Teach

er

Exce

llen

ce In

itia

tive:

20

19

-20

TE

I R

esu

lts a

nd

20

20

-21

Pri

ori

tie

s

Board Briefing, February 2020

Teacher Performance

Teachers are evaluated and receive

feedback on Lesson Preparation,

Instructional Delivery, Classroom

Culture, and Professional Growth

Student Experience (Grades 3-12 only)

Students complete research-based,

age-appropriate, surveys that gauge

student perception of teacher impact

on student achievement.

Student Achievement

Campus and teacher-level achievement

measures capture growth on state and

local assessments as well as teacher-

determined measure of student growth.

Teacher Excellence Initiative (TEI)

1

1

4%

1%

21%

26%

37%

7%

3%

1%2%

1%

19%

25%

38%

11%

4%

1% 1%

2%1%

15%

23%

41%

11%

6%

1% 1%1% 1%

14%

20%

43%

12%

7%

1% 1%2% 1%

14%

19%

40%

13%

8%

2% 2%

No Level Unsatisfactory Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Proficient III Exemplary I Exemplary II

2015-16

2016-17

2017-18

2018-19

2019-20

& Master

Distribution of Teachers by Effectiveness Level over Time

• 9587 teachers received 2018-2019 TEI scorecards

• 64.6% of teachers earned a 2019-20 Effectiveness Level of Proficient I or higher

24.2% of teachers earned Distinguished Status

452 newly Distinguished teachers in 2019-2020

2

3

2019-20 Effectiveness Levels and Teaching Experience (CYS)

9%

Generally, teacher effectiveness increases with experience; however, a broad range of experience exists at

each performance level.

145 “No Level” Teachers not included on this slide.

8%

8%

9%

7%

12%

23%

17%

10%13%

59%

43%36% 39%

31%

All Teachers(9587)

Proficient II(1252)

Proficient III(789)

Exemplary I(152)

Exemplary II / Master(146)

0-10 CYS 11-19 CYS 20+ CYS

2019-20 Effectiveness Levels and Teaching Experience (CYS)

41%57% 64% 61%

69%

• Experienced teachers are disproportionately represented at Proficient II and higher

• Nearly 7 out of 10 Exemplary II/Master teachers have 11 or more years of service

4

96% 94% 95% 93% 89%78%

71%62%

3% 2% 3%6%

16%

18%28%

4%3% 3% 4%

5% 6%11% 10%

Unsatisfactory(97)

Progressing I(1298)

Progressing II(1839)

Proficient I(3825)

Proficient II(1242)

Proficient III(781)

Exemplary I(150)

Exemplary II/Master(146)

Comprehensive/Choice Magnet ACE

2019-20 Effectiveness Levels and School Level/School Type

5

• 2342 teachers earned distinguished status based on 2018-19 TEI Scorecards

• 87% of distinguished teachers served in comprehensive or ACE campuses in 2018-19.

Teachers who received a 2018-19 TEI Scorecard, 01/06/2020. Does not include centrally assigned teachers (64) or No Level teachers (145)

6

Results: 2019-20 TEI Compensation

Effectiveness

Level N Teachers* CYS Range

Average

CYS

Average Salary

Percent Increase18-19 19-20

Unsatisfactory 97 2 – 34 9 $54,249 $54,249 0.0%

No Level 145 1 – 25 4 $53,078 $54,393 2.5%

Progressing I 1302 1 – 44 3 $52,295 $54,158 3.6%

Progressing II 1841 2 – 53 8 $54,152 $55,821 3.1%

Proficient I 3863 3 – 54 13 $57,578 $59,774 3.8%

Proficient II 1252 3 – 49 14 $60,358 $63,495 5.2%

Proficient III 789 3 – 51 15 $64,820 $70,274 8.4%

Exemplary I 155 3 – 47 15 $70,493 $76,082 7.9%

Exemplary II 140 4 – 40 16 $79,338 $83,765 5.6%

Master 6 7 – 12 10 $86,000 $91,575 6.5%

Total Scorecards 9587 1 – 54 11 $57,805 $60,265 4.3%

• On average, Dallas ISD teachers now earn more than $60K

• More than 13% of TEI-Eligible teachers now earning $70K+

Teachers who received a 2018-19 TEI Scorecard, 01/06/2020

7

Results: Distribution of TEI Salary Increases over Time

Amount of Increase2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

Percent Active TEI-Eligible Teachers Receiving Increase*

No increase** 10% 5% <2%

$305 -$1,000 60% 11% 4%

$1,001 - $2,000 10% 66% 54%

$2,001 - $3,000 9% 8% 20%

$3,001 - $4,000 4% 5% 4%

$4,001- $5,000 2% 2% 2%

$5,001 or more 5% 3% 15%

* # Active TEI-Eligible positions vary annually based on budgeted FTEs

**By board policy, teachers with an Unsatisfactory Effectiveness Level are not eligible for increase. Teachers who were paid above Effectiveness Level with less than

6 CYS were not eligible for a base salary increase in 2019-2020

• More than 98% of returning teachers received an increase to base salary in 2019-20

• 96% earned $1,000 or more increase in base salary.

Results: TEI Salaries against the State and Region

13.0%

9.7%

9.0%

7.6%

6.0%

5.4%

4.3%3.9% 3.8% 3.7%

3.0% 2.8%2.3% 2.2% 2.1% 2.1%

1.7% 1.6% 1.6%1.2% 1.2% 1.1% 1.0%

0.7% 0.7% 0.7%0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

Dallas ISD TEI-eligible teachers lead the state and regional market in percent of earning $70,000 or higher in base salary.

8*Draft data provided between 01/06/2020-01/21/2020 via Public Information Request

19-20 Effectiveness LevelN 2018-19

Teachers*

Retained as Teacher Retained in District Separated

N (Average CYS) % N (Average CYS) % N (Average CYS) %

No Scorecard 441 96 (9.2) 22% 37 (12.4) 8% 308 (9.0) 70%

Unsatisfactory 82 50 (9.0) 61% NA 0% 32 (11.3) 39%

Progressing I 1212 942 (3.2) 78% 6 (5.3) 0% 264 (3.8) 22%

Progressing II 1809 1467 (8.0) 81% 23 (7.7) 1% 319 (6.8) 18%

Proficient I 3827 3256 (12.7) 85% 97 (11.1) 3% 474 (13.1) 12%

Proficient II 1250 1120 (13.6) 90% 42 (10.0) 3% 88 (13.3) 7%

Proficient III 787 720 (14.7) 92% 18 (13.1) 2% 49 (13.7) 6%

Exemplary I 152 145 (14.8) 95% 3 (10.0) 2% 4 (24.8) 3%

Exemplary II 140 132 (15.8) 94% 2 (15.5) 2% 6 (26.8) 4%

Master 6 6 (9.7) 100% NA 0% NA 0%

All Teachers 9706 7934 (11.0) 82% 228 (10.8) 2% 1544 (9.5) 16%

Results: 2018-19 to 2019-20 Teacher Retention

Teachers employed in a TEI-Eligible position on PEIMS snapshot date, 2018

The district retained 84% of TEI-eligible teachers in the district from the 2018-19 to 2019-20 October snapshot

dates.

89

16.2%16.6% 16.5% 16.4% 16.6% 16.5%

21.9% 21.2% 21.6%

19.1%18.4%

19.1%

17.8%18.5% 18.5%

18.1%18.4%

18.4%

StateRegion 10

Results: Teacher Retention against the State and Region

Dallas ISD

Since 2014, Dallas ISD has reduced teacher turnover while significantly narrowing the STAAR

achievement gap with the state.

10

39%40%

44% 44%

47%

50%

27%28%

33%35%

40%

44%

Teacher turnover rate, 2014-2019

Percentage of students at “MEETS” on STAAR (All Subjects, All Tests)

2013-14(43)

2014-15(37)

2015-16(21)

2016-17(14)

2017-18(13)

2018-19(4)

-1.9

+17

Year (N IR Campuses)

TEI

Implemented

Fall 2014

While average teacher turnover has increased in many local districts and at the state since 2012, Dallas ISD turnover is less than many suburban districts.

Source: TEA TAPR Staff Information Reports 2012 and 2019. Note that TAPR data reflects the prior school year.

Percentage point change in teacher turnover rate from 2012-2019

Teacher turnover rate by district, 2019

26.3%

22.5%21.4% 21.0% 20.8% 20.7% 20.5%

19.1%18.1%

16.8% 16.4% 16.3% 16.3%14.9% 14.9% 14.3%

12.8% 12.6%

16.5%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

15.9%

2.0%

7.9%

-2.7%

11.3%

7.2% 7.6% 6.9% 6.1%4.9%

2.7%

6.6%

3.4%

7.2%5.4% 5.1%

4.0%2.0%

3.9%

-5.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

Results: Teacher Retention against the State and Region

District Name (% EconDis Students)11

Results: 2019-20 and 2020-21 Priorities

Address equity within the TEI system through continuous improvement

of TEI processes.

• Utilize an updated version of the Student Perception Survey and modify the point

distribution for this Student Experience component (Implementation: Spring 2020)

• Increase points available for Tier I (high priority) campus service from 5 to 10

(Implementation: Fall 2019)

• Modify the targeted distribution process for Evaluation Ratings to provide two sets of cut

points for comprehensive and admissions magnets. (Implementation: Fall 2020)

Ensure Dallas ISD teacher salaries aggressively lead the regional and

state markets, and leverage compensation to drive strategic staffing

efforts districtwide.

12

Qu

esti

on

s?