pera essence of pera are you an effective teacher? · pera 1 essence of pera are you an effective...
TRANSCRIPT
9/9/2014
1
Performance Evaluation
Reform Act
PERA
1
Essence of PERA
Are you an effective teacher?
Prove it!
2
A recent newspaper article on
weakened tenure rights for teachers
quoted the Idaho state
superintendent, who said, “Good
teachers shouldn’t be worried.”
3
9/9/2014
2
Why are we here discussing
changes to the way teachers are
evaluated?
Why now?
Illinois statehood = 1818
compulsory education laws since 1900
4
Race To The Top Grant
Ratings Inflation
Business Model
of Accountability
Statewide Assessments
Simplicity of Numbers
Arne Duncan
Professional Sports
5
Survey: “93% of teachers rated
Superior or Excellent while 66% of
students failed to meet State standards.”
Arne Duncan said, “…not including
student achievement in teachers’
evaluations is illogical and
indefensible.”
6
9/9/2014
3
Teachers with:
10 years of experience = hard
20 years of experience = harder
30 years of experience = hardest
7
What are the pros and cons
of using student growth
to evaluate teachers?
Cons first.
8
Even three 45 minute
observations represent only
¼% of a teacher’s work
year. (180 days X 5 hours X 60 minutes = 54,000 minutes)
9
9/9/2014
4
Purposes of Evaluations
Formative: Low Stakes
Pay for Performance: Low Stakes
Summative: High Stakes
Goldhaber
10
Professional Practice or the
Process of Teaching:
Observations & Artifacts
Student Growth or the
Product of Teaching:
Student Assessments
11
Purpose of Article 24A
To improve the educational
services … by requiring that all
certified school district employees
be evaluated on a periodic basis
and that the evaluations result in
remedial action being taken when
deemed necessary.
12
9/9/2014
5
All = all teaching:
art, music, physical education,
special education, etc., but not
school service personnel, such
as social workers, or
occupational or physical
therapists
13
Ratings of teachers and
principals must be either:
Excellent,
Proficient,
Needs Improvement, or
Unsatisfactory. (Probationary teachers too)
14
Implementation Dates:
RTTT/SIG = date specified in grant
Lowest performing 20% by 9-1-15 (using spring 2014 State Test data)
by type (P-8, P-12, 9-12), All others, Cooperatives too, by 9-1-16
15
9/9/2014
6
ISBE Rules shall be
developed through a process
involving collaboration with
the Performance Evaluation
Advisory Council (PEAC).
isbe.net/peac 16
A choice for school
districts:
Bargain your own model
OR
Choose all or part (student
growth part only) of the
State’s default model 17
Each school district shall develop in
cooperation with its bargaining unit
an evaluation plan for all teachers
that incorporates the use of data and
indicators of student growth as a
significant factor (30%) in rating
teaching performance. (phase-in at
25% for first two years)
18
9/9/2014
7
A Joint Committee, composed of
equal representation, has 180
calendar days to reach agreement on
an evaluation plan. If not, then
district shall implement the plan
established by ISBE with respect to
the student growth part and only the
part(s) to which you can’t agree.
19
First meeting of Joint Committee
shall occur no later than
November 1 of the year preceding
implementation. Okay to have
discussions prior to formal
agreement and the beginning of the
180-day clock.
20
State default model shall
establish minimum requirements
for teacher evaluation
instruments and procedures in
which student growth shall
comprise exactly 50% of the
final performance rating.
21
9/9/2014
8
Professional Practice
22
Professional practice: anything a
teacher does (duties and
responsibilities) to promote the learning
of students… must include
consideration of the teacher’s
attendance, planning, instructional
methods, classroom management,
where relevant, and competency in the
subject matter taught;
23
…standards to which that teacher is
expected to conform, and
specification as to the teacher’s
strengths and weaknesses, with
supporting reasons for the
comments made.
24
9/9/2014
9
Districts must adopt an
instructional framework based on
research regarding effective
instruction that addresses
planning, instructional delivery,
classroom management, and is
aligned with the Illinois
Professional Teaching Standards.
25
Plan must take into consideration
student attendance and mobility so
as to best measure the impact a
teacher, principal, school and
district has on students’ academic
achievement.
26
Professional Practice:
The Danielson Framework will
be used to assess the professional
practice component of the State’s
default model. The Framework
must include all domains,
elements, components, and rating
levels. 27
9/9/2014
10
The Framework must include a description
of the four rating categories.
Danielson Framework uses:
Distinguished
Proficient
Basic
Unsatisfactory (Professional Practice ratings may be different.)
28
The district must quantify the relative
importance of each portion of the
Framework to the final rating.
Danielson Framework
Domain I: Planning and Preparation
Domain II: Classroom Environment
Domain III: Instruction
Domain IV: Professional Responsibilities 29
Teacher being evaluated must
receive a copy of the rubric and
standards to be used and a
summary of how student growth
and professional practice relate to
the ratings.
30
9/9/2014
11
Evidence of Professional Practice:
formal observations of a complete
lesson, evidence of planning,
instructional delivery, classroom
management, informal
observations, and any additional
evidence agreed to by the
Joint Committee
31
Formal observations are scheduled,
last for a complete lesson, or
minimum of 45 minutes, or an
entire class period, preceded by a
conference, at which a discussion of
the planned lesson and areas in
which the evaluator should focus
takes place.
32
Formal observations are followed by
a conference at which a discussion
and reflection of the observed lesson
takes place. The evaluator shall
provide feedback about the teacher’s
professional practice and evidence
specific to the area of focus.
33
9/9/2014
12
Informal observations:
no minimum time,
no pre-conference needed,
no post-conference needed,
feedback should be
provided.
34
Probationary teachers (evaluated every
school year) require
a minimum of three observations
(at least two formal).
Tenured teachers (evaluated at least
once very two school years) require
a minimum of two observations
(at least one formal).
35
Beginning-of-year
conference:
teacher and evaluator set
goals for
professional practice and
student growth.
36
9/9/2014
13
A mid-year interim conference:
teacher and evaluator meet to
discuss progress toward
professional practice and
student growth and allows for
an adjustment to instruction,
as needed.
37
Teacher whom evaluator deems to
be on a path toward a Needs
Improvement or Unsatisfactory
rating should receive notification
as soon as the evaluator makes
such a determination.
38
An end-of-year conference
between teacher and
evaluator is held to review
evidence for each part of the
Framework and teacher’s
performance rating.
39
9/9/2014
14
Evidence must be collected
consistent with a rubric aligned to
the Framework and include
evidence without bias or judgment.
Alternate qualified evaluators may
be designated to conduct
observations.
40
Student Growth
41
Student growth is
the change in a student’s
learning, evidenced by gain
on two or more assessments,
between two or more points
in time.
42
9/9/2014
15
Joint Committees shall consider
how certain characteristics, such
as students receiving special
education services, English
language learners, and low-
income populations, impact a
student’s academic achievement.
43
Joint Committees may define student
growth ratings different than the
State’s ratings as long as the final
ratings are the mandated ratings:
Excellent
Proficient
Needs Improvement
Unsatisfactory
44
An assessment is any instrument
that measures a student’s
acquisition of specific knowledge
and/or skills.
45
9/9/2014
16
Type I = Reliable assessments that
measure students in the same
manner with the same items, scored
by a non-district entity, widely
administered in or beyond Illinois.
Examples: NWEA, MAP Tests,
AIMSWeb, Scantron, ThinkLink.
46
Type II = Assessments adopted and
approved by the school district and
used on a district-wide basis, given
by all teachers in a given grade or
subject area. Examples:
collaboratively developed common
algebra test, or grade level test or a
publisher’s textbook test.
47
Type III = An assessment that is
rigorous and aligned with the
course’s curriculum and that the
evaluator and teacher agree best
measures student learning.
Examples: student work samples,
portfolios, projects, teacher-created
assessments.
48
9/9/2014
17
A Type I or Type II assessment may
qualify as a Type III assessment if
it aligns to the curriculum,
measures student learning in that
subject area, and is administered on
a district-wide basis by all teachers
in a given grade level/subject area.
49
At least one assessment from
Type I or Type II and one
from Type III is required,
or if no Type I or Type II,
then both can be Type III.
50
Data points may come from
different assessments as long as the
assessments address the same
content and as long as each data
point falls within
one calendar (12 months) year.
51
9/9/2014
18
Student Learning Objectives
are annual, targeted, goals to
advance student learning.
52
Student Learning Objectives
are based on conversations
between the teacher and the
evaluator that reflect a
thorough review of available
data to set growth targets for
the teacher
53
For example:
Number or percent of students who
reach a pre-determined standard
defining proficiency or achieve
simple growth, the difference
between end score and beginning
score
54
9/9/2014
19
Sample SLOs from New Haven:
5th grade class average of 80%
mastery across all math
standards will increase from
70% of students to 85% of
students on teacher-scored
assessments.
55
9th grade Art: 90% of final
portfolio presentations will
attain the level of “shows
significant improvement” on
rubric at year-end-review.
56
11th grade English: 90% of
students will score at or above
“above expectations” on final
research paper.
57
9/9/2014
20
Special education students:
should receive accommodations
specified in IEPs;
no disincentives for taking special
education students; and
should promote shared
accountability.
58
Joint Committees:
define process for each metric,
how student characteristics, (ELL,
special education, low income) shall
be considered for each assessment,
set growth expectations,
identify a uniform midpoint process ,
and define student growth ratings.
(Not necessarily all students)
59
Final Ratings
60
9/9/2014
21
In the State default model, a
matrix approach may be
used to determine the
summative rating, i.e.,
melding the professional
practice rating with the
student growth rating. 61
E P NI U
E E E P P
P P E P NI
NI P P NI E
U P NI E U
62
If a tenured teacher’s performance
is rated as either “Needs
Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory,”
then the teacher must be evaluated
at least once in school year
following the rating.
63
9/9/2014
22
Tenured teacher rated “Needs
Improvement” must develop, with the
evaluator and within 30 days, a
professional development plan directed
to areas identified as needing
improvement.
Reinstatement to the evaluation
schedule if rating becomes
Proficient or Excellent.
64
Tenured teacher rated “Unsatisfactory”
must develop and commence a
remediation plan, within 30 days,
provided the deficiencies are
remediable.
The plan shall provide for 90 school
days of remediation unless bargained
for fewer. (Remediation process is
outlined in the law.)
65
School districts do not need to
submit their new teacher evaluation
plans or future amendments to
ISBE.
66
9/9/2014
23
Dr. Joseph J. Matula
67
Evaluator Training
68
Evaluators must participate in
training on the evaluation of
certified personnel provided or
approved by ISBE prior to
undertaking any evaluation and at
least once during each certificate
renewal cycle.
Bargaining unit members may be
evaluators if bargaining unit agrees. 69
9/9/2014
24
Evaluator’s pre-qualification
program must involve rigorous
training and an independent
observer’s determination that the
evaluator’s ratings properly align to
the 24A requirements.
70
Senate Bill 7
71
Replaces teacher seniority with a
process for filling new and
vacant positions. Filling such
positions will be based on
certifications, qualifications,
merit and ability (performance
evaluations) and relevant
experience. 72
9/9/2014
25
Reduction in Force (RIF)
procedures changed from
seniority to one based on
performance evaluations.
(Notice is now 45 days for
all.)
73