teacher evaluation system update

8/3/2019 Teacher Evaluation System Update

1/18

1


2/18

2

Teacher Evaluation System Update

Presented by Luis Tamez, Executive Director Veronica Garcia, Director Human Resources Human Resources

Dr. Claudia Rodriguez, Chief of Staff

November 3, 2011


3/18

Internal analysis shows the current state of performance evaluation

98% of 10,248teachers evaluated in2010-11 received ameets expectations

this was true for teachers evaluatedunder PDAS, PCAS,and LPDAS

and at AUcampuses, where 16campuses did not ratea single teacher as

3

Of the 34 campuses ratedAcademically Unacceptable, only18 campuses rated any teacher below expectations overall

Meetsexpectations,98% (10,027)

Belowexpectations,

2% (221)

98% 98% 100%

2% 2% 0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

PDAS PCSAS LPDAS

BELOWEXPECTATIONS

MEETEXPECTATIONS

.


4/18

Focus on stakeholder feedback and input

~1,400 hours havebeen invested toprovide input on the

system design

more than 50,000communicationshave been extended

about the project

all stakeholders canlearn about the projectthrough a website, board

briefings, & public info

4

.

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

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 re lease

15 Committee meetings with 100 participantso Committees: Steering Committee, Design Committee, Input Committee,

Effective Teaching subcommittee, Evidence subcommittee, Quantitativesubcommittee

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

Key engagement activities


5/18

Sample list of participantsLakey Teresa - CoreyPierce Leanette - CoreyCoerCynthia -CoreyKarla Erksin- CoreyKaren - Corey

Teacher - CoreyTeacher - CoreyRobinson Debra - MedranoWilliams Segoya - MedranoGillian Jimmy - MedranoTeacher - MedranoTeacher - MedranoGilbert - MedranoArrow Kendra - Medrano

Teachers Principals/APsS. Phillis - SpruceJacobson Cedric - SpruceWalker Reed Tracie - SpruceSanchez - SpruceRuffin-Brown Patrice - ComstockCarmen Comstock

Squire Desiree - LincolnGriffin Calandra - LincolnSwann Leslie - LincolnEziakor Nkiru- LincolnBence Janelle - North DallasWright Michelle - North DallasBible Ricky - North DallasForester Tamm - North Dallas

Delgado Belinda - CaryParker Jonathan - FranklinStuass Sharon - Gaston MiddleSosa Salvador - Hill MiddleWilliams Elvis - Lang MiddlePetters Danielle - Long MiddleSigurdson Theresa - Medrano MiddleCardenas Jose - Tasby Middle

Rico Grace - Walker MiddleHackemack Lucy - Conrad HighJones Ronald - Hillcrest HighConger Edward -Jefferson High

Irene Aguilar (Principal, CM Soto ES)Johanna Bortnem Dealey BannermanAcademyMarsha Burkley (Principal, Kleberg ES)Israel Cordero Samuell High SchoolDinnah Escanilla North DallasFelicia Gibbons (Assoc. Principal, Gaston MSMenay Harris (Principal, Kramer ES)

JoleeHealey (Principal, Hexter ES)Lynette Howard Starks ElementaryTiffany Huitt (Asst. Principal, Garcia MS))Brian Lusk (Principal, ED Walker MS, N)

Miller Melanie - ComstockLatson Lucretia - ComstockFumbu Godlove - SamuellNolan Kristy - SamuellSloan LaToya SamuellMagana-Saenz maria - SamuellJones Marlo - SamuellMcKimRachell - SamuellWalton Teresa SamuellDoretha Allen Morena ESJeanine Amy - WT White,Jayda Batchelder Stockard MSElizabeth Blue-White Florence MS

5

Hussain Abdul - Jefferson HighBoyle Suzie - Jefferson HighMikelllsChris - Jefferson HighJohn -Jefferson High

Sentori Rachel - Jefferson HighBaskell Celia - Jefferson HighTaylor Dennis -Jefferson HighSmith Blair -Jefferson HighCaddyton Kathleen - Jefferson HighCore Cynthia - Jefferson HighGay Connie - GonzalesGarrett-Hill Paullette - ThompsonWilliams Patsy - StarksRangel Linda - DorseyJarvis Latoya - JarvisLevy Howard - Blair Ford Stephanie - DouglassFalcon Lisa -San JacintoSarmiento Alberto - MaconButler Rochelle - WHEWalker Doris - ErvinBryant Vivian - BlantonAllen Doretha- Charles RiceBaptiste Mallory - PeaseHouston Rory - HallidayWeaver Sharri - Peasant GroveHaley - Frazier Shane Williams -BushmanMarishStephanie - LincolnChancellor April - LincolnHarris Steven Lincoln

Squire Desiree LincolnIzard Ernest - Spruce

Toney Renetria - Atwell MSFerguson - Atwell MSHarvey - Atwell MSJohnson Marcus - Atwell MSCole Amy -Atwell MSWilliams Gwen - Carter HurdPaulette - Carter Lockhart Jennifer - Carter Hawkins-Briley Deborah - Carter Gates Marcus - MadisonBlackmon Steffanie- MadisonHunter Aaron - MadisonNicholson Edwina - MadisonMeadows Kay - MadisonBodede Ummi - Seagoville MSLong Larissa - Seagoville MSNavinThomas - Seagoville MSMcCowan Evevon - Seagoville MSTennison Belinda - Seagoville MSBrownlon Richard - FlorenceTyler Teri - FlorenceBlue-White Elizabeth FlorenceMcLaughlin Tom - FlorenceHepburn Jacelyn - FlorenceWheerKimberly - FlorenceTarakLisa - SpruceTothDevon - SpruceBurr A. Beverly -SprucePumpelly Beth - SpruceWanseiskiKatie SpruceJohnson Lisa - Comstock

Prelow-Stephens Erika - ComstockWhittfieldS. - Comstock

Hardwick Anita - White HighRichardson Kyle - Woodrow Wilson HighHovseth Constance - Gabe Allen ElementaryVega Diana - Arcadia Park ElementaryHeffernan Richie -F.P. Caillet ElementaryChavez Raymond Anthony - Foster ElementaryOntiveros Manuel - Herbert Marcus ElementaryWeir Ricardo - Esperanza Medrano Elementary

Barbara Moham (Principal, Hulcy MS)Juan Vega Rusk Middle SchoolYvonne Rojas (Principal, Lida Hooe ES)Leisha Shaver (Principal, Roosevelt HS)Gayle Smith Gi lliam Collegiate AcademyPete Chapasko - Preston Hollow ElementaryAngela West (Principal, Dallas EnvironmentalScience Academy MS)

Blanca CortesCabell ElementaryWhitney Curtis Marcus ElementaryRobert Edison - Obama MaleLeadershipElizabeth Farris - Lipscomb ESPatricia Gage W hite High SchoolJessica Guthrie John Leslie Patton Jr.Zack Hall Cochran ElementaryHeather Holland Cochran ElementaryLatoya Irvine Thompson Learning CtChelsea Johnson Stockard MSNikki Jones- Rice ESJenny Lee Gaston MS

Eva Leal-Trevio Botello ElementaryCharvelia Lewis -Rice ESKaren Marx North Dallas High SchoolMagdalena Marquez Moreno ElemBiviana McAfee -Lida HooeESIva Panchilova Marcus ESLinda Polk (ESL Teacher, Ray ES, NE)Charles Sabapathy Townview Center Stephanie Taylor - Greiner MSEva Leal-Trevino -Botello ESLeticia Varela - Rosemont ESKristen Watkins Stockard MSCurtis Whitehead Bryan Adams HS, N.Secondary)

Rena Honea AFT Alliance

Angela Davis NEA DallasDiane Reed Dallas ATPEJill Cochran (Parent)Diana Cruz (Parent)Liliana Garcia (Parent)Melissa Higginbotham (Parent)Nataly Martinez (Parent)Monica Nash (Parent)Ceclia Ramirez (Parent)Jim Kipp (Parent)

Marciela Vargas (Parent)

Chris Coxon Communities Foundation of TXSherril English School of Education andHuman DevelopmentJuany Valdespino-Gaytan Girls and BoysClubDena Jackson Greater Dallas Chamber /Dallas Education FoundationCharles ONeal Dallas Black Chamber Ellen Wood Teaching TrustKen Barth Symphonic Source

Community


6/18

Survey results on system designHow to measure teacher impact on

performance

Principals Teachers

71% Value-added measures 38%

65% Comparative growth data 38%

Teacher evaluation best practices ranked mostimportant

6

63%End of Courseassessments 51%

50%End of Year

assessments 45%

49% CEI 22%

48%School- or teacher-

generated goals 49%

33% SEI 16%

8%Do not use studentoutcome measures 18%

Source: Principal Survey, 10/5/11, n= 137; Teacher Survey, 10/5/11, n= 2,736Question: Which of the following quantitative components should be used to measure teacher impact on student learning as part of an enha nced teacher evaluation process? Check all that apply.

Source: Teacher Survey, 10/5/11, n= 2,111; Principa l Survey 10/5/11, n= 127, Question: Please ra nk thefollowing statements concerning teacher evaluation systems in order of importance (1 being mostimportant). Percentages indicate respondents who ranked the statements 1 (most important).


7/18

Feedback is changing the designTeachers

The system must bedoable and focus on

The system must focuson feedback &

Principals Community

What weve heard

Focus on feedback ANDaccountabilit to su ort

7

instruction

Would like to see greater accountability using data

Focus on doability

Rubric will focus oninstruction

Include significant

quantitative component

development

Nervous about CEIscores being tied toaccountability

Focus on feedback andcoaching

Focus on clearcommunication aboutthe system and data

Design changes

better instruction for children

Focus on feedback andthe use of data


8/18

System design

Subcommittees are under wayEffective Teaching Subcommittee, Quantitative Subcommittee, Evidence SubcommitteeMembership includes approximately 30 teachers, 20 principals,10 community members

Organized by the committees themselves

8

Stakeholder input and external research is driving the designStakeholder input comes from surveys, interviews, committees and info sessionsCommittees are evaluating research and case studies to identify best practices

Drafts and design prototypes are in progressModel Design : Drafts to contain rubric, evidence, and quantitative componentProcess Design : Drafts to contain the number of observations, professional growth plans, scoringand weighting mechanisms, and training plan for principals


9/18

Project Timeline

July - October November December January 2012February 2012-

July 2012

DesignPlanning & Stakeholder Engagement Testing Implementation

August 2012

Gather stakeholder input Communications andstakeholder Communicationand stakeholder Communication

and stakeholder Continue

communication with Launch

subcommittees(rubric, qualitative,quantitative) of principals, teachersand central officechosen and led byDesign committee

Establish keydesign questions

Begin to establishvision

teachers invited)

Committee meetings& design

Establish vision withteachers

Drive contentforward through sub-committees led byDesign Committee

engagement ateachers invited)

Committeemeetings & design

Selectcomponents of evaluation andweighting system

Create processand protocol

Determinequantitativecomponents

engagement ateachers invited)

Committeemeetings & testing

Test tools, gather feedback, andadjustDesign trainingprocess andmaterials

Develop trainingschedule and trainthe trainers

sta e o ers ateachers invited)

Committeemeetings & rollout

Roll-out to schools

Provide training toprincipals andteachers

Provide support,technology, tools

Track progress of implementation

9


10/18

Progress ReportWhat has been completed

(Jul-Oct)See calendar for specifics

What is going tohappen next

(Dec-Jan)

What is currentlyunderway

(Nov)See calendar for specifics

E-Blasts to all staff 9/13, 9/26, 10/11 ~20,000 each time cumulative ~60,000

Website launched

E-Blast to all staff (minimum monthly) Website updated (minimum monthly) Continue teacher engagement

100 teachers interviewed by end of October; goal

E-Blast to all staff (minimum monthly) Website updated (minimum monthly) Continue teacher engagement

3,129 teachers surveyed

145 principals surveyed 96 principals interviewed and engaged through focus

groups 9 Learning Community presentations

Begin teacher engagement 3,129 teachers surveyed 81 teachers engaged through focus groups (as of

10/10) Committees formed

Teacher Evaluation System Input Committeemeeting 8/30, 9/20, 10/18

Design Committee meetings 7/18, 8/10, 8/31, 9/21,10/19

Steering Committee meetings 7/20, and 8/29, 9/12,10/10

Established sub-committees of teachers, principals andcentral office chosen and led by design committee

Public Information Sessions by trustee district: 10/12,10/19, 10/25

Proposed names for system Gathered and analyzed Dallas ISD 2010-2011 data on

teacher evaluation

o y en o ovem er 50 Elementary school teachers completed by

end of October ; goal of 100 by end of November

50 Middle and High School completed by endof October ; goal of 100 by end of November

20 1 st to 3 rd year completed by end of October;goal of 40 by end of November

Teacher Evaluation System Progress ReportUpdate by trustee district

Public Information Sessions by trustee district:11/7, 11/8, 11/9, 11/14, 11/29

Committee meetings Teacher Evaluation System Input Committee

meeting 11/8 Design Committee meeting 11/9 Steering Committee meeting 11/7

Sub-committee meetings

Goal of 500 teachers interviewed by end of January

Goal of 250 Elementary school teachers Goal of 250 Middle and High school teachers Goal of 60 1 st to 3 rd year teachers

Committee meetings Teacher Evaluation System Input Committee

meeting 12/6 Design Committee meeting 12/7, 1/11 Steering Committee meeting 12/12

Sub-committee meetings

Preliminary recommendations for defining effectiveteaching, qualitative components, and quantitativecomponents

10


11/18

Design Work Progress Report

Step 1: Begin to define

project directionObtained teacher in ut

Design steps completed(Jul-Oct)

Design steps tohappen next(Jan-April)

Design steps currentlyunderway(Nov-Feb)

Step 1: Continue to define

project directionWork with teachers to

Step 4: Define weighting of components

Work with teachers to

regarding strengths andareas of improvementwith current teacher evaluation system

Established a commonunderstanding on theproject direction

Worked with teachers toidentify best starting pointfor teacher evaluationsystem design

Followed up with teacherson each committee for

feedback 11

establish a common visionfor the project to beunderstandable and fair

Step 2: Define teacher rubric

Work with teachers tocreate a rubric withdomains and proficiencylevels

Step 3: Define components of teacher evaluation

Work with teachers toestablish quantitative andqualitative components to

include in the system

determine weighting of eachevaluation systemcomponent for teachers andother staff

Step 5: Align evaluation system

Work with teachers to alignevaluation system acrossDallas ISD systems relatedto teacher effectivenessincluding professionaldevelopment, recruiting,principal evaluations,compensation, curriculumand instruction, etc.


12/18

Communication PlanWhat has been completed

(July to October)What is currently underway

(November)What is going to happen next (December

to January)

ALL GROUPS

Committee meetings Website launched Public Information Sessions led by

DMC/Dallas ISD

Committee meetings Public Information Sessions led by

DMC/Dallas ISD Teacher Evaluation System Progress

Report Update (9 Trustee Districts)

Committee Meetings Teacher Evaluation System Progress

Report Update (9 Trustee Districts)

Teachers

Teacher of year interviewed (teachers unavailable in summer) All teacher survey launched

Conduct interviews and focus groups All teacher E-blast on website

Conduct interviews and focus groups Monthly E-blast

Parents Invited and participated in committee

meetings Initiated parent interviews

Conduct interviews and focus groups of parents

Focus groups of parents selected byprincipals to gather input on progressand design of system

Principals andAPs

Conducted interviews and focus groups Introduction at LC meetings All principal Survey launched

Conduct interviews and focus groups Introduction at LC meetings All principal and AP E-blast

Conduct interviews and focus groups Monthly E-blast

Teacher Organizations

Interviewed Continue interviews Follow-up interviews

Business/Community

Interviewed Follow-up Interviews Follow-up interviews

Senior EDs Interviewed Follow-up interviews Follow-up interviews

Central staff Interviewed Follow-up interviews

E-Blast reminder on website In-depth meetings on student data

Follow-up interviews Monthly E-blast

Trustees Interviewed Board briefings (2 - Aug/Sept)

Monthly Board Briefing Complete trustee interviews

Monthly board briefing

12


13/18

Current Calendar (October)Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

3 4 Define effective teaching

subcommittee mtg Qualitative subcommittee

mtg

5 Quantitative sub-

committee mtg STAR Employee

Commission mtgAdministration Bldg 6 pm

6 7

10 11 -

12

13

14

13

Teacher focus group (1)

District 8 PublicInformation Session inthe Chavez LearningCenter from 6-7pm

17 18 Teacher Eval System Input

Committee

19 Design Committee

District 1 Public Sessionin the George HerbertWalker Bush ElementarySchool from 6-7pm

STAR EmployeeCommission mtgAdministration Bldg 6 pm

20 Central Sec LC mtg

Teacher focus group(tentative )

21

24 25 District 4 Public

Information Session in theSpruce High School from

4:30-5:30pm

26 27 28


14/18

Upcoming Calendar (November)Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

1 Parent focus group

6pm

2 Define effective teaching sub-

committee meeting District 7 Public Information

Session in the Lida HooeElementary School from 6-7pm

STAR Employee Commission

mtg Administration Bldg 6 pm

3 Meeting with

BusinessRepresentative

New Teacher (1 st -3 rd

year) Focus Group Parent Focus Group

6pm

4 Quantitative sub-

committee meeting

7

8

9

10 11

14

District 5 PublicInformation Session inthe Yvonne A. EwellTownview Center from 6-7pm

Qualitative subcommitteemeeting

District 3 PublicInformation Session in theBryan Adams HighSchool from 6-7pm

Teacher EvaluationSystem Input Committeemeeting

Meeting with BusinessRepresentative

District 2 Public InformationSession in the StonewallJackson Elementary Schoolfrom 6-7pm

Design Committee meeting

14

District 6 PublicInformation Session inthe Carter High Schoolfrom 6-7pm

Quantitative sub-committee meeting

15 16

STAR Employee Commission mtgAdministration Bldg 6 pm

17 18

21 22 23 24 Thanksgiving

25

28 29 District 9 Public

Information Session in theSkyline High School from6-7 m

30STAR Employee Commission mtgAdministration Bldg 6 pm


15/18

Teacher Evaluation SystemUpdate

Q&A15


16/18

Details on stakeholder feedback and inputCommittee Membership

Focus groups andinterviews Survey participation

InformationalBriefings

Pushedcommunication

Activitiescompleted

1. Design Committee (5 meetings)2. Teacher Evaluation System Input

Committee (3 meetings)3. Define effective teaching sub-

committee (3 meetings)4. Evidence / qualitative sub-committee

(2 meetings)5. Quantitative sub-committee (2

meetings)

In-person focus groups (15conducted)

Conference call focusgroups (21 conducted)

Individual interviews (over 150 interviews)

Principal survey (9/1) Teacher survey (9/15)

Public informationsessions (4completed, 5scheduled)

Principal meetingsby LC (8completed)

E-Blasts(4 sent to allDallas ISD staff)

Media release (1) Website launched (10/1)

23 in Design and Teacher EvaluationS stem In ut Committee

Teacher organizations (2interviews

29% of teachers in thedistrict artici ated

All teachers invitedhrou h rinci al

All teachers reachedhrou h e-blasts

16

Teachers

19 in subcommittees 128 teachers

3,129 teachersresponded / 2,513teachers completed

email, E-blast,media release, andnewspaper

199 teachers responded

on website

Principals

7 in Design and Teacher EvaluationSystem Input Committee

12 in subcommittees

23 interviewed 73 in focus groups

66% of principals in thedistrict participated

145 principalsresponded / 129completed

All p rinc ipal sinformed of publicsessions

8 LC princ ipalmeetings (over 150principals informed)

All principals reachedthrough e-blasts

12 responded on website

Parents 10 in Teacher Evaluation System InputCommittee 2 Interviews Focus group (scheduled by

Lead principal) up to 50 No web-based survey planned Open to all Informed through principalsand media

59 parents responded onwebsite

Businesscommunity

7 in Teacher Evaluation System InputCommittee

5 interviews No web-based survey planned

Open to all 11 business partnersresponded on website

Central admin

31 in Design and Teacher EvaluationSystem Input Committee

13 in subcommittee

30 Interviews No web-based survey planned

Open to all All staff reached through e-blasts

8 central staff respondedon survey


17/18

External research and best practicesSelected academic sources:

Gates Foundation MET ProjectThe New Teacher ProjectCommission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC)Center for Education and Policy and Practice

Brookings InstituteNational Education Association

In depth study on over 35 evaluationmodels to develop 16 case studies:

Charlotte Danielson, Framework for TeachersKim Marshall, Teacher Evaluation RubricsRobert Marzano, Classroom Instruction that

WorksTeach for America, Teaching as Leadership

National Council on Teacher QualityAspen InstituteNational Comprehensive Center for Teacher QualityEducation Sector ReportsEconomic Policy Institute Reports

EdWeek ReportingUS Department of EducationAchieving Student Success through EffectiveTeaching (ASSET)National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Datain Education Research (Urban Institute)Consortium For Policy Research in EducationPeabody Journal of Education 17

Teacher Advancement Program (TAP)KIPP Framework for Excellent TeachingJon Saphier, The Skillful Teacher Interstate New Teacher Assessment & SupportConsortium (INTASC)Houston Independent School District (HISD)DC IMPACTTexas Beginning Educator Support System(TxBESS)California Standards for Teaching ProfessionIowa Teaching Standards and CriteriaMassachusetts Principals of Effective TeachingMemphis TEMNew Haven Teacher Evaluation


18/18

18

teacher evaluation system update

Documents