© 2011, Tulsa Public SchoolsCopyright © Tulsa Public Schools 2011© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Teacher and Leader Effectiveness (TLE) OBSERVATION AND EVALUATION SYSTEM

2

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Driving Gains in Student Achievement3

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Effective Teaching / Student Achievement

4

“Truly effective teaching…

could overcome student

indifference, parental

disengagement, and poverty

--- and, in fact, is the key to

enabling children to rise

above those circumstances.”

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

“Demography will no longer be destiny.”

5

“Successful teaching is

grueling work. It requires

more talent, more

preparation, more daily re-

evaluation and retooling,

more hours in the class day,

and just plain more

perseverance.”

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Tulsa Public Schools’ TLE Evaluation System

6

Observations

Evaluations

Conferences

Feedback / Support

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

TLE Evaluation System Description

RubricThe support document that provides the definitions of professional proficiency (effectiveness) for all 5 rankings.

•Based on research and best practices•Developed and improved hand-in-hand with teachers•Contains 20 indicators (down from 37 in first year of implementation)

Observation Process and FormThe principal's intentional study and analysis of the teacher’s classroom performance – guided by the detailed descriptions of the rubric and recorded in the observation form, which simplifies the rubric. A minimum of two (2) observations are required before every evaluation.

7

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

TLE Evaluation System Description, continued

ConferencesFollow every observation and evaluation and provide teachers with a status check and road map to improve effectiveness.

A 5-Tiered Approach to Feedback and SupportFocuses on 1 (“Ineffective”) and 2 (“Needs Improvement”) performance levels AND increases in all Effectiveness areas.

Evaluation FormA technology-enhanced tool that documents / logs patterns of effectiveness according to the rubric’s definition of professional proficiency.

8

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

STRUCTURE (FROM SB 2033)

WITH ADDED SPECIFICITY (DESIGNED WITHIN TPS)

9

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

TLE – Structure, Indicators, Weight

Teachers (20)• Classroom Management (6/30%)

• Instructional Effectiveness (10/50%)

• Professional Growth & Continuous Improvement (2/10%)

• Interpersonal Skills (1/5%)

• Leadership (1/5%)

Principals (19)• Organization & School

Management (6/35%)

• Instructional Leadership (2/13%)

• Professional Growth & Responsibility (1/13%)

• Interpersonal Skills (4/13%)

• Leadership (5/13%)

• Stakeholder Perceptions (1/13%)

10

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

TLE System’s Alignment with SB 2033

• Five tiers of effectiveness

• Domains mirror SB 2033’s requirements

• Evaluation time frames

• Supports for improvement

• Applies to ALL Teachers and Leaders

11

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

HANDBOOK, RUBRICS AND FORMS

12

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

TLE Handbook for Principals

13

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Teacher Rubric14

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Teacher Observation Form15

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Teacher Evaluation Form16

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Instructional Supports for Teacher & Leader Improvement: 5 Tier-Approach

1. “Push Pin” (less formal, yet documented) approaches to remedy ineffectiveness

2. Personal Development Plans (PDP)

3. Quality Experiences Supporting Teachers (QUEST)

4. “9-Week Cohort” focusing on application, reflection and critical teaching tools that will support teachers to move to the next level of consistently impacting student learning.

5. “PDP Training Support Cycles” 2-hour specific topic PD to address issues identified in PDPs. October through April.

17

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Research-Based & Measures What Matters

• Rubrics were developed and based upon an extensive review of best practices associated with higher student achievement.

• Indicators within the TLE rubric are empirically associated with student achievement. (The Journal of Human Resources, September 2010, 46:3).

• MET Validation Project, Fall 2011.

18

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

IMPACT AND LESSONS LEARNED

19

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

The Impact

20

• Student achievement gains• Great improvements in identifying and distinguishing levels of

professional performance:– Teacher evaluation: rankings guided and defined by 185

performance descriptions in 2010-2011 (‘09-’10: 0)

– Principals: rankings guided and defined by 95 performance descriptions in 2010-2011 (‘09-’10: 0)

• More support for less than effective Teachers/Leaders:– 136 Teacher PDPs in 2010-2011 (‘09-’10: 5)

– 29 Teachers placed in intensive mentoring program– 31 (35%) of Principals rec’d PDPs in 2010-2011 (‘09-’10: 2)

20

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

The Impact, continued

• Exit of ineffective Teachers/Principals57 Teachers exited from District for performance in

2010-2011 (v. 0 in ‘09-’10)

12 Principals exited from District for performance in 2010-2011 (v. 0 ‘09-’10)

7 Principals removed (demoted) from Principal positions in 2010-2011 (v. 0 in ‘09-’10)

• Alignment of professional development plans and evaluation findings

21

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Lessons Learned

Following one year of full implementation…• Leverage teacher and administrator input• Improve the system based on real-world

implementation– Simplicity is best

• Train evaluators, and train them again• Ensure inter-rater reliability– Certification and re-certification process

22

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Lessons Learned, continued

• Importance of collaboration and ownership: seek, embrace and respond to teacher and administrator input, especially regarding the decisions that impact them.

• Importance of fortitude.• Importance of developing, listening to and

engaging the help of community and outside resources.

23

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Evidence of Teamwork…

SB 2033: “In those school

districts in which there exists a

professional negotiations

agreement … the procedure for

evaluating members of the

negotiations unit and any

standards of performance and

conduct proposed for adoption …

shall be negotiable items.”

• Every process and document of TLE has been incorporated into the TPS / Assoc. Master Agreement. (October ’11)

• Assoc. members have ratified the contract by an affirmative vote of 98%.

• A performance-based RIF policy / procedure is in place not only for this school year but next school year.

24

24

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

Teamwork within Tulsa Public Schools…

“… is the ability to work together toward a common vision…

It is the fuel that allows common people to attain uncommon results.”

– Henry Ford

25

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

THANK YOU!

26

© 2011, Tulsa Public Schools

For more information: www.tulsaschools.orgOffice of Teacher and Leader Effectiveness

918-746-6800

27