teacher evaluation field test school leader development january 22 23 2013 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Teacher Evaluation Field Test School Leader Development January 22/23, 2013 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Teacher Evaluation Field Test School Leader Development January 22/23, 2013

Teacher Evaluation Field Test School Leader Development January 22/23, 2013

71 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Teacher Evaluation Field Test School Leader Development January 22/23, 2013

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Teacher Evaluation Field TestSchool Leader DevelopmentJanuary 22/23, 2013

  2. Agenda • 8:00-8:30 – Registration and Breakfast • 8:30-9:20 – Address from Dr. Sonja Brookins Santelises and Jennifer Bell-Ellwanger • 9:20-9:40 – Q & A Session with Dr. Sonja Brookins Santelises and Jennifer Bell-Ellwanger • 9:40-9:55 – Break • 9:55-11:45 – Student Learning Objectives • 11:45-12:00 – Q & A session on Student Learning Objectives • 12:00-12:45 – Lunch • 12:45-1:45 – Value-Added • 1:45-2:00 – Q & A on Value-Added • 2:00-2:15 – Break • 2:15-2:45 – Professional Responsibilities • 2:45-3:30 –Student Surveys • 3:30-3:45 – Q & A on Student Surveys • 3:45-4:00 – Close-Out

  3. The Problem… “Current teacher evaluation systems are not providing the information needed to close the achievement gap. Despite 40 years of research pointing to huge differences in student achievement gains across teachers, most school districts…cannot pinpoint what makes a teacher effective, or identify their most and least effective teachers” Working with Teachers to Develop Fair and Reliable Measures of Effective Teaching Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

  4. The Problem… “The Widget Effect describes the tendency of school districts to assume classroom effectiveness is the same from teacher to teacher. This decades-old fallacy fosters an environment in which teachers cease to be understood as individual professionals…In its denial of individual strengths and weaknesses, it is deeply disrespectful to teachers; in its indifference to instructional effectiveness, it gambles with the lives of students.” The Widget Effect: Our National Failure to Acknowledge and Act on Differences in Teacher Effectiveness The New Teacher Project

  5. The Road Behind:Teacher Evaluation of the Past Unfocused Infrequent Undifferentiated Unhelpful Inconsequential

  6. The Road Ahead: An Evaluation System Grounded in Development “Evaluations should provide all teachers with regular feedback that helps them grow as professionals, no matter how long they have been in the classroom. Evaluations should give schools the information they need to build the strongest possible instructional teams, and help districts hold school leaders accountable for supporting each teacher’s development. Most importantly, they should focus everyone in a school system…on what matters most: keeping every student on track to graduate from high school ready for success in college or a career.” Teacher Evaluation 2.0 The New Teacher Project

  7. The Road Ahead: An Evaluation System Grounded in Student Achievement • Data-Driven Professional Development • Improved Student Outcomes • Improved Teaching Practices • Improved Teacher Evaluation Based on Multiple Measures • Strategic Human Capital Decisions

  8. Implications for City Schools • City Schools is committed to creating a new evaluation process grounded in teacher development that promotes student achievement • Clear, rigorous expectations • Multiple measures • Differentiated ratings • Regular feedback • Significance

  9. Implications for City Schools Clear, Rigorous Expectations Multiple Measures Differentiated Ratings • No single data point can paint a complete picture of a teacher’s performance • Evaluations should incorporate multiple measures for assessing professional practice and student growth, with greater weight afforded to the most accurate measures of student progress. • Teachers should earn a summative rating at the end of each school year that distinguishes performance between levels with meaningful differentiation of performance • Teachers should have a clear picture of their current performance. • Teachers should be evaluated against clear, rigorous performance expectations based primarily on evidence of student learning. • Expectations should reflect excellence in the classroom, not minimally acceptable performance.

  10. Implications for City Schools Regular Feedback Significance • Evaluations should not be limited to a single end-of-year rating, but instead are viewed as an ongoing developmental process. • Cultivate a performance-focused culture with frequent teacher observations. • Regular conversations with teachers to discuss overall classroom performance and student progress; professional goals and developmental needs; and the support school leaders will provide to meet those needs. • Evaluations should have meaningful implications • Teacher effectiveness should play an important role in determining strategic human capital decisions. • Ability to identify, develop, and keep talented teachers is one of the most important priorities for schools leaders

  11. Teacher Evaluation Field Test Measures Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Value-Added Model (VAM) 50%: Professional practice 50%: Multiple measures of student growth • City Schools will propose weights after studying the results of the pilot and consulting with our teachers and principals. No one measure can account for more than 35% of a teacher’s evaluation.

  12. Why did we choose these measures? • City Schools believes in the following: • Measures should help inform and improve teacher practice • Measures should demonstrate both validity and reliability • Measures should align with teaching best practices and research

  13. Why did we choose these measures?Research from the MET Project What is the MET Project? • MET stands for Measures of Effective Teaching, and the project aims to help teachers and schools understand what great teaching looks like. • The goal of the MET project is to identify which multiple measures give the best and most accurate information about how well a teacher helps his or her students learn – and how these measures should be used together to see the whole picture of a teacher's effectiveness. The MET project, funded by the Gates Foundation, is testing five different measures of teaching effectiveness: • Student achievement gains on state standardized tests and supplemental tests • Classroom observations and teacher reflections • Teachers' pedagogical content knowledge • Student perceptions of the classroom instructional environment

  14. The MET Study • Two school years: 2009-10 and 2010-11 • >100,000 students • Grades 4-8: ELA and Math • High School: ELA I, Algebra I and Biology

  15. Three Key Take-Aways • High-quality classroom observations will require clear standards, certified raters, and multiple observations per teacher. • Combining three approaches (classroom observations, student feedback, and value-added student achievement gains) capitalizes on their strengths and offsets their weaknesses. • Combining new approaches to measuring effective teaching – while not perfect – significantly outperforms traditional measures. Providing better evidence should lead to better decisions.

  16. Why did we choose these measures?

  17. Teacher Involvement • How are teachers providing feedback on measures? • Educator Support and Evaluation Committee (ESEC) – 4 principals, 16 teachers, and an ED • How can teachers learn more about the evaluation field test? • Emails from City Schools • Webinars at ILT and faculty meetings • City Schools’ website, under “About Us” and click on “Effectiveness” • BTU/City Schools information sessions beginning February 5

  18. What Will Teachers Experience in 2012-13? During SY 2012-13: Teachers will experience two formal observations using PBES with Framework 2.0 as the guiding document. Launch Field Test via email blast from Dr. Alonso, and joint message with Marietta English. All teachers in grades 3-12 have at least one grade/ course/section complete a student survey. Teachers will validate their course rosters. • Summer 2013: All teachers receive a composite rating SLOs will be rolled out gradually to all schools beginning Jan 2013. Professional responsibilities component will be outlined for teachers in Jan 2013. All teachers receive updates on VAM as well as other measures in the teacher evaluation field test

  19. Questions?

  20. Like Me? • Type of Leader? • Product of City Schools? • Years in City Schools? • Years in Leadership?

  21. Teacher Evaluation Field Test Components Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Value-Added Model (VAM) 50%: Professional practice 50%: Multiple measures of student growth • City Schools will propose weights after studying the results of the pilot and consulting with our teachers and principals. No one measure can account for more than 35% of a teacher’s evaluation.

  22. Session Objectives • Understand the major components of a City Schools Student Learning Objective (SLO), • Develop an understanding of the rationale behind using SLOs as part of the teacher evaluation system, • Discuss the potential challenges and learning opportunities that SLOs provide, • Consider the impact that school leaders and teacher-leaders may have on the successful roll-out of SLOs, • Begin to consider potential candidates as SLO Ambassadors

  23. City Schools: the Numbers • Approximately ~35-45 % of teachers* fall into the “tested” category • In other words, 35-45% of our teachers teach subjects assessed by the MSA, HSA, or Stanford-10 • The other 55-65% of our teachers fall into the “non-tested” category • These teachers do not teach subjects directly assessed by the MSA, HSA, or Stanford-10 * Estimates based on SMS data, Fall 2011

  24. Think-Pair-Share • Silently consider your response to the following question: What tools do we currently have to analyze student growth to help our teachers in the non-tested grades and subjects (NTGS)? • Turn to the person beside you and discuss your response • Share what you heard your discussion partner say

  25. Independent Reading • Read the first four pages of the SLO Brief provided in your folder (10 min) • While reading consider the following questions: • Why are SLOs proposed to be a part of the teacher evaluation system? • In what ways do SLOs connect to other district initiatives (ie SPPs, etc)? • Where do you see yourself having the most impact on SLOs?

  26. The Research • “In Denver, students whose teachers crafted high quality SLOs showed more than a year’s worth of gain… during each year of the study at all three school levels.” • “In Charlotte-Mecklenburg, during the first phase of implementation we found another strong correlation between the targeted objective and student achievement….” Source: Community Training and Assistance Center, 2012

  27. Why SLOs? • Rationale: Of the measures of student growth we studied for non-tested areas, SLOs had the most potential for improving practice • SLOs reinforce good teaching practices • What all of our best teachers are already doing anyway • Are not compliance-based • Data-driven instruction • Provides an anchor and theme for collaborative planning

  28. “If properly implemented, student learning objectives help teachers bring more science to their art, strengthen instructional support to the classrooms, and improve the quality of the outcome.” William J. Slotnik Founder and Executive Director Community Training and Assistance Center

  29. SLO Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

  30. Exploring an SLO • At your table you will be given a model SLO • Review the document silently for 5 minutes • Respond to the four questions on the Four Square document provided • Take 10 minutes to discuss your responses with your table • Share out your group’s responses

  31. What is an SLO? • Learning goal for students • Specific to a group of students for that year • Measurable • Collaborative: set in consultation with colleagues and evaluator(s) • Organic to good teaching practice • Popular: Many states and districts are building systems of educator effectiveness that include SLOs as one of multiple measures in teacher and principal evaluations, including: • Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, New York, Rhode Island • Austin, Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Denver, Houston, New Haven

  32. Which Teacher Will Complete SLOs? • All teachers except those with students that take the following assessments: • Stanford 10, grades 2 • Teachers with students that take Stanford 10 in grade 1 will write SLOs • MSA Reading and Math, grades 3-8 • Courses that trigger HSA Algebra, Biology, English, and Government in grades 8-12

  33. What Has Already Happened with SLOs? • Progress to date: • September email/video from Dr. Alonso and Marietta English announcing field test • SLO 101 (2 sessions) for central office personnel • SLO Tools Development Workshop (November 15-16) • On-going policy decisions by City Schools leadership team SLO bank and guidebook are created by January 2013. Principals receive training in January, with materials they will take back to their buildings so that SLOs can be rolled out to all schools for SLO field test in February 2013. SLO WRITING WORKSHOP – Content Leaders and non-tested subject teachers

  34. SLO Implementation for Field Test June-July: OAA collects and analyzes SLO data and reports to MSDE Following Principals’ training on 1/22-1/23: Principals select 2 SLO ambassadors at their schools April: Ambassadors draft SLOs in work groups; principals trained on SLO approval (April 2nd); principals approve ambassadors’ SLOs August/September: All non-tested teachers trained on SLO 101 and SLO Writing Feb-March: Ambassadors attend half-day PD on SLO 101; content-based workgroups trained on SLO writing (Dates: Feb. 12th, March 19th) June: SLOs scored by district staff.

  35. What role will you play in SLO Development? • Nominate2SLO Ambassadors • Send 2 nominations to by January 31st • Assist with coverage for these teachers for 3-5 hours a month • Attend SLO approval training on April 2nd • Approve SLOs that have been written by Ambassadors–ensuring “ambitious, yet attainable”

  36. SLO Ambassadors: Role Description There will be 2 SLO Ambassadors at each school. SLO Ambassadors will: • Attend monthly trainings • Submit draft SLOs to principals for approval • In SY13-14, become school-based SLO experts and provide SLO support in their buildings

  37. SLO Ambassadors: Selection Criteria SLO Ambassadors Should: • Teach in a non-tested content area; i.e. subjects/grades not covered by MSA/HSA exams • Demonstrate strength in instructional practices during classroom observations using the Framework • Be able to commit 3-5 hours per month to attend trainings, workgroup meetings, and complete outside work, as needed • Plan to return to same school for SY13-14, and facilitate and lead SLO trainings to colleagues • Candidates may be Model Teachers

  38. SLO EXAMPLE:Basic Information

  39. SLO Writing: Assessment • Assessment should: • Answer the question: “How will I know if students have learned the key content?” – it provides evidence • Be aligned to standard(s) targeted • Meet quality criteria that will be established by City Schools • For teacher-created SLOs, describes the assessment • Assessments can be standardized, but they also can be performance tasks or portfolios that are judged against a rubric

  40. SLO Writing: Standards Addressed by SLO • Lists specific standards that will have been met/mastered if the SLO is achieved • Address critical content, skills or knowledge necessary for advancement to future coursework • That is, if students do not master these standards, they will not be able to progress to the next level • No need to list every single standard

  41. SLO Writing: Baseline Data • Baseline data can be collected from: • Pre-assessments • In-class assignments • Observation • Include any additional student data or background information used in setting the target (e.g. ESOL status, SWD incidence)

  42. SLO Writing: Student Learning Objective • States the specific target for student achievement by the end of the instructional period • Target should be ambitious, yet achievable, given the students’ baseline data

  43. SLO Hazards These common errors make an SLO unscorable: • THE DOUBLE TARGET SLO: “My students will get to [this level] by January and [this level] by May” Or “My students’ average score will be 84 and no score will be lower than 70” • THE VAGUE SLO: “My students will all be able to write an excellent explanatory essay by May.” • THE NARROW SLO: “My students will be able to describe three ways that the 1787 Constitutional Convention influences our country today.”

  44. SLO Writing:Encouraging Powerful Teacher Practices

  45. Turn and Talk • How can these sections impact collaboration in your school and across the district? • What practices will you plan to use here to encourage teachers to collaborate?

  46. Scoring Plan

  47. Debrief and Questions • How would you explain what an SLO is to your teachers? Why are we using them? • What systems will you need in place to ensure that your teachers are successful with SLOs? How can the Ambassadors best support quality SLO work? • What outstanding questions do you still have regarding SLOs?

  48. Next Steps • SLO 101 for School Leaders (Today) • Select 2 SLO ambassadors (By Jan 31) • Ambassadors attend half-day PD on SLO 101; content-based workgroups trained on SLO writing (Dates: Feb. 12th, March 19th) • Ambassadors draft SLOs in work groups; principals trained on SLO approval (April 2nd); • SLOs scored by district staff (June) • OAA collects and analyzes SLO data and reports to MSDE (June-July) • All non-tested teachers trained on SLO 101 and SLO Writing (August/September)

  49. Support and Resources • For more information on Student Learning Objectives, please contact us at

  50. LUNCH!School Leader DevelopmentJanuary 22/23, 2013