1. TEAM Evaluation Model OverviewTEAM Evaluation Model Overview Zachary Rossley, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Data and Research Division, Tennessee Department of Education

2. Evaluation closely links with Common Core 2 Student Readiness for Postsecondary Education and the Workforce WHY we teach Common Core State Standards provide a vision of excellence for WHAT we teach TEAM provides a vision of excellence for HOW we teach

3. 3 We aim to be the fastest improving state in the country by 2015 We will measure our success by our progress on NAEP, ACT, and PARCC Tennessee

4. 4 And we will continue to close achievement gaps as we grow overall achievement and Growth for all students, every year Faster growth for those students who are furthest behind

5. Tennessee’s students are struggling to compete with their peers in other states 2011 NAEP data 5 Subject/ Grade Level Tennessee’s % Proficient/Advanced National Rank Southeast Rank 4 th Grade Reading 26%41 st 8 th of 10 4 th Grade Math 30%46 th 8 th of 10 8 th Grade Reading 27%41 st 7 th of 10 8 th Grade Math 24%45 th 7 th of 10

6. However, we have seen continued growth on TCAP 3-8 Achievement results over the past two years 6

7. Origin of the TEAM rubric TDOE partnered with NIET to adapt their rubric for use in Tennessee. The NIET rubric is based on research and best practices from multiple sources. In addition to the research from Charlotte Danielson and other prominent researchers, NIET reviewed instructional guidelines and standards developed by numerous national and state teacher standards organizations. From this information they developed a comprehensive set of standards for teacher evaluation and development. The work reviewed included guidelines and standards developed by: The Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) The National Board for Professional Teacher Standards Massachusetts' Principles for Effective Teaching California's Standards for the Teaching Profession Connecticut's Beginning Educator Support Program, and The New Teacher Center's Developmental Continuum of Teacher Abilities. 7

8. Components of Evaluation: Tested Grades and Subjects  Qualitative includes:  Observations in planning, environment, and instruction  Professionalism rubric  Quantitative includes:  Growth measure  TVAAS or comparable measure  Achievement measure  Goal set by teacher and evaluator 8

9. Components of Evaluation: Non-tested Grades and Subjects  Qualitative includes:  Observations in planning, environment, and instruction  Professionalism rubric  Quantitative includes:  Growth measure  TVAAS or comparable measure  Achievement measure  Goal set by teacher and evaluator 9

10. Rubrics  General Educator  Library Media Specialist  School Services Personnel  School Audiologist PreK-12  School Counselor PreK-12  School Social Worker PreK-12  School Psychologist PreK-12  Speech/Language Therapist  May be used at the discretion of LEA for other educators who do not have direct instructional contact with students, such as instructional coaches who work with teachers. 10

11. Domains 11 Instruction EnvironmentProfessionalismPlanning

12. Planning Domain 12 Instructional PlansStudent WorkAssessment

13. Environment Domain 13 Managing Student BehaviorExpectationsEnvironmentRespectful Culture

14. Instruction Domain 14 Standards & ObjectivesMotivating StudentsPresenting Instructional ContentLesson Structure & PacingActivities & MaterialsQuestioningAcademic FeedbackGrouping StudentsTeacher Content KnowledgeTeacher Knowledge of StudentsThinkingProblem-Solving

15. Professionalism Domain 15 Professional Growth and LearningUse of DataSchool and Community InvolvementLeadership

16. Evaluation Process  Initial Coaching Conversation Required for teachers who received an overall effectiveness rating or individual growth score of 1 in the previous year  Pre-Conference  Classroom Visit  Post-Conference  Professionalism Scoring  Summative Conference 16 Repeat as needed depending on number of required observations

17. Suggested Pacing 17

18. Observation Guidance Documents  Educator groups convened by TDOE to provide additional information for evaluators to inform evaluation using SSP rubric  Observation guidance documents were created for the following educator groups: 18 GENERAL EDUCATOR RUBRICSCHOOL SERVICES PERSONNEL RUBRIC Early ChildhoodSchool Counselors Special EducationSchool Audiologists Career and Technical Education (CTE)Speech/Language Pathologists (SLP) Online TeachingSchool Social Workers (SSW) Alternative EducatorsVision Specialists School Psychologists

19. Growth Measure Overview  State law currently requires value-added (or a comparable growth measure) to count as 35% of the total evaluation score.  For teachers in state tested grades/subjects, the 35% growth component is their individual TVAAS score.  For fine arts teachers in districts that have opted-in to this model, this will be their portfolio score.  For teachers without an individual growth measure, this will be a school-, district-, or state-wide TVAAS score that comprises 25%.  Additional measures for non-tested grades/subjects are in development. 19

20. 15% Achievement Measure  The 15% measure based on a yearly goal set by the educator and his/her evaluator that is measured by current year data.  To make the 15% meaningful, the evaluator and educator work together to identify a measure.  Evaluator’s decision takes precedent over the educator’s if there is a disagreement.  The selection and goal-setting process involves determining which measure most closely aligns to the educator’s job responsibilities and the school’s goals. 20

21. Key Changes From Year 1  Targeted support for schools  Differentiated observations based on performance  Including special education students in individual growth scores  Reducing the weight of growth for non-tested teachers  More choices for individual growth scores 21

22. Key Changes Upcoming  More rigorous evaluator training and certification process  Mild revisions to teacher evaluation rubric  Administrator evaluation process fixes  Administrator evaluation rubric revision underway 22

23. Top Five Lessons Learned 1. Principal time demands are real 2. High-quality evaluation demands highly skilled observers 3. Balance pressure points with strong supports 4. Data is KING 5. Best practice is best practice at every level: implement, get feedback, study and improve 23

24. Resources E-mail:  Questions: Team.Questions@tn.gov  Feedback: Luke.kohlmoos@tn.govLuke.kohlmoos@tn.gov Websites:  CODE Data System: https://code-education.com/tennesseebpc/https://code-education.com/tennesseebpc/  NIET Best Practices Portal: Portal with hours of video and professional development resources. www.nietbestpractices.org  TEAM website: www.team-tn.orgwww.team-tn.org  Weekly TEAM Updates 24