Advancing Professional Excellence Guide Table of Contents

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Advancing Professional Excellence Guide Table of Contents"

Transcription

1 1

2 Advancing Professional Excellence Guide Table of Contents APEX Values and Beliefs History and Development of APEX Purpose of APEX Components of APEX The APEX Process APEX Process Timeline Training/Orientation Professional Practice Self-Assessment (power in self-reflection) Professional Growth Plan (PGP) Goal Setting Classroom Visits (Observations), School Visits and Ongoing Feedback Mid-Year Conversations End of Year Conversation Measures of Student Learning Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Handbook Professional Practice Ratings and MSL Ratings Determining an Overall Rating Appendix A - Resources & Tools Appendix B RANDA Navigation Support Appendix C - Additional Details About APEX Revised 8/12/15 2

3 Advancing Professional Excellence Adams 12 Five Star Schools Advancing Professional Excellence (APEX) is the professional growth and performance system for educators in Adams 12 Five Star Schools. APEX encompasses the components of Colorado s Educator Effectiveness bill and represents the district s core values and beliefs of professional growth. APEX Values and Beliefs We believe high-quality reflective educators create high performing schools. We believe in a growth mind set for all educators. We believe professional relationships built on mutual respect and transparency enhance everyone s practice and elevate our profession. We believe reflective practice and professional collaboration make educators more effective. We believe in continuous improvement, rather than perfection. History and Development of APEX Since 2011, the Five Star Schools Educator Effectiveness Advisory Committee, comprised of teachers, principals, district leaders, and District Twelve Educators Association leaders has been proactively studying the Colorado Educator Effectiveness Model and planning for its implementation in our district. This committee was formed in response to Colorado Senate Bill , Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness (or simply: Educator Effectiveness), which was passed in May of In 2011 and 2012, the committee focused on developing a deep understanding of the purpose and intent of Educator Effectiveness and the professional practices referenced in the Colorado State Evaluation Rubrics. From 2012 to 2014, the committee focused on planning for how the Professional Practices (evaluation rubrics) portion of Educator Effectiveness would be utilized in the Five Star District as a tool for supporting educators growth. During the school year, the district started using RANDA, the online support tool for educator effectiveness, and the committee tackled specific questions around Measures of Student Learning (MSL) and has helped guide a cohort of more than 200 educators who are learning about the use of MSL data, including setting Student Learning Objectives (SLOs). The committee fosters a strong collaborative relationship among its members and has identified the values and beliefs that support our collective goal of ensuring we have a cadre of reflective, growth minded school leaders, teachers, and specialized service professionals throughout our district. Revised 8/12/15 3

4 Purpose of APEX We know that high quality instruction creates high performing schools that have a positive impact on student achievement and prepare students with the 21st century skills needed for college and career. APEX is designed to support the professional growth of building leaders, teachers and specialized service professionals through reflective practice and purposeful feedback. The purpose of APEX is to enhance professional learning and growth so that every child in Adams 12 Five Star District is educated by high quality classroom teachers and service professionals who are effectively supported by building leaders. Benefits to Students Research shows that when educators have opportunities to reflect on their practice in order to strengthen their instruction, student achievement increases. In Adams 12 Five Star Schools, we have established high expectations for our students based on the Colorado Academic Standards. These standards can support us in providing all students with the academic knowledge, language, and skills necessary to be successful beyond our system in college and careers. While the academic standards provide the foundation for the content we teach, APEX provides educators with the supports they need to ensure all students can achieve. Benefits to Educators APEX provides building leaders, teachers, and specialized service professionals with opportunities to become reflective practitioners and receive meaningful feedback about how their practice impacts student achievement. The system includes training, goal setting, instructional observations, and reflective collaborative conversations that can support all educations in refining their practice in order to continually meet the needs of all students. This Guide is intended for all educators within APEX, including principals, assistant principals, teachers and special service professionals. Revised 8/12/15 4

5 Components of APEX APEX can be thought of as having two main halves. Details about each half, and how they work together are addressed later in this guide. This summary of each half, and the following pie graphs, provide context for the details addressed later. Professional Practice Standards (50%) One half of APEX is based on Professional Practice Standards. These outline performance indicators that align with best practice for instruction that will help all students succeed. After multiple opportunities for feedback, reflection and growth, educators will receive a rating on the Quality Standards that measure professional practice. Teacher & Special Service Professional Quality Standards I. Content Knowledge II. Establish Classroom Environment III. Facilitate Learning IV. Reflect on Practice V. Demonstrate Leadership Principal & Assistant Principal Quality Standards I. Strategic Leadership II. Instructional Leadership III. School Culture & Equity Leadership IV. Human Resource Leadership V. Managerial Leadership VI. Development Leadership Measures of Student Learning (50%) The other half of APEX addresses Measures of Student Learning (MSL) which are based on multiple measures including Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) not a single assessment. The MSL half applies to all educators beginning in the school year. Revised 8/12/15 5

6 APEX Educator Weighting Models The following models illustrate the approved weighting of the professional practice standards and measures of student learning as determined by the Five Star District Educator Effectiveness Advisory Committee. Revised 8/12/15 6

7 Revised 8/12/15 7

8 The APEX Process Revised 8/12/15 8

9 APEX Process Timeline The APEX process puts our values and beliefs of reflection, feedback and growth into action. Through regular reflection and collaboration, educators and their supervisors continue to build relationships and hone practices. These set the foundation for strong educational environments for our students. Item Timeframe / Deadline Action / Purpose APEX Training for Evaluators August Ensure reliability and validity, and give all evaluators the same foundational knowledge Describe APEX and expectations for its implementation Train evaluators on how to utilize RANDA Educator Effectiveness Management System Training will be provided for new evaluators. Orientation Mid September Complete by end of September Orientation for using the RANDA system is available on CDE s site. https://vimeo.com/album/ We will also offer help sessions for those who are interested. Self assessment & Professional Growth Plan (PGP) Goals Link to Sample PGP Goals Link to RANDA Login Complete by end of October Educators will complete a self assessment within RANDA, to reflect on professional performance within the professional practice standards and determine areas of focus for a professional growth plan (PGP). Educators draft a PGP goal and submit these goals in the RANDA system. Educators are encouraged to complete the self assessment and draft their PGP with a colleague or team of colleagues in order to have open/honest collaborative conversations about areas of strength with instructional practice and areas where they may want to grow. A collegial approach allows educators to consider how to support each other. The self assessment and PGP can also be completed individually, if an educator is more comfortable with that format. Revised 8/12/15 9

10 Measures of Student Learning (MSL) Link to Teacher Categories Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) (as part of the Measures of Student Learning) Link to SLO Handbook Link to sample SLOs Supervisor Approval of PGP Goals & SLOs Mid Year Conversation Complete by End of October Complete by End of October Complete by Mid November December January Complete by End of January * NOTE: For the school year, only SLOs will be used by all certified staff for the MSL half of APEX. * Administrator and teacher agree upon the Measures of Student Learning portion of the system which, depending on teacher category, will include data from two or more of the following measures: Colorado Growth Model (CGM) State Summative Assessment (CMAS, ACT, ACCESS, etc.) School Performance Framework (SPF) Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) Please follow the link to the teacher categories section of this document for more information about each measure. Because SLOs are new, much more information about them can be found in the row below, and later in this document in the SLO Handbook section. Educators work in teams to determine student learning objectives (SLOs) that will be part of their overall Measures of Student Learning. Educators draft two SLOs and submit them to their evaluator for review and approval. SLOs are entered into the RANDA system. Schools will determine the best approach for teams to have time to draft SLOs. Many support documents, tools and some centralized support sessions will be offered. Educators are highly encouraged to complete the SLO with a team (e.g. grade level or department team) of colleagues in order to think about common assessments and the importance of certain standards for their students. Throughout the fall, administrators host individual and team meetings as needed for clarification, suggestions, etc. in regard to PGP Goals and SLOs. Administrators approve PGP Goals and SLOs within the RANDA System by 11/15. Reflective conversation between educator and supervisor to discuss the following: o Progress toward PGP Goals o Progress toward SLOs o Review of student performance data o Summary of ongoing conversations o Potential ratings on Quality Standards within the professional practices rubric Use RANDA to support conversation and track progress Most educators will have a reflective conversation at mid year. However, for educators with any known performance concerns, those concerns should be discussed in this meeting, including supports provided and next steps addressed administrators should document these conversations. Revised 8/12/15 10

11 End of Year Conversation April May Complete by Mid May Reflective conversation between educator and supervisor to discuss the following: o Success with PGP Goals o Success with SLOs o Review of student performance data o Summary of ongoing conversations o Final ratings on Professional Practice Quality Standards o Initial conversation about potential PGP Goals for next school year, based on reflection from current year o Review of process for determining overall effectiveness rating so educators understand how the professional practices ratings will combine with the MSL ratings in the fall of 2016 Use RANDA to support conversation, finalize professional practice ratings, and finalize MSL worksheet. Training/Orientation All educators will receive training on the components of APEX. An orientation to the system will occur at the beginning of the school year with additional trainings provided throughout the year as needed to share updates to APEX or updates from CDE. Trainings may also include directions for how to navigate and utilize RANDA. This training will primarily occur at the building level for teachers and SSPs, and will also occur for principals at the start of their school year. Prior to inputting information into the RANDA system, educators will need to acknowledge completion of the training/orientation. A sample screenshot of the training acknowledgement page can be found in Appendix B RANDA Navigation Support. Revised 8/12/15 11

12 Professional Practice As the district implements more rigorous academic standards for our students, we want to ensure that our educators are equipped with the knowledge, skills and strategies needed to help all students be successful in meeting these standards. The Professional Practice Standards in APEX are an outline of the performance indicators that align with best practice for instruction that will help all students succeed. APEX creates a system of high expectations for our teams of educators including school leaders, teachers, specialized service professionals, and all central school support employees that is based on research based professional practices, proven to have a positive impact on student achievement. This section of the APEX Guide will go into detail about the Professional Practice half of APEX in the following order: Self Assessment (power in self reflection) Professional Growth Plan Goal Setting (power in identification of professional growth goals) Classroom Visits (Observation), School Visits and Ongoing Feedback Mid Year Conversations End of Year Conversations Self-Assessment (power in self-reflection) Purpose of the self-assessment: The self assessment process provides educators an opportunity to reflect on their practice. Using the professional practices on the Colorado Evaluation Rubrics, educators assess their performance by assigning ratings and identifying areas of strength and areas for refinement. The rubric used for a self assessment reference the same professional practices that appear on the evaluator s end of year rubric. Process for the self-assessment: All educators will complete the self assessment and are encouraged to draft their PGP with a colleague or team of colleagues in order to have open/honest conversations about areas of strength with instructional practice and areas where they may want to grow. A collegial approach allows educators to consider how to support one another. The self assessment can also be completed individually, if an educator is more comfortable with that format. Note: Even though educators who are new to the profession and/or APEX may not have historical data to draw from, they will also fill out the self assessment. The process will familiarize them with the professional practice standards and allow them to think about their areas of strength and areas for growth in the role they serve. Sharing the self-assessment: The practice of educators sharing their self assessments is encouraged. Sharing one s self assessment allows opportunity for collaborative, reflective conversations that lead to shared understanding of an educator's strengths and areas for professional growth. It is more likely that supports, leadership opportunities, collaborative learning opportunities and other individualized possibilities for learning will surface if the self assessment is shared and discussed with one s supervisor. Revised 8/12/15 12

13 Professional Growth Plan (PGP) Goal Setting Power in identifying professional goals Purpose and makeup of the PGP: Educator goal setting is an important component of reflection and feedback that leads to growth and refinement in an educator s practice. Goal setting is designed to focus educators on developing and mastering skills that will impact their overall performance, and in turn, student achievement. The establishment of PGPs promotes collaboration and reflection among educators. Experience and research show that the goal setting process has the greatest impact on student learning when educators use it to reflect on professional practices which are having the greatest impact on student learning. The PGP includes two goals: One goal is based on the educator s area of growth that emerged from the self assessment. One goal is based on a school wide focus from the school Unified Improvement Plan. The PGP is not a plan that includes focus on student achievement goals. Measures of Student Learning see corresponding section below take into account the importance of goals aligned to student achievement. In contrast, the PGP allows educators to think critically about their practice. We know that the practice of school leadership, teaching, and the many specialized supports for students, are all complex practices. The opportunity to set professional goals through the PGP allows educators to focus on their practice and elevate their craft. Process for PGP Development: Educators are encouraged to complete the self assessment and draft their PGP with a colleague, or team of colleagues, in order to have open/honest conversations about areas of strength in instructional practice and areas where they may want to grow. A collegial approach allows educators to consider how to support each other. The self assessment and PGP can also be completed individually, if an educator is more comfortable with that format. Approval of PGPs: Teachers, specialized service professionals, and assistant principals will collaborate with their school leader (supervisor) to finalize their PGP. Principals will collaborate with their district leader to finalize their PGP. All supervisors will need to approve PGPs in the online RANDA system (please see the APEX Process Dates for timelines). Please see Appendix A for a Professional Growth Plan Goal Setting Protocol. Please see Appendix B for guidance on navigating the PGP in the RANDA system. Revised 8/12/15 13

14 Sample PGP Goals Example 1: Classroom Management (potentially a new teacher PGP goal) Professional Learning Goal: Name and Description Goal Name : Classroom Management Goal Description: I will maximize student learning by creating and sustaining a focused classroom, (set clear directions, emphasize positive student behavior, support students in self-management of their behavior). How will we will measure progress toward this goal? Overall growth over time on Quality Standard 2 Element A and F of the Educator Effectiveness Rubric. Consistently implement School-wide Discipline System, High Behavioral Expectations, Clear Expectations, Positive Framing, and 100%) Implement Kagan structures Informal Observation Feedback ( During informal and formal observations) Observation Data on Student Actions after Teacher Directions What Action Steps will work on to improve my practice and meet this goal? Modeling from coach and strong teachers, then practicing the skill. Reflection from classroom visits and feedback from the Instructional Coach and building leader Co-planning with grade level and mentor Attend district Kagan workshops Example 2: (potentially a more seasoned teacher PGP goal; or potentially a school-wide goal) Professional Learning Goal: Name and Description Goal Name : Instructional practice with text-based questioning in my classroom Goal Description: I will maximize student learning by working on my practice with questioning in my classroom, trying to include more text-based questions when facilitating classroom discussion and more text-based questions in the assignments I provide students. How will we will measure progress toward this goal? Overall growth over time on Quality Standard 3 Element C, E, and G of the Educator Effectiveness Rubric. Share with my students that this is what I m working on and that they are going to get good at answering questions from text this year ask them to help me track my progress Implement 2 LDC modules this year with emphasis on text-based questions embedded into the overall task and the skills lessons along the way Informal Observation Feedback ( During informal and formal observations) ask my principal to look at this when he/she is in my classroom and share with me the questions he/she hears me ask students Observation Data on Student Actions after Teacher Directions What Action Steps will work on to improve my practice and meet this goal? Reflection on observation and feedback from the Instructional Coach and building leader have them come observe me and give me feedback on this practice when they are in my room. Co-planning with grade level let them know I m working on this and collaborate to have them help me think of these questions. Attend LDC Learn sessions to support my understanding of the shift for text-based questioning and build it into an LDC Module. Revised 8/12/15 14

15 Example 3: (Specialized Support Professional - Social Worker) Professional Learning Goal: Name and Description Goal Name : Screening and preventive support for social-emotional needs of students Goal Description: I will utilize a universal social emotional screening tool to identify and support students who are at risk, including their families. How will we will measure progress toward this goal? Quality Standard 1 Element A of the educator effectiveness rubric for social workers. Implement universal screener with all 1st, 2nd and 3rd grade students Use data from screener to identify students at risk and group them according to need Run regular social emotional groups with students Meet 3-6 times with families of the students for update and supportive strategies at home Observation from assistant principal of both groups and family meetings including feedback on if the instruction matches student need identified by screener What Action Steps will work on to improve my practice and meet this goal? Regular electronic and face to face communication with families Regular electronic and face to face communication with students teachers Attend training on universal screener Attend district social worker early release wednesday PLC meetings to collaborate with other mental health professionals Example 4: (Principal or Assistant Principal) Professional Learning Goal: How will we measure progress toward this goal? Name and Description Goal Name : Principals demonstrate instructional leadership. Goal Description: Promote school-wide efforts to establish, implement and refine appropriate expectations for curriculum, instructional practices, assessment and use of data from student work. Overall growth over time on Quality Standard 2 Element A, C, D, and E of the Educator Effectiveness Rubric. Share with teachers that this is what I m working on and that they will receive feedback through formal and informal observations. Create an Early Release schedule focused on time for teachers to continue to learn about and plan for the three instructional shifts in the Common Core Standards, district writing focus, and TLC Planning on Purpose Sessions focused on the Common Core ELA Standards and District Units of study. Teachers will complete surveys and/or reflections after each Early Release session that connect learning to their instructional practices. Utilize the MSL Cohort Leadership Team and Elementary Writing teacher leaders to help facilitate planning sessions with teachers to increase assessment literacy aligned to writing. Teachers will design SLOs and lesson plans that highlight the CCSS including instructional shifts and formative and summative assessments. Facilitate data day sessions with grade level teams focused on grade level data, specifically looking at student work to help identify student needs and refine instructional practices. Use the data to support feedback conversations about school-wide instructional practices with Executive Director during observational walkthroughs. What Action Steps will I work on to improve my practice and meet this goal? Reflection on observation and feedback from Executive Director. Co-planning with assistant principal, building instructional coach and teacher leaders to develop an aligned predictable yearlong professional development schedule for Early Release Days, Data Days, and Grade Level Planning. Attend principal Just in Time Trainings. Attend principal cohort visits with colleagues to norm expectations for instructional practice Track progress by engaging in instructional walkthroughs with executive director during each visit Revised 8/12/15 15

16 Classroom Visits (Observations), School Visits and Ongoing Feedback As part of APEX, principals, teachers and specialized service professionals should anticipate that their district and school leaders will provide them with feedback, so that they have the opportunity to engage in self reflection to help them refine their craft. Here is a sample list of professional interaction opportunities for supervisors to observe and provide feedback to practitioners, with associated tools to support reflective, collaborative relationships: School or classroom visits with reflective feedback conversations (See Appendix A for a Classroom Visit Tool and Reflective Conversation Protocol ) Participation in Professional Learning Communities Engaging in data study Planning sessions that include unpacking standards Participation in district/department/team/grade level meetings Engaging in walk throughs Participating in staff meetings/principal meetings *At least one of these professional interactions needs to be documented in the RANDA system for non probationary staff and two for probationary staff. (See Appendix B for guidance on navigating the Observation section in the RANDA system). *Principals should be in classrooms and with teachers or assistant principals often enough to identify strengths and needs of teachers and assistant principals. Executive Directors should be in schools and with principals enough to identify strengths and needs of principals. A Note about Classroom Visits (Observations): Some classroom and school visits may be scheduled and more formal in nature, while others may be part of drop in visits and informal in nature. Regardless of whether school and classroom visits are scheduled or not, teachers, principals, assistant principals and executive directors of schools are always encouraged to engage in providing feedback and engaging in reflection about their practice. Feedback Conversations: Feedback conversations are a critical component to APEX in that through these conversations, educators have the opportunity to reflect and grow. The Five Star District is continually working with executive directors, principals and assistant principals to support a shared understanding of instructional practice and a shared process for providing feedback that is helpful for educators. Please see Appendix A Resources & Tools for a reflective conversation protocol. Revised 8/12/15 16

17 Mid-Year Conversations (December - January) Mid year conversations are an opportunity for educators to meet with their evaluator and reflect on their professional growth. These conversations should occur between December and the end of January, and are in addition to the feedback conversations occurring throughout the school year. During a mid year conversation, educators and their evaluator collaboratively review evidence of their practice, along with student data, in order to identify strengths and areas for growth. The use of educator and student data allows educators to reflect on the impact their practices are having on student achievement and develop strategies/next steps based on this impact. This data should also be used to reflect on the educator s progress toward meeting his or her professional goal and, if needed, make revisions to the PGP. Mid year conversations provide an opportunity to review available student assessment information and student progress toward Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) see more about SLOs in the Measures of Student Learning and Student Learning Objectives sections of this guide. Please see Appendix A for Mid Year Conversation Guidance for Evaluators. Documentation to review during a Mid-Year Conversations may include: Draft ratings and anecdotal data for the educator s practice Progress toward PGP Goals Progress toward SLOs and potential revisions to SLOs (if necessary) Review of student performance data (formative and/or summative) aligned to the SLO and/or other student data Summary of ongoing conversations Potential ratings on Quality Standards within the professional practices rubric. Student assessment information (formative and/or summative) aligned to the SLO and/or other student data Most educators will have a reflective conversation at mid year. However, for educators with any known performance concerns, those concerns should be discussed specifically in this meeting, including supports provided and next steps addressed. Please see Appendix A for a mid year reflective conversation protocol for an individual educator or small group of educators. There is also a protocol to help guide a more candid conversation. Possible Outcomes of the Mid-Year Conversation: Identification of areas of professional strength Identification of areas for professional growth, with potential revision to the PGP Goals Strategies/steps the educator will implement Supports/opportunities the educator will benefit from Potential Revision to an educator s SLOs Identification of support the educator may receive to promote their professional growth Revised 8/12/15 17

18 To prepare for mid-year conversations, educators may reflect on the following questions: What would you identify as strengths within your practice? What evidence do you have of those strengths? What would you identify as an area (s) of growth in your practice? Why would you identify this area? What strategies/steps do you need to utilize to support your professional growth? How have you made progress toward meeting your professional goal? What is your evidence of this progress? How has this progress impacted student learning? What is your evidence of this impact? What support do you need in order to continue your professional growth? Outcomes from the mid year conversations will be documented in the RANDA system by completing the mid year portion in the system or through a document upload. See Appendix B for guidance on navigating the mid year conversation section in the RANDA system. Revised 8/12/15 18

19 End of Year Conversation (Mid-May) At the end of the school year, (April 1 through mid May) principals, assistant principals, teachers, specialized service professionals, and evaluators will have a reflective conversation about their overall professional practice. These conversations will provide an opportunity for educators to reflect on their implementation of the professional practices on the Colorado Evaluation Rubric and the impact these practices had on student achievement. Educators may also begin the process of thinking about next year s Professional Growth Plan (PGP) Goals. During end of year conversations, educators also have an opportunity to review students progress in meeting the Student Learning Objectives (SLOs). Documentation reviewed during an End- of-year Conversations may include: Final ratings and anecdotal data for the educator s professional practice Progress toward PGP Goals Progress toward SLOs Review of student performance data (formative and/or summative) aligned to the SLO and/or other student data Summary of ongoing conversations Potential ratings on Quality Standards within the professional practices rubric Student assessment information Possible Outcomes from End-of-Year Conversations: Identification of areas of professional strength Identification of areas for professional growth Student performance data Final professional practices ratings Begin PGP goal setting for the following school year To prepare for the end-of-year conversations, educators may reflect on the following questions: What would you identify as strengths within your practice? What evidence do you have of these strengths? What would you identify as an area (s) of growth in your practice? Why would you identify this area? What strategies/steps do you need to utilize to support your professional growth? How have you made progress toward meeting your professional goal? What is your evidence of this progress? How has this progress impacted student learning? What is your evidence of this impact? What support do you need in order to continue your professional growth? Please see Appendix A for guidance on a reflective end of year conversation. Outcomes from the end of year conversation must be documented in the RANDA. See Appendix B for guidance on navigating the End of Year Conversation in the RANDA system. Revised 8/12/15 19

20 Measures of Student Learning (NOTE: This section addresses aspects of APEX beyond the school year. It is provided in anticipation of full implementation as data become available.) In the Measures of Student Learning (MSL) portion of APEX, each teacher and specialized service professional is classified into one of three categories based on the summative data available. That data is usually tied closely to the content areas and grade level(s) taught. Principals and Assistant Principals are in a separate category. The teacher and special service professional categories in APEX are as follows: * NOTE: For the school year, all certified staff will only use SLOs for the MSL half of APEX. * Category 1: Teachers who instruct students in grade levels and content areas with Colorado Growth Model (CGM) data available. Category 2: Teachers who instruct students in content areas measured by State Summative Assessments but where CGM data are unavailable for the students instructed. Category 3: Teachers who instruct students in content areas where there are no State Summative Assessments. For help determining the correct category please see the Teacher Type Category flowchart in Appendix A. Teachers in each category will have different assessment results factored into the Measures of Student Learning portion of the system based on the content area(s) and grade level(s) taught. The total weight of the measures incorporated into the Measures of Student Learning portion for each teacher will be 50%. The three types of measures incorporated are: Summative assessment results or Colorado Growth Model (CGM) Data School Performance Framework (SPF) Indicators tied directly to the School s UIP Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) * With the latest revisions to state law the APEX Committee may revise the following two tables. * Teacher or Specialized Service Professional Category Summative/CGM Measure Weight SPF/UIP Measure Weight SLO Measure(s) Weight Category I 10% 10% 30% Category II 10% 10% 30% Category III 0% 20% 30% Measures of Student Learning for Principals and Assistant Principals Measure Weight Literacy Median Growth Percentile (MGP) 10% Math Median Growth Percentile (MGP) 10% Student Learning Objectives Measures 30% Revised 8/12/15 20

21 Framework for Measures of Student Learning for Educator Effectiveness Every teacher s or special services provider s evaluation is determined by equally weighting professional practice and measures of student learning/outcomes. The professional practices score and rating is determined by the completed professional practices rubric. There is no single best way to score and evaluate a teacher based on measures of student learning/outcomes; however, there are some requirements based on the rules promulgated by the State Board of Education. The full set of State Board of Education rules for professional growth can be found in Appendix C. Fundamental Requirements for Student Growth Measures for Teachers a) A measure of individually-attributed Student Academic Growth, meaning that outcomes on that measure are attributed to an individual licensed person; b) A measure of collectively-attributed Student Academic Growth, whether on a school-wide basis or across grades or subjects, meaning that outcomes on that measure are attributed to at least two licensed personnel (e.g., measures included in the school performance framework, required pursuant to section , C.R.S.); c) When available, Statewide Summative Assessment results; and d) For subjects with annual Statewide Summative Assessment results available in two consecutive grades, results from the Colorado Growth Model. Because of these rules, creating a single system applicable for all teachers and special services providers will become difficult. Some teachers teach at grade levels and in subject areas where Colorado Growth Model (CGM) data are available (e.g., 6 th grade Math and 9 th grade Reading and Writing), but many teachers do not. Some teachers teach in subject areas and grade levels where CMAS/TCAP proficiency data are available (e.g., 3 rd grade and 8 th grade Science), but most teachers do not. Then, there are teachers who do not teach in a grade level or content area measured by CMAS/TCAP or other state assessments. Finally, there are special services providers who may or may not provide instruction to students related to any content standards. As a result of these differences, a method for determining measures of student learning must be devised based on the type(s) of assessment data or outcome data available for a specific teacher or special services provider. At this time, there appear to be three categories into which teachers or special services providers could be classified. Category I teachers who instruct students in content areas where Colorado Growth Model data are available from state summative assessments (e.g. 4th or 5th grade teacher or a Language Arts or Math teacher at the secondary level) Category II Teachers who instruct students in content areas with state summative assessments, but with no Colorado Growth Model data (e.g. K- 3 classroom teacher or secondary Science/Social Studies teachers) Category III Teachers who instruct students in areas without state summative assessments (e.g. elementary specials teacher or elective teacher) or special services providers may or may not provide instruction to students tied to content standards at all (e.g. counselors, nurses, or psychologists). On the following pages, a proposed framework for each category of teacher will be outlined and explained. The framework for each category of teacher will use multiple measures to divide and weight the portion of the evaluation based on student growth. The method for each category of teacher entails using both required measures and choice measures to ensure a level of consistency as well as flexibility given the unique needs and improvement focus of each school and for each teacher. The measures used will fall into two or three of the following categories based on the data available. 1) CGM or State Summative data 2) School Performance Framework (SPF) measure(s) 3) Other Student Learning Objective (SLO) measure(s) Revised 8/12/15 21

22 CATEGORY I TEACHERS Teachers in Category I have data directly attributable to them from the CGM for CMAS/TCAP Reading, Writing, and Math, and/or ACCESS; teach students in one or more content areas that are assessed on State summative assessments, and also have data attributable to them from district and/or classroom assessments. CGM data is individually attributable for a Category I teacher because the CGM measures change in performance of students the year the teacher is directly instructing those students. The following table and explanation outlines a proposed method to use multiple measures to divide and weight the portion of the evaluation based on student growth for the teacher. The method entails using both required measures and choice measures to ensure a level of consistency as well as flexibility given the unique needs and improvement focus of each school. Measures Used for Student Growth Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM MGP Individual MGP(s) most applicable area(s) 10% School Focus SPF Measure(s) Tied to UIP Other SLO(s) Teacher Discretion Collective Individual or Collective TBD by Teacher/Evaluator at the grade, department, or school level 10% TBD by Teacher/Evaluator 30% Explanation of Growth Measures* 1) CGM MGP The most technically-sound growth measure currently available is from the CGM. As a result, a required measure for Category I teachers will be the inclusion of the MGP of his/her students in the most applicable content area(s) as an individual attribution measure. For example, a Math teacher s results would include the Math MGP of his/her students. The weight of this measure is 10%. 2) School Focus SPF Measures(s) Tied to UIP A principal, in consultation with his/her teachers, is required to choose one or more measures from the SPF to include in the identified educator s growth calculation (e.g., Math Achievement (%P&A), ACCESS Growth (MGP), Growth of IEP students in Reading (MGP), or Composite ACT score) as a collective attribution measure. In some schools, this may be the same measure for all educators. In other schools, the principal may differentiate this measure based on the various roles that educators play in that building. For example, it may make sense for an entire elementary school to include writing growth from the SPF in everyone s evaluation. However, at a comprehensive high school, this may not be the case. The weight for this measure is 10%. So, two other measures from the SPF, the combined total of those measures weights must be 10%. As an example, a teacher could choose both Math Achievement with a weight or 5% and ACCESS Growth MGP with a weight of 5%. 3) Other SLO(s) Teacher Discretion A teacher, in consultation with his/her evaluator, must choose two or more other measures as part of his or her growth calculation as either individual or collective attribution measures. These measures should align with the school s goal of increasing student achievement/growth and be comprised of well-constructed, sound assessments. The weight for these measures must total 30%. For example, a teacher could choose to use Fall-Winter MAP Math growth with a weight of 10%, a District Writing Assessment at 15%, and a science inquiry assessment at 5%, which overall would total 30%. *The total combined weight of all the measures from #1-3 above must total 50%. Revised 8/12/15 22

23 The following examples are merely illustrations for a variety of teacher types. Not every measure would be the same for every individual teacher belonging to that type. Example 1: Category I Middle School Math Teacher Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM MGP Individual Teacher s TCAP Math MGP 10% School Focus SPF Collective Math Achievement for Grade 7 students 10% Measure(s) Tied to UIP Other SLO(s) Individual Semester Grade 7 Math Test - % of students w rubric score 15% Teacher Discretion 3+ Individual NWEA Math MAP Growth - % of students meeting growth projection 15% Example 2: Category I 4 th Grade Teacher Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM MGP Individual Teacher s TCAP Reading MGP 10% School Focus SPF Measure(s) Tied to UIP Other SLO(s) Teacher Discretion Collective School s ACCESS MGP 5% Individual Teacher s TCAP Math MGP 5% Individual Collective Individual Teacher s Language Use MAP growth % meeting growth target School s % of students scoring 12+ on district writing assessment School-developed 4 th grade summative reading proficiency assessment Example 3: Category I ESL teacher Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM MGP Individual Teacher s ACCESS MGP 10% School Focus SPF Measure(s) Tied to UIP Other SLO(s) Teacher Discretion Collective School s TCAP Reading MGP 5% Collective School s Writing TCAP MGP for ELLs 5% Collective Percentage of students exiting ELL as FEP 15% Individual English Literacy Development portfolio growth measure 15% 10% 10% 10% Revised 8/12/15 23

24 CATEGORY II TEACHERS Teachers in Category II have data indirectly (collectively) attributable to them from CMAS/TCAP Reading, Writing, Math, Science, or other state summative assessments and also have data directly attributable to them from district and/or classroom assessments. The data from the CGM and State summative assessments are not directly attributable to the Category II teachers because the assessments measure the contribution of multiple teachers to the performance of students over time. For example, for an 8 th grade Science teacher, the data on the 8 th grade Science CMAS/TCAP would be collectively attributable, as that teacher instructed those students the year of the test, but not the prior two years upon which the test is also based. For a 6 th grade Science teacher at the same school, the data would be collectively attributable because, while the teacher did not instruct those students the year of the test, he or she contributed in the past and/or during the current year through collaborative work within the Science department. The following table and explanation outlines a proposed method to use multiple measures to divide and weight the portion of the evaluation based on student growth for the teacher. The method entails using both required measures and choice measures to ensure a level of consistency as well as flexibility given the unique needs and improvement focus of each school. Measures Used for Student Growth Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM or Summative Collective TCAP MGP, %P&A (TCAP), and/or avg scale score (ACT) 10% Assessment School Focus SPF Collective TBD by Teacher/Evaluator at the grade, department, or 10% Measure(s) Tied to UIP school level Other SLO(s) Individual or TBD by Teacher/Evaluator 30% Teacher Discretion Collective Explanation of Growth Measures* 1) CGM or Summative Assessment TCAP and other State summative assessment are valid measures of student achievement, and Category II teachers teach in content areas where these tests are used as part of school accountability. As a result, a required measure for Category II teachers will be the inclusion of CGM or State summative assessment data for students in the most applicable content area(s) as a collective attribution measure. For example, a 2 nd grade teacher s results could include the School s Reading MGP or the %P&A on Reading TCAP. The weight of this measure is 10%. 2) School Focus SPF Measures(s) Tied to UIP A teacher, in consultation with his/her evaluator, is required to choose one or more measures from the SPF to include in the growth calculation (e.g., Math Achievement (%P&A), ACCESS Growth (MGP), Growth of IEP students in Reading (MGP), or Composite ACT score) as a collective attribution measure. The weight of this measure is 10%. So, if a teacher chooses two other measures from the SPF, the combined total of those measures weights must be 10%. 3) Other SLO(s) Teacher Discretion A teacher, in consultation with his/her evaluator, must choose two or more other measures as part of his or her growth calculation, at least one of which must be an individual attribution measure. These measures should align with the school s goal of increasing student achievement/growth and be comprised of reliable, valid assessments. The weight for these measures must total 30%. For example, a socials studies teacher could choose to use a common grade level social studies summative assessment with a weight of 15% and a socials studies document-based social studies performance task, which overall would total 30%. *The total combined weight of all the measures from #1-3 above must total 50%, no more and no less. The following examples are merely illustrations for a variety of teacher types. Not every measure would be the same for every individual teacher belonging to that type. Revised 8/12/15 24

25 Example 1: Category II 1 st Grade Teacher Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM or Summative Collective School s %P&A on Reading TCAP 10% Assessment School Focus SPF Collective School s Writing MGP 10% Measure(s) Tied to UIP Other SLO(s) Individual Teacher s Math MAP growth % meeting growth target 10% Teacher Discretion Collective School s % of students scoring 12+ on district writing 10% assessment Collective 1 st grade Reading MAP growth % meeting growth target 10% Example 2: Category II 7 th Grade Science Teacher Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM or Summative Collective School s TCAP Science %P&A 10% Assessment School Focus SPF Collective School s TCAP Reading MGP 5% Measure(s) Tied to Collective School s ACCESS MGP 5% UIP Other SLO(s) Individual Teacher s data from Approved 7 th grade Common 15% Teacher Discretion Assessment % scoring 3+ on rubric Individual Teacher s data for common district inquiry assessment - % meeting proficiency benchmark 15% Example 3: Category II 11 th Grade English Teacher Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight CGM or Summative Collective School s ACT Score - Reading 10% Assessment School Focus SPF Collective School s TCAP Reading MGP for minority students 10% Measure(s) Tied to UIP Other SLO(s) Individual English AP test - % of students scoring 3+ 15% Teacher Discretion Collective School s % of students scoring 12+ on district writing assessment 15% Revised 8/12/15 25

26 CATEGORY III TEACHERS Teachers in Category III do not teach in content areas assessed by State summative assessments. Category III teachers have only data directly attributable to them from district and/or classroom assessments. Further, special services providers may or may not provide instruction to students tied to content standards at all. The following table and explanation outlines a proposed method to use multiple measures to divide and weight the portion of the evaluation based on student growth for the teacher or specialized service provider. The method entails using both required measures and optional measures to ensure a level of consistency as well as flexibility given the unique needs and improvement focus of each school. For every Category III teacher, at least one Other SLO measure must be individually attributable to meet the rules regarding individual and collective attribution. Measures Used for Student Growth Type of Measure Attribution Measure Weight School Focus SPF Measure(s) Tied to UIP Other SLO(s) Teacher Discretion Collective TBD by Teacher/Evaluator at the grade, department, or school level Individual or TBD by Teacher/Evaluator 30% Collective *For special services providers whose work cannot be tied directly to SPF measures, the full 50% of the measures of student learning will come from SLOs. Explanation of Growth Measures* 1) School Focus SPF Measures(s) Tied to UIP A teacher, in consultation with his/her evaluator, is required to choose one or more measures from the SPF (unless the specialized service provider s work cannot be directly tied to SPF measures) to include in the growth calculation (e.g., Math Achievement (%P&A), ACCESS Growth (MGP), Growth of IEP students in Reading (MGP), or Composite ACT score) as a collective attribution measure. The weight for this measure is 20%. So, if a teacher chooses two measures from the SPF, the combined total of those measures weights must be at least 20%. 2) Other SLO(s) Teacher Discretion A teacher, in consultation with his/her evaluator, must choose two or more other measures as part of his or her growth calculation, at least one of which must be an individual attribution measures. These measures should align with the school s goal of increasing student achievement/growth and be comprised of reliable, valid assessments. The weight for this measure is 30%. For example, a teacher could choose to use a common content area assessment approved through the school and district as well as an AP test administered to students taking that exam both weighted at 15%, for a total of 30%. *The total combined weight of all the measures from #1-3 above must total 50%, no more and no less. 20%* Revised 8/12/15 26

NC TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS SAMPLE EVIDENCES AND ARTIFACTS

NC TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS SAMPLE EVIDENCES AND ARTIFACTS STANDARD I: ELEMENT A: Teachers demonstrate leadership Teachers lead in their classroom Developing Has assessment data available and refers to it to understand the skills and abilities of students Accesses

More information

Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation

Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation The growth and learning of children is the primary responsibility of those who teach in our classrooms and lead our schools. Student growth and learning can

More information

Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System. Principal Evaluation Process Manual

Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System. Principal Evaluation Process Manual Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System Principal Evaluation Process Manual Updated February 2016 This manual is an interim update to remove inaccurate information. A more comprehensive update for 2016-17

More information

Masters Comprehensive Exam and Rubric (Rev. July 17, 2014)

Masters Comprehensive Exam and Rubric (Rev. July 17, 2014) 1 Educational Leadership & Policy Studies Masters Comprehensive Exam and Rubric (Rev. July 17, 2014) The comprehensive exam is intended as a final assessment of a student s ability to integrate important

More information

Teacher Performance Evaluation System

Teacher Performance Evaluation System Chandler Unified School District Teacher Performance Evaluation System Revised 2015-16 Purpose The purpose of this guide is to outline Chandler Unified School District s teacher evaluation process. The

More information

ACGC Teacher Growth Model

ACGC Teacher Growth Model Revised 3/28/14 ACGC Teacher Growth Model Leading Forward is providing this document as a resource to demonstrate how the Minnesota Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model brings districts into compliance with

More information

James Rumsey Technical Institute Employee Performance and Effectiveness Evaluation Procedure

James Rumsey Technical Institute Employee Performance and Effectiveness Evaluation Procedure James Rumsey Technical Institute Employee Performance and Effectiveness Evaluation Procedure James Rumsey Technical Institute, a West Virginia state institution, is bound by Policy 5310, Performance Evaluation

More information

Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System. Teacher Evaluation Process Manual

Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System. Teacher Evaluation Process Manual Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System Teacher Evaluation Process Manual Updated February 2016 This manual is an interim update to remove inaccurate information. A more comprehensive update for 2016-17

More information

THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TEACHER PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM, 2014-2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA TEACHER PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL SYSTEM, 2014-2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS , 2014-2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Key Components... 1 1. Core of Effective Practices... 1 2. Student Growth... 2 3. Evaluation Rating Criteria... 13 4. Teacher and Principal Involvement... 14 5.

More information

Principal Practice Observation Tool

Principal Practice Observation Tool Principal Performance Review Office of School Quality Division of Teaching and Learning Principal Practice Observation Tool 2014-15 The was created as an evidence gathering tool to be used by evaluators

More information

Principal Appraisal Overview

Principal Appraisal Overview Improving teaching, leading and learning T e x a s P r i n c i p a l E va l u a t i o n S y s t e m Principal Appraisal Overview Design and Development a collaborative effort McREL International Texas

More information

TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER b: PERSONNEL

TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER b: PERSONNEL ISBE 23 ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 50 Section 50.10 Purpose 50.20 Applicability 50.30 Definitions TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES : EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION : PERSONNEL

More information

Educator Evaluation Gradual Implementation Guidebook

Educator Evaluation Gradual Implementation Guidebook Learning to Succeed Educator Evaluation Gradual Implementation Guidebook Version 1.0 1 Portland Public Schools * 196 Allen Avenue * Portland, Maine 04103 * Phone: (207) 874-8100 Table of Contents Introduction...

More information

Online Professional Development Modules N O R T H C A R O L I N A D E P A R T M E N T O F P U B L I C I N S T R U C T I O N

Online Professional Development Modules N O R T H C A R O L I N A D E P A R T M E N T O F P U B L I C I N S T R U C T I O N Online Professional Development Modules N O R T H C A R O L I N A D E P A R T M E N T O F P U B L I C I N S T R U C T I O N Free self-paced modules, self-paced mini-modules, and facilitated courses Learn

More information

Leader Keys Effectiveness System Implementation Handbook

Leader Keys Effectiveness System Implementation Handbook Leader Keys Effectiveness System Implementation Handbook Office of School Improvement Teacher and Leader Keys Effectiveness Division Acknowledgments The s (GaDOE) (LKES) Handbook was developed with the

More information

Performance Evaluation System Protocol. Licensed Executive Professionals

Performance Evaluation System Protocol. Licensed Executive Professionals Colorado Springs School District 11 Dr. Nicholas Gledich, Superintendent Performance Evaluation System Protocol Licensed Executive Professionals Revised March 2014 235169.6 Department of Human Resources

More information

Model for Practitioner Evaluation Manual SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST. Approved by Board of Education August 28, 2002

Model for Practitioner Evaluation Manual SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST. Approved by Board of Education August 28, 2002 Model for Practitioner Evaluation Manual SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST Approved by Board of Education August 28, 2002 Revised August 2008 Model for Practitioner Evaluation Guidelines and Process for Traditional

More information

Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System

Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System Overview Teacher Effectiveness Student Achievement Student Achievement Stronge Evaluation System Effectiveness is the goal. Evaluation is merely

More information

MANITOU SPRINGS SCHOOL DISTRICT #14 LICENSED AND CLASSIFIED STAFF PERFORMANCE EVALUATION HANDBOOK 2015-16. Relationships Rigor Opportunity

MANITOU SPRINGS SCHOOL DISTRICT #14 LICENSED AND CLASSIFIED STAFF PERFORMANCE EVALUATION HANDBOOK 2015-16. Relationships Rigor Opportunity MANITOU SPRINGS SCHOOL DISTRICT #14 LICENSED AND CLASSIFIED STAFF PERFORMANCE EVALUATION HANDBOOK 2015-16 Relationships Rigor Opportunity DISTRICT VISION STATEMENT Compassionate citizens, contributing

More information

Crosswalk of the New Colorado Principal Standards (proposed by State Council on Educator Effectiveness) with the

Crosswalk of the New Colorado Principal Standards (proposed by State Council on Educator Effectiveness) with the Crosswalk of the New Colorado Principal Standards (proposed by State Council on Educator Effectiveness) with the Equivalent in the Performance Based Principal Licensure Standards (current principal standards)

More information

St. Joseph s College Education Department Handbook for Student Teachers Cooperating Teachers College Supervisors

St. Joseph s College Education Department Handbook for Student Teachers Cooperating Teachers College Supervisors St. Joseph s College Education Department Handbook for Student Teachers Cooperating Teachers College Supervisors Brooklyn Campus Long Island Campus 245 Clinton Avenue 155 West Roe Boulevard Brooklyn, NY

More information

Online Professional Development Modules

Online Professional Development Modules Online Professional Development Modules NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Free Self- paced Modules, Self- paced Mini- modules, and Facilitated Courses Learn more at www.rt3nc.org. Self- Paced

More information

Revisioning Graduate Teacher Education in North Carolina Master of Arts in Elementary Education Appalachian State University

Revisioning Graduate Teacher Education in North Carolina Master of Arts in Elementary Education Appalachian State University Revisioning Graduate Teacher Education in North Carolina Master of Arts in Elementary Education Appalachian State University A. A description of how the proposed program has been revisioned to reflect

More information

The School Leadership Collaborative Intern and Administrative Mentor Guide

The School Leadership Collaborative Intern and Administrative Mentor Guide Gonzaga University School of Education The School Leadership Collaborative Intern and Administrative Mentor Guide Principal Certification Program Administrator Certification Department of Educational Leadership

More information

Norfolk Public Schools Teacher Performance Evaluation System

Norfolk Public Schools Teacher Performance Evaluation System Norfolk Public Schools Teacher Performance Evaluation System The Norfolk Public Schools does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, national origin, religion, age, political affiliation, veteran

More information

Texas Principal Evaluation and Support System FAQ

Texas Principal Evaluation and Support System FAQ A. Overview 1. What is T-PESS? Texas Principal Evaluation and Support System FAQ T-PESS is the Texas Principal Evaluation and Support System. It is a new principal evaluation system for the state of Texas

More information

Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems

Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems Revised for 2014 2015 State Guidelines for ESEA Waiver & SB 290 OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 255 Capitol St, NE, Salem, OR

More information

Colorado High School Graduation Guidelines

Colorado High School Graduation Guidelines Colorado High School Graduation Guidelines Adopted by the State Board of Education May 2013 Introduction In 2007, the General Assembly adopted H.B. 07-1118 that set forth a process for developing statewide

More information

PDP Writing Workshop For Initial and Professional Educators Diocese of Madison INTRODUCTION

PDP Writing Workshop For Initial and Professional Educators Diocese of Madison INTRODUCTION PDP Writing Workshop For Initial and Professional Educators Diocese of Madison INTRODUCTION The PDP is a requirement for any educator in Wisconsin who is licensed in a particular category (teacher, administrator,

More information

Colorado Professional Teaching Standards

Colorado Professional Teaching Standards Colorado Professional Teaching Standards Standard I: Teachers demonstrate knowledge of the content they teach a. Teachers provide instruction that is aligned with the Colorado Academic Standards and their

More information

School Leader Effectiveness Evaluation: Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Guidebook

School Leader Effectiveness Evaluation: Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Guidebook School Leader Effectiveness Evaluation: Student Learning Objectives (SLO) Guidebook 2014-15 March 11, 2015 1 Contents I. Overview of the Guidebook...3 II. An Introduction to SLOs...3 A. What is an SLO?...4

More information

Hiawatha Academies School District #4170

Hiawatha Academies School District #4170 Hiawatha Academies School District #4170 World s Best Workforce Plan All Hiawatha Academies scholars will be empowered with the knowledge, character and leadership skills to graduate from college and serve

More information

NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GUIDANCE ON THE NEW YORK STATE DISTRICT- WIDE GROWTH GOAL-SETTING PROCESS FOR TEACHERS: STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES Revised November 2013 1 SLO RESOURCES: SLO Resources

More information

To expand teachers use of a variety of resources to improve instruction

To expand teachers use of a variety of resources to improve instruction Tool 5.1 Coaching roles Role Purpose Example Resource provider To expand teachers use of a variety of resources to improve instruction Gathers information and/or resources (articles, materials, etc.) for

More information

Tackling the NEW Teacher Evaluation Guidelines

Tackling the NEW Teacher Evaluation Guidelines Tackling the NEW Teacher Evaluation Guidelines Required by the Feds for Arizona to be eligible for Race to the Top $$$, Federal stabilization funding and Title IIA By Nannette Soule And Dennis Blauser

More information

NYSED/NYCDOE JOINT INTERVENTION TEAM REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

NYSED/NYCDOE JOINT INTERVENTION TEAM REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS NYSED/NYCDOE JOINT INTERVENTION TEAM REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS DBN: 14K477 School Name: High School for Legal Studies 850 Grand Street School Address: Brooklyn, NY 11211 Principal: Monica Ortiz Restructuring

More information

New York State Professional Development Standards (PDF/Word) New York State. Professional Development Standards. An Introduction

New York State Professional Development Standards (PDF/Word) New York State. Professional Development Standards. An Introduction New York State Professional Development Standards New York State Professional Development Standards (PDF/Word) Background on the Development of the Standards New York State Professional Development Standards

More information

Teacher Evaluation. Missouri s Educator Evaluation System

Teacher Evaluation. Missouri s Educator Evaluation System Teacher Evaluation Missouri s Educator Evaluation System Teacher Evaluation Protocol Introduction Missouri s Educator Evaluation System was created and refined by hundreds of educators across the state.

More information

GEORGIA STANDARDS FOR THE APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION UNITS AND EDUCATOR PREPARATION PROGRAMS

GEORGIA STANDARDS FOR THE APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION UNITS AND EDUCATOR PREPARATION PROGRAMS GEORGIA STANDARDS FOR THE APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION UNITS AND EDUCATOR PREPARATION PROGRAMS (Effective 9/01/08) Kelly Henson Executive Secretary Table of Contents Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge,

More information

Illinois Center for School Improvement Framework: Core Functions, Indicators, and Key Questions

Illinois Center for School Improvement Framework: Core Functions, Indicators, and Key Questions Framework: Core Functions, Indicators, and Key Questions The Core Functions and Indicators, which form the structure for the delivery and execution of (Illinois CSI) services, describe the big ideas or

More information

Key Principles for ELL Instruction (v6)

Key Principles for ELL Instruction (v6) Key Principles for ELL Instruction (v6) The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English Language Arts and Mathematics as well as the soon-to-be released Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) require

More information

Fair dismissal district means any common or union high school district or education service district.

Fair dismissal district means any common or union high school district or education service district. WHO IS EVALUATED? 1. Who is required to be evaluated under the new system? All teachers and administrators are required to be evaluated using the new system. As per ORS 342.815 a teacher means any person

More information

B. Public School Partners Involvement in the Revisioning of the Program and Continued Involvement in the Delivery and Evaluation of the Program

B. Public School Partners Involvement in the Revisioning of the Program and Continued Involvement in the Delivery and Evaluation of the Program Re-Visioning Graduate Teacher Education in North Carolina MA in History, Secondary Education with Licensure in History and Social Studies Appalachian State University A. Description of how the Proposed

More information

TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER b: PERSONNEL

TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES SUBTITLE A: EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SUBCHAPTER b: PERSONNEL ISBE 23 ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 50 Section 50.10 Purpose 50.20 Applicability 50.30 Definitions TITLE 23: EDUCATION AND CULTURAL RESOURCES : EDUCATION CHAPTER I: STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION : PERSONNEL

More information

The performance assessment shall measure the extent to which the teacher s planning:

The performance assessment shall measure the extent to which the teacher s planning: Arizona s Professional Teacher Standards Standard 1: The teacher designs and plans instruction that develops students abilities to meet Arizona s academic standards and the district s assessment plan.

More information

2015-16 Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: Speech-Language Pathologists

2015-16 Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: Speech-Language Pathologists 2015-16 Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: Speech-Language Pathologists Definition of an Effective Speech-Language Pathologist Effective speech-language pathologists are

More information

North Carolina TEACHER. evaluation process. Public Schools of North Carolina State Board of Education Department of Public Instruction

North Carolina TEACHER. evaluation process. Public Schools of North Carolina State Board of Education Department of Public Instruction North Carolina TEACHER evaluation process Public Schools of North Carolina State Board of Education Department of Public Instruction Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina Teachers ( This form should be

More information

Standards: What does it mean to Community College Faculty? General Overview & Panel Discussion. OhioMATYC April 12, 2013

Standards: What does it mean to Community College Faculty? General Overview & Panel Discussion. OhioMATYC April 12, 2013 The Common Core State Standards: What does it mean to Community College Faculty? General Overview & Panel Discussion OhioMATYC April 12, 2013 Ohio s Readiness for College and Careers Definition High school

More information

All students are admitted during the summer and begin their coursework in the fall. Students must commit to completing these courses in sequence.

All students are admitted during the summer and begin their coursework in the fall. Students must commit to completing these courses in sequence. Department of Special Education Initial Licensure and Added Endorsement the Special Education Generalist Overview and Assessment Plan Purpose for Program Change In the Fall of 2013 the Department of Special

More information

The residency school counselor program does not prepare candidates to design, deliver, and

The residency school counselor program does not prepare candidates to design, deliver, and STANDARD V: KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS SCHOOL COUNSELORS -Building on the mission to prepare educators who demonstrate a positive impact on student learning based on the Improvement of Student Achievement act

More information

Continuum of Teaching Practice

Continuum of Teaching Practice Continuum of Teaching Practice Table of Contents Introduction....2 Context and History....2 Rationale and Use....3 Structure and Organization....3 Reading and Self-Assessing on the Continuum of Teaching

More information

MILLIKIN TEACHING STANDARDS

MILLIKIN TEACHING STANDARDS MILLIKIN TEACHING STANDARDS Millikin Teaching Standards are correlated to and modifications of Illinois Professional Teaching Standards. Modifications reflect Millikin s mission and the education unit

More information

TEACHER DEVELOPMENT & EVALUATION HANDBOOK

TEACHER DEVELOPMENT & EVALUATION HANDBOOK TEACHER DEVELOPMENT & EVALUATION HANDBOOK College, Career Career & Citizen-Ready! Table of Contents Part 1: Introduction Purpose Part 2: Standards of Effective Teaching Performance Standards Sample Performance

More information

School Leadership Framework And Assistant Principal Evidence Guide

School Leadership Framework And Assistant Principal Evidence Guide Leadership Framework And Guide Leadership Framework A Shared Vision for Effective Leaders in Denver Public s At Denver Public s we believe we can achieve our vision that every child succeeds by having

More information

Committee On Public Secondary Schools. Standards for Accreditation

Committee On Public Secondary Schools. Standards for Accreditation Committee On Public Secondary Schools Standards for Accreditation Effective 2011 New England Association of Schools & Colleges 3 Burlington Woods Drive, Suite 100 Burlington, MA 01803 Tel. 781-425-7700

More information

BUILDING CURRICULUM ACCOMMODATION PLAN

BUILDING CURRICULUM ACCOMMODATION PLAN BUILDING CURRICULUM ACCOMMODATION PLAN 2014-2015 ERIC STARK, PRINCIPAL KATE PERETZ, ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much. Helen Keller FRANKLIN PUBLIC SCHOOLS VISION

More information

ROCORI Schools Professional Development Program (PDP)

ROCORI Schools Professional Development Program (PDP) ROCORI SCHOOLS ISD 750 ROCORI Schools Professional Development Program (PDP) To be central Minnesota s public education standard of excellence A joint agreement between Education Minnesota-ROCORI and ISD

More information

Chapter 6: Hiring and placing coaches

Chapter 6: Hiring and placing coaches Tool 6.1 Teacher on special assignment/ elementary instructional coach job description 6.2 High school language arts instructional coach job description and responsibilities Purpose Use this sample job

More information

Educator Performance Evaluation and Professional Growth System

Educator Performance Evaluation and Professional Growth System Educator Performance Evaluation and Professional Growth System September 2015 Table of Contents Introduction... 2 Stakeholders Group... 2 Beliefs... 3 Development Process... 4 Steering Committee Membership...

More information

Student Learning Goals Handbook

Student Learning Goals Handbook Student Learning Goals Handbook Contents Overview... 3 High-Quality Student Learning Goals... 4 Roles in Student Learning Goal Process... 7 Teacher... 7 Peer Reviewer(s) and/or Professional Learning Community

More information

Frequently Asked Questions Contact us: RAC@doe.state.nj.us

Frequently Asked Questions Contact us: RAC@doe.state.nj.us Frequently Asked Questions Contact us: RAC@doe.state.nj.us 1 P a g e Contents Identification of a Priority, Focus, or Reward School... 4 Is a list of all Priority, Focus, and Reward Schools available to

More information

Elementary Education: Teacher Leadership Track

Elementary Education: Teacher Leadership Track Elementary Education: Teacher Leadership Track Designed for: Students who have an undergraduate degree in Education and an initial teaching license for elementary grades K-6, plus a minimum of one year

More information

Conley, D. T. (2010). College and Career Ready: Helping all Students Succeed Beyond High School. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Conley, D. T. (2010). College and Career Ready: Helping all Students Succeed Beyond High School. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. 1 Conley, D. T. (2010). College and Career Ready: Helping all Students Succeed Beyond High School. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. (Abstract prepared for AVID Postsecondary by Harriet Howell Custer, Ph.D.)

More information

TOOL KIT for RESIDENT EDUCATOR and MENT OR MOVES

TOOL KIT for RESIDENT EDUCATOR and MENT OR MOVES Get to Know My RE Observe Collect Evidence Mentor Moments Reflect Review Respond Tailor Support Provide Provide specific feedback specific Feedback What does my RE need? Practice Habits Of Mind Share Data

More information

KTS Rubric STANDARD 1:: THE TEACHER DEMONSTRATES APPLIED CONTENT KNOWLEDGE

KTS Rubric STANDARD 1:: THE TEACHER DEMONSTRATES APPLIED CONTENT KNOWLEDGE KTS Rubric STANDARD 1:: THE TEACHER DEMONSTRATES APPLIED CONTENT KNOWLEDGE directions for that level with regard to the indicators fails to demonstrate a current and sufficient academic knowledge of the

More information

TENNESSEE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

TENNESSEE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Alternative Education Program Model/Standards Standard 1.0: Mission An exemplary alternative education program operates with a clearly stated mission, a formal set of standards, and a plan for program

More information

Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System FAQ

Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System FAQ A. Overview 1. *What is T-TESS? Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System FAQ T-TESS is the Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System. It is a new teacher evaluation system for the state of Texas designed

More information

Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric M-STAR

Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric M-STAR Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric M-STAR Introduction and Process Guide May 2012 2192_05/12 Contents Introduction... 1 Purpose of Teacher Performance Evaluation... 1 Teacher Evaluation Process...

More information

GaPSC Teacher Leadership Program Standards

GaPSC Teacher Leadership Program Standards GaPSC Teacher Leadership Program Standards Purpose: Georgia has identified a need to improve P-12 students academic performance as measured by various assessments. One method to ensure improved student

More information

CONNECTICUT SEED Student and Educator Support Specialists Guidance Document

CONNECTICUT SEED Student and Educator Support Specialists Guidance Document CONNECTICUT SEED Student and Educator Support Specialists Guidance Document 1 This document provides guidance to administrators and Student and Educator Support Specialists (SESS) on the application of

More information

TEACHING THE LAW AND JUSTICE CURRICULUM. lawandjustice.edc.org

TEACHING THE LAW AND JUSTICE CURRICULUM. lawandjustice.edc.org lawandjustice.edc.org Introduction Welcome to the Law and Justice curriculum! Developed by Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC), with support from The James Irvine Foundation, the Law and Justice curriculum

More information

Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: School Psychologists Definition of an Effective School Psychologist

Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: School Psychologists Definition of an Effective School Psychologist Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: School Psychologists Definition of an Effective School Psychologist Effective school psychologists are vital members of the education

More information

North Carolina Professional Teaching Standards

North Carolina Professional Teaching Standards North Carolina Professional Teaching Standards For every student in North Carolina, a knowledgeable, skilled compassionate teacher...a star in every classroom. As Approved by the State Board of Education

More information

Curriculum and Instruction: A 21st Century Skills Implementation Guide

Curriculum and Instruction: A 21st Century Skills Implementation Guide Curriculum and Instruction: A 21st Century Skills Implementation Guide Produced by To succeed in college, career and life in the 21st century, students must be supported in mastering both content and skills.

More information

DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS. EduStat Case Study. Denver Public Schools: Making Meaning of Data to Enable School Leaders to Make Human Capital Decisions

DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS. EduStat Case Study. Denver Public Schools: Making Meaning of Data to Enable School Leaders to Make Human Capital Decisions DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS EduStat Case Study Denver Public Schools: Making Meaning of Data to Enable School Leaders to Make Human Capital Decisions Nicole Wolden and Erin McMahon 7/19/2013. Title: Making Meaning

More information

I. THE PLAN. Init.10/10

I. THE PLAN. Init.10/10 I. THE PLAN Professional employees will be grouped into four categories, or STAGES. Teacher evaluation occurs through a variety of activities: (1) required supervisory activities, (2) personalized supervisory

More information

Model for Practitioner Evaluation Manual SCHOOL COUNSELOR. Approved by Board of Education August 28, 2002

Model for Practitioner Evaluation Manual SCHOOL COUNSELOR. Approved by Board of Education August 28, 2002 Model for Practitioner Evaluation Manual SCHOOL COUNSELOR Approved by Board of Education August 28, 2002 Revised August 2008 Model for Practitioner Evaluation Guidelines and Process for Traditional Evaluation

More information

08X540. School For Community Research and Learning 1980 Lafayette Avenue School Address: Bronx, NY 10473

08X540. School For Community Research and Learning 1980 Lafayette Avenue School Address: Bronx, NY 10473 NYSED/NYCDOE JOINT INTERVENTION TEAM REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS BEDS Code/DBN: 08X540 School Name: School For Community Research and Learning 1980 Lafayette Avenue School Address: Bronx, NY 10473 Principal:

More information

State of Colorado K-12 Mandate

State of Colorado K-12 Mandate State of Colorado K-12 Mandate Below is a partial list of state and federal mandates for school districts in Colorado: Minimum Number of Days of Instruction Every child who has attained the age of six

More information

FRAMEWORK FOR EFFECTIVE TEACHING. Newark Public Schools Teacher Performance Evaluation

FRAMEWORK FOR EFFECTIVE TEACHING. Newark Public Schools Teacher Performance Evaluation FRAMEWORK FOR EFFECTIVE TEACHING Newark Public Schools Teacher Performance Evaluation A GUIDEBOOK FOR TEACHERS & ADMINISTRATORS 2014-2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter from the Superintendent... iii Introduction...

More information

19K660. Brooklyn, NY 11207. Jocelyn Badette

19K660. Brooklyn, NY 11207. Jocelyn Badette NYSED/NYCDOE JOINT INTERVENTION TEAM REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS BEDS Code/DBN: 19K660 School Name: W. H. Maxwell High School 145 Pennsylvania Avenue School Address: Brooklyn, NY 11207 Principal: Jocelyn

More information

Student Learning Goal Guidance

Student Learning Goal Guidance Student Learning Goal Guidance Overview Self Assessment Each educator assesses his or her practice using the professional practice rubric and determines current students' knowledge/skills on key standards.

More information

BARTLESVILLE BOARD OF EDUCATION

BARTLESVILLE BOARD OF EDUCATION 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. 2014-2015

More information

CITY OF ST. CHARLES SCHOOL DISTRICT PERFORMANCE-BASED GUIDANCE COUNSELOR EVALUATION

CITY OF ST. CHARLES SCHOOL DISTRICT PERFORMANCE-BASED GUIDANCE COUNSELOR EVALUATION CITY OF ST. CHARLES SCHOOL DISTRICT GUIDE TO PERFORMANCE-BASED GUIDANCE COUNSELOR EVALUATION Board Review April 2009 Table of Contents Topic Page Statutory Authority for Performance-Based... 1 Philosophy...

More information

Appendix E. Role-Specific Indicators

Appendix E. Role-Specific Indicators Appendix E. Role-Specific Indicators A frequent topic of debate with regard to educator evaluation both in Massachusetts and across the nation is the extent to which performance rubrics should be specific

More information

Burlington Area School District Roadmap for Instructional Excellence

Burlington Area School District Roadmap for Instructional Excellence Burlington Area School District Roadmap for Instructional Excellence Introduction The Roadmap for Instructional Excellence is the Burlington Area School District s vision for improving student achievement.

More information

Help Desk: Section 1

Help Desk: Section 1 Help Desk: Section 1 This page provides detailed guidance to Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Department of Education s SLO Process Template 10. Additional information can be found on-line at: 1a. Name Educator

More information

Fact Sheet 15-13 UPDATED January 2016

Fact Sheet 15-13 UPDATED January 2016 UPDATED Fact Sheet Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) January 2016 Page 1 ANNUAL PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW (APPR) Fact Sheet 15-13 UPDATED January 2016 The 2015 state budget included replacing

More information

Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation

Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation Massachusetts Model System for Educator Evaluation Participant Handouts for Teacher Training Workshop 2: Self Assessment October 2014 (updated) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

More information

Professional Education Unit Early Childhood, Elementary, and Special Education

Professional Education Unit Early Childhood, Elementary, and Special Education Professional Education Unit Early Childhood, Elementary, and Special Education Clinical Practice: Infants & Toddlers and Preschool for 3-5 Year Olds IECE 425-001 Spring 2013 Dr. Elizabeth McLaren 301 B

More information

WHEELOCK COLLEGE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PROGRAM

WHEELOCK COLLEGE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PROGRAM WHEELOCK COLLEGE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PROGRAM REVISED SPRING 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Development And Evaluation Process: Tenure Track Faculty... 4 Overview Of Mentoring And Evaluation Process

More information

FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE

FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE S The Framework of Supports are a set of Practice Profiles that serve as an implementation overview of Support for Personalized Learning (SPL). Practice

More information

Area Findings Recommendations

Area Findings Recommendations I. Executive Summary At the request of Superintendent Cheryl Atkinson, Education Planners, LLC (Ed Planners) conducted an evaluation of the curricula-based programs and professional development currently

More information

Domain 1: Strategic/Cultural Leadership

Domain 1: Strategic/Cultural Leadership Framework for Leadership Types of Evidence Supervisor: Curriculum and Instruction Please note: The evidence identified here is provided to stimulate conversations that occur between a supervising authority

More information

The North Carolina Recent Graduate Survey Report 2012-2013

The North Carolina Recent Graduate Survey Report 2012-2013 The North Carolina Recent Graduate Survey Report 2012-2013 Fayetteville State University Education Policy Initiative at Carolina April 2014 One Two Three Four Five One Two Three Four Five Recent Graduate

More information

Ohio School Counselor Evaluation Model MAY 2016

Ohio School Counselor Evaluation Model MAY 2016 Ohio School Counselor Evaluation Model MAY 2016 Table of Contents Preface... 5 The Ohio Standards for School Counselors... 5 Ohio School Counselor Evaluation Framework... 6 School Counselor Evaluation

More information

Oak Park School District. Counselor Evaluation Program

Oak Park School District. Counselor Evaluation Program Oak Park School District Counselor Evaluation Program Table of Contents Foreword... 1 Purpose of Evaluation... 3 Timelines for Implementation... 3 Overview of Counselor Evaluation... 4 Plan I Individual

More information

Board Leadership Development Strategy- Feb 2012

Board Leadership Development Strategy- Feb 2012 Board Leadership Development Strategy- Feb 2012 Superior-Greenstone District School Board believes both leadership and excellence are important at all levels within the organization and contributes to

More information

Teacher Generated Examples of Artifacts and Evidence. Criterion Element Example Artifacts/ Evidence

Teacher Generated Examples of Artifacts and Evidence. Criterion Element Example Artifacts/ Evidence Criterion 1: Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement 2b: Establishing a culture for learning 3a: Communicating with students 3c: Engaging Students in learning student generated

More information

Teacher Assistant Performance Evaluation Plan. Maine Township High School District 207. Our mission is to improve student learning.

Teacher Assistant Performance Evaluation Plan. Maine Township High School District 207. Our mission is to improve student learning. 2012 2015 Teacher Assistant Performance Evaluation Plan Maine Township High School District 207 Our mission is to improve student learning. 0 P age Teacher Assistant Performance Evaluation Program Table

More information