Transcript Slide 0
Teacher Evaluation: Professional Practice
Compass Update April 2012
L O U I S I A N A D E P A R T M E N T O F E D U C A T I O N
Objectives:
•
Share findings about Compass rubric from pilot districts
•
Share LDOE’s decisions regarding the teacher rubric in response to these findings
•
Identify LDOE supports for implementation
2
Setting Our Priorities Compass and Common Core are LDOE’s top two priorities.
Common Core:
Shifting expectations for students
Compass:
Shifting educator support and evaluation practices to align with these new expectations
• • • • •
How Will We Achieve in the Classroom?
In order to turn our beliefs into higher student achievement, we will use Common Core Standards and the Compass system as guides. Goal Setting: Teachers in all subjects will set quantifiable achievement goals for each student. Assessment and Content: Teachers in all subjects will select assessments and curricular materials that align with skills students are expected to demonstrate on new Common Core assessment items. Feedback: Principals and other instructional leaders will observe all teachers and will provide feedback based on a Common Core-aligned rubric. Collaboration: Teachers will work in teams to examine student work and to articulate specific changes in instructional practice that will align student performance to Common Core standards. Identifying leaders: Districts will use Compass effectiveness ratings to identify teacher leaders who can take on new responsibilities to support these Core Elements in their schools.
Overview
1.
What is Compass?
2.
Compass Pilot Findings
3.
Adapting the Tools
4.
Waiver Process & Next Steps
5
Compass Elements
6
The Purpose of Compass Compass is intended to ensure:
• Teachers set meaningful goals for students; • Teachers and leaders collaboratively evaluate student progress relative to goals; • Teachers receive specific feedback on their performance to drive improvement; and • Teachers, administrators, and district leaders have annual effectiveness data to inform decision-making
Compass Process & Components
Set Goals
-For Educators -For Students
Observation & Feedback Evaluate Performance
-Student Growth -Prof. Practice
Use Data
to Inform Human Capital Decisions
Compass Process & Components
•
Two components of evaluation
Student Growth Measures • Value-Added Model OR • Student Learning Targets Professional Practice Measures • Observations
LDOE Support
• Provide a model observation tool, and create a waiver process for LEAs which desire to use alternative tools • Provide districts with evaluation guidance and tools for teachers in non-tested grades and subjects •
Train educators statewide this spring and summer on Compass tools (teacher effectiveness rubric, goal setting process)
• Assist district and school staff throughout next school year in making the Core Elements part of everyday practice. They will
facilitate collaboration among educators; will observe classroom practice and provide feedback; and will review progress with district administrators.
Compass Pilot Findings
11
Piloting Compass: Purpose The Compass Pilot served to:
1.
Test the tools and process developed by collaboration between LDOE and educators, and 2.
Gather feedback from the field on how the tools could be improved prior to statewide implementation
12
Compass Pilot: What Did We Learn?
1.
Simplify the process.
• Focus on positions who are responsible for the academic outcomes of a specific group of students (eg, classroom teachers, librarians, and guidance counselors), and • End requirements for multiple conferences, streamline the goal setting process, eliminate restrictive timelines
2.
Lessen the burden on principals.
• Expand the group of school-based staff and district teams who can assist teachers in setting targets and conducting observations
3.
Revise the teacher rubric to be clearer, more concise, and more directly aligned to the Common Core.
Compass Pilot: What Did We Learn?
1.
Simplify the process.
2.
Lessen the burden on principals.
3.
Revise the teacher rubric to be clearer, more concise, and more directly aligned to the Common Core.
• Redundancies exist within standards and descriptors.
• Evaluators have had difficulty distinguishing between the top two levels of effectiveness. • Focus on core competencies directly aligned to support more rigorous instruction for Common Core
Compass Pilot: Recommendations
1.
Adopt modified version of Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching, a nationally recognized evaluation and support model.
• Narrow number of performance standards to focus on core components.
• Move to a 4 point scale to make effectiveness levels more distinct.
• Leverage resources available nationally.
The Danielson Rubric
•
A good choice for students and teachers: Supports teacher improvement and professional growth
− Easy to distinguish standards and performance levels •
Will align to Common Core
•
Tried and true
− Implemented in >15 states − Approved in AR, NJ, NY, OH, PA, WA and major cities nationwide •
Accompanied by numerous support materials
•
Emphasizes Planning and Instruction
The Danielson Rubric
D1: Planning and Preparation
1a Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy 1b Demonstrating Knowledge of Students
1c Setting Instructional Outcomes
1d Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources 1e Designing Coherent Instruction 1f Designing Student Assessments
D3: Instruction
3a Communicating With Students
3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c Engaging Students in Learning 3d Using Assessment in Instruction
3e Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness
D2: Classroom Environment
2a Creating an Environment of Respect and Rapport 2b Establishing a Culture for Learning
2c Managing Classroom Procedures
2d Managing Student Behavior 2e Organizing Physical Space
D4: Professional Responsibilities
4a Reflecting on Teaching 4b Maintaining Accurate Records 4c Communicating with Families 4d Participating in a Professional Community 4e Growing and Developing Professionally 4f Showing Professionalism
The Danielson Rubric
These five core components help teachers and leaders focus on:
1c Setting Instructional Outcomes 2c Managing Classroom Procedures 3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques 3c Engaging Students in Learning 3d Using Assessment in Instruction
•
High-impact activities,
narrowed and focused from ACEE recommendations
•
Concrete, observable actions
to help teachers understand what and how to change
•
Rigor, consistent with Common Core:
−
1c Setting Instructional Outcomes
−
3b Using Questioning and Discussion Techniques
−
3c Engaging Students in Learning
•
Taking a Closer Look at the Components
Setting Instructional Outcomes (1c): Establishing clear, rigorous objectives that describe what students will learn. • Managing Classroom Procedures (2c): Establishing a smoothly functioning classroom through the management of instruction and transitions to allow for maximum learning for all students.
• Using Questioning and Discussion (3b): Strategically using a varied set of questions to engage all students in discussion around rigorous content.
• Engaging Students in Learning (3c): Asking all students to do work that is rigorous an intellectually challenging.
• Using Assessment in Instruction (3d): Using clear assessment criteria to drive instructional choices throughout the lesson and at the end.
1c: Setting Instructional Outcomes Critical Attributes Ineffective
Outcomes represent low expectations for students and lack of rigor, nor do they all reflect important learning in the discipline. Outcomes are stated as activities, rather than as student learning. Outcomes reflect only one type of learning and only one discipline or strand, and are suitable for only some students.
• Outcomes lack rigor. • Outcomes do not represent important learning in the discipline. • Outcomes are not clear or are stated as activities. • Outcomes are not suitable for many students in the class.
The Danielson Rubric
Effective: Emerging
Outcomes represent moderately high expectations and rigor. Some reflect important learning in the discipline, and consist of a combination of outcomes and activities. Outcomes reflect several types of learning, but teacher has made no attempt at coordination or integration. Most of the outcomes are suitable for most of the students in the class based on global assessments of student learning. • Outcomes represent a mixture of low expectations and rigor. • Some outcomes reflect important learning in the discipline. • Outcomes are suitable for most of the class.
Effective: Proficient
Most outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. All the instructional outcomes are clear, written in the form of student learning, and suggest viable methods of assessment. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and opportunities for coordination. Outcomes take into account the varying needs of groups of students.
• Outcomes represent high expectations and rigor. • Outcomes are related to “big ideas” of the discipline. • Outcomes are written in terms of what students will learn rather than do. • Outcomes represent a range of outcomes: factual, conceptual understanding, reasoning, social, management, communication. • Outcomes are suitable to groups of students in the class, differentiated where necessary.
Highly Effective
All outcomes represent rigorous and important learning in the discipline. The outcomes are clear, written in the form of student learning, and permit viable methods of assessment. Outcomes reflect several different types of learning and, where appropriate, represent opportunities for both coordination and integration. Outcomes take into account the varying needs of individual students.
In addition to the characteristics of “proficient,” • Teacher plans reference curricular frameworks or blueprints to ensure accurate sequencing. • Teacher connects outcomes to previous and future learning • Outcomes are differentiated to encourage individual students to take educational risks.
Calculating a Teachers Overall Score
Averaging the student growth score and the professional practice score provides the final evaluation score.
(Each component generates a score between 1.0-4.0.)
Professional Practice Student Growth Score + 2 Score = Final Evaluation Score
Calculating Rubric Score
The Compass rubric consists of five components; teachers are assigned a score of 1, 2, 3, or 4 on each of the five components.
Teacher receives a 1 on each of the five components of the observation rubric
Sum of Component Scores 5 6 7 Average 1.00
1.20
1.40
8 1.60
To calculate a teacher’s overall score on the observation rubric, take the average of his/her scores on each component of the observation rubric (i.e., sum his/her scores on each component and then divide by five to reflect the five components).
Teacher receives a 4 on each of the five components of the observation rubric 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1.80
2.00
2.20
2.40
2.60
2.80
3.00
3.20
3.40
3.60
3.80
4.00
Teachers receiving an average score of less than 1.5 on the observation rubric will receive an
overall Compass rating of
‘Ineffective’
Effective: Emerging Effective: Proficient Highly Effective
22
The Overall Compass Score
Teachers will then receive a rating based on their overall COMPASS score.
Teacher Rating Rule
Overall COMPASS score of 1.00-1.49 Ineffective Effective Emerging:
OR
Received a score less than 1.50 on either the observation rubric or student growth measure Overall COMPASS score of 1.50 to 2.49
AND
Effective Proficient: Did not receive a score less than 1.50 on either the observation rubric or student growth measure Overall COMPASS score of 2.50 to 3.49
AND
Did not receive a score less than 1.50 on either the observation rubric or student growth measure Highly Effective: Overall COMPASS score of 3.50 to 4.00