Dr. David Grace [email protected] Dr. Nick Osborne
[email protected] Dr. John Dively [email protected] Dr. Marleis
Trover [email protected] February 12, 2014 Slide 2 Overview
Introduction District Efforts Joint Committees Professional
Practice Growth Model Lessons Learned to Date EIU EDL Efforts
Questions Slide 3 Illinois General Assembly Performance Evaluation
Reform Act (PERA) SB 315 January 13, 2010 Public Act 096-0861 was
signed into law by Governor Quinn on January 15, 2010. To Be
Eligible for Race To The Top Slide 4 Senate Bill 7 June 23, 2011
Incorporated PERA student growth requirements into various
personnel processes(Tenure, RIF, Remediation, Termination) Rules
and regulations finally established in May 2012 Slide 5 High Stakes
Teacher Evaluations 70% Professional Practice 30% Student Growth
*(50% State Default) Tenure, RIF and Recall, Remediation,
Revocation, Suspension Slide 6 Illinois Framework for Teacher
Performance Evaluation 6 Slide 7 WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND HOW ARE THEY RESPONDING? Slide 8 2010 PERA LAW
MANDATES MAJOR CHANGES The PERA Law requires all school districts
to design and implement a new performance evaluation system or
default to a state developed performance evaluation system. The new
system must assess professional practice as well as incorporate
significant measures of student growth. The new system must
incorporate consistent standards and provide clearer more objective
feedback. Slide 9 2010 PERA LAW MANDATES MAJOR CHANGES The new
system must lead to improved professional development. The new
system must incorporate multiple metrics to measure student growth.
The main focus of the PERA Law is to create a new system focused on
improving student learning. The PERA Law also requires the
development of a Joint Committee. Slide 10 PERA EVALUATION SYSTEM
STATE DEFAULT DISTRICT DESIGNED OR Slide 11 PERA EVALUATION SYSTEM
PRACTICE STUDENT GROWTH 75% - 70% - DISTRICT 50% - STATE DEFAULT
25% - 30% - DISTRICT 50% - STATE DEFAULT Slide 12 2010 PERA LAW :
JOINT COMMITTEE PERA LAW requires that the new comprehensive
performance evaluation system must be designed and developed by a
Joint Committee of the school administration and the teacher union.
The Joint Committee must reach an agreement on the design of the
new performance evaluation plan incorporating a means to measure
both teacher practice and student growth. PERA LAW defines Student
Growth as a demonstrable change in a students or group of students
knowledge or skill, as evidenced by gain and/or attainment on two
or more assessments, between two of more points in time.. Slide 13
2010 PERA LAW : JOINT COMMITTEE The Joint Committee is a committee
composed of equal representation selected by the district and its
teachers or, where applicable, the exclusive bargaining
representative of its teachers. The Joint Committee shall have the
duties regarding the establishment of a performance evaluation plan
that incorporates data and indicators of student growth as a
significant factor in rating teacher performance and addresses
professional practice. Slide 14 2010 PERA LAW : JOINT COMMITTEE
Under statute, this committee has one major job: Determine the
student growth component to incorporate into the teacher evaluation
plan for the school district for each subject area pursuant to the
District Requirements as listed previously. However in doing so,
the committee will need to examine: What data is the District
collecting? What data does the District need to collect? Where is
the data being stored? What growth measures are to be used? What
percentages should be utilized in calculating the performance
rating ? Other statutory and regulatory requirements Slide 15 The
PERA Joint Committee must come to a consensus of incorporating
student growth within 180 days of their first formal meeting. If
the Formal Joint Committee fails to reach an agreement on the
design and development of the Performance Evaluation Model within
the 180 day time frame they will be required to default to the
portion of the State Model for Performance Evaluation that they
were unable to reach agreement. School districts are presently
engaging in Informal Joint Committee Meetings to avoid triggering
the 180 day time frame. 2010 PERA LAW : JOINT COMMITTEE Slide 16
Slide 17 Teachers : Student Growth Determine the categories of
teachers who have neither a Type I nor a Type II assessment
available. For teachers without a Type I or II assessment, the
evaluation plan must include a minimum of two Type III assessments.
Set student growth expectations that are consistent with the
assessment and model selected. Develop a uniform process for
collective formative student learning data at the midpoint of the
evaluation cycle that will assess progress and inform instructional
adjustments but will not be included in the student growth scores.
Discuss how student characteristics are used in the measurement
model. Slide 18 Teachers : Student Growth Select a measurement
model for each assessment that includes multiple data points.
Identify at least one Type III assessment that will be used to
measure student growth for each category of teacher State the
general nature of any Type III assessment that will be used to
measure student growth for each category of teacher. Describe the
process and criteria that the qualified evaluator and teacher will
use to identify or develop the specific Type III assessment to be
used. Slide 19 Teachers : Student Growth Demonstrable change in a
students learning between two or more points in time Need data from
at least 2 assessments: At least one Type III assessment And at
least one Type I or II assessment (PREFERABLY not ISAT or PSAE) Or
two Type III assessments if no Type I or II are available District
PERA joint committee decides metrics and targets, including for
different student groups (ELL, etc.) Slide 20 2010 PERA LAW : JOINT
COMMITTEE Identify at least one Type III assessment that will be
used to measure student growth for each category of teacher State
the general nature of any Type III assessment that will be used to
measure student growth for each category of teacher. Describe the
process and criteria that the qualified evaluator and teacher will
use to identify or develop the specific Type III assessment to be
used. Slide 21 Mandated Teacher Evaluation Training Understand
Teacher Performance Aligned to Professional Practice in the teacher
evaluation process and evaluator qualifications (Module 1- Teacher
Evaluator Training) Validate Knowledge and Skills when using
professional standards to collect and measure evidence of teaching
practice (Module 2) Collaborate using observation and conversation
to provide feedback to teachers on their planning, classroom
environment, and instructional teaching practices (Module 3)
Measure, Evaluate and Reflect in order to determine ratings for all
teachers and when appropriate, develop improvement plans that
address teaching at the needs improvement or unsatisfactory levels
(Module 4) Understand Teacher Performance Aligned to Student Growth
in the teacher evaluation process and evaluator qualifications
(requirement to take Module 5 dependent upon PERA Implementation
Date) 21 Slide 22 What are the Requirements for School Districts
and How are they Responding? Dr. Osborne Dr. Grace Slide 23 2010
PERA LAW Mandated Major Changes PERA requires districts to design
and implement performance evaluation systems that assess
professional practice as well as incorporate measures of student
growth. Consistent standards, clearer more objective feedback
Improved professional development Multiple measures of student
growth Improved student learning Principals & Teachers: Two
choices for districts: Use General Rules to create your own system
or use State Model (all or parts) Slide 24 District Plan/Joint
Committee District Plan/Joint Committee Under PERA and Illinois
Administrative Code Part 50, school districts and teachers unions
must develop comprehensive teacher evaluation plans which include
data and measures of student growth as a significant part. The
incorporation of student growth as a significant factor should be
done in cooperation with the Districts SB 315 Joint Committee.
Student Growth is defined as a demonstrable change in a students or
group of students knowledge or skill, as evidenced by gain and/or
attainment on two or more assessments, between two of more points
in time. Significant Part is determined to be 25% for the first two
years and 30% thereafter. Slide 25 The Joint Committee must
identify two assessment types to measure student growth for each
category of teachers as well as one or more measurement models that
use multiple data points to determine student growth using the
selected assessments. Measurement Model is defined as the process
in which two or more assessment scores are analyzed to identify a
change in a students knowledge or skills over time. District
Plan/Joint Committee District Plan/Joint Committee Slide 26 PERA
and Regulations Requirements : Select a measurement model for each
assessment that includes multiple data points. Identify at least
one Type III assessment that will be used to measure student growth
for each category of teacher State the general nature of any Type
III assessment that will be used to measure student growth for each
category of teacher. Describe the process and criteria that the
qualified evaluator and teacher will use to identify or develop the
specific Type III assessment to be used. District Plan/Joint
Committee District Plan/Joint Committee Slide 27 Stage I: Educator
system design Design an educator practice model (evaluation tool
and processes). Design a plan to support professional growth of all
educators and ensure that the professional development design is
aligned with the educator evaluation system. Train evaluators on
educator practice model. Determine plan to ensure inter-rater
reliability and a mechanism for educators to challenge ratings.
Train certified staff on educator practice model. Provide
implementation support. PERA and the Joint Committee Design Slide
28 Stage II: Student growth measures and implementation of
evaluation system Facilitate early implementation of educator
practice model (evaluation tool and processes). Identify, design,
and/or develop student growth measures aligned with curriculum and
standards. If assessments need to be developed create an assessment
committee comprised of educators in every non-tested grade and
subject. These may be multiple committees. The Joint Committee may
oversee the work of these committees. Design student growth
measures. Train evaluators on student growth measures. Train
certified staff on student growth measures. Plan for and provide
implementation support. PERA and the Joint Committee Design Slide
29 Stage III: Full implementation Create an implementation plan.
The elements of this plan should address the: design,
implementation, and operation of the system across all schools.
Facilitate full implementation of the educator evaluation system
with student growth measuresthis should include: monitoring school
progress in implementing the evaluation system. Provide
implementation support and resources to schools as they operate the
evaluation system. PERA and the Joint Committee Design Slide 30
Types of Growth Models 30 Slide 31 What are ways to measure growth?
Pg. 9 (ITED Chapter 2B, Appendix 3) 31 Growth Model
DescriptionBenefitsDrawbacks District Implementation Requirements
Value-Tables Compares attainment each year, examining whether a
student met or exceeded standards from one grade level to the next
Easy to calculate with certain assessments Easy to communicate to
teachers Does not separate teachers effect on student growth from
other factors Can focus on bubble kids Does not account for growth
within proficiency levels Maintain data from two sets of time May
require creation of categories Can be used with Type I, Type II, or
Type III (with proficiency levels) Simple Growth Compares post-test
performance to pre-test performance to measure growth Easy to
calculate Easy to communicate to teachers and other stakeholders
Does not separate teachers effect on student growth from
student-level factors Easy to draw incorrect conclusions based on
test scale instability Maintain data from two points in time,
subtract post from pre test Any Type I, Type II, or Type III Best
for Type II or III Adjusted Growth Sets an expected growth target
based upon pre-test performance and measures growth based upon that
target Takes a students starting point into account when
calculating growth over a year More comprehensive than simple
growth Does not separate teachers effect on student growth from
factors (e.g. SES) Requires large student populations Often
requires certain assessments (NWEA MAP, Scantron Performance
Series) Statistical reference group data Some Type I or Type II
(need comparison data), such as Scantron Performance Series, NWEA
MAP, EPAS Value-Added Compares students attainment over time,
controlling for selected factors Comprehensive measure Accurately
separates effect of educator on student growth from other factors
Apples to apples comparison Requires the most data and most complex
modeling Requires data team or outside entity to collect and
analyze data Requires several years of data Research
team/statistical capacity Statistical reference group score and
demographic data Some Type I or Type II (with statistical model)
Student Learning Objectives A process for using baseline data to
set growth targets for students Can be used with any assessment
type Can be used with any measurement model Can be uniquely
tailored to each educators goals Can be easy to game without
certain parameters Results are not comparable if individually
created Time-consuming to develop the system District should set
parameters for educators to follow when designing SLOs to ensure
consistency and fairness Any Type I, Type II, or Type III Slide 32
Sandoval CUSD 501 Student Learning Objective Framework Targeted
Growth Slide 33 Growth Factor Assessments Under the rules, every
teachers evaluation growth factor will be judged by at least one
Type I or Type II and one Type III assessment. If no Type I or II
assessment is appropriate, then two Type III assessments will be
used. 23 Ill. Admin. Code pt. 110 b, (2012). 33 Slide 34 District
Plan Requirements District Plan Requirements PERA and Regulations
Requirements: Determine the categories of teachers who have neither
a Type I nor a Type II assessment available. For teachers without a
Type I or II assessment, the evaluation plan must include a minimum
of two Type III assessments. Set student growth expectations that
are consistent with the assessment and model selected. Develop a
uniform process for collective formative student learning data at
the midpoint of the evaluation cycle that will assess progress and
inform instructional adjustments but will not be included in the
student growth scores. Discuss how student characteristics are used
in the measurement model. Slide 35 Student Growth Metric Types
Common and comparable across contexts, widely administered
(nationally normed) assessments. Examples: PARCC, NWEA, Scantron,
Star Reading; At least one metric from Type I or II Type I
Assessments Any assessment adopted or approved by the district and
given by teacher(s) across a grade/subject. Examples: common
assessments, criterion-referenced tests, textbook assessments; At
least one metric from Type I or II Type II Assessments Any
assessment, aligned with curriculum, decided upon between teacher
and evaluator as a measure of student learning. Examples:
teacher-created assessments, student work samples, performance
assessments; At least one metric from Type III Type III Assessments
Slide 36 District Plan Requirements District Plan Requirements
Assessment Type Definition Type I A reliable assessment that
measures a certain group or subset of students in the same manner
with the same potential assessment items, is scored by a non-
district entity, and is administered either statewide or beyond
Illinois. Examples include assessments available from NWEA,
Scantron, Star Reading, the College Boards SAT, Advanced Placement
or International Baccalaureate exams, or ACTs EPAS (Educational
Planning and Assessment System) Slide 37 District Plan Requirements
District Plan Requirements Assessment Type Definition Type II Any
assessment developed or adopted and approved for use by the school
district and used on a district-wide basis by all teachers in a
given grade or subject area. Examples include collaboratively
developed common assessments, curriculum tests and assessments
designed by textbook publishers. Slide 38 District Plan
Requirements District Plan Requirements Assessment Type Definition
Type III Any assessment that is rigorous, that is aligned to the
course curriculum, and that the qualified evaluator and teacher
determine measures student learning in that course. Examples
include teacher-created assessments, assessments designed by
textbook publishers, student work samples or portfolios,
assessments of student performance, and assessments designed by
staff who are subject or grade-level experts that are administered
commonly across a given grade or subjects. Type I and II
assessments also may be considered Type III if they align to the
curriculum and are capable of measuring student learning in the
subject. Slide 39 Grade and/or Subject Assessment AAssessment B
Middle School Science- Grade 7 and 8 District-developed testType
III, teacher-selected, with SLO Middle School Social Studies- Grade
7 and 8 District- developed testType III, teacher-selected, with
SLO Middle School Physical EducationType III, teacher-selected,
with SLO Middle School MusicType III, teacher-selected, with SLO
Other Middle School SpecialsType III, teacher-selected, with SLO
Special Education TeachersGeneral education assessmentType III,
teacher-selected, with SLO Special Education Teachers of Students
who do not take traditional assessments See the additional guidance
for Special Education Teachers section in this document Type III,
teacher-selected, with SLO English as a Second Language Teachers
MODEL AssessmentType III, teacher-selected, with SLO Library
CoordinatorSRI- 20% Type III, teacher-selected, with SLO- 10%
LibrariansSRI- 20% Type III, teacher-selected, with SLO- 10% MAPS
CoordinatorSRI/SMI- 10% Type III, teacher-selected, with SLO- 20%
Curriculum Coordinator- English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science
and Social Studies, Inquiry Science SRI/SMI- 20% Type III,
teacher-selected, with SLO- 10% Instructional Technology
CoachesSRI/SMI- 10% Type III, teacher-selected, with SLO- 20%
Instructional CoachesType III, teacher-selected, with SLO School
Improvement CoordinatorSRI/SMI Type III, teacher-selected, with SLO
based on district assessments- mathematics and English Language
Arts Gifted CoordinatorType III, teacher-selected, with SLO Title I
ReadingGates- 15% Type III, teacher-selected, with SLO- 15% 39
Slide 40 By no later than the applicable implementation date, each
school district shall, in good faith cooperation with its teachers
or, where applicable, the exclusive bargaining representatives of
its teachers incorporate the use of data and indicators on student
growth as a significant factor in rating teaching performance into
its evaluation plan for all teachers. 105 ILCS 5/24A-4b. 40 Slide
41 Timeline of Implementation 41 Slide 42 How has EIU EDL
Responded? Dr. Trover Slide 43 What did we do to prepare our
candidates for changes in evaluation mandates? Four Action Steps 1.
Reviewed the Research 2. Trained and Sought Evaluation
Certification 3. Reviewed (ITED) Illinois Teacher Evaluation
Development Plan 4. Reviewed Course Syllabi, Content, Activities
and Assessments and Refined Courses to Incorporate Professional
Practice and Growth Model Content, Activities and Assessments. 43
Slide 44 The first step that the Faculty of EIU took was to broaden
its awareness of the research in the areas of outcomes based
teacher and principal evaluation. In addition to readings in the
area of evaluation research, the EIU Faculty attended workshops by
the Illinois Performance Evaluation Advisory Committee (PEAC). This
advisory group offered meetings across the state. Additional
awareness and understanding opportunities were provided during the
meetings of the Illinois Council of Professors of Educational
Administration (ICPEA), the Illinois Association of School
Administrators (IASA), the Illinois Principals Association (IPA),
the Illinois Association of School Boards (IASB) and the Illinois
State Board of Education (ISBE). 44 Slide 45 The second step was to
complete the Teacher and Principal State Training and Tests to be
certified as Teacher and Principal Evaluators. Mandated Teacher
Evaluation Training 1. Understand Teacher Performance Aligned to
Professional Practice in the teacher evaluation process and
evaluator qualifications (Module 1-Teacher Evaluator Training) 2.
Validate Knowledge and Skills when using professional standards to
collect and measure evidence of teaching practice (Module 2) 3.
Collaborate using observation and conversation to provide feedback
to teachers on their planning, classroom environment, and
instructional teaching practices (Module 3) 4. Measure, Evaluate
and Reflect in order to determine ratings for all teachers and when
appropriate, develop improvement plans that address teaching at the
needs improvement or unsatisfactory levels (Module 4) 5. Understand
Teacher Performance Aligned to Student Growth in the teacher
evaluation process and evaluator qualifications (requirement to
take Module 5 dependent upon PERA Implementation Date) 45 Slide 46
The third step was the review the Illinois Teacher Evaluation
Development (ITED) Practices and Procedures for districts to use to
incorporate professional practice and growth models into their
teacher evaluation documents. ITED Document Chapter 1-Critical
First Steps, Chapter 2-Developing an Educator Practice System and a
Student Growth Plan Chapter 3-Preparing your System for the New
Evaluation Plan Chapter 4-Support the Professional Learning of
Educators Chapter 5-Providing Meaningful Information for Human
Resources Decision-making. 46 Slide 47 The fourth step in the plan
was to review our course materials, activities and refine our
courses to incorporate professional practice and growth model
content. Supervision, Principalship, Superintendency and Planning
and Evaluation Courses were reviewed and refined to incorporate
professional practice and growth model content a into our
activities and assessments. EDL Department sponsored an
Administrator Academy Workshop for our Regional Leadership Teams of
Administrators and Teachers. The Workshop highlighted Professional
Practice and Growth Model Incorporation into district teacher
evaluation documents. The workshop was delivered by the Consortia
for Educational Change in Partnership with our Leadership
Department and the Area Regional Offices of Education. Our service
will continue as we assist district teams through the preparation
of future administrators and staff. 47 Slide 48 Questions 48