Tennessee Teacher Evaluation Technical Advisory Group Orientation Meeting May 12, 2011

Agenda

      Welcome and Introductions Understanding Tennessee’s Evaluation Development Process Review the Teacher Evaluation Technical Advisory Group’s Roles and Responsibilities Defining “Comparable” Analyze the Criteria for Review Review of Recommendation Process • Accessing Recommendations – Hope Street Group Portal • • Using the Criteria Method for Responding to Recommendations • • Adding Additional Recommendations Timeline 4/25/2020 2

Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model

An Overview

Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model

The Vision: Accountability: valid, reliable, defensible Professional growth: collegial and collaborative 4/25/2020 4

First to the Top Act, January 2010

    50% based on quantitative student data:  35% student growth, 15% approved student achievement measures 50% based on qualitative instrument/process Authorizes teacher effect data to be shared with approved teacher preparation programs if the data does not personally identify particular teachers Requires annual evaluation of all teachers and principals and that evaluations be a factor in personnel decisions, including promotion, retention, tenure, and compensation 4/25/2020 5

Teacher Evaluation: An Overview

Effectiveness Ratings

 Evaluations will differentiate teachers and principals into

five effectiveness groups:

4/25/2020 7

35% Growth Measures

 TVAAS Scores where available  Groups of 8 –12 educators in each of the non ‐ tested subject and grade groupings have met to recommend measures.

 The Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE) and a Teacher Evaluation Technical Advisory Group of state and national experts will review the recommendations of the Development Teams to determine the list of approved measures. 4/25/2020 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Academic Interventionists Career Technical Education Educators with Caseloads Computer Technology 8.

9.

English Language Learners Fine Arts High School Courses in English, Math, Science, and Social Studies without state tests Library/Media Specialists Physical Education/Health/Wellness 10. Pre-kindergarten-Grade 3 11. Special Education 12. World Languages 8

15% Other Achievement Measures

 To develop options for the 15% achievement portion of the teacher evaluation, the Teacher Evaluation Advisory Committee (TEAC) recommended a menu of options, approved by the State Board, from which teachers may choose, in cooperation with their administrator, for use in their evaluation. The chosen measures should reflect the educator’s primary responsibility as directly as possible.  Measures are under review currently for appropriateness and scalability. 4/25/2020 9

    

Guidelines for 50% Qualitative Component

 Qualitative appraisal instruments must address the following domains: – Planning – – Environment Professionalism – Instruction Observation rubric shared and available to all teachers; teachers should be trained TDOE to provide user-friendly, manageable forms to document observations and personal conferences Feedback from observation visits provided within one week Minimum of 4 observations for non-apprentice teachers Minimum of 6 observations for apprentice teachers 4/25/2020 10

Required Observations

Professional Teachers-Four Observations Annually

1. 15-minute observation covering 3 indicators 2. Lesson-length observation covering 12 indicators 3. 15-minute observation covering 4 indicators 4. Lesson-length observation covering 12 indicators

Apprentice Teachers—Six Observations Annually

1. 15-minute observation covering 3 indicators 2. Lesson-length observation covering 12 indicators 3. 15-minute observation covering 4 indicators 4. Lesson-length observation covering 12 indicators 5. 15-minute observation covering 7 indicators 6. Lesson-length observation covering 12 indicators 4/25/2020 11

Selection of the TAP Rubric

 Research – – – Nearly 2 decades of research and refinement, with large-scale implementations Research has shown positive correlation between TAP rubric ratings and student growth.

TN CRED survey results have been positive.

 Resources – TAP Training Portal with extensive videos and other instructional resources – – TAP has capacity to train all observers and evaluators; not train-the-trainer TAP prepared to administer certification tests for all observers  Meaningful, but Manageable 4/25/2020 12

Teacher Evaluation Technical Advisory Group

Roles and Responsibilities

Roles and Responsibilities

The Teacher Evaluation Technical Advisory Group (TETAG) will be responsible for the following:  Finalizing a set of criteria to use when evaluating the recommendations from the Development Teams  Reviewing and commenting on recommendations from the Development Teams  Determining if the recommendations are appropriate instruments for measuring teacher effectiveness by applying standardized criteria  Advising the TDOE on other instruments that could be used for teacher evaluations in the 12 educator categories 4/25/2020 14

Roles and Responsibilities

The TETAG will also be responsible for the following:  Making final instrument recommendations to the TDOE  Making recommendations to TDOE on a year’s growth for each measure as initially recommended to the TDOE (In some cases, the group may recommend the actual baseline and growth levels; in others, the group will identify a clear process involving psychometricians and educators to determine expected growth levels.) 4/25/2020 15

FTTT Statute & Defining Comparable

FTTT Statutory language

Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-1-302(d)(1) and (2)

Thirty-five percent (35%) of the evaluation criteria shall be student achievement data based on student growth data as represented by the TVAAS, developed pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 1, Part 6, or some other comparable measure of student growth, if no such TVAAS data is available.

‘Comparable’



‘Comparable’ is not defined in statute

– Where terms in statute are not defined, courts will reference a standard dictionary definition  Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2011. com·pa·ra·ble –adjective 1. capable of being compared ; having features in common with something else to permit or suggest comparison : He considered the empires to be comparable.

Roman and British 2. worthy of comparison : shops comparable to those on Fifth Avenue. 3. usable for comparison ; similar: We have no comparable data on Russian farming.

Development Team Recommendations

Review Criteria & Process

Educator Group Categories

Development Teams

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Academic Interventionists Career Technical Education Educators with Caseloads Computer Technology English Language Learners Fine Arts High School Courses in English, Math, Science, and Social Studies without state tests Library/Media Specialists Physical Education/Health/Wellness Pre-kindergarten-Grade 3 Special Education World Languages



Non-Tested Subject and Grades Assessment Overall Criteria

The assessments match the curriculum standards.  The assessments are free of bias.  The assessment achievement levels are appropriate.

 The assessment administration is standardized.

 The assessments are scored and reported in a consistent manner.

Review Criteria

Category 1

 High-quality, appropriate measure of academic growth  Reliable – similar results and secure administration     Would yield a similar distribution of scores to TVAAS Valid - sufficiently aligned with curriculum Transparent Fiscally responsible* • • PreK-3 HS Core non-tested *’Fiscally responsible’ will ultimately be determined by TDOE, but should be a criteria for TETAG review as well.

Review Criteria

Category 2

 Appropriate measure of student growth  Credible     Would yield distribution of scores Valid - sufficiently aligned with curriculum Transparent Fiscally responsible* • - World Languages - CTE - ELL - Library Media Specialists Computer Technology - Academic Interventionists - Caseloads - Fine Arts - Special Education - PE/Health *’Fiscally responsible’ will ultimately be determined by TDOE, but should be a criteria for TETAG review as well.

Decision Rubric

 Met – Assessment met all five criteria.

 Met With Comment – Assessment met four of the five criteria with comment as appropriate on the criteria not met.

 Not Met With Comment – Assessment met fewer than four of the criteria.

Recommendations Review Process

  Accessing recommendations and other useful information  Hope Street Group Portal  Catherine Cullen, Education Analyst (301) 922-3755; [email protected]

Finalizing and using the criteria  Method for responding to the recommendations – feedback form  Adding additional recommendations – planning document posted  Timeline

Purpose Welcome and process orientation Deadline for responses from the TETAG Date/Time

May 12: 90 min conference call June 6 4/25/2020 25

Thank You!