rise principal evaluation and development system: overview and principal effectiveness rubric

RISEPrincipal Evaluation and Development System: Overview and Principal Effectiveness Rubric

2

Agenda

Overview of the RISE Principal Evaluation and Development System

Professional Practice

Student Learning

Summative Scoring

3

What is the purpose of the RISE Principal Evaluation and Development System?

Support a Fair and Transparent Evaluation of Effectiveness

Promote the Development of Key Leadership Skills

Shine a Spotlight on Great Leadership

4

There are two major components of the RISE system.


Student Learning

Summative Evaluation

Rating

5

Multiple measures inform the summative evaluation score.

Each of these measures are scored separately and combined for the summative rating.

1) Professional PracticeMeasure: Indiana Principal Effectiveness Rubric (PER)

2) Student Learning Measure: School-wide Learning Measure (SWL)

Measure: Administrative Student Learning Objectives (SLO)

6

The overall summative scoring weights emphasize school performance and rubric data.

Rubric, 50%

A-F Grade, 30%

Admin. SLOs, 20%

Principal Metrics

7

Agenda



Student Learning

Summative Scoring

8

We will first look at Professional Practice, as measured by the Principal Effectiveness Rubric.


Student Learning


Rating

9

PART I

You will need: Paper and Pen

Directions: Brainstorm a list of 5 or more skills/actions effective principals display. List your ideas on paper. You will have 5 minutes.

Guiding Question: What skills and actions do effective principals display?

Activity 1: Indicators of an Effective Principal

10

Mission and Vision

Hiring and Retention

Instructional Leadership

Professional Development

School Operations

Student Discipline

How was the RISE Principal Effectiveness Rubric Developed?

Developed with focus

on principal

as driver of student

achievement and growth

11

The Principal Effectiveness Rubric (PER) has two Domains.

Professional Practice: PER

Domain 1: Teacher

Effectiveness

Domain 2: Leadership

Actions

12

The two Domains each have three Competencies.

Domain 1: Teacher Effectiveness

1.1 Human Capital Manager1.2 Instructional Leadership1.3 Leading Indicators of Student Learning

Domain 2: Leadership

2.1 Personal Behavior2.2 Building Relationship2.3 Culture of Achievement

50%

50%

13

Each competency has multiple sub-competencies.

Domain 1: Teacher Effectiveness

Competency 1.1: Human Capital Manager• Sub-competencies:

• 1.1.1 Hiring and retention• 1.1.2 Evaluation of teachers• 1.1.3 Professional development• 1.1.4 Leadership and talent development• 1.1.5 Delegation• 1.1.6 Strategic assignment• 1.1.7 Addressing teachers who are in need of

improvement or ineffective

Overall there are 23 sub-competencies in the Principal Effectiveness Rubric.

50%

14

The rubric is structured to capture multiple performance level ratings, as defined by indicators. Performanc

eLevel

Ratings

Competencies

IndicatorsSub-competencies

15

Activity 1: Effective Principal IndicatorsPART II

You will need: The Principal Effectiveness Rubric and the list you created in Part I of this activity.

Directions: Read through the sub-competencies and some of the indicators in the Principal Effectiveness Rubric. If a skill or action you identified appears in the rubric, circle it on your list.

Discussion Questions: Which skills appear both in your list and in the rubric? Which skills appear in the rubric, but not in your

list? Why might these skills be highlighted in the rubric?

16

To paint a complete picture of principal practice, the evaluator must collect multiple forms of evidence.

Direct Observation• Observing the principal “in action” – Two are

required

Indirect Observation• Observing the result of the principal’s work in

the school

Artifacts• Records kept by the principal of the his/her

work

School data• Outcomes and concrete results of the

principal’s work

17

School visits by the evaluator should be frequent, and they will be observing principal practice.Direct Observation

• Like attending faculty meetings, a teacher’s observation and post-observation conference, committee meetings the principal leads, etc.

• Can be used for sub-competencies such as 1.1.1: Hiring and Retention, 1.1.7: Addressing Teachers in Need of Improvement and Ineffective, 1.2.2: Classroom Observations, 2.2.3: Forging Consensus, etc.

Indirect Observation• Like sitting in on a PLC, grade-level meeting, or

committee meeting without the principal, observing teacher-leaders in action, observing evidence in the halls or on the walls of the building, etc.

• Can be used for sub-competencies such as 1.1.4: Leadership and Talent Development, 1.2.3: Teacher Collaboration, 2.2.1: Culture of Urgency, 2.3.3: Data Usage in Teams

18

Evaluators collect evidence during observations and conferences throughout the year.

Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4

Beginning of year

conference

End of year conference

Mid-year conference(optional)

RequiredDirect

Observation#2

OptionalDirect or Indirect

Observation

RequiredDirect

Observation#1


Observation


Observation

19

There are observation requirements for principal evaluators.

• Observations will be spaced throughout the year.

• Required observations should be direct observations of the principal in practice.

• Feedback will be provided to principals after each required observation.

• Additional observations and feedback can be provided as needed.

Observation Type

Length (min.)

FrequencyPre Conference

Post Conference

Written Feedback

Announced?

Required30 min.

2/yr Optional YesWithin 5 days

Optional

Optional Varies 3/yr (suggested)

No Optional Optional No

20

Artifacts and school data are the other forms of evidence an evaluator might gather. Artifacts

• Frequently provided by the principal

• Like schedules of community meetings, PD opportunities for teachers, etc.

• Can be used for sub-competencies 1.1.3: Professional Development, 1.1.6: Strategic Assignment, 1.3.2: Rigorous SLOs

School data• Can be gathered by the

evaluator• Like surveys of staff and

community, teacher evaluation data, etc.

• Can be used for sub-competencies such as 1.1.2: Evaluation of Teachers, 2.1.3: Using feedback to improve student performance, 2.3.2: Academic rigor

Gathering this evidence

should not be so

burdensome for principals that it hinders their ability to

focus on their

responsibilities as a school

leaders.

21

Evaluators use the rubric and a 4 step process to rate a principal.

Compile ratings and notes from multiple observations, drop-ins, and other sources of evidence.

Use professional judgment to establish final ratings for each competency within the two domains.

2

Example: Domain 1

Competency

1.1 1.2 1.3

Principal’s Rating

3 3 2

Final Domain 1 Rating:

3Use

Professional Judgment

Competency ratings based on notes from observations, conferences and other sources of evidence.

1

1) Professional Practice – Assessment of leadership outcomes

Measure: Indiana Principal Effectiveness Rubric (PER)

22

The last two steps convert domain ratings to a final, overall Professional Practice rating.

Use professional judgment to establish final ratings in Teacher Effectiveness and Leadership Actions.

3

Average two domain ratings (because each is weighted 50% of the rubric score) into one final professional practice rubric score.

4

D1: Teacher Effectiveness

D2: Leadership Actions

Final Professional Practice Rating

Ratings 3(E) 2(IN) 2.5

50% 50%

23

Agenda



Student Learning

Summative Scoring

24

Let’s look quickly at the Student Learning measures for principals in RISE


Student Learning


Rating

25

The measures for Student Learning include a school-wide measure and Student Learning Objectives

The School-wide Learning Measure will be calculated by the state, and returned to schools as an A-F grade

2) Student Learning Measure: School-wide Learning Measure (SWL)

Measure: Administrative Student Learning Objectives (SLO)

26

Each principal will set two administrative Student Learning Objectives, which are weighted equally.Administrative Student Learning Objective

A growth or achievement goal focused on student learning, potentially in specific areas/subjects, set to suit local needs

Administrative SLO#1

50%

Administrative SLO#2

50%

An example Administrative SLO: The bottom 25% of grade 6-8 students, based on last year’s ISTEP+ scores, will increase their ISTEP ELA passing rates by 10%.

27

Agenda



Student Learning

Summative Scoring

28

Recall: The summative scoring weights for the RISE Principal Evaluation and Development System

Rubric, 50%

A-F Grade, 30%

Admin. SLOs, 20%

Principal Metrics

29

Summative Scoring: The evaluator uses raw scores to calculate the summative score for the principal.

Raw Score x Weight

Score

Rubric Rating 2.5 0.50 1.25A-F Accountability

Grade (DOE) 3 (B) 0.30 .90

Admin. SLO Rating 2 0.20 .4Comprehensive Effectiveness Rating 2.55 (E)

rise principal evaluation and development system: overview and principal effectiveness rubric

Documents