MILWAUKEE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Educator Effectiveness:

Update on the Teacher Growth and

Evaluation System

Gregory E. Thornton, Ed.D.

Superintendent of Schools Anita M. Pietrykowski Chief of Schools

Cynthia Ellwood, Ph.D. James Edler March 12, 2013

(ATTACHMENT 1) REPORT AND

POSSIBLE ACTION ON

EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS:

UPDATE ON THE TEACHER

GROWTH AND

EVALUATION SYSTEM

1-1

The Context for Change

Student success depends on effective teaching.

Teachers deserve meaningful feedback to improve their teaching practices.

School Improvement Grant (SIG) required an evaluation system that included both student performance and teacher practice measures.

1-2

The Redesign Process

• July 2010 - Six member labor/management committee

• October 2010 - DPI representative supports committee

• Research and Design – July 2010 - August 2011

• 2011-2012 – Redesign piloted in 9 schools

• 2012-2013 – Expansion to all SIG and East Region Schools

1-3

Committee Established Guiding Principles

• Professional growth through reflection, feedback, and professional development “owned” by the teacher

• Multiple sources of evidence to create a robust, reliable picture of performance

• A process that is fair, systematic, and workable

1-4

Shift in Teacher Evaluation Traditional Learning Focused

• Administrator directs and takes responsibility for process. Teacher has a passive role.

• System is focused on snapshots of teacher performance.

• Separate from professional development and school improvement.

• Process is focused on teacher growth to meet student needs.

• Administrator & teacher are "in it together."

• Teacher takes responsibility for professional and personal growth.

• Embedded in an overall process for improving student learning.

1-5

Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching

DOMAIN 1

PLANNING AND PREPARATION

Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Demonstrating Knowledge of Students Selecting Instructional Outcomes Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources Designing Coherent Instruction Designing Students assessments

DOMAIN 2 THE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

Creating and Environment of Respect and

Rapport Establishing a Culture for Learning

Managing Classroom Procedures Managing Student Behavior

Organizing Physical Space

DOMAIN 4 PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES

Reflecting on Teaching Maintaining Accurate Records Communicating with Families Participating in a Professional Community Growing and Developing Professionally Demonstrating Professionalism

DOMAIN 3 INSTRUCTION

Communicating with Students

Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques Engaging Students in Learning

Using Assessment in Instruction Demonstrating Flexibility and

Responsiveness

1-6

DOMAIN 3

INSTRUCTION

3a. Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques

Quality of Questions Discussion Techniques Student Participation

1-7

Key Findings: Validity

“There is a strong relationship between classroom observation ratings [based on Danielson’s Framework for Teaching] and value added measures for math and reading test scores.”

Consortium on Chicago School Reform, University of Chicago (November, 2011)

1-8

Key Findings: Reliability

Principals rated teaching practice reliably using the Danielson Framework when compared with highly trained external observers, especially at the low and middle range of performance.

Consortium on Chicago School Reform, University of Chicago (November, 2011)

1-9

MPS Collaborative Observation Process

1. Teacher Action Plan

2. Pre-observation Planning Conference

3. Observation – Evidence-based

4. Post-Observation Reflecting Conference

5. Action Plan Review, if necessary

6. Ongoing data/evidence collection (formal & informal observations, other evidence)

7. Summative Evaluation

1-10

The New MPS Model

• Strong, clear definition of good teaching

• Evidence based

• Includes a broad range of evidence

• Full spectrum of the teacher role

• Aimed at growth

• Reliable

• Includes peer observation

1-11

MPS Pilot 2011-12 Survey Analysis

• More than 75% agreed that they used the Framework for Teaching to reflect on their teaching practice.

• More than 70% agreed that they focused their professional development efforts on activities that they thought would help them to meet their goals as aligned to the Framework for Teaching.

• More than 70% agreed that they know what they need to do in order to improve their practice.

• The opportunity be involved in a collaborative observation process was the most positive theme of open ended responses.

1-12

MPS Pilot 2011-12 Survey Analysis

“I liked getting more individualized and specific feedback from my administrator.”

“I finally had the opportunity to sit and talk with my principal. There is never enough time to have a conversation, let alone discuss learning strategies and goals for learning.” “I appreciated the ability to explain to the reviewer what I was going to do and how I felt I did. The conferences were useful.” “(I liked) the ability to talk about the lessons and make adjustments to those and all other plans since many of the changes applied to instructional decisions as a whole.”

1-13

Measures Included in Teacher Evaluation

All Nine Pilot Schools 2011-2012

50%

Professional

Practice

50% Student

Growth and

Achievement

1-14

Professional

Practice

Student Growth

and

Achievement

Added

East Region Schools:

Prof. Practice Only

All SIG and

Original Pilot Schools:

Both Halves 1-15

WI Educator Effectiveness Model 2014-15

1-16

2013-2014

• Expand the Danielson teacher practice model to all schools district-wide

• Continue the pilot of the entire “Educator Effectiveness” Model in the 16 Metro/SIG and initial pilot schools

1-17

2014-2015

Implement the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness model (Teacher Practice and Student Growth and Achievement Measures) district-wide

1-18

Challenges • Maintain fidelity to the collaborative observation

process

• Support meaningful coaching conversations

• Insure accuracy and reliability

• Develop and integrate technological systems

• Align all systems (professional development, curriculum, assessment, accountability systems, technological systems, coaching, mentoring, observation and evaluation)

1-19

Milwaukee Public Schools Educator Effectiveness

Update

MPS Board of School Directors Dr. Michael Bonds, President Larry Miller, Vice President Mark Sain, District 1 Jeff Spence, District 2 Annie Woodward, District 4 Dr. Peter Blewett, District 6 David Voeltner, District 7 Meagan Holman, District 8 Terrence Falk, At-Large

Senior Team Dr. Gregory Thornton, Superintendent Naomi Gubernick, Chief of Staff Darienne Driver, Chief Innovation Officer Tina Flood, Chief Academic Officer Dr. Karen Jackson, Chief Human Resources Officer Michelle Nate, Chief Operations Officer Gerald Pace, Esq., Chief Financial Officer Anita Pietrykowski, Chief, School Administration Denise Callaway, Executive Director of Community Engagement Patricia Gill, Executive Director, Family Services Sue Saller, Coordinator to the Superintendent

1-20