Orientation to Revisions in the Colorado State Model Evaluation System

1. Orientation to Revisions in the Colorado State Model Evaluation System Colorado Dept. of Education Educator Effectiveness Unit August 2013

2. Reminders All districts are required to evaluate all of their principals and teachers on both the professional practices (50 percent) and student learning outcomes/growth (the other 50 percent). Additionally, all principals and teachers must receive a final rating combining both the professional practices and student learning outcomes/growth scores into a final rating of either: highly effective, effective, partially effective or ineffective. 2

3. Include any new district or school decisions for measuring Student Learning 2. Annual Orientation 1. Training 9. Goal-Setting and Performance Planning 3. Self-Assessment Confirm measures used to determine Student Learning – Finalize baseline information Evaluation Cycle Principal/Assistant Principals and Teachers End of September. Train: Prior to the beginning of School. Orient: Within the first week of School. May 15 End of September. End of June Prior to the beginning of Spring Semester End of May Mid-June 8. Final Ratings 4. Review of Annual Goals and Performance Plan Review available information from measures to determine if students are on track 7. End-of-Year Review 5. Mid-Year Review Review and finalize compiled results of measures of student learning 6. Evaluator Assessment

4. Revisions to Educator Rubrics • What’s changed in the educator rubrics as a result of feedback from the field? • The current rubrics have been shortened in response to feedback from nearly all participants that it felt overwhelming and intimidating due to its size. • Redundancies have been eliminated. • Most non-observable professional practices (in the teacher rubric) have been eliminated from Standards 1, 2, and 3 because many of the pilot site participants indicated they believed them to be biased or unfair. • The lowest category on the rubric has been changed to “Basic.” 4

5. Revised Teacher Rubric • The language of the professional practices has been made more specific in order to be clearer and more concise in setting performance expectations. 5

6. BEFORE AFTER 6

7. Revised Teacher Rubric • Example: Data is now represented in Std. IV, Element a. • Redundancies have been eliminated. 7

8. Revised Teacher Rubric • Most non-observable professional practices have been eliminated from Standards 1, 2, and 3 because many of the pilot site participants indicated they believed them to be biased or unfair. 8

9. Revised Teacher Rubric • The lowest category on the rubric has been changed to “Basic.” 9

10. Rubric Structure and Rating Level Focus BEFORE Not evident. This describes practices of a teacher who does not meet state performance standards and is not making progress toward meeting them. The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what teachers do on a day to day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels. The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the impact of the teacher’s practices on student outcomes.

11. Rubric Structure and Rating Level Focus NOW The focus of Accomplished and Exemplary ratings shifts to the outcomes of the educator’s practices, including expectations for staff, students, parents and community members, as a result of practices exhibited under rating levels 2 and 3. The focus of Partially Proficient and Proficient levels is what educators do on a day-to-day basis to achieve state performance standards and assure that students are achieving at expected levels. The focus of the Basic rating level is the educator whose performance does not meet state performance standards and who is not achieving at expected levels.

12. Understanding the Scoring “Business” Rule Look for the first unchecked professional practice. Move one column back to identify the rating for the element.

13. Rubric Rating Levels 0 Educator’s performance on professional practices is significantly below the state performance standard. 1 Educator’s performance on professional practices is below the state performance standard. 2 Educator meets state performance standard. 3 Educator exceeds state standard. 4 Educator significantly exceeds state standard.

14. BEFORE 2

15. 2 3 1 NOW 2 2 3 13 108/24 = 4.5 4.5 x 13 = 58.5 58.5 Proficient

16. Calculating the Overall Score Determining the overall rating for Professional Practices when standards are weighted equally

17. Revisions to the Principal/Assistant Principal Rubric Principal and Assistant Principal Rubric Teacher Rubric Mirror and are aligned to the changes in the teacher rubric 17

18. Other Changes Measures of Student Learning Student Academic Growth Student Learning Outcomes 18

19. Updated Users’ Guide 19 • Principal/Assistant Principal & Teacher Forms • Evaluation Process Tracking Forms • Rubrics • Summary Evaluation Worksheets • Summary Evaluation Sheets • Goal-Setting Forms • Professional Growth Plans • Mid-Year Performance Discussion Forms

20. Tools in Development 20

21. Specialized Service Professionals • Rubrics are currently being drafted for the following Specialized Service Professional groups: • SSP Pilot Year 2013-2014 • Pilot sites are currently being selected and will formally pilot the evaluation system for those SSP groups they have selected • SSP Implementation and Validation Study Year 2014-2015 • All districts will evaluate their SSPs under SB 191 requirements • CDE will conduct a validation study on the evaluation rubrics 21

22. How to combine professional practice and measures of student learning ratings 540 Exemplary (433 to 540 pts) Highly Effective 730-1080 Accomplished (325 to 432 pts) Effective 487-729 Proficient (217 to 324 pts) Professional Practices 0 540 Partially Effective 244-486 Partially Proficient (109to 216pts) Ineffective 0-243 Basic (0 to 108pts) 0 Much Lower Than Expected Growth (0 to 134 pts) Expected Growth (270 to 404 pts) Lower Than Expected Growth (135 to 269 pts) Higher Than Expected Growth (405 to 540 pts) Measures of Student Learning

23. Educator Evaluation Performance Management System • RANDA Solutions is a FREE educator evaluation performance management system and will be available in the 2014-15 school year for all districts • Interested districts can apply to beta test parts of the system in this school year • Four modules will be available: • 1. Professional practice • 2. Aggregates Measures of Student Learning • 3. Decision Framework • 4. Reporting

24. Excel Rubrics Excel versions of the Principal/Assistant Principal and Teacher rubrics will be available on the CDE website by August 15th. 24

25. Inter-Rater Agreement and My Learning Plan (MLP) • A FREE educator calibration & professional development system available for all school districts • Fall 2013 – Master scored videos for evaluators to calibrate on the professional practices in the rubric • 2013-14 – Master scored Teaching Cases created to include multiple videos of a teacher and supporting artifacts that mimics the evaluation cycle • Video clips aligned to the rubric for professional development for all educators

26. Timeline of Implementation

27. Contact Us EE Leadership • Katy Anthes: Executive Director • Anthes_K@cde.state.co.us • Toby King: Director • King_T@cde.state.co.us • Jean Williams: Rubric Evaluation Specialist • Williams_J@cde.state.co.us Colorado Legacy Foundation • Mike Gradoz: Director • mgradoz@colegacy.org Communications • Amy Skinner • Skinner_A@cde.state.co.us • Katie Lams: • Lams_K@cde.state.co.us • Britt Wilkenfeld: Data Fellow • Wilkenfeld_B@cde.state.co.us • Tricia Majors: Project Mgr. • Majors_T@cde.state.co.us

28. Contact Us • Bob Snead • Snead_B@cde.state.co.us • Chris Vance • Vance_C@cde.state.co.us Implementation Support and Development • Courtney Cabrera • Cabrera_C@cde.state.co.us • Sed Keller • Keller_S@cde.state.co.us • Dawn Pare • Pare_D@cde.state.co.us