Andover Public Schools September 27, 2012 Wiki with Resources o Dropbox with forms o https://www.dropbox.com/sh/86u6ipux8psuf5m/MiqAk3QUT_ https://www.dropbox.com/sh/86u6ipux8psuf5m/MiqAk3QUT_ Overview of the Five Step Process and What it Looks Like How to Engage Educators in the Process Collective Bargaining Process Announced/Unannounced Observations District Determined Measures Additional Thoughts Risks (What if I screw up?) Nobody has ever been fired at Valve for making a mistake. It wouldnt even make sense for us to operate that way. Providing the freedom to fail is an important trait of the company-we couldnt expect so much of individuals if we also penalized people for errors. Even expensive mistakes, or ones which result in a very public failure, are genuinely looked at as opportunities to learn. We can always repair the mistake or make up for it. Screwing up is a great way to find out that your assumptions were wrong or that your model of the world was a little bit off. As long as you update your model and move forward with a better picture, youre doing it right. Look for ways to test your beliefs. Never be afraid to run an experiment or collect more data. It helps to make predictions and anticipate nasty outcomes. Ask yourself what would I expect to see if Im right? As yourself What would I expect to see if Im wrong? Then ask yourself, what do I see? If something totally unexpected happens, try to figure out why. There are still some bad ways to fail. Repeating the same mistake over and over is one. Not listening to customers or peers before or after failure is another. Never ignore the evidence; particularly when it says youre wrong. Risks (What if I make a mistake?) Nobody has ever been fired in the Reading Public Schools for making an honest mistake that benefits students. It wouldnt even make sense for us to operate that way. Providing the freedom to try new methods or ideas, and fail is an important trait of our organization-we couldnt expect so much of individuals if we penalized our staff for taking risks and not succeeding. Even expensive mistakes, or ones which result in a very public failure, are genuinely looked at as opportunities to learn and grow. We can always repair the mistake or make up for it. Making mistakes is a great way to discover that your assumptions were wrong or that your method was a little bit off. As long as you update your method and move forward with an improved way, youre doing it right. Look for ways to test your beliefs and values. Never be afraid to pilot a new idea or collect more data. It helps to set goals and benchmarks and anticipate what would happen if you do not reach those goals. Ask yourself, What would I expect to see if I am right? Or What would it look like if I am wrong? Then ask yourself, What do I see? What do I hear? What do I say? If something totally unexpected happens, try to figure out why. There are still some bad ways to fail. Repeating the same mistake or using the same instructional strategy over and over again without any positive results is one. Not listening to feedback from peers, supervisors, parents, or students before or after a mistake is another. Never ignore the evidence or the data; particularly when it says youre wrong. Remember, our overall collective goal, PreK-12 is to prepare all students to succeed in this ever-changing complex world that awaits them after high school. In other words, we need to prepare them for college and/or career readiness. The only way that we can do that is to continue to experiment with new ideas, make mistakes, learn from those mistakes, and grow from the experience. New DESE Regulations approved on June 28, 2011 Collaboratively Designed by o Massachusetts Teachers Association o Massachusetts Association of Secondary School Principals o Massachusetts Elementary School Principals Association o Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents o Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Requires evaluation of all educators on a license Designed to promote leaders and teachers growth and development Designed to support and inspire excellent practice 1. Focuses on Growth and not Gotcha 2. Applies to everyone (in positions requiring licenses) 3. 4 Levels of Performance 4. Rubrics (describing performance at standard, indicator, and element level) 5. Self-Assessment (using rubrics and student learning data) 6. Educator Goal Setting and Monitoring (Evaluator has final say) 7. Team Goals (Have to be considered) 8. Unannounced Observations (of practice, not just classroom teaching) 9. Formative or Midcycle Review 10. Multiple Measures (of performance and student learning) 11. District Determined Measures of Student Learning (Implemented in three years) 12. Student Feedback ((Implemented in two years) 13. Staff Feedback (For administrators) Piloted o Educator Plan o Principal/Assistant Principal Evaluation o Superintendent Evaluation Contract Language Approved Created Several Forms o Self Assessment o SMART Goal Development Workbook o Educator Plan o Formative Evaluation o Summative Evaluation o Unannounced/Announced Observations Developed an Electronic Portfolio System (Baseline Edge) Presented at Several Workshops o Blue Ribbon o NEC/SEEM/EDCO o MASS o MASBO o Brookline Public Schools o Peabody Public Schools o Harvard Public Schools Professional Development for Administrator, Team Chairs, Department Chairs, Directors o Difficult Conversations Workshop o SMART Goals/Supervision/Teacher Rubric Workshop TAP Committee Meetings o Review of Forms o Discussion of Process Committee of Teachers, Building Administrators, Central Office Administrators Representation from every school Compared current rubric with model rubric system Reviewed model contract language Will be involved in development of forms for September, 2012 Andover Public Schools Administrators Four Domains of Educator Engagement o I know o I apply o I participate o I lead Each domain expects levels of mastery and involvement and different habits of mind. We must intentionally engage educators across all four of the domains. I KnowI Apply I Participate I Lead I know how the evaluation system in my district works. I also know the rationale for the changes in policy. I understand the observational framework used to assess my performance and I understand how it intersects with student growth measures. I understand the rating system and how my rating information leads to different types of educator plans. I know to whom I can turn for support in order to improve. In short, the evaluation system is a set of clear signals I use to guide the improvement of my performance. All stakeholders (SEA, LEA, Union) are responsible Develop feedback loops for misconceptions o Surveys, Focus Group Sessions Communicate, Communicate, Communicate o Guidebooks o FAQ o Website o Newsletter oo Information Sessions o Podcasts/Webinars Train the Trainer Models I apply what I know about the evaluation system to improve my practice and get better results with the students I teach. I think through the expectations of the observation rubrics and apply those expectations to the design of my lesson plans. I also use the information for other measures of student growth, to set expectations for my students, and to decide how to differentiate instruction. I use feedback from observers and consider my strengths and weaknesses as a practitioner. I use student data and other forms of feedback to assess my own performance and consider what to do to continue improving the results I get with my students. Make resources and tools available for educators to use o Model lesson plans aligned to standards o Instructional coaching o Mentoring o Professional Development o Interim Assessments o Videos of high quality instruction I participate in the development, implementation and refinement of my districts teacher evaluation system at both the practical and policy levels. At my school, I work with leaders and colleagues to set shared expectations for how evaluations will be conducted. I collaborate with others to review the observation rubric so we can understand what it means for us. I work with my colleagues to interpret student data to inform instructional decisions. As a member of my union, I participate in union-management collaborative sessions to calibrate video teaching samples using the observation rubric. I work with union and district leadership to reflect how the new system will change the way my colleagues and I will use our time in my school. Feedback Loops o Surveys that gauge frequency and quality of feedback o Focus Group Sessions Follow up on Feedback Joint Union/Administration Communication Teams o Breaks down barriers and eliminates misconceptions Identify teachers for additional roles and responsibilities o Peer Observation Pilot o Developing assessments for multiple measures o Tools and guidance with student learning objectives I lead my colleagues to improve their performance and to improve the evaluation system as we go forward. I am recognized as an excellent practitioner, whose classroom performance and student growth results stand out. At my school, my principal and colleagues seek me out for my expertise. I open my classroom as a demonstration site, and I am called upon to deliver model lessons. I mentor new teachers and support other teachers as they develop. At the district level, I collaborate with leaders from other schools, the union and district administration to improve the facultys understanding of how to improve the evaluation system. With other leaders, I visit schools around my district and help others know, apply, participate, and lead. I make sure that things are done with teachers, not to them. Identify excellent practitioners and give them opportunities to lead o Study groups which focus on particular evaluation standards or development of assessments o Participate on school/district evaluation advisory committees Establish a culture that accommodates disagreement, but does not accept the status quo 30 5 Step Evaluation Cycle Continuous Learning Every educator is an active participant in an evaluation Process promotes collaboration and continuous learning Foundation for the Model Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 31 Part III: Guide to Rubrics Pages 4-5 Part III: Guide to Rubrics Pages 4-5 Rubric is used to assess performance and/or progress toward goals Rubric is used to analyze performance and determine ratings on each Standard and Overall Every educator uses a rubric to self-assess against Performance Standards Professional Practice goals team and/or individual must be tied to one or more Performance Standards Evidence is collected for Standards and Indicators; rubric should be used to provide feedback 32 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 33 Continuous Learning Counselor reviews data and identifies three areas for improvement, grade 8 transition issues for special education students, YRBS data for students feeling emotionally safe at school, and low participation levels for students in Teen Screen program Counselor works with Director of Guidance to develop a department professional practice goal on Grade 8 Transition. Works with health educators, social workers, and school psychologists on a team student learning goal to improve emotional safety of students, and works with Behavioral Health Coordinator on a team student learning goal increasing percentage of students who participate in Teen Screen program. Counselor gathers and synthesizes evidence on progress on goals in Educator Plan. Director of Guidance focuses data collection on goal areas. Midway through the cycle, the Director of Guidance and counselor and department/teams to review evidence and assess progress on goals: makes adjustments to action plan or benchmarks, if needed. Counselor receives a rating on each standard plus an overall rating based on performance against standards and progress on the three goals. 5 Step Cycle in Action for Specialized Instructional Support Personnel Self Assessment Completed using one of three rubrics and a summary of results is sent to Primary or Supervising Evaluator by October 1 st. Includes o An analysis of evidence of student learning, growth, and achievement for students under the educators responsibilities o An assessment of practice against each of the four Performance Standards of effective practice using the district rubric. o Proposed goals to pursue. Analysis of Evidence of student learning, growth and achievement Assessment of Practice against performance standards Proposed goals to pursue to improve practice and student learning. General Classroom Rubric o PreK-High School o Special Education o ELL o Vocational Education o World Languages o Health, PE, Family and Consumer Science, Arts Specialized Instructional Support Personnel for Counselors o School Social Workers and Adjustment Counselors o Guidance Counselors o School Psychologists Specialized Instructional Support Personnel for Nurses and Specialists o School Nurses o Library Media Specialists o Technology Integration Specialists o Reading specialists o OT/PT/Speech and Language Grade level, subject area, department, team goals strongly encouraged. Goals can be constructed for individuals, teams, departments, or groups of educators who share responsibility for student results. Exceptions o First Year Teachers (Year 2 or 3 teachers at guidance of Principal) o Teachers who have not received ratings of Proficient or Exemplary District Strategy Superintendent Goals School Committee School Improvement Principal Goals Plans Classroom Practice Teacher Goals Student Achievement Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 39 DistrictSchoolEducator Teams District Goals/InitiativesSchool Goals/Initiatives Standards for Effective Teaching Practice Target IndicatorsPotential Team Goals I.Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment II.Teaching All Students III.Family and Community Engagement IV.Professional Culture Create a through line from district school educator team goals Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 40 Evaluator reviews goals the Educator has proposed in the self-assessment. The evaluator retains final authority over goals to be involved in an educators plan. Educators meet with the evaluator by October 15 th to develop their educator plan. New educators must meet by October 1 st. Educator plan should be completed by October 30 Designed to provide Educators with feedback for improvement, professional growth, and leadership Plan must be aligned to the standards and indicators, as well as, district and school goals. Shall include o At least one goal related to the improvement of practice tied to one or more Performance Standards o At least one goal for the improvement of the learning, growth, and achievement of the students under the Educators responsibility o An outline of actions the Educator must take to attain the goals and benchmarks to assess progress. Actions must include specified professional development and learning activities. o Examples could include, coursework, self-study, action research, curriculum development, study groups with peers, and implementing new programs. The Developing Educator Plan (Non-PTS Teachers and teachers new to a position) is developed by the educator and the evaluator and is for one school year or less. The Self-Directed Growth Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Proficient or Exemplary and is developed by the educator. When the Rating of Impact on Student Learning is implemented (beginning in ), educators with a Moderate or High Rating of Impact will be on a two-year plan; educators with a Low Rating will be on a one-year plan. The Directed Growth Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Needs Improvement and is a plan of one school year or less developed by the educator and the evaluator. The Improvement Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Unsatisfactory and is a plan of no less than 30 calendar days and no longer than one school year, developed by the evaluator. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 46 Standards (4)-Required in Regulations o Instructional Leadership (5 Indicators) o Management and Operations (5 Indicators) o Family and Community Engagement (4 Indicators) o Professional Culture (6 Indicators) Indicators (20)-Required in Regulations Elements (32)-May be modified, but most keep rigor Rubrics o A tool for making explicit and specific the behaviors and actions present at each level of performance. Standard I: Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment Standard II: Teaching All Students A. Curriculum and Planning Indicator 1. Subject Matter Knowledge 2. Child and Adolescent Development 3. Rigorous Standards-Based Unit Design 4. Well-Structured Lessons A. Instruction Indicator 1. Quality of Effort and Work 2. Student Engagement 3. Meeting Diverse Needs B. Assessment Indicator 1. Variety of Assessment Methods 2. Adjustments to Practice B. Learning Environment Indicator 1. Safe Learning Environment 2. Collaborative Learning Environment 3. Student Motivation C. Analysis Indicator 1. Analysis and Conclusions 2. Sharing Conclusions With Colleagues 3. Sharing Conclusions With Students C. Cultural Proficiency Indicator 1. Respects Differences 2. Maintains Respectful Environment D. Expectations Indicator 1. Clear Expectations 2. High Expectations 3. Access to Knowledge Note: A teacher will need to receive at least a score of proficient on both Standard I and II to be eligible to receive an overall rating of proficient. Standard III: Family and Community Engagement Standard IV: Professional Culture A. Engagement Indicator 1. Parent/Family Engagement A. Reflection Indicator 1. Reflective Practice 2. Goal Setting B. Collaboration Indicator 1. Learning Expectations 2. Curriculum Support B. Professional Growth Indicator 1. Professional Learning and Growth C. Communication Indicator 1. Two-Way Communication 2. Culturally Proficient Communication C. Collaboration Indicator 1. Professional Collaboration D. Decision-Making Indicator 1. Decision-making E. Shared Responsibility Indicator 1. Shared Responsibility F. Professional Responsibilities Indicator 1. Judgment 2. Reliability and Responsibility Principals & AdministratorsTeachers Instructional Leadership* Management and Operations Family & Community Partnerships Professional Culture Curriculum, Planning & Assessment* Teaching All Students* Family & Community Engagement Professional Culture 50 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Revised 9/30/2011 * denotes standard on which educator must earn proficient rating to earn overall proficient or exemplary rating; earning professional teaching status without proficient ratings on all four standards requires superintendent review 51 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 6 Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 6 52 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 6 Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 6 53 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 53 54 The educators performance significantly exceeds Proficient and could serve as a model for leaders district-wide or even statewide. Few educatorsprincipals and superintendents includedare expected to demonstrate Exemplary performance on more than a small number of Indicators or Standards. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 14 Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 14 55 Proficient is the expected, rigorous level of performance for educators. It is the demanding but attainable level of performance for most educators. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 9 Part III: Guide to Rubrics Page 9 Educators whose performance on a Standard is rated as Needs Improvement may demonstrate inconsistencies in practice or weaknesses in a few key areas. They may not yet fully integrate and/or apply their knowledge and skills in an effective way. They may be new to the field or to this assignment and are developing their craft. Educators whose performance on a Standard is rated as Unsatisfactory are significantly underperforming as compared to the expectations. Unsatisfactory performance requires urgent attention. 58 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Summative Performance Rating Exemplary Proficient Needs Improvement Unsatisfactory Attainment of Educator Practice Goal(s) and Student Learning Goal(s) as identified in the Educator Plan (Did Not Meet, Some Progress, Significant Progress, Met, Exceeded) Standard 1 Standard 2 Standard 3 Standard 4 RUBRICRUBRIC Outcomes for Educator: Recognition and rewards Type and duration of Educator Plan Trends and Patterns in at Least Two Measures of Student Learning Gains MCAS growth and MEPA gains where available; measures must be comparable across schools, grades, and subject matter district-wide Products of Practice (e.g., observations) Multiple Measures of Student Learning Other Evidence (e.g. student surveys) Evidence Rating of Impact on Student Learning ( ) Low, Moderate, or High Standards Revised 9/30/2011 Rating System Until Impact on Student Learning is Implemented in / Summative Rating Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF- DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Proficient Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN LowModerateHigh Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Summative Rating Exemplary 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Proficient Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN Educators earn two separate ratings 60 Summative Rating Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF- DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Proficient Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN LowModerateHigh Rating of Impact on Student Learning (multiple measures of performance, including MCAS Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where available) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Summative Rating Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF- DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Proficient Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN LowModerateHigh Rating of Impact on Student Learning (multiple measures of performance, including MCAS Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where available) Phase 1-Summative ratings based on attainment of goals and performance against the four Standards defined in the educator evaluation requirements (September, 2012) Phase 2-Rating of educator impact on student learning gains based on trends and patterns of multiple measures of student learning gains (September, 2013) Phase 3-Using feedback from students (for teachers) and teachers (for administrators)-(September, 2014) September 30, 2013-All Districts expected to identify their district determined measures and their process for rating educator impact on student learning. School Year: All districts implement the DDM. Non-level 4 districts may choose to use the school year as a pilot year to test out their DDM. By October, 2014: Level 4 districts complete their collection of the first year of data on educator impact on student learning. No ratings assigned (2 Years required) o All other districts may either collect the first year of data on educator impact on student learning or consider the school year as a pilot. By October, 2015: Level 4 districts report educator impact ratings to DESE. All other districts either collect the first year of data on educator impact on student learning or if they did not use school year as a pilot, report educator impact ratings to ESE based on ratings from the and school years. By October, 2016: All districts report educator impact on student learning ratings to DESE based on the previous two years of impact data. Timeline may be different for administrators for MCAS, MEPA, AP Results Measures of student learning should focus on growth, not just achievement Growth measures will only be useful if they pertain to a relevant group of students for the educator being evaluated. Direct Measures (Assess student growth in a specific subject area over time) o MCAS Growth Percentiles in Math and ELA o Other Standardized assessment of student achievement o Portfolios of student work o Performance assessments Indirect Measures (Do not measure student growth in a specific subject area, but measure the consequences of that learning) o Changes in graduation rates o College enrollment rates o College remediation rates Teachers o PreK-High School o Special Education o ELL o Vocational Education o World Languages o Health, PE, Family and Consumer Science, Arts Administrators o Superintendents o Other District Administrators o Principals, Assistant Principals o Teachers with supervisory responsibilities, including department chairs Educators supporting specific teachers or subjects o Instructional coaches or mentors o Reading specialists Specialized Instructional Support Personnel o School Nurses o School Social Workers and Adjustment Counselors o Guidance Counselors o School Psychologists o Library Media and Technology Integration Specialists Teachers o Tests and other measures of learning specific to subjects and grades o Student portfolios, projects, performances, artifacts Administrators o Tests and other measures of learning specific to subjects and grades o Indirect measures of student learning such as graduation rates Educators supporting specific teachers or subjects o Measures of student learning of the students of the teachers with whom they work Specialized Instructional Support Personnel o Tests and other measures of learning specific to subjects and grades o Indirect measures of student learning such as graduation rates. Establishing Growth Credibility o Validity The extend to which the assessment measures what it is intended to measure and provides sound evidence for decisions informed by its results. o Reliability A student who takes it multiple times should get a similar score each time. o Fair and free of bias Items and tasks are appropriate for as many students as possible and students are not presented with unnecessary and unwarranted barriers to demonstrating their knowledge, skills, and abilities. Attribution o Designating responsibility among educators for their impact on students learning growth and achievement Primary, Shared, or Limited Roster Verification o Confirming the accuracy of student-teacher links Determining the Impact on Student Learning Rating o What is low growth, moderate growth, and high growth? Unannounced Observations o Partial or full period classroom visitations, instructional rounds, walkthroughs, learning walks, or other means deemed useful by the evaluator. o Educator will be provided with brief written feedback Evidence compiled and presented by educator Fulfillment of professional responsibilities and growth Active outreach to and on-going engagement with families Any other relevant evidence from any source that the evaluator shares with the educator Student/staff feedback ( ) Student and Teacher Growth Educator Evaluation Common Core Common Assessments Common Core For Literacy has three expectations o Building knowledge through content rich non-fiction and informational texts o Reading and writing grounded in evidence from text o Regular practice with complex text and its academic vocabulary Rubric o Element I-A-3 (Rigorous Standards-Based Unit Design) o Element I-B-1 (Variety of Assessment Methods) o Element II-A-2 (Student Engagement) Goal setting would be focused on o Increasing the amount of non-fiction and informational text used in the classroom o Increasing the amount of writing that focuses on using evidence from text o Increasing student engagement by using quality questioning techniques. Classroom Observations Focus On o Engaging Students Directly with High Quality Texts o Quality of Questions and Instructional strategies used to engage students with a high level of key academic vocabulary o Assessing Student Work through Evidence of Speaking and Writing Common Assessments Could Focus On o MCAS/PARCC o Student Analytic Writing which shows growth over time o Student presentations which shows evidence of drawing information from texts over time Opportunity to change teaching and learning o Focused Conversations o Creating Opportunity for Educator Growth o Leads to Student Growth o Tie in initiatives to educator evaluation Build trust with educators o Committee Work on Teacher Evaluation Process Educate the Community o School Committee Meetings o Community Forums 79 or The organizing initiative? Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Adopting the new MA Curriculum Frameworks 21 st Century/Global Skills Anti-Bullying Professional learning communities Examining student work Data Teams Project Based Learning Common course/grade level assessments Elementary Report Cards Social Emotional Health BYOD 80Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education This combination of common core/educator evaluation/district determined measures may be the most important integrated initiative that you undertake in your district Look at this as your organizing initiative for all other initiatives Look at this as an opportunity to improve teaching and learning and educator growth in your district Plan your strategy and process Train staff on how to write and implement SMART goals o Use the Train the Trainer Model o Use Special Education Teachers as Experts Collaboration is critical to the success of this implementation Link this system to the common core and assessment development Integrate the behavioral health framework into the system Transparent and ongoing open honest communication is critical Train all supervisors in the process to create inter-rater reliability Use the DESE materials Adopt the model rubrics Develop a logic model on how you will implement this process Involve your staff, school committee, and community early and often in the communication process Wiki with Resources o Dropbox with forms o https://www.dropbox.com/sh/86u6ipux8psuf5m/MiqAk3QUT_ https://www.dropbox.com/sh/86u6ipux8psuf5m/MiqAk3QUT_ o