Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR) January 31, 2013

1. Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR) January 31, 2013

2. Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR)A research-based instrument to evaluate teacher effectiveness M-STAR’s Goal: To improve teacher practice and positively impact student learning M-STAR: • provides a reliable and valid process based on common standards, • includes multiple measures, • indentifies areas of strength and challenge, and • helps track educational progress to improve the performance of teachers.

3. The National Perspective: Research and Reports • Research confirms that teachers and leaders matter most to students’ achievement. • Recent studies find current educator evaluation systems are deficient in three key ways: • Lack sufficient connection to goals for student learning and growth • Do not provide educators with adequate feedback for improvement • Fail to differentiate educator effectiveness

4. Trends in Teacher Evaluation • Inclusion of student achievement growth data represents a huge “culture shift” in evaluation • Focus on models and measures that help teachers/schools/districts improve performance • Policy is way ahead of the research in teacher evaluation measures and models

5. U.S. Department of Education Priority for Identifying Effective Teachers Method for determining and identifying effective and highly effective teachers: • Must include multiple measures • Effectiveness evaluated, in significant part, on the basis of student growth • Supplemental measures may include multiple observation based instruments

6. Defining Teacher Quality • “Highly qualified teacher” status: • Bachelor’s degree • Full state certification • Demonstrated knowledge of assigned subject(s) • “Highly effective teacher” status: • Student academic growth • Other measures

7. Defining Teacher Quality • Stakeholder engagement • Mississippi Teachers of the Year • State Teacher Evaluation Council (STEC) • Meetings with Teachers and Principals • Teacher Focus Groups (2,000 Teachers) • Teacher Organizations • Mississippi Association of School Superintendents • Contract with American Institutes for Research (AIR) to streamline and redesign instrument

8. Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF)in Mississippi • Five Year Federal Grant • Awarded September 2010 • $ 10.7 Million Award for MS • Serves 10 schools in 7 districts • Multi-strategy approach to school improvement

9. Multiple Strategies Five TIF Project Components for School Improvement • Educator Evaluation • Student Growth Data • Professional Development • Career Ladders for Teachers • Performance Based Compensation

10. M-STAR DOMAINS, STANDARDS, PERFORMANCE LEVELS, AND RATINGS

11. M-STAR Why a standardized process? • Increases the validity of the evaluation and the reliability of the evaluation instruments • Ensures teachers are evaluated fairly, using consistent criteria • Ensures that scores are based on evidence, not on personal judgment or bias • Strengthens evaluative decisions

12. How is M-STAR Different?

13. Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR) • Five domains (weighted equally) • Planning • Assessment • Instruction • Learning Environment • Professional Responsibilities • 20 Standards • Four levels of effectiveness: • Unsatisfactory • Emerging • Effective • Distinguished

14. A teacher’s summative rating is based on two components: Professional Practice and Student Outcomes. Professional Practice: 50% M-STAR: 30% • 2 formal observations • 5 informal observations (walkthroughs) Professional Growth Goals: 20% • Self-evaluate, receive feedback, and progress toward goals Student Outcomes: 50% Individual Growth • State tested areas OR Student Learning Objectives • Non-tested areas AND School-wide Growth • Tested and Non-tested

15. Formal Observation Cycle Review lesson plan, understand context, & ask clarifying questions Key Questions: What are students learning? What is the evidence of this learning? Effective, concrete feedback & next steps are critical. Observe feedback in action

16. Scoring Process • Teachers will receive a rating (on a point scale) for each standard • 4 points • 3 points • 2 points • 1 point • Within each domain, the points will be averaged. • The averages from each domain will be weighted equally to arrive at a summative rating.

17. M-STAR Ratings A teacher’s performance will be appraised in accordance with a four-level rating scale: • Level 4 Distinguished: indicates that the teacher’s performance consistently exceeds expectations. • Level 3 Effective: indicates that the teacher’s performance meets expectations. • Level 2 Emerging: indicates that the teacher’s performance inconsistently meets expectations. • Level 1 Unsatisfactory: indicates that the teacher’s performance does not meet expectations.

18. Example: Summative Observation Rating (2.75 + 4 + 2.5 + 3.5 + 2.5) 5

19. MS Teacher Evaluation System Pilot Implementation (TIF) 2011 - 2012 Statewide Training on New System July 2012 – July 2013 Field Test the System 2013 - 2014 Full Implementation 2014 - 2015 Implementation Timeline

20. M-STAR TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL FOCUS GROUP RESPONSESPRE-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE Principals • Clear expectations for both teachers and principals • Opportunity for open dialogue • Information on what administrators want to observe • Easing of teachers’ anxieties • Relationship building with teachers • Opportunity for knowledge gathering • Alerting of principals to special circumstances Teachers Clear expectations for both teachers and principals Specific, timely feedback Principal awareness of what will occur in the classroom Teacher/principal communication Necessity of teacher preparation Focus on teacher’s strengths and weaknesses Teacher self-reflection Prior identification of potential problems

21. M-STAR TEACHER AND PRINCIPAL FOCUS GROUP RESPONSESPOST-OBSERVATION CONFERENCE Principals • Feedback on strengths and areas of challenges • Teacher reflection • Open dialogue • Provision of accommodations and recommendations for improvement • Relationship building • Teacher input regarding professional development needs • Time for teacher/administration collaboration • Opportunity for coaching and professional learning Teachers Immediate, timely feedback Dialogue on strengths and areas of improvement Opportunity for professional development and improvement plans Self-reflection Teacher explanations of classroom activities (planned and unplanned)

22. TO IMPROVE TEACHING AND LEARNING! The ultimate goal of M-STAR is…

23. mstar@mde.k12.ms.us