CLASS Project

1. CLASS Project

2. Teacher Incentive Fund Orientation Meeting November 30, 2011 South Lane

3. Partners Chalkboard Project Mathematica Policy Research Education Northwest Vanderbilt University EcoNW Westat Greater Albany Public Schools Lebanon Community Schools Bend-La Pine Schools Crook County School District Redmond School District Salem-Keizer Public Schools

4. Teacher Incentive Fund History • Established in 2006 • 34 Grants Awarded in 2007 • Chalkboard keenly interested and tracked progress for three years • Round 3 grants made available in 2010 • 68 grants awarded • Round 4 TIF posted in Spring, 2012

5. Chalkboard Core Beliefs in 2007 and Today: • Do not undermine collective bargaining • Do not take away pay from some teachers to better reward others • Do not mandate performance pay; voluntary approach is best • Do not pay educators for standardized test scores; teachers determine multiple measures

6. Chalkboard will… • Treat educators as the professionals they are • Support stronger evaluation processes • Look for more ways to measure student growth • Look for more flexibility to reward those who excel through a voluntary program

7. Core Beliefs Continued • Teachers must be at the table to create, design, and implement meaningful reform • The best ideas will come from within our schools and districts

8. Advised by National Leaders and Partners: • Center for American Progress • National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future • National Governor’s Association • National Education Association • National Staff Development Council • Center for Education Data Research

9. TIF grant reflects four years of laying the groundwork: • Many trips to Washington D.C. • Presentations to Senators, Congressmen and key leaders • Sharing by our extended team of Oregon administrators, teachers, and local union presidents in addition to Chalkboard staff and lobbyists • Early achievement results and strong collaborative design are distinct

10. “There are only experts on what was…There are no experts on what will be” - David Ben Gurion

11. Our Approach to TIF • Built upon CLASS model • Performance Evaluation • Professional Development • New Career Roles and Leadership Opportunities for Teachers • New Compensation Models • Insist on and emphasize collaboration

12. Previous TIF Application Timeline • May 21, 2010 – Notice of Final Priorities • June 15, 2010 – CLASS Project Design Final Reports Due • July 6, 2010 – Applications Due • September 2010 – Added Albany to application • October 1, 2010 – TIF Grant Award Date & Official Start of Grant Period

13. Two TIF Competitions: Main & Evaluation • Main – Design and implement a PBCS (Performance Based Compensation System) • Evaluation – Design and implement a PBCS and allow a national evaluator to study the compensation model designed and implemented

14. Selection CriteriaFor Both Main & Evaluation Competition • Application Requirement: Describe how the proposed PBCS will consider gains in student achievement, classroom evaluations, and other factors & provide educators with incentives to take on additional responsibilities. • Need: High-Need Schools – 50% or more Free & Reduced Lunch • Difficulty recruiting and retaining highly qualified teachers • Student achievement lower than comparable schools

15. Selection CriteriaFor Both Main & Evaluation Competition • Core Elements – have or a plan to have in place by end of planning period (no more than 12 months) • Plan for communicating to stakeholders the components of its PBCS • Involvement & Support of stakeholders (teachers, principals, administrators, local unions, school board) needed to to carry out grant • Evaluation systems for teachers and principals that differentiate effectiveness • Data-management system that includes student growth data, teacher and principal payroll and HR systems • Plan for ensuring that participating educators understand the specific measures of effectiveness included in the PBCS and the delivery of PD that enables them to use the data generated by these measures to improve their practice

16. Application RequirementsFor Both Main & Evaluation Competition • Priority 1: Differentiated Levels of Compensation for effective teachers and principals • Determine effectiveness with significant weight given to student growth • Include observation-based assessments • Include other measures, i.e. leadership roles • Priority 2: Fiscal Sustainability of PBCS • Project costs during project period and beyond • Non-TIF funds will be provided over course of 5-year grant • Priority 3: Comprehensive Approaches to the PBCS • Alignment with a coherent and integrated strategy for strengthening the educator workforce

17. Application RequirementsFor Both Main & Evaluation Competition • Priority 4: Use of Value-Added Measures of Student Achievement • Use a value-added measure of the impact on student growth in design and implementation of differentiated levels of compensation • Capacity to implement a value-added model • Explain the value-added model to participating educators and enable them to use the data generated • Priority 5: Increased Recruitment & Retention of Effective Teachers to Serve High-Need Students in Hard-to-Staff Subjects and Specialty Areas in High-Need Schools • Serve high-need students • Retain effective teachers in hard-to-staff subjects • Fill vacancies with teachers who are effective or likely to be so • Priority 6: New Applicants to TIF

18. Planning Year Timeline & Implementation Chart

19. CLASS PBCS TIF Application – Key Points • CLASS Project components are the platform upon which this grant is built • The grant proposal was crafted using the work of CLASS districts, designing and implementing • Project funds are distributed at a school level, but many of the components of the CLASS PBCS TIF proposal are district-wide and/or capacity-building • CLASS PBCS TIF proposal unique in approach and management • You and your colleagues are now participants in the national conversation on educator effectiveness

20. Bend- La Pine Crook County Oregon City Salem-Keizer Redmond Lebanon Albany Deborah Linda Candace Coaches / Consultants / National Experts Finance Director (TBA) Project Manager (TBA) Project Director (Dan) US Department of Education

21. Emerging Beliefs about Student Achievement • Student achievement growth is best considered through multiple measures • Teachers should shape and have strong voice in designing meaningful measures of student growth

22. Emerging Beliefs about Student Achievement • While we do not believe that performance evaluation should be based upon a single test score, we all share in accountability for student achievement growth • The purpose of a sound evaluation system is focused on growth and not punishment

23. Value-Added Models • A Value-Added Model is required for all TIF grant recipients. • A Value-Added Model (VAM) is intended to be a statistical analysis of a teacher’s impact on student growth. There is no one way to create a VAM and each district will be asked to inform the creation and implementation of a local model.

24. Value-Added Models • By taking into account factors outside of a teacher’s control (socio-economic differences, previous scores, etc), a VAM attempts to show the “value” a teacher adds to student learning. • The Value-Added Model provides just one measure and will not be used on its own to determine effectiveness.

25. Current Status of Value-Added Models • Great skepticism and criticism about misuse of VAMs: Linda Darling-Hammond • Many believe it will be another 3-4 years before effective models are established and accepted

26. Value-Added Models The use of a VAM will be new to the CLASS framework and Chalkboard knows that the creation of a good model will need to be a careful process that requires the participation and best thinking of CLASS teachers and administrators as well as local and national experts.