PERA Whats happening What should be happening The

PERA – What’s happening? What should be happening? The basics of how to approach PERA as an Association leader

Session Goals • To put PERA into a context that makes it easier to understand act upon • To share important actions for this stage of the game • To share resources to inform and guide your continuing to work with PERA implementation

Context • Status of teacher evaluation (Widget Effect) • Research on what constitutes good professional practice (Danielson) • Politics – RTTT… (Pressure for $$$ and Accountability) • IEA involvement in three decades of reform activities (CEC/TURN – Activities of member districts) • PERA and SB 7 are born after long incubation

What does PERA do really? • It requires districts to define what constitutes levels of professional practice (adopt Danielson or something similar) • It requires that evaluators use that definition and descriptors to the yardstick for evaluation of performance. • It is grounded in evidence (evaluators are required to be trained – use of objective evidence is at the heart of that training) • It requires that districts, union and administration, build a system for incorporating student growth into teacher evaluations (PERA Joint Committee created and empowered by law)

Danielson (Degrees of Specificity) Domains Components Elements Evidence

Recommended actions • Engage both administration and your members regarding evaluation and PERA Implementation • Bargain around evaluation processes • Make sure that the PERA committee is prepared to work out student growth component and perhaps more • Familiarize yourself with available resources and gain commitment to collaborate

Engagement • Make sure members know how the Framework is supposed to be used • Encourage members to own the process – it should not be seen as something being done to them • Insist upon use of evidence when talking about professional practice • Introduce administration to Illinois Teacher Evaluation Development (ITED) – Attempt get them to agree to use it as a guide

Bargaining Let’s just follow the law – • Broad latitude under the law for Districts (union and management) to craft an evaluation system • PERA sets parameters and requirements, established some non-negotiable elements, but leaves lots of discretion up to the district • Two districts doing very different things could both be following the law • One of the very important things that PERA has not changed – but perhaps has blurred a bit, is bargaining around evaluation is the line between mandatory and permissive subjects of bargaining are defined as they have been.

Standards for Bargaining Teacher Evaluations Since 1993 • Procedural issues = mandatory subjects of bargaining • Substantive issues = permissive subjects of bargaining • Impact of substantive/procedural issues = mandatory

So What Does that Mean? • Procedure = mechanics of evaluation process • Substance = standards of work by which teacher performance is judged

Mandatory subjects A sampling: • • • Existence, #, timing of formative evaluations Existence, #, timing of informal observations # of summative evaluations > minimum, & timing Existence, length, timing of post-formal observation conference Videotaping observations Length(s) of PDP # observations during PDPs for non-tenured Earlier PERA implementation date

Permissive Subjects A sampling: • Who evaluates • BU members to do peer evaluations • Instructional framework for assessing teacher practice, i. e, Danielson, etc. • Rubric, criteria used in rating teacher practice • How overall performance rating determined • Application of grievance procedure to substantive evaluation • Expanded role of joint PERA committee • Role of joint PERA committee after new process implemented

PERA Committee & Substantive issues • Authority over data and indicators of student growth such as: • Weight of student growth in the overall teacher evaluation • Types of assessments to be used (Type 1, 2, or 3) • How progress on assessments will be measured analyzed

PERA COMMITTEE & SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES • Authority over data and indicators of student growth such as: • Weight each assessment has in determining overall student growth part of evaluation • Identify student growth expectations against which teacher’s student growth assessed • How student characteristics will be factored in

PERA COMMITTEE & Substantive Issues • Authority over data and indicators of student growth, but: • If no agreement, default to the state model • These topics are permissive subjects before PERA implementation.

PERA COMMITTEE & Substantive Issues • The mechanics of the interaction between the bargaining team, the PERA committee, and a standing evaluation committee will develop as more locals and districts implement.

Abundant Resources Available • Illinois Teacher Evaluation and Development (ITED) http: //ited. cecillinois. org/ • ISBE & PEAC http: //www. isbe. net/ http: //www. isbe. state. il. us/PEAC/default. htm • CEC http: //cecillinois. org/ • Growth Through Learning http: //www. growththroughlearningillinois. org/