1. Rhode Island Innovation Evaluation & Support System (RIIESS) for Support Professionals Fall 2013

2. History… RIFTHP worked with labor-management teams from 6 locals (Central Falls, Cranston, Pawtucket, Providence, West Warwick, Woonsocket) Received AFT Innovation Grants and US DE i3 Grant and technical assistance from AFT and National Experts Piloted RIIESS during Gradual Implementation in 2011-2012 Submitted Support Professional Rubrics for approval end of 2013 School Year. Approved for Gradual Implementation for 2013- 2014 School Year for Support Professionals

3. Effective Educator Evaluation- Research Six Best Practices 1)Annual Processes 2)Clear, rigorous expectations 3)Multiple Measures 4)Multiple ratings 5)Regular feedback 6)Significance I3 Innovation Consortium Processes are aligned with the best practices in the TNTP research.

4. 2013-14 Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals The Innovation Consortium has submitted Standard 3 rubrics for support professional groups to RIDE for approval District Evaluation Committees (DECs) will determine whether support professionals will be evaluated using the educator rubric or the appropriate support professional Standard 3 option based on assignment

5. Support Professionals Rubrics Instructional Coaches Library/Media Specialists School Counselors School Nurse Teachers School Psychologists Social Workers Speech/Language Pathologists

6. Support Professionals Rubrics Think about how you have been evaluated in the past What tool was used? What impact did it have on your practice?

7. Components of Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals One Professional Growth Goal At least one Student Learning Objective (SLO) or Student Outcome Objective (SOO) One to two evaluation conferences One in-person assessment of practice Evidence may also be collected in day-to-day interactions Written feedback at least once over the course of the school year

8. Components of Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals One Professional Growth Goal At least one Student Learning Objective (SLO) or Student Outcome Objective (SOO) One to two evaluation conferences (may be 3 if SLO/SOO needs revision One in-person assessment of practice Evidence may also be collected in day-to-day interactions Written feedback is required at least once over the course of the school year

9. Writing a Professional Growth Goal Brainstorm and write down one aspect of your professional practice that you wish to improve on within this academic year. Provide a context/rationale for choosing the goal you have chosen. Consider action steps that will help you achieve your goal.

10. SMART Goal Setting Specific – What is it that I want to achieve? Measurable – How will I know I’ve achieved it? Attainable – Is the goal realistic? Relevant - Why am I doing this? Does the goal address an identified need? Time Bound - When will I achieve this?

11. Goal Setting My goal for today’s session is: “This group will complete this professional development with a better understanding of the RIIESS Support Professional Evaluation Model.”

12. Goal Setting My goal for today’s session is: “All participants will leave this training with a correctly written SMART goal for professional growth or Student Learning Objective that they can use for their evaluation.”

13. Goal Setting My goal for today’s session is: “More than ⅔ of the group will leave with an increased understanding of the RIIC Teacher Evaluation System, based on survey responses.”

14. Professional Goals Using the SMART Goal guidance as a guide, rewrite the following goal: “Communicate better with parents.”

15. Professional Goals Using the SMART Goal guidance sheet as a guide, rewrite the following goal: “Produce a weekly electronic newsletter, with student input, that reaches 90% of my students’ parents.”

16. Components of Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals One Professional Growth Goal At least one Student Learning Objective (SLO) or Student Outcome Objective (SOO) One to two evaluation conferences One in-person assessment of practice Evidence may also be collected in day-to-day interactions Written feedback is required at least once over the course of the school year

17. SLOs & SOOs A Student Learning Objective (SLO) is a long- term academic goal set for groups of students. A Student Outcome Objective (SOO) is a long- term goal that is focused on an outcome that increases access to learning or creates conditions that facilitate learning Both SLOs and SOOs can be set for the school year or an interval of service delivery/instruction appropriate to the assignment

18. SLO or SOO? Look at RIDE’s Decision Tree to determine whether to write and SLO or SOO

19. How to Read the Rubric How to Read the Rubric Standard Component Elements

20. Components of Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals One Professional Growth Goal At least one Student Learning Objective (SLO) or Student Outcome Objective (SOO) One to two evaluation conferences One in-person assessment of practice Evidence may also be collected in day-to-day interactions Written feedback is required at least once over the course of the school year

21. Conference One A pre-conference occurs prior to the assessment of practice Look at Standard 1 – Planning and Preparation and your SLO/SOO What evidence and “considerations” do you feel that you will share with your evaluator during your pre-conference to inform them about your practice?

22. Components of Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals One Professional Growth Goal At least one Student Learning Objective (SLO) or Student Outcome Objective (SOO) One to two evaluation conferences One in-person assessment of practice Evidence may also be collected in day-to-day interactions Written feedback is required at least once over the course of the school year

23. Support Professionals Rubrics Take some time to individually review the Standard 3 rubrics for your discipline Mark the rubric with questions and comments Work with your colleagues to generate evidence into the Evidence Collection Template

24. Components of Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals One Professional Growth Goal At least one Student Learning Objective (SLO) or Student Outcome Objective (SOO) One to two evaluation conferences One in-person assessment of practice Evidence may also be collected in day-to-day interactions Written feedback is required at least once over the course of the school year

25. Standards 2 and 4 “Considerations” Using the “Considerations” document, look closely at each element in Standards 2 & 3 What evidence might your evaluator gather in support of your effectiveness? What evidence might you present in support of your effectiveness? This information will be shared at the “focus group sessions in the comings weeks !!

26. The Summative Conference: Final Rating Calculation Sources of Evidence to Consider: Professional Growth Goal (PGG) Student Learning/Outcome Objective (SLO/SOO) Professional Practice o All evidence from formal observation of practice o Additional evidence brought by the support professional

27. Timelines for Gradual Implementation for Support Professionals SLO/SOO Due November 8, 2013 and approved by November 15, 2013. BOY (Beginning of year) begin week of November 22, 2013. In-person Assessment begins December 2, 2013 and ends February 28, 2014. MOY (Middle of Year) begin week of February 24, 2014 and ends March 7, 2014. EOY (End of Year) begin May 5, 2014 and end June 2, 2014. Evidence collected during the In-person Assessment must be received within 72 hours of the end of the IpA. Post-conference within 72 hours of receipt of evidence from evaluator.

28. Support….. Any questions you have may be directed to me and I will respond in 24-48 hours! maribeth.calabro@ppsd.org Teachscape issues email the tech support email on Teachscape and add Attention: Genaro in the subject line.

30. Use of Data During the 2013-14 RIDE will collect Support Professionals’ final effectiveness ratings for informational purposes only The Innovation Consortium will collect data to inform modifications and revisions to the Support Professional rubrics and “considerations”