1. NAPS Educator Evaluation Spring 2014 Update

2. Agenda Evaluation Cycle Review Goal Expectations and Rubric Review SUMMATIVE Evaluation Requirements FORMATIVE Evaluation Requirements Preparing Artifacts Rating Guidelines for Evaluators Further Support Questions

3. Evaluation Cycles One year plans Non-PTS Teachers (in years 1 to 3), Long-term Sub, PTS Teachers on One-Year Directed Growth Plans Summative Evaluation 1 year of evidence Two year plans PTS Teachers on 2 year Self-Directed Growth Plans Summative Evaluation (2 years of evidence) Formative Evaluation (1 year of evidence)

4. Ratings Ratings on progress toward each SMART Goal Rating for each Standard I to IV Overall rating based on all of the above Reminder: Rubrics include 4 Standards 16 Indicators 33 Elements

5. I-A. Elements UnsatisfactoryNeeds Improvement Proficient Exemplary I-A-1. Subject Matter Knowledge Demonstrates limited knowledge of the subject matter and/or its pedagogy; relies heavily on textbooks or resources for development of the factual content. Rarely engages students in learning experiences focused on complex knowledge or skills in the subject. Demonstrates factual knowledge of subject matter and the pedagogy it requires by sometimes engaging students in learning experiences around complex knowledge and skills in the subject. Demonstrates sound knowledge and understanding of the subject matter and the pedagogy it requires by consistently engaging students in learning experiences that enable them to acquire complex knowledge and skills in the subject. Demonstrates expertise in subject matter and the pedagogy it requires by engaging all students in learning experiences that enable them to synthesize complex knowledge and skills in the subject. Is able to model this element. I-A-2. Child and Adolescent Development Demonstrates little or no knowledge of developmental levels of students this age or differences in how students learn. Typically develops one learning experience for all students that does not enable most students to meet the intended outcomes. Demonstrates knowledge of developmental levels of students this age but does not identify developmental levels and ways of learning among the students in the class and/or develops learning experiences that enable some, but not all, students to move toward meeting intended outcomes. Demonstrates knowledge of the developmental levels of students in the classroom and the different ways these students learn by providing differentiated learning experiences that enable all students to progress toward meeting intended outcomes. Demonstrates expert knowledge of the developmental levels of the teacher’s own students and students in this grade or subject more generally and uses this knowledge to differentiate and expand learning experiences that enable all students to make significant progress toward meeting stated outcomes. Is able to model this element. Standard I: Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment. The teacher promotes the learning and growth of all students by providing high-quality and coherent instruction, designing and administering authentic and meaningful student assessments, analyzing student performance and growth data, using this data to improve instruction, providing students with constructive feedback on an ongoing basis, and continuously refining learning objectives. Indicator I-A.Curriculum and Planning: Knows the subject matter well, has a good grasp of child development and how students learn, and designs effective and rigorous standards-based units of instruction consisting of well-structured lessons with measurable outcomes.

6. Goal Expectations Possible Ratings: No progress Some progress Significant Progress Met Goal Exceeded Goal A good faith effort = at least “some progress” No evidence of reasonable effort = “no progress”

7. Rubric Review Unsatisfactory Inappropriate, inadequate, none, little, few, rare Needs Improvement Limited, occasional, some, inconsistent Proficient Consistent, appropriate, thorough, effective, regular Exemplary Successful, established, all or always, engaging others (students or colleagues), modeling for others

8. Summative Evaluation (Teachers in Y1 to Y3, PTS teachers on Directed Growth Plans, PTS Teacher who received a Formative Evaluation last year) Artifacts must be submitted between May 1 st and May 15 th An Artifact Cover Sheet for each artifact Maximum of 18 artifacts to cover your SMART goals and the 16 indicators ONE Educator Collection of Evidence form

9. Formative Evaluation – What’s Different? Check in regarding progress toward summative evaluation Low stakes Less paperwork

10. Formative Evaluation (PTS Teachers in Year 1 of 2 year plan) Artifacts due between May 15 th and May 22 nd ALL artifacts must be labeled at the top of the first page indicating the Standard(s) & Indicator(s) to which it aligns Maximum of 14 artifacts Optional Artifact Cover Sheet Optional Formative Evaluation Evidence Log ONE Educator Collection of Evidence form

11. Preparing Artifacts Examples of Artifacts summary sheet Samples on our website DESE training on gathering evidence http://www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/te achers/

12. Rating Guidelines To be eligible for proficient or higher rating… For Formative Evaluation Evidence of at least “some progress” toward each goal Evidence for at least one indicator under each standard Evidence for at least 8 indicators overall For Summative Evaluation Evidence of at least “some progress” toward each goal Evidence for each indicator

13. Further Supports Work time today and on 4/15 during district faculty meeting time Individual consultation with your evaluator Exemplars on the district website This Powerpoint with facilitator notes on district website

14. Questions?