Overview of Educator Effectiveness

Overview of Educator Effectiveness

SB 191: CONCERNING ENSURING QUALITY INSTRUCTION THROUGH EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS (EQUITEE).
A system to evaluate the effectiveness of licensed personnel is crucial to improving the quality of education in this state and declares that such a system shall be applicable to all licensed personnel in the school districts and boards of cooperative services throughout the state. The purpose of the evaluation shall be to: serve as a basis for the improvement of instruction; enhance the implementation of programs of curriculum; serve as a measurement of the professional growth and development of licensed personnel; evaluate the level of performance based on the effectiveness of licensed personnel, and provide a bases for making decisions in the areas of hiring, compensation, promotion, assignment, professional development, earning and retaining nonprobationary status, dismissal, and nonrenewal of contract.

Requirements State law requirements:
Conduct performance evaluations for all teachers and principals at least once each school year. Base at least half of each teacher’s and principal’s evaluation on multiple measures of students’ academic growth (CSAP, as appropriate, plus other growth data). Requires all teachers and principals in one of the performance standards, “highly effective”, “effective”, “partially effective”, or “ineffective”.

Requirements State law requirements:
Award non-probationary status to teachers with three consecutive years of “effective” performance and remove it for those who are not “effective” for two consecutive years. Consider factors such as student mobility and the numbers of students with disabilities or at risk of failing school. Require mutual consent of teachers and principals to teacher assignments. Factor in teacher effectiveness before seniority when considering district-level layoffs.

Requirements Guided by state law, the Council’s work focused on:
Defining teacher effectiveness and principal effectiveness. Defining Quality Standards and elements for teachers and principals. Establishing performance standards and guidelines for assigning educators to them. Developing guidelines to districts for a fair, rigorous and transparent system to evaluate teachers and principals. Recommending state policy changes to prepare, evaluate and support teachers and principals. Recommending guidelines for local processes that enables non-probationary teachers to appeal their second consecutive “ineffective” rating. Recommending guidelines for state implementation, monitoring and support to districts. Conducting a study of anticipated cost to districts of new educator evaluation systems.

Guiding Principles/Themes
Data should inform decisions, but human judgment will always be an essential component of evaluations. The implementation and evaluation of the system must embody continuous improvement. The purpose of the system is to provide meaningful and credible feedback that improves performance. The development and implementation of educator evaluation systems must continue to involve all stakeholders in a collaborative process. Educator evaluations must take place within a larger system that is aligned and supportive.

State Policy and Practice

Policy & Practice Integration: How it all fits together:
Accountability & improvement is SB 163 High Expectations is SB 212 EE- is SB 191

Educator Effectiveness Policy Alignment
Effectiveness Management Increase and support the effectiveness of all educators Talent Pipeline Attract and develop the best educators Educator Effectiveness Policy Alignment Data and Results Recruitment & Hiring Practices Educator Preparation Licensure Induction Professional Dev. Evaluation Retention & Recog . Teacher equity Vision: Effective educators for every student and effective leaders for every school

Colorado Content Collaboratives Technical Steering Committee
Cohort I & II: Flow Chart of Work Pilot then peer review Colorado Content Collaboratives Bank National Researchers Technical Steering Committee Future Work I: Jan-Mar 2012 II: Jun-Aug 2012 I: Feb-May 2012 II: July-Nov 2012 I &II: Feb-Dec 2012 I & II: Aug Aug 2014 I: Aug 2013 II: Aug 2014 Researchers gather existing fair, valid and reliable measures for Consideration. Collaboratives use protocol to review researchers’ measures for feasibility, utility and gaps. Prepare to fill gaps. Provide recommendations to Technical Steering Committee. Technical Steering Committee creates frameworks and design principles for collaboratives to use in reviewing and creating measures. Committee reviews recommendations of collaboratives. Piloting and peer review of measures. Aug 2012-Aug 2013: Cohort I piloting & peer review January 2013-Aug 2014: Cohort II piloting & peer review Measures placed in online Education Effectiveness Resource Bank for voluntary use.

Assurances Collected annually, beginning July 2013
Districts will provide assurance that they are implementing the state model system or a locally- developed system that meets all statutory and regulatory requirements.

Components of an Effective Evaluation System
1. Evaluation System Goals 2. Stakeholder Investment and Communication Plan 3. Selecting Measures 4. System Structure 5. Evaluators 6. Data Integrity 7. Using Results & Professional Development 8. System Evaluation

Required Components of Evaluation Systems
Purposes of evaluation system Positions to be evaluated and title of evaluator(s) Standards and criteria for evaluating licensed personnel Frequency and duration of evaluations Process for validating the evaluation methods used System using Principal Professional Performance Plans Note: these components must be included in both the state model system and all locally-developed evaluation systems.

Teacher Evaluation Framework
How do I prepare? What about non-TCAP subjects? Who can evaluate? When does the new system go into affect? How do we shift to a culture of reflective thinking and collaborative practice? What multiple measures can be used?

Definition of Teacher Effectiveness 2-23
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.

Teacher Quality Standards
I: Teachers demonstrate mastery of and pedagogical expertise in the content they teach. The elementary teacher is an expert in literacy and mathematics and is knowledgeable in all other content that he or she teaches. The secondary teacher has knowledge of literacy and mathematics and is an expert in his or her content endorsement area(s). II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive, and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students. III: Teachers plan and deliver effective instruction and create an environment that facilitates learning for their students. IV: Teachers reflect on their practice. V:Teachers demonstrate leadership. VI: Teachers take responsibility for student academic growth.

Principal and Teacher Performance Evaluation Ratings After CDE develops the state model system and an evaluation scoring matrix, the State Board will adopt definitions for each rating. Highly Effective Effective Partially Effective Ineffective

Teacher Evaluations 50% Student Academic Growth
Evaluated using: (1) observations; and (2) at least one of the following: student perception measures, peer feedback, parent/guardian feedback, or review of lesson plans/student work samples. May include additional measures. 50% Professional Practice 50% Student Academic Growth Evaluated using: (1) a measure of individually-attributed growth, (2) a measure of collectively-attributed growth; (3) when available, statewide summative assessments; and (4) where applicable, Colorado Growth Model data. Quality Standards I-V: I. Mastery of content II. Establish learning environment III. Facilitate learning IV. Reflect on practice V. Demonstrate leadership Quality Standard VI: VI. Responsibility for student academic growth

Components of the Teacher Rubric
Quality Standard Components of the Teacher Rubric Rating levels Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students. Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient (Meets State Standard) Accomplished Exemplary Element c: Teachers engage students as individuals with unique interests and strengths. The teacher: Has low-level expectations for some students. Uses data for instructional decision making on an infrequent basis. Monitors students for level of participation. Encourages students to share their interests. Challenges students to expand and enhance their learning. . . . and Asks difficult questions of all students. Scaffolds questions. Gives wait time equitably. Flexibly Groups students. Assumes that all students will meet or exceed expectations. Modifies instruction to assure that all students: Understand what is expected of them. Are challenged to meet or exceed expectations. Participate in classroom activities with a high level of frequency and quality. Take responsibility for their work. Have the opportunity to build on their interests and strengths. Students: Actively participate in all classroom activities. Monitor their own performance for frequency of participation. Seek opportunities to respond to difficult questions. Select challenging content and activities when given the choice in order to stretch their skills and abilities. Encourage fellow students to participate and challenge themselves. Element that aligns with standard Professional Practices

Evidence provided by artifact Teacher comment section
Element e: Teachers provide proactive, clear and constructive feedback to families about student progress and work collaboratively with the families and significant adults in the lives of their students. The teacher: Collaborates with others infrequently or only as required in order to address identify, understand and address student learning needs. Establishes a classroom environment that is not inviting to families and significant adults in the lives of students. Maintains appropriate and respectful relationships with students and their significant adults. Routinely communicates with parents to better understand student needs. Is sensitive to the diverse family structures in all communication to/about the student. . . . and Provides tools, materials, and guidance significant adults to help students meet education goals. Maximizes the home/school connection by coordinating information from significant adults with colleagues who provide student services. Seeks out services, strategies and resources to meet the diverse needs of students. Students: Take advantage of support services made available to them. In order to deepen their skills and knowledge. Seek out assistance such as tutoring, computer software, advice from specialists, and guidance from fellow students to address learning issues. Examples of Artifacts that may be used: Evidence of Performance: Evidence of performance provided by artifact: Student Achievement Data Student feedback Parent feedback Lesson plans/units of study Feedback from walkthrough observations Instructional activities schedules Student journals/learning logs Student work Anecdotal records Formative and summative assessments of student work Evidence provided by artifact Evaluator comments Examples of Artifacts Teacher comment section Comments (Required for Ratings of “Not Evident” or “Partially Proficient” and recommended for all rating levels). Please indicate the element for which the comment applies if not for the standard as a whole. Comments of person being evaluated. (Optional)

(Meets State Standard)
Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students. Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient (Meets State Standard) Accomplished Exemplary Element d: Teachers adapt their teaching for the benefit of all students, including those with special needs across a range of ability levels. The teacher does not: Design instruction to address individual student learning needs. Collaborate with specialists, colleagues and parents to provide understand student needs. The teacher: Designs instruction to address specific learning needs of some groups of students (e.g., ELL, LD, special needs, gifted and talented). Challenges all students with the same frequency and depth and monitors the quality of participation. . . . and Solicits input from parents, colleagues, specialists, and others to understand students’ learning needs. Implements individualized plans for the content and delivery of instruction. Uses multiple strategies to teach and assess students. Adapts instructional strategies to meet student needs. Students: Actively participate in all classroom activities. Articulate an awareness of their learning needs. Reflect about their learning and make adjustments to accommodate their learning needs. Seek out ways to cope with learning differences and apply coping skills to classroom situations. Share coping strategies and with fellow students. 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.

Measures- QS I-V, #11-21 Measures of Teacher Professional Practice
Common Statewide Technical guidelines for valid and reliable measures Quality Standard I-V equal to no more than 50% Multiple measurement tools used to evaluate performance Observation by trained evaluator District Flexibility In collaboration with local teachers, districts select measures Increase frequency and/or variety of measures collected for novice, ineffective or other categories of teachers

Measuring Student Growth-QS VI #11-21
Measures of Teacher Student Growth Common Statewide Technical guidelines for valid and reliable measures Multiple measures of student growth Include statewide summative assessment data where available District Flexibility In collaboration with representatives of local teacher association, districts select measures Increase frequency and/or variety of measures collected for novice, ineffective or other categories of teachers Assign teachers to categories based upon quality of available measures Encouraged to attribute student growth to teams of educators

Measures of Growth Categories-#12-13
Category A (state criterion-referenced/standards-based) data: CDE-certified student-level assessment data (e.g. CSAP) that is of a technical quality (standardized, external and objective) that allows student growth to be calculated for personnel in specific grades and subjects using the Colorado Growth Model, and justifies its use as a major portion of the educator’s student growth score effectiveness evaluation. Category B: Student-level assessment data collected from district-created or vendor-created assessment tools that are comparable across classrooms with demonstrated rigor which meet CDE guidelines for technical quality. This category may also include assessments such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the SAT and ACT, and other norm-referenced tests. These measures may or may not allow for the calculation of student “growth.” Category C : Student-level assessment data using unique teacher or school-based measures collected at the school or individual classroom level, which do not meet the higher technical requirements of Category A and Category B data but which do comply with minimal technical guidelines developed by CDE. These measures may be highly valid as measures of student progress/learning against standards, but will not technically allow for the calculation of student “growth.”

[SAMPLE] SUMMARY RATING SHEET FOR TEACHERS
1 2 3 4 5 Overall Rating for Standard IV Standard V: Teachers demonstrate leadership A: Teachers demonstrate leadership in their schools B: Teachers lead the teaching profession C: Teachers advocate for schools and students D: Teachers demonstrate high ethical standards Overall Rating for Standard V Standard VI: Teachers take responsibility for student growth A: Teachers pursue high levels of student growth in academic achievement B: Teachers pursue high levels of student growth in the skills necessary for postsecondary life, including democratic and civic participation C: Teachers use evidence to evaluate their practice and continually improve attainment of student growth Overall Rating for Standard VI

District decides measures
Standards I-V: use observation plus at least one other method Standard VI: select multiple measures appropriate to teaching assignment District decides weights Each Standard I-V determines at least 7.5% of total score; districts may weight priority standards more Standard VI must count for at least 50% of total score District decides data collection procedures Standards I-V: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence Standard VI: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence District decides how to analyze data Standards I-V : Convert data to scale scores Standard VI: Determine score and convert to student growth rating District decides how to aggregate measures Aggregate professional practice scores into a single score on Quality Standards I-V Aggregate student growth measures into a single score on Quality Standard VI District uses State Scoring Framework Matrix to determine Performance Standard

School district personnel councils (1338)
Current law school district personnel evaluation councils require every school district to have an advisory school district personnel evaluation council. Since SB 191 requires districts to implement the evaluation system created by the State Council for Educator Effectiveness, this means that your district will need a functioning council to do this work. Many district combined this council with other existing committees or this council existed on paper but was not functioning. Implementation of 191 can be done using your 1338 or school personnel council, but it may require an expansion of that council’s roles/charges beyond the current law. Or, you may have a separate council that will deal with implementation of 191, but your council still should exist and meet the requirements of the law stated below. At a minimum, as appointed by the BOE, said council shall consist of: One teacher; One administrator; One principal from the school district; One parent with a child in the school district; and One resident of the district who does not have a child in the school district The council may be composed of any other school district committee having proper membership (i.e. District Accountability Committee, Evaluation Task Force, Professional Concerns…). Duties of the council: Shall consult with local board as to fairness, effectiveness, credibility, and professional quality of the licensed personnel performance evaluation system. Shall conduct a continuous evaluation of the system

Principal Evaluation Framework
How do I evaluate all teachers starting in 2012? What evidence should we be looking for? Can teachers be a partner in the evaluation process? What training is available? Is there an online system for gathering data?

Definition of Principal Effectiveness-24-40
Effective Principals in the state of Colorado are responsible for the collective success of their schools, including the learning, growth and achievement of both students and staff. As schools’ primary instructional leaders, effective Principals enable critical discourse and data- driven reflection about curriculum, assessment, instruction, and student progress, and create structures to facilitate improvement. Effective Principals are adept at creating systems that maximize the utilization of resources and human capital, foster collaboration, and facilitate constructive change. By creating a common vision and articulating shared values, effective Principals lead and manage their schools in a manner that supports schools’ ability to promote equity and to continually improve their positive impact on students and families.

Principal Quality Standards
I: Principals demonstrate strategic leadership. II: Principals demonstrate instructional leadership. III: Principals demonstrate school culture and equity leadership. IV: Principals demonstrate human resource leadership. V: Principals demonstrate managerial leadership. VI: Principals demonstrate external development leadership. VII: Principals demonstrate leadership around student academic growth.

Principal Evaluations
50% Professional Practice 50% Student Academic Growth Evaluated using: (1) teacher input; (2) teacher evaluation ratings; and (3) teacher improvement. Evaluated using: (1) SPF data; and (2) at least one other measure of student academic growth. Quality Standard VII: VII. Leadership around student academic growth Quality Standards I-VI: I. Strategic leadership II. Instructional leadership III. School culture/equity leadership IV. HR leadership V. Managerial leadership VI. External development leadership

Components of the Principal Rubric
Standard I: Principals Demonstrate Strategic Leadership Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient Accomplished Exemplary School Vision, Mission and Strategic Goals: Principals develop the vision, mission, values, beliefs and goals of the school, collaboratively determining the processes used to establish these attributes, and facilitating their integration into the life of the school community. Vision, mission, values, beliefs and goals of school are: Not evident or familiar to staff and other stakeholders. Developed by school administrators working in relative isolation. Not integrated into the life of the school community. Vision, mission, values, beliefs and strategic goals of school are: Developed through a collaborative process with staff and other stakeholder groups. Publicly available at the school. Part of routine school communications with staff and other stakeholders. Routinely updated. . . . and Establishes strategic goals for students and staff that are: Focused on student achievement. Based on the analysis of multiple sources of information. Aligned with district priorities. Measurable. Rigorous. Concrete. Staff incorporate identified strategies in their instructional plans to assure that students achieve expected outcomes. Staff and other stakeholders take leadership roles in updating the school’s vision, mission, and strategic goals. Staff members assume responsibility for implementing the school’s vision, mission, and strategic goals. Quality Standard Rating levels Element of the standard Professional Practices

Rubric Rating Levels Standard Not Evident Partially Proficient
Accomplished Exemplary Element Professional Practices 1 Does not meet state standard but is making progress toward meeting standard. Does not meet state standard and is not making progress toward meeting standard. 2 Meets state standard. 3 Exceeds state standard. 4 Significantly exceeds state standard.

Measures Measures of Principal Leadership Practice (QS I-VI)
Common Statewide Technical guidelines for valid and reliable measures Multiple measurement tools used to evaluate performance Teacher/staff perception data # and % of teachers within each performance standard District Flexibility In collaboration with local principals, districts select measures of practice District accountability committees recommend measurement tools Encouraged to use student, and parent/guardian perception data

Analysis of Student Growth
Measures of Student Growth for Principal Evaluation (QS VII) Common Statewide Technical guidelines for valid and reliable measures Multiple measures of student growth Include School Performance Framework District Flexibility In collaboration with local principals, districts select measures May vary weight that individual component of School Performance Framework (SPF) is given Encouraged to use additional measures of student achievement and outcomes related to post-secondary and workforce readiness

Professional Performance Plan:
A tool that facilitates goal-setting of standards Shall outline annual goals Shall include explicit reference to ways principal shall address % of effective teachers in plan and UIP Shall include goals addressing school climate and teaching and learning conditions with reference to TELL survey, CADI or SST review Shall be accountable for progress against goals in PPP

District decides measures
Standards I-V: use observation plus at least one other method Standard VI: select multiple measures appropriate to teaching assignment District decides weights Each Standard I-V determines at least 7.5% of total score; districts may weight priority standards more Standard VI must count for at least 50% of total score District decides data collection procedures Standards I-V: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence Standard VI: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence District decides how to analyze data Standards I-V : Convert data to scale scores Standard VI: Determine score and convert to student growth rating District decides how to aggregate measures Aggregate professional practice scores into a single score on Quality Standards I-V Aggregate student growth measures into a single score on Quality Standard VI District uses State Scoring Framework Matrix to determine Performance Standard

Pilots and Integration Districts

Pilot and Rollout Value of the pilot period
CDE selected 15 pilot districts based on stages of readiness, current evaluation efforts, geographic/size. Performance evaluation results shall not impact the attainment or loss of non- probationary status for those who are rated in pilot and rollout period. Value of the pilot period Learn from districts exploring state model system Assess value of using student growth objectives Impact of new evaluation systems on professional practice and collaboration Impact of new evaluation systems on student outcomes Refine evaluation tools to enhance credibility Determine validity and reliability of evaluation tools Council will recommend improvements based upon results of the pilot period

Pilots Districts PILOT SITES: These districts will pilot the state model evaluation system starting with the Principal Evaluation protocols during the school year. CDE Pilot CLF Integration Piloting the State Model System 1 Moffat RE-1 Centennial 2 South Routt San Juan BOCES Archuleta 3 St. Vrain Bayfield 4 Jefferson Dolores RE-2 5 Sterling Dolores RE-4 6 Wray Durango 7 Platte Canyon Ignacio 8 Miami-Yoder Mancos 9 Eads (Sometimes communicated as Kiowa) Montezuma Cortez 10 Crowley Silverton 11 Custer Thompson 12 Salida Eagle 13 Mountain Valley 14 Center 15 Del-Norte

Pilot requirements: Execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between your district and CDE regarding your participation in the pilot and field tests. Include, at a minimum, schools within the district from each level (elementary, middle and secondary) in the pilot. District-wide participation is encouraged, but we acknowledge that this may be difficult for larger districts. Participate in training for the principal evaluation provided by CDE during September 2011 (approximately 1.5 days) and for teacher evaluation provided during late spring of 2012 (approximately 1.5 days) as well as some interim training during the initial pilot years. Evaluate principals during the academic year using the state model system. Provide feedback on the teacher evaluation instruments and system during the academic year. Provide copies of all evaluation materials and other data identified in the MOU to CDE.

Pilot requirements continued:
Participate in interviews and focus groups designed to determine needed changes and to gather ideas for improvement of the system from you and your staff members. Implement both the principal and teacher evaluation processes in your district during the and school years, and provide information and feedback requested by CDE. Attend and actively participate in meetings conducted by CDE related to the development process. Complete a district review including surveys of teachers, principals and district leaders in August 2011, August 2012, August 2013, August 2014, August 2015 and August 2016. Collect and report data to CDE about the pilot process and selected outcomes for a 5-year period from Please note that much of the information collected during the , , and academic years will be data that districts will be required to report to CDE as part of the new educator effectiveness law. Provide student achievement data that is linked to teachers beginning in the 2012/13 school year.

Year One 2011-12 Development and Beta Testing
CDE ACTIVITIES Develop State Model Systems for teachers and principals Beta-testing of rubrics and tools Develop technical guidelines Provide differentiated support for districts Populateand launch online Resource Bank Develop state data collection and monitoring system Year Two Pilot and Rollout Support pilot districts through resources, training, tools, etc. Convene pilot districts to share lessons learned Analyze pilot district data and make adjustments as needed Provide targeted support to non-pilot districts Continue to populate Resource Bank Develop evalution system for other licensed personnel Year Three Pilot and Rollout Begin statewide rollout of teacher/principal systems Start pilot of evaluation system for other licensed personnel Support pilot districts through resources, trainings, tools, etc. Analyze pilot data and make adjustments as needed Year Four Full Statewide Implementation Finalize statewide implementation of teacher/principal systems Begin statewide rollout of other licensed personnel system Continue support to districts Analyze data and make adjustments as needed Make final Council recommendations to SBE

Questions/Resources www.coloradoea.org Tqsource.org

Overview of Educator Effectiveness

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Overview of Educator Effectiveness"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Overview of Educator Effectiveness

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Overview of Educator Effectiveness"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback