Educator Evaluation Overview Office of Educational Assessment and

Educator Evaluation Overview Office of Educational Assessment and Accountability 1

Legislation Michigan School Reform Law Districts are required to conduct annual educator evaluations that include student growth as a significant factor. 2

Legislation State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) Districts are required to report the effectiveness label generated by these evaluations. 3

What are districts REQUIRED to do? Michigan School Reform Law ØConduct annual educator evaluations. ØInclude measures of student growth as a significant factor. 4

What are districts REQUIRED to do? Ø Locally determine the details of the educator evaluations, the consequences, and the timeline for implementation. 5

What are districts REQUIRED to do? Ø Tie educator effectiveness labels to decisions regarding promotion and retention of teachers and administrators, including tenure and certification decisions. 6

What are districts REQUIRED to do? Ø Use a performance-based compensation method that evaluates performance based, at least in part, on student growth data. 7

What are districts REQUIRED to do? Ø Growth data can include state-provided measures from assessment data AND locally determined measures. 8

What are districts REQUIRED to do? State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) Ø Report an effectiveness label in the Registry of Educational Personnel (REP) during the end of year submission. 9

What are districts REQUIRED to do? ü 2011: Principals only (based on most recent evaluation) ü 2012: All educators (based on annual evaluations) 10

What are districts ENCOURAGED to do? Ø Use the Framework for Educator Evaluations as a model for educator evaluations. 11

What are districts ENCOURAGED to do? Ø Identify ways to measure student growth and progress toward proficiency using internal measures and local data. 12

What are districts ENCOURAGED to do? Ø Include data from multiple sources as measures of educator effectiveness whenever possible. 13

What are districts ENCOURAGED to do? Ø Collaborate to identify best practices for evaluation methods, metrics in currently non-assessed content areas and grades, and key data sources. 14

MDE is REQUIRED to: Ø Link student data with teacher of record beginning in 2010 -11 (CEPI/MDE). ü Districts will report “teacher of record” for each course a student takes; local decision. 15

MDE is REQUIRED to: Ø Provide districts and schools with measures of student growth on state-assessments in reading and mathematics for each teacher (regardless of subject taught). 16

MDE is REQUIRED to: Ø Provide districts with measures of student proficiency in writing, science and social studies, and reading and mathematics for each teacher (regardless of subject taught) 17

State-Provided Measures For each educator, we will generate: ü Student growth o Reading o Math 18

State-Provided Measures ü Percentage o o of proficient students Reading Math Writing Science Social Science 19

Growth Data Ø Achievement “growth” can be calculated only where a Grade 3 -8 student has been tested in consecutive years (i. e. reading and Math). 20

Growth Data 21

State-Provided Measures “Puzzle pieces” approach Ø Districts choose which “pieces” make sense in their local context. Ø Reports are generated for each educator, regardless of subject taught or type of position. Ø 22

MDE is REQUIRED to: Ø Report (with CEPI) the proportion of educators rated as highly effective, and ineffective (SFSF/ARRA) 23

MDE is REQUIRED to: Ø Report (with CEPI) the factors used in educator evaluations and the proportion of evaluations which include student growth as significant factor. 24

Statewide Flow of Information: Educator Evaluations Districts provide information on student courses and 1 teacher of record (Teacher Student Data Link) 2 25

Statewide Flow of Information: Educator Evaluations 2 MDE attaches assessment data (proficiency and growth) from each student in each teacher’s courses to that teacher and provides to districts 3 26

Statewide Flow of Information: Educator Evaluations Districts use assessment data, local measures of growth and other factors to conduct annual evaluations. The results of evaluations are reported back to the state. 3 4 27

Statewide Flow of Information: Educator Evaluations MDE provides aggregate reports to the federal government on the percent of educators in each 4 effectiveness category 28

Assessment Data Provided Ø MDE will provide for each teacher: ü Student growth o Reading o Math 29

Assessment Data Provided ü Percent of students o Reading o Math o Writing o Science o Social Science proficient 30

Draft Data Provided to District for Use in Evaluations 31

Aggregate Report by Teacher 32

Student Roster for Each Teacher 33

Final Step: Evaluations Ø Districts conduct annual evaluations that are: ü locally determined 34

Effectiveness Labels in REP Ø Districts determine educators’ local ratings based on evaluations. 35

Effectiveness Labels in REP Ø Districts crosswalk local ratings to: ü ü Framework for Educator Evaluation labels OR SFSF Effectiveness Labels 36

Ø Labels: Framework for Educator Evaluation suggests four labels: ü Exceeds Goals ü Meets Goals ü Progressing Toward Goals ü Does Not Meet Goals 37

Framework Labels SFSF Labels Exceeds goals Highly effective Meets goals OR Progressing toward goals Effective Does not meet goals Ineffective 38

MDE Support for Evaluations Ø Ø Ø Guidance and evaluation “toolbox” Inventory of current practices Collaboration with external stakeholders 39

MDE Support for Evaluations Ø Referent groups focused on: ü Evaluating non-assessed grades/ content areas. ü Use in “value-added models. ” 40

Timeline Ø End of year 2011: ü Teacher Student Data Link Collection available in MSDS. 41

Timeline Ø End of year 2011 (continued): ü Principal effectiveness ratings must be reported in REP. ü Other administrators encouraged, but optional until 2012. 42

Timeline Ø Early fall 2011: ü MDE will provide districts with measures for all educators based on data from the 2009 -10 & 201011 school years. 43

Timeline Ø Fall 2011 – Spring 2012: ü Districts conduct educator evaluations as locally bargained/determined. 44

Timeline Ø End of year 2012: ü Districts report effectiveness ratings for all administrators and teachers. 45

Contact Information Carla Howe Olivares Evaluation Research & Accountability Office of Educational Assessment & Accountability MDE-Accountability@michigan. gov 877 -560 -8378, choose option 6