Evaluations Update

General Administrators Dr. Glenn Maleyko.

February 27, 2014

Timelines Have Changed

 All Evaluation Documents must be submitted to HR by May 10 recall. th . This is to comply with board of education policy on layoff and  Goal Deadlines Moved up  Goals for Subsequent Year Should be discussed and teachers should create them with data from year-end evaluations  A Google Calendar with Evaluation Deadlines was created.

      

Teacher Evaluation Committee

Bill Tucker Jill Chochol Andrew Denison Fatme Faraj Mark Palise Shannon Peterson Linda Salamey Robert Seeterlin Hassane Jaafar Julia Maconochie Gail Shenkman Chris Sipperley Wyatt David Steve Salah Glenn Maleyko Nicole Chubb

Weighted Formula

 75% will be based on Observation Protocol and the 5 Standards for Effective Teaching.   This includes observations (formal and not formal), walkthroughs, other performance measures that are related to the teacher evaluation rubric which includes all 5 standards. Professional Responsibilities are included as one of the standards.

25% Growth Data

 5% District growth based on state accountability measures  10% Building Growth based on state or building or district common assessments  10% Classroom Growth based on State Assessments,

10% Building Growth Data

 Elementary -SRI, DRA & DRA task analysis, Star Math, 6 plus 1 traits, Building/District Common Assessments, NWEA, MEAP, Art, Music and & PE common Assessments.  Middle School -SRI, DRA, Star Math, 6 plus 1 traits, Building/District Common Assessments, NWEA, MEAP, Art, Music and & PE common Assessments, and Explore.

 High School- Explore, Plan, MME, MEAP, SRI, Star Math, Common Assessments, AP exams, and Departmental Assessments.

10% Classroom Growth Data

 10% Classroom Growth based on State Assessments, District Common Assessments or Classroom Assessments (ex. Performance or product measures or other formative assessments, pre and post tests are required).

Teachscape

 We have 59 Administrators that have passed the assessment. 14 started in a new cohort this year.



Proposed Legislation in Lansing

House Bill 5223 (MCL 380.1249 & 380.1531j) would revise current evaluation requirements for teachers, and require that school districts meet new requirements for school administrator evaluations, as described in detail in House Bill 5224.

Weighted Evaluation Timeline HB 5223

 Percentage remain at 25 percent during the next three academic years: 2014-2015; 2015-2016; and 2016-2017.

 Then in 2017-2018 school year, the student growth component would be raised to 50 percent.

Student Growth

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 Observation Growth Data

Multiple Observations

 Require that a teacher be observed at least 2 times each year  unless the teacher had received a rating of effective or highly effective on the two most recent evaluations.

 One observation must be unannounced



Ineffective Teacher Dismissals

 Currently, school districts and charter schools must dismiss teachers rated as ineffective on 3 consecutive year-end evaluations. House Bill 5223 would retain this provision,

Continued

but specify that it would apply only if the evaluations were conducted using the same evaluation framework and under the same performance evaluation system.

HB 5223 Student Growth and Assessment Must Consist of

 State student growth and assessment measurement standards,  And a local student growth assessment, and may also include school-level

Weighting of Student Growth and Assessment Data

 40 Percent Based on State Assessment if available in Content Area  Other Teachers State Provided Data or Local Assessments

State Deadline

 Require the State Student Growth and Assessment Data by March 1, 2014.



Practice Component of Evaluations & Teacher Observations

 80% of practice component must be based on observations.

4 choices

 Charlotte Danielson's Framework for  Teaching;  the Marzano Teacher Evaluation  Thoughtful Classroom  Five Dimensions.

HB 5224 Administrator Evaluation 3 Choices

 The school advance administrator evaluation instrument developed by  Reeves and McNeill for the Michigan Association ofSchool Administrators;  the Reeves Leadership Performance Rubric;  or the Marzano Framework