Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS IN WISCONSIN: FEEDBACK FROM RURAL SCHOOLS 1.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS IN WISCONSIN: FEEDBACK FROM RURAL SCHOOLS 1."— Presentation transcript:

1 EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS IN WISCONSIN: FEEDBACK FROM RURAL SCHOOLS 1

2 Meetings Across State: Suggestions 1.Reduce Burden 1.Reduce observation requirements 2.Reduce number of SLOs 3.Reduce time associated with reporting requirements 2.Increase Resources: 1.Raise revenue limits 2.Provide support for administrators locally 2

3 Reduce Burden: Observations Changed for 14-15: Removed the long unannounced observation.

4 Reduce Burden: SLOs Changed for 14-15: Reduced from two SLOs annually to one annually

5 Reduce Burden: Reporting Requirements Remove use of word “Reporting” First, why Report? Federal: – Requested: Percentage of educators in each “category” at the school, district, and state levels – Not what we will provide

6 Educator Practice Summary and Student Outcomes Summary

7 Student Practice Summary DPI Model Teachers: Component scores averaged = Domain Summary Domain Summary averaged = Practice Summary Principals: Component scores averaged = Practice Summary CESA 6 Model Use Rubric of Scoring Ranges

8 Student Outcomes Summary Individual measure scores weighted proportionally Weighted scores added together Summary rounded to nearest decimal on scale of 1-4 Example: TeacherPrincipal SLOs = 3.0 * 0.95 = 2.85SLOs: 3.0 * 0.50 = 1.5 Value-Added = NAValue-Added = 3.0 * 0.45 = 1.35 SW Reading = 3.0 * 0.05 = 0.15 Outcome Summary = 3.0Outcome Summary = 1.50 + 1.35 + 0.15 = 3.0

9 Summary Graph Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction 2014-15 Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System-At-A-Glance June 2014 9 The educator’s results will be reported visually using a coordinate pair on the Summary Graph, summarizing the data collected regarding their practice and outcomes across the Effectiveness Cycle.

10 Effectiveness Summary Graph

11 Reporting Requirements Locally: – Visually/graphically report all data in most meaningful ways – Only between educator and their administrators – What and how used is local decision Federal: – USDE has approved this scoring process – USDE has provided initial approval for state-level reporting ONLY (for coming year)

12 Reduce Burden: Reporting Requirements Your Role? Teachscape and documentation flexibility Note: Make sure you are not creating local processes which increase burden on time Evaluators ensure each of these scores is documented within online platform by June 30 th Continued work to improve documentation platform

13 Contact Me If you have a question or concern: – We haven’t communicated clearly; or – You are presenting something we have not yet thought of. Either way, it is important for us to know these things and we can only learn them from YOU. Please contact us with ANY questions, concerns, or comments. 608.267.9551 @KatharineRainey 13 katharine.rainey@dpi.wi.gov

14 For more information and resources related to the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System, please visit the WIEE website at: ee.dpi.wi.gov ee.dpi.wi.gov Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction 2014-15 Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System-At-A-Glance June 2014 14 Follow us on Twitter: TwitterChats Wednesdays at 8:00 pm @WisDPI_EE


Download ppt "EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS IN WISCONSIN: FEEDBACK FROM RURAL SCHOOLS 1."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google