DISTRICT: Date Submitted to DOE: Contact Person s Name Title. Phone # E mail:

Transcription

1 Review and Approval Checklist for RTTT Principal Evaluation Systems *represents beginning of change and # represents end of change. * Modified to Reflect Statutory Changes 4/12/11 # DISTRICT: Date Submitted to DOE: Contact Person s Name Title Phone # E mail: * MOU section (D)(2)(ii) and (1)(b) requires that the school district s instructional personnel and school administrator evaluation systems must be approved by the Department of Education. State Board Rule 6B 4.010, F.A.C., requires that where a district makes substantive modifications to an approved school district instructional personnel assessment system, the modified system shall be submitted to the Department of Education for review and approval. The following checklist combines the Race to the Top (RTTT) requirements for developing and conducting teacher and principal evaluation systems with those required in the recently amended section , Florida Statutes, and Rules 6B and 6A.5.065, F.A.C. This checklist will assist LEAs in ensuring that they have met the requirements for the RTTT grant in this area, while also satisfying requirements for Florida Statutes and State Board Rule. The checklist will also speed the review process. # DIRECTIONS: 1. For each component of the evaluation system shown on the left, provide the page number(s) where that component is addressed in your evaluation system documentation. If more than one document is included in your submission, note the title of the document as well as the page number(s). 2. Submit this checklist with your district s evaluation system documentation June 1, 2011 for district s whose Scope of Work requires a year 1 submission. 3. Documentation submitted for review and approval for initial implementation in is to be sent in digital format no later than June 1, 2011, 11:59 PM EST to RacetotheTop@fldoe.org. A digital version of this checklist is provided on the Race to the Top website ( Questions and clarification on the review process may be sent to john.moore@fldoe.org.

2 Section I. System Components Referenced both by the RTTT Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Florida Statutes 1. * Refocused System Goals: Increasing Student * (1)(a), F.S. Learning Growth & Improving the Quality of Instruction: a. Acknowledgement that the purpose of the redeveloped evaluation system is increasing student learning growth by improving the quality of instructional, administrative, and supervisory service b. Reference or list of related research on which it is based (see note below) c. Leadership practices are used for all who are conducting evaluations Note: While your principal evaluation will be aligned with the SBE Leadership standards, there will be a change in focus and priority from past systems based on changes in law under the Student Success Act. The purpose of the evaluation system has changed to increasing student learning and improving instructional practice. Contemporary research on effective educational leadership and on instructional practice must be a basis for the indicators and priorities in the redeveloped evaluation system. Note the research base on which your leadership assessment is based and also note the research base which your administrators will rely on in leading faculty development for instructional improvement. Sources Citations (refer to MOU, statutes and rules for specifics) For the purpose of increasing student learning growth by improving the quality of instructional, administrative, and supervisory services the district superintendent shall establish procedures for evaluating the performance of duties and responsibilities of all instructional, administrative, and supervisory personnel (3)(a), F.S. Performance evaluation must be based upon sound educational principles and contemporary research in effective educational practices. MOU (D)(2)(i) and (ii) The principal evaluation system utilizes the state adopted teacherlevel student growth measure cited in (D)(2)(i) as the primary factor of the principal evaluation system. Student achievement or growth data evaluation component as defined in the grant must account for at least 50% of the principal s evaluation. Document Name and Page # 2. Evaluation Criteria: MOU D(2)(ii)

3 Your system will address the components on which evaluation is based. Your documentation must indicate how you conform to all MOU and statutory requirements. a. Description of how evaluations for all school administrators are based on sound educational principles and contemporary research in effective educational practices b. Describe your Inclusion of the following evaluation criteria: 1. Performance of students (student growth) 2. Instructional leadership 3. Any additional professional and job responsibilities if included (e.g. Other job responsibilities as adopted by State Board of Education; District may identify additional responsibilities c. Provide evidence that your system Incorporates leadership standards adopted by State Board of Education, including new statutory requirements of performance measures related to: 1. Effectiveness of classroom teachers 2. Recruitment and retention of effective & highly effective teachers; 3. Improvement in the percentage of instructional personnel rated as highly effective & effective; 4. Appropriate use of evaluation criteria; 5. Other practices that result in student learning growth. d. May include means to give parents and instructional personnel opportunities to provide input into evaluation e. For ALL Instructional personnel and school administrators: 1. Other job responsibilities as adopted by State Utilizes for the remaining portion of the evaluation the Florida Principal Leadership Standards with an emphasis on recruiting and retaining effective teachers, improving effectiveness of teachers, and removing ineffective teachers (3)(a), F.S. Performance evaluation must be based upon sound educational principles and contemporary research in effective educational practices (3)(a)1, F.S. At least 50 percent of a performance evaluation must be based upon data and indicators of student learning growth assessed annually by statewide assessments or, for subjects and grade levels not measured by statewide assessments, by school district assessments as provided in s (8). # (3)(a)3, F.S. Evaluation criteria must include indicators based upon each of the leadership standards adopted by the State Board of Education (3)(a)4, F.S. Other professional and job responsibilities adopted by the State Board of Education or identified by district school board.

4 Board of Education 2. District may identify additional responsibilities # 3. Student Growth Measure: * 50% of evaluation is MOU (D)(2)(i) and (ii) based on student growth provisions in the Student The principal evaluation system utilizes the state adopted teacher Success Act supersede what was expected under the level student growth measure cited in (D)(2)(i) as the primary factor of MOU. # the principal evaluation system. Student achievement or growth data evaluation component as defined in the grant must account for at least 50% of the principal s evaluation. a. Verification of using the state adopted student growth measure for courses associated with FCAT for b. The list of student assessments for each subject and grade level for use in that will contribute student growth data to be used in a principal s evaluation c. The timeline for development/selection of student assessments for each subject and grade level that will be also used for evaluation and the anticipated timeline when they will be incorporated into the evaluation d. The timeline for developing/selecting growth measures for additional grades and subjects * e. At least 50% of evaluation of school administrators must be based on student learning growth assessed annually and measured by statewide assessments or, for subjects not measured by statewide assessments, by district assessments in s (8), F.S. f. Performance of students: Data of 3 years of students assigned to school. If 3 years of data are not available, years available must be used and percentage of evaluation based on student learning growth must not be less than 40% # 4. Evaluation Rating Criteria: * a. A description of the four rating labels. If the district s * (3), F.S. Instructional personnel and school administrator performance evaluations must be based upon the performance of students assigned to their classrooms or schools (3)(a)1, F.S. Performance of students. At least 50 percent of a performance evaluation must be based upon data and indicators of student learning growth assessed annually by statewide assessments or, for subjects and grade levels not measured by statewide assessments, by school district assessments as provided in s (3)(a)1.c, F.S. The student learning growth portion of the evaluation must include growth data for students assigned to the school over the course of at least 3 years. If less than 3 years of data are available, the years for which data are available must be used and the percentage of the evaluation based upon student learning growth may be reduced to not less than 40 percent (2)(e), F.S. The system must Differentiate among four levels of performance as follows: 1. Highly effective

5 system uses additional rating labels for internal purposes, a description of how these labels translate into the four required labels should be included. b. The rubric(s) and weighting scales/scoring systems used to define and assign an employee s final evaluation rating. Until criteria for each of the four summative rating levels are developed by the Commissioner and adopted by the State Board, districts will specify the criteria they are using. c. The process of assigning the final rating (i.e., who is involved in the final determination and what process takes place) d. The calculation method for the final rating # 2. Effective 3. Needs Improvement, or for instructional personnel in the first 3 years of employment who need improvement, developing 4. Unsatisfactory (1)(a), F.S. For the purpose of increasing student learning growth by improving the quality of instructional, administrative, and supervisory services the district superintendent shall establish procedures for evaluating the performance of duties and responsibilities of all instructional, administrative, and supervisory personnel MOU (D)(2)(ii) NOTE: MOU provisions regarding a comprehensive range of ratings have been superseded by statutory language. # 5. Annual Evaluation: MOU (D)(2)(ii) The LEA will conduct evaluations as described in MOU (D)(2)(ii) for Documentation will describe the annual evaluation frequency principals at least once per year. and any variations for new or remediating principals. * (3)(a), F.S. A performance evaluation must be conducted for each employee at least once a year. # 6. Leadership Standards Evaluation Component: MOU (D)(2)(ii) Utilizes for the remaining portion of the evaluation the Florida Principal Leadership Standards (see leadership standards at a. Description of how the current leadership standards with an emphasis on: in State Board Rule are aligned with the principal Recruiting and retaining effective teachers evaluation system Improving the effectiveness of teachers b. Explanation of how the evaluation system addresses principal proficiency in recruiting and retaining Removing ineffective teachers effective teachers, improving the effectiveness of * (3)(a)3, F.S. teachers, and removing ineffective teachers For school administrators, evaluation criteria must include indicators based upon each of the leadership standards adopted by the State Board of Education under s , including performance

6 measures related to the effectiveness of classroom teachers in the school, the administrator s appropriate use of evaluation criteria and procedures, recruitment and retention of effective and highly effective classroom teachers, improvement in the percentage of instructional personnel evaluated at the highly effective or effective level, and other leadership practices that result in student learning growth. The system may include a means to give parents and instructional personnel an opportunity to provide input into the administrator s performance evaluation. # 7. Range of Ratings: Existing requirements call for procedures, methods, and criteria to designate, document, and differentiate performance levels. The MOU established a more uniform way to do so among RTTT districts so that differences in proficiency levels will be recognized in the evaluation outcomes. * The Student Success Act signed into law on 3/24/11 further clarifies what is required. The four summative final evaluation ratings are specified in (2)(e). # a. A description of the rating labels *. If rating labels for components of the summative evaluation (e.g. leadership development) are other than the summative labels, include a description) # b. The rubric(s) and weighing scales/scoring systems used to define and assign an employee s final rating (e.g. how factors like principal involvement in improvement of instruction and curriculum have higher weight than other factors) c. The process of assigning the final rating (i.e., who is involved in the final determination and what is the process) d. The calculation method for the final rating SBE Rule 6A 5.080, F.A.C. Florida Principal Leadership Standards * MOU (D)(2)(ii) NOTE: MOU provisions regarding a comprehensive range of ratings have been superseded by statutory language (2)(e), F.S. Differentiate among four levels of performance as follows: 1. Highly effective 2. Effective 3. Needs Improvement, or for instructional personnel in the first 3 years of employment who need improvement, developing 4. Unsatisfactory #

7 Section II. System Components Referenced only by the Sources Citations (refer to MOU, statutes and rules for specifics) Document Name MOU and Page # 8. Involvement: a. The process for development of the evaluation system that included teacher and principal involvement b. The process that will be used for continued principal involvement in review and/or improvement of the evaluation system MOU (D)(2)(ii) Develop and implement an evaluation system with teacher and principal involvement. Section III. System Components Referenced by Florida Statutes 9. Improvement Plans: a. How the evaluation system supports the district and school improvement plans * b. How evaluation results are used when developing school and district improvement plans. NOTE: Where planning is underway to link data collection and analysis from evaluation and professional development through the Local Instructional Improvement System (LIIS) under development, districts may indicate how those tools will be developed to support improvement planning # 10. Continuous Professional Improvement: * a. How information from the evaluation system will be returned to the administrator as feedback for individual continuous improvement b. The district s timeline for using evaluation results to inform individual professional development OR Sources Citations (refer to MOU, statutes and rules for specifics) * (2)(a), F.S. Evaluation systems for instructional personnel and school administrators must be designed to support effective instruction and student learning growth, and performance evaluation results must be used when developing district and school level improvement plans (2)(b), F.S. Provide appropriate instruments, procedures, and criteria for continuous quality improvement of the professional skills of instructional personnel and school administrators, and performance evaluation results must be used when identifying professional development. Document Name and Page #

8 c. How the district currently uses evaluation results to inform individual professional development and the general timeline for improvements to the process under statutory requirements # 11. Annual Review of Evaluation System: a. The procedures, time frames, data analysis and personnel involved b. The process for evaluating the * effectiveness of the system in supporting improvements in instruction and student learning, including the criteria to be evaluated Note: Districts may not be fully prepared for b. by June 1. For those who are not, a timeline for meeting this requirement should be included. # (6), F.S. The district school board shall establish a procedure for annually reviewing instructional personnel and school administrator evaluation systems to determine compliance with this section. All substantial revisions to an approved system must be reviewed and approved by the district school board before being used to evaluate instructional personnel or school administrators (2)(h), F.S. Includes a process for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the system itself in improving instruction and student learning. 12. Evaluator Training: a. A description of the initial training process b. The process for on going training of evaluators c. The process for monitoring evaluator performance and * consistency of # results * Note: Appropriate guidelines from the Department of Education are in development. At present your training programs should include informing evaluators on the purpose of the evaluation system, the research base, proficiency expectations, processes for giving feedback for improvement, correct use of forms and timelines, and procedural processes needed to implement the system. # 13. Parent Input: (2)(f) F.S. Provide for training programs that are based upon guidelines provided by the department to ensure that all individuals with evaluation responsibilities understand the proper use of the evaluation criteria and procedures (2)(g),F.S. Include a process for monitoring and evaluating the effective and consistent use of the evaluation criteria by employees with evaluation responsibilities (2)(c), F.S. Include a mechanism to examine performance data from multiple

9 * A description of opportunities for parent input 14. Peer Review Option: a. Whether peer assistance is part of the evaluation system If peer assistance or review is included, b. Describe the role of peers in observation or in contributing evidence to be used in the evaluation by the evaluating supervisor, and the groups of teachers who will be receiving peer assistance/feedback c. How peer input is used in your system (formative feedback only, part of the data used for summative evaluation, etc.) d. A description of the training for peer assistance practitioners. sources, including opportunities for parents to provide input into employee performance evaluations. # (2), F.S. * Each district may establish a peer assistance process. This process may be a part of the regular evaluation system or used to assist employees placed on performance probation, newly hired classroom teachers, or employees who request assistance. 15. Evaluation by Supervisor: Documentation should include how the supervisor for evaluation purposes is determined. 16. Input into Evaluation by Trained Personnel Other than the Supervisor: a. A description of personnel who will give input into evaluation b. Verification that personnel will be trained in the process (3)(c), F.S. The individual responsible for supervising the employee must evaluate the employee s performance (3)(c), F.S. The evaluation system may provide for the evaluator to consider input from other personnel trained [for the task]. Note: Supporting deliberate practice for continuous progress in instructional practice expertise will generate input from

10 numerous sources. The evaluation system should make clear to all participants which sources of input will be used to inform evaluation and ensure training for personnel whose input may inform evaluation results. 17. Amending Evaluations: (3)(d), F.S. Documentation should include procedures related to amending evaluations based on receipt of additional data. # 18. Informing Assessed Personnel: a. The process whereby personnel are informed of the criteria and procedures by which they will be evaluated, including the transition to the district s new evaluation system under RTTT b. The procedures for new employees who join the workforce The evaluator may amend an evaluation based upon assessment data from the current school year if the data become available within 90 days after the close of the school year. The evaluator must then comply with the [notification] procedures set forth in paragraph (c).# (3)(b), F.S. Fully informs all personnel of the criteria and procedures associated with the evaluation process before the evaluation takes place.