Overview of Proposed Teacher evaluation and development system

1. NEW HAVEN PUBLIC SCHOOLS – April 26, 2010 Overview of Proposed Teacher evaluation and development system

2. Background Online surveys of NHPS administrators and teachers, conducted in the fall of 2009, surfaced a clear overarching set of improvements to be made through the new evaluation system.* However, nearly all teachers and all administrators believe that it is “very important” or “important” that an evaluation system help teachers improve by providing specific and useful feedback, and identify and offer concrete steps to remedy poor performance. *The teacher survey was distributed to all current (as of November 2009) NHPS teachers and instructional support staff, with a response rate of 74 percent. The administrator survey was distributed to all current principals, assistant principals, and subject supervisors, yielding a 94 percent response rate from principals and assistant principals.

3. Background (cont’d) All survey results regarding teacher and administrator opinions on all elements of evaluation design were thoughtfully considered in informing the discussions and decisions of the district-wide Teacher Evaluation Committee. For example: 3 out of 4 teachers “strongly agree” or “agree” that all teachers should receive annual formative evaluations that identify clear areas for development. 87 percent of teachers and 99 percent of administrators believe that student learning measures were “very important” or “important” in a fair and comprehensive evaluation system. 48 percent of teachers* agree that standardized test score growth should be used to measure teacher impact on student learning. Over two-thirds (70 percent) of teachers “strongly agree” or “agree” that all teachers should receive an annual summative evaluation rating that is a clear measure of their performance as a teacher. 2 out of 3 of teachers “strongly agree” or “agree” that all teachers should be observed regularly throughout the year. *Teachers who teach tested subjects in grades 3-8.

4. New Evaluation and Development System Highlights NHPS’ new model for teacher evaluation and development includes innovative elements that sets it apart from other typical evaluation systems used around the country. The model is designed to: • Allow administrators to provide frequent, concrete feedback to teachers about their performance against a clear, detailed performance rubric, through multiple classroom observations and a mid-year review of student data and teacher performance; • Incorporate student growth as measured by objective assessments as a significant factor in evaluations, with a clearly defined plan to be able to collect such data for the vast majority of classroom teachers within the next several years; • Use the peer review process in an innovative way, using third party experts to validate administrator judgments about exemplary performance, as well as performance most in need of improvement; and • Ensure all teachers have evaluation and development conferences every year, as the foundation of a professional learning relationship with their manager. This new system will be implemented in September 2010 for all teachers, with development and refinement based on the available resources and the experience of implementation.

5. Guiding Design Principles and Key System Components The new teacher evaluation and development system was designed collaboratively under a set of guiding principles that would allow the new system to: • Enable professional evaluation and coaching for all teachers • Support deep individualized development aligned to student learning goals for teachers • Recognize, with real consequences, both outstanding and poor performance Each teacher will be evaluated annually by a single instructional manager. • Instructional managers will be principals, assistant principals, and, as appropriate and necessary, teacher leaders of different kinds. • Instructional managers will be accountable for the evaluation and overall development of each teacher in their caseload. All teachers will have only one instructional manager throughout the year, though other individuals (e.g., coaches, mentors, lead teachers) may provide specific development. The centerpiece of the new process will be regular, substantive and collegial conferences between each teacher and his/her assigned instructional manager. These conferences will: • Center teacher performance conversations around student learning • Provide teachers with the opportunity to assess their performance and drive the conversation • Provide comprehensive feedback to each teacher, including all elements of teacher evaluation • Set a defined plan of targeted development opportunities that are based on evaluation data for each teacher • Act as the foundation of the professional relationship between teacher and instructional manager

6. Timeline and Key Elements of Evaluation and Development Situational feedback conversations; student data reviews and data team meetings Evaluation Instructional Rounds and/or full-period classroom observations Mid-year check-in conference, informed by all available data End of year summative evaluation conference Beginning of year goal-setting conference Self-assessment and discuss next year’s professional focus areas Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Self-assessment and develop professional focus areas Self-assessment and revisit professional focus areas Development Targeted development activities (i.e., coaching, co-teaching, etc.) Professional learning community meetings and feedback sessions Note: Additional evaluation and development activities for non-tenured teachers, developing teachers, and/or teachers in need of improvement (such as mentoring from coaches, progress check-ins with instructional managers, additional conferences, etc) are proposed in greater frequency but do not appear in the timeline above.

7. Assessment of Teacher Performance (By Component) The new evaluation and development system will use multiple sources of information to assign each teacher’s evaluation ratings and determine targeted development opportunities. Component Measured By Student learning outcomes Growth in student learning (i.e., growth on state- and/or district-standardized assessments) and attainment of academic goals that are rigorous and aligned to standards 1 Teacher instructional practice Instructional manager judgments of observed teacher performance in the domains of Planning and Preparation, Classroom Practice, and Reflection and Use of Data 2 Teacher professional values Instructional manager judgments of observed teacher behavior that address a set of characteristics including professionalism, collegiality and high expectations for students. 3 At the end of each year, all teachers will be assigned a rating that indicates their level of performance for each component on the following scale:

8. Example Component: Instructional Practices

9. Assessment of Teacher Performance (Summative) The ratings for the three evaluation components will be synthesized into a final summative rating at the end of each year. Student growth outcomes will play a preponderant role in the synthesis. *Ratings with this degree of mismatch should be the subject of focused policy review, outside the context of the specific teacher’s evaluation, to determine why such a mismatch is occurring and what, if anything, needs to be corrected. The individual ratings themselves will also be reviewed to ensure that the given rating in these situations is fair and accurate based on the preponderance of evidence shared by the instructional manager and teacher. Individual ratings may be adjusted for unfairness or inconsistency. Note: Instructional Practices will make up 80 percent of the combined Instructional Practices and Professional Values rating. Professional Value will account for 20 percent. While the end-of-year summative rating is the official rating on record, all teachers should be aware of what that summative rating will be, based on ongoing situational feedback, as well as feedback received at each evaluation and development conference throughout the year.

10. Evaluation Outcomes Exemplary teachers (teachers who receive a final summative rating of “5”): Peer Validation Process • Eligible for teacher leadership positions, including modeling and sharing of best practices, supporting other teachers, and leading professional learning communities • Teachers on track to receive an “exemplary” rating will be observed by an external peer validator as part of the Peer Validation process to ensure fairness and accuracy of the instructional manager’s judgment • Used as a norming mechanism to validate instructional manager judgments for teachers rated a “1” or a “5” • Peer validators will be former teachers not currently affiliated with the district and who have demonstrated effectiveness in the classroom • NHPS and NHFT will issue a joint contract to hire peer validators. Validators will be selected by the contractor in consultation with the district and the union, pending funding. Developing teachers (teachers who receive a final summative rating of “2”): • Will receive immediate and intense development opportunities, including a written Plan of Improvement and more frequent support sessions with a coach • Tenured teachers may not be rated “developing” for more than two consecutive years Teachers in need of improvement (teachers who receive a final summative rating of “1”): • Will receive immediate and intense development opportunities, including a written Intensive Plan of Improvement and frequent support sessions with a coach/coaches • Teachers who do not improve sufficiently even with intense development and support opportunities will be subject to immediate (i.e., end of this school year) sanctions; Teachers on track to receive a “needs improvement” rating must receive verbal notice of their trajectory by November 1 in order to trigger the potential for “end-of-this-school-year sanctions.” • Teachers with a “needs improvement” rating will be observed by an external peer validator as part of the Peer Validation process to ensure fairness and accuracy of the instructional manager’s judgment

11. Next Steps The overall system design phase was a first and critical step for NHPS toward giving all its teachers the support and feedback they need to reach their full potential, but key work streams remain to build on the design work and prepare for system implementation this fall. Immediate Next Steps • Finalize the administrator evaluation and development system. Administrators will be evaluated and developed through a similar continuum of growth in student learning, leadership practice, and professional values, with similar performance-based recognition and consequence options in place. • Determine the final procedural details for each system component and develop all necessary supporting documents (e.g., conference forms, observation tools, self-assessment forms, etc.) to be used in the evaluation process. • Begin “testing” of key design elements with teachers and administrators and develop all necessary explanatory documents to be used in communication with and training of teachers and administrators. • Train administrators to implement the system with fidelity and ensure differentiated results. • Determine specific resource and capacity needs in order to make final system implementation decisions. This course of action includes completing NHPS’ federal Investing in Innovation (I3) grant application, as well as exploring other necessary sources of funding and/or ways to repurpose existing positions and resources. Long-term/Ongoing Considerations • Track the extent to which summative ratings align with student learning outcomes, as well as the extent to which instructional practice measures align with student growth measures, and adjust the system as needed. • Create high-quality district-wide assessments to measure student learning outcomes for all students. • Refine professional development opportunities as needed. • Monitor the progress of the new evaluation system as measured by key success metrics and teacher and administrator feedback. • Provide ongoing support for administrators.