2013-2014 Weld Re-4 School District Evaluation System

Agenda

• Educator Effectiveness (S.B. 191) Overview• Guiding Principles of Model Evaluation System • Framework for System to Evaluate Educators• Educator Rubrics• What is Weld Re-4 doing?

Guiding Principles of State Evaluation System

1. Data should inform decisions, but human judgment will always be an essential component of evaluations.

2. The implementation and evaluation of the system must embody continuous improvement.

3. The purpose of the system is to provide meaningful and credible feedback that improves performance. (It’s about the conversation!)

4. The development and implementation of educator evaluation systems must continue to involve all stakeholders in a collaborative process. (District Accountability Subcommittee opportunity)

5. Educator evaluations must take place within a larger system that is aligned and supportive.

2. Annual

Orientation

3.Self-

Assessment

4.Review of

Annual Goals and

Performance Plan

5.Mid-Year Review

6.Evaluator

Assessment

7.End-of-Year

Review

8.Final

Ratings

9.Goal-Setting

and Performance

Planning

1.Training

1.Training

Educator Evaluation Cycle

In Certified Handbook – page 6

 DO Responsibility Administrator

ResponsibilityTeacher Responsibility

August to October

Gather initial data to share with principals for pre-conferences/goal-setting meetings. Begin review of potential assessments for use in evaluation Determine offerings of potential professional development that aligns with need

Schedule Pre-Conferences and set goals with teachers in building Determine evaluation times for the year and begin evaluations and walkthroughs 

Participate in any required training Do Self-Assessment within first two weeks of school  Become familiar with current data and building and /or department goals. 

December - February

Support buildings with data or professional development Continue reviewing potential assessments and data use for evaluations.

Evaluations and walkthroughs Midyear Conference with Staff   

Schedule a Midyear conference with Administrator  Review data and goals to determine midyear adjustments 

March-May Review process and gather feedback on implementation and determine assessment priorities and/or decisions for the following year Process and collect all evaluations for staff

Evaluations and walkthroughs  End of year conference with staff to determine final ratings and final written evaluation  

Schedule end of year conference with administrator  Discuss your evaluation and data scores with administrator Review data and generate possibilities for goals

Teacher Evaluations

50% Professional Practice

50% Student Academic Growth

Quality Standards I-V:I. Mastery of contentII. Establish learning environmentIII. Facilitate learningIV. Reflect on practiceV. Demonstrate leadership

Evaluated using: (1) observations; and (2) at least one of the following: student perception measures, peer feedback, parent/guardian feedback, or review of lesson plans/student work samples. May include additional measures.

Quality Standard VI:VI. Responsibility for student academic growth

Evaluated using: (1) a measure of individually-attributed growth, (2) a measure of collectively-attributed growth; (3) when available, statewide summative assessments; and (4) where applicable, Colorado Growth Model data.

STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS

Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers

Definition of Teacher Effectiveness

I. Know Content

50% Professional Practice Standards 50% Student Growth Measures

Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard

Count Towards Overall Performance?

Observations of Other Measures Teaching Aligned with

CDE Guidelines

State Other Assessments Other Measures Summative for Non-tested Aligned Assessments Areas CDE Guidelines

Match of test to teaching assignments

Weighting:Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards

Result in a Determination of Individual Performance?

Performance Standards

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective

Quality StandardsII. Establish Environment

III. Facilitate Learning

IV. Reflect on Practice

V. Demonstrate Leadership

VI. Student Growth

Appeals Process

PowerPoint Template

Driving Questions

What do we want students, educators, schools, and districts to know and be able to do?

How will we know if expectations are met?

How will we respond when help is needed and to support continued growth?

Colorado Academic Standards

Assessments

• RTI• PBSI• Targeted interventions• IEPs

Educator quality standards

Educator evaluations

• Induction• Mentoring• Professional development plans• Remediation plans

Performance indicators

School and district performance frameworks

• Unified planning• Priority• Turnaround

Students Students

EducatorsEducators

Schools/DistrictsSchools/Districts

Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students.

Not Evident Partially Proficient Proficient(Meets State Standard) Accomplished Exemplary

Element c: Teachers engage students as individuals with unique interests and strengths.

The teacher: Has low-level expectations for

some students. Uses data for instructional

decision making on an infrequent basis.

The teacher: Monitors students for

level of participation. Encourages students to

share their interests. Challenges students to

expand and enhance their learning.

. . . andThe teacher: Asks difficult questions

of all students. Scaffolds questions. Gives wait time

equitably. Flexibly Groups

students. Assumes that all

students will meet or exceed expectations.

Modifies instruction to assure that all students: Understand what is

expected of them. Are challenged to meet

or exceed expectations. Participate in

classroom activities with a high level of frequency and quality.

Take responsibility for their work.

Have the opportunity to build on their interests and strengths.

. . . andStudents: Actively participate in

all classroom activities. Monitor their own

performance for frequency of participation.

Seek opportunities to respond to difficult questions.

. . . andStudents: Select challenging

content and activities when given the choice in order to stretch their skills and abilities.

Encourage fellow students to participate and challenge themselves.

Quality Standard

Element that

aligns with

standard

Rating levels

Professional Practices

Changed to “Basic” in 13-14

Principal and Teacher Performance Evaluation Ratings

After CDE develops the state model system and an evaluation scoring matrix, the State Board will adopt definitions for each rating.

Highly Effective

Effective

Partially Effective

Ineffective

PerformanceRating Levels

Elements of the Standard

Professional Practices

Teacher Quality Standards

Evaluator Comments

Summary of Ratings for the Standard

Evidence Provided by Artifacts

Teacher’s Response to Evaluation

Examples of Artifacts

= Observable in

Classroom

What is Weld Re-4 Doing?

• Professional Practices 50%– CDE Evaluations used again 2013-2014– Updated rubric posted under Staff Resources, Weld

Re-4 Staff Resources, Educator Effectiveness– Folders available again for schools – The state will be adopting a free evaluation storage

solution this year. We will implement when available. Some schools are choosing to start with Teach Point.

What is Weld Re-4 doing?

• Student Learning Outcomes 50%– All staff will receive ratings based on School

Performance Frameworks this year– Assessment Approval process is being

developed – staff who attended training this summer will be a great resource

– Assessments will go through a district process in order to be used for evaluation purposes (more info coming)

Questions?

• Overall Process – Amy Heinsma, X8028 and District Accountability Members

• Specific Evaluation and Deadlines – see your administrator

• Feedback or general questions – District Accountability subcommittee members