BARTLESVILLE BOARD OF EDUCATION

Transcription

1 EVALUATION, OTHER ACADEMIC MEASURES, AND STUDENT ACADEMIC GROWTH All certified staff evaluations will comply with the requirements of the district s Teacher and Leader Effectiveness (TLE) model School Year Qualitative components of the evaluation will count for 100% of the employee s total score. In employees are required to participate in the quantitative components of the state-mandated TLE evaluation model, which includes OAM and Student Academic Growth School Year and beyond Quantitative and qualitative components of the evaluation will each be valued at 50% of the employee s total score. Thirty five percent (35%) of the employee s quantitative score will be based on Student Academic Growth as demonstrated through multiple years of standardized test data or through the use of growth data from the prior school year on Student Learning Objectives (SLO) or Student Outcome Objectives (SOO), and fifteen percent (15%) shall be comprised of OAM scores on data collected the prior school year. An Other Academic Measure must be distinct from whatever measure is used for Student Academic Growth, differing in one or more of these areas: student population assessed, content assessed, assessment measure, and/or growth expectations. The required percentages for each component of the TLE model shall be adjusted as required by any updates in state law or as required by the state board of education. This policy first addresses procedures for Other Academic Measures and then addresses procedures for Student Academic Growth. OTHER ACADEMIC MEASURES PROCEDURES Board-Approved Other Academic Measures The board of education adopts the below list of OAMs as its approved list. This list provides all options promulgated by the Oklahoma State Department of Education which are currently available to certified personnel within the school district. The board acknowledges that there may be other assessments and options approved by the Oklahoma State Department of Education but which are not available within the school district. The attached list is intended to provide maximum flexibility for certified personnel and is not intended to limit any employee s access to OAMs. Each employee is entitled to select one (1) OAM from at least two (2) approved, appropriate OAMs. If there are not at least two (2) approved, appropriate OAMs on the list, the Page 1 of 12

2 superintendent shall make a recommendation to the board of education for approval of additional OAMs. The superintendent will not make recommendations to the board regarding adopting additional OAMs if two (2) approved, appropriate OAMs are already on the approved list. Because of the difficulty in amassing, reviewing and analyzing data regarding OAMs, no employee will be permitted to use more than one OAM per school year. The board encourages collaboration among faculty when selecting OAMs in order to create consistency within the school district. By way of example, the board encourages all 5 th grade English teachers, 9 th grade science teachers, etc. to consult with each other and agree on the same measures and 5-tier ratings for all employees in the category. Despite the board s preference for this level of professionalism, the board respects each individual employee s right to select an appropriate OAM and related SMART plan. Employees Who Teach Multiple Grades / Subjects In the event an employee teaches multiple grades/subjects, the employee will not select an OAM for each grade/subject. Employees teaching multiple grades/subjects are only guaranteed two (2) OAM choices total - not two (2) choices per grade/subject. Selection of Other Academic Measures Certified employees, in conjunction with their supervisor, will annually select an OAM. The OAM selected must meet the following criteria: be specific to the employee s job assignment (for employees teaching multiple subjects, the employee may select an OAM which is relevant to any of the subjects); reflect student performance which is impacted by the teacher; be objectively quantifiable; be on the board approved list of OAMs; and be approved by the employee s supervisor as outlined below. Selection and Approval of OAM and Related Processes All certified employees must submit a proposed OAM with data sources and SMART plan to his/her supervisor before the second quarter of the school year. The proposal must be submitted using the format shown below. The supervisor shall have ten (10) school days to accept or reject the employee s proposal. Page 2 of 12

3 Employees and supervisors are expected to work together collegially through this process and only the formal submission and approval/rejection notice are required to be written. If an impasse develops at any point during this process, the employee and the supervisor will begin a mediation process. Mediation Process for Other Academic Measures If an employee and supervisor are unable to agree on an appropriate OAM, data sources and/or SMART plan, either party can request that the superintendent meet with the parties to determine an appropriate outcome. The superintendent may designate another administrator to oversee the mediation process. In order to request mediation, either party may the superintendent to request mediation. The superintendent (or designee) will promptly schedule a meeting with both parties and at the conclusion of the conference if the parties still have not reached an agreement the superintendent (or designee) will make a determination. The superintendent (or designee) will provide a written report of the agreement reached or decision made within two (2) school days of the meeting. The superintendent s (or designee s) decision is final and non-appealable. Extenuating Circumstances and Other Academic Measures In the event an extenuating circumstance (e.g., student teacher, extended illness, natural disaster, etc.) impacts student achievement after approval of the SMART goal, a reflective analysis will be used in lieu of the OAM score. The analysis must be in depth and provide information regarding the data which is available, the factors which contributed to the data, and the employee s assessment of all factors surrounding the SMART goal. In the event an extenuating circumstance outside of the teacher s or school district s control (e.g., unavailability of selected data sources) makes it impossible to evaluate the SMART goal, the reflective analysis described above will be employed. Evaluation Timing The administration is expected to act promptly in gathering data and providing feedback to employees regarding OAMs. However, it is impossible to have all OAM assessment data completed in time to be utilized during the current school year. Accordingly, OAM scores will be included on the employee s subsequent year evaluation. Page 3 of 12

4 Board Approved Other Academic Measures Category Approved Measures Rating Examples State Assessments Value Added Model Score 1 End of Instruction (EOI) Fine Arts Assessment Oklahoma Core Curriculum Tests (OCCT) Oklahoma Alternate Assessment Program (OAAP) Accessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to- State for English Language Learners (ACCESS for ELLs) Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) Oklahoma College and Career Ready Assessments (OCCRA) School-wide VAM (all subjects) School-wide VAM (literacy and numeracy) School-wide VAM (literacy) School-wide VAM (numeracy) Individual VAM Students scoring proficient or advanced: 5: 95% 4: 85% 3: 75% 2: 65% 1: less than 65% % increase in student proficiency: 5: 20% 4: 15% 3: 10% 2: 5% 1: less than 4% School wide value added score: 5: 5 4: 4 3: 3 2: 2 1: 1 1 Note: If one of these components is used for the 35% student academic growth component for the employee, it cannot be selected as the 15% OAM unless the teacher has an individual VAM score used for the 35% student academic growth. Page 4 of 12

5 Off the Shelf Assessments A-F Report Card Components Advanced Placement (AP) / International Baccalaureate (IB) exams Assessments on the ACE alternate test list Computer Generated Assessments EXPLORE / PLAN / ACT / WorkKeys Industry recognized certification exams NWEA MAP tests RSA Approved Assessments SAT / PSAT Star Reading / Star Math Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) Other state or nationally available assessment that generates student scores automatically (In other words, the cut scores are consistent across all districts and states.) Overall School Grade or GPA Student Academic Performance Grade Student Growth Grade Any A-F Report Card Component (e.g., Graduation Rate, Bottom 25% Growth) Students on grade level performance: 5: 100% 4: 90% 3: 80% 2: 70% 1: less than 70% Increase in student passing rate: 5: 20% 4: 15% 3: 10% 2: 5% 1: less than 5% Individual components: 5: A 4: B 3: C 2: D 1: F Surveys BPSD Student Survey Approval rating: 5: 90% with 75% response rate 4: 80% with 75% response rate 3: 70% with 75% response rate or 80% with 50% response rate 2: 60% with 75% response rate or 70% with 50% response rate 1: Less than 60% approval rating with 75% response rate or less than 70% approval rating with 50% response rate Page 5 of 12

6 Student Competition Miscellaneous National, State, Area or Regional Competitions (Sponsored by OSSAA or similar organization) Robotics Competitions State Science Fair IEP Goal Attainment Linguifolio Service Learning Project Portfolios Student Community Service Project Portfolios Teacher/leader Portfolios Third Grade Promotion State-, District-, and/or Consortium- Developed Benchmark Assessments Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Student Outcome Objectives (SOO) 5: 1 st / 2 nd place (area competition) 4: 3 rd / 4 th place (area competition) 3: 1 st / 2 nd place (regionals) 2: Invitation to regionals 1: No invitation to regionals % increase in # students qualifying to compete 5: 20% 4: 15% 3: 10% 2: 5% 1: less than 5% % students meeting all IEP goals: 5: 100% 4: 90% 3: 80% 2: 70 % 1: less than 70% Page 6 of 12

7 Employee Proposal - Other Academic Measures Name: School Year: Grade/Subject Taught: Proposal Date: Academic Focus Area: Proposed OAM: Proposed baseline data source: Proposed post instruction data source: Proposed SMART goal (Specific, Measurable, Attainable and Ambitious, Results-drive, and Time-bound) Proposed rating: Superior (5): Highly Effective (4): Effective (3): Needs Improvement (2): Ineffective (1): Employee Signature Date I have reviewed and approved this plan: Supervisor Signature Date Page 7 of 12

8 STUDENT ACADEMIC GROWTH PROCEDURES The board has made each of the decisions outlined in this policy in an attempt to ensure the efficient operation of the district while providing fairness and flexibility to employees. The board expects that the administration will provide adequate training to all affected employees. The superintendent or his designee will coordinate the district s SLO/SOO program. Value Added Measures District teachers who receive a value added score from the OSDE are required to use that score as their student academic growth score for purposes of evaluation, unless state law or policy allows alternate use of a SLO/SOO. Student Learning Objectives (SLO) and Student Outcome Objectives (SOO) Employees subject to this policy who do not receive a value added score from OSDE ( educators ) must create either a SLO or a SOO to use as their student academic growth score for purposes of evaluation in accordance with this policy. Timeline / Required Monitoring and Meetings Educators must submit their SLO/SOO proposal annually on the district s approved form before the date established by the district Teacher Appraisal Committee or individual supervisors. The supervisor will either approve the SLO/SOO within ten (10) school days of submission or will advise the educator of changes required to the plan. Both the educator and the supervisor will initial the final document and each will maintain a copy of the SLO/SOO. An appeal may be made to the supervisor or his designee, whose decision is final. The educator and his/her supervisor will meet at approximately the middle of the interval of instruction to check the progress of the SLO/SOO and make any necessary modifications to the plan. Deviations from a previously approved plan will only be allowed at the discretion of the supervisor. Employees who request a deviation must have a compelling reason, supported by documentation, for the modification. Types of circumstances which might justify a deviation include students who do not attend the educator s class for at least 85% of the interval of instruction or a teacher being on leave for more than 15% of the interval of instruction. The supervisor s decision regarding whether to grant a deviation may be appealed to the superintendent of his designee, whose decision is final. The educator and his/her supervisor will also meet at the conclusion of the instructional interval to reflect on the SLO/SOO and consider ways in which the educator was successful and ways in which adjustments and improvement for the upcoming school year would be beneficial. Page 8 of 12

9 All meetings required by this policy may be conducted in conjunction with another appraisal meeting at the discretion of the supervisor. SLO/SOO Plan Development Because of the time involved in creating, reviewing and monitoring these plans, educators will be limited to one (1) SLO/SOO per year. All educators must submit an individual SLO/SOO, although the board endorses required use of site or course-level Data Teams to collaboratively develop SLOs/SOOs when feasible. All SLO/SOO plans will be approved by the educator s direct supervisor. An appeal may be made to the superintendent or his designee, whose decision is final. SLOs/SOOs must meet each of the following guidelines: Require rigorous but attainable student growth. Demonstrate student academic growth impacted by the educator in order to provide actionable feedback. Be developed based on training provided by or approved by OSDE. Comply with the district s quality checklist approved by the district Teacher Appraisal Committee. Include an interval of instruction which conforms to the duration of the course; typically that is either one (1) semester or one (1) school year, depending on the assessment chosen. Focus on essential skills and course content rather than all state standards covered in the class (SLOs only). Be implemented at the site grade or district course level, if possible. If a site grade or district course level plan is not possible, the plan must be a class level plan and if a class level plan is not possible, be a tiered plan. Answer the following questions: What are the most important knowledge/skill(s) I want my students to attain by the end of the interval of instruction? Where are my students now (at the beginning of instruction) with respect to the objective? Based on what I know about my students, where do I expect them to be by the end of the interval of instruction? How will they demonstrate their knowledge/skill(s) at the end of the interval of instruction? Data Collection and Storage All SLO/SOO plans must use appropriate baseline / trend data collected from either formal assessments, performance tasks graded with a rubric, portfolios, or cumulative projects. This data will be stored at the site level. Page 9 of 12

10 Scoring Educators are expected to score their plans and provide the results to their supervisor before approval of the next SLO/SOO cycle. Supervisors will review the scoring and may make corrections needed to ensure accurate scoring. The score will be based on the SLO scoring table shown on the template below. Page 10 of 12

11 Employee Proposal - SLO/SOO Page 11 of 12

12 Page 12 of 12