Teacher Evaluation: Implications for Special Educators Leading Change 2014

1. Virginia Stodola Teacher Evaluation Audra Ahumada Alternative Assessment Lisa Aaroe Professional Learning and Sustainability Teacher Evaluation: Implications for Special EducatorsLeading Change 2014

2. Special Educators:A Look at Teacher Evaluation • Provide information on the implications for Special Educators • HighlightNational Trends • Share concerns from the field • Discuss the use of Student Learning Objectives as one measure of growth

3. Four Corners Activity • What have you heard? • What questions do you have? • What concerns do you have? • How are you currently evaluated? Each group has 5 minutes to chart and share. Choose 1 spokesperson to share out.

4. Teacher Effectiveness (Evaluation) Teachers face tougher evaluations than ever, according to the National Council on Teacher Quality report. "The number of states that have moved so far forward on teacher evaluation is just striking -- more than 40 states now require student achievement to be a factor in teacher evaluations is very different from where we were before," Sandi Jacobs, the group's vice president, said in an interview. "There's been a real transformation."

5. Review of States’ Models(Teacher Effectiveness) • Include a variety of data into the measuring of teacher effectiveness (including growth measurements) • Have varying levels of models being implemented ( i.e. pilot systems) • Trying to develop fair and rigorous measures for all teachers

6. Similarities and Differences Across States http://www.nctq.org/dmsView/State_of_the_States_Teacher_Evaluation_and_Effectiveness_Policies_NCTQ_Report

7. National Concerns for Special Educators • Sensitivity of progress in models for students with the most significant disabilities • Ambiguity of writing SLOs for classes/subjects- not IEP goals/objectives for individuals- writing an SLO for class of very diverse students for use in effectiveness models

8. National Concerns for Special Educators • Trained observers who recognize the knowledge and skills of a special educator as research based practice • Limited research base for how to link academic growth to teacher evaluation and the consequences of doing so • Implications and impact of service delivery models (co-teaching)

9. CEC’s Position

10. 4 General Characteristics of Teacher Evaluation Systems • One evaluation system. • Identifyappropriate professional learning opportunities. • Support continuous improvement. • Open and transparent

11. Recognize the Complex Roles and Professionalism of Special Education Teachers • Basedon a special education teacher’s specific roles and responsibilities • Considers the population of children and youth and their range of exceptionalities • Evaluations must be conducted by evaluators with expertise in special education. • Evaluations must respect special education teachers’ professional practice and have reasonable case loads and paperwork responsibilities; competitive salaries; benefits; access to resources; and positive working conditions.

12. Rules of Evaluations • Must be based on multiple reliable measures • Should never be based solely on student growth. • Should not use a student’s progress on their goals, objectives, and benchmarks in the IEP as a measure of a special education teacher’s contribution to student growth.

13. Continually Incorporate Findings From Research • Leaders of evaluation systems reforms must collaborate to ensure that the development and implementation of evaluation systems are carried out in a systematic, coordinated, and efficient manner. • Research should identify reliable measures and indicators of student growth that can be validly used to evaluate special education teachers. • Policy makers and leaders should consider the intended and unintended consequences of wide-scale implementation of teacher evaluation systems.

14. ADE’s Educator Evaluation ModelThe Effective Teachers and Leaders Unit & The Research and Development Section2013-2014 http://www.azed.gov/teacherprincipal-evaluation/

15. Holistic View of Teacher Effectiveness and Use of Multiple Measures: • Student Academic Progress • Achievement • Growth • College and Career Ready • Teaching Performance: • Planning and Preparation • The Classroom Environment • Instruction • Professional Responsibilities • Surveys • Student Survey • Parent Survey • Peer Review • Self-Reflection

16. Pre-Conference Considerations Example Role Play: Danielson Framework, 2013 Indicator 3c Student Engagement • Self Contained- Alternate Assessment (Audra) • Resource Classroom (Lisa)

17. Student Academic Progress

18. Student Academic Progress Data-Multiple Measures Student Efficacy: Attendance and Graduation Rates-Lag Data College and Career Ready Achievement Growth STATE ASSESSMENT PRIOR YEAR DATA Current Year Data for Achievement and Growth

19. Group A Teachers Arizona Framework For Measuring Educator Effectiveness – April 2011 Elementary Teachers Grades 2-6 Special Education Teachers Math & English Grades 9-10 Science Teachers Grades 4, 8, & 10 Reading and Math Interventionists

20. Group B Teachers Arizona Framework For Measuring Educator Effectiveness – April 2011 • CTE • Performing Arts • Computers • P.E. • Gr. K-1 Elementary • Gr. 7-10 Social Studies • Gr. 7 & 9 Science • Gr. 11-12 All Subjects

21. So why use SLOs? SLOs are one way to assess teacher impact on student performance that involves the teacher in the process of goal setting, monitoring, and assessing of student progress within the expertise of their own content area.

22. What is a Student Learning Objective?

23. Planning a system of support to measure growth

24. SLO Process-ADE Model What will we do if they already know it? What do we expect students to learn? What will we do if they don’t learn it? How will we know if students have learned it?

25. 75%

26. Student Learning Objective Process SLO Achievement Statement Includes ALL Students in the class, including SPED & ELL

27. SLO Achievement Statement Example 80% of the students will score a minimum of 75% on the end of course final by May 2015. 80% of the students will score a 3 in the proficiency range on the performance assessment by May 2015.

28. 45% 55% • GROWTH 65%

29. Option #1: Levels of Preparedness Growth Approach

30. Option #1: Levels of Preparedness Growth Approach • High Level of Preparedness • All students will increase their potential growth score by at least ? % • Adequate Level of Preparedness • All students will increase their potential growth score by at least ? % • Low Level of Preparedness • All students will increase their potential growth score by at least ? %

31. Option #2: Individualized Growth Statements Differentiates for each individual student based on a prescribed rubric

32. Example of Individualized SLO Growth Statements • Each student will reach their individual growth cut score on AimsWeb by moving over at least one category’s growth on the performance rubric by May 2015. • Each student will reach their individual growth cut score on the final general science exam calculated by using the prescribed formula by May 2015.

33. 3-2-1-Wrap-Up 3 actions I will take immediately 2 actions I will plan to have in place 2-3 months from now 1 action I will have in place in 6 months

34. Interest Cards I am interested in receiving technical assistance for: Teacher Evaluation System (All Components)______ Teacher Performance Component_______ Student Academic Progress Component______ Student Learning Objectives -SLOs_______ ESS Support for effective teacher evaluations____

35. Contact Information Lisa Aaroe Director of Recruitment and Retention Exceptional Student Services 602.542.4831 Lisa.aaroe@azed.gov Audra Ahumada Director of Alternative Assessment Assessment 602.542.4061 Audra.ahumada@azed.gov Virginia Stodola Education Program Specialist Effective Teachers and Leaders 602-364-3552 Virginia.stodola@azed.gov