A few tips!

Teacher Evaluation System for Floridas Charter Schools

An Overview:Florida Consortium of Public Charter Schools Evaluation ModelName of School

The Leadership and Learning CenterThis presentation is designed for use by Charter school leaders to help them inform their teachers about the evaluation system the school will use in the coming year. A leader may choose to use the power point as is, or may pick and choose particular slides to use in his or her presentation. It is suggested that the leader make copies of the school teacher evaluation system and have them accompany the slides here. State Department documents are also available on the HMH support website to be used with the slides should a leader desire to share them with the staff. It is also suggested that a copy of the approved evaluation plan be provided to all staff at the time of this presentation.1What do we need to know about educator evaluation in charter schools?

Presenter:Share with your team that both leader and teacher evaluation systems are changing in Floridas charter schools. All evaluations had to meet certain criteria in order to be approved for use. Today you will share that criteria, the law and rules set forth by the state of FL related to educator evaluation.Purpose of Evaluation

For the purpose of increasing student learning growth by improving the quality of instructional, administrative, and supervisory services in the public schools of the state, the district school superintendent shall establish procedures for evaluating the performance of duties and responsibilities of all instructional, administrative, and supervisory personnel employed by the school district. Florida Statutes Section 1012.34 (1) (a).This slide makes the point that the purpose for evaluation for leaders and teachers is the same.3This New Approach to EvaluationSupports three processes:

Self-Reflection by the teacher on current proficiencies and growth needs. (What am I good at? What can I do better?)Feedback from the evaluator and others on what needs improvement.An annual summative evaluation that assigns one of the performance levels required by law (i.e., Highly Effective, Effective, Needs Improvement / Developing, or Unsatisfactory).Details on the purpose of evaluation4

Leader & Teacher PerformanceStudent LearningThe underlying purpose of all evaluation systems is to positively impact student learning. When adults get better at their work, students benefit.

Objectives for TodayExamine foundational statutes and rules related to teacher evaluation systemsFEAPs Florida Educator Accomplished PracticesCommon LanguageReview the requirements in the evaluation system Discuss the timelines and logistics for implementation of the system

Presenter-share the objectives for your session. You may edit thee to meet your specific needsFEAPs and Common Language documents may be found on the HMH support website6

Objectives for TodayExamine and discuss the additional metric: professional growth Discuss and understand performance metricsValue-added measureInstructional practice

7Todays Agenda Part I: Foundational Information Part II: Requirements Part III: Contemporary Research Part IV: Charter School Consortium Model Part V: Logistics & SupportFoundational InformationThis section of the presentation will provide participants with foundational information important to understanding whey evaluations are changing and the philosophy upon which they are based.9Rewards states leading the way in comprehensive, coherent, statewide education reform across four key areas:Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplaceBuilding data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals how to improve instruction Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed mostTurning around their lowest-performing schools.

The state of FL received $700 million in RtTT money the most of any state in the nation. As part of their application, revised evaluation systems for both leaders and teachers is required. The FL legislature deemed that charter schools would be included in the revised evaluation procedures.

Florida worked diligently to bring together broad statewide support from superintendents, school board members, teachers and teacher associations for the Race to the Top application.

Senate Bill 736: Student Success Act Presenter - you the full text of the bill is available on the HMH support website. Participants may not know the full extent of what is actually required by law in re to evaluation systems.The following slides provide the details from 736 most pertinent to teacher evaluation.

SB 736 Requires

DOE approve school district evaluation systems & monitor for complianceDOE provide requirements and criteria for evaluation systemsCharter schools comply with provisions related to performance evaluationsSource: p. 1-4 SB 736

SB 736 RequiresDistrict evaluation systemsSupport effective instruction & student learning growthProvide appropriate instruments, procedures, and criteria for continuous improvementUse data from multiple sources including input from parentsSource: P. 4-5 SB 736

SB 736 RequiresFour levels of performance (highly effective, effective, *needs improvement, unsatisfactory)At least **50% of the evaluation is based on student learning growthBased on contemporary researchIndicators based on each of the FEAPS Source: P. 6-9 SB 736* Can use a developing rating for teachers with less than 3 years experience - this rating is NOT to be used for new leaders**40% is less than 3 years of data is available

SB 736 RequiresDOE annual reports to the public on performance ratings including the percent of teachers and leaders receiving each ratingSchool reports to parents when their childs teacher or principal has received unsatisfactory ratings for two consecutive years Source: P. 31 SB 736

SB 736 RequiresThe state Board of Education shall adopt rules to establish uniform procedures for the submission and approval of evaluations of teachers and leaders.Source: P. 9- SB 736

SBE Rule 6A-5.065 The Educator Accomplished PracticesFlorida's core standards for effective educators. The Educator Accomplished Practices are based upon three (3) foundational principles; high expectations, knowledge of subject matter and the standards of the profession.

Each effective educator applies the foundational principles through six (6) Educator Accomplished Practices. Each of the practices is clearly defined to promote a common language and statewide understanding of the expectations for the quality of instruction and professional responsibility.

Presenter- the full text of FEAPS is on the HMH support website.The FCPCS Model is based on FEAPs.The Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs) are Florida's core standards for effective educators and provide valuable guidance to Florida's public school educators and educator preparation programs throughout the state on what educators are expected know and be able to do. The Educator Accomplished Practices are based upon three (3) foundational principles. Those principles focus on high expectations, knowledge of subject matter, and the standards of the profession. Each effective educator applies the foundational principles through six (6) Educator Accomplished Practices. Each of the practices is clearly defined to promote a common language and statewide understanding of the expectations for the quality of instruction and professional responsibility.

Teacher Evaluation Requirements

Part II provides teachers with the requirements upon which your evaluation system was built.19In Accordance with F.S. 1012.34 evaluation systems must

Share the information in the FCPCS Model under Evaluation Requirements on pages 6-7 as written below and on the following slides

In accordance with s. 1012.34, F.S., the evaluation systems for both instructional personnel and school-based administrators must be designed to do the following: Support effective instruction and student learning growth; results must be used when developing district and school level improvement plans.

Provide appropriate instruments, procedures and criteria for the continuous quality improvement of the professional skills of the instructional personnel and the school-based administrators; results must be used when identifying professional development.

Include a mechanism to examine performance data from multiple sources, including opportunities for parents to provide input on employee performance evaluations when appropriate.

Identify those teaching fields for which special evaluation procedures and criteria are necessary.

Differentiate among four levels of performance: Highly Effective; Effective; Needs Improvement or, for instructional personnel in the first three years of teaching, Developing; Unsatisfactory.

Provide training programs to ensure that all individuals with evaluation responsibilities understand the proper use of the evaluation criteria and process.

Include a process for monitoring and evaluating the effective and consistent use of the evaluation criteria by employees with evaluation responsibilities.

Include a process for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the system itself in improving instruction and student learning.

All evaluation systems approved pursuant to Section 1012.34, Florida Statutes, shall be posted on a district (or charter school) website within thirty (30) days of approval of the evaluation system. 20F.S. 1012.34Support effective instruction Use student learning growth results to create school improvement plans Provide appropriate instruments, procedures and criteria for continuous quality improvement of the professional skillsInclude a mechanism to examine performance data from multiple sources

F.S. 1012.34Identify special evaluation procedures and criteria Differentiate among four levels of performanceProvide training for individuals with evaluation responsibilities Include a process for monitoring and evaluating the effective and consistent use of the system Post the system on the charter school website within thirty (30) days of approval

Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPS)In this slide, the apple represents education in general, and the orange represents education in FL. There are specific understandings about effective educator practice that the state of FL requires all educators to know and follow. Understanding these practice as described in FEAPs in critical to the success of all teachers and leaders. Presenter- The Common Language Project is a process to refine conversations in ways that increase the clarity of exchanges and deepen common understanding of the work in progress. ADMR TM (p.40)

Common Language of InstructionClearly stated in FEAPs is the desire to have a common language of instruction throughout the state of Florida. The next four slides address the common language content and goal. The full document is available on the site. You may want to have copies available and engage teachers in an activity which requires that they dig into the document.

24Common Languagea tool of master practitioners in any profession that is used to facilitate effective communications about the essential concepts and practices of the profession.

From the Common Language doc

Common language" is a tool of master practitioners in any profession that is used to facilitate effective communications about the essential concepts and practices of the profession. Consensus within a group of practitioners on the specific meaning of terms and expressions is used to provide feedback for improvement of proficiency on important job functions and in deepening understanding of the priority practices, standards, and goals of the profession. There are over 200 terms defined and clarified in the Common Language document.Causal Instructional Strategies

Key strategies revealed by research to have the highest probability of impacting student learning when used appropriately and in appropriate instructional contexts. These are the controllable actions in a school that impact student learning. DOE Form No. EQEVAL-2012-4ADMR TM (p.40)

Examples of Common Language Causal instructional strategies is a term pulled from the common language document. It is a term that is used often in both leader and teacher evaluation systems.

26Learning Goal(s)

A learning goal is a statement of what learners will know and/or be able to do. In teaching situations, effective teachers state learning goals in a rubric (or scale) format where ascending levels of proficiency of the goal are specified. The rubric form guides learners in self-assessment of progress toward mastery of the goal and guides teachers in tracking student progress and providing feedback on progress toward accomplishing the goal.

DOE Form No. EQEVAL-2012-4ADMR TM (p.40)Examples of Common Language

Another terms from the common language document appears on this slide. Learning goals with scales are a large part of the state model for teacher evaluation and it also has a significant presence in the leader evaluation. It is important for all teachers and leaders to become familiar with the terms in the common language document so that everyone understands what is expected of them.

Presenter- you may choose additional or different words to focus on based on your context and work as a school.

27High-Effect Size PracticesContemporary research reveals a core of instructional and leadership strategies that have a higher probability than most of positively impacting student learning in significant ways.

Florida also has an focus on instructional staff using high effect size practices. This document applies equally to leaders and teachers. Using contemporary research, the state defines high effect size practices and provides suggestions for what these practices include.This state document is also available on the site for your use in training. It is suggested that some time be spent on high effect size practices in multiple trainings throughout the year. In addition to the state document, Robert Marzanos Art and Science of Teaching, and John Hatties Visible Learning are two great sources of information on the topic. High-Effect Size Strategies

Are components within the core standards and expectations described in the FEAPs (Rule 6A-5.065, F.A.C.) and FPLS (Rule 6A-5.080, F.A.C.) and Constitute priority issues for faculty development and deliberate practice. A listing of these high effect size strategies will be posted for district use on www.fldoe.org/profdev/pa.asp.

According to the DOE High effect size is defined as seen on the screen. Source: PPT presented in Orlando Jan. 2012 by John Moore on completing the state checklist.High-Effect Size Practices

Classroom teachers need a repertoire of strategies with a positive effect size so that what they are able to do instructionally, after adapting to classroom conditions, has a reasonable chance of getting positive results. The quote here is pulled directly from the state document on high effect size practices. The visual is from Hatties Visible Learning. The barometer on the screen illustrates the various effect sizes and impact they have on student learning. Negative ES means that students actually loose ground in their learning when these practices are used. For example- summer vacation has a negative impact on student learning. They actually loose ground when they go home for the summer.

What works BEST?

Hattie, J. (2009) Visible Learning. Rutledge. New YorkThe zone of desired effects, in the blue, illustrates the impact of high effect size practices when used consistently and with fidelity. A 0.40 ES will give you better than average results. A 0.60 ES and higher will give you 2-3 years of learning in one years time. The research on high effect size practices helps us maximize the effects of our teaching. WE are not seeking what works, rather, we are seeking what works BEST. More info on this can be found in Hatties book

Research Framework for the Consortium Model

Part III explores what research forms the foundation for teacher evaluation in Florida. The following slides provide more detail on this.

32

Research frameworks pre-approved by the Department are:Based on contemporary researchAligned with the Student Success Act, the FEAPs or FPLS, as appropriate

Presenter: The key word here is pre-approved. If schools opted to create their own models, they would need to provide the research framework like the one provided by the state to support the system and show the alignment to SB 736, FEAPs and FPLS.

The Florida state model relies on:

Behavioral Framework strategies to establish a core repertoire of teaching competenciesConstructivist methods for planning instructional units, collegial work on adapting core strategies to local conditions, and deliberate practice work for deepening expertise.

Presenter you may want to go deeper into this topic in which case you could ask for your teachers to engage in reflection and group discussion____ Charter School Evaluation ModelThe Charter School Consortium ModelPart IV- Your Model. In this case, the slides are based on the consortium model, which you have adopted for your school. Put your school name on the slide. This begins the discussion about the evaluation model you are using.35

The Florida Evaluation System for Teachers shouldReflect teacher performance across all elements (4 domains)Account for teachers experience levelsAssign weight to the domain with greatest impact on student achievement Acknowledge deliberate practice by measuring teacher improvement over time on specific elements within the frameworkThese are the non-negotiables for teacher evaluation they are required by the state.FCPCS Performance IndicatorsInstructional Design & Lesson Planning The Learning EnvironmentInstructional Delivery & Facilitation Assessment Continuous Professional Improvement Professional Responsibility & Ethical Conduct

Based on the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs)Using the Consortium model share the main areas for performance as seen on the screen, as well as the sub indicators numbered in the document.37Performance Ratings and Associated ScoresTotal Score Performance Rating 3.6 4.0 Highly Effective 3.0 3.5 Effective 2.0 2.9 Needs Improvement / Developing 1.0 1.9 Unsatisfactory

Classroom Teacher Evaluation Rubric Unsatisfactory1Needs Improvement / Developing2Effective3Highly Effective43950% of a teachers performance score comes from the ratings on FEAPsInstructional Practice &Professional Ethics 50%Student Growth / VAM50%50% of a teacher performance score comes from the overall total of the rating from the FEAPs indicators as indicated on the slide here. The remaining 50% of the performance score will come from some combination of student performance indicators such as VAM score on FCAT and other appropriate assessments for non-FCAT classes. More information on VAM and student growth indicators follow.

Student Growth Measure?The Student Success Act requires the inclusion of student learning growth measures in teacher evaluations, and it tasks the education commissioner with identifying and implementing student growth models.

Student growth measure accounts for the remaining 50% of the evaluation and is required in the law. The law tasked the DOE with coming up with a model which would fairly evaluate the impact of teachers on student learning.

The Department put together a work group which including researchers from American Institute of Research (AIR), researchers and psychomatricians from Pearson, as well as DOE staff, teacher unions and other stakeholders.

They decided on a Value-added Model. (VAM) This model uses a co-variant process to separate or isolate the impact of the teacher from the other influences on student achievement.

See next slide

The Value-Added Model (VAM)Value-added is a statistical model that uses student-level growth scores to differentiate teacher performance in the area of student learning growth.

The model takes into account other factors that may impact the learning process. These covariates include: prior achievement scores, disability status, mobility, ELL status, attendance, class size, number of subject relevant courses taken, and others. Prior years achievement is the strongest predictor among them. The prior achievement data is combined with other measured student characteristics- the covariates- to form the predicted performance of the student.

The Value-Added Model (VAM)A students predicted performance serves as the target. A student who meets or exceeds his target has a positive impact on the teachers evaluation, and a student not making his target has a negative impact.

The listed covariates are run through the statistical model to establish a predicted, or expected performance level for each student. The model is substantially different than other models that may evaluate teachers based on a single year of student performance or evaluate teachers based on simple comparisons of student growth from one year to the next. Some of the covariates lower the students expected performance level while others raise it.

The Value-Added Model (VAM)The percent of students whose performance is equal to or higher than predicted forms the foundation for the student growth score in the evaluation system.

How a teacher or leader scores is determined is based on the % of students meeting or exceeding their predicted score. A student who meets their expected performance level has a VAM score of 0. When the student exceeds their predicted performance, their score is a postive over 0. When a student scores below their predicted performance, their VAM is a negative below 0.VAM Scores

Students who meet their expected performance levelStudents who fall below their expected performance levelStudents who exceed their expected performance levelHow a teacher scores is determined is based on the % of their students meeting or exceeding their predicted score. A student who meets their expected performance level has a VAM score of 0. When the student exceeds their predicted performance, their score is a positive over 0. When a student scores below their predicted performance, their VAM is a negative below 0.The final VAM score for a teacher is the combined average score based on all of their students.

The higher % of the VAM scores at 0 or higher, the higher score for the teacher on the student growth portion of the evaluation system.

The Value-Added Model (VAM)This overall percent is transferred to a scale which provides a rating for the teacher at highly effective, effective, needs improvement/ developing, or unsatisfactory.

Each district creates their own scale ranges based on scores in the positive and scores in the negative and relates those ranges to a rating of highly effective, effective, Needs improvement or unsatisfactory. That may be changing, as the state is considering creating VAM score ranges and their ratings equaliiency that will be the same for all schools. Escambia County has a good scale on their E3 website.Recorded Webinar for Charter Schools with Kathy Hebda, Deputy Chancellor for Education Quality, and Adam Miller, Charter Schools Director, on the Florida Value-Added Model (VAM) is available at http://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/Information/Charter_Schools/ (bottom of page). This presentation provides an overview of Floridas Value-Added Model and how it should be used for teacher evaluations.

FloridasValue Added Model

Presenter- you may want to have your staff watch the DOE webinar which was created specifically for charter schools. This might clear up some f the questions and confusion around how they are scored. It is suggested that all leaders watch the webinar before they present VAM to their teams.47Teachers of Classes with FCATInstructional Practice &Professional & Job Responsibilities 50%Student Growth MeasureFL VAM50%For teachers of classes with FCAT tests:

Fifty percent (50%)* of the evaluation is based on Instructional Practice and Professional and Job Responsibilities (assessed through an evaluation instrument that measures the professional's performance)

Fifty percent (50%)* of the evaluation is based on Student Learning Growth (using the value-added score calculated and provided by the school district, based on Floridas value-added model) * If less than three years of data are available, the percent of a performance evaluation based on Instructional Practice and Professional and Job Responsibilities will increase to sixty percent (60%) and the percent of a performance evaluation based on Student Learning Growth will decrease to forty percent (40%). The teachers performance on the 6 FEAPs practices and associated indicators under each practice adds together to form 50% of the final score for teachers. The metrics vary based on teaching assignments for the remaining 50% which you will see as we go forward.Non-FCAT TeachersInstructional Practice 50%VAM30%Other SGMs20%Student Growth 50%For teachers of non- FCAT classes:

Student growth must be measured by student learning growth on statewide assessments, or if students do not take statewide assessments, by established learning targets approved by the school-based administrator. Beginning with the 2014-2015 school year, each school district shall administer for each course offered in the district a student assessment that that measures the mastery of the content, as described in the state-adopted course description, at the necessary level of rigor for the course [FS 1008.22 (8)]. Until these assessments are developed by the local district, charter schools will determine the professional's summative performance level, through the combined Professional Practices and student measures as follows

Teachers of Non State-Assessed Courses 50%-Instructional Practice & Professional and Job Responsibilities (Performance Evaluation Instrument) 30%-Student Learning Growth (VAM Score based on FCAT/EOC) 20%-Student Learning Targets (Measurable Student Outcome Goals listed on IPGP) Practices and Student Growth Ratings as follows: Fifty percent (50%)* of the evaluation is based on Instructional Practice and Professional and Job Responsibilities (assessed through an evaluation instrument that measures the professional's performance)

Thirty percent (30%)* of the evaluation is based on Student Learning Growth (using the value-added score calculated and provided by the school district, based on Floridas value-added model)

Twenty percent (20%) of the evaluation is based on Student Learning Targets (student outcome goals delineated in the teacher's Individual Professional Development Plan) that are measured through other standardized assessments, including nationally recognized standardized assessments (i.e., SAT-10), assessments recognized by the state of Florida (i.e., FAIR) and district-developed subject area assessments.

* If less than three years of data are available, the percent of a performance evaluation based on Instructional Practice and Professional and Job Responsibilities will increase to sixty percent (60%) and the percent of a performance evaluation based on Student Learning Growth will decrease to twenty percent (20%). Non-Classroom Instructional Personnel The student learning growth portion of the evaluation must include growth data on statewide assessments for students assigned to the instructional personnel over the course of at least 3 years, or may include a combination of student learning growth data and other measurable student outcomes that are specific to the assigned position, provided that the student learning growth data accounts for not less than 30 percent (30%) of the evaluation. If less than 3 years of student growth data is available, the years for which data is available must be used and the percentage of the evaluation based upon student learning growth may be reduced to not less than 20 percent (20%). Professional Growth Plans (PGP)3 Components Included BelowStudent academic growth goals included in the teachers overall performance scoreMeasurable objectives to meet the goals that clearly identify the expected change in professional practiceAn evaluation plan to determine the effectiveness of the professional development

Presenter, refer to the section of the model that addresses the development of professional growth plans.

Professional Growth: The ProcessAdministrators and teachers meet at the beginning of the year to analyze data, determine goals & targets, and plan professional development.At mid-year a review is held to promote discussion and reflection, and to monitor progress toward the goal using formal and/or informal data.At the end of the year, a final review of the PGP is held with each teacher to examine student data, evidence of participation in PD, subsequent implementation of PD and determination if PD was effective based on the goals. Areas for continued growth are also discussed.Presenter- focus on the process of PGP development described in the model.51Scoring Professional Growth Plans

To calculate the employees TOTAL PGP RATING, add the Totals for each Student Learning Target and divide by 2.

TOTAL SCORE ON INDIVIDUAL PROFESSIONL GROWTH PLAN = ______3.6 - 4.0 = Highly Effective; 3.0 - 3.5 = Effective; 2.0 - 2.9 = Needs Improvement / Developing1.0 - 1.9 = Unsatisfactory Once the total and rating is determined- success on these indicators counts 20% in the student growth measure portion of the of performance evaluation. See next slide52Teachers of Subjects or Grades NOT Assessed with State AssessmentsInstructional Practice &Professional Ethics 50%Fifty percent (50%)* of the evaluation is based on Instructional Practice and Professional and Job Responsibilities (assessed through an evaluation instrument that measures the professional's performance) Thirty percent (30%)* of the evaluation is based on Student Learning Growth (using the value-added score calculated and provided by the school district, based on Floridas value-added model) Twenty percent (20%) of the evaluation is based on Student Learning Targets (student

14 outcome goals delineated in the teacher's Individual Professional Development Plan) that are measured through other standardized assessments, including nationally recognized standardized assessments (i.e., SAT-10), assessments recognized by the state of Florida (i.e., FAIR) and district-developed subject area assessments. * If less than three years of data are available, the percent of a performance evaluation based on Instructional Practice and Professional and Job Responsibilities will increase to sixty percent (60%) and the percent of a performance evaluation based on Student Learning Growth will decrease to twenty percent (20%). LogisticsHow will our system work?Part V- this section of the presentation is intended for leaders to share the nuts and bolts on how their system will work. Who will do what by when? What will teachers do at various points in the year? What should they expect from the leader in the way os support? How eill they receive feedback? What forms will be used? And so on. Presenters should all of this information in their approved model, and should share the details at this point in the presenttion with rthe staff affected by it.54Implementation Components & TimelinesDuring the summer or early fallThroughout the YearEnd of first semesterEnd of YearPresenter- this graphic is a sample of what you might here for YOUR process. Make edits to the boxes on the screen to reflect the process you will use. Add dates to each box for a correct timeline.55Our Plan to Support Teacher Learning and Development

This slide is intended to prompt presenters to lay out the professional development plan for the year which will build capacity of the staff to perform well on the evaluation domains and indicators. Each schools plan will be different, based on their current status, needs, challenges and focus. Presenters should add slides here to highlight major components of the plan.56The FCPCS will offer the following professional development sessions in 2013-14Overview of SB 736 and the FCPCS Evaluation System Understanding the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices Framework of the FCPCS Evaluation System Utilizing the Rubric Evaluating Student Services, Curriculum Support & Personnel/Media Specialists Processes and procedures for evaluating Instructional Personnel Providing specific and timely feedback Conference protocols and forms, meeting requirements & maintenance of records Scoring Rules and Calculations Use of forms and instruments Procedures for training employees Providing employees with support and assistance

Once all of the prior information has been shared, teachers will be curious about what comes next. What is the first thing they should do and what will be the first thing their leader will do to implement the cycle. When will teachers meet with their principals on their PGP? What should they bring to the meeting? What else should they be doing now to prepare for the new teacher evaluation system?58Questions & Reflection