1 / 26

Introduction to 2013-14

Introduction to 2013-14. Principal Performance Review (PPR). 1. Today’s agenda. 1. Context and components of 2013-14 Principal Performance Review (PPR) under 3012-c. 2. Summative ratings, timelines and next steps. 3. Frequently Asked Questions. 4. Q&A. 2. Today’s agenda.

arnold
Download Presentation

Introduction to 2013-14

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Introduction to 2013-14 Principal Performance Review (PPR) 1

  2. Today’s agenda 1. Context and components of 2013-14 Principal Performance Review (PPR) under 3012-c 2. Summative ratings, timelines and next steps 3. Frequently Asked Questions 4. Q&A 2

  3. Today’s agenda 1. Context and components of 2013-14 Principal Performance Review (PPR) under 3012-c 2. Summative ratings, timelines and next steps 3. Frequently Asked Questions 4. Q&A 3

  4. History of the DOE’s Principal Performance Review The 2013-14 PPR uses core components of the multiple measures principal performance review system that has been in place in NYC for the last six years Current PPR New System QualityReview Local Measures of Student 22% Progress Reports Learning 20% 32% Measures ofState or Leadership Goals andObjectives Attention toPopulationsw/ Particular Comparable Practice 31% Measures of 60% StudentLearning 20% Needs 5% Compliance 10% 4

  5. Goals of 2013-14 PPR 1. Instructionally valuable: Supports educators in making instructional decisions 2. Supports educator development: Helps educators improve their practice 3. School-level autonomy: Creates options to support school-level autonomy where possible 4. Reliable and valid: Measures educator effectiveness consistently and accurately 5. Fair: Does not disadvantage educators based on population of students served 6. Transparent: Clear/understandable to educators 7. Feasible: Can be implemented without undue burden These goals are designed to support a common vision:An effective principal in every school for every student. 5

  6. Key requirements of the 2013-14 PPR State Measures of Other System Measures of Student Learning Requirements Leadership (20%) Practice (60%) Measures based on Minimum of two All superintendents will be growth on state/NYCDOE supervisory visits using certified annually on the Quality Review rubric assessments new system Superintendents and Principals rated “developing” or“ineffective” will trained administrators conduct school visits Local Measures of implement a PrincipalImprovement Plan in the Student Learning (20%) subsequent year Select NYCDOE Progress Report measures focused on performance and progress 6

  7. 40% of a principal’s overall rating will be based onMeasures of Student Learning (MOSL) • Every principal will have two different 2013-14 PPR measures of student learning • Local measures, which include performance and progress components • State or comparable measures, which are focused on student growth 20% • In total, the measures value both progress and performance, with an 60% 20% emphasis on the progress schools make with students • Multiple measures provide principals with different sources of feedback and amore valid and robust picture of State or Comparable Measures Local Measures principal performance Measures of Leadership Practice 7

  8. Local measures (20%) are based on key ProgressReport metrics K-2 Schools**** Elementary, Middle, K-8 Schools • DOE-approved assessments • ELA/math average proficiency • ELA/math median growth percentile - all students District 75 • ELA/math median growth percentile - students in school’s lowest third • NYSAA % proficient • ELA/math average proficiency (EMS) High Schools & Transfer Schools** • Regents performance (HS, as of June) • 4- and 6-year graduation rate (as of June) • ELA/math median growth percentile (EMS) • % students earning 10+ credits*** ** For transfer high schools, only 6-year graduation rates will be used *** Similar to the Progress Report, six of the ten credits must be in three of the four core subjects **** More information will be provided this summer; for early childhood schools including Grade 3, ELA/mathaverage proficiency will be used. 8

  9. Details of local measures Progress Report metrics Elementary, Middle, K-8 Schools, some D75 • ELA/math average proficiency (65% of Local Measures) -This measure represents the average proficiency rating for all students attributed to the school in ELA and math. • ELA/math median growth percentile, all students (17.5%) - This measure calculates the median growth percentile students in a school. A student’s growth percentile compares his or her growth to the growth of all students in the City who started at the same level of proficiency the year before. • ELA/math median growth percentile, students in school’s lowest third (17.5%) - This measure calculate the median growth percentile of the lowest-performing third of students within each grade and subject in the school. High Schools & Transfer Schools • 4- and 6-year graduation rate, as of June (65% of Local Measures)* • % students earning 10+ credits (35%) - This measures the percentage of students at a school who accumulate 10 or more academic credits in a school year. At least six of the ten creditsmust be earned in three of the four core subjects (English, math, science and social studies).This level of credit accumulation keeps students on track to graduate in four years. * For transfer high schools, only 6-year graduation rates will be used 9

  10. Local measures are calculated using the Progress Reportmethodology 1. For each school type, a school’s result is compared to: • Up to 40 peer schools serving similar students, and • The citywide average 2. A school’s result is compared primarily to peer schools, so that the varying challengesschools face in serving students is taken into account: (% of peer range) x 75% + (% of city range) x 25% 3. The metrics are combined based on the weight of each one (as shown on the previous slide) and a percentile rank is calculated. HEDI points and ratings are basedon a school’s percentile rank. 10

  11. State growth or comparable measures (20%) are selected bythe state or DOE based on grade level • Principals of 4-8 Math and ELA and high schools will be evaluatedusing SED-provided growth or value-added scores. For high schools, SED has proposed two new metrics for each principal: • Growth Percentile on ELA and Integrated Algebra Regents • Comparative Growth in Regents Exams Passed The metrics will be weighted by the number of students. • Principals of schools with other state tests will be evaluated using DOE-provided growth scores on state assessments (e.g., 3rd grade Mathand ELA, NYSAA) • Principals of schools without state tests (e.g., K-2 schools) will beevaluated using DOE-approved assessments** ** More information will be provided this summer 11

  12. Measures of Leadership Practice (60%): Superintendentswill rate principals annually using the QR rubric 2013-14 PPR System The Measures of Leadership Practice (60%) willconsist of a minimum of two supervisory visitsbased on the Quality Review rubric: • In cases where schools have a scheduled Quality Review, it will count for one supervisory visit. Allother supervisory visits will be referred to as aPrincipal Practice Observation (PPO). The PPO 20% will be based on the Quality Review rubric, but willnot follow the structure of a formal Quality Review 20% 60% • In 2013-14,one of the visits will be announced, one will be unannounced • One visit must be conducted by the superintendent. In many cases, superintendents will conduct both visits. Otherwise, some visits will State or ComparableMeasures be conducted by cluster or central staff.Superintendents confer a rating for the 60% at theend of the year. Local Measures Measures of LeadershipPractice 12

  13. Goals for supervisory visits To yield feedback for principals that improves their practice and thusthe overall quality of the schools you lead To ensure that our principal performance review is instructionally valuableand continues to focus the work of school leaders on what mattersmost: the instructional core and the systems and structures that facilitateimprovements to the core To create a meaningful process that is feasible to implement for allconstituents without undue burden 13

  14. Principal Practice Observation guidance • In general, the process will last no more than one school day and will consist of: • Principal interview(s) • Classroom visitations and debriefs • Evaluator reflection • PPO debrief • Each of the above components will closely follow the Quality Review protocols for the principal interview, classroom visits and debrief and end of day one debrief. A conversation between the principal and the evaluator will inform the evaluator’sclassroom visitation selections • Prior to the visit, the superintendent or trained administrator will review key data trails such as Progress Reports, Quality Reviews, and prior supervisory visits • The evaluator (superintendent or trained administrator) will use the Principal Practice Observation tool to gather and record low-inference evidence aligned to the Quality Review indicators • A network representative can be invited at the discretion of the principal to be present during a visit 14

  15. Sample of the Principal Practice Observation tool Final draft will be shared in Principals’ Weekly in August 15

  16. Use of Principal Practice Observation tool The Principal Practice Observation tool was created to provide guidancearound how to gather evidence on a principal’s practice in the context ofthe Quality Review rubric. The tool: • Serves as an evidence gathering tool (in the same function as the QR record book) during supervisory visits • Provides examples and questions directly connected to leadership practices embedded in each indicator of the Quality Review rubric • Allows strong leadership practices to be recognized in the context of new or struggling schools • Evidence gathered will ultimately be scored against the Quality Review rubric to yield 60% of a principal’s annual rating • The questions embedded in the tool can also serve as a reflection exercise for principals 16

  17. Supervisory visits will yield actionable feedbackthroughout the year • Following the Quality Review: exit conference at the end of day two; QR report within eight weeks • Following the PPO: low inference, verbal feedback at the end of the day around what was seen and heard regarding each QR indicator Note: At the end of the year, every principal will receive written summative feedback from their superintendent. 17

  18. Today’s agenda 1. Context and components of 2013-14 Principal Performance Review (PPR) under 3012-c 2. Summative ratings, timelines and next steps 3. Frequently Asked Questions 4. Q&A 18

  19. Every principal will receive an overall summative ratingbased on multiple measures of principal effectiveness Measures State or Locally- of Comparable Summative Selected Leadership Growth Evaluation Measure (20%) Practice Measure (60%) (20%) Rating Measures of State or Comparable Local Measures of Leadership Measures of Student Student Learning Overall Practice (60%) Learning (20%)* (20%)* Ineffective 0 to 38 0 to 12 0 to 12 0 to 64 Developing 39 to 44 13 to 14 13 to 14 65 to 74 Effective 45 to 54 15 to 17 15 to 17 75 to 90 Highly Effective 55 to 60 18 to 20 18 to 20 91 to 100 Note: Principals who score ineffective on both measures of student learning will receivean overall rating of ineffective regardless of score 19

  20. Principal improvement plans (PIP) will be implemented in2014-15 for any principal rated developing or ineffectivein 2013-14 Principal Improvement Plans • The PIP is a 12-month plan drafted by a principal’s superintendent and includes supervisory meetings and feedback • The purpose of a PIP is to assist principals to work to their fullest potential.The PIP provides assistance and feedback to the principal and establishes atimeline for assessing its overall effectiveness • Superintendents are responsible for outlining the areas in need ofimprovement for the principal • Superintendents will conduct both supervisory visits for principals ratedIneffective or Developing (beginning in 2014-15) • Networks will be responsible for conducting two support visits to anyprincipal who has a PIP in 2014-15. More information about Principal Improvement Plans will be released as the 2014-15 school year approaches 20

  21. High level PPR timeline for 2013-14 October 2013 - June 2014 • Supervisory visits • Quality Reviews • Feedback throughout the year Summer 2014 • Principals will receive summative feedback from their superintendent around measures of leadershippractice • Principals will receive preliminary data around local measures for data verification September 2014 • Final overall ratings are due on September 1st and made available to principals • Developing and ineffective principals receive a PIP and a consultation from their superintendent 21

  22. Next steps for principals • Review the Quality Review rubric and the Principal Practice Observation Tool (upon publication in August), as well as recent Quality Review and Alternative Quality Review reports and reflect on strengths and areas for improvement • Monitor Principals’ Weekly throughout the fall for announcements around additional resources and information related to the new principal evaluation system 22

  23. Today’s agenda 1. Context and components of 2013-14 Principal Performance Review (PPR) under 3012-c 2. Summative ratings, timelines and next steps 3. Frequently Asked Questions 4. Q&A 23

  24. Frequently asked questions about 2013-14 PPR Do goals and objectives still count towards my annual rating? Goals and objectives no longer factor into a principal’s annual rating. Goal settingcontinues to be a part of the CEP. Does the compliance checklist still count towards my annual rating? The compliance checklist no longer factors into a principal’s annual rating, but willcontinue to be implemented. How will we account for compliance, attendance, and misconduct issues? Any misconduct including failure to comply with relevant policies and regulations isstill subject to disciplinary action including letters for file and disciplinary charges. Principals must also maintain compliance with key policies and laws in the areas covered by the compliance checklists. 24

  25. Frequently asked questions about 2013-14 PPR Final ratings for principals are due on September 1st. Does that deadline affect what goes into local measures towards 20% of my evaluation? Due to the September 1st deadline for ratings to be completed for the prior year, summeroutcomes, including credit accumulation, test results and graduation results will not be included in the results. We will not have this information in time to incorporate it. What role does my network play in supervisory visits? Where a supervisory visit is a Quality Review, network leaders will continue to be invited to attend the exit conference and utilize existing protocols. For a principal practice observation, networks can be invited at the discretion of the principal to be present duringa visit. The conversation during the supervisory visit should take place primarily betweenthe principal and the evaluator. Can my superintendent consider additional evidence outside of my supervisoryvisit(s) towards my rating for leadership practice (60%)? Yes - a superintendent may consider information or evidence not obtained at the supervisory visit that is aligned to the QR Rubric. Superintendents have the discretion to request additional evidence from principals. 25

  26. Frequently asked questions about 2013-14 PPR What role should artifacts play during and after supervisory visits? Principals can point to existing artifacts in an authentic way during the QR or the PPO to illustrate the impact of their practice but should not prepare artifacts for the solepurpose of the visit. Can my AP, achievement coach, etc. participate in the principal interview for supervisory visits? Only the principal should be in attendance during the principal interview; during this time they can speak to distributed leadership practices, if appropriate. Other membersof the school cabinet can be interviewed at the discretion of the evaluator. My day is fully scheduled, but an evaluator just arrived at my school for an unannounced visit. What are expectations for how to proceed with the day? Principals are expected to accommodate the superintendent or trained administrator forunannounced supervisory visits. At minimum, principals should set aside time for theprincipal interview and classroom visits. Principals should work with the conductor of the visit to establish a schedule that works for both parties. For additional questions, please email ppr@schools.nyc.gov. 26

More Related