1. Teacher Evaluation MEASURING EDUCATOR IMPACT / / / CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

3. History – Teacher Evaluations  Often included 1 formal observation of teacher work  Summative assessment of the year  Desired effect often poorly identified, if at all  Low inter-rater reliability  Pronouncement of status at the end of the year with little opportunity for growth or improvement  Not related to admin. evals.

4. Student Growth / Educator Impact Key Components  Student growth “as a significant factor”  Nationally normed and standardized  State summative (if available)  Local / Teacher created / Qualitative  Administrator evaluation related to student growth measures also

5. Performance Categories  Beginning in 2011, the school district “shall revise the performance evaluation system…to ensure that it rates teachers as…”  Highly Effective  Effective  Minimally Effective  Ineffective

6. Impact on Decisions  The effectiveness of teachers & admins, ensuring that they are given ample opportunities for improvement  Promotion, retention, and development of teachers & admin.  Tenure / certification  Removal, after having been provided ample opportunities to improve and “ensuring that these decisions are made using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.”  Supporting professional growth and increasing accountability do not have to be mutually exclusive.

7. Other Key Components  Mid-year progress reports for probationary, minimally effective, or ineffective teachers  Should be based, at least in part, on student achievement  Aligned with teacher’s individualized development plan  Include performance goals for the remainder of the year  Include supports necessary for remainder of year

8. How is evaluation getting done?

9. Evaluation Model: What’s this look like in practice?

10. Learning Map / Teacher Pedagogy

11. Multiple “Drops” in evaluative bucket

12. Professional Learning Community

13. Questions?