Standard VI Teachers Contribute to the

Academic Success of Students

Overview

The central focus of READY is improving student learning ...

by enabling and ensuringgreat teaching.

04/21/23 • page 2

What is our goal?

Student ReadinessAchievement and growth for all students

Great Teachers and LeadersAn effective teacher in every classroom and leader in every school

Before Teaching and LeadingDevelop effective teachers and leaders in preparation programs

During Teaching and LeadingUse meaningful evaluation and professional development to increase effectiveness of teachers and leaders

04/21/23 • page 3

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

Observation + Other Measures

04/21/23 • page 4

Standard 6 is a measure of

Growth

Teacher Ratings Categories

Teachers

1 65432Demonstrate Leadership

Establish Environment

KnowContent

Facilitate Learning

Reflect on Practice

Contribute to Academic

Success

5 Rating CategoriesNot Demonstrated

Developing

Proficient

Accomplished

Distinguished

3 Rating CategoriesDoes Not Meet Expected Growth

Meets Expected Growth

Exceeds Expected Growth

Key Notes

Ratings

Teachers

1 65432Demonstrate Leadership

Establish Environment

KnowContent

Facilitate Learning

Reflect on Practice

Contribute to Academic

Success

5 Rating Categories 3 Ratings Categories

Why the difference?

Identifying only three rating categories on standard 6 & 8 improves certainty of categorization.

Teacher Ratings in 2011-12Rationale - MET Research - Standard 6 & 8 - Status - Support

▲

School-wide

EVAAS Growth

Teacher EVAAS Growth

70% 30%Weighted Average

Yearly Rating•Does not Meet Expected Growth

•Meets Expected Growth

•Exceeds Expected Growth

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 have school-wide growth for Standard 6.

6

Teacher Ratings in 2012-13

School-wideEVAAS Growth

Teacher EVAAS Growth

Weighted Average

Yearly Rating•Does not Expected Growth

•Meets Expected Growth

•Exceeds Expected Growth

6Student Surveys

(?)

2012 – 2013 is the first year of data for all teachers and school administrators who have their own data

Possible additional element

04/21/23 • page 12

What is the difference between ratings and a status?

Rating Status

Three Years of Data

04/21/23 • page 16

Any three years of data attributable to a teacher or principal will be combined and used:

•Any grades•Any subjects•Any schools•Any districts

The three years of data do not start until they are specific to that teacher and his or her students

Status

So once a educator has a three-year average rating for Standard 6 or 8, how is status determined?

04/21/23 • page 17

Status

• The Three Status Categories are

1. In Need of Improvement

2. Effective

3. Highly Effective

04/21/23 • page 18

Teacher Status

In Need of Improvement

EffectiveHighly

Effective

Standards 1-5In the year

Standard 6Three-year rolling average

6 6 62 years ago

1 year ago

Thisyear+ + /3)

)

1 5432Demonstrate Leadership

Establish Environment

KnowContent

Facilitate Learning

Reflect on Practice

Any rating lower than proficient

And/Or

Does Not Meet

Expected Growth

Proficient or Higher

on Standards1-5

And

Meets or Exceeds Expected Growth

Accomplished

or Higher on

Standards1-5

And

Exceeds Expected Growth

What will teachers see?

Detail on the Sixth Standard Rating

Remember Status and Standard VI

• An educator receives an effectiveness status only when he or she has 3 years of data on standard 6

• A 3-year rolling average of growth data from standard 6 is used as part of determining overall status

Measures of Student Learning

Measuring student

growth in all areas

of the curriculum

Measures of Student Learning

Measures of Student Learning are being designed for non-tested subjects for district use to populated Standard 6

04/21/23 • page 27

• 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

Guiding Principles

04/21/23 • page 28

• 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

What MSLs Are

04/21/23 • page 29

• 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

What MSLs Are Not

04/21/23 • page 30

Four Buckets of Assessments for Growth

MSLsCourses

Focused on Performance

Locally Developed Courses

A B C D

• Assessment Common Across Districts

• Growth using EVAAS

• Guidance from DPI with local implementation options

• Growth determined by evaluator

EOCs,EOGs and VoCATS

04/21/23 • page 32

Through three feedback protocols, teachers provided answers to the following critical question:

What does meaningful assessment in your

content area look like?

Phase I: Gather Feedback

04/21/23 • page 33

Appreciation, pride, and even joy that their content areas are now being valued and that the State is recognizing that they impact the learning of their students

Worry about finding a valid way to measure student learning in an art or PE class that meets once a month and one that meets every day

Value the input of teachers into the process

Doubt over the sustainability of these Measures of Student Learning after Race to the Top ends

Worry about a “test-heavy” environment for students, especially young children

Teacher Thoughts and Concerns

Phase II: Develop Framework

04/21/23 • page 34

Validity framework and psychometric plan detail:•Theory of Action•Score Generation•Propositions and Claims for Use•Assessment Development Process•Administration•Scoring•Item Calibration, Equating, and Scaling•Data Collection Processes

Involvement of NC Technical Advisors

Phase II: Review Items

04/21/23 • page 35

Teachers return on rolling schedule to review items

First design group members returned at end of July 2012•High School Science design group members•High School World History, Civics and Economics, and American History II/II design group members•English I, English III and IV design group members•High School Mathematics design group members•OCS design group members

Administration – Fall Semester

04/21/23 • page 36

Earth/Environmental Science Physics

Chemistry Physical Science

English Language Arts I English Language Arts III

English Language Arts IV Pre-Calculus

Advanced Functions and Modeling Geometry*

Algebra II/Integrated Math III World History

Civics and Economics U.S. History (2003 standards)

American History I American History II

OCS English Language Arts I OCS English Language Arts III

OCS English Language Arts IV OCS Financial Management

OCS Applied Science OCS Introductory Math

Administration – Spring Semester

04/21/23 • page 37

Grade Four Science Grade Six Science

Grade Seven Science Grade Four Social Studies

Grade Five Social Studies Grade Six Social Studies

Grade Seven Social Studies Grade Eight Social Studies

Coming in 2013 - 2014

Literacy Assessment (running record) for grades K-3

Pre- and Post-Assessments for Healthful Living

Analysis of Student Work Protocols for the Arts, World Languages, and District Electives