Educator Evaluations

Education Accountability SummitAugust 26-28, 2013

1

Topics to be Covered

• History of educator evaluations in Florida• Changes to district evaluation systems under

the Student Success Act• Progress and timelines since the Student

Success Act

2

History of Educator Evaluation in Florida

• Before 1999– Each district was responsible for implementing an evaluation

system; the department reviewed and approved each system that applied to teachers

– Evaluations were required for each employee once per year– Evaluations were to be designed for continuous quality

improvement of educational services– Evaluations must be based on sound educational principles and

contemporary research in effective practices – Parent input was included and each district had to review its

evaluation system each year to make improvements – Evaluation criteria were applied to instructional personnel

(teachers, guidance counselors, etc.), school administrators and supervisors

3

History of Educator Evaluation in Florida

• Before 1999, the evaluation criteria were:– Ability to maintain discipline– Knowledge of subject matter– Ability to plan and deliver instruction– Ability to evaluate instructional needs– Ability to communicate with parents– Other professional competencies determined by

the district or State Board rules

4

History of Educator Evaluation in Florida

• Beginning in 1999, the evaluation criteria were:– Performance of students– Ability to maintain discipline– Knowledge of subject matter– Ability to plan and deliver instruction– Ability to evaluate instructional needs– Ability to communicate with parents– Other professional competencies

5

History of Educator Evaluation in Florida

• Beginning in 1999, how was “performance of students” defined?– Evaluations had to primarily use data and indicators

of improvement in student performance measured by state and local assessments

– In 1999, this requirement was introduced with a caveat: “beginning with the full implementation of an annual assessment of learning gains…”

– In 2002, the caveat was dropped, and the requirement became an expectation

6

Current Educator EvaluationsBeginning in 2010 with the Student Success Act:• New purposes for evaluation:

– Designed to support student learning growth– Results used when developing district and school level improvement

plans and to identify individual professional development

• Evaluations must differentiate among 4 levels of performance:– Highly effective– Effective– Needs improvement, or for instructional personnel in first 3 years of

employment, Developing– Unsatisfactory– State Board of Education must establish student growth standards for each

performance level and the Commissioner must consult with experts, instructional personnel, school administrators, and education stakeholders in developing the criteria for the performance levels

7

Current Educator Evaluations

• Beginning in 2011 with the Student Success Act, the criteria are:– Performance of students– Instructional practice/instructional leadership• Florida Educator Accomplished Practices• Florida Principal Leadership Standards and indicators

of how well the principal ensures effective teaching in the school

– Professional and job responsibilities

8

Current Educator EvaluationsHow is “performance of students” defined now?•Based on student learning growth assessed annually and measured by state or local assessments

– Assessments are the same ones that students take to determine their mastery of the content standards for that course

•Should include performance data for three years of students assigned to the teacher or principal•Makes up at least 50% of the evaluation, but can be reduced to 40% if a teacher has less than three years of student data•Districts can choose to combine state and local assessment data (based on the individual’s teaching assignment) and can choose to measure achievement instead of growth when more appropriate•Districts are given until July 1, 2015, to determine which local assessments should be used for evaluation purposes

9

10

“Student Learning Growth” in Educator Evaluations

Growth Formulas for Statewide Assessments • Formulas must take into account each student’s prior performance• Specifies other factors that must be considered in development of

formula, such as attendance, disability, and ELL status• Commissioner approved a growth formula by June 1, 2011, to measure

individual student learning growth on FCAT and approved a formula for Algebra I last May

• Additional growth formulas for other statewide assessments will be developed, approved, and implemented statewide

Growth Formulas for Local Assessments• Districts must adopt equally appropriate learning growth formulas for

local student assessments• Example growth formulas for other standardized assessments and local

assessments will be provided by DOE that districts may choose to adopt to meet the requirement

“Student Learning Growth” in Educator Evaluations

• Florida uses a value-added model as the formula to calculate student learning growth for courses linked to FCAT

• The value-added model is one part of a multi-faceted teacher evaluation system

• The FCAT model was developed independently by a committee of Florida educators (Student Growth Implementation Committee) with assistance from experts in student growth modeling

• The model accounts for factors outside the teacher’s control that can influence learning and does not rely on a single year of data or single test score

• Measuring an individual teacher’s contribution to student learning growth in this manner is done to level the playing field for purposes of teacher evaluation

11

Factors Identified by the Student Growth Committee to “Level the Playing Field”

Student Characteristics:• Up to two prior years of achievement scores (the strongest predictor of

student growth in Florida’s model and in research)• The number of subject-relevant courses in which the student is enrolled• Students with Disabilities (SWD) status• English Language Learner (ELL) status• Attendance• Gifted status• Mobility (number of transitions)• Difference from modal age in grade (as an indicator of retention or

acceleration)Classroom Characteristics:

• Class size• Homogeneity of students’ entering test scores in the class

School Characteristics:• The model recognizes that there is a factor related to the school,

independent of the teacher’s contribution, that impacts student learning

12

Current Educator Evaluations

Senate Bill 1664 (2013) clarified some aspects of evaluations and how they relate to performance salaries in the future:

• Teachers and principals should be evaluated on their own students

• Non-classroom instructional personnel student outcome data should reflect how they contribute to the performance of students based on their job responsibilities

• For the performance salary plans that districts adopt in 2014-15, teachers whose evaluations are not yet based on state and local assessments will remain on the district’s grandfathered salary schedule

13

Timelines for Evaluations and Performance Salary Plans

• 2014-15 school year – To determine student mastery of content standards, districts administer student assessments of their choice for each course they offer

• 2015-16 school year – From the student assessments they administer, districts complete their choices for student assessment data that will be used for teacher evaluations for all teachers

• July 1, 2014 – Each district adopts a performance salary schedule to be implemented with their grandfathered schedule

• 2014-15 school year – Teachers on the performance salary schedule qualify for next year’s salary increases based on their district’s plan and their evaluation results

• 2015-16 – Teachers on the performance salary schedule who earned effective and highly effective ratings for 2014-15 are paid on their new base salaries

14

Educator Evaluations

• Understanding how our teachers are evaluated

• Ensuring a transparent and fair process that provides teachers and principals with meaningful feedback on their practice

• Identifying, recognizing and rewarding our high performing teachers, so that all students have access to great teachers

15