1. SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT EDUCATOR EVALUATION PROJECT Presentation to the SLCSD Board of Education May 7, 2013

2. Joint Educator Evaluation Committee  Teachers: Chrissy Paulos, Diane Pulver, Monty Eyink, Dessie Olson  Administrators: Bert Steele, Logan Hall, Peggy Paterson, Dan Bergman  Parents: Melissa Ford, Sherri Hutten, Christopher King, Michelle Tuitupou  Chair: Craig Ruesch  Steering Committee: Patrick Garcia, Susan McFarland, Jo Ellen Shaeffer

3. In Review  June 2012- Report to the Board about the new state-mandated components required in the educator evaluation programs and our intention to adapt our programs to meet the new requirements  July 2012- First meeting held with the Joint Educator Evaluation Committee (JEEC) to set a direction for the work  Agreed to maintain as much of the structure of ECAP and the administrators’ program as possible and to honor the established guiding and operating principles which reflect a commitment to educator support  The JEEC has met monthly to become informed, review the programs and make adaptations consistent with state law and state board policy  May 8, 2013- the JEEC will meet for a final time this year to finalize our recommended pilot plans  2013-2014- The JEEC will continue to meet to address issues and needs that arise as a result of this year’s state pilot and our implementation of the program in our district

4. Educator Evaluation Components  Orientation  Mentor Provided  Professional Growth Plan  Fall Collaborative Conference  Monitoring  Observations  Providing Support  Mid-Year Collaborative Conference  Spring Collaborative Conference  Evaluation With minor differences, the components are essentially the same for teachers and administrators.

5. Orientation  Provided to all educators at the beginning of each school year.  Must be provided prior to beginning the evaluation process  Includes the evaluation process and forms to be used in the program  We hope to make the yearly initial orientation a video presentation to increase consistency throughout the district

6. Mentor Provided  A mentor will be provided to all provisional educators  The mentor shall be a career educator with at least 3 years of successful educational experience who performs substantially the same duties as the provisional educator  Training will be provided to mentors through the STAR program

7. Professional Growth Plan  Professional Growth Plan (PGP) development begins with a review and a self-assessment of the Utah Effective Teaching or Utah Educational Leadership Standards  Goals are selected to address areas needing improvement  Plans for goal accomplishment are established  Professional learning resources are identified  We are working to make the PGP an on-line process

8. Fall Collaborative Conference  Scheduled early in the school year (months 2-3)  Educator meets with his/her supervisor  The Professional Growth Plan (self-assessment, goals, and professional learning plan) is discussed  Other items such as disclosure documents, instructional time lines, pacing maps, documentation of student progress, school and district goals, and agreements regarding formal observations are reviewed

9. Monitoring  The supervisor observes and collects information from a variety of sources, such as walk-throughs, informal classroom observations, asking the customers (students, parents, staff members), interacting with the educator, and listening  This information helps inform the Professional Practices portion of the evaluation

10. Observations  Several informal observations will be conducted throughout the year with all educators  Provisional Teachers will be formally observed a minimum of two times  Career Teachers in the summative year of their three-year evaluation cycle will be formally observed at least once

11. Providing Support  Supervisor will provide assistance to educators needing additional support to increase effectiveness  Step 1- Collaborative Intervention (informal), supervisor works with the educator  Step 2 (if needed)- Performance Assistance (more formal), other support personnel, including the association, are called upon for added support  Step 3 (if needed)- Remediation (formal), well-defined high stakes process to help correct unresolved deficiencies This process will be reviewed by the JEEC during 2013-2014 and revised if needed.

12. Mid-Year Collaborative Conference  Supervisor meets with all educators  Scheduled mid-year to review student data and progress on the Professional Growth Plan and goals  Provisional educators are also evaluated as part of this conference to comply with the requirement to evaluate provisional educators two times during the year

13. Spring Collaborative Conference  Professional Growth Plan and goal progress are reviewed  A “Data Source,” in its current format, will no longer be required. Data sources (i.e. documents/artifacts) may be submitted as evidence of effective practice.  Record of Professional Development and Learning Activities reviewed  Evaluation Report and Decision Summary forms are discussed and signed

14. Evaluation  Evaluation components are reviewed and discussed  Observed Professional Practices: related to standards  Stakeholder Input: student surveys yearly, parent surveys every year or every third year (plus teacher surveys for administrators)  Student Growth Data: Student Growth Percentiles for tested subjects/grades, Student Learning Objectives for non-tested subjects/grades (2014-15)  Annual Effectiveness and Decision Summary forms are reviewed and signed  Educator receives one of four rating designations:  Not Effective  Minimally Effective or Emerging Effective (option for provisional educators)  Effective  Highly Effective

15. USOE Model Evaluation System TING OBSERVATIONS CONFERENCES DOCUMENTS & ARTIFACTS OTHER DATA PROFESSIONAL GROWTH PLAN SELF ASSESSMENT PERFORMANCE GOALS PROFESSIONAL LEARNING PLAN AND OTHER DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS SUPERVISOR EVALUATION STUDENT GROWTH & LEARNING STAKEHOLDER INPUT, (PARENTS, TEACHERS, AND STUDENTS) PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES FOR HIGH QUALITY INSTRUCTION & LEADERSHIP % % % + + 10100 %%

16. Annual Educator Evaluation Overview Evaluation ComponentCareer Educator Provisional Educator OrientationXX Mentor Provided X Professional Growth PlanXX Fall Collaborative ConferenceXX Monitoring / Informal ObservationsXX Formal ObservationsXX Providing Additional Supportas needed Mid-Year Collaborative ConferenceXX Spring Collaborative ConferenceXX EvaluationXX

17. Looking Ahead  Scope of the Pilot (Key agenda item for the JEEC meeting tomorrow)  We will discuss things such as how many of the standards to focus on for the pilot year, how stakeholder input will be handled, and what types of protocols we will use for observations, etc.  Our pilot may be impacted by feedback generated by the state pilot. Some of this feedback will not be available until fall  We feel we have a good foundation on which to begin our pilot but some changes will likely occur over the course of the 2013-2014 school year  Unknowns  Observation and Evaluation Protocols (format and platform)  Results of the state pilots (surveys, instruments, protocols)  Next Steps  Create modules for fall teacher and administrator orientation (spring/summer)  Work to create demonstrations of what the descriptors look like in practice  Create training to increase reliability among observers  Guide development and use of stakeholder surveys tailored to SLCSD  Revise intervention piece as needed  Inform revisions of the written agreement, written understanding and board policy  Address concerns identified in the pilot