1. Materials for today’s session  Shared website – Wiki  http://pugetsoundesdtpep-rig.wikispaces.com/ http://pugetsoundesdtpep-rig.wikispaces.com/  Wireless Access  Open Air  password: summer10

2. PSESD Teacher Principal Evaluation Project Regional Implementation Grants December 16, 2011 8:30 am – 2:30 pm

3. AGENDA  Welcome and Data Gathering  Updates  Instructional Coherence  Webinar Information  Framework Alignment  Principal Framework  Develop Common Messages and Action Plans  Debrief and Next Steps

4. The following items have been or will be determined by the state:  Definitions of the four tiers  Cut score for summative evaluation determined between Unsatisfactory & Basic  Summative evaluation statements will be determined

5. Group Norms and Agreements  Be present  Participate actively:  Ask questions  Share connections  Listen  Work together as a community  Invite and welcome contributions of every member

6. Learning Targets  Hear updates from the TPEP Steering Committee  Understand the importance of having a clearly articulated instructional framework  Understand the key elements of the three instructional frameworks and AWSP’s leadership framework  Plan the next steps for your district

7. Grant Timeline Explore and align criteria Teacher and Principal Review and select frameworks 5 Dimensions (CEL) Danielson Marzano Rubrics (From frameworks) Determine evidence Observations Plans Artifacts Reflections Student Work Other Summative Model Progression Holistic Formula Raw Score Hybrid Conditions Preparation PD Plan Communication Tools and forms MOU Participants

8. The following items have been or will be determined by the state:  Teacher criteria definitions  Principal criteria definitions and rubrics being “tweaked” by work group led by AWSP  Labels of the four tiers determined for both teachers and principals: Unsatisfactory, Basic, Proficient and Distinguished

9. 20% of Certified Staff =  Certificated staff includes provisional status  Excludes ESAs (Counselors, OT, PT, etc.,)  MINUS those on a plan of improvement  PLUS principals and assistant principals who complete evaluations *Consider random selection for pilot participation and representation from each school

10. Updates  Evaluation Model Matrix: Decisions and Input Evaluation Model Matrix: Decisions and Input

11. Instructional Coherence Article  Issue: many improvement initiatives become disconnected  Study of Chicago schools that worked to bring coherence  Strong program coherence evident when three major conditions prevail

12. Strong Program Coherence  Condition One  A common instructional framework guides curriculum, teaching, assessment, and learning climate.  This framework combines specific expectations for student learning with specific strategies and materials to guide teaching and assessment.

13. Strong Program Coherence  Condition Two  Staff working conditions support implementation of the framework.

14. Strong Program Coherence  Condition Three  The school allocates resources such as materials, time, and staff assignments to advance the school’s common instructional framework and to avoid diffuse, scattered improvement efforts.

15. Strong Program Coherence  Condition Three  The school allocates resources such as materials, time, and staff assignments to advance the school’s common instructional framework and to avoid diffuse, scattered improvement efforts.

16. Process 1.Go to the group that most closely matches your job role. 2.Form a group with two or three other people. 3.Individually read and identify passages (and a couple of back-ups) that you feel may have important implications for your work. 4.Discuss using Three Levels of Text protocol

17. Three Levels of Text Protocol 1. Individually read and identify passages (and a couple of back-ups) that you feel may have important implications for your work. 2. Identify a facilitator/timekeeper 3. A Round consists of: One person using up to 3 minutes to: LEVEL 1: Read aloud the passage she/he has selected LEVEL 2: Say what she/he thinks about the passage (interpretation, connection to past experiences, etc.) LEVEL 3: Say what she/he sees as the implications for his/her work. The group responds (for a TOTAL of up to 2 minutes ) to what has been said. 4. After all rounds have been completed, debrief the process

18. BREAK

19. While there are many formative and summative reasons to measure teacher and principal effectiveness, we believe the ultimate goal of all measurement should be.....to improve teaching and student learning.

20. Webinars and viewing protocols  http://tpep-wa.org/instructional-framework-alignment- resources/ http://tpep-wa.org/instructional-framework-alignment- resources/  Guiding Questions Guiding Questions

21. Exploring the Instructional Frameworks Crosswalk Document  Background  FAQs  Criteria and Definitions  Architecture of the Three Frameworks  Criterion 1: EXPECTATIONS

22. Criterion 1: Expectations  Review pg. 5 from the crosswalk  Notice organization, language, layout, etc.  Individually, read framework and rubric excerpt and highlight where “high expectations” is found  As a team, discuss the following questions:  Compare and contrast the documents’ language, layout, organization.  Is the document understandable and easy to use?  How easily could it be communicated to stakeholders  What else stands out about the 3 Frameworks?

23. Creating a Culture Ensuring School Safety Planning with Data Aligning Curriculum Improving Instruction Managing Resources Engaging Communities Closing the Gap PRINCIPAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

26. Responsibilities Qualities  Create and support a learning culture  Develop and monitor a Safe Schools Plan  Analyze and use data to improve student learning  Assist teachers in aligning curriculum to instruction and assessment  Develop and evaluate teaching and support staff  Manage Resources  Engage the community in students’ learning  Speak and write with clarity  Act in an ethical manner  Be organized & forward thinking  Build relationships with staff & students  Follow through  Judgment  Sensitivity  Teamwork  Understanding own strengths & weaknesses  Situational Awareness

27. Centering instruction on high expectations Demonstrating effective teaching practices Individualizing instruction Subject matter knowledge Fostering a safe, positive learning environment. Use student data to modify instruction Communicating with parents and school community. Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices TEACHER EVALUATION CRITERIA

28. Creating a Culture Ensuring School Safety Planning with Data Aligning Curriculum Improving Instruction Managing Resources Engaging Communities Closing the Gap PRINCIPAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

29. Teachers: “fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment.” “collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning.” Principals: “creating a school culture that promotes the ongoing improvement of learning and teaching for students and staff.” “providing for school safety.”

30. Teachers: “using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning.” Principals: “development, implementation, and evaluation of a data-driven plan for increasing student achievement, including the use of multiple student data elements.”

31. Teachers: “providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum.” Principals: “assisting instructional staff with alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessment with state and local district learning goals.”

32. Teachers: Implementing the instructional framework Principals: “monitoring, assisting, and evaluating effective instruction and assessment practices.”

33. Teachers: “communicating and collaborating with parents and school community.” Principals: “partnering with the school community to promote learning.”

36. Responsibility 1 Creating and sustaining a learning culture Skills and Knowledge Evidence and Measures SupportAuthority

38. Lunch

39. Consensus Decision Making Models (November 15, 2011 choose one) Group agreement scale Use this method two or three times to gauge group support. Write statement, concept or action so that all members can see it. Make the following voting indicators for each member of the group. (October 18, 2011) 3=total agreement 2=support idea with reservations 1=can't support ?=Need to have more questions answered

40. Team Planning…  What are your next steps?  What support do you need?  What are the key messages from today?  What is your communication plan?  Other?

41. Work group timeline

42. Next Steps: 1/12/11  Analyzing Frameworks  February 17 th : cancel workgroup session

43. A new evaluation system should be a model for professional growth, supporting collaboration between teachers and principals in pursuit of stronger teaching and leadership.