reading public schools staff presentations march 30, 2012
TRANSCRIPT
The New TAPReading Public Schools Staff Presentations
March 30, 2012
Agenda Discussion of New Teacher Evaluation
Regulations Comparison to Our TAP
o What is the sameo What is new
How does this effect me as a teacher? Next steps in the process Questions
Educator Evaluation Model System
3http://www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/model/
Educator Evaluation New DESE Regulations approved on June 28, 2011 Collaboratively Designed by
o Massachusetts Teachers Associationo Massachusetts Association of Secondary School
Principalso Massachusetts Elementary School Principals Associationo Massachusetts Association of School Superintendentso Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Requires evaluation of all educators on a license Designed to promote leaders and teachers growth
and development
Reading is an Early Adopter
Our current system is comparable to new DESE model Allowed us to give significant input into the process Developed a network with other school districts Attended professional development opportunities Piloted
o Educator Plan with SMART Goalso Superintendent’s Evaluation Processo Principal Evaluation Process
TAP Committee Representation from every school Compared current rubric with model rubric
system Reviewed model contract language Will be involved in development of forms for
September, 2012
What is the same? Focuses on Educator Growth and not “Gotcha” Five Step Evaluation Cycle
o Self-Assessmento Analysis, Goal Setting, Educator Plan Developmento Implementation of Plano Formative Assessment (Midyear or Mid-cycle)o Summative Evaluation (End of Year/Cycle Evaluation)
Rubric for Evaluation Use of Artifacts for Evidence
o Lesson Plans, Professional Development Activities, Flierso Walkthroughs
Differentiated Approacho New Teacherso Non-PTS Teacherso PTS Teacherso PTS Teachers who need additional support
Use of SMART Goals
What is different? Levels of Performance on Rubric
o Exemplary (Exceeding the Standard)o Proficient (Meeting the Standard)o Needs Improvement (Progressing Toward the Standard)o Unsatisfactory (Does not meet standard)
Specificity of Rubrico Standards o Indicatorso Elements
Four Standards instead of Six Multiple Measures of Student Performance (2013-14
School Year) Use of student surveys (2014-15 School Year)
9
5 Step Evaluation Cycle
Continuous Learning
Every educator is an active participant in an evaluation
Process promotes collaboration and continuous learning
Foundation for the Model
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education10
5 Step Evaluation Cycle: Rubrics
10
Part III: Guide to RubricsPages 4-5
Rubric is used to assess
performance and/or progress
toward goals
Rubric is used to analyze
performance and determine
ratings on each Standard
and Overall
Every educator uses a rubric to
self-assess against Performance
Standards
Professional Practice goals – team and/or individual must be tied to one or more
Performance Standards
Evidence is collected for
Standards and Indicators;
rubric should be used to provide
feedback
Four Different Educator Plans
The Developing Educator Plan (Non-PTS Teachers and teachers new to a position) is developed by the educator and the evaluator and is for one school year or less.
The Self-Directed Growth Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Proficient or Exemplary and is developed by the educator. When the Rating of Impact on Student Learning is implemented (beginning in 2013-14), educators with a Moderate or High Rating of Impact will be on a two-year plan; educators with a Low Rating will be on a one-year plan.
The Directed Growth Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Needs Improvement and is a plan of one school year or less developed by the educator and the evaluator.
The Improvement Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Unsatisfactory and is a plan of no less than 30 calendar days and no longer than one school year, developed by the evaluator.
Standards, Indicators and Rubrics
Standards (4)-Required in Regulationso Instructional Leadership (5 Indicators)o Management and Operations (5 Indicators)o Family and Community Engagement (4 Indicators)o Professional Culture (6 Indicators)
Indicators (20)-Required in Regulations Elements (32)-May be modified, but most keep
rigor Rubrics
o A tool for making explicit and specific the behaviors and actions present at each level of performance.
13
Model Rubrics: Structure
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationPart III: Guide to RubricsPage 6
14
Model Rubrics: Vertical Alignment within Rubrics
Example: Teacher Rubrico Standard I
• “Standard I. Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment”o Indicator B
• “Indicator I-B. Assessment”o Elements 1 & 2
• I-B-1: Variety of Assessment Methods• I-B-2: Adjustments to Practice
Part III: Guide to RubricsAppendix C, pages 2-4
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
15
Model Rubrics: Structure
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationPart III: Guide to RubricsPage 6
16
Exemplary
“The educator’s performance significantly exceeds Proficient and could serve as a model for leaders districtwide or even statewide. Few educators—principals and superintendents included—are expected to demonstrate Exemplary performance on more than a small number of Indicators or Standards.”
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationPart III: Guide to RubricsPage 14
17
Proficient
“Proficient is the expected, rigorous level of performance for educators. It is the demanding but attainable level of performance for most educators.”
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationPart III: Guide to RubricsPage 9
Needs Improvement Educators whose performance on a Standard is
rated as Needs Improvement may demonstrate inconsistencies in practice or weaknesses in a few key areas. They may not yet fully integrate and/or apply their knowledge and skills in an effective way. They may be new to the field or to this assignment and are developing their craft.
Unsatisfactory Educators whose performance on a Standard is rated
as Unsatisfactory are significantly underperforming as compared to the expectations. Unsatisfactory performance requires urgent attention.
Standard I:Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment
Standard II:Teaching All Students
Standard III:Family and Community Engagement
Standard IV:Professional Culture
A. Curriculum and Planning Indicator
1. Subject Matter Knowledge
2. Child and Adolescent Development
3. Rigorous Standards-Based Unit Design
4. Well-Structured Lessons
A. Instruction Indicator
1. Quality of Effort and Work
2. Student Engagement
3. Meeting Diverse Needs
A. Engagement Indicator
1. Parent/Family Engagement
A. Reflection Indicator
1. Reflective Practice
2. Goal Setting
B. Assessment Indicator
1. Variety of Assessment Methods
2. Adjustments to Practice
B. Learning Environment Indicator
1. Safe Learning Environment
2. Collaborative Learning Environment
3. Student Motivation
B. Collaboration Indicator
1. Learning Expectations
2. Curriculum Support
B. Professional Growth Indicator
1. Professional Learning and Growth
C. Analysis Indicator
1. Analysis and Conclusions
2. Sharing Conclusions With Colleagues
3. Sharing Conclusions With Students
C. Cultural Proficiency Indicator
1. Respects Differences
2. Maintains Respectful Environment
C. Communication Indicator
1. Two-Way Communication
2. Culturally Proficient Communication
C. Collaboration Indicator
1. Professional Collaboration
D. Expectations Indicator
1. Clear Expectations
2. High Expectations
3. Access to Knowledge
D. Decision-Making Indicator
1. Decision-making
E. Shared Responsibility Indicator
1. Shared Responsibility
F. Professional Responsibilities Indicator
1. Judgment
2. Reliability and Responsibility
Example of Teacher Rubric
Standard I: Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment. The teacher promotes the learning and growth of all students by providing high-quality and coherent instruction, designing and administering authentic and meaningful student assessments, analyzing student performance and growth data, using this data to improve instruction, providing students with constructive feedback on an ongoing basis, and continuously refining learning objectives.
Example Indicator I-A. Curriculum and Planning: Knows
the subject matter well, has a good grasp of child development and how students learn, and designs effective and rigorous standards-based units of instruction consisting of well-structured lessons with measurable outcomes.
Example Element A-1. Subject Matter Knowledge
o Proficient-Demonstrates sound knowledge and understanding of the subject matter and the pedagogy it requires by consistently engaging students in learning experiences that enable them to acquire complex knowledge and skills in the subject.
Educators earn two separate ratings
24
Summative
Rating
Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF-
DIRECTED GROWTH
PLAN
2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Proficient
Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Low Moderate High
Rating of Impact on Student Learning(multiple measures of performance, including MCAS
Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where available) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Summative
Rating
Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF-
DIRECTED GROWTH
PLAN
2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Proficient
Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Low Moderate High
Rating of Impact on Student Learning(multiple measures of performance, including MCAS
Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where available)
Educators earn two separate ratings
25
Summative
Rating
Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF-
DIRECTED GROWTH
PLAN
2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Proficient
Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Low Moderate High
Rating of Impact on Student Learning(multiple measures of performance, including MCAS
Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where available) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Summative
Rating
Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF-
DIRECTED GROWTH
PLAN
2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Proficient
Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Low Moderate High
Rating of Impact on Student Learning(multiple measures of performance, including MCAS
Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where available)
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education26
Multiple sources of evidence inform the summative performance rating
Phase-in Over Next 2 Years
Phase 1-Summative ratings based on attainment of goals and performance against the four Standards defined in the educator evaluation requirements (September, 2012)
Phase 2-Rating of educator impact on student learning gains based on trends and patterns of multiple measures of student learning gains (September, 2013)
Phase 3-Using feedback from students (for teachers) and teachers (for administrators)-(September, 2014)
Next Steps Collective Bargaining Process for Areas Not in
Regulations Meeting with individual schools to discuss process
further Training for Primary and Secondary Supervisors
on Process and Calibration of Rubric TAP Committee Summer Work
o New Formso Planning professional development opportunities
September Inserviceo SMART Goal Development
29
or “The” organizing initiative?
“An” initiative?
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Examples of District/School
Initiatives Adopting the new MA Curriculum Frameworks 21st Century/Global Skills Anti-Bullying Professional learning communities Examining student work Data Teams Project Based Learning Common course/grade level assessments Elementary Report Cards Social Emotional Health BYOD
30Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Thank You!