Transcript www.cesa4.k12.wi.us

School Administrator
Performance Evaluation System
Facilitated by Sherri Torkelson and Kaye Henrickson
CESA #4
November 18, 2014
The purpose of the Wisconsin
Educator Effectiveness System
is to help educators grow as
professionals in order to
increase student learning.
2
PRACTICES
Compiled across 3-year cycle
100% of
Educator
Practices Score
Observations
OUTCOMES
Compiled across 3-year cycle
5% of score
DPI calculates
Student or
Program
Scores on 6 EP Standards
Growth
95% of Student
Outcomes Score Artifacts/
Data
Artifacts
Quality of
Process
School-wide VA Reading or Graduation
SLOs (completed annually by everyone)
Resource Documents and Videos
• All of the resources referenced today can
be accessed using this link
SAPES Workshop Resources 11.18.14
This symbol means you have the
handout in your packet!
Today’s Key Questions
• What is the data saying?
• What are the tiers and foundational components of
the EP© model?
• How do Central Office and District Administrator
Evaluation Systems fit into EP©?
• How will school administrator performance be
documented? What does this mean for me – the
evaluator?
• How will school administrator performance be
rated?
• Using MyLearningPlan
Key Question
What’s the data saying?
Data Highlights
Key Question
What are the tiers and
foundational components
©
of the EP model?
Goal of the CESA 6 Effectiveness Project©
Improve Student Learning by enhancing the effectiveness
of all educators and providing each school district with ..
 an effective teacher in every classroom,
 an effective administrator in every school,
 an effective leader(s) in every district, and
 an effective educational system in every community .
Classroom
Teacher
Eval.
(TPES)
Ed.
Specialist
Eval.
(ESPES)
School
Admin.
Eval.
(SAPES)
Central
Office
Admin.
Eval.
(COPES)
Dist. Adm./
Supt.
Eval.
(DAPES)
Implementation of DAPES &
COPES will assist districts to
fulfill State Statute 121.02(1)(Q)
• Each School Board
shall evaluate in
writing all certified
school personnel
in the first year
and at least every
three years.
5-Tiered Professional Evaluation System
SUPERINTENDENTS
CENTRAL OFFICE ADMINS
Business
C&I
Facilities
HR
PS/SP Ed
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
EDUCATIONAL SPECIALISTS
CLASSROOM TEACHERS
Tech
Key Question
How do Central Office and
District Administrator
Evaluation Systems fit into
EP©?
5-Tiered Professional Evaluation System
SUPERINTENDENTS
CENTRAL OFFICE ADMINS
Business
C&I
Facilities
HR
PS/SP Ed
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
EDUCATIONAL SPECIALISTS
CLASSROOM TEACHERS
Tech
CENTRAL OFFICE ADMINISTRATORS:
District employees designated as administrators who provide
leadership and services to other administrators, teachers, staff,
parents and students. Central office administrators supervise
other staff members, a program or a department.
CENTRAL OFFICE ADMINS
Business
C&I
Facilities
HR
*6 COMMON Performance Standards
*UNIQUE Indicator Options for
each Professional Category
PS/SpEd
Tech
The CESA 6 Effectiveness Project©
Performance Evaluation Standards Overview
Teachers
Educational
Specialists
School
Administrators
Central Office
Administrators
District
Administrators
Professional
Knowledge
Professional
Knowledge
Leadership for
Student Learning
Mission, Vision &
Goals
Strategic
Leadership
Instructional
Planning
Communication&
Collaboration
School Climate
Planning &
Analysis
Instructional
Leadership
Instructional
Delivery
Assessment
Human Resources
Leadership
Human Resources
/ Instructional
Leadership
Human Resources
Leadership
See handout:
EP
PerformanceOrganizational
Organizational
Managementfor AllManagement
Standards
Systems
Assessment
FOR/OF Learning
Program Planning
& Management
Operations and
Resource
Management
Learning
Environment
Program Delivery
Communication &
Community
Relationships
Communication &
Community
Relationships
Communication &
Community
Relationships
Professionalism
Professionalism
Professionalism
Professionalism
Professionalism
COPES Training:
CESA #4: January 15, 2015
Key Question
What is the basis of
school administrators’
evaluation?
Influences on Student Achievement:
Explained Variance
Teachers
30%
Home
5-10%
School
5-10%
Peers
5-10%
Students
50%
Hattie (2003): http://acer.edu.au/documents
School Administrator Performance
Standards
1. Leadership for Student Learning
2. School Climate
3. Human Resources Leadership
4. Organizational Management
5. Communication and Community Relations
6. Professionalism
Alignment to ISLLC Standards:
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium
Standards*
Standard 3:
Effective
Management
Standard 4
Collaboration and
Communication
Standard 5: Acting
w/Integrity
Ethnically
X
X
X
X
X
2. School Climate
X
X
3. Human Resources Leadership
X
X
1. Leadership for Student Learning
4. Organizational Management
5. Communication and Community Relations
6. Professionalism
X
Standard 6:
Understanding
Political Legal
Influences
Standard 2: School
Climate
ISLLC
Standard 1: Vision
for Learning
SAPES
X
X
X
X
*EP Leaders are updating this Alignment to reflect the 2014 ISLLC Standards REFRESH.
Main Components
Performance
Standard
Standard 4: Organizational Management
The school administrator fosters the success of all students by supporting, managing, and overseeing the
school’s organization, operation, and use of resources.
Sample Performance Indicators
Performance
Indicators
Examples may include, but are not limited to:
The school administrator:
4.1 Demonstrates and communicates a working knowledge and understanding of the state’s public
education rules, regulations and laws, and school district policies and procedures.
4.2 Establishes and enforces rules and procedures to ensure a safe, secure, efficient, and orderly facility
Performance
and grounds.
Appraisal
4.3 Monitors and provides supervision for all instructional programs, building space usage, and activities.
Rubric
Distinguished*
Effective
In addition to meeting the
requirements for Effective…
Effective is the expected level of
performance.
The school administrator
is highly effective at
organizational
management,
demonstrating proactive
decision-making,
coordinating efficient
operations and
maximizing available
resources.
The school
administrator fosters
the success of all
students by
supporting, managing
and overseeing the
school’s organization,
operation, and use of
resources.
Developing
Needs Improvement
The school administrator
inconsistently supports,
manages, or oversees
the school’s
organization, operation
and/or use of resources.
Unacceptable
The school administrator
ineffectively supports,
manages, or oversees
the school’s
organization, operation
or use of resources.
Visiting the SAPES Guidebook
• Available online at
EP-Resources.cesa6.org
• Let’s do a walk-through of
the School Administrator’s
Guidebook…
Activity: Looking Deeper at the
Standards
• Each person take one of the performance
standards and indicators – p. 21-26 of
SAPES Guidebook. Summarize it in one
sentence.
• Review the SAPES Rubric.
Give an example of what
Effective might look like
for your Standard.
Key Questions
How will school administrator
performance be documented?
What does this mean for me –
the evaluator?
Multiple Data Sources
Surveys
Observations
Doc Log
Professional
Goal Setting
School Administrator Evaluation
Observation/School Site Visits
• Provide information on the wide range of responsibilities
of school administrators
• May range from watching school administrators’
interactions to observing programs and shadowing the
administrator
• Evaluators discuss various aspects of the job via formal
interview or less structured discussion
Data Collection
Procedure
Forms to be
Completed
Observation/
School Site Visits
Observation Forms
Evaluator

School
Administrator
Examples of Observations
• HS principal in parent meeting – informal
observation form
• Committee or Staff Meeting – formal or informal
observation
• Watching while MS principal deals with a student
behavior issue at the volleyball game – informal
observation
• Tagging along on a Building Walk Through –
formal or informal observation
• Other central office people (certified
administrators) can do some of the observations
and document them in MLP
Summary of Observations
New/In Need of
Improvement
Admin
Formal (includes One by December
pre- and post15
conference and
45 minutes of
observation)
Informal (15-20
minutes)
Summary Year
Admin
Non Summary
Year Admin
One by end of year
One by January 30 One by January 30
Two by End of Year One by End of Year
(Three informal
during the
evaluation cycle)
One by End of
Year
Documentation Log
• Artifacts provide evidence of meeting selected performance
standards
• Demonstrates an administrator’s skills, talents, and
accomplishments through an organized collection of work
• No REQUIRED artifacts for School Administrators
• Emphasis is on quality, not quantity
Data Collection
Procedure
Forms to be
Completed
Document Log
Documentation Log
Evaluator

School
Administrator

Let’s talk about Artifacts:
• What is the difference between an Artifact and
Evidence?
• Review the “CESA 4Possible
Artifacts for Principals”
document. For your
standard, highlight
possible artifacts your
principals already have/do.
Surveys
• Gathers client data regarding their perceptions of the school administrator’s
performance.
• Provides feedback for professional growth and development; helps
administrators set goals for continuous improvement (formative evaluation)
• Options: staff, community, family survey
• Survey administered once annually during third nine weeks prior to
April 15
• Sample forms are in the guidebook
• Actual survey responses seen only by school administrator
Data Collection
Procedure
Forms to be
Completed
Surveys
Survey Summary
Form
Evaluator
School
Administrator

Professional Goal Setting Plan
Complete the SLO Process first and consider how you might link to your (PPG) Professional Practice Goal.
Year 1
• Complete 1 SLO
• Complete full Self
Assessment of
Professional
Practice
• Set PPG
Data Collection
Procedure
Professional Goal
Setting Plan
Year 2
• Complete 1 SLO
• From SelfAssessment of
Professional
Practice data focus
in on one or two
standards &
complete PPG
Forms to be Completed
Professional Goal Setting Form
Mid – Year SLO Review
End of the Year – SLO Review
Score Report
Year 3 Summary Year
• Complete 1 SLO
• From SelfAssessment of
Professional
Practice data focus
in on one or two
standards &
complete PPG
Evaluator

Summary Year
Scoring Only
School
Administrator

Professional Goal Setting Plan
Complete the SLO Process first and consider how you might link to your (PPG) Professional Practice Goal.
Year 1
• Complete 1 SLO
• Complete full Self
Assessment of
Professional Practice
• Set PPG
Data Collection
Procedure
Professional Goal
Setting Plan
Year 2 Summary Year
• Complete 1 SLO
• From Self-Assessment of
Professional Practice data
focus in on one or two
standards & complete
PPG
Forms to be Completed
Professional Goal Setting Form
Mid – Year SLO Review
End of the Year – SLO Review
Score Report
Evaluator

Summary Year
Scoring Only
School
Administrator

Activity: The Principal Professional
Goal Setting Plan
• Watch Anne
Clooney, Middle
School Principal,
as she meets
with her
superintendent
about her
Professional
Goal Setting
Plan
Turn and Talk:
• What similarities are
there between the
conference you just
observed and previous
conferences you’ve had
with principals/your
superintendent?
• What differences?
Thinking of your district:
• Have you had any Goal Setting
Conferences with your Principals yet?
• What reflections do you have from them –
what went well? Are there things you
would do differently? What might make
them even more informative to both of
you?
• If you haven’t had any, how will you
structure them using the new form?
Summary of Data Sources for School
Administrators
Observations/
School Site
Visits
• Provide information on wide-range of contributions made by
school administrators
• May range from watching school administrators’ interactions
to observing programs and shadowing the administrator
Documentation
Log
• Artifacts provide evidence of meeting selected performance
standards
• Provides school administrator with opportunity to
demonstrate quality work
Surveys
• Once annually. Options: staff, community, family survey
• Actual survey responses seen only by school administrator
--- Complete a Survey Summary Form.
Professional
Goal Setting
Plan
A plan documented in My Learning Plan that
lists the school learning objective, professional practice goals,
and professional growth strategies.
Summary of Data Collection
Responsibilities
Data Collection
Procedure
Professional Goal
Setting Plan
Form(s) to be Completed
Professional Goal Setting Form
Mid – Year SLO Review
End of the Year – SLO Review
Score Report
Evaluator

School
Administrator

Summary Year
Scoring Only
Observation/
School Site Visits
Observation Forms

Document Log
Documentation Log

Surveys
Survey Summary Form


Roles and Responsibilities
Evaluator
Supporter
of
Evaluators
Implementation
Leader
Implementation Leader
• Implementation Planning Tools
– 2 Year Evaluation Cycle
– 3 Year Evaluation Cycle
• EPIC Resources: EPIC and Liaison Responsibilites, EPIC Checklist
• EP Readiness Audit
Supporter of Evaluators
• Professional Development for Administrators
–
–
–
–
Monthly Check Ins at Admin meetings on EP Implementation
Calibration two times a year
Checklists
Standards and Indicators Deep Dive
• Just In Time Support
– Mini Modules
– Support Sessions – MLP, SLOs,
Surveys, Coaching, Mid Interval
Conferences, PIP, others?
• Resources and Tools
– EP Resource Page
Evaluator
• Checklist – Superintendent as Evaluator
SAPES Timeline
Timeline
September
September
September early October
By October 15
By October 30
By December 15
School Administrator
Responsibilities
Review school data to
identify area(s) of need
for SLO.
Identify targeted student
populations and
evidence sources
Administer appropriate
baseline measure of
student knowledge and
set growth targets for
SLO
Complete Professional
Practice Goal Setting
Plan
Evaluator Responsibilities
Review SLO with new/in need of improvement and summary
year school administrators
Conduct 1 announced site visit with pre-observation & postobservation conferences for new/in need of improvement school
administrators
Continued SAPES Timeline
By January 15
By January 15
Complete interim evaluation of new school/in
need of improvement administrators including
review of mid-year SLO section of the
professional goal setting review form
Review SLO data and complete the mid-year section
of professional goal setting review form
By January 30
Conduct an SLO review conference with summary
year school administrators regarding the mid-year
section of the professional goal setting review form
By January 30
Complete 1 informal school site visit (about 15-20
minutes long) for new/in needs of improvement and
summary year school administrators
By April 15
By May 15
Two weeks prior to end of year
Conduct school climate survey and complete the
survey summary form
Complete documentation log
By End of School Year
Review documentation log for new/in need of
improvement/summary year school administrators
Review SLO data and complete the end of year
review section and PPG review on the professional
goal setting review form
By End of School Year
By End of School Year
Review survey summary form
Score the SLO
Review SLO data with educator for new/in need of
improvement and summary year school
administrators
Holistically score SLO for new/in need of
improvement and summary year educators
Conduct 1 announced site visit with pre-observation
& post-observation conferences for summary year
school administrators
By End of School Year
Conduct 2 additional informal site visits (about 1520 minutes each) for new/in need of improvement
and 1 additional for summary school administrators
By End of School Year
Conduct 1 informal site visit (about 15-20 minutes)
for non-summary school administrators
By End of School Year
Complete summative evaluations/ hold summative
conferences
Deadline for entering summary scores into My
LearningPlan
June 30 (DPI Mandated)
Sample Evaluation Planning
Spreadsheet
Question 5
How will school
administrator
performance be rated?
Terms used in Rating Scale
Category
Description
Definition
Distinguished
The school administrator
maintains performance,
accomplishments, and behaviors
that consistently and considerably
surpass the established standard.
• Sustains high performance over evaluation
cycle
• Behaviors have strong positive impact on
student academic progress and school climate
• Serves as role model to others
Effective
The school administrator meets
the standard in a manner that is
consistent with the school’s
mission and goals.
• Meets the requirements contained in job
description as expressed in evaluation criteria
• Behaviors have positive impact on student
academic progress and school climate
• Willing to learn and apply new skills
Developing/
Needs
Improvement
The school administrator is
inconsistent in meeting standards
and/or in working toward the
school’s missions and goals.
• Requires support in meeting the standards
• Results in less than expected quality of student
academic progress
• Leads to professional growth being jointly
identified and planned between school
administrator and evaluator
Unacceptable
The school administrator
consistently performs below the
established standards or in a
manner that is inconsistent with
the school’s missions and goals.
• Does not meet requirements contained in job
description as expressed in evaluation criteria
• Results in minimal student academic progress
• May contribute to recommendation for school
administrator not being considered for
continued employment
SAPES Rubric
Activity: SAPES Rubrics
• Review the Rubrics for each standard on
the handout What’s in a Rubric?
• In table groups, discuss:
– What the rubrics mean
– What actions would pull an administrator
away from EFFECTIVE for each of the six
standards?
– Questions you have or items that you would
like more clarity on
Summative Scoring Rules
Performance Level
Rating
Distinguished
Effective
Developing/
Needs Improvement
Unacceptable
Score Range
21-24
16-20
12-15
6-11
54
Summative Scoring Rules
Ratings on standards of
Means an Overall Rating of
3 or more Developing
Developing/Needs Improvement
2 or more Needs Improvement
Developing/Needs Improvement
1 or more Unacceptable
Unacceptable
A Performance Improvement Plan will be required if:
1 or more Unacceptable ratings on the standards
2 or more Needs Improvement ratings on the standards
3 or more Developing ratings on the standards
Or any time, as needed, to benefit from additional support
Scoring Example
Scores Shared with DPI directly from MyLearningPlan
Standard
1
Standard
2
Standard
3
Standard
4
Standard
5
Standard
6
Summative
Score by
Evaluator
Holistic
SLO
Score
by
Evaluator
3
3
3
3
3
1
??????
1,2,3
or 4
Summative Reporting
Locally:
• Visually/graphically report all data in most
meaningful ways
• Only between educator and their evaluator(s)
Federal:
•
•
USDE has approved this scoring process
USDE has provided initial approval for state-level
reporting ONLY (for coming year)
58
Scores Reported to DPI
Scores Shared with DPI directly from MyLearningPlan
Standard
1
Standard
2
Standard
3
Standard
4
Standard
5
Standard
6
Summative
Score by
Evaluator
Holistic
SLO
Score
by
Evaluator
1,2,3 or 4 1,2,3 or 4 1,2,3 or 4 1,2,3 or 4 1,2,3 or 4 1,2,3 or 4 1,2,3 or 4
1,2,3
or 4
Questions on the School Administrators
Performance Evaluation System?
MLP for SAPES
MyLearningPlan
• http://bit.ly/MLPSuperintendent
• All Handouts are also on the CESA #4 EE
Effectiveness webpage at
SAPES Workshop Resources 11.18.14
Principals MATTER!!
Sherri Torkelson
Billie Finco
608-786-4830
[email protected]
608-786-4855
[email protected]
Kaye Henrickson
608-786-4827
[email protected]
http://bit.ly/CESA4EE
Torkelson & Finco
64
Thanks for your time
today!!!!
Please complete the online Exit Ticket at