1. The Delaware Performance Appraisal System II for Teachers August 2013 Training Module 4 Component Five – Student Improvement

2. Training Overview Four separate modules: Module 1: Introduction to DPAS II Module 2: DPAS II and the Delaware Framework Module 3: The DPAS II Process Module 4: Component Five – Student Improvement DRAFT

3. Materials for this module Power Point Presentation DPAS II Guide for Teachers DPAS II Forms for Teachers http://www.doe.k12.de.us/cas/dpasii/default.shtmlhttp://www.doe.k12.de.us/cas/dpasii/default.shtml. DRAFT

4. Component Five – Student Improvement Philosophy/Purpose DRAFT

5. Key Factors of Component Five Three Educator Groups Group I Group II Group III Three Measures Measure A Measure B Measure C DRAFT

6. Educator Groups and Measures Group I Educators 50% Measure A and 50% Measure B Group II Educators 50% Measure B and 50% Measure C Group III Educators 100% Measure C DRAFT

7. Component Five Ratings Exceeds Satisfactory Unsatisfactory DRAFT

8. Overall Performance Levels Overall Summative Ratings Highly Effective Effective Needs Improvement Ineffective DRAFT

9. Summative Ratings Chart Total # of Satisfactory ratings in Components I-IV Component VSummative Rating 4/4ExceedsHighly Effective 4/4SatisfactoryEffective 4/4UnsatisfactoryNeeds Improvement 3/4ExceedsHighly Effective 3/4SatisfactoryEffective 3/4UnsatisfactoryNeeds Improvement 2/4ExceedsEffective 2/4SatisfactoryEffective 2/4UnsatisfactoryIneffective 1/4ExceedsNeeds Improvement 1/4SatisfactoryNeeds Improvement 1/4UnsatisfactoryIneffective 0/4ExceedsNeeds Improvement 0/4SatisfactoryNeeds Improvement 0/4UnsatisfactoryIneffective DRAFT

10. Measure A Growth Targets Student growth targets are determined based on the average growth made by similar students over the past three years of state testing data. Similar students are defined as those who had: Similar fall DCAS instructional scores; and The same grade and subject; and The same SWD, ELL, SWD/ELL designation Students have two opportunities in the spring to take the DCAS. The DCAS vendor, American Institutes for Research (AIR), uses the higher of the two scores for those students. *Student Growth Targets will be provided by the DDOE. DRAFT

11. Determination of Growth Measure A Ratings ExceedsSatisfactoryUnsatisfactory (with administrator discretion) Unsatisfactory 65% or more of a teachers DCAS student growth targets are met. 50%-64% of a teachers DCAS student growth targets are met. 35%-49% of a teachers DCAS student growth targets are met (conference between administrator and teacher could provide option to upgrade to a Satisfactory rating). Less than 35% of a teachers DCAS student growth targets are met. Measure B and Measure C Ratings ExceedsSatisfactoryUnsatisfactory The agreed upon exceeds target is met or surpassed. The agreed upon satisfactory target is met or surpassed, but the exceeds target is not met. The agreed upon satisfactory target is not met. DRAFT

12. Measure B and C Growth Targets How will Measure B and Measure C Growth Targets be set? Based on professional conversations between the administrator and educator Agree upon measures used Agree upon a satisfactory target and an exceeds target Growth Targets will not be provided by the DDOE. DRAFT

13. Component Five Process

14. Process Step 1: Self Reflection and Educator Group Selection Step 2: Roster Identification and Measure(s) Selection Step 3: Analysis, Target/Goal Setting, Fall Conference Step 4: Observation(s), Formative Feedback, Spring Conference Step 5: Summative Evaluation DRAFT

15. Step 1: Self Reflection and Educator Group Selection Educator Group is determined Group I, Group II, or Group III www.doe.k12.de.us DRAFT

16. Step 2: Roster Identification and Measures Selection Approval Group I and II educators are required to conduct a Roster Identification Teacher of Record (TOR) must be determined for Group I educators to ensure valid class rosters. Group II teachers will work with their administrators to develop student rosters. Approval of selected Measure(s) Evaluators/Administrators have final approval of measure(s) DRAFT

17. Step 3: Fall Conference Educators can set targets by employing techniques such as: S.M.A.R.T. Goals Specific Measureable Appropriate Realistic Time-bound Educators set targets based on: Analysis of pre-test results School success/improvement plans Professional Goals Standards that a student is expected to master DRAFT

18. Step 4: Spring Conference Educator and evaluator gather evidence of practice and progress toward goals, to include: Student performance data Measures of student learning Observation(s) Professional growth outcomes Any artifact or evidence related to performance Spring Conference DRAFT