Educator Effectiveness SB 191 Into Action Transition Leadership

Educator Effectiveness SB 191 Into Action Transition Leadership Institute Colorado Department of Education

Together We Can Vision All students in Colorado will become educated and productive citizens capable of succeeding in a globally competitive workforce. Mission The mission of CDE is to shape, support, and safeguard a statewide education system that prepares students for success in a globally competitive world.

Globally competitive workforce Students Educators Schools/ Districts State GOALS • Ensure every student is on track to graduate postsecondary and workforce ready. • Ensure students graduate ready for success in postsecondary education and the workforce. • Increase achievement and national/international competitiveness for all students. Great teachers and leaders • Increase and support the effectiveness of all educators. • Optimize the preparation, retention, and effectiveness of new educators. • Eliminate the educator equity gap. Outstanding schools and districts • Increase school and district performance. • Foster innovation and expand access to a rich array of high quality school choices for students. Best state education agency in the nation • Develop and implement CDE’s strategic direction. • Increase customer satisfaction with CDE’s communication, services, and systems. • Attract and retain outstanding talent to CDE.

Driving Questions Students Educators Schools/ Districts What do we want students, educators, schools, and districts to know and be able to do? How will we know if expectations are met? How will we respond when help is needed and to support continued growth? Assessments • • RTI PBSI Targeted interventions IEPs Educator quality standards Educator evaluations • • Induction Mentoring Professional development plans Remediation plans Performance indicators School and district performance frameworks • Unified planning • Priority • Turnaround Colorado Academic Standards

Expanding Student Learning

What’s on Your Mind?

Purposes of S. B. 10 -191 • A system to evaluate the effectiveness of licensed personnel to improve the quality of education. • Provide meaningful feedback for professional growth and continuous improvement. • Provide a basis for making decisions in the areas of hiring, compensation, promotion, assignment, professional development, earning and retaining non-probationary status, dismissal, and nonrenewal of contract.

Critical Effects of S. B. 10 -191 • Requires statewide minimum standards for what it “effective” means to be an _____ teacher or principal • Requires that all teachers and principals be 50 % growth evaluated at least _____on the academic ______ of their students • Prohibits _____ placement of teachers forced • Makes non-probationary status ____ “portable”

Critical Effects of S. B. 10 -191 annual • Requires ______ evaluation of all teachers and principals • Changes non-probationary status from one that is service ______ based upon years of ______ to one that earned is ______ based upon three consecutive years of effectiveness demonstrated ______ • Provides that non-probationary status may be ___ based upon two consecutive years of lost ______ ineffectiveness

Priorities of Implementation • Human judgment – Data should inform decisions, but human judgment will always be a part of the process – Processes and techniques are recommended to improve individual judgment and minimize errors and bias • Embodiment of continuous improvement by monitoring – Pilot and rollout intended to capture what works and what doesn’t – Changes in assessment practices and tools – Emerging research and best practices

Priorities of Implementation • Providing credible and meaningful feedback with: – Actionable information – Opportunities for improvement – Idea that this is a process and not an event • Involves all stakeholders in a collaborative process – Families, teachers, related service providers, administration, school board, etc.

Priorities of Implementation • Takes place within a larger, aligned and supportive system – All components of the system must serve to increase the number of educators and students who are successful

Timeline of Implementation Year One 2011 -12 Year Two 2012 -13 Development Pilot and Rollout and Beta Testing • CDE ACTIVITIES • Develop State Model Systems for teachers and principals • Beta-testing of rubrics and tools • Develop technical guidelines on Prof Practices and Student Growth • Provide differentiated support for districts • Populate and launch online Resource Bank • Develop state data collection and monitoring system • Develop tools for district implementation of system (Bloomboard) • CDE ACTIVITIES • Usability study of rubrics • Support pilot districts through resources, training, tools, etc. • Convene pilot districts to share lessons learned • Analyze pilot district data and make adjustments as needed • Train ALL non-pilot districts that are using the state model • Make Recommendations on Other Licensed Personnel Year Three 201314 Pilot and Rollout • CDE ACTIVITIES • Statewide TA on rollout of teacher/principal systems • Develop evaluation system for other licensed personnel (OLP) • Support ALL districts through resources, trainings, tools, etc. • Convene pilot districts to share lessons learned • Analyze state data and make adjustments to the system as needed • Validate teacher and principal rubrics • Dev. criteria for eval training courses for approval Year Four 2014 -15 Full Statewide Implementation • CDE ACTIVITIES • Finalize statewide implementation of teacher/principal systems • Pilot OLP • Continue support to districts via resources and training • Ensure there are evaluator training courses throughout the state • Analyze data and make adjustments as needed • Make recommendations to SBE this year and all following years for CI

Table of Contents • Top 10 District Readiness Questions • Evaluation Process • Principal Quality Standards • Teacher Quality Standards • Student Academic Growth • • • District Decisions Content Collaboratives Pilot/Partner Districts Rubric Components Rubric Basics Scoring the Rubric

Top 10 District Readiness Questions • Key questions to help determine how close district systems are to the new requirements in the law – May help to guide future work or modifications needed to current system

Strategic Partnerships/ Committees CDE’s Educator Effectiveness Unit Equity Initiatives Strategic Partnerships/ Committees Recruitment Effectiveness Management Increase and support the effectiveness of all educators Talent Pipeline Attract and develop the best educators Retention Educator Preparation Vision: Effective educators for every student and effective leaders for every school Evaluation And Support Licensure Professional Dev. Hiring/ Placement Induction Policy, Metrics and Monitoring Measures of educator effectiveness and student postsecondary and workforce readiness

Contact Us • CDE Staff – Katy Anthes: Executive Director • Anthes_K@cde. state. co. us – Toby King: Director • King_T@cde. state. co. us – Mike Gradoz • Gradoz_M@cde. state. co. us – Jean Williams • Williams_J@cde. state. co. us – Britt Wilkenfeld • Wilkenfeld_B@cde. state. co. us – Dawn Pare • Pare_D@cde. state. co. us – Courtney Cabrera • Cabrera_C@cde. state. co. us – Sed Keller • Keller_S@cde. state. co. us – Bob Snead • Snead_B@cde. state. co. us – Chris Vance • Vance_C@cde. state. co. us – Tara Boertzel • Boertzel_T@cde. state. co. us – Amy Skinner • Skinner_A@cde. state. co. us – Katie Lams • Lams_K@cde. state. co. us

1. Training Educator Evaluation Cycle

STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS Framework for System to Evaluate Principals Definition of Principal Effectiveness Quality Standards I. Strategy II. Instruction III. Culture IV. Human Resources V. Management 50% Professional Practice Standards Number and Percentage Other Measures of Teachers Aligned with CDE Guidelines VI. External Development VII. Student Growth 50% Student Growth Measures Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard Count Towards Overall Performance? School Performance Other Measures Framework Aligned with CDE Guidelines Weighting: Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards Result in a Determination of Individual Performance? Performance Standards Ineffective Partially Effective Highly Effective

Principal Quality Standards • Quality Standard I: Principals demonstrategic leadership. – 4 elements • Quality Standard II: Principals demonstrate instructional leadership. – 5 elements • Quality Standard III: Principals demonstrate school culture and equity leadership. – 4 elements • Quality Standard IV: Principals demonstrate human resource leadership. – 3 elements • Quality Standard V: Principals demonstrate managerial leadership. – 6 elements • Quality Standard VI: Principals demonstrate external development leadership. – 2 elements • Quality Standard VII: Principals demonstrate leadership around student growth 7 Standards, 24 elements Note: Standard VII is NOT included as a part of determination of ratings on professional practice.

STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers Definition of Teacher Effectiveness Quality Standards I. Know Content II. Establish Environment III. Facilitate Learning 50% Professional Practice Standards Observations of Other Measures Teaching Aligned with CDE Guidelines V. Demonstrate Leadership IV. Reflect on Practice VI. Student Growth 50% Student Growth Measures Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard Count Towards Overall Performance? State Other Assessments Other Measures Summative for Non-tested Aligned Assessments Areas CDE Guidelines Match of test to teaching assignments Weighting: Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards Result in a Determination of Individual Performance? Performance Standards Ineffective Partially Effective Appeals Process Highly Effective

Teacher Quality Standards • Quality Standard I: Teachers demonstrate mastery of and pedagogical expertise in the content they teach. – 6 elements • Quality Standard II: Teachers establish a safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students. – 6 elements • Quality Standard III: Teachers plan and deliver effective instruction and create an environment that facilitates learning for their students. – 8 elements • Quality Standard IV: Teachers reflect on their practice. – 3 elements • Quality Standard V: Teachers demonstrate leadership. – 4 elements • Quality Standard VI: Teachers take responsibility for Student Academic Growth. – 2 elements 6 Standards, 29 elements Note: Standard VI is NOT included as a part of determination of ratings on professional practice.

STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS Framework for System to Evaluate Principals Definition of Principal Effectiveness Quality Standards I. Strategy II. Instruction III. Culture IV. Human Resources V. Management 50% Professional Practice Standards Number and Percentage Other Measures of Teachers Aligned with CDE Guidelines VI. External Development VII. Student Growth 50% Student Growth Measures Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard Count Towards Overall Performance? School Performance Other Measures Framework Aligned with CDE Guidelines Weighting: Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards Result in a Determination of Individual Performance? Performance Standards Ineffective Partially Effective Highly Effective

Principal Evaluations I. Strategic leadership II. Instructional leadership III. School culture/equity leadership IV. Human resource leadership V. Managerial leadership VI. External development leadership VII. Leadership around student academic growth 50% Student Professional Academic Practice Growth Measured using multiple measures on multiple occasions, including tools that capture: (1) teacher input; (2) number and percentage of teachers with each; and (3) number and percentage of teachers who are improving in their performance, in comparison to the goals articulated in the principal’s professional performance plan. Evaluated using the following: (1)data included in the school performance framework; and (2) at least one other measure of student academic growth.

STATE COUNCIL FOR EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS Framework for System to Evaluate Teachers Definition of Teacher Effectiveness Quality Standards I. Know Content II. Establish Environment III. Facilitate Learning 50% Professional Practice Standards Observations of Other Measures Teaching Aligned with CDE Guidelines V. Demonstrate Leadership IV. Reflect on Practice VI. Student Growth 50% Student Growth Measures Weighting: How Much Does Each Standard Count Towards Overall Performance? State Other Assessments Other Measures Summative for Non-tested Aligned with Assessments Areas CDE Guidelines Match of test to teaching assignments Weighting: Scoring Framework: How Do Measures of Quality Standards Result in a Determination of Individual Performance? Performance Standards Ineffective Partially Effective Appeals Process Highly Effective

Teacher Evaluations I. Mastery of content II. Establish learning environment III. Facilitate learning IV. Reflect on practice V. Demonstrate leadership VI. Responsibility for student academic growth 50% Student Professional Academic Practice Growth Measured using multiple measures on multiple occasions, including: (1) observations; and (2) at least one of the following: student perception measures, where appropriate and feasible, peer feedback, feedback from parents or guardians, or review of teacher lesson plans or student work samples. May include additional measures. Evaluated using the following: (1) a measure of individually-attributed growth, (2) a measure of collectivelyattributed growth; (3) when available, statewide summative assessment results; and (4) for subjects with statewide summative assessment results available in two consecutive grades, results from the Colorado Growth Model.

Districts decide… measures Standards I-V: use observation plus at least one other method Standard VI: select multiple measures appropriate to teaching assignment weights On each Standard I-V districts may weight priority standards more Standard VI must count for at least 50% of total score data collection procedures Standards I-V: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence Standard VI: Must occur with enough frequency to create a credible body of evidence aggregate measures Aggregate professional practice scores into a single score on Quality Standards I-V Aggregate student growth measures into a single score on Quality Standard VI District uses State Scoring Framework Matrix to determine Performance Standard

Content Collaboratives • P-12 educators from around the state are gathering to identify and create high-quality assessments, which are aligned to the new Colorado Academic Standards and may be used in the context of Educator Effectiveness evaluations. • The Content Collaboratives, CDE, along with state and national experts, will establish examples of student learning measures within each K – 12 content area including: Cohort I Dance Drama & Theatre Arts Reading, Writing and Communicating Music Social Studies Visual Arts Cohort II Physical Education Science World Languages Mathematics Comprehensive Health

Cohort I & II: Flow Chart of Work National Researchers Colorado Content Collaboratives I: Jan-Mar 2012 II: Jun-Aug 2012 I: Feb-May 2012 II: July-Nov 2012 Researchers gather existing fair, valid and reliable measures for Consideration. Collaboratives use protocol to review researchers’ measures for feasibility, utility and gaps. Technical Steering Committee I &II: Feb-Dec 2012 Technical Steering Committee creates frameworks and design principles for collaboratives to use in reviewing and creating measures. Prepare to fill gaps. Provide recommendations to Technical Steering Committee reviews recommendations of collaboratives. Pilot then peer review I & II: Aug 2012 Aug 2014 Piloting and peer review of measures. Aug 2012 -Aug 2013: Cohort I piloting & peer review January 2013 -Aug 2014: Cohort II piloting & peer review Bank Future Work I: Aug 2013 II: Aug 2014 Measures placed in online Education Effectiveness Resource Bank for voluntary use.

Collaborating Districts Pilot Partner Integration • Testing elements of • Working with already • Implementing all of the state’s new model developed local the following: evaluation system performance • Colorado • Representative of the evaluation system Academic various sizes, student • Provide valuable Standards and demographics and information on the aligned geographic process for aligning instructional differences across existing evaluation materials Colorado systems to the rules • Professional • Provide valuable developed by the development feedback on the State Board of • Annual quality of the model Education performance system evaluations Working in collaboration with the Colorado Legacy Foundation

Collaborating Districts CDE Pilot CLF Integration Piloting the State Model System 1 Moffat RE-1 Centennial 2 South Routt Archuleta 3 St. Vrain Bayfield 4 Jefferson Dolores RE-2 5 Sterling Dolores RE-4 6 Wray Durango 7 Platte Canyon 8 Miami-Yoder 9 Eads (Sometimes communicated as Kiowa) 10 Crowley San Juan Boces • PILOT SITES: These districts will pilot the state model evaluation system starting with the Principal Evaluation protocols during the 2011 -12 school year. 11 Custer Thompson 12 Salida Eagle 13 Mountain Valley 14 Center 15 Del-Norte Ignacio Mancos Montezuma Cortez Silverton

Teacher Quality Standards Elements of the Standard Performance Rating Levels Professional Practice is Observable Elements of the Standard Professional Practice is Not Observable Teacher User’s Guide, Page 25

Examples of Artifacts Standard Rating Scale Evaluator Comments Teacher User’s Guide, Page 25 Evidence Provided by Artifacts Summary of Ratings for the Standard Teacher’s Response to Evaluation

Quality Standard III: Teachers plan and deliver effective instruction and create an environment that facilitates learning for their students. Not Evident Partially Proficient (Meets State Standard) Accomplished Exemplary Element b: Teachers plan and consistently deliver instruction that draws on results of student assessments, is aligned to academic standards, and advances students’ level of content knowledge and skills. There is inadequate evidence that the Teacher: . . and The Teacher: Students: The Teacher: OInstructs and assesses required Uses assessment feedback to skills OMonitors instruction OMonitor their level of against student performance engagement. OAdvances students’ content and makes real-time o. Has explicit student outcomes knowledge and skills. adjustments. OConfer with the Teacher to in mind for each lesson. achieve learning targets. OAligns instruction with academic standards and student assessment OEncourages students to results. take academic risks. . OMakes sure students meet learning objectives while increasing proficiency levels. guide adjustments to instruction. Not evident. This describes practices of a teacher who does not meet state performance standards and is not making progress toward meeting them. The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what teachers do on a day to day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels. Teacher User’s Guide, Page 26 Strive to: OAddress their learning needs. Close gaps between their level of performance and that of other students. o. Take academic risks. The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the impact of the teacher’s practices on student outcomes.

State Model Rubric Basics • Cumulative in content • Each level of the rubric represents an increase in the quality, intensity, consistently, breadth, depth, and complexity of practice • Effectiveness marked by the addition of practices that improve the overall performance of the educator and drives to student outcomes • Standards based – Outlines the practices that you must meet to be at standard

Scoring the Rubric Determining the teacher’s professional practices rating is a three-step process that involves rating the individual elements and standards and using those to determine the overall rating on professional practices. 1. Rating the Elements 2. Rating the Standards 3. Determining the Overall Professional Practices Rating

Look for the first unchecked box. Move one column back* to identify the rating for the element. *Note: if there any boxes checked on the right side of the red line, the lowest rating is Partially Proficient

Look for the first unchecked box. Move one column back* to identify the rating for the element. *Note: if there any boxes checked on the right side of the red line, the lowest rating is Partially Proficient

Look for the first unchecked box. Move one column back* to identify the rating for the element. *Note: if there any boxes checked on the right side of the red line, the lowest rating is Partially Proficient

Look for the first unchecked box. Move one column back* to identify the rating for the element. *Note: if there any boxes checked on the right side of the red line, the lowest rating is Partially Proficient

Look for the first unchecked box. Move one column back* to identify the rating for the element. *Note: if there any boxes checked on the right side of the red line, the lowest rating is Partially Proficient

Look for the first unchecked box. Move one column back* to identify the rating for the element. *Note: if there any boxes checked on the right side of the red line, the lowest rating is Partially Proficient

Rubric Rating Levels Standard Not Evident Partially Proficient Professional Practices Accomplished Exemplary Element Professional Practices 0 Does not meet state standard and is not making progress toward meeting standard. 1 Does not meet state standard but is making progress toward meeting standard. 2 Meets state standard. Professional Practices 3 Exceeds state standard. Professional Practices 4 Significantly exceeds state standard.

Quality Standard I: Teachers demonstrate mastery of and pedagogical expertise in the content they teach. The elementary Teacher is an expert in literacy and mathematics and is knowledgeable in all other content that he or she teaches (e. g. , science, social studies, arts, physical education, or world languages). The secondary Teacher has knowledge of literacy and mathematics and is an expert in his or her content endorsement area(s). Performance Rating Level: NE PP P A Ex Total (Number of Points) (0) (1) (2) (3) (4) Points a. Provides instruction aligned with the CO Academic Standards; the District’s organized plan of instruction; and the individual needs of students. 2 ♦ b. Demonstrates knowledge of student literacy development in reading, writing, speaking and listening. c. Demonstrate knowledge of mathematics and understands how to promote student development in numbers and operations, algebra, geometry and measurement, and data analysis and probability. d. Demonstrates knowledge of the content, central concepts, tools of inquiry, appropriate evidence based instructional practices and specialized character of the disciplines being taught. e. Develops lessons that reflect the interconnectedness of content areas/disciplines. f/. Makes instruction and content relevant to students and takes actions to connect students’ background and contextual knowledge with new information being taught. ♦ 1 ♦ 2 ♦ ♦ 3 2 ♦ Total Points Determining the Overall Standard Rating: 0 to 5 points = Not Evident 6 to 10 points = Partially Proficient 11 to 15 points = Proficient 16 to 20 points = Accomplished 21 to 24 points = Exemplary 3 Overall Rating for Standard I: Proficient 13