SVVSD Educator Effectiveness Orientation Licensed Staff Evaluation Model

SVVSD Educator Effectiveness Orientation Licensed Staff Evaluation Model 2014 -2015

Evaluation System Resources • CDE Educator Effectiveness Website http: //www. cde. state. co. us/Educator. Effectiveness • CDE Evaluation System User Guide http: //www. cde. state. co. us/sites/default/files/Ed_Eval_User_ Guide_LP 11_07_Links_REV 121213. pdf • SVVSD-SVVEA Agreement 2014 -2016 http: //www. svvsd. org/files/SVVSD-SVVEA%20 Agreement. pdf • Bloom. Board Online Evaluation Management System https: //apps. bloomboard. com/users/login • SVVSD Teacher Evaluation Information 2014 -15 http: //www. svvsd. org/about/departments/humanresources/teacher-evaluation-information-2014 -2015

SB 10 -191 – Overview Educator Effectiveness • System to evaluate the effectiveness of licensed personnel is crucial to improving the quality of education in Colorado. • Evaluation provides basis for making decisions… – Hiring, assignment, professional development, earning and retaining nonprobationary status, and nonrenewal of contract • Evaluation is based on the impact teachers have on the growth of their students • Non-probationary status earned after three consecutive years of demonstrated effectiveness • Non-probationary status is lost after two consecutive years of less than effective final ratings

Five Key Priorities 1. Data should inform decision & human judgment is essential 2. The system embodies continuous improvement 3. Provide meaningful & credible feedback to improve performance 4. Stakeholder involvement & collaboration 5. Educator evaluation is part of a larger system that is aligned & supportive

Teacher Evaluation System Evaluated using: • Observations; and • At least one of the following: student perception measures, peer feedback, parent/guardian feedback, or review of lesson plans/student work samples. May include additional measures. Quality Standards I-V: I. Mastery of content II. Establish learning environment III. Facilitate learning IV. Reflect on practice V. Demonstrate leadership Evaluated using: • A measure of individuallyattributed growth • A measure of collectivelyattributed growth • When available, statewide summative assessments • Where applicable, Colorado Growth Model data. Professional Practices 50% (designed by State) Measures of Student Learning 50% (designed locally by District) Quality Standard VI: VI. Responsibility for student academic growth

Annual Evaluation Cycle • Aligned with Article 6 of the SVVSD-SVVEA Agreement • Regular conversations between the evaluator and teacher being evaluated – not a one-time event or observation • The cycle includes, but is not limited to: annual orientation & training to the system/tools educator self-assessment establish measures of student learning & professional growth goals mid-year review initial end of the year review with professional practices ratings and employment recommendation – final end of the year review & measures of student learning ratings and final overall rating – goal-setting for the next school year – – –

Evaluation Component Step 1 – Orientation & Training Step 2 – Self Assessment Step 3 – Measures of Student Learning (MSLs) & Professional Growth Goals Step 4 – Walk-throughs & Observations Timeline Action By September 10 • assigned evaluator/administrator meeting with the teachers being evaluated • explain the supervision and evaluation process • review of the required steps, timeline for completion and an overview of the online management system • copy of the specific rubric • data collection sources identified • guidance on the development and recording of individual Measures of Student Learning (MSLs) • attendance and participation at this meeting will be documented By September 15 • licensed staff member completes self-assessment using on-line management system By October 15 • licensed staff member submits proposed MSLs & Professional Growth Goals to evaluator By October 31 • evaluator reviews & approves proposed MSLs & Professional Growth Plan; or, • meets with licensed staff member to revise and approve MSLs & Professional Growth Plan On-going • on-going data collection including artifacts & multiple data sources through formal and informal observations • on-going conversations between evaluator and licensed staff being evaluated • formal observations – at least 20 minutes with notice and followup documentation and face-to-face conference (one required for non-probationary staff & two required for probationary staff with one required prior to mid-year review) • informal observations/walk-throughs – focused classroom visits for brief periods of time supported by follow-up documentation (optional)

Evaluation Component Step 5 – Mid Year Review Step 6 – Walk-throughs & Observations Step 7 – Initial End of Year Review & Report Step 8 – Final End of Year Review & Report Timeline Action By January 31 • evaluator & licensed staff member meeting • provide evidence/artifacts of progress towards professional growth goals and the individual classroom growth Measures of Student Learning (MSLs) • share & discuss any evaluator concerns and specific suggestions for improvement • current performance overview & copy of the mid-year ratings on the professional practices rubric On-going • on-going data collection including artifacts & multiple data sources through formal and informal observations • on-going conversations between evaluator and licensed staff being evaluated • formal observations – at least 20 minutes with notice and followup documentation and face-to-face conference (one required for non-probationary staff prior to mid-year review & two required for probationary staff with one required prior to and one required after mid-year review) • informal observations/walk-throughs – focused classroom visits for brief periods of time supported by follow-up documentation (optional) By April 20 • copy of the final ratings on the professional practices rubric • summary of strengths, weaknesses & professional growth recommendations • dates of at least two classroom observations • employment recommendation • signatures • licensed staff member response, if any By May 15 • copy of the final ratings on the Measures of Student Learning (MSLs) • final evaluation report including professional practice & MSLs ratings and final overall rating • copy of initial End of Year Review Report • signatures • licensed staff member response, if any

Professional Practices – 50% • Evaluated using (data collected throughout cycle): – Observations; and – At least one of the following: student perception measures, peer feedback, parent/guardian feedback, or review of lesson plans/student work samples. May include additional measures. • Quality Standards I-V (measured against rubric*): I. Mastery of content II. Establish learning environment III. Facilitate learning IV. Reflect on practice V. Demonstrate leadership • Tier 1 Best Practices Alignment – Tier 1 Instruction Best Practices aligned with Educator Effectiveness Teacher Evaluation Rubric * All evaluation rubrics are available for download at the CDE Educator Effectiveness website at: http: //www. cde. state. co. us/educatoreffectiveness/statemodelevaluationsystem

Rubric Structure and Rating Levels Quality Standard 1 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). Basic Partially Proficient (Meets State Standard) Accomplished Exemplary Element A: The teachers provide instruction that is aligned with the Colorado Academic Standards; their district’s organized plan of instruction; and the individual needs of their students. THE TEACHER uses lesson plans that reflect: O Opportunities to review prior learning. O Instructional objectives appropriate for students. O Connections to specific learning objectives and approved curriculum. …and implements lesson plans based on: O Student needs. O Colorado Academic Standards. O District’s plan of instruction. q Collaborates with other school staff to vertically and horizontally align, articulate and deliver the approved curriculum. O Interact with the rigorous and challenging content. O Perform at a level consistent with or above expectations. O Discuss strengths and next steps regarding their learning wit their teacher(s). THE TEACHER: STUDENTS: O Professional Practice is Observable during a classroom observation. q Professional Practice is Not Observable during a classroom observation. The focus of the Basic rating level is the educator whose performance does not meet state performance standards and who is not achieving at expected levels. The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what educators do on a day-to-day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels. The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the outcomes of the educator’s practices, including expectations for staff, students, parents and community members, as a result of practices exhibited under rating levels 2 and 3.

Rating Rule for Individual Elements Quality Standard 1 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). Basic Partially Proficient Accomplished (Meets State Standard) Exemplary Element A: The teachers provide instruction that is aligned with the Colorado Academic Standards; their district’s organized plan of instruction; and the individual needs of their students. THE TEACHER uses lesson plans that reflect: 4 O Opportunities to review prior learning. O 4 Instructional objectives appropriate for students. O 4 Connections to specific learning objectives and approved curriculum. …and THE TEACHER implements lesson plans based on: 4 O Student needs. 4 O Colorado Academic Standards. O 4 District’s plan of instruction. …and THE TEACHER: 4 q Collaborates with other school staff to vertically and horizontally align, articulate and deliver the approved curriculum. …and O Interact with the rigorous and challenging content. O 4 Perform at a level consistent with or above expectations. O Discuss strengths and next steps regarding their learning wit their teacher(s). STUDENTS: O Professional Practice is Observable during a classroom observation. q Professional Practice is Not Observable during a classroom observation. Look for the first unchecked Professional Practice. Move one column back to identify the rating for the element. STUDENTS:

Rubric Rating Levels Standard Partially Proficient Accomplished Exemplary Professional Practices Professional Practices 0 1 2 3 4 Basic Element Educator’s performance on professional practices is significantly below the state performance standard. Educator’s performance on professional practices is below the state performance standard. Educator meets state performance standard. Educator exceeds state standard. Educator significantly exceeds state standard.

Scoring Individual Standards Ratings B (Number of points per rating at this level) (0) PP (1) P (2) A (3) E (4) Total Points Quality Standard I ELEMENT A: Teachers provide instruction that is aligned with the Colorado Academic Standards; their district’s organized plan of instruction; and the individual needs of their students. X ELEMENT B: Teachers demonstrate knowledge of student literacy development in reading, writing, speaking and listening. ELEMENT C: Teachers demonstrate knowledge of mathematics and understand how to promote student development in numbers and operations, algebra, geometry and measurement and data analysis and probability. ELEMENT D: Teachers demonstrate knowledge of the content, central concepts, tools of inquiry, appropriate evidence-based instructional practices and specialized character of the disciplines being taught. X X X 2 X X Total Points for Standard I 0 to 4 Total Points = Basic 5 to 9 Total Points = Partially Proficient 10 to 14 Total Points = Proficient 15 to 19 Total Points = Accomplished 20 to 24 Total Points = Exemplary 3 1 ELEMENT E: Teachers develop lessons that reflect the interconnectedness of content areas/disciplines. ELEMENT F: Teachers make instruction and content relevant to students and take actions to connect students’ background and contextual knowledge with new information being taught. 2 3 2 13 Overall Rating for Standard 1 Proficient Evaluator Comments: (Required for all Ratings of “Basic” or Partially Proficient” and recommended for all rating levels. ) Please indicate the Element for which the comments apply if not for the Standard as a whole.

Converting Standards Ratings B (0) (Number of points per rating at this level) PP (1) P (2) A (3) E (4) Total Points Quality Standard I ELEMENT A: Teachers provide instruction that is aligned with the Colorado Academic Standards; their district’s organized plan of instruction; and the individual needs of their students. X X ELEMENT B: Teachers demonstrate knowledge of student literacy development in reading, writing, speaking and listening. ELEMENT C: Teachers demonstrate knowledge of mathematics and understand how to promote student development in numbers and operations, algebra, geometry and measurement and data analysis and probability. 2 3 X 1 ELEMENT D: Teachers demonstrate knowledge of the content, central concepts, tools of inquiry, appropriate evidence-based instructional practices and specialized character of the disciplines being taught. X 2 X ELEMENT E: Teachers develop lessons that reflect the interconnectedness of content areas/disciplines. ELEMENT F: Teachers make instruction and content relevant to students and take actions to connect students’ background and contextual knowledge with new information being taught. 3 X 2 Total Points for Standard I Determining Converted Score for Individual Standard: 1. 108 Total Points available for Standard 4 Points per Element X 6 Elements 2. Multiply Result of Step 1 by Total Points Earned for Standard 3. Result is the Converted Score for the Individual Standard. Overall Standard Rating: Proficient 108 / 24 = 4. 5 x 13 = 58. 5 Converted Score for Standard: 58. 5 13

Calculating Overall Professional Practices Score & Rating Standard Total Points Earned Rating I. Mastery of and pedagogical expertise in the content they teach. 58. 5 Proficient II. Safe, inclusive and respectful learning environment for a diverse population of students. 79. 5 Accomplished III. Effective Instruction and an Environment that Facilitates Learning 72 Accomplished IV. Reflection on Practice 42 Partially Proficient V. Leadership 47. 75 Proficient Total Points for All Standards 299. 75 Translating the Total Points for All Standards to Overall Professional Practices Rating Total Number of Points Received Rating for Points Received 0 to 108 Basic 109 to 216 Partially Proficient 217 to 324 Proficient 325 to 432 Accomplished 433 to 540 Exemplary Example: Total Number of Points Received: 299. 75 Overall Professional Practices Rating: Proficient

Measures of Student Learning – 50% • Evaluated using (data collected from multiple sources): – – A measure of individually-attributed growth A measure of collectively-attributed growth When available, statewide summative assessments Where applicable, Colorado Growth Model data. • Quality Standard VI: VI. Responsibility for student academic growth • Using multiple measures to determine student learning over time. • Locally Designed Model – Collective Measures (20% of total evaluation) – Individual Growth Measures (20% of total evaluation) – TCAP Growth (10% of total evaluation)

Measures of Student Learning • Using multiple measures to determine student learning over time. • To set outcome targets and scales based on data from the selected measures. • Combine the results of multiple measures to get a single measures of student learning rating.

Measures of Student Learning Collective Growth & Achievement = 20% Professional Practice Standards = 50% TCAP Growth = 10% TCAP Growth 1. 2. Individual Classroom Growth = 20% TCAP Teachers will use all their TCAP Growth Scores Non-TCAP Teachers & SSPs: The school chooses a TCAP growth focus area from the UIP (1 -2 Subject Areas) Collective Growth & Achievement School Performance Framework (SPF) 50% Student Learning Outcomes Evaluated using: • A measure of individuallyattributed growth • A measure of collectivelyattributed growth • When available, statewide summative assessments • Where applicable, Colorado Growth Model data. Individual Classroom Growth Licensed staff members & evaluators work collaboratively to design the Assessment Plan, which supports the SPF and District Goals (TCAP Growth or Achievement, Galileo, DRA 2, GOLD, SRI, ACT, PALS, Writing Rubrics, Portfolios, Pre/Post Unit Tests in all content areas, Leadership Team Performance Tasks in all content areas, AIMS Web, ACCESS, Attendance Rates, Assessments from the CDE Resource Bank)

MSLs Rating Levels & Rubric Scores Standard VI – Multiple Measures of Student Learning Much Lower than Higher than Expected Student Learning Rubric Score 0 1 2 3 Learning outcomes are significantly below expectation and do not meet the target(s) set on the established scale. Learning outcomes are at the expected level(s) and meet the target(s) set on the established scale. Learning outcomes are significantly higher than the expected level(s) and exceed the target(s) set on the established scale.

Scoring Individual MSLs School Performance Framework (SPF) Collective Measure Building SPF Total Score District-wide Scale: (percent out of 100%) Much Lower than Expected Student Learning = 0% to 24% Lower than Expected Student Learning = 25% to 49% Expected Student Learning = 50% to 74% Higher than Expected Student Learning = 75% to 100% Rating for MSL Expected ML (0) Weight 40% Previous School Year Score 72 L (1) E (2) HE (3) X Total Points for MSL Points Earned 2 2

Scoring Individual MSLs TCAP Growth Score Weight 20% Individual TCAP Growth Score(s)/Building or Department TCAP Focus Area(s) from UIP Previous School Year Combined Score 68 District-wide Scale: (percentile score) L Individual or Collective Measure Much Lower than Expected Student Learning = 0 to 29 percentile Lower than Expected Student Learning = 30 to 44 percentile Expected Student Learning = 45 to 59 percentile Higher than Expected Student Learning = 60 to 99 percentile Rating for MSL Higher than Expected HE (3) Points Earned X 3 Total Points for MSL 3 ML (0) (1) E (2)

Scoring Individual MSLs Individual Classroom Growth Weight Individual Measure Individual Classroom Growth Measure(s) (established cooperatively between licensed staff member & evaluator) District-wide Scale: (established by licensed staff member & evaluator) Much Lower than Expected Student Learning = <to be established> Higher than Expected Student Learning = <to be established> Rating for MSL Expected ML (0) 40% Previous School Year Combined Score L (1) E (2) HE (3) X Total Points for MSL Points Earned 2 2

Calculating Overall MSLs Rating Measures of Student Learning (MSLs) Total Points Earned Weighted Score Rating School Performance Framework (SPF) 2 40% 0. 8 Expected TCAP Growth Score 3 20% 0. 6 Higher than Expected Individual Classroom Growth 2 40% 0. 8 Expected 100% 2. 2 Expected Total for All Standards Overall MSLs Rating Scale: Total Weighted Score 0. 0 to 0. 49 = Much Lower than Expected Total Weighted Score 0. 5 to 1. 49 = Lower than Expected Total Weighted Score 1. 5 to 2. 49 = Expected Total Weighted Score 2. 5 to 3. 0 = Higher than Expected

Converting Overall MSLs Rating Measures of Student Learning (MSLs) Total Points Earned Weighted Score Rating School Performance Framework (SPF) 2 40% 0. 8 Expected TCAP Growth Score 3 20% 0. 6 Higher than Expected Individual Classroom Growth 2 40% 0. 8 Expected 100% 2. 2 Expected Total for All Standards Formulas for Converting Total Weighted Score to 540 Point Scale: Overall MSLs Rating of Much Lower than Expected - (Weighted Score – 0. 0) x 270 = Total MSL Points Overall MSLs Rating of Lower than Expected - (Weighted Score – 0. 5) x 135 + 135 = Total MSL Points Overall MSLs Rating of Expected - (Weighted Score – 1. 5) x 135 + 270 = Total MSL Points Overall MSLs Rating of Higher than Expected - (Weighted Score – 2. 5) x 270 + 405 = Total MSL Points Example: Step 1: 2. 2 – 1. 5 = 0. 7 Step 2: 0. 7 x 135 = 94. 5 Step 3: 94. 5 + 270 = 364. 5 Total Converted Points: 365 NOTE: CDE rule is to round to the next higher whole number

Teacher Evaluation Ratings Decision Framework Professional Practices Exemplary Accomplished Proficient Partially Proficient Basic Measures of Student Learning Overall Rating Higher than Expected Growth Highly Effective Expected Growth Effective Lower than Expected Growth Partially Effective Much Lower than Expected Growth Ineffective

Combining Professional Practice & Measures of Student Learning Ratings 540 Professional Practices Exemplary (433 to 540 pts) Hi gh ly 73 Ef 0 - fe 10 ct Ef 80 ive f e 48 ct 7 - ive 72 9 Accomplished (325 to 432 pts) Pa Proficient (217 to 324 pts) 0 Partially Proficient (109 to 216 pts) Basic (0 to 108 pts) In rt ia lly 24 E 4 - ffe 48 ct iv 6 ef f 0 - ect 24 iv 3 e Much Lower Than Expected Growth (0 to 134 pts) 0 Lower Than Expected Growth (135 to 269 pts) 540 e Expected Growth (270 to 404 pts) Measures of Student Learning Higher Than Expected Growth (405 to 540 pts)

Bloom. Board Online Evaluation Management System • The District has decided to continue with the Bloom. Board online evaluation management system for the 2014 -15 school year. • It will be required that all of our evaluators and participating licensed staff use this system. • This system is being revised based on feedback from our first year. • Our evaluation process is aligned with the Bloom. Board system, which is also aligned with the Colorado State Model Evaluation System. • Rubrics, scoring formulas & overall rating calculations are built into the system.

Rubric Assignments Teacher Rubrics Elementary Teachers: • • Elementary ELA Elementary Math Elementary ELA & Math Elementary Other Secondary Teacher Rubrics: • Secondary ELA • Secondary Math • Secondary ELA & Math • Secondary Other Specialized Service Provider Rubrics • • • Audiologist Psychologist School Nurse Physical Therapist Occupational Therapist School Counselor Social Worker Speech Language Pathologist Orientation & Mobility Specialist NOTE: TOSAs (Coordinators, Deans, etc. ) are exempted unless an available rubric is identified as appropriate as determined by the District Copies of Rubrics are available for download at the CDE Educator Effectiveness Website: http: //www. cde. state. co. us/educatoreffectiveness/statemodelevaluationsystem

Following the completion of the Self. Assessment & by October 15, Licensed Staff Member will develop & submit to Evaluator proposed Measures of Student Learning (MSLs) using Bloom. Board. Evaluators will review & approve proposed MSLs or meet with Licensed Staff Member to revise & approve MSLs by October 31 using Bloom. Board. Scheduled in Bloom. Board for all assigned Learners by Evaluator for September 15. Required action in Bloom. Board & completed by Licensed Staff Member by September 15. Scheduled for all assigned Learners by Evaluator for January 31. Required action by Licensed Staff Member with completion by September 15. Scheduled in Bloom. Board for all assigned Learners by Evaluator for May 15. Initial End of Year Review Report completed by Evaluator & shared with Licensed Staff Member by April 20 & Final End of Year Evaluation Report completed by Evaluator & shared with Licensed Staff Member by May 15.

Required activity for evaluation process - optional use of Bloom. Board. Scheduled by Evaluator one time for the evaluation cycle - optional use of Bloom. Board.

Bloom. Board Login URL https: //apps. bloomboard. com/users/login

Questions / Discussion