Charter School Evaluation System Work Session

1. Charter School Evaluation System Work Session January 2016

2. Outcomes for Today • Review the required components of an evaluation system • Based on level of readiness, provide differentiated supports to move your planning process forward • Develop an action plan with your team for next steps beyond today’s session

3. OregonFramework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support SystemsAlignment of State and Federal Requirements The Oregon Framework incorporates SB290 and federal requirements HB 2186 in 2015 session added charter schools OAR 581-022-1723 Guides implementation of aligned state & federal requirements

4. Purpose of an Evaluation & Support System • Improve instructional, professional and leadership practices • Engage every educator as an active participant in their evaluation • Ensure the process promotes collaboration and continuous learning • Improve student growth and prepare students for College, Careers and Citizenship

5. Oregon Framework Required Elements • Elements must be included in all teacher and administrator evaluation and support systems: • Must align to requirements, but flexibility in local design

6. Standards of Professional Practice Teachers Administrators Model Core Teaching Standards (InTASC) • Four Domains/10 Standards: • The Learner and Learning • Content • Instructional Practice • Professional Responsibility EducationalLeadership/ Administrator Standards (ISLLC) • Six Domains: • Visionary Leadership • Instructional Improvement • Effective Management • Inclusive Practice • Ethical Leadership • Socio-Political Context

7. Differentiated Performance Levels • Performance evaluated on the Standards of Professional Practice on 4 levels • Level 1 – Does not meet standards • Level 2 – Making progress toward standards • Level 3 – Meets standards • Level 4 – Exceeds standards Proficient

8. Multiple Measures

9. Professional Practice Evidence of the quality of the teacher’s planning, delivery of instruction, and assessment of student learning. • Observations (minimum of 2) • Evaluator’s observation, documentation and feedback on a teacher’s instructional practices; both formal and informal • Artifacts • Lesson plans, curriculum design, scope and sequence, student assignments, student work

10. Professional Responsibility Evidence of the teacher’s progress toward their own professional goals and contribution to school-wide goals. • Examples: Teacher reflections, self-reports, data analysis, professional goal setting, student growth goal setting, records of contributions, peer collaboration, teamwork, parent/student surveys, meetings, record keeping, portfolios, building level leadership (committees, demonstration classrooms)

11. Student Learning and Growth (SLG) Evidence of the teacher’s contribution to student learning and growth. • All teachers set and score two goals each year • Category 1 goals are measured using statewide assessments in ELA and math • Category 2 goals are measured using school-wide or district-wide assessments • Collaborative process that includes mid-year check in for conversation on progress

12. Factors in Summative Effectiveness Rating

13. Determining a Final Score: Oregon Matrix *Inquiry Process

14. Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle Educator conducts an assessment of practice against performance standards Culmination of multiple formative observations, reflections, professional conversations Educator strategically identifies professional practice and student learning goals Educator and evaluator review progress toward goals and/or performance against standards Educator and evaluator collect evidence using multiple measures

15. Aligned Professional Learning • Evaluation aligned with high quality professional development opportunities • Relevant to educator’s goals and needs • Informs decisions for professional growth Standards for Professional Learning http://www.learningforward.org/standards

16. Questions about requirements?

17. Materials for Today’s Work • Your completed Process Tool • Sample systems on website (David Douglas & Philomath), one on flash drive • Handbook template • Implementation guidance • Action Planning template • Oregon Framework • Survey

18. Today’s Work Session • With your team, select the appropriate level of readiness: Yellow - Our team has not completed the Process Tool Blue - Our team has completed the Process Tool, but we do not have a formal evaluation handbook Green - Our team has completed the Process Tool and has a formal evaluation handbook that needs adjustments to align with the requirements of the Oregon Framework Pink - Our team has completed the Process Tool and is using a system that fully aligns with the Oregon Framework

19. Work Time

20. Before we break for lunch… • Questions or discussion points for the group? • ESEA Reauthorization – Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

21. ESEA Reauthorization • The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and replaces the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. • Reauthorization period FY2017 thorough FY2020.

22. Major ESSA Timelines

23. Oregon’s Rollout Timeline

24. Assessments NCLB ESSA • Title I-A funding required state testing in reading and math annually in grades 3-8 and once in high school; and in science annually in grades 3-5, 6-8, and 10-12. • Same testing requirements • Allows states to use a single annual summative assessment or multiple interim assessments that result in one summative score. • Allows districts to use other nationally recognized tests in high school, approved by the state.

25. Assessments cont. NCLB ESSA • Title I-A funding allowed states to administer alternative tests to students with disabilities; to be used by no more that 1% of the students being assessed. • Required states to administer assessments to at least 95% of each student subgroup. • Allows states to administer alternate tests for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities; 1% cap still applies. • Maintains 95% participation requirement but state creates its own “opt out” policy and decide how to include in its accountability system.

26. Teacher and Leader Effectiveness NCLB ESSA • Required 100% of teachers in core academic subjects to be “highly qualified.” • BS degree, • Demonstrate subject-matter knowledge in subject they teach, and • Hold certification or license in subject they teach. • Eliminates highly qualified teacher (HQT) requirements. • Requires state to provide assurances that all teachers and paraprofessionals in Title 1-A funded schools meet state certification and licensure requirements. • Districts must report experience, credentials, teaching out of field in the Report Card; disaggregated by high/low poverty.

27. Teacher and Leader Effectiveness cont. NCLB ESSA • The ESEA waiver for NCLB required states to develop teacher and principal evaluation and support systems that included state assessments as a measure of student growth in tested grades and subjects (ELA/math; grades 3-8 and high school). • Does not require teacher or principal evaluation systems. • But if Title II funds are used to create or change evaluation systems, they must be based “in part” on evidence of student achievement, which may include student growth; must include multiple measures of educator performance; and provide clear, timely, useful feedback. Note: State law (SB290) and Oregon Administrative rule remain in effect.

28. Well-Rounded Education NCLB ESSA • Title IV-A funding included a variety of programs and funding authority to support a well-rounded education, including arts education, school counseling, physical education, and 21st century learning community centers. • Eliminates 50 individual programs and creates new a block grant. • Funds for Student Support and Academic Enrichment grants for: • Well-rounded education - e.g. counseling, music and arts, accelerated learning, STEM… • Safe and healthy students. • Effective use of technology. • Continues 21st Century Community Learning Centers as a stand-alone program. • Authorizes Family Engagement Centers.

29. ESSA Resources & Links

30. Enjoy your lunch!

31. Timeline for Charter Schools • 2015-16 Design Year • Establish a collaborative process/team that includes teachers • Review current evaluation practice and processes to capitalize on what you are already doing • Create a handbook aligned to the Framework requirements • Learn about Student Learning and Growth Goals • Develop a plan for implementation

32. Thinking about Implementation • 2016-17 Implementation • Conduct all teacher evaluations using the aligned system • Write Student Learning and Growth (SLG) goals • Provide professional learning on the system and tools for all staff • Provide professional learning for evaluators on observation, calibration and feedback • Implement a system for gathering and tracking evidence related to the evaluation Charter school evaluation systems must be fully implemented beginning in 2016-17

33. Work Time

34. Processing… • Based on the work your team did today, what are the areas of focus for the remaining work?

35. Work until you’re done! Before you leave today… • Complete the action planning template outlining the remaining work for your team to accomplish • Complete the survey to inform follow-up regional support from ODE in Spring/Summer 2016. Please reach out to any of our team members for support! • Kate Pattison kate.pattison@state.or.us • Tanya Frisendahltanya.frisendahl@state.or.us • Sarah Martin sarah.martin@state.or.us • Sarah Phillips sarah.phillips@state.or.us • Brian Putnam brian.putnam@state.or.us