1 / 40

Educator effectiveness:

An Orientation for Principals and Assistant Principals. Educator effectiveness:. The purpose of the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System is to help educators grow as professionals in order to increase student learning. The Educator Effectiveness System in Wisconsin.

xander-bray
Download Presentation

Educator effectiveness:

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. An Orientation for Principals and Assistant Principals Educator effectiveness:

  2. The purpose of the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System is to help educators grow as professionals in order to increase student learning.

  3. The Educator Effectiveness System in Wisconsin • DPI has established minimum expectations for educator evaluation. • Districts have the authority to add to the system requirements but cannot do less (i.e. A district could require 2 SLOs each year) • There are aspects of the EE System that are left to local discretion (Which educators fit the definition of teacher)

  4. Who is in Which Year of the Cycle? Supporting Year 1? Supporting Year2? Summary Year?

  5. Continuous Improvement Using Multiple Measures Outcomes Practice

  6. Changing Our Thinking… WI EE • The path to mastery is hard • Educators set goals to focus their improvement efforts • From the most novice to the most expert, everyone can improve some aspect of their practice TRADITIONAL EVALUATION • If you are good at something, it isn’t hard • You set goals to “demonstrate” your strengths and abilities • Struggles or challenges demonstrate weakness

  7. The Effectiveness Cycle

  8. First year, and every third year after

  9. Multiple measures

  10. Balancing Multiple Measures A Summary based on evidence of Student Outcomes A Summary based on evidence of Educator Practice

  11. Educator Practices The Educator Practices Summary is comprised of scores for each of the components in the Wisconsin Framework for Principal Leadership.

  12. Assistant Principal Evaluation Components 1.1.3 and 1.2.5 are added if an Assistant Principal evaluates teachers

  13. Required Principal Observations Announced School Visit Observation (no specified length) *School Sampling Visits + *School Sampling Visits *School Sampling Visits are less formal opportunities for the principal’s evaluator to get a sense of the normal flow of the school day and observe the principal in their varied roles.

  14. Collecting Evidence of Practice • Evidence can be collected through scheduled observations and school visits as well as through other sources such as interviews, surveys, or artifacts as determined during the planning session. • A list of possible artifacts linked to subdomains and components can be found in Appendix C of the Principal Process Manual.

  15. What is an Artifact? • A source of evidence used to document effectiveness at the component level • Some artifacts will provide evidence for multiple components • Evaluators will use the rubric to identify the performance level that best matches the evidence of practice within the artifact that has been uploaded

  16. A Few Considerations… • Is there value in aligning some of your artifacts? (PD you led or organized related to an element of the School Improvement Plan and schedule of walk-throughs used to monitor implementation). • When does an artifact become evidence? If I upload a certificate from a conference…what does it prove? Consider the value of a short reflection to give meaning to an artifact.

  17. Outcomes .

  18. School Learning Objectives (SLOs) • 1 SLO • Educator self-approves and scores in all years. • SLO is part of the EEP

  19. Creating the SLO Score Educators self-scores his/her SLO annually using the Revised SLO Scoring Rubric. The rubric contains 2 criteria: one related to results (Did students meet the goals you set?) and one related to process (Did you engage fully in the SLO process?).

  20. Using the Revised SLO Scoring Rubric, the evaluator will assign a holistic score (based on a 1-4 scale) after considering all SLOs. • Score is based on the preponderance of evidence from documentation.

  21. In the typical, 3 year Effectiveness Cycle, the educator will have three SLO processes that inform the final holistic score:

  22. Educators in the Summary Year this year (our first official year of implementation) will only have one SLO process that informs your final holistic score at the end of the 14-15 year:

  23. Turn and Talk • What have you heard that’s new? • What questions do you still have?

  24. Summarizing the Effectiveness Cycle

  25. Final Effectiveness Summary At the conclusion of the Summary Year, the evaluator determines a score for each Principal Framework component and also determines one holistic SLO score.

  26. Reporting Scores The component scores (practice) and the holistic SLO score (outcome) are uploaded by Teachscape to DPI’s WISEdash secure, where only the educator and his or her administrators will be able to view the results.

  27. Final Effectiveness Summary Within WISEdash, the scores for the components are combined to result in a final Educator Practices Summary. The holistic SLO score, the Reading/Graduation Rate score, and Principal Value-Added score (when available) are combined to result in a final Student Outcomes Summary.

  28. Practice Summary Principals: • Component scores averaged = Practice Summary

  29. Outcomes Summary • Individual measure scores weighted proportionally • Weighted scores added together • Summary rounded to nearest decimal on scale of 1-4 • Example:

  30. Effectiveness Summary Graph

  31. Summary Year Overview and Timeline

  32. Turn and Talk • What are the similarities and differences between the Supporting Years and the Summary Year?

  33. Our Effectiveness Coaches • Who they are • How they can help

  34. Local Talking Points: Has your district discussed… • setting parameters for the number of artifacts an educator may upload? • the number of Sampling School Visits (mandated range is 2-3) and whether or not one or more will happen in the Supporting Years? • whether principals will be directed to write School Learning Objectives that align to district goals? • whether teachers will be directed to write Student Learning Objectives that align to school or district goals? • what is an artifact? • Whether you will ask for any aligned artifacts? • The structure, process, documentation of peer review

  35. What is Next? • View the first Module for Step 4 • Attend additional Teachscape training opportunities • Complete “Beginning of the Year” activities

  36. CESA #4 Educator Effectiveness Support Billie Finco 608-786-4830 bfinco@cesa4.k12.wi.us Sherri Torkelson 608-786-4855 storkelson@cesa4.k12.wi.us Want to get all the latest information and updates or just ask a question? Join the CESA #4 Educator Effectiveness Google+ Community: http://bit.ly/CESA4EE

  37. For more information and resources related to the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System, please visit the WIEE website at: ee.dpi.wi.gov

More Related