teacher evaluation system updateteacher evaluation system ...c.ymcdn.com/sites/. tes... · teacher...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Teacher Evaluation System UpdateTeacher Evaluation System Update
Presented byL i T E ti Di t V i G i Di tLuis Tamez, Executive Director Veronica Garcia, DirectorHuman Resources Human Resources
December 8, 2011
2
December 8, 2011
Board Update SummaryEngagement Design
Surveys (district-wide and through website) 161 Principal responses 3,981 Teacher responses 71 Parent responses
Engagement DesignContinue to refine project direction Established a common understanding on the
project direction Continue to obtain teacher and principal input 71 Parent responses
Focus groups and interviews 99 Principals engaged 138 Teachers engaged 50+ Parents engaged
Committees/ Virtual feedback panel
p p pregarding strengths and areas of improvement with current teacher evaluation system
Define teacher rubric Draft rubric of effective teaching
4 domainsCommittees/ Virtual feedback panel 12 Principals engaged 109 Teacher engaged 17 Parents engaged
Information briefings in every Trustee district 10/12, 10/19, 10/25, 11/7, 11/8,11/9,11/14, 11/29
27 indicators 4 performance categories
Define components of teacher evaluation Qualitative evidence
Potential components: peer feedback, portfolio evaluation lesson plan review and self-10/12, 10/19, 10/25, 11/7, 11/8,11/9,11/14, 11/29
Pushed communication Monthly E-blasts, media releases, website updates Sharing preliminary design efforts through
SBDMs in December and January
evaluation, lesson plan review and selfreflection
Quantitative elements Considering a mix of student growth and value-
added, school performance
Upcoming events/meetings in December
3
Dec 5: Qualitative Sub-Committee Meeting Dec 6: Principal Feeder Pattern Meeting (on engaging SBDMs), Teacher
Evaluation System Input Committee Dec 7: All Principal’s Meeting, Teacher Org Focus Groups, Design
Committee Meeting
Dec 9: Rubric design session (tentative) Dec 12: Counselors Focus Group, Special Education Teachers Focus
Group Dec 13: Librarian Focus Group, ELL Focus Group Dec 14: Psychologists Focus Group (tentative)
Upcoming events/meetings in December
Agenda
The need for a new evaluation
Project overview
Designing with input
Next steps
4
Internal analysis shows the current state ofInternal analysis shows the current state of performance evaluation
98% of 10,248 teachers evaluated in 2010-11 received a
… this was true for teachers evaluated under PDAS, PCAS,
… and at AU campuses, where 16 campuses did not rate
“meets expectations” rating…
and LPDAS… a single teacher as “below expectations”.
Of the 34 campuses rated “Academically Unacceptable”, only 18 campuses rated any teacher “below expectations” overall
Below expectations,
2% (221)
2% 2% 0%
80%
100%
Meets expectations, 98% (10,027)
98% 98% 100%
20%
40%
60% BELOW EXPECTATIONS
MEET EXPECTATIONS
50%
20%
PDAS PCSAS LPDAS
We know teachers matter so we need to pay moreWe know teachers matter, so we need to pay more attention to the work they do in the classroom
Principal observations are too few Multiple measures to prevent
What we’ve heard… How we’re responding…
Principal observations are too few and too subjective
Evaluations have nothing to do
Multiple measures to prevent subjectivity / multiple observations
Evaluation activities directly tied to with development
It is not clear how ratings are determined
developmental feedback
Clear weighting and process outlined in the systemdetermined
Where is the student outcome piece?
outlined in the system
Multiple measures including student achievement
6
Agenda
The need for a new evaluation
Project overview
Designing with input
Next steps
7
Project vision
Identify excellence Help every teacher get better
Create lasting impact
• Multiple measuresResearch shows that finding and using
• Multiple forms of feedback for every teacher
• Alignment with HR and T&LIn order to motivate
multiple measures to accurately identify excellence
• Student data
Instilling feedback systems in the district must start with multiple forms of feedback such
itt t d
teachers, evaluations need to be able to recognize, reward and leverage effective teachers in training
Excellent practices are evidenced in student growth. Dallas ISD is committed to including evidence of student
as written notes and verbal conversations.
teachers in training, compensation, and placement. Professional advancement plans will be implemented.
8
evidence of student outcomes.
Three year project plan overview
Define Effective Teacher
Identify Measures
Develop Evaluation
System
Implement System Scale System
ojec
t Pha
se
June-Sept 2011 Aug-Sept 2011/12 Aug-Sept 2011/12 Aug-Jun 2012/13 Aug-Sept 2013/14
System
• Documentation of key measures and design parameters
• Documentation of definitional options and final choices
• Process documentation
F ilit ti d
• Testing phase results and adjustments
T i i d
• Completed teacher evaluation toolkit, including tools
Pro
es design parameters
• Process documentation
• Facilitation and project management
and final choices
• Process documentation
• Facilitation and project
t
• Facilitation and project management
• Training process and materials
• Communications collateral and plan
including tools, processes and technology implementation in every campus
Del
iver
able
management
Designing an integrated evaluation system:Designing an integrated evaluation system: the approach
Step 1: Define Effective Teaching Create rubric with domains and proficiency levels for teacher’s knowledge and
habits of mind.
Step 2: Define Components of Teacher Evaluation Establish which quantitative and qualitative components will comprise the
evaluation systemevaluation system
Step 3: Define Weighting of Components Determine weighting of each evaluation system component for teachers and g g y p
other staff
Step 4: Align Evaluation System S ff Align evaluation system across DISD systems related to teacher effectiveness
including PD, recruiting, principal evaluations, compensation, curriculum and instruction, etc.
Step 1: Define effective teaching
In order to create a comprehensive, applicable, and cohesive definition of teacher effectiveness, a rubric will be created with the following process:
Analyze strengths and opportunities of eight domains currently in place in DISD’s PDAS and Performance Pay Program
Consult nation-wide frameworks: DC’s Teaching & Learning Framework, NorthConsult nation wide frameworks: DC s Teaching & Learning Framework, North Star Academy’s Teacher Evaluation Rubric, Connecticut’s Common Core of Teaching, Houston, Charlotte-Mecklenburg, etc.
Consult evidence based best practice tools: Teacher Evaluation Experts: Consult evidence-based, best practice tools: Teacher Evaluation Experts: Robert Marzano, Kim Marshall, Charlotte Danielson. Other tools: Understanding By Design, Skillful Teacher, Teaching As Leadership, etc.
From these analyses, draft frameworks will be developed to share and test with various stakeholders.
Step 2: Define components of teacherStep 2: Define components of teacher evaluation
P t ti l C tPotential Components:
Effective Teaching Instructional Rubric- created by augmenting current tools with new best practice frameworks. Observations Process – determine the process for observation of effective instruction
(frequency, observer, feedback cycle) Portfolio review
Student Outcomes Standardized Assessments - determine relative emphasis of STARS, TAKS, ITBS, EOC, interim
assessments and diagnostics. State Assessment value added measures growth measures State Assessment– value added measures, growth measures DISD Assessments – School Effectiveness Index, Classroom Effectiveness Index Other Assessments – projects, formative assessments, other classroom
F db k Feedback Self-assessment Feedback from others: colleagues, parents, students, supervisors
Step 3: Define weighting of components
Determine weighting of potential components for teachers
Decide how the system applies to different subsets of teachers (core classroom, tested subject teachers, non-tested subject teachers) and non-classroom, tested subject teachers, non tested subject teachers) and nonteaching staff
Decide if/how the system applies to non-teaching staff
Key questions to consider:
What will be the relative weight of teacher outcomes (effective teaching rubric feedback) compared with student outcomes?rubric, feedback) compared with student outcomes?
How much weight will student outcomes receive?
If there are multiple constituents providing qualitative feedback, how will this be weighted?
How will the weighting differ for non-teaching staff?
Step 4: Aligning the system
Ongoing Performance Management
Career Tracking& SuccessionPlanning
Staffing & Allocation Models
Compensation&Rewards/Recognition
Professional Dev’t & Leadership Dev’tAccess & Delivery
Qualitative:• Skill/will or Perf./Potential
Quantitative:• Growth/Value-added data
Evaluation: Tool & Process
Data Tools & Support
• Observation/360s• Evaluation rubrics
• Achievement data• Formative assessments
14
Data Tools & Support
The work is being designed by multipleThe work is being designed by multiple committees
Teacher Evaluation CommitteeSteering Committee Design Committee
Role Role Role This committee will
designate owners and monitor progress of work streams and have accountability for developing
This committee will govern key decisions in the teacher evaluation system development and will be given broad stakeholder
This committee will be engaged to discuss and deliver feedback at major milestones during the development of the teacher y p g
the evaluation system. Timing Bi-Monthly / Monthly Membership (10-15)
ginput.
Timing Monthly Membership (7)
pevaluation system.
Timing Every 2 months Membership (~35)
Central office department reps
Sr. Executive Director reps Principals Teachers
Superintendent Chiefs of Districts Attorney
Central officer reps Teacher Organizations Community Partners Business Partners Parent Organizations
15
Parent Organizations Principals Teachers Attorney
iDesign Work Progress Report
D i t l t d Design steps toDesign steps currently
Step 1: Begin to define
Design steps completed(Jul-Oct)
Design steps to happen next(Jan-April)
Design steps currently underway(Nov-Feb)
Step 1: Continue to define Step 4: Define weighting of t
p gproject directionObtained teacher input
regarding strengths and areas of improvement
project direction Work with teachers to
establish a common vision for the project to be
d t d bl d f i
components Work with teachers to
determine weighting of each evaluation system component for teachers andwith current teacher
evaluation systemEstablished a common
understanding on the j t di ti
understandable and fairStep 2: Define teacher rubric Work with teachers to
create a rubric with
component for teachers and other staff
Step 5: Align evaluation system Work with teachers to align
evaluation system acrossproject directionWorked with teachers to
identify best starting point for teacher evaluation system design
domains and proficiency levels
Step 3: Define components of teacher evaluation
evaluation system across Dallas ISD systems related to teacher effectiveness including professional development, recruiting, system design
Followed up with teachers on each committee for feedback
16
Work with teachers to establish quantitative and qualitative components to include in the system
principal evaluations, compensation, curriculum and instruction, etc.
Agenda
The need for a new evaluation
Project overview
Designing with input
Next steps
17
Focus on stakeholder feedback and input
~1,400 hours have been invested to provide input on the
…more than 50,000 communications have been extended
… all stakeholders can learn about the project through a website, board
system design… about the project… briefings, & public info sessions.
• More than 270 people engaged through focus groups and interviewso 130 teachers, 96 principals, 30 central office, 10 community
• Public information sessions in every districto 4 completed, 5 more scheduled
• 15 Committee meetings with 100 participantso Committees: Steering Committee, Design Committee, Input Committee,
Effective Teaching subcommittee, Evidence subcommittee, Quantitative subcommittee
Key engagement activities
18
• Principal meetings by Learning Communityo 8 meetings reaching all DISD principals
• Launch of DISD Teacher Evaluation System website• 4 E-Blasts each reaching 10,000+ employees• Media press release
o 30 teachers, 19 principals, 30 central office, 20 community• More than 3700 responses via surveys and website
o 3129 teachers via surveyo 145 principals via surveyo ~300 via website (including 200 teachers, 60 parents, 10 business)
• Monthly board briefings
Multiple stakeholders are involved in theMultiple stakeholders are involved in the design of the new system
Teachers
Principals / APs
Non-profit orgs APs
Texas
orgs
Design of new Teacher
Evaluation
ParentsTexas
Education Agency
Students Central office staff
19
Business and
community members
Association partners
Website dedicated to providing updatesWebsite dedicated to providing updates and gathering input from all stakeholders
Join a virtualfeedback team through email
Learn about progress in design
Provide feedback
20
through onlinesurveys
Feedback is changing the design
T h P i i l C itTeachers Principals Community
What we’ve heard
• The system must be “doable” and focus on instruction
• The system must focus on feedback & development
N b CEI
• Focus on feedback AND accountability to support better instruction for children
• Would like to see greater accountability using data
• Nervous about CEI scores being tied to accountability
Design changes
children
• Focus on “doability”
• Rubric will focus on instruction
• Focus on feedback and coaching
F l
Design changes• Focus on feedback and
the use of data
21
instruction
• Include significant quantitative component
• Focus on clear communication about the system and data
Agenda
The need for a new evaluation
Project overview
Designing with input
Next steps
22
Next steps
Develop draft components of teacher evaluation
Rubric of effective teaching
Qualitative measures
Quantitative measuresQuantitative measures
Test draft components with volunteer schools and teachers
Refine components based on feedback
P t i i f il t Prepare training for pilot year23
C C l d (D b )Current Calendar (December)Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday FridayMonday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Nov 28 Nov 29• New teacher focus group
5pm• District 9 Public
Information Session in the Sk li Hi h S h l f
Nov 30•STAR Employee Commission mtgAdministration Bldg 6 pm
1 2
Skyline High School from 6-7pm
5Qualitative sub-committee (4:30pm)
6• Principal Feeder Pattern
MeetingT h E l ti
7• All Principals’ meeting• Teacher Org Focus Groups
M ti ith B i
8 9• (Tentative) Rubric
Design Session • Teacher Evaluation
System Input Committee meeting
• Meeting with Business Representative
• Design Committee meeting
12• Counselors Focus Group
13• Librarian Focus Group at
14• Parent focus group (tentative)
15 16Counselors Focus Group 4:30pm at Spence MS
• Special Education Teachers Focus Group 4:30pm at Cesar Chavez
Librarian Focus Group at 4:30pm Spence MS
• ELL Teacher Focus Group 4:30pm at Cesar Chavez
Parent focus group (tentative)• Psychologists Focus Group
(tentative)
19 20 21 22 23
24
Holiday Holiday Holiday Holiday Holiday
26Holiday
27Holiday
28Holiday
29Holiday
30Holiday
Teacher Evaluation SystemTeacher Evaluation System Update
Q&AQ&A25
26