Delaware’s Performance Evaluation System II for School Administrators Jackie O. Wilson, Ed.D. Interim Director Delaware Academy for School Leadership College.

Delaware’s Performance Evaluation System II for School Administrators

Jackie O. Wilson, Ed.D.Interim Director

Delaware Academy for School LeadershipCollege of Education and Human Development

University of Delaware

2

DPAS II for AdministratorsBackground

• Components of SB260–Strong focus on student

improvement–One element specifically

dedicated to student improvement (weighted equally with the others)


Practitioner-Based Committee• 5 principals• 5 central office staff• 1 representative from higher education • 1 Delaware Association for School Administrators• 1 representative from the Department of Education • teacher• consultant


Committee Work

–year long deliberation–review of research & existing models–outside expert-

–Dr. Joseph Murphy

DPAS II for AdministratorsPrinciples

The committee began work in 2000,by constructing a platform of values to both guide its work and to measure its outcomes. In order to create a powerful new system of assessment that offered the promise of real improvement in schools and school districts, the committee determined that the integrity of the evaluation design must rest on the following seven principles


The Seven Principles 1. Standards Driven2. Focus on Accomplishments3. Continuous Improvement4. Fairness & Multiple Sources of Data5. Dialogue6. Effort to Enhance Student Performance7. Clear Expectations & Priorities


Principle 1: Standards Driven

– Follows National Administrator Standards for Instructional Leadership (ISLLC)

• A vision of what exemplary leaders must know and do to ensure continuous improvement


Principle 2: Focus on Accomplishments

–Results Driven–Expressed in Measurable Terms–Consistent with State Accountability


Principle 3: Continuous Improvement

–Constructive Feedback–Forward Looking–Professional Growth


Principle 4: Fairness

–Multiple Sources

of Data–No Secrets – No

Surprises


Principle 5: Dialogue

–Meaningful–Relevant–Ongoing


Principle 6: Leadership Connected to Student Improvement

Shift in focus from management to instructional leadership:

–Learning–Teaching–School Improvement


Principle 7: Clear Expectations

–What are the priorities?–What are the targets?–What are the criteria for success?

Who is Included in the Administrator DPAS II?

• All licensed and certified administrators who oversee instruction.

• It does not include those who supervise non-instructional aspects of school and district operations, such as transportation, maintenance, finance, and personnel.

15

Standards

• The design of DPAS II was driven by the Delaware Administrative Standards, which align with the Interstate School Leaders’ Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards

• Aligning the evaluation of school and district administrators with student learning and school improvement.

• Grounded in research and an understandingof leader performance in high-achieving schools.

16

Standards

• The DPAS II system provides a strong focus on teaching and learning.

• The data and evidence collected as part of the process should be a natural harvest of an administrator’s ongoing work.

17

Process

• DPAS II for Administrators is a continuous improvement model.

• The cycle is on--going throughout the employment of the administrator

18

Components

• 1) Vision and Goals• 2) Culture of Learning• 3) Management• 4) Professional Responsibilities• 5) Student Improvement

19

Goal Setting—Component 1: Vision and Goal

Setting

• Setting goals for student improvement is an important part of every educator’s work. Clear measurable goals provide a road map for staff, teachers and students. The process includes a Goal-Setting Conference and completion of Part One of the two-part Goal-Setting Form

20

Component One: Vision and GoalsISLLC Standard One (A Vision of

Learning)

• Assessing Data• Implementing Vision and Goals• Promoting Vision and Goals• Communicating the Vision and Goals

21

Assessment of Component 1

• A review of the evidence provided by the administrator

• Conferences between the evaluator and the administrator

• The use of the Administrator Standard Survey

22

Component Two: Culture of Learning

ISLLC Standard Two (School Culture)

• Advocating a Culture of Learning• Monitoring the Culture of Learning• Sustaining the Culture of Learning• Maintaining the Culture of Learning

23

Assessment of Component 2

• A review of the evidence provided by the administrator

• Conferences between the evaluator and the administrator

• Use of the Administrator Standards Survey Form

• Implementing DPAS II in accordance with its intent

24

Component 5: Student Improvement

Current Regulation

• The Delaware State Statute, 14 Del. C §1270, which defines the Performance Appraisal System, requires that a portion of the overall evaluation be based on measures of student improvement.

25

Multiple OutcomesAchievement and improvement in three

broad areas should be the basis of this part of the administrator’s evaluation:– School Accountability– State Accountability Test– Other measures of student

achievement. (SAT, AP, school data)

26

Criteria Component 5

• Showing Student Improvement• Measuring Student Improvement• Implementing Strategies for Student

Improvement• Reflecting on Student Improvement

27

AssessmentThe evidence for Component Five is

comprised of a review of the administrator’s– progress toward attaining the goals

established at the beginning of the cycle, as provided to the evaluator on the Goal-Setting Form (Parts 1 and 2), and an analysis of the data associated with the goals.

28

Assessment

• In this component, the administrator will be judged on the measures of– student performance and the progress made

by students.– how the data are used to inform the

administrator’s goal-setting – how the administrator communicates those

data and their implications to staff to lead the improvement initiatives in the leader’s setting

29

Frequency of Appraisal Process

Inexperienced Administrators– Inexperienced administrators and

administrators whose performance appraisals state, “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” must participate in an annual appraisal cycle.

Experienced Administrators– Experienced administrators whose

performance is “Effective” may be appraised over a two-year period.

30

Frequency of Conferences

Inexperienced administrator conferences will typically occur three times over the one-year evaluation cycle

In the late summer or early fall for agreement on goals

Mid-year for progress discussions followed by completion of a Formative Feedback Form

Late spring or early summer for a summative conference, followed by a completed Summative Evaluation Form

31

Frequency of Conferences

• Experienced administrator conferences will typically occur at least four times over the two-year evaluation cycle

During the summer or early fall of the first year for agreement on goals

Mid-year each year to discuss progress During the summer of the first year to

review progress on goals and establish goals for the upcoming year

At the end of the second year to discuss results and complete the summative evaluation

32

Timeline Process Description

July-August Goal Setting Conference • During the Goal-Setting Conference, the evaluator and administrator agree on those who will be asked to complete the Administrator Standards Survey Form

•Each party brings data that will inform the process of mutually establishing performance goals and thecriteria for defining success in achieving those aims

33


July-August Goal Setting Conference • Administrator completes individual Goal Form and submits to evaluator within ten (10) working days of Goal-Setting Conference.

• New administrators complete the Goal Form within one month of employment.

Spring Goal Form •Administrator compiles evidence of performance for all components throughout the school year.

•Administrator documents progress on individual goals and completes Part 2 of the individual Goal Form, which is delivered to the evaluator prior to the Summative Conference.

34


Mid-Winter Formative Conference The Formative Conference is held in mid-winter, to discussprogress toward goals and other issues of interest or concern.

Mid-Winter Formative Feedback Form •The Formative Feedback Form is used to record the content of conferences held and to note any goals or performance expectations agreed upon. •Any other pertinent information either party feels should be recorded will be included.• Following the conference, the evaluator completes a Formative Feedback Form and forwards it to the administrator within ten (10) working days of the conference 35


Mid-Winter Professional Responsibilities ReportingComponent Four—Professional Responsibilities

Prior to the Formative Feedback Conference

•Administrator completes Professional Responsibilities Formand delivers it to the evaluator prior to the Formative FeedbackConference.• Additional information may be added to the ProfessionalResponsibilities Form at any time prior to the SummativeConference

By March 15 Delaware Administrator StandardsAll Components

Administrator Standards Survey Formby March 15

•This section of the evaluation provides an opportunity for educators supervisedby the administrator being evaluated to assess the administrator on progress toward meeting the Delaware Administrator Standards.•It also provides the administrator an opportunity to self-assess performance on the Delaware Administrator Standards. The evaluator also completes the survey on the administrator.

36


SUMMATIVE CONFERENCEMay–JulyInexperienced Administrators

Inexperienced administrators and experienced administrators whoseperformance is “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” are evaluatedthrough an annual appraisal cycle. The Summative Evaluation for inexperiencedadministrators and experienced administrators whose performance is “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” takes place over a one-year period.

• The evaluator and the administrator conference in July or August to discuss goals.• The administrator completes the Individual Goal-Setting Form and submits it to the evaluator within ten (10) days of the conference.• The evaluator and the administrator meet for a Formative Conference at least once, generally in December, to discuss progress toward goals and other issues of concern.• The evaluator completes the Formative Feedback Form andforwards it to the administrator within ten (10) days of the Formative Conference

37


SUMMATIVE CONFERENCEMay–JulyInexperienced Administrators

The administrator completes the Professional Responsibilities Form prior to the Formative Feedback Conference. Additional information may be added prior to the Summative Conference.

By March 15, the evaluator, the administrator, and designated professional staff complete the Administrator Standards Survey Form.

• The administrator documents progress on individual goals and completes Part 2 of the Individual Goal Form, which is delivered to the evaluator prior to the Summative Conference.• The Summative Conference is held at the end of the cycle, in the summer (between June and August). All of the documents, evidence, and discussions which took place during the cycle may become part of the Summative Evaluation.• Within ten (10) days, the evaluator completes the Summative Evaluation Form and forwards it to the Administrator. The Summative Conference sets the stage for the development of goals for the ensuing year

38


SUMMATIVE CONFERENCEMay–JulyExperienced Administrators

Experienced administrators whose performance is “Satisfactory” are appraised on a two-year cycle

. The Summative Conference takes place during the summer of year two of the appraisal cycle. The Summative Evaluation for experienced administrators whose performance is “Satisfactory” takes place over a two-year period.• The Goal-Setting Form is completed annually. Goals for the second year of the cycle are developed as a result of the conference to review progress on the goals set forth for year one. This conference generally takes place during the summer.• Formative Feedback Conferences take place annually, generally in December of each year of the cycle. Progress toward goals and other issues or concerns are discussed.

39

40

Component Ratings

Each of the five (5) components of DPAS II for

Administrators is weighted equally and assigned a

rating of Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory on the

Summative Evaluation

41

Satisfactory Performance – The administrator demonstrates

• acceptable performance by meeting at least three (3) of the four (4) criteria outlined in each of the five (5) components of DPAS II for Administrators.

Unsatisfactory Performance – The administrator demonstrates

• unacceptable performance on two (2) or more of the four (4) criteria outlined in each of the five (5) components of DPAS II for Administrators

42

Principal EffectivenessSummative Ratings

43

PATTERN OF INEFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATIVE PERFORMANCE

INEFFECTIVEINEFFECTIVE INEFFECTIVEINEFFECTIVE

NEEDS NEEDS IMPROVEMENTIMPROVEMENT

INEFFECTIVEINEFFECTIVE NEEDS NEEDS IMPROVEMENTIMPROVEMENT



INEFFECTIVEINEFFECTIVE




INEFFECTIVEINEFFECTIVE


INEFFECTIVEINEFFECTIVE INEFFECTIVEINEFFECTIVE

IMPROVEMENT PLANAn Improvement Plan shall be developed for an administrator who receives an overall rating of Needs Improvement or Ineffective on the Summative Evaluation or a rating of Unsatisfactory on any component on the Summative Evaluation regardless of the overall rating.

DPAS II for Administrators– Challenge Process

An administrator may challenge any rating on the Summative Evaluation, either a Component Rating or the Overall Rating, or an administrator may challenge the conclusions of the Formative Process.

DPAS II for Administrators☞ Two-year pilot in two school districts --2005-

2007☞ Outside evaluation of the system, annually ☞ Changes were made based on pilot results

and outside evaluation☞ Statewide implementation 2007-2008☞ Current Statewide system of evaluation

2008-2011☞ Changes to Component 5 and

Summative Ratings for all educators July 2011

Changes July 2011

Under Delaware’s recently revised regulations,beginning in July 2011, a satisfactory rating for thefifth component (student improvement), meanthat the teacher has met the standard for studentgrowth. That standard, to be approved bySecretary Lowery before July 2011, will representan appropriate level of change in achievementdata for an individual student between two pointsin time, as well as any other measures that are

determinedto be rigorous and comparable across classroom….alsohaving an impact on Component 5 of the

AdministratorEvaluation

48

Changes July 2011

Currently, assessments can result in summative ratings of “effective,” “needs improvement,” or “ineffective.” Under the revised regulations, Delaware will add a fourth summative rating of “highly effective” in July 2011. Educators will be required to demonstrate satisfactory levels of student growth to receive an “effective” rating, and more than a year of student growth to receive a “highly effective” rating.

49

Changes July 2011

• For administrators’ changes, DSEA, DASA and other parties have been consulted. State staff are working to align the new ISLLC standards in components 1 to 4 then consult with the committee representing administrators (in progress)

• For component five, Secretary Lowery will approve measures, models and menus as recommended by stakeholder workgroups and consultants (in progress)

• The first year will be a development year.

50

Questions

• http://www.doe.k12.de.us/csa/dpasii/admin/DPASII_AdministratorGuidecomplete.pdf

51

Delaware’s Performance Evaluation System II for School Administrators Jackie O. Wilson, Ed.D. Interim Director Delaware Academy for School Leadership College.

Documents

district administrators

school administrators

certified administrators

principles standards

surprises slide

administrator dpas

design of dpas

evaluation of school