Transcript
Page 1: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

HB 153 TEACHER

EVALUATION AND STUDENT

PERFORMANCE DATA

Michele Winship, Ph.D.

[email protected]

Page 2: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

2

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Presentation slides Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

Framework Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation

System Model (OTES) Battelle for Kids Value-Added Talking

Points Battelle for Kids Value-Added Resources Race to the Top Work Flow Chart District Assessment Mapping District Assessment Mapping Sample

Template

Page 3: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

3

A NEW ERA IN TEACHER EVALUATION A national push for teacher evaluation reform

from policy makers Recognition through research that current teacher

evaluation practices are not effective in helping teachers improve performance and identifying underperforming teachers

A desire to identify levels of teacher performance to reward high performers and remove low performers

RttT mandate to change evaluation practices State-level policies that change evaluation

requirements Student performance as a significant factor

in teacher (and principal) evaluation (adopted in 13 states currently)

Page 4: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

4

WHY WE NEED EVALUATION REFORM…

Page 5: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

5

HB 153 EVALUATION FRAMEWORK REQUIREMENTS Sec. 3319.112 (A) Not later than December 31, 2011, the state board of education shall develop a

standards-based state framework for the evaluation of teachers. The framework shall establish an evaluation system that does the following:

(1) Provides for multiple evaluation factors, including student academic growth which shall account for fifty per cent of each evaluation;

(2) Is aligned with the standards for teachers adopted under section 3319.61 of the Revised Code;

(3) Requires observation of the teacher being evaluated, including at least two formal observations by the evaluator of at least thirty minutes each and classroom walkthroughs;

(4) Assigns a rating on each evaluation in accordance with division (B) of this section; (5) Requires each teacher to be provided with a written report of the results of the

teacher's evaluation; (6) Identifies measures of student academic growth for grade levels and subjects for

which the value-added progress dimension prescribed by section 3302.021 of the Revised Code does not apply;

(7) Implements a classroom-level, value-added program developed by a nonprofit organization described in division (B) of section 3302.021 of the Revised Code;

(8) Provides for professional development to accelerate and continue teacher growth and provide support to poorly performing teachers;

(9) Provides for the allocation of financial resources to support professional development.

(HB 153 as signed by the Governor)

Page 6: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

6

Page 7: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

7

HB 153 LOCAL REQUIREMENTS FOR TEACHER EVALUATIONSec. 3319.111 [Effective 9/29/2011] Teacher evaluation

(A) Not later than July 1, 2013, the board of education that of each school district, in consultation with teachers employed by the board, shall adopt a standards-based teacher evaluation policy that conforms with the framework for evaluation of teachers developed under section 3319.112 of the Revised Code. The policy shall become operative at the expiration of any collective bargaining agreement covering teachers employed by the board that is in effect on the effective date of this section and shall be included in any renewal or extension of such an agreement.

(B) When using measures of student academic growth as a component of a teacher's evaluation, those measures shall include the value-added progress dimension prescribed by section 3302.021 of the Revised Code. For teachers of grade levels and subjects for which the value-added progress dimension is not applicable, the board shall administer assessments on the list developed under division (B)(2) of section 3319.112 of the Revised Code.

(C)(1) The board shall conduct an evaluation of each teacher employed by the board at least once each school year, except as provided in divisions (C)(2) and (3) of this section. The evaluation shall be completed by the first day of April and the teacher shall receive a written report of the results of the evaluation by the tenth day of April.

(2) If the board has entered into a limited contract or extended limited contract with the teacher pursuant to section 3319.11 of the Revised Code, the board shall evaluate the teacher at least twice in any school year in which the board may wish to declare its intention not to re-employ the teacher pursuant to division (B), (C)(3), (D), or (E) of that section.

One evaluation shall be conducted and completed not later than the fifteenth day of January and the teacher being evaluated shall receive a written report of the results of this evaluation not later than the twenty-fifth day of January. One evaluation shall be conducted and completed between the tenth day of February and the first day of April and the teacher being evaluated shall receive a written report of the results of this evaluation not later than the tenth day of April.

(3) The board may elect, by adoption of a resolution, to evaluate each teacher who received a rating of accomplished on the teacher's most recent evaluation conducted under this section once every two school years. In that case, the biennial evaluation shall be completed by the first day of April of the applicable school year, and the teacher shall receive a written report of the results of the evaluation by the tenth day of April of that school year.

 

Page 8: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

8

HB 153 OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES Opportunities

Create evaluation systems that improve instructional practice through formative feedback and educator reflection

Design a complete “system” of evaluation with formative feedback and support and not just a typical observation check list

Work together to identify best practices and scale them up through our locals

Bargain the process for changing the evaluation system as well as the procedures, practices and tools

Work collaboratively with administrators who are subject to the same requirements

Page 9: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

9

HB 153 OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES Challenges

Short timeline to complete the work and operationalize the system (July 1, 2013)

Unfunded mandate for non-RttT locals Changing perceptions (ours and theirs) about the

purpose of evaluation Incorporating student growth in a way that

benefits teachers and doesn’t rank and sort them Limited state support at the present time Non-explicit requirement to create assessment

systems to provide required student growth metric Annual evaluations for all but accomplished

teachers

Page 10: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

10

POST HB 153—RTTT AND NON-RTTT DISTRICTS HB 153 leveled the evaluation playing field

RttT districts and non-RttT districts are all required to reconstruct their evaluation systems to align with the adopted state framework based on the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession

All districts are now on virtually the same timeline: RttT districts were required to implement their new

evaluation systems by the 2013-2014 school year or sooner depending on their Scope of Work timeline and changes that are bargained collaboratively (MOU)

Non-RttT districts are required to adopt their evaluation systems no later than July 1, 2013 and implement them at the expiration of the current CBA (discrepancy in timeline—can’t implement if not created)

Page 11: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

11

POST HB 153—RTTT AND NON-RTTT DISTRICTS HB 153 places an additional burden on ALL

districts to address the requirement of the 50% student growth measure The only measure currently available is value-

added data for teachers in grades 3-8 in reading and math (some districts have extended data through Battelle for Kids initiatives)

ODE is creating a “list of student assessments that measure mastery of course content” which districts can use (may need to purchase)

However, there will be many grade levels and courses with no existing assessments; districts will have to create their own

Page 12: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

12

POST HB 153—RTTT AND NON-RTTT DISTRICTS HB 153 creates an advantage for RttT

districtsRttT districts can use their funds to buy the

time and support to re-create their evaluation systems, including the development of an assessment system

RttT districts can use their funds to purchase support for assessment systems (data management, specific testing protocols, testing materials and grading support)

However…these funds will go away. How will the systems be supported financially in the future?

Page 13: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

13

EVALUATION REFORM GUIDELINES We must begin with the belief that the main

purpose of teacher evaluation is improved teaching practice and student learning.

Teacher performance is to be measured through multiple sources of evidence, with observation as one source.

Student performance is required to be 50% of the evaluation, BUT student performance is to be measured through multiple sources of data, not just a single standardized test score.

The State Board of Education has adopted a framework; districts must still develop their evaluation system that includes processes, procedures and forms.

Page 14: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

14

Page 15: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

15

EVALUATION 50% PART 1STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES Student academic growth will be measured

through multiple measures which must include value-added scores on evaluations for teachers where value-added scores are available.

Value-added scores are ONLY available for tested grades and subjects, math and reading in grades 3 – 8. Some extended reports are available in locals who participate in Battelle for Kids projects.

Even if there are value-added scores, there must be additional student growth measures for all teachers.

Page 16: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

16

THREE CATEGORIES OF STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES Districts will create a local

student growth measure worth 50% of the evaluation from a combination of the following:Value-Added DataODE-approved Student Assessments

Menu of Options Determined by the District

Page 17: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

17

STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES Local boards of education may administer

assessments chosen from the Ohio Department of Education’s assessment list ($$$) for teachers of subjects where value-added scores are not available.

and/or local measures of student growth using state-designed criteria and guidance.

This will require districts to create

local measures of student growth (assessments) in areas where there are no standardized assessments.

Page 18: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

18

DIVIDING THE 50% STUDENT PERFORMANCE PIE

Student Achievement, Including Improve-ment of Achievement, in Tested Grades and

Subjects

20% State Achievement Growth Measure

30% District-level Growth Metric

30% School-based Growth Metric

20% Other Locally Determined Measures of Achievement

Page 19: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

19

DIVIDING THE 50% STUDENT PERFORMANCE PIE

Student Achievement, Including Improve-ment of Achievement in Non-tested Grades

and Subjects

40% District-level Growth Metric40% School-based Growth Metric20% Other Locally Determined Measures of Achievement

Page 20: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

20

OHIO’S VALUE-ADDED SYSTEM

Accountability Measures and

Reports

Technical Assistance

and Support

SAS® Data Processing

Maintained by SAS® Single Limited Access Password Protected Data:

District/LEA and school Student information Analytic tools Teacher-level reports

Limited Use Public Access Includes BFK SAS® EVAAS® reporting Enhanced reporting features

Developed & supported by BFK

Regional System Trained VAL’s support

districts/LEAs through DVALT training

Support to teacher-teams

Focus on school improvement

Toolkits Online courses

Maintained by ODELRC

Valued-Added AYP Growth Measure

ODE Reports-School and District (LEA) Measures

Diagnostic Tools

EVAAS®

ODE-BFK

Partnership

Page 21: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

21

VALUE-ADDED MODELING Value-Added Modeling (VAM) has

become the “gold” standard for measuring educator effectiveness.

One year’s growth in one year’s time is the benchmark = effective.Teachers who exceed this growth rate have

a positive value-added rating (+) = highly effective

Teachers who fail to meet this growth rate have a negative value-added rating (-)

Page 22: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

22

VALUE-ADDED MODELING BUT…VAM modeling is flawed. The tests used to generate the scores

were never designed to measure teacher effectiveness.

“Student test scores alone are not sufficiently reliable and valid indicators of teacher effectiveness to be used in high-stakes personnel decisions, even when the most sophisticated statistical applications such as value-added modeling are employed.” (EPI Briefing Paper--Problems with the Use of Student Test Scores to Evaluate Teachers)

Page 23: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

23

LIMITATIONS OF VAM Given that students

are not randomly assigned to classes, VAM can’t distinguish between teacher effects and the effects based on students’ needs.

VAM do not provide information to help “struggling” teachers.

Lack of properly scaled year-to-year tests makes it difficult to evaluate gains along the continuum.

Mobility of students (especially in high needs schools) impact the data

VAM cannot distinguish among teachers in the middle range of performance.

Page 24: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

24

LIMITATIONS OF VAM About 69% of

teachers can’t be accurately assessed with VAMs*

Teachers in subject areas that are not tested

Teachers in grade levels (lower elementary) where no prior test scores are available

Special education & ELL

VAM estimates vary with the tests used

If a teacher is in the bottom quintile based on one test there is a 43% chance she will be in the bottom quintile on a different test, but a 16% chance she will be in the top two quintiles.

If a teacher is in the top quintile based on one test there is a 43% chance she will be in the top quintile on a different test, but a 13% chance she will be in the bottom two quintiles.

Page 25: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

25

TEACHER-LEVEL VALUE-ADDED REPORTINGo Rollout Schedule

o 30% of LEAs Link in Year 1 RttT (reports received fall 2011)o 60% of all RttT LEAs in Year 2o 100% of all LEAs in Ohio in Years 3 & 4

o Requirements—Accuracy of Reportingo Must conduct linkage o Minimum number of students and time enrolled

o Access to Reportingo Online via EVAAS® accountso Password protected

o Grades/Subjects Availableo ODE: grades 4-8, math & readingo BFK: grade 3, math & reading; grades 3-8, science & social

studies; high school—algebra I & II, geometry, pre-calculus, biology, chemistry, English 9, 10 & 11

Issue—Public Records Requests

Page 26: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

26

Page 27: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

27

Page 29: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

29

SIGN UP FOR A PORTAL ACCOUNT

Page 30: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

30

USING STUDENT PERFORMANCE DATA EFFECTIVELY Used properly, student performance

data DOES have a role in school and district improvement efforts, it CAN positively impact student performance.

Nationally, we have come to believe that the data itself—the “score”—is the end game instead of the starting point.

And…an overreliance on and faith in value-added metrics as accurate measures of TEACHER performance has entirely skewed the way we use student performance data.

Page 31: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

31

USING STUDENT PERFORMANCE DATA EFFECTIVELY To be meaningful, student performance

data should be used by educators to Identify achievement gaps, Inform instructional practice, and Direct professional development.

To effectively use the data, teams of educators should Be trained in the analysis and interpretation of

student performance data, Have real-time access to the data, and Meet regularly in teams to analyze the data

and plan intervention, instruction and professional development.

Page 32: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

32

USING STUDENT PERFORMANCE DATA EFFECTIVELY

How do we create the conditions for educators to use student performance data effectively?

Page 33: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

33

DEVELOPING A STUDENT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM Use the assessments you have first. Determine what assessments you

need to create a rigorous, comparable and inclusive assessment system that is designed to provide student performance data to be used for educator professional growth and also for inclusion in an evaluation system.

Chart a course of action with a timeline, persons responsible and deliverables.

Page 34: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

34

DEVELOPING A STUDENT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM Requiring student performance in teacher

evaluations means districts will need to:1. Map current school-based and district-wide

assessments in all grades and subjects2. Determine where assessment “gaps” exist3. Create groups of educators to select/develop

appropriate assessments for “gaps”4. Create an assessment timeline for all grades and

subjects5. Collect, analyze and store student performance

data6. Provide time and training for educators to work

together with student data to improve their own instruction

Page 35: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

35

DISTRICT ASSESSMENT MAPPING

Page 36: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

36

EVALUATION 50% PART 2TEACHER PERFORMANCE Each evaluation will consist of two formal

observations of the teacher at least thirty minutes each in duration, as well as periodic classroom walkthroughs.

Teacher performance metrics must also use multiple and variable sources of data, such as lesson plans, samples of student work, classroom assessment results, and portfolios, in addition to data from direct observation in classrooms.

Page 37: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

37

THE OHIO TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM MODEL(OTES)

Page 38: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

38

OTES TEACHER PERFORMANCE COMPONENTS (PAGE 6) Goal Setting

Self Assessment against Ohio StandardsAnalysis of student data Identifying 2 professional growth goals

Formative Assessment of Teacher Performance—Formal ObservationPre-observation conferenceObservationPost-observation conference and reflection

Evidence Collaboration and Professionalism (determined locally)

Student Growth

Page 39: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

39

SUMMATIVE EVALUATION The overall teacher performance rating

(50%) will be combined with the results of student growth measures (50%) to produce a summative evaluation rating as depicted in the following matrix.

Teachers will be rated in one of four categories:AccomplishedProficientDeveloping Ineffective

Page 40: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

40

Teacher Performance

4 3 2 1

Stu

de

nt

Gro

wth

Me

as

ure

s

Ab

ove

Accomplished Accomplished Proficient Developing

Exp

ecte

d

Proficient Proficient Developing Developing

Belo

w Developing Developing Ineffective Ineffective

Evaluation Matrix

Page 41: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

41

FOLLOWING THE EVALUATION… Teachers with above expected levels of student

growth will develop a professional growth plan and may choose their credentialed evaluator for the evaluation cycle.

Teachers with expected levels of student growth will develop a professional growth plan collaboratively with the credentialed evaluator and will have input on their credentialed evaluator for the evaluation cycle.

Teachers with below expected levels of student growth will develop an improvement plan with their credentialed evaluator. The administration will assign the credentialed evaluator for the evaluation cycle and approve the improvement plan.

This is entirely unrealistic and does not reflect what actually happens in schools.

Page 42: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

42

ADDITIONAL HB 153 REQUIREMENTS At the local level, the board of education will

include in its evaluation policy, procedures for using the evaluation results for retention and promotion decisions and for removal of poorly-performing teachers.

Seniority will not be the basis for teacher retention decisions, except when deciding between teachers who have comparable evaluations.

The local board of education will also provide for the allocation of financial resources to support professional development.

Page 43: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

43

BARGAINING CONSIDERATIONS With a July 1, 2013 deadline for system

completion, evaluation work will need to begin ASAP and may not fit into current bargaining cycle

Effective evaluation reform will require collaboration with administration at a very different level in many locals

Future evaluation language in CBAs will need to include all processes, procedures and tools

Stakes are high; we can’t afford to adopt systems that aren’t designed to support teachers

Page 44: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

44

BARGAINING CONSIDERATIONS:PROCESS FOR EVALUATION REFORM

Composition and selection of evaluation team members

Timeline for evaluation work Compensation for work outside of the

school day Mandatory training for evaluators for

observation protocols and ratings Training for staff about evaluation

processes, procedures and tools No-fault piloting provision to work out

problems

Page 45: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

45

NEXT STEPS FOR TRANSFORMING EVALUATION1. Identify and engage district evaluation team, including

teachers from various levels/areas2. Review and analyze teacher current evaluation polices

and rules 3. Conduct ODE Evaluation GAP Analysis4. Review effective evaluation models including the OTES5. Select/Develop a district evaluation system and tools6. Map and develop student assessments that will provide

student performance data7. Create training for evaluators and teachers8. Construct a pilot timeline9. Have volunteer teachers and evaluators pilot the system10. Review and revise the system based on pilot data11. Train all evaluators and teachers12. Implement the new evaluation system

Page 46: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

46

QUESTIONS??

Please send any questions to:[email protected]

Page 47: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

47

RESOURCES Teacher Evaluation Systems materials and

resources (login required) http://www.ohea.org/teacher-evaluation-systems

www.lauragoe.com Includes various state and local systems and examples of multiple measures for teacher performance and student growth

Teacher Assessment and Evaluation: The NEA's Framework http://www.nea.org/home/41858.htm

Getting Teacher Assessment Right: What Policymakers Can Learn from Research -- the source for Dr. Hinchey’s presentation:  http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/getting-teacher-assessment-right

Page 48: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

48

RESOURCES Goe, L., Bell, C., & Little, O. (2008).

Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

Goe, L., Holdheide, L., Miller, T. (2011) A practical guide to designing comprehensive teacher evaluation systems. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

Hinchy, P. (2010). Getting Teacher Assessment Right: What Policymakers Can Learn From Research. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.

Mathers, C., Oliva, M., with Laine, S. W. M. (2008). Improving instruction through effective teacher evaluation: Options for states and districts. Research and Policy Brief. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

National Education Association. (2009). Teacher evaluation systems: The window for opportunity and reform. Washington, D.C.

Stronge, J. H, & Tucker, P. D. (2003). Handbook on teacher evaluation: Assessing and improving performance. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Page 49: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

49

REFERENCES Laura Goe--Webinar for Oregon School

Coaches, April 20, 2011: http://www.lauragoe.com/LauraGoe/Oregon-April%202011.pptx

EPI Briefing Paper--Problems with the Use of Student Test Scores to Evaluate Teachers: http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/bp278

Rand Education—Evaluating Value-Added Models for Teacher Accountability: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG158.pdf

Page 50: Michele Winship, Ph.D. winshipm@ohea.org.  Presentation slides  Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework  Current draft Ohio Teacher Evaluation System

50

CONTACT INFORMATION Michele Winship 614-227-3001 [email protected]

Questions? [email protected]


Top Related