Race to the Top: Great Teachers and Leaders (D) (2) (i) (ii) (iii)

Transcription

1 The School District of Osceola County, FL Student Achievement - Our Number One Priority Improve Teacher and Principal Evaluation Systems (D) (2) (i) (ii) (iii) Review and Approval Checklist for RTTT Redeveloped Teacher Evaluation Systems For The School District of Osceola County, Florida June 1, 2011 Introduction: The School District of Osceola County s Race To The Top (RttT) Teacher Evaluation Subcommittee was established to examine viable options for the selection of a substantially redeveloped Teacher Evaluation instrument. The purpose for selecting a substantially modified Teacher Evaluation System was to ensure the inclusion of: the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs), compliance with S , F.S., effective practices strongly linked to increased student achievement, current research, and the core of effective practices, used at a minimum by the principal, direct supervisor, and any other individual performing observation. The Race To The Top Teacher Evaluation Subcommittee is comprised of teacher members of the Osceola County Education Association (OCEA), principals, and district leaders. After careful consideration, the committee recommended that the district adopt the Florida Department of Education-authorized Marzano Model Teacher Evaluation System. This recommendation is confirmed in a Memorandum of Understanding between the OCEA and the School District of Osceola County. On the following pages, evidence of the School District of Osceola County s substantially modified Teacher Evaluation System is documented through the Review and Approval Checklist for RTTT Teacher Evaluation Systems. This document, its appendices, and the Approval Checklist will be submitted electronically on or before June 1, 2011, for review and approval by the Florida Department of Education. This Review and Approval Checklist is submitted by RTTT Teacher Evaluation Subcommittee members: Cecille Diez, Ed. D., Senior Manager, School Leadership Training and Development, and Committee Co-chair Sandy Rushlow, OCEA Teacher Member, and Committee Co-chair Kathy Donato, OCEA President Tony Donato, OCEA Teacher Member Heather Gullstrand, OCEA Teacher Member Maria Cruz, OCEA Teacher Member Karen Johnson, OCEA Teacher Member Lare Allen, OCEA Teacher Member 1

2 Bill Coffman, Principal Michael Allen, Principal Laura Rhinehart, Principal Section I. System Components Referenced both by the RTTT Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Florida Statutes 1. Core of Effective Practices: As a recipient of Race to the Top grant funding, The School District of Osceola County began the process of examining multiple factors that impact the quality of education for its students. One component to be examined as required by the RttT grant is the method by which teachers are evaluated. Current research indicates that growth in student learning and achievement is directly related to the quality of instruction by the classroom teacher. The teacher evaluation process should support the professional growth of the teacher, and provide a path to professional development that will offer the greatest impact on instructional quality. Documentation of the systems components in the Teacher Evaluation system referenced by the RTTT Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Florida Statutes is provided in the following pages. The first of these is the Core of Effective Practices. The Core of Effective Practices includes: Florida Educator Accomplished Practices Practices strongly linked to increased student achievement Criteria for evaluation systems listed in s , F.S. Contemporary research on effective practices The principal, direct supervisor, and any other individual performing observation will use, at a minimum, this same core of effective practices. 1a. The School District of Osceola County acknowledges that it will support the goal of increased student growth and achievement by adopting a substantially modified Teacher Evaluation system. In conjunction with the Osceola County Education Association (OCEA), the School District of Osceola County agreed to adopt Dr. Robert Marzano s Teacher Evaluation Model for its substantially modified teacher evaluation system. At the core of the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system are Four Domains with direct links to increased student learning and increased student achievement. The Marzano Teacher Evaluation system is a causal model, having identified through a meta-analysis of over two decades of research, certain instructional strategies that can cause an increase in student learning gains by improving the quality of the teacher s instruction. 1b. Observation instruments adopted by the School District of Osceola County, with the indicators of effective practice, are those developed by Dr. Robert Marzano and authorized by the Florida Department of Education. All 61 Protocol Observation forms developed by Dr. Marzano are shown in Appendix I. The summative evaluation instruments include: 2

3 Annual Observation Report Category I Teacher Annual Observation Report Category II Teacher Annual Observation Report Category III Teacher A sample of one page of one Annual Observation Report Category I Teacher is found in Appendix II. Calculations for summative points are found in: Category I Worksheet Category II Worksheet Category III Worksheet The School District of Osceola County in conjunction with OCEA agreed to adopt Dr. Marzano s observation tools as formative measures leading to the summative teacher evaluation. 1c. The School District of Osceola County in conjunction with OCEA, adopted the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system. This system is the Florida Department of Education-authorized teacher evaluation model, due in part to its thorough inclusion of the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs). Appendix III demonstrates the school district s knowledge and recognition of the FEAPS, reauthorized by the Florida Department of Education in December, Appendix IV shows two sample pages of the Florida Department of Education Support for Local Education Agencies FEAPS Crosswalk to Marzano Art and Science of Teaching These two Appendices document the School District of Osceola County s knowledge of and recognition of the inclusion of the FEAPs as the foundation for school district instructional personnel evaluation systems, as seen in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation System. 1d. The Marzano Teacher Evaluation System is based on the meta-analysis of research on teacher effectiveness. Appendix V contains the Research Base and Validation Studies on the Marzano Evaluation Model, April, Appendix VI is the Reference List for Supervising the Art and Science of Teaching. Alexandria, VA. ASCD. 1e. In order to ensure the fidelity of the implementation of the growth model in which the Marzano Teacher Evaluation System is grounded, all administrators will receive an initial five days of training on the evaluation instruments through LSI/iObservation contracted professional development services. In addition, a plan is being developed to build capacity within the administrative ranks which will identify a cadre of school leaders who will provide informal support, training support, and/or more intensive support for administrators needing assistance with implementing the revised teacher evaluation system. The reporting options will allow data on each administrator s evaluation processes to be examined in the context of student achievement data and teacher effectiveness. A plan is being developed that will provide an ongoing training cycle to train new administrators, and provide updates for all administrators. 3

4 2. Student Growth Measures For the 2011/12 school year, the School District of Osceola County will maintain compliance with Florida Statute which requires the use of student achievement data be the primary criterion in the Teacher Evaluation system. Pursuant to (3)(a)1, F.S., at least 50% of a teacher s performance evaluation will be based on data and indicators of student learning growth, assessed annually by statewide assessments. For subjects and grade levels not measured by statewide assessments, school district assessments will be used. The formula adopted pursuant to Paragraph (7) (a) for measuring student learning growth in all courses associated with stateside assessments (FCAT) will be used by the School District of Osceola County. Student learning growth in all other grades and subjects will be measured by an equally appropriate formula. See Appendix XI. Pursuant to (7)(b), F. S., the School District of Osceola County will implement the additional student learning growth measures selected by the commissioner under paragraph (a) for the remainder of the statewide assessments as they become available. Beginning in the 2014/15 school year, the School District of Osceola County will measure student learning growth using an equally appropriate formula for grades and subjects not assessed by statewide assessments, but otherwise assessed as required under s (8). 2a. A list of student assessments for each subject and grade level scheduled to be used in is found in Appendix VII. 2b. A task force will be established in the summer of 2011 for the purpose of: developing plans for the creation of and/or selecting student assessments for each non- FCAT related subject and grade level that will be also used for evaluation, and establishing the timeline as to when the student assessment data will be incorporated into the evaluation. The task force will be comprised of OCEA teacher members, site-based administrators, districtlevel administrators, and employee members of the district s Research and Accountability and Instructional Technology Departments. The task force will be formed in the first quarter of the 2011/12 school year. The work of the task force will continue through the school year in district, and with support provided by DOE. 2c. The School District of Osceola County verifies that the state-adopted student growth measure for courses associated with FCAT in 2011/12 will be used. 2d. A task force will be established in the summer of 2011 to begin developing/selecting growth measures for those non-fcat associated courses. The task force will be comprised of OCEA teacher members, site-based administrators, district-level administrators, and employee members of the district s Research and Accountability and Instructional Technology Departments. The task force will be formed in the first quarter of the 2011/12 school year. Select teachers of those non-fcat related courses for which the selection/development of student growth measures are being examined, will serve on the subcommittees representing their specific teacher group. The task force will select an 4

5 equally appropriate formula for measuring student learning growth for all other grades and subjects, except as otherwise provided in subsection (7) ( (3)(a)1, F.S. The subcommittees and task force committee will adhere to the timeline required of the school district in phasing in those subjects and grades not associated with FCAT testing, but are otherwise assessed. By 2014/15, the task force and subcommittees will have selected/developed assessments appropriate for each grade and/or subject to be assessed. The School District of Osceola County will adopt a model for measuring student learning growth from among those presented by the Florida Department of Education. 2e. For each teacher with only FCAT course assignments, growth results will be based on the FCAT results of students assigned to that teacher for that school year. The student achievement data from the FCAT test will represent 50% of the teacher summative evaluation, and will combine with the Instructional Practice score to produce the summative evaluation rating. 2f. Evaluation Criteria 1. For classroom teachers, excluding substitutes, who have less than 3 years of data available, years for which data are available must be used, and the percentage of the evaluation based on student learning growth will be 50%. 2. For instructional personnel who are not classroom teachers, and who have at least 3 years of student learning growth data, the student learning growth data and other measurable student outcomes will represent 50% of the summative evaluation. For instructional personnel who are not classroom teachers, and who do not have 3 years of student learning growth data, years with available student learning growth data will be used. The percentage represented by the years of available student learning growth data will be also 50%. Student Learning Growth 1. Beginning in the 2011/12 school year, the School District of Osceola County will measure student learning growth using the formula approved by the Commissioner under paragraph (a) for courses associated with FCAT. See Appendix XI. By school year , subjects and grades not assessed by statewide assessment student learning growth will be measured by equally appropriate formulas provided by the Florida Department of Education. 2. For courses for which there are no appropriate assessments under s (8), F. S., the district will establish a task force in school year to determine if assessments can be adopted and/or developed. Learning targets established by the principal, in conjunction with specific teachers, will be used until, or if, appropriate assessments become available through adoption or development. The task force will determine with the Superintendent in school year whether or not 5

6 instructional personnel in an instructional team will have the team s students learning growth scores assigned as a percentage of each teacher s summative evaluation score. 3. Evaluation Rating Criteria The Rating Criteria for the Teacher Evaluation System has been defined through the RTTT MOU and The Student Success Act. The School District of Osceola County s RTTT Teacher Evaluation Subcommittee, supported the adoption of four rating labels which would differentiate instructional performance levels. The district s previous teacher evaluation instruments contained four rating labels, but the subcommittee including its OCEA teacher members agreed to begin utilizing the following rating labels to be consistent with language being introduced through the DOE RTTT language. 3a. Rating labels are: Highly Effective (HE) Effective (E) Needs Improvement (NI) for 3+ years of employment, or Developing (DV) for 0-3 years of employment Unsatisfactory (U) 3b. The School District of Osceola County and its OCEA teacher members are adopting the rubrics and weighting scales/scoring systems associated with the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Systems. These will be used until the Commissioner of Education for Florida develops criteria for the rubrics and weighting scales and they are adopted by the State Board of Education. The Marzano model describes: Proficiency Scales for Category I Teachers (1-3 years) Proficiency Scales for Category II Teachers (4+ years) Proficiency Scales for Category III Teachers (Optional; 10+ years) The description of each of these categories in the Marzano model includes the recommended percentages for: o Highly Effective o Effective o Developing (1-3 years) or Needs Improvement (4+ years) o Unsatisfactory (for any number of years of service) 3c. The assignment of the final rating will be made through the following process: The evaluator for the Instructional Practice summative evaluation will be the Principal of the school. Instructional Practice formative evaluations will occur throughout the school year for the teacher, by an administrator at the school site (Principal or Assistant Principal). The summative Instructional Practice evaluation instruments that will be used are the Marzano Annual Evaluation Reports I, II, or III. Points will be assigned on the Category I, II, or III Worksheets. 6

7 Using the weighting scale/scoring system in the Marzano Worksheets, the teacher s Instructional Practice rating will be determined as follows: HE E NI or DV U The Student Achievement Data will be translated into rating scores for each teacher, from students for whom they were responsible. These rating scores will be combined with the formative worksheet scores, for the teacher s annual summative total rating, as the ratings fall into one of the four-five rating labels described above. 3d. The calculation for the final rating will be aggregated using the Instructional Practice score and the Student Growth score. The School District of Osceola County will utilize the weighting method determined by the Florida DOE. Section II. System Components Referenced only by the MOU 4. Teacher and Principal Involvement The School District of Osceola County established an overarching Race to the Top Committee tasked with addressing all sections of the RTTT Scope of Work document. The Great Teachers subcommittee was developed specifically to address the components of the Great Teachers and Great Leaders section. The Great Teachers subcommittee was comprised of OCEA teacher members, principals, and district staff. The subcommittee accepted the challenge of redeveloping the teacher evaluation system for Osceola instructional personnel with the goal being increased student learning and achievement by improving the quality of instructional practice. The subcommittee is committed to continue collaboration throughout the implementation process. 4a. The process for the development of the evaluation system began with an examination of teacher evaluation systems grounded in current research. After examining both Danielson s and Marzano s teacher evaluation models, and upon the announcement of the authorization by the Florida DOE of the Marzano model, the subcommittee recommended the adoption of Dr. Robert Marzano s Art and Science of Teaching Teacher Evaluation Model. The subcommittee met on the following dates: Wednesday, December 8, 2010 Wednesday, January 12,

8 Wednesday, February 9, 2011 Wednesday, February 23, 2011 Wednesday, March 9, 2011 Wednesday, March 16, 2011 Wednesday, April 6, 2011 Wednesday, April 27, 2011 The subcommittee attended the following trainings: March 3-5, 2011, Three-day Academy, Largo, Florida March 10-12, 2011, Three-day Academy, Orlando, Florida March 30 & 31, 2011, Days One and Two, Redevelopment Training April 28, 2011, Day Three, Redevelopment Training 4b. The School District of Osceola County will continue to utilize the RttT Teacher Evaluation subcommittee as the core group for OCEA teacher members, principals, and district staff to develop a process for the ongoing review and/or improvement of the teacher evaluation system. Upon the recommendation of the subcommittee, the School District of Osceola County will establish a training protocol with Learning Sciences International (LSI) as the vendor. The training will consist of a total of five days initially for principals and assistant principals in a Learning Leaders workshop. In addition, an informal cadre of Peer Support teachers will be trained. This cadre will include district and school level coaches and resource teachers. School level coaches and resource personnel would be expected to train teachers at their school site in the Art and Science of Teaching domains and instructional practices that produce high-yield student achievement results. This group would provide mentor and coach support in the research base found in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system. Other personnel will be offered training to be identified as Certified Facilitators. This group of teachers would be offered training in the eight workshops designed to certify trainers in Dr. Marzano s Art and Science of Teaching. The expectation would be that they would then assume the role of Trainer, and would continue training struggling and/or new teachers. At the end of Year 2, the first year of implementing the Marzano teacher evaluation system ( ), the Great Teachers subcommittee will conduct the first annual review of the revised teacher evaluation system. The process by which the subcommittee will conduct the review and subsequent reviews, will include, but not be limited to: Selection of additional committee members to expand representation Development of survey questions to be presented by SurveyMonkey Collection and disaggregation of survey results Presentation of survey results to OCEA and district leadership for any points that will require negotiation. School Board approval of negotiated changes Reporting to the DOE any negotiated, School Board approved changes 8

9 4c. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the OCEA and the School District of Osceola County, and signed by the Superintendent, confirms the agreement between the two parties that the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system has been agreed upon and will be submitted to the DOE for review and approval. The MOU is shown in Appendix VIII. 5. Multiple Evaluations for First Year Teachers: 5a. Evaluation includes both observations and reviews of student work. All teachers who are new to the School District of Osceola County will be evaluated at least twice in the first year of teaching in the district. New to the district includes teachers who have never taught before in any district (new teaching graduates or those on alternative certification) and those who have previous teaching experience but are teaching for their first year in Osceola County. The Recommended Schedule from the LSI Day 2 Teacher Evaluation Redevelopment Meeting will serve as the basis for Category I, II, and III teachers. The Recommended Schedule suggests: 4 announced Formal Observations for Category I and Struggling Teachers, 2 for Category II, 1-2 for Category III (optional); 5 announced or unannounced Informal Observations for Category I, 5-9 for Struggling Teachers, 2 for Category II, and 1-2 for Category III; Twice monthly Classroom Walkthroughs (CWTs) for Category I and Struggling Teachers, Monthly for Category II and III. The administrative staff at each school, which includes the Principal and Assistant Principal(s), will conduct observations of, and data reviews with, the teacher. 5b. Student performance data used for the review conference between the administrator and teacher will include, but not be limited to: o Formative assessments, o Content end-of-chapter assessments, o Student product and/or projects, o Portfolio artifacts, o Teacher-made assessments, and o Student self-assessments. 5c. The evaluator for the summative evaluation will be the Principal of the school. Principals and/or assistant principals may conduct data reviews upon receipt of formative and/or summative student achievement data. The evaluators will be required to have successfully completed the training of the Marzano observation and evaluation instruments and processes. The training is a service purchased through a School Board approved contract with LSI. It consists of three days training on Domains 1-4, and 2 days training on the web-based platform for conducting observations and collecting data. 5d. The feedback process will be conducted by the observing administrator for the purpose of providing support to the teacher, specifically in areas in need of improvement, and to inform the teacher of his/her progress toward effective teaching. The support provided could include, but not be limited to: 9

10 o o o o Recommending resources from Dr. Marzano/LSI s Resource Library, Recommending a highly effective peer observer to observe and suggest ways to improve in specific instructional strategies, Providing release time for the teacher to observe in classrooms of highly effective teachers, specific to areas in which improvement is needed, and Recommending district-provided Professional Development specific to areas in which improvement is needed. 5e. Beginning teachers will be observed and evaluated with the same Teacher Evaluation System as all other teachers. A modified rating system will be employed with first year teachers, and is the Proficiency Scale for Category I Teachers (1-3 years of service). It is based on the following: o Highly Effective (4) = at least 65% at Level 4 and 0% at Level 1 or 0 o Effective(3) = At least 65% at Level 3 or higher o Developing (2) = Less than 65% at Level 3 or higher and Less than 50% at Level 1 or 0 o Unsatisfactory (1) = Greater than or equal to 50% at Level 1 or Additional Metric Evaluation Element: 6a. The multi-metric component of the evaluation system as referenced in the MOU will be accomplished through the multiple observation components embedded in the Marzano Observation Protocol Forms. These multi-metric components will combine with student achievement data for the final summative teacher evaluation rating. 6b. All instructional personnel will be evaluated with the Marzano Teacher Observation/Evaluation system. The evaluator will contribute the Deliberate Practice Score as a component of the Teacher evaluation. The multi-metric components within the Marzano Teacher Observation/Evaluation system, combined with the student achievement data, will produce the final summative teacher evaluation rating. 6c. The multi-metrics components of the Marzano Teacher Observation/Evaluation system will be calculated as presented in the trainings presented by Learning Sciences International. The first year of implementation ( ) the Status Score will represent 50% of the summative score. In year two and beyond, the Status Score will be combined with the Deliberate Practice Score for 50% of the summative score. The Instructional Practice Score (50%) will be combined with the Student Achievement Data Score for the remaining 50% of the teacher evaluation. 6d. The multi-metrics represented in the Marzano Teacher Observation/Evaluation system will be implemented beginning in school year e. The proficiency ratings presented in the training by Learning Sciences International are those adopted by the Great Teachers sub-committee for the summative evaluation. 7. Milestone career event(s) N/A: The School District of Osceola County will conduct Multi-metric evaluations on all teachers, therefore, Milestone Career Events do not need to be identified. 10

11 Section III. Systems Components Referenced by Florida Statutes 8. Annual Evaluation: Appendix IX contains the F.S definition of criteria for Evaluation systems. Appendix X contains an excerpt from the current Contract between the School Board of Osceola County and the Osceola County Educators Association , which describes the currently negotiated processes for the Annual Teacher Evaluation. The processes adhere to (3)(a), F.S., requiring a performance evaluation be conducted for each employee at least once per year. In addition, the processes align with the MOU (D)(2)(ii) 1, 2, and 4, for all other teachers at least once per year. 9. Improvement Plans (9b N/A) 9a. The School District of Osceola County s district leaders, school-based administrators, teachers, professional support staff, business partners, and other community stakeholders, annually review School Improvement Plans (SIPs) by instructional content area, teacher, grade level, school, district, and/or department. Content areas in which data indicates student achievement strengthening is called for, are the driving force of the development of each SIP. School Improvement Plans are developed annually through the collaborative efforts of the School Advisory Councils (SAC) composed of school-site administrators, faculty, parents, other community and/or business partners, and at specific schools, students. The SAC reviews all pertinent student achievement data, such as FCAT scores, in the related content areas. The teacher evaluation system supports the School Improvement Planning effort through the examination of student achievement data by teacher, grade level, school, district, and state. As the student achievement data is examined, district and school-based administrators, and teachers, determine specific and/or global professional development opportunities that would support increased student achievement through increased instructional effectiveness. The Marzano Teacher Evaluation system is constructed to facilitate connections between increased teacher effectiveness and increased student achievement through: targeted teacher professional development incremental growth over time evaluators, mentors, and teacher leaders trained in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system can provide support in its approach as a growth model for teachers. 9c. The School District of Osceola County is currently negotiating the purchase of an improved Local Instructional Improvement System (LIIS). This system, along with the purchase of the Lucid PDExpress and the iobservation technical platforms, will support improvement planning through: effective and efficient data collection from FCAT-tested grades and subject, effective and efficient data collection from other data sources from hard-to-assess courses, the fair, accurate, and transparent collection, transmission, and calculation of student achievement data, district-to-state, and state-to-district, 11

12 an improved parent component which will provide a more effective and efficient avenue for parents to access student achievement data, technical links to the iobservation Resource Library for teacher professional development, and technical links to Lucent s PDExpress for professional development opportunities. The implementation of these new LIIS and professional development components will connect the school improvement planning process to the teacher evaluation performance results and student achievement data. 10 Continuous Professional Improvement 10a. Information from the evaluation system will be returned to the teacher as feedback for continuous improvement by various methods, including, but not limited to: face-to-face private conferences between teacher and administrator, such as reflection conferences, formative and summative evaluation conferences, instructional conferences about the Individual Professional Development Plan areas and professional development goals based on student achievement data, instructional conversations preceding and following Classroom Walkthroughs; Resource Library to the teacher s iobservation mailbox associated with the webbased Marzano Teacher Evaluation system written communication. 10b. N/A (go to 10c) 10c. The School District of Osceola County currently uses evaluation results to inform individual professional development by utilizing the Individual Professional Development Plan (IPDP). Instructional and administrative personnel develop IPDPs and ILDPs respectively based on a review of student achievement data derived from students for whom the teacher or administrator is responsible. The core purpose of the IPDP is to provide an avenue for the selection of professional development opportunities by the teacher for individual growth in instructional strategies for the purpose of increasing student achievement. The teacher s evaluation results will be used to identify professional development specific to student achievement data results. Teachers will conference with an observing administrator and/or the evaluator to review results from their observation or evaluation as quickly as possible. Areas in which growth is needed will be discussed at these conferences. The discussion can include options for professional development at the school site, district-sponsored, and/or online. In addition, the teacher can confer with school mentors, teacher-leaders, coaches, or other highly effective instructional personnel for informal training support from peers. The Professional Development Department develops a calendar schedule annually which provides dates for deadlines for the formal evaluations to be completed by administrators in the conference setting, at which time the teacher confirms receipt of the evaluation with his/her signature. The Race to the Top grant initiative has provided the district the ability to purchase tools and services which will improve the professional development process during school year The 12

13 district has purchased Lucid s PDExpress system which is designed to electronically manage the dissemination of professional development opportunities, registration for the professional development, reminder notices, and evaluations of the delivered professional development. The system automatically sends notices of professional development opportunities identified by employees in their IPDPs. The district also purchased services from iobservation to utilize their web-based professional development options. These options are available to teachers and administrators in real-time, through articles and videos in which Dr. Marzano s research-based high impact behaviors and strategies (described in the four Domains in the teacher evaluation instruments) are demonstrated by K-12 classroom teachers, with elaboration by Dr. Marzano. 11. Teaching Fields Requiring Special Procedures Examples given of Teaching Fields Requiring Special Procedures were: 1. Long-term substitute teachers (No employee category identified as Long term substitute teachers) 2. Teacher-on-Assignment Currently, the School District of Osceola County has one instructional employee who is designated as a Teacher-on-Assignment, and serves as the President of the Osceola County Educators Association. All instructional personnel in the district currently have an evaluation instrument specific to the instructional group. A sub-committee/task force will be established for the school year 2011/12 to review the alignment of these evaluation documents to the Florida Teacher Evaluation model. The process will ensure that these evaluation instruments: Are anchored to the FEAPs Reflect the national organization s professional standards for each instructional group Include classroom/work location observation instruments for professionals who spend a portion of their time in the classroom. 3. Evaluator Training 12a.Based on a pending contract with iobservation, the following training services are being purchased: Two (2) cohorts, each with 65 administrators (principals and assistant principals) will be trained in the iobservation three-day Learning Leaders workshop on Marzano s Teacher Evaluation System, Domains I IV. The training will focus on: o Embedding a common language of instruction o Training by Marzano trainers in the teacher evaluation system and processes o Developing inter-rater reliability through the use of classroom videos for practice observations/evaluations. One cohort with 160 administrators (principals and assistant principals) will enroll in the Day 1 Technology Training, to master the iobservation technical platform for the web-based teacher evaluation data collection system. A team of administrators from within the group 13

14 will be identified to serve as Trainers for the remainder of the administrators in Days 2 and 3 of the Technology Training. 12b. The process for an ongoing training program for evaluators will occur through: o An ongoing quality control process overseen by Marzano trainers and Certified Facilitators o Ongoing monitoring by the District sustained by Administrator Leaders expert in the evaluation process 12c. The process for monitoring evaluator performance and consistency of results will be ensured through the use of classroom videos during the three-day Leaders of Learning LSI training. 4. Process of Informing Teachers About the Evaluation Process The School District of Osceola County complies with (3)(b), F.S. which requires that all personnel be fully informed of the criteria and procedures associated with the evaluation process before the evaluation takes place. In addition, the district s Teacher Contract contains similar language regarding this requirement, shown in 13a. 13a. Teacher Contract language currently exists which describes the process by which teachers are annually informed of the criteria and procedures by which they will be evaluated. ARTICLE XII TEACHER ASSESSMENT (Evaluation) All teachers shall be oriented annually to all assessment (evaluation) procedures and observation forms during the first twenty (20) days of teaching. Assessment procedures and observation forms shall also be uniformly and fully explained in the faculty handbook. Teachers will be informed of the transition to the district s new evaluation system through, but not limited to, the following methods: Pre-planning Faculty Meeting (reference from Teacher Contract above) Personal communications at the school level, which includes but is not limited to, face-toface announcements in faculty, PLC meetings, administrator newsletters, etc., Teacher trainings conducted by administrators and select teachers who are Certified Facilitators (Marzano-trained to present workshops on Domains) District-wide Faculty Handbook OCEA communications, such as the OCEA website, newsletters, etc., District website announcements, links to Florida DOE websites, Marzano websites, etc. News media announcements District FirstClass Announcement board Video purchased from iobservation to be posted on the district website for public viewing. 13b. New employees will be informed of the evaluation system and process per current contract language in the first twenty (20) days of teaching, through the same methods as listed above. 14

15 Informing new teachers can also occur in a small group meetings conducted by administrators and/or mentors for new employees. The instruments utilized from the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system will be provided. Trained Facilitator teachers will be available for further training and explanation. 5. Parent Input 14a. During the process of the evaluator completing the teacher s summative evaluation, he/she may incorporate information from parental input generated through face-to-face parent/teacher/ administrator conferences, written parent communications such as notes, letters, and/or s, phone calls, data meetings, an/or other formal or informal contacts with parents. The incorporated parent information can be included as one or more data points in the Marzano Teacher Observation/Evaluation system through specific Elements from Domain 1 in year one implementation, and Domains 1-4 in subsequent years of implementation. 14b. The metric for Parent Input will be a result of data point ratings put into the iobservation system. This system produces a summative rating from the multiple data points generated in Domain 1 in year one of implementation, and Domains 1-4 in subsequent years of implementation. Annual Review by the District The following will provide a framework for annually (or as needed) reviewing the Teacher Evaluation System: 15a. A Teacher Evaluation Review Committee will be assembled annually (or as needed) to review the Teacher Evaluation system. The review will be conducted in the spring, after the teacher evaluation process deadline has occurred, but prior to the end of the current school year. The Teacher Evaluation Review Committee members will be selected from the following groups: Core Content Classroom teachers K-12 ESE Classroom teachers K-12 Special Area/Elective teachers K-12 Adult-Technical Education Teachers Other instructional group representatives Osceola County Educators Association Principals and Assistant Principals K-12, Adult-Technical Administrators District-level Administrators The Teacher Evaluation Review Committee members will disseminate a voluntary survey to all district employees evaluated by the teacher evaluation instrument. This can be accomplished through a SurveyMonkey Likert-style instrument. Survey questions will be developed in conjunction with the Marzano/LSI group. Survey questions can include, but not be limited to: A. Based on student achievement data, and Instructional Scores are teachers generally improving performance over time B. Based on student achievement data, and Instructional Scores are schools retaining consistently top-performing teachers at a higher rate that consistently lower-performing teachers C. Are teachers receiving useful feedback based on clearly articulated expectations for classroom behaviors and instructional strategies 15

16 D. Do teachers believe they are being evaluated in a fair, consistent, and transparent manner E. Do teachers see ample Professional Development opportunities to increase teaching efficacy and student achievement, as a result of the evaluation process F. Other 1. The Teacher Evaluation Review Committee members will collect survey results and examine the results for possible revision elements. A task force will be assembled in the first semester, 2011, to develop the data analysis model to be used. 2. The review by the teacher evaluation committee members is to include the: currency of the research-base on which the evaluation is built training needs of administrators conducting the evaluation training needs of teachers with whom the evaluation instrument is being used IPDP construct Peer Observer construct Multi-metric construct Student Achievement Data construct Weighting of Student Achievement Data Inclusion of the FEAPs Inclusion of current DOE/Legislated components Feedback component Provision of a defined pathway for teacher-leader roles Provision of a defined pathway for pay for performance 6. Peer Review Option 16a. The School District of Osceola County currently utilizes peer assistance at the school level. However the Great Teacher RttT subcommittee chose to not include a peer component in the teacher summative evaluation. However, the Great Teachers RttT subcommittee agreed to annually review the option of including Peer Evaluation as a future consideration. 16b. The role of the assisting peer is for situations including, but not limited to: performance support for a teacher, identified by a site administrator and/or the teacher, for teachers placed on a district Improvement Plan, teachers new to the district, and/or teachers who request assistance. 16c. Peer assistance input will be used in our district system for ongoing formative feedback only. Upon the conclusion of a classroom observation by the Peer, the Peer mentor and teacher will meet at a mutually agreeable time, for a conversation designed to provide growth, support reflective practice, and instill professionalism and collegiality. 16d. Peers who provide assistance in those situations listed in 16b will: hold a Florida Professional Certification for the subject area(s) in which the peer assistance is requested, have received the Highly Effective or Effective rating on his/her three most recent annual summative evaluation from the combined scoring on the Instructional Practice and 16

17 the Student Achievement Data sections, as evidence by the District s State-approved evaluation system in compliance with FS, have three or more years of experience of classroom experience, have successfully completed the Clinical Educator training in compliance with (6) (b) (a) FS, have successfully completed the District Mentor Training Program, and, have received a recommendation from his/her administrator to serve as a Peer mentor. 7. Evaluation by Supervisor The teacher contract contains the following language regarding who can conduct the teacher evaluation: It shall be the responsibility of the administrator to assess the teacher's performance and to keep the teacher informed as to his/her assessment. The administrator has historically meant the Principal and/or Assistant Principal(s) at the school site. A record of ongoing training on the teacher evaluation system currently in use has been maintained, including updates, assessments, and re-certifications. This has ensured continued interrater reliability of the evaluation process. To ensure this level of quality evaluation continues, the Principal and the Assistant Principals who conduct formal observations, will be trained in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system through contracted services with LSI, as described in Section Input into the Evaluation by Trained Personnel other than the Supervisor 18a. The School District of Osceola County and the OCEA have determined that the administrative team at each school site who are trained in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation system will conduct summative evaluations. In addition, current contract language provides for an additional observation to be requested by the teacher: A teacher may request and shall be granted an additional observation by a trained observer mutually selected by the teacher and the administration. Said observation shall be included as an official part of the evaluation. 18b. Upon School Board approval (summer, 2011) of the Learning Sciences International and iobservation contract for training in the Marzano Teacher Evaluation, all Principals, Assistant Principals, and district-level administrators who supervise teachers, will be trained in the new teacher evaluation system. Only those who successfully complete the required training will conduct teacher observations and evaluations. 9. Amending Evaluations 17

18 The evaluator will conclude the Instructional Practice portion of the teacher evaluation, based on the schedule developed in the Professional Development department, for all Annual and Professional Services Contract instructional employees. The Student Achievement Data, which represents 50% of the teacher evaluation for all FCAT-tested grades and subjects, historically is not available prior to the end of the instructional school year. For that reason, the student achievement data that is available for inclusion in the teacher evaluation rating calculation after the school year ends, and which combines with the Instructional Practice portion of the teacher evaluation, could alter a teacher s summative rating score. In this case, the evaluator may amend a summative evaluation rating score, if it becomes available within 90 days after the close of the school year. The evaluator must send written notification of the teacher s amended evaluation to the teacher within 10 days of amending the evaluation and rating score, exercising diligence to contact the teacher. The evaluator must notify the Professional Development department in writing within 10 days of the amended evaluation and rating score, so that it may be changed in the data system to reflect the updated rating score. Eligible data are: Student achievement data from state assessments The procedures for amending the teacher evaluation will be: The LIIS will ensure the accuracy of the received data The received data will be automatically, electronically combined with the other 50% of the teacher evaluation rating score (Instructional Practice score) The resulting summative score will determine the updated rating on the five level scoring rubric. The teacher will be notified of the amended rating score within 10 days of the received data 18

19 APPENDIX I 19

20 Marzano Teacher Observation Protocol Forms 20

21 21

22 22

23 23

24 24

25 25

26 26

27 27

28 28

29 29

30 30

31 31

32 32

33 33

34 34

35 35

36 36

37 37

38 38

39 39

40 40

41 41

42 42

43 43

44 44

45 45

46 46

47 47

48 48

49 49

50 50

51 51

52 52

53 53

54 54

55 55

56 56

57 57

58 58

59 59

60 60

61 61

62 62

63 63

64 64

65 65

66 66

67 67

68 68

69 69

70 70

71 71

72 72

73 73

74 74

75 75

76 76

77 77

78 78

79 79

80 80

81 81

82 82

83 83

84 84

85 85

86 86

87 87

88 88

89 89

90 90

91 91

92 92

93 93

94 94

95 95

96 96

97 97

98 98

99 99

100 100

101 101

102 102

103 103

104 104

105 105

106 106

107 107

108 108

109 109

110 110

111 111

112 112

113 113

114 114

115 115

116 116

117 117

118 118

119 119

120 120

121 121

122 122

123 123

124 124

125 125

126 126

127 APPENDIX II SAMPLE FIRST PAGE OF ONE DOCUMENT Annual Evaluation Report for Category I Teachers: 1-3 Years of Service Instructional Practice Score Teacher: District: School: Evaluator: Current Assignment: Grade/Subject: Years of Service: School Year: This form is to serve as a permanent record of an administrator s evaluation of a teacher s performance during a specific period based on specific criteria as it relates to the teacher s instructional practice using the Art and Science of Teaching Framework. 127

128 APPENDIX III FLORIDA EDUCATOR ACCOMPLISHED PRACTICES Rule 6A is substantially rewritten to read (see Florida Administrative Code for present text): 6A The Educator Accomplished Practices. (1) Purpose and Foundational Principles. (a) Purpose. The Educator Accomplished Practices are set forth in rule as Florida s core standards for effective educators. The Accomplished Practices form the foundation for the state s teacher preparation programs, educator certification requirements and school district instructional personnel appraisal systems. (b) Foundational Principles. The Accomplished Practices are based upon and further describe three essential principles: The effective educator creates a culture of high expectations for all students by promoting the importance of education and each student s capacity for academic achievement. The effective educator demonstrates deep and comprehensive knowledge of the subject taught. The effective educator exemplifies the standards of the profession. (2) The Educator Accomplished Practices. Each effective educator applies the foundational principles through six (6) Educator Accomplished Practices. Each of the practices is clearly defined to promote a common language and statewide understanding of the expectations for the quality of instruction and professional responsibility. (a) Quality of Instruction 1. Instructional Design and Lesson Planning. Applying concepts from human development and learning theories, the effective educator consistently: a. Aligns instruction with state-adopted standards at the appropriate level of rigor; b. Sequences lessons and concepts to ensure coherence and required prior knowledge. c. Designs instruction for students to achieve mastery; d. Selects appropriate formative assessments to monitor learning; e. Uses a variety of data, independently, and in collaboration with colleagues, to evaluate learning outcomes, adjust planning and continuously improve the effectiveness of the lessons; and f. Develops learning experiences that require students to demonstrate a variety of applicable skills and competencies. 128