Developing Effective Teacher Evaluations

1
Developing Effective Teacher Evaluations

• Christina Linder
• Director, Certification and Professional
  Standards
• http//www.sde.idaho.gov/site/teacherEval/

2
Timeline for Evaluation
After June 30, 2012, all districts and public
charter schools must adopt a policy to include
student achievement data as part of their
evaluation models for superintendents, assistant
superintendents, directors, principals, other
district administrative employees and
certificated employees on Category A, B and
grandfathered continuing contracts evaluations.
After June 30, 2012, all districts and public
charter schools must adopt a policy to include
parent input as part of their evaluation models
for principals, other school based administrators
and certificated employees on Category A, B and
grandfathered continuing contracts evaluations.
February, 2013 and every February following, the
first half a teachers evaluation is due. This
half of a teachers evaluation is based on the
Charlotte Danielson Framework and includes the
parent/guardian input component.
Starting in March 2011, districts and public
charter schools must submit the results of
teacher and principal evaluations through the
ISEE Longitudinal Data System monthly upload.
September 30 2011, all district and public
charter school teacher and principal evaluation
models must be posted to the SDE website along
with the results of all teacher and principal
evaluations.
By the end of the 2013 school year and subsequent
years, the second half of a teachers evaluation
is due. This half of a teachers evaluation is
based on student achievement as determined by the
local school board.
3
Evaluating for What?Federal Definition of
Effective Highly Effective Teacher

• Effective teacher students achieve acceptable
  rates (e.g., at least one grade level in an
  academic year) of student growth. States, LEAs,
  or schools must include multiple measures,
  provided that teacher effectiveness is evaluated,
  in significant part, by student growth.
  Supplemental measures may include, for example,
  multiple observation-based assessments of teacher
  performance.
• Highly effective teacher students achieve high
  rates (e.g., one and one-half grade levels in an
  academic year) of student growth.

4
Teacher Evaluations Prior to ARRA and Students
Come First

• At the recommendation of the task force, school
  districts were required to adopt a teacher
  evaluation model and policy aligned to the
  Charlotte Danielson Framework.
• All districts were required to submit their
  teacher evaluation models and policies to the
  State Department of Education for review and
  approval.
• During the 2010-2011 school year, districts were
  required, at a minimum, to pilot the Danielson
  Framework in their district with full
  implementation by the 2011-12 school year.
• Most districts compliant with State Board Rule
  and engaging in a review of their
  process prior to full implementation.

5
State Teacher Evaluations Impacted by ARRA

• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
• In 2009, Idaho signed on to receive federal funds
  under ARRA.
• ARRA reporting requirements
• States must post each district and public charter
  school teacher and principal evaluation model and
  policy online for the general public to view.
• States must post the results of each teacher and
  principal evaluation model online.
• Idaho was able to reach a compromise with the US
  Department of Education to only post the results
  in aggregate, by district/charter and in cases
  where five or more principals or five or more
  teacher are employed rather than individual
  results.

6
Resulting EvaluationRequirements in 2011

• ARRA Compliance Beginning in March 2011,
  districts and public charter schools submit the
  results of teacher and principal evaluations
  through ISEE Longitudinal Data System.
• (Proficient/Non-Proficient publicly
  reported in aggregate)
• ARRA Compliance By September 30, 2011, all
  district and public charter school teacher and
  principal evaluation models must be posted to the
  SDE website along with the results of all teacher
  and principal evaluations.
• (Teacher Evaluation Model according to Idaho
  Code, Administrator Model
  according to district design)

7
State Teacher Evaluations Impacted by Students
Come First

• Student Achievement Component in Evaluations
• 33-513 Professional Personnel and 33-514
  Issuance of Annual Contracts - - Written
  Evaluation
• By July 1, 2012, all superintendent, assistant
  superintendent, director, principal, other
  district administrative employees and
  certificated employees on Category A, B and
  grandfathered continuing contracts, must receive
  an evaluation in which 50 of the evaluation
  results are based on objective measures of growth
  in student achievement as determined by the board
  of trustees.

8
Models or Measures for Student Achievement
Component

• Districts can utilize student achievement data
  that is individual for each teacher or schoolwide
  student achievement data similar to that used for
  the local share of Pay for Performance.
• This student achievement portion of the
  evaluation is separate from Pay for Performance
  but districts can use the same models of student
  achievement for both.

9
Models or Measures for Student Achievement
Component

• Colorado Growth Model using ISAT Test Results
• End of Course Assessments
• IRI test results
• ACT/SAT results
• Student graduation rates/dropout rates
• Percent of graduates attending postsecondary
  education or entering military service

10
Things to Consider

• What areas of student achievement do you want to
  see improve?
• What is your highest area of need?
• How can student growth be measured in non-tested
  subjects and grades?
• Please keep in mind that you must resubmit your
  teacher
• evaluation models and policies once you have made
  these
• changes. This is in compliance with the ARRA
  requirements.

11
State Teacher Evaluations Impacted by Students
Come First

• Parent and Guardian Input for Evaluations
• 33-514 Issuance of Annual Contracts - - Written
  Evaluation
• By July 1, 2012, input from the parents and
  guardians of students shall be considered as a
  factor in the evaluation of principals, any other
  school-based administrative employees and
  teachers.
• For certificated employees on a Category A, B or
  grandfathered continuing contract, this input
  shall be part of the first half of the evaluation
  that must be completed before February 1 of each
  year.

12
Models for Parent and Guardian Input for
Evaluations

• A number of Idaho school districts already
  utilize parent or guardian input for evaluation
  purposes, including
• Hansen 
• Vision Charter 
• Filer School District
• Plummer-Worley
• Potlatch
• Formal surveys (e.g. 360 Degree Evaluation Model)
• Evidence in a teachers portfolio.

13
Things to Consider

• This requirement can be considered an
  enhancement to the collection of artifacts in
  completing a teachers normal evaluation.
• Domain 4, Professional Responsibilities,
  Component 4c, Communicating with families
• Teacher provides frequent information to
  families, as appropriate, about the instructional
  program. Students participate in preparing
  materials for their families.
• Teacher provides information to families
  frequently on student progress, with students
  contributing to the design of the system.
  Response to family concerns is handled with great
  professional and cultural sensitivity.
• Teachers efforts to engage families in the
  instructional program are frequent and
  successful. Students contribute ideas for
  projects that could be enhanced by
  family participation.

14
Things to Consider

• Will you consider informal communications
  received throughout the year or only formal
  surveys?
• Will the survey ask if the parent/guardian has
  attended parent/teacher conference or if they
  have spoken to your childs teacher or
  administrator? 
• What percentage of your evaluations will be based
  on the parent/guardian input or will it just be
  another data collection element used in looking
  at the overall performance?
• Resource
  Matt Hyde
• Parent
  Involvement Coordinator
• 
  mhyde_at_sde.idaho.gov

15
Resulting Evaluation Requirements 2012

• SCF Compliance By July 1, 2012, all districts
  and public charter schools must adopt a policy to
  include student achievement data as part of their
  evaluation models for superintendents, assistant
  superintendents, directors, principals, other
  district administrative employees and
  certificated employees on Category A, B and
  grandfathered continuing contracts evaluations.
• SCF Compliance By July 1, 2012, all districts
  and public charter schools must adopt a policy to
  include parent input as part of their evaluation
  models for principals, other school based
  administrators and certificated employees on
  Category A, B and grandfathered
  continuing contracts evaluations.

16
State Teacher Evaluations Impacted by Students
Come First

• Number of Evaluations and Timeline for
  Evaluations
• Teachers
• There shall be a minimum of one written
  evaluation in each of the annual contract years
  of employment including Category A, B and
  grandfathered continuing contracts.
• The second portion shall be completed by the end
  of the school year and shall comprise at least
  fifty percent of the total written evaluation and
  shall be based on objective measure(s) of growth
  in student achievement.
• The requirement to provide at least one written
  evaluation does not exclude additional
  evaluations that may be performed.

17
Resulting Evaluation Requirements 2013

• SCF Compliance By February, 2013 and every
  February following, the first half a teachers
  evaluation is due. This half of a teachers
  evaluation is based on the Charlotte Danielson
  Framework and includes the parent/guardian input
  component.
• SCF Compliance By the end of the 2013 school
  year and subsequent years, the second half of a
  teachers evaluation is due. This half of a
  teachers evaluation is based on student
  achievement as determined by the local school
  board.

18
Beyond Compliance Putting It All
Together

• What other measures could be considered?
• While state rule and statute require Value-Added
  measures, observation, and parental input, there
  are others to consider
• Content Pedagogy Assessments
• Analysis of Artifacts and Portfolios
• Self-Report of Practice
• Student Evaluation

19
Using Multiple Measures to Assess Teacher
EffectivenessFall 2011

• Sample Population- second and third year
  teachers
• Recruiting districts for a national
  professional licensure project

20
Three Measures

1. Content Knowledge for Teaching
2. Observation of Classroom Practice Using the
   Danielson Framework
3. Artifacts of Teaching

21
Goals of the Pilot

• To understand
• how professional licensure could be improved
  through richer measures
• how selected measures function with real teachers
  in a state system
• the operational issues required to deliver a
  fully functioning system

22
Participating States

• Georgia       Idaho
  Kansas        Maryland
• Missouri         New Jersey
• Ohio               Pennsylvania
• Tennessee    Utah
• Vermont        West Virginia
• Wyoming

23
For More Information

• A full overview of the project can be accessed
  at http//www.sde.idaho.gov/site/teacherEval/
  at the SDE Teacher Evaluation website
• or
• cplinder_at_sde.idaho.gov

24
Links to Helpful Resources

• NCCTQ Educator Quality Downloadable Resources
• http//www.tqsource.org/
• Using the Framework for Teacher Evaluation
  (Handouts from BSU Center for School Improvement)
• http//csi.boisestate.edu/Improvement/Teacher20Ev
  aluation20Handouts20-20All.pdf
• Sample Evaluation Models. Powerpoint
• http//scee.groupsite.com/uploads/files/x/000/060/
  5f4/Laura_Goe_PowerPoint.pptx
• Colorado Growth Model Powerpoint
• http//www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket9ZeU
  x9Y9nzw3Dtabid116
• Initial Findings from MET Including Student
  Surveys
• http//www.gatesfoundation.org/college-ready-
  education/Documents/preliminary-findings-research-
  paper.pdf

25
Questions?