Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness Reforms: Enhancing Student Achievement through Quality Teachers and Principals

1. Teacher and Principal Standards for Educator EffectivenessNDE Data Conference 2011 April 18-19, 2011

2. State policymakers across the nation are embracing comprehensive educator effectiveness reforms as the key to improving student achievement. Educator Effectiveness Reforms Why?

3. Teachers and Principals make the greatest difference in student achievement. Educator Effectiveness Rationale Robert Marzano (2005):Nearly 60 percent of a school’s impact on achievement is attributable to principal and teacher effectiveness. M. Barber and M. Mourshed, (2007):“The quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers.”

4. School reforms won’t work unless educator effectiveness is improved. Educator Effectiveness Rationale Mariana Haynes (2010):“It has become clear that heavy investments in state reforms will not yield the level of buy-in, ownership, and results needed at the school level unless policy leaders address the capacity of teachers and leaders to implement instructional improvements.”

5. Educator Effectiveness Rationale • State policies on educator effectiveness are often designed piecemeal, in separate “silos”, each with its own constituency. Managing Educator Talent (2010):“….significant and sustained improvements in teacher and principal effectiveness will be achieved only if all key policies across the educator career continuum are addressed in a cohesive, aligned and strategic manner.”

6. Educator Effectiveness Rationale • State policies often focus on preparation and certification and do not address the entire educator career continuum. • State policies may reflect a lack of coordination across different levels of governance. The Wallace Foundation (2006):“Absent…cohesion in policies and practices – both within and between different levels public education – victories won by leaders in improving teaching and learning are likely to be smaller, more isolated, and short-lived than they could be.”

7. Federal programs, such as Race to the Top, have put a strong emphasis on teacher and principal effectiveness. Educator Effectiveness Rationale Nebraska’s Race to the Top application called for the development of state teacher/principal standards, statewide induction, mentoring, and evaluation, continuous professional development, and performance-defined certificate renewal.

8. National organizations, such as the Council of Chief State School Officers, are urging comprehensive approaches to personnel development. Educator Effectiveness Rationale Taking Human Capital Seriously (2009): “The time has come to address these ‘people’ issues; unless there are talented teachers in every classroom and talented principals in every building, policy reform will not be realized. Delay is not acceptable.”

9. The Process

10. In November, Nebraska Department of Education staff asked the State Board for a policy statement supporting an Educator Effectiveness Initiative and for permission to proceed with the development of Teacher and Principal performance standards as a first step. Aims and elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative were outlined: Educator Effectiveness Proposal

11. (1) Develop educator effectiveness policies that are cohesive, aligned and strategic. (2) Focus on effective school leaders as well as teachers. (3) Provide horizontal alignment across educators’ full careers. (4) Create vertical alignment across levels of governance – school, districts, state. Aims of the Educator Effectiveness Initiative

12. (5) Manage educator talent systematically as a way to enhance student learning and upgrade the education profession. Aims of the Educator Effectiveness Initiative Taking Human Capital Seriously (2009):“States should launch policies and strategies to recruit, develop, reward and retain top teacher and principal talent. The goal – to improve student learning through improved instruction and effective teaching – will not only benefit students but it will also help teachers and principals as well, giving them the professionalism and respect they deserve as shepherds of our nation’s most precious resource, our children.”

13. Statewide Educator Standards Possible elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative • Teacher/Principal performance standards. • Tied to national standards for teachers and principals. • Form the basis for other effectiveness policies. Example: InTASC and ISLLC national standards.

14. Standards-based accountability for preparation programs. • Standards-based performance assessments for new teacher and principals. • Traditional/alternative certification tied to standards. Example: California’s Teacher Performance Assessment. Possible elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative Preparation and Licensure

15. Coordination of state and district efforts. • Mentoring based on teacher/principal standards. • Full certification tied to successful induction. Example: Connecticut’s BEST Program. Possible elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative Induction and Mentoring

16. Standards-based teacher/principal evaluation. • State mandated system or state guidance for local systems. • Linkage to student achievement as well as standards of practice. • Tied to professional development activities. Example: Iowa’s standards-based evaluation. Possible elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative Teacher/Principal Evaluation

17. Alignment to state performance standards/improvement goals. • Linkage to local school improvement plans. • Tied to teacher/principal evaluation. • Linked to recertification. Example: Wisconsin’s Individual Development Plans. Possible elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative Professional Development

18. Alternative compensation models. (Nebraska’s LB 1114) • Linkage to performance management (evaluation)? • Incentives for shortage areas/hard-to-staff schools. Example: Minnesota’s Q-Comp program. Possible elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative Compensation and Incentives

19. School climate and physical environment issues. • Equity in technology and resources. • Statewide student behavior/discipline policies. • Working conditions tied to recruitment/retention. Example: Ohio’s Teaching/Learning Conditions Survey. Possible elements of an Educator Effectiveness Initiative Working Conditions

20. High level leadership is critical. • State policymakers must take the lead. • Need a unified vision and a strategic plan. • Broad stakeholder engagement is crucial. Leadership needs of an Educator Effectiveness System • Managing Educator Talent (2010):“Education reform cannot be sustained in the long-term without galvanizing the momentum and political will needed for success from a broad range of stakeholder and constituency groups. ”

21. November State Board Response Is this something the state should be doing? What are the benefits? What are the costs? Get the views of education stakeholder groups throughout the state. What do Stakeholders Think? .

22. December 10, 2010, Stakeholder meeting involved 26 participants representing 10 educational organizations as well as NDE staff and guests. Two small group discussion sessions were held – one on educator effectiveness initiatives and one on performance standards – followed by large group discussions. Listening to Stakeholders

23. Gauge support for a comprehensive Educator Effectiveness Initiative. • Identify stakeholder concerns and provide guidance to State Board/NDE on effectiveness policies. • Define purposes and structure for Nebraska teacher/principal performance standards. • Recommend next steps to State Board/NDE. Stakeholder Meeting Purposes

24. Strong consensus that an Educator Effectiveness Initiative is needed in Nebraska. Discussion themes included: • Comprehensiveness is important. • Provides for commonality and consistency. • Provides expectations for teachers/administrators. • Provides for growth and alignment across careers. • It is purposeful. • Reflects public demands for a focus on educator effectiveness. • A system is needed that is both centralized and customized and that provides for local flexibility. Is an Educator Effectiveness Initiative needed in Nebraska?

25. Themes from discussion included: • Cost in money, time, and human resources. • Maintaining a tight/loose configuration. Need to be tight on standards but loose on the ways for districts to meet those standards. • Confidentiality and the risk of misuse of data. • Maintaining an ongoing discussion with stakeholders as changes are implemented. • Keeping diversity in mind. What are some of the concerns/limitations?

26. Approach from standpoint of making a good system better rather than fixing a broken system. • Recognize that stakeholder groups in Nebraska are willing to collaborate and contribute. • Learn from experiences of other states/organizations. • Design policies for improving teaching and learning, not just comparing schools. • Approach this as a value-added opportunity. • Focus on development not regulation. • Recognize the end objective is improved student achievement. Recommendations to NDE/State Board regarding an Educator Effectiveness Initiative

27. Broad consensus to create a Standards Drafting Committee. Other recommendations included: • Allow appropriate time to determine what will best serve the state. • Support the process that NDE is currently using for the development of standards. • The Board needs to understand how fortunate we are to have a group of stakeholders that can accomplish these things. This is not what we will find in other states. Recommendations to NDE/State Board for next steps regarding performance standards.

28. Standards Drafting Committee created with 41 educators, Board members, and parents representing 13 stakeholder groups as well as NDE. Met Feb. 15-16 to begin task. • Divided into Teacher/Principal Drafting Teams. • 12-person Editing Committee met Feb. 28. • Drafting Committee and Editing Committee met again on March 15-16 and Editing Committee held a final meeting on April 12. Standards Drafting Process

29. Drafting Committee reviewed national standards from several organizations as well as standards from numerous states. • First meetings reached consensus on purposes, targets, and structure of standards as well as identifying standards topics. • Second meetings resulted in six draft standards for teachers and nine for Principals. • Further revisions by Editing Committee after Stakeholder and State Board reviews. Standards Drafting Process

30. Drafting Committee Consensus: “The primary purpose of the Nebraska Teacher and Principal standards is to define effective practice in order to improve teaching and learning.” Purpose of Standards

31. State Board Accountability Committee : • Members emphasized Standards as a resource for local districts and higher education institutions – a guiding framework describing effective practice for teachers and principals – not a regulatory mandate. • Standards only useful if they lead to improved student performance. Purpose of Standards

32. Teachers and Principals: Can be defined as… Educators whose primary task is working directly with students in a school setting. Consensus that standards for specialists who do not fit the definition above could be developed by local districts. Target Group for Standards

33. Professional audience: Teachers, Principals, Stakeholder Groups, and Other Professionals • Policymaker audience: State Board of Education, Legislators, Governor, Local Boards. • Public audience: General Public, Media, etc. Audiences for Standards

34. Important for Standards Statements to be: • Clear and concise • Reasonably specific • Free of educational jargon • Able to be understood by all audiences whether with or without detailed indicators Writing for diverse audiences

35. Drafting Committee consensus on structure: • Standard Statements – Broad statements of effective practice. • Indicator Statements – Examples that clarify Standards. Not an exhaustive list; districts can add local Indicators. • Introductory Statement – Preface to the document. Structure of Standards

36. Standard Topic: Instructional Strategies. Standard Statement: “The Teacher systematically uses a variety of effective and relevant instructional strategies to ensure student learning and develop skills to access and appropriately apply information. “ Example Indicators: “ The Teacher… ….achieves learning goals and uses appropriate instructional strategies and resources. …motivates and engages students to participate in a shared learning process. …uses data to modify, adapt, and differentiate instruction based on students’ diverse learning needs.” Standards Format Example

37. Teacher Standards Topics: • Foundational Knowledge • Planning and Preparation • The Learning Environment • Instructional Strategies • Assessment • Professionalism • Vision and Collaboration Standards Topics

38. Principal Standards Topics: • Vision for Learning • Continuous School Improvement • Instructional Leadership • Culture for Learning • Systems Management • Staff Leadership • Developing Relationships • Professional Ethics and Advocacy Draft Standards Topics

39. Teacher and Principal Accountability for Student Learning. • Cultural Competence • Use of Technology Recurring Themes Throughout Standards

40. March 29—Stakeholder Committee reviewed draft standards. April 4—State Board Accountability Subcommittee reviewed draft and discussed purposes. April 11 - State Board Accountability Subcommittee conducted detailed review of draft standards. April 12—Editing Committee refined draft standards. Review Process

41. April 20: Revised draft standards to be sent to full State Board. May 4-5, 2011: State Board considers draft for public review. May-September, 2011: Public/professional input on standards. Meetings to be held across Nebraska. September, 2011: Final revisions made to drafts. October, 2011: State Board considers final drafts for approval. Next Steps

42. What priorities for Educator Effectiveness policies in Nebraska? NDE and State Board will need your views. Where do we go from here?

43. And have a safe trip home. THANKS for joining us today.