Materials

Materials

Wiki http://pugetsoundesd-rig2.wikispaces.com

/

2

Outcomes

As a group, we will: Create working agreements. Surface hopes and concerns. Learn about the background and purpose of

TPEP. Compare the district’s current evaluation

system with the new evaluation system components. Identify key decisions to be made.

Begin to map out an action plan, including a communications plan.

3

Agenda

IntroductionsWorking agreementsCore principlesStatewide TPEP informationPSESD RIGTaking stock: What is

already in place? What decisions need to be made?

Communications planNext steps

4

Agreements

Individually write what agreements you would like the group to make in order to create a productive, working environment

5

Possible Agreements--DRAFT

Be present

Participate actively Ask questions Share connections Listen

Invite and welcome contributions of every member

Work together as a community

6

Hopes and Concerns

7

TPEP Core Principles

1. The critical importance of teacher and leadership quality

2. The professional nature of teaching and leading a school

3. The complex relationship between the system for teacher and principal evaluation and district systems and negotiations

4. The belief in professional learning as an underpinning of the new evaluation system

5. The understanding that the career continuum must be addressed in the new evaluation system

6. The system must determine the balance of “inputs or acts” and “outputs or results”

8

Hopes? Concerns?

Select two sticky notes.

On one, write a hope you have for the teacher and principal evaluation system.

On the other, write a concern you have for the teacher and principal evaluation system.

Hope

Concern

9

Hopes? Concerns?

Number off by threes.

Share sticky notes with your group by placing them on the chart paper. Identify any common themes that emerge.

Share with large group.

What do you notice?

Hope

Concern

10

TPEP Background

11

Influences on TPEP Development

Steering Committee

BackgroundTeacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP)

AnacortesCentral ValleyKennewickNorth ThurstonNorth MasonOthelloSnohomish Wenatchee

ESD 101 ConsortiumAlmiraDavenportLibertyMedical LakePullmanReardan-EdwallWellpinitWilbur

14

Before & After: A Snapshot

Before Component After

Binary – Satisfactory/Unsatisfac

toryTiers

Four Tiers – Professional growth

& development system

Developed over 25 years ago Criteria

Describes effective teaching & leadership –

developed by stakeholders in 2010

legislative session

Two years (prior to SY 2009–10)

Provisional Status Three years

No existing requirement

Educator Evaluation Data

Evaluation data must be submitted to OSPI, beginning SY 2010–11, for all employee

groups

15

Evaluation ComponentsEvaluation Component ESSB 5895

Criteria (RCW) Stays the same

Criteria Definitions Stays the same

Instructional/Leadership Frameworks

Three “Preferred” FrameworksOSPI –September 1, 2012

Four-Tiered System UnsatisfactoryBasicProficientDistinguished

Final Summative Scoring Methodology

OSPI –December 1, 2012Rulemaking has started as of August 21, 2012

Unsatisfactory/Satisfactory Delineation

Years 1–5 between 1 and 2Years 5+ between 2 and 3

Measures and Evidence Observation* and Student Growth*(*Required in RCW)Artifacts and other Evidence related to Framework Rubrics

Changes in Teacher & Principal Evaluation Criteria

Current Teacher Evaluation Criteria New Teacher Evaluation Criteria1. Instructional skill2. Classroom management3. Professional preparation and scholarship4. Effort toward improvement when needed5. Handling of student discipline and

attendant problems6. Interest in teaching pupils7. Knowledge of subject matter

1. Centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement2. Demonstrating effective teaching practices3. Recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to

address those needs4. Providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum5. Fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment6. Using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student

learning7. Communicating with parents and school community8. Exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focus on improving instructional

practice and student learning

Current Principal Evaluation Criteria New Principal Evaluation Criteria1. Knowledge of, experience in, and training

in recognizing good professional performance, capabilities and development

2. School administration and management3. School finance4. Professional preparation and scholarship5. Effort toward improvement when needed6. Interest in pupils, employees, patrons

and subjects taught in school7. Leadership 8. Ability and performance of evaluation of

school personnel

1. Creating a school culture that promotes the ongoing improvement of learning and teaching for students and staff

2. Providing for school safety3. Leads development, implementation and evaluation of a data-driven plan for

increasing student achievement, including the use of multiple student data elements

4. Assisting instructional staff with alignment of curriculum, instruction and assessment with state and local district learning goals

5. Monitoring, assisting, and evaluating effective instruction and assessment practices

6. Managing both staff and fiscal resources to support student achievement and legal responsibilities

7. Partnering with the school community to promote student learning8. Demonstrating commitment to closing the achievement gap

16

18

Regional Implementation Grants (RIGs)

19

PSESD RIG Cohorts

RIG I (2011-2012)Bainbridge, Bellevue, Carbonado, Eatonville, Highline, Issaquah, Renton, Seattle,

Shoreline, White River

RIG II-A (Sept 2012-Jan 2013)

Auburn, Bethel, Lake Washington, Orting, Peninsula, Sumner

RIG II-B (Jan 2013-June 2013)Dieringer, Federal Way, Fife, Kent, Mercer Island, Puyallup, Skykomish,

Snoqualmie Valley, Steilacoom, Tahoma, Tukwila, Vashon,

20

RIG Content Over Five Sessions

Introduction to Educator Evaluation in Washington

Using Instructional and Leadership Frameworks in Educator Evaluation

Applying Multiple Measures of Performance Including Student Growth Measures in

Educator Evaluation Conducting High-Quality Observations Providing High Quality Feedback for

Continuous Professional Growth and Development

RIG Work

22

Taking Stock, Looking Forward

What components of the new system are already in place, and are a foundation to build upon?

What do we need to do over the next eight months to be ready for implementation in the fall?

23

Communications Plan

Communicating our Values

“Value” is at the root of the word “evaluation.”What we evaluate needs to come from what

we value as a community.

Student Learning

Educator Growth

25

Communication Planning

Which stakeholders need to be engaged this month?

What information do they need?

How will that information be communicated?

26

Whip Around and Plus/Delta Debrief

One word summary of the day

Take a few minutes and create at least two sticky notes for the Plus/Delta Chart on your way out. Plus: What was a real “plus” of today’s session?

What went well and should be repeated? Delta: Where is there room for improvement and

change?