1 / 48

Teacher Effectiveness and Support for Growth

Teacher Effectiveness and Support for Growth. Using meaningful evaluation to increase effectiveness of teachers and leaders. Overview for Today Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs. Rationale Why we are doing this?.

yaron
Télécharger la présentation

Teacher Effectiveness and Support for Growth

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Teacher Effectiveness and Support for Growth Using meaningful evaluation to increase effectiveness of teachers and leaders

  2. Overview for TodayRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs RationaleWhy we are doing this? • StatusDetermining educator effectiveness status MET ResearchKey ideas from recent research SupportProfessional development for improving practice • MSLsMeasuring growth in currently non-tested subjects Standard 6 & 8How we’ll include student growth in educator evaluations

  3. OverviewRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ The central focus of READY is improving student learning ... by enabling and ensuringgreat teaching.

  4. What is our goal?Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Before Teaching and Leading Develop effective teachers and leaders in preparation programs Great Teachers and LeadersAn effective teacher in every classroom and leader in every school Student Readiness Achievement and growth for all students During Teaching and Leading Use meaningful evaluation and professional development to increase effectiveness of teachers and leaders

  5. What is our goal?Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs Big Question:What is the best approach to Educator Evaluation and how do we get NC there? ▲

  6. Measures of Effective TeachingRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲

  7. Measures of Effective TeachingRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ This research suggests: • Multiple measures are important. • Including student growth improves objectivity of evaluation.

  8. Re-creation of chart from Gathering Feedback For Teaching, http://www.metproject.org/downloads/MET_Gathering_Feedback_Practioner_Brief.pdf Observation + Other MeasuresRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Months of Learning Gained or Lost State Math State ELA Observation Tool +1.2 +.2 Top 25% -1.4 -.4 Bottom 25% Observation Tool+ Student Survey Top 25% +2.8 +.7 Bottom 25% -2 -.9 Observation Tool+ Student Survey + Growth (Value-Add) Top 25% +1.2 +4.5 Bottom 25% -1.3 -3.1

  9. What We Have • Some Assessments to Measure Growth From the MET… • Evaluation Tools  • End of GradeEnd of CourseVoCATs • Observation Tools • Assessments to Measure Growth • Student Survey  Standard 8 • Standards 1-7 • End of GradeEnd of CourseVoCATs • Standards 1-5 Standard 6 Exploring Pilot in 29 LEAs in 2011-12

  10. What We Need What do we need? • Standard 6 and 8We need a state-adopted growth model and a fair 6 & 8 rating strategy • StatusWe need an overall method to determine educator effectiveness status • Measures of Student Learning (MSLs)For those grades and subjects that are currently non-tested, we need ways to measure growth

  11. Standards 6 & 8 – The BasicsRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Teachers 1 2 3 4 5 6 Contribute to Academic Success Demonstrate Leadership Establish Environment KnowContent Facilitate Learning Reflect on Practice • Principals (and other Administrators) 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Human Resource Leadership External Development Leadership Academic Achievement Leadership ManagerialLeadership Strategic Leadership InstructionalLeadership Cultural Leadership Micro-politicalLeadership

  12. Growth ModelRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Standard 6 and 8 are measures of Growth • Teachers 6 Contribute to Academic Success • Principals 8 Academic Achievement Leadership Academic Achievement Leadership

  13. Growth ModelRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ We will useEducator Value-Added Assessment System EVAASfor standards 6 & 8 when possible • Teachers 6 Contribute to Academic Success • Principals 8 Academic Achievement Leadership Academic Achievement Leadership

  14. Growth ModelRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ How do Value-Added models work? • They measure growth by predicting how well a student will do on an assessment. How do they predict how well the student will do? • They look at previous test scoresand estimate how well the student should do at the end of the year. Every student must grow based on where they start. • Teachers 6 Contribute to Academic Success • Principals 8 Academic Achievement Leadership Academic Achievement Leadership

  15. RatingsRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ How will the ratings on Standards 6 & 8 work? • Teachers 6 Contribute to Academic Success • Principals 8 Academic Achievement Leadership Academic Achievement Leadership

  16. Principal Rating CategoriesRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Principals 8 Academic Achievement Leadership Strategic Leadership • 3 Rating Categories • 5 Rating Categories Does not Meet Expected Growth Meets Expected Growth Exceeds Expected Growth Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Human Resource Leadership Micro-politicalLeadership External Development Leadership ManagerialLeadership InstructionalLeadership Cultural Leadership

  17. Teacher Ratings CategoriesRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Teachers 1 2 3 4 5 6 Contribute to Academic Success Demonstrate Leadership Establish Environment KnowContent Facilitate Learning Reflect on Practice • 5 Rating Categories • 3 Rating Categories Not Demonstrated Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished Does not Meet Expected Growth Meets Expected Growth Exceeds Expected Growth

  18. RatingsRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Teachers 1 2 3 4 5 6 Contribute to Academic Success Demonstrate Leadership Establish Environment KnowContent Facilitate Learning Reflect on Practice • 5 Rating Categories • 3 Ratings Categories Why the difference? Identifying only three rating categories on standard 6 & 8 improves certainty of categorization.

  19. Teacher Ratings in 2011-12Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ 6 • Yearly Rating • Does not Meet Expected Growth • Meets Expected Growth • Exceeds Expected Growth TeacherEVAAS Growth School-wide EVAAS Growth 70% 30% Weighted Average Why is school-wide EVAAS growth included? • To encourage collaboration and collective ownership of overall outcomes. Note: In 2011-12, teachers without individual EVAAS growth will get school-wide growth for Standard 6.

  20. Teacher Ratings in 2012-13Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ We are piloting some additional elements for possible inclusion in Standard 6 in 2012-13 6 Possible additional elements • Yearly Rating • Does not Expected Growth • Meets Expected Growth • Exceeds Expected Growth TeacherEVAAS Growth School-wide EVAAS Growth Team EVAAS Growth (?) Student Surveys (?) Weighted Average

  21. Principal Ratings Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Standards 8 rating will be determined using school-wide EVAAS growth 8 • Yearly Rating • Does not Meet Expectations • Meets Expected Growth • Exceeds Expected Growth School-wide EVAAS Growth

  22. Ratings Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Key Note on Ratings • Every educator is evaluated every year • Each standard and rating stands on its own (1 out of 6, not 1/6) • Ratings are used to create professional development plans each year • Ratings are used to determine status • Teachers 1 2 3 4 5 6 Contribute to Academic Success Establish Environment KnowContent Facilitate Learning Demonstrate Leadership Reflect on Practice • Principals 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Human Resource Leadership External Development Leadership Academic Achievement Leadership ManagerialLeadership Strategic Leadership InstructionalLeadership Cultural Leadership Micro-politicalLeadership

  23. Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs What is the difference between Ratings and Status? ▲

  24. Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Teachers6 separate ratings to help teachers grow each year • Principals8 separate ratings to help principals grow each year Ratings Status • A single overall status that is determined once a principal or teacher has three years of growth data to populate 6 or 8 • Categories for Status In Need of Improvement Effective Highly Effective

  25. Status and Standard 6 & 8 Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • An educator receives an effectiveness status only once she has 3 years of data on Standard 6 or 8 • A 3-year rolling average of growth data from standard 6 or 8 is used as part of determining overall status

  26. 3-Year Rolling Average Teacher Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Rating from 2 years ago Rating from 1 year ago Rating from this year 1.0 + .8 + 1.2 6 6 6 Standard Standard Standard 3 Contribute to Academic Success Contribute to Academic Success = 1.0 Met Expected Growth3- year average rating on standard 6 for determining status 1.0Met Expected Growth .8Did not meet Expected Growth 1.2 Met Expected Growth Note: A similar methodology applies to principals as well.

  27. Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs So once a educator has a three-year average rating for Standard 6 or 8, how is status determined? ▲

  28. Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • The Three Status Categories are In Need of Improvement Effective Highly Effective

  29. Principal Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Standards 1-7In the year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Human Resource Leadership External Development Leadership ManagerialLeadership Strategic Leadership InstructionalLeadership Cultural Leadership Micro-politicalLeadership Any rating lower than proficient and/or ) / 3 Standards 8Three year rolling average ) 8 8 8 + + 2 years ago 1 year ago Thisyear Does Not Meet Expected Growth

  30. Principal Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Standards 1-7In the year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Human Resource Leadership External Development Leadership ManagerialLeadership Strategic Leadership InstructionalLeadership Cultural Leadership Micro-politicalLeadership Proficient or Higher on Standards 1 - 7 and ) / 3 Standards 8Three year rolling average ) 8 8 8 + + 2 years ago 1 year ago Thisyear Meets or Exceeds Expected Growth

  31. Principal Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Standards 1-7In the year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Human Resource Leadership External Development Leadership ManagerialLeadership Strategic Leadership InstructionalLeadership Cultural Leadership Micro-politicalLeadership Accomplished or Higher on Standards 1 - 7 and ) / 3 Standards 8Three year rolling average ) 8 8 8 + + 2 years ago 1 year ago Thisyear Exceeds Expected Growth

  32. Teacher Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Standards 1-5In the year 1 2 3 4 5 Establish Environment KnowContent Facilitate Learning Demonstrate Leadership Reflect on Practice Any rating lower than proficient and/or ) / 3 Standards 6Three year rolling average ) 6 6 6 + + 2 years ago 1 year ago Thisyear Does Not Meet Expected Growth

  33. Teacher Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Standards 1-5In the year 1 2 3 4 5 Establish Environment KnowContent Facilitate Learning Demonstrate Leadership Reflect on Practice Proficient or Higher on Standards 1 - 7 and ) / 3 Standards 6Three year rolling average ) 6 6 6 + + 2 years ago 1 year ago Thisyear Meets or Exceeds Expected Growth

  34. Teacher Status Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ Standards 1-5In the year 1 2 3 4 5 Establish Environment KnowContent Facilitate Learning Demonstrate Leadership Reflect on Practice Accomplished or Higher on Standards 1 - 5 and ) / 3 Standards 6Three year rolling average ) 6 6 6 + + 2 years ago 1 year ago Thisyear Exceeds Expected Growth

  35. What will teachers see?Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Ratings on Standards 1 – 5 of the Educator Evaluation System (as recorded in online tool) • Standard 6 rating (current year and 2 prior years) • Three-year rolling average of student growth values and accompanying Standard 6 rating(for Status determination) • Overall Effectiveness Status

  36. North Carolina Educator Evaluation System Evaluation Summary Sheet Name: Martha Washington School: Independence Elementary School LEA: Freedom County Schools Licensure: Career-Status Overall Status: Effective DRAFT

  37. Support for TeachersRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs How will we support Teachers in using the evaluation system? ▲

  38. Support for TeachersRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Increased professional development (PD) and support in content and pedagogy • Common Core & Essential Standards • Data Literacy • Pedagogy for engaging students • State PD Leads working with Local PD Leads to create strong, lasting communities of practice • Online PD resources

  39. SupportRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs How will we support Principals in using the evaluation system? ▲

  40. Support for PrincipalsRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Increased training and support in use of the instrument (Standards 1-5) • increased consistency/reliability • better information for teachers • Increased professional development regarding instructional leadership and other management practices

  41. Measures of Student LearningRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs But we can’t measure growth for everybody. What about the non-tested subjects? ▲

  42. Measures of Student LearningRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs Measures of Student Learning are being designed for non-tested subjects for district use to populated Standard 6 ▲

  43. Guiding PrinciplesRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • NC’s experienced teachers know their students and their content • NC teachers are best-qualified to provide input on meaningful assessment of currently non-tested grades and subjects • Valid measures of what students know and are able to do will likely exceed traditional multiple-choice assessment

  44. What MSLs AreRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Measures of what students know and are able to do after completing a course or grade • Tightly linked to the instruction that a teacher delivers • One part of how North Carolina will evaluate the effectiveness of its teachers • Similar to the common summative assessments that many districts already have in place

  45. What MSLs Are NotRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ • Multiple-choice standardized exams for all areas of the Standard Course of Study • Assessments that need to be delivered with the same level of security as EOCs and EOGs • Designed without teacher input • The only source of data used to make decisions about a teacher’s effectiveness • Part of the school accountability model

  46. Four Buckets of Assessments for GrowthRationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ A B C D Category Two of MSLs With the heavy emphasis on performance, these MSLs cannot be validated psychometrically Locally Developed Courses EOCs, EOGs and VoCATS Category One of MSLs With appropriate resources and time, these MSLs can be validated psychometrically

  47. A Picture of Assessment Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ 1 2 3 4

  48. Three-Phase Process Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support - MSLs ▲ 1 2 3 4

More Related