in the state of Colorado have the knowledge, skills, and commitments needed to provide excellent and equitable learning opportunities and growth for all students. They strive to support growth and development, close achievement gaps and to prepare diverse student populations for postsecondary and workforce success. Effective teachers facilitate mastery of content and skill development, and employ and adjust evidence-based strategies and approaches for students who are not achieving mastery and students who need acceleration. They also develop in students the skills, interests and abilities necessary to be lifelong learners, as well as for democratic and civic participation. Effective teachers communicate high expectations to students and their families and utilize diverse strategies to engage them in a mutually supportive teaching and learning environment. Because effective teachers understand that the work of ensuring meaningful learning opportunities for all students cannot happen in isolation, they engage in collaboration, continuous reflection, on-going learning and leadership within the profession.
Chat: If you teach a course, what are some of the characteristics that you emphasize and see to develop in your courses?
Which words or phrases from this definition resonate with you?
Use the chat box to write down 1-2 words/phrases that resonate with you.
Step Out: S.B. 191 required that Teacher Effectiveness be defined. The State Council members created this definition and the definition drove what was included in the rubric.

16. Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers
STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS
Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers
Definition of Teacher Effectiveness
Quality Standards
I. Know Content
II. Establish Environment
III. Facilitate Learning
IV. Reflect on Practice
V. Demonstrate Leadership
VI. Student Growth
50% Professional Practice Standards % Student Growth Measures
Observations of Other Measures Teaching Aligned with
CDE Guidelines
Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard Count Towards Overall Performance?
State Other Assessments Other Measures
Summative for Non-tested Aligned with Assessments Areas CDE Guidelines
Match of test to teaching assignments
Step Out: This framework describes the State Model Evaluation System for teachers. A similar framework is provided for principals.
We are focusing on Standards 1-5 which represent the Professional Practices side of the evaluation.
Weighting:
Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards
Result in a Determination of Individual Performance?
Performance Standards
Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
Appeals Process

17. Teacher Effectiveness
4/9/2017
Teacher Effectiveness
Turn and Talk – Standards and Elements Handout
What courses do you offer to support new teachers in meeting the characteristics of an effective teacher?
Are there any areas within the Teacher Quality Standards/Elements that you might want to consider in designing new courses?
Use the Standards and Elements handout to think about what you already offer – and what you might see a new emphasis on.

18. Pilot Data
What does our pilot data tell us about support needed in the field?

19. Distributions: Standards and Overall
4/9/2017
Distributions: Standards and Overall
92% of teachers received a proficient or higher overall rating.
Teachers received the highest ratings on Standards 2 (Establish Environment) and 5 (Demonstrate Leadership).
Teachers received the lowest ratings on Standard 3 (Facilitate Learning).
We don’t want to “over interpret” the data. There’s so much we don’t know about fidelity of implementation, calibration, etc., but let’s think about what the data does tell us.
Notes. Percentages may not add to 100 percent because of rounding. 19

20. Standard 3: Facilitate Learning Elements and Summative Rating
Standard 3 (Facilitate Learning) is the lowest rated standard, with 87% of teachers receiving a rating of proficient or higher. Twenty percent were rated accomplished or exemplary.
Four of the lowest rated elements are in this Standard: Elements 3a (Human Development), 3d (Utilize Technology), 3e (High Expectations), and 3h (Use of Assessment). Element 3h is the lowest rated element on the rubric, with only 11% of teachers rated accomplished or exemplary.
Notes. Percentages may not add to 100 percent because of rounding. 20

21. Summary of Lowest Ratings
4/9/2017
Summary of Lowest Ratings
Lowest Rated Elements
Element 3h - Use of Assessment: Use appropriate methods to assess what each student has learned, including formal and informal assessments, and use results to plan further instruction.
Element 3a - Human Development: Knowledge of current developmental science, the ways in which learning takes place, and the appropriate levels of intellectual, social, and emotional development of their students.
Element 1b - Literacy Development: Knowledge of student literacy development in reading, writing, speaking and listening.
Element 3d - Utilize Technology: Integrate and utilize appropriate available technology to maximize student learning.
Element 3e - High Expectations: Communicate high expectations for all students and plan instruction that helps students develop critical-thinking and problem solving skills.
Lowest Rated Standard
Standard 3 - Facilitate Learning: Teachers plan and deliver effective instruction and create an environment that facilitates learning for students.
Most of the lowest-rated elements fall into Standard 3, which is the standard that covers effective instruction and facilitating student learning.
In particular, teachers received the lowest ratings on:
-the use of student assessment data to inform practice, and
-understanding different aspects of their students’ development and how that impacts learning
Though we know these findings are preliminary, you can start to see how this information would be helpful to districts in identifying places to support teachers in terms of district-wide PD or school-based supports. 21

22. Probationary Teachers
What does the data tell us?
Out perform non-probationary teachers in Standard 3, Element d – Utilizing technology
Non-probationary teachers out perform probationary teachers on all other elements.

23. Teacher Effectiveness
Turn and Talk
What courses do you currently have in place that might address these areas of need?
Are there any areas that you might want to consider in designing new courses?

24. Questions
What questions do you have?

25. Resources Available

26. Additional Resources CDE Educator Effectiveness e-newsletter
Stay informed by signing up for this monthly newsletter

27. Contact Us Communications Colorado Legacy Foundation EE Leadership
Katy Anthes: Executive Director
Toby King: Director
Colleen O’Neil: Director
Jean Williams: Rubric Evaluation Specialist
Colorado Legacy Foundation
Mike Gradoz: Director
Communications
Amy Skinner: Director
Katie Lams
Britt Wilkenfeld: Data Fellow
Tricia Majors: Project Mgr.
Disclaimer: The contents of this PowerPoint were developed under a grant from the Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.

28. Contact Us Implementation Support and Development
4/9/2017
Contact Us
Implementation Support and Development
Courtney Cabrera
Sed Keller
Dawn Paré
Bob Snead
Chris Vance