1. Accountability Assessment Parents & Community Preparing College, Career, & Culturally Ready Graduates Standards Support 1

2. Accountability 2 for Districts & Schools for Educators

3. Educator Accountability  Background  Purpose  System Requirements  District Reporting  System Revision  Educator Evaluation Toolkit 3

4. Background  Previous Evaluation Regulations, 1975  Evaluation Statutes, 1996  Significant changes to educator evaluations  Student learning data provides essential information  SFSF Assurances/ESEA Flexibility Waiver 4

5.  Help the educator grow professionally  Improve the effectiveness of instruction  Relate to the future employment of the educator 5 Purpose

6. System Requirements Information, Evaluation, & Actions 6

7. Educator Evaluation Requirements *Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments  Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)  Information from parents, students, etc.  Other information (as determined by the district) Information Sources Evaluation Components Results & Actions Professional Learning Focus for district & teacher. ________ Annual Evaluation Alternative for the following school year (as determined by the district) District Support OR Plan of Professional Growth (optional) Plan of Improvement Proficient or higher on 7 standards and basic or higher on 1 standard. __________ Exceeds the districts performance standards (as determined by the district) Basic on 2 or more standards Unsatisfacto ry on 1 or more standard Student Learning Standard Professional Practice Family & Community Learning Environment Assessment Content Knowledge & Instruction Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Cultural Standards Performance Rating on each of the eight ( 8) standards.  Unsatisfactory  Basic  Proficient  Exemplary 7

8. Information Sources Districts: may select a nationally recognized observational framework approved by the department or continue to use the observation tools they have previously adopted. must have a procedure and a form to collect information concerning an educator’s performance from students, parents, and other stakeholders. may use other information like surveys, self-assessments, portfolios, etc. to gather information concerning an educator’s performance. Qualitative  Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)  Information from parents, students, etc.  Other information (as determined by the district) 8

9. Information Sources Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments Districts must: Select appropriate measures of student growth with the input of the educators being evaluated. Establish standards and performance levels for student learning data. Develop procedures based on objective & measurable criteria to ensure that data used accurately reflects student growth based on the educator performance. Use statewide assessment data for teachers who provide instruction in the content areas assessed. Quantitative 9

10. Aligning Information Sources to Evaluation Components Information Sources Educator Evaluation Components Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments  Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)  Information from parents, students, etc.  Other information (as determined by the district) Student Learning Standard Professional Practice Family & Community Learning Environment Content Knowledge & Instruction Assessment Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Cultural Standards Performance Rating on each of the eight (8) standards.  Unsatisfactory  Basic  Proficient  Exemplary 10

11. Levels of Performance Standards Performance Levels EPBU Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Content Knowledge & Instruction Assessment Learning Environment Family & Community Professional Practice Student Learning Performance Rating on each of the 8 standards.  Unsatisfactory (U)  Basic (B)  Proficient (P)  Exemplary (E) 11

12. Training & Inter-rater Reliability A district’s evaluation training must include training that provides for an assurance of inter ‐ rater reliability. 12

13. Linking Levels of Performance to Results & Actions Professional Learning Focus for district & teacher. _______________ Annual Evaluation Alternative for the following school year (as determined by the district) District Support OR Plan of Professional Growth (optional) Plan of Improvement Proficient or higher on 7 standards and basic or higher on 1 standard. ______________ Exceeds the districts performance standards (as determined by the district) Basic on 2 or more standards Unsatisfactory on 1 or more standard Standards Performance Levels EPBU Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Content Knowledge & Instruction Assessment Learning Environment Family & Community Professional Practice Student Learning 13

14. Plan of Improvement If, at the conclusion of a plan of improvement, the educator’s performance does not meet district standards the educator may be non- retained. Standards Performance Levels EPBU Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Content Knowledge & Instruction Assessment Learning Environment Family & Community Professional Practice Student Learning Results & Actions 14

15. District Support or A Plan of Professional Growth (optional) If, at the conclusion of a plan of professional growth, the educator’s performance is not proficient or exemplary, the district may place the educator on a plan of improvement. Standards Performance Levels EPBU Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Content Knowledge & Instruction Assessment Learning Environment Family & Community Professional Practice Student Learning Results & Actions 15

16. Results & Actions 16 Standards Performance Levels EPBU Understanding Student Needs Differentiation Content Knowledge & Instruction Assessment Learning Environment Family & Community Professional Practice Student Learning Professional Learning Focus for teachers & district

17. Evaluation Components Return to your partner. Discuss which of the following components will be the most challenging for your district to incorporate into your educator evaluation system: Cultural Standards Student Learning Data & Standard Four Performance Ratings Inter-rater reliability 17

18. District Reporting Calculating Educators’ Overall Ratings 18

19. Results vs. Reporting Evaluation Results District Reporting  Leads to professional learning, district support, and/or plan of improvement  Confidential— between administrator(s) and the individual being evaluated  Educator evaluations provide the information the district will use to calculate the overall rating  Number and percentage of educators at each overall ratings will be reported to the department by each school district beginning in July 2016  Information will only be made available to the public at levels that maintain individual confidentiality 19

20. Overall Rating & Student Learning Data  A district will evaluate whether an educator’s overall performance is exemplary, proficient, basic, or unsatisfactory.  A district shall include student learning data in teacher and administrator’s overall rating according to the following schedule: SY 2015 ‐ 16 & SY 2016 ‐ 17, at least 20% SY 2017 ‐ 18 at least 35% SY 2018 ‐ 19 and after, at least 50%  A district may not give an educator an overall performance rating of proficient or higher if the educator has been evaluated to be performing at a level of basic or lower on one or more of the content standards or other criteria for which evaluation is required. 20

21. Overall Rating District Reporting School Year 2015-2016 & School Year 2016-2017 Student Learning Standards Alaska Teacher Standards Student Learning Standard 20% Student Learning Standard  Exemplary  Proficient  Basic  Unsatisfactory Content Standard 80% Alaska Teacher Standards Student Learning Standards Exemplary Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory Proficient or higher on all standards Basic or Unsatisfa ctory on any one standard Professional Practice Learning Environment Assessment Family & Community Understanding Student Needs Content Knowledge & Instruction Differentiation Cultural Standards Rating on each of the 7 Content Standards.  Exemplary  Proficient  Basic  Unsatisfactory 21

22. Results vs. Reporting Find your partner. Partner #1: How do evaluation results differ from the district reporting requirements? Partner #2: How are they similar? 22

23. System Revision Stakeholders & Next Steps 23

24. Stakeholders  District School Board  Administrators  Teachers  Special Service Providers  Students  Parents  Community members 24

25. Next Steps  Build awareness around new requirements with all stakeholders  Compare existing system to new requirements  Identify gaps  Identify decision points  Develop a transition plan 25

26. Alaska Educator Evaluation Toolkit http://education.alaska.gov/TeacherCertification/edeval.html 26

27. Exit Ticket Please answer the following questions on the half sheets of paper provided: What are the three most important things you learned about the new educator evaluation regulations today? What are the two most pressing questions you still have about the new evaluation requirements? (Provide your email address if you would like a direct response.) 27

28. Contact Information Sondra Meredith Teacher Education & Certification Administrator (907) 465-8663 sondra.meredith@alaska.gov 28