Transforming Educator Evaluations in Illinois

1. Transforming Educator Evaluations in Illinois Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) Illinois Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC)

2. Why This Matters • We all want students to succeed • We know that teachers matter • We know that principals matter • We know that the legislature has mandated changes

3. The Basics • 2010 PERA law mandated major changes • New evaluations address both practice andstudent growth with these benefits: • Consistent standards…clearer, more objective feedback • Improved professional development • Multiple measures of student growth • Improved student learning • Principals & Teachers: Two choices for districts: Use General Rules to create your own system or use State Model (all or parts)

4. Evaluator Training for Principal Evaluation & Teacher Evaluation ALL Evaluators must be trained and must pass the imbedded assessments in order to perform observations and/or full evaluations No longer required to have a Type 75 certification to be an evaluator, but must have completed/passed evaluation training. Training is online and self-paced through:

5. Evaluator Training provides training on or lays the foundation for: Minimum state requirements based on Part 50 rules of the Administrative Code: http://www.isbe.net/rules/archive/pdfs/50ARK.pdf Facilitates a common language and dialogue around teacher practice and student growth Encourages collaboration, learning and alignment amongst stakeholders

6. Principal Evaluation Training Design and Delivery Model

7. Teacher Training Design and Delivery Model

8. Key Dates: Developing & Implementing the Systems 2012-2013: All principals & assistant principals evaluated following new rules 2012-2013: All teacher summative evaluation ratings will reflect one of the four categories: Excellent, Proficient, Needs Improvement, or Unsatisfactory 2012-2013: Teacher evaluations following new rules phased in, starting with 300 Chicago schools

9. Key Dates: Developing & Implementing the Systems 2013-2014: Teacher evaluations following new rules for the remaining CPS schools http://www.isbe.net/PEAC/pdf/student-growth-timeline0812.pdf 2015-2016: The lowest performing 20% of schools in the state 2016-2017: All other districts in state implement PERA, Part 50 of administrative rules.

10. About PEAC 32 educators, union and association leaders from K-12 and higher education 2 1/2-year process … and counting with meetings at least monthly sometimes more often Regular scheduled meetings open to the public with a time for public comment on every agenda Comprehensive website: www.isbe.net/PEAC

11. Definition of “Joint Committee” Each district will convene a PERA joint committee of equal representation of teachers and administrators “Joint committee” means a committee composed of equal representation selected by the district and its teachers or, when applicable, the exclusive bargaining representative of its teachers, which shall have the duties set forth in this Part regarding the establishment of a performance evaluation plan that incorporates data and indicators of student growth as a significant factor in rating teacher performance.

12. PERA—PART 50 Rules • Use of General Rules (minimum standards) (http://www.isbe.net/rules/archive/pdfs/50ARK.pdf) to draft own district system • Or use of State Model—rules are available to formulate the state model with an example forthcoming from PEAC • On student growth only, if district PERA joint committee cannot come to consensus then the teacher evaluation must default to State Model after 180 days

13. Definition of “Teacher” in PERA Rules “Teacher” means full-time or part-time professional employees of the school district who are required to hold a teaching certificate issued in accordance with Article 21 of the School Code or a professional educator’s license endorsed for a teaching field issued in accordance with Article 21B of the School Code. For the purposes of the requirements specific to student growth outlined in Article 24A of the School Code and this Part, “teacher” shall not include any individual who holds a school service personnel certificate issued under Article 21 of the School Code or a professional educator license endorsed for school support personnel issued under Article 21B of the School Code and is assigned to an area designated as requiring this certificate or endorsement, including but not limited to school counselor, school psychologist, nonteaching school speech and language pathologist, school nurse, or school social worker.

14. Definition of “Assistant Principal” in PERA Rules “Assistant Principal” has been defined as an employee who reports to the principal to assist with the overall administration of the school. The district has broad discretion as to whether to characterize an individual reporting to the principal as assisting that principal with overall administration of the school.

15. Evaluation of Teacher/Principal Practice versus Student Growth Practice Practice Practice Practice >25% (first two yrs) ≥30% (third yr+) >25% (first two yrs) ≥30% (third yr+) 70%proportional >50% proportional Student growth Student growth Student growth Student growth 50% 50% 50% 50%

16. TEACHERS: Evaluation of Practice Districts must adopt instructional framework aligned with the Illinois Professional Teaching Standards http://www.isbe.net/PEAC/pdf/IL_prof_teaching_stds.pdfwith four performance levels for the summative rating: • unsatisfactory • needs improvement • Proficient • excellent

17. TEACHERS: Evaluation of Practice The plan shall provide for an evaluation at least once every two years of each teacher in contractual continued service (i.e., tenured); however, a tenured teacher who has obtained a “needs improvement” or “unsatisfactory” rating on the previous year’s evaluation shall be evaluated in the next school year after receiving that rating. (See Section 24A-5 of the School Code.) The plan shall provide for an evaluation at least once every year of each teacher not in contractual continued service (i.e., nontenured). (See Section 24A-5 of the School Code.)

18. Teacher Observations • Evidence of professional practice shall be collected through the use of multiple observations that include formal and informal observations. • a formal observation shall allow the qualified evaluator to acquire evidence of the teacher’s planning, instructional delivery, and classroom management skills and shall involve one of the following activities: an observation of the teacher in his or her classroom for a minimum of 45 minutes at a time • or an observation during a complete lesson • or an observation during an entire class period

19. Number of Teacher Observations • For each tenured teacher who received either an “excellent” or “proficient” performance evaluation rating in his or her last performance evaluation, a minimum of two observations are required during the cycle in which the current evaluation is conducted, one of which must be a formal observation. • For each tenured teacher who received a “needs improvement” or “unsatisfactory” performance evaluation rating in his or her last performance evaluation, a minimum of three observations shall be required in the school year immediately following the year in which the “needs improvement” or “unsatisfactory” rating was assigned, of which two must be formal observations. • For each non-tenured teacher, a minimum of three observations shall be required each school year, of which two must be formal observations.

20. TEACHERS: Each formal observation shall be preceded by a conference between the qualified evaluator and the teacher. In advance of this conference, the teacher shall submit to the qualified evaluator a written lesson or unit plan and/or other evidence of planning for the instruction that will be conducted during the window of time when the formal observation may occur and make recommendations for areas on which the qualified evaluator should focus during the observation. The qualified evaluator and the teacher shall discuss the lesson or unit plan or instructional planning and any areas on which the qualified evaluator should focus during the observation, if applicable.

21. TEACHERS: Following a Formal Observation . . . The qualified evaluator shall meet with the teacher to discuss the evidence collected about the teacher’s professional practice The qualified evaluator shall provide feedback following a formal evaluation to the teacher in writing (electronic or paper) Following an informal observation, the qualified evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher either orally or in writing (electronic or paper) and if the feedback is in a written format, also provide the teacher with an opportunity to have an in-person discussion with the evaluator.

22. TEACHERS: Following a Formal Observation . . . The teacher shall consider (that is, reflect upon) his or her instruction and, if applicable, may provide to the qualified evaluator additional information or explanations about the lesson presented. The qualified evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher about the individual’s professional practice, including evidence specific to areas of focus designated during the conference preceding the observation (see subsection (c)(4) of this Section). If the qualified evaluator determines that the evidence collected to date may result in the teacher receiving either a “needs improvement” or “unsatisfactory” performance evaluation rating, then the qualified evaluator shall notify the teacher of that determination. The teacher shall work with the qualified evaluator or others (e.g., professional learning team, department head), as determined in the plan, to identify areas for improvement.

23. TEACHERS: Student Growth • “Demonstrable change in a student’s learning between two or more points in time” • Need data from at least 2 assessments: • At least one Type III assessment • And at least one Type I or II assessment (PREFERABLY not ISAT or PSAE) • Or two Type III assessments if no Type I or II are available • District PERA joint committee decides metrics and targets, including for different student groups (ELL, etc.) • Must comprise at least 25% of final rating in 2012-13 and 2013-2014, 30% thereafter

24. Assessments shall be defined according to three distinct types:

25. PRINCIPALS:(General Rules) • Same rules apply for assistant principals • Annual evaluations required • Principal will complete a self-assessment against the standards of practice no later than February 1. The evaluator will use the information provided in the self-assessment as one input to the overall evaluation of principal practice • Practice framework must align to new state Standards for Principal Evaluation found in the proposed rules

26. PRINCIPALS: Practice Recommendations (General Rules) Final, written summative evaluation by March 1 (July 1 for CPS) Rate in one of four performance levels (Excellent, Proficient, Needs Improvement, or Unsatisfactory) with clear indicators and written evidence that identifies specific strengths/weaknesses District use of General Rules by PERA joint committee to develop own system or use State Model … but no mandated default to State Model as for teachers Practice: Counts for at least 50% of overall evaluation in State Model but 25% ramping up to 30% not in state model

27. PRINCIPALS: Evaluation of Practice • At least 2 formal site observations • Observing school and/or principal practice, scheduled in advance, feedback within 10 days • Time spent in the school site observing school practices, that may also include direct observation of principal action • Scheduled in advance with at least one specific observation objective (reviewing classrooms, observing a leadership team meeting, etc) • Followed within 10 principal work days by feedback on the observation shared from evaluator to the principal, either in writing or verbally • The evaluator may conduct additional formal observations as needed

28. PRINCIPALS: Evaluation of Practice • The evaluator may conduct as many informal site observations as needed, and information from informal site visits may also be included in the summative evaluation as long as it is documented in writing • By October 1: Evaluator and principal set student growth measures and targets, plus PD goals • Principal and evaluator together define how data will be used, with specific weights for each assessment and target

29. PRINCIPALS: Student Growth “Measurable change in a student’s or group of students’ knowledge or skills between two or more points in time” Growth: Counts for at least 25% of final evaluation in 2012-13 and 2013-14, 30% thereafter Use of standardized tests (ISAT and PSAE are allowed but not recommended) and district-developed tests; only in special circumstances will Type III tests developed by teachers/evaluators be used

30. PRINCIPALS: Student Growth When available from PARCC, state value-added score must comprise most of growth rating District, evaluator, and principal will decide how to account for certain student characteristics (ELL, SPED, etc.)

31. Assessments for Principals Special circumstances only Assessments shall be defined according to three distinct types:

32. PRINCIPALS: Practice (State Model) Minimum Weight for Principal Practice -the “principal practice” portion of the principal evaluation must comprise at least 50% of the overall principal evaluation Requirements for Principal Evaluation Instruments Every district must align the instruments for evaluation of principal practice to the revised Illinois Standards for Principal Evaluation (drafted by sub-committee and included in proposed rules) Every district must create or select a rubric that has clear indicators for each standard and clear descriptions of at least 4 performance levels for each indicator For any district not adopting the default rubric, the district must create a training process to build shared awareness and understanding of the rubric and principal practice expectations with all principals and principal evaluators

33. PRINCIPALS: Practice (State Model) Rules for Gathering Data on Principal Practice are same as the General Recommendations for Principal Practice Rules for the Summative Rating of Principal Practice • In the summative evaluation, the evaluator must identify a performance rating with written evidence to support the rating for each standard • The summative evaluation must identify the strengths and growth areas of the principal • The district must define how the data gathered against the principal practice standards will be used to determine a summative practice rating

34. PRINCIPALS: Student Growth (State Model) • Selecting Assessments and Setting Targets- No later than October 1 of every calendar year, the evaluator must inform the principal which assessments, data, and targets will be used to judge student growth for the year, and specify the weights of each outcome and target • Including Students in Growth Calculation- A student will be included in the student growth metric as long as the student has been assigned to the school long enough to have at least two data points on a comparable assessment (e.g. 2012 ISAT and 2013 ISAT, or a beginning of year assessment and mid-year assessment within an aligned interim assessment system.)

35. PRINCIPALS: Student Growth (State Model) • Definition of Student Growth - A measurable change in student outcomes at the school level. Totaling 50% of Summative Evaluation • Maintain all general guidelines for 30% of the principal evaluation: • The student growth portion of the principal evaluation must be based on academic assessments - “Academic” is defined as any instructional area for which Illinois state standards exist • Require the use of multiple academic assessments • The state model uses assessments that meet the definition of Type 1 and Type 2 for principal evaluation, including state assessments

36. PRINCIPALS: Student Growth (State Model) • Definition of Student Growth - A measurable change in student outcomes at the school level. Totaling 50% of Summative Evaluation Remaining 20% of the student growth portion of state model can focus on similar academic assessments of growth, or on a broader set of student outcome measures

37. PRINCIPALS: Student Growth (State Model) Elem/MS

38. PRINCIPALS: Student Growth(State Model) HS

39. Defining Student Growth Performance Levels • Exceeds Goal - Exceeds the target for a majority of the student growth measures; meets all targets • Meets Goal - Meets or exceeds the target for a majority of the student growth measures; does not have negative growth on any measures • Minimal Growth - Meets only 1 or 2 student growth targets; has no more than one measure with negative growth results • No Growth or Negative Growth - Does not meet any student growth targets; demonstrates negative growth on one or more measures

40. PRINCIPALS: (State Model) Summative Rating Model

41. Further General Information & Rules Rules can be viewed at http://www.isbe.net/rules/archive/pdfs/50ARK.pdf More information at www.isbe.net/PEAC

42. More Information on Training • www.growththroughlearningillinois.org

43. Contact Information Vicki Phillips Division Administrator Preparation and Evaluation IL State Board of Education vphillip@isbe.net