View
222
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
1/60
Su per in t en d en t Sh a r on L . Con t r er a s
Oct ob er 1 , 2 013
APPR Review and Preliminary Results2012 2013
1
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
2/60
APPR Background2
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
3/60
3
Vision
To become the most improvedurban school district in
America
SCSD Strategic Plan 2012-2017
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
4/60
Great Expectations and the NYS Regents reform agendaboth include a focus on teacher and leader effectiveness.
4
Strategic Plan Goal 2:Recruit, develop, support andretain effective teachers and
school leaders.
Strategic Plan Goal 4:Build a district culture on highexpectations, respect and co-accountability for performance
that recognizes and rewardsexcellence at all levels of theorganization.
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
5/60
Also, the Board of Education recognizes the importance of greatteachers and leaders in its Core Beliefs and Commitments.
5
Two of our Core Beliefs and Commitments:
We believe that teachers have the greatest positive
impact on student achievement. We will recruit, develop, support, reward and retain world-classteachers.
We believe that effective leaders produce excellent
results. We will recruit, develop, retain, and reward leaders who champion
a relentless focus on high student achievement and effectivelymanage teacher talent.
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
6/60
After 3
INEFFECTIVE
Teachers
After 3
HIGHLYEFFECTIVE
Teachers
6
57
55
0 20 40 60 80 100
Group 2
Group 1
Average Percentile Rank
Beginning of 2nd Grade
27
76
0 20 40 60 80 100
Group 2
Group 1
Average Percentile Rank
End of 5th Grade
49
Dallas students who begin 2nd
grade at about the same level of
math achievement
may finish 5thgrade math at
dram atical ly dif ferent levels
depending o n the qual i ty of their
teachers.
We know there are big differences in outcomes of studentsbased on their teachers levels of effectiveness.
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
7/60
7
How did we get here?
NYS Education Law Section 3012-c
Race to Top effective teacher evaluation system is a condition
Actions of Governor Cuomo linking state aid to overall studentperformance and teacher and principal evaluation systems
Recent actions of Governor Cuomo extending previously agreed toplans until a new plan is agreed upon
Movement across the nation to strengthen teacher and principalevaluation systems
Most of the specifics of the new teacher and principalevaluation systems are dictated by New York State law.
7
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
8/60
We believe that teachers have the greatest positive impact onstudent achievement and principals make the difference inteacher quality.
What happens in classrooms matters far beyond the doors ofthe classroom and school.
Getting to a place where all students and schools have and keepgreat teachers and leaders is a top priority.
We know that great teachers and leaders can changeoutcomes for students.
8
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
9/60
The District has invested 1 of every 30 dollars in its budget toprofessional development.
We have a Director of Professional Development, a dedicatedProfessional Development Center, and new Office of TalentManagement staff focused on building teacher and leader skills.
Because we now have APPR data for teachers and principalsacross SCSD schools for the first time, we are more able thanever to plan and provide great, targeted support.
Targeted, differentiated professional development is a keylever for building great teachers and leaders.
9
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
10/60
We believe in data-driven decision making to ensurecontinuous improvement at all levels.
Most teachers fall in the middle this is mostly not about rockstars or bad teachers.
Put the labels aside: the details of observers feedback will help
everyone keep getting better.
The purpose of APPR is to provide ongoing, individualizedfeedback.
10
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
11/60
Highly effective teachers and principals can earn annualperformance Teacher Incentive Fund bonuses (nearly 10% ofaverage salary).
Those who are consistently effective can take on TIF careerpathway roles ways they can advance in their careers,especially without having to leave the classroom or school.
On the other hand, the least effective teachers and principalscan be prioritized for intensive support.
We also want to recognize, reward, retain, and leverage themost effective teachers and principals.
11
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
12/60
Our APPR plans were built to align with New York Staterequirements for an objective rating system.
Ratings are based on multiple measures of performance toensure that they are as accurate as possible not based juston one persons opinion oron assessment data alone.
Over time, we seek to get even better at identifying individualstrengths and growth areas while meeting all Staterequirements.
Collectively, we are constantly making evaluations even moreaccurate and helpful.
12
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
13/60
Boost effectiveness of allteachers through effectiveevaluation and targetedprofessional development.
Improve or exit thepersistently leasteffective teachers.
Retain andleverage themost effectiveteachers.
C
A
B
Current performance Potential performance
Effectiveness in Improving Student Achievement
Framework for Improving Teacher and Principal Effectiveness
13
We can improve overall performance of teachers and principalsthrough three tactics, focusing mostly on PD and coaching.
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
14/60
Changes to NYS Education Law Section 3012-c
Teachers and principals must now be evaluated annually and using ascale of 0-100 points, assigned one of the following ratings:
Highly Effective (91-100 points)Effective (75-90 points)Developing (65-74 points)Ineffective (0-64 points)
Evaluations must include the following components: growth on stateassessments, locally selected measures of student achievement andteacher/principal observations and individual professional growthplan.
New York State law sets the parameters for the teacher andprincipal evaluation process.
14
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
15/60
APPR The Equation15
60%
OtherMeasures
20%Local
20%State
Growth100%
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
16/60
T E A C H E R E V A L U A T I O N S
APPR Requirements16
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
17/60
APPR for Teachers
17
60%Other
Measures
20%
Local
20%State
Growth
100%
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
18/60
NY State TeachingStandards: Approved Rubric
Multiple Measures(State approved options)
At least a majority (31) of the 60 pointsmust be based on multiple classroomobservations (a minimum of 2)byprincipal or other trained administrator:
- At least one must be unannounced- May be conducted using video or in-
person
Any remaining standards not addressedin classroom observation must beassessed at least once a year
1.Observation(s) by trained independentevaluators
2.Observation(s) by trained in-school peerteachers
3.Feedback from students and/or parents
using a State-approved survey tool
4.Structured review of lesson plans,student portfolios, and/or other teacherartifacts
60% Other Measures
18
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
19/60
Conducting Observations
Principal/trained administrator 2 observations for every teacher
o One announced, one unannounced
o Multiple days of training
o Certification
Peer Observerso Content-focused teaching experts
o Trained and certified observers
Probationary and tenured teachers opting for peer observations
o Two announced observations
Tenured teachers may opt for peer observations
o One announced observation
19
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
20/60
APPR for Teachers
20
60%Other
Measures
20%
Local
20%State
Growth
100%
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
21/60
Elementary, Middle, and K-8Teachers
High School Teachers
School-wide measures of studentgrowth based on a state-provided
MGP growth score covering allstudents
Reduce students scoring at level 1 inMath by 10 percentage points
Reduce students scoring at level 1 inELA by 10 percentage points
Increase students score at Level 3 &4 in Math by 5 percentage points
Increase students scoring Level 3 &4 in ELA by 5 percentage points
Increase 3% proficiency on theELA Regents Exam
Increase 3% proficiency on theAlgebra Regents Exam
Increase 3% proficiency on theGlobal Studies Regents Exam
Increase 3% proficiency on the USHistory Regents Exam
Increase 3% proficiency on theLiving Environments RegentsExam
Local Measures-School Growth
21
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
22/60
High School Local Measures
Increase Proficiency Rate by 3% on the following RegentExams (Capped at 4 points):
1. ELA
2. Algebra3. Global Studies
4. U.S History
5. Living Environment
22
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
23/60
High School Local Measures.
The Proficiency Rates are based on Cohort Results throughAugust from 2011-12 and 2012-13.
For each Regents Exam:
% Change in Proficiency Rate: 2012-13 Proficiency Rate 2011-12 Proficiency Rate
Points Earned= % Point increase in Proficiency Rate X 1.2
23
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
24/60
High School Local Measures.
The total score earned by each high school was calculatedas follows:
Total Points: Points earned by ELA + Points earned byAlgebra + Points earned by Global History+ Points earnedby U.S. History + Points earned by Living Environment
HEDI Scale
Ineffective Developing Effective Highly Effective
Total Points 0-2 3-8 9-17 18-20
24
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
25/60
K-8 School Local Measures
1. Reduce the number of students scoring at level 1 inMath by 10 % Points (Capped at 2.5 points)
2. Reduce the number of students scoring at level 1 in
ELA by 10 % Points (Capped at 2.5 points)
3. Increase the number of students scoring at level 3 and4 in Math by 5 % Points (Capped at 2.5 points)
4. Increase the number of students scoring at level 3 and4 in ELA by 5 % Points (Capped at 2.5 points)
25
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
26/60
K-8 School Local Measures.
26
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
27/60
K-8 School Local Measures.
27
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
28/60
K-8 SchoolLocal Measures.
Based on the 2012 Cut-Scores and Matching 2013 Cut-Scorestables, the Proficiency levels from 2011-12 were converted into2012-13 proficiency levels.
Once the conversion was done, the percentage change wascalculated for ELA and MATH based on the following formulas:
% Change in Level 1: 2012-13 Percentage of Students in Level 1
2011-12 Percentage Students in Level 1
% Change in Level 3+4: 2012-13 Percentage of Students inLevel 3+4 2011-12 Percentage Students in Level 3+4
28
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
29/60
K-8 School Local Measures.
For ELA and Math:
Points Earned= % Point decrease in Level 1 X 0.225
Points Earned= % Point increase in Level 3+4 X 0.45
29
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
30/60
30
The total sco re earned by each K -8 school was
calculated as fol lows:
Total Points: Po ints earned b y ELA + Points earned
by Math + Poin ts earned based on a State-pro vided
MGP grow th score.
HEDI Scale
Ineffective Developing Effective Highly Effective
Total Points 0-2 3-8 9-17 18-20
K-8 SchoolLocal Measures.
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
31/60
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
32/60
State Growth
Every teacher receives a growth score (based onState assessment OR SLO)
Pre- and post-assessment improvement and
achievement Terra Nova 3/SRI
AIMSweb
District-developed assessments
Performance-based assessments preferable
32
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
33/60
P R I N C I P A L E V A L U A T I O N S
APPR Requirements33
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
34/60
APPR for Principals
34
60%Other
Measures
20%
Local
20%State
Growth
100%
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
35/60
Approved Rubric Multiple Measures
Multiple school visits bysupervisor, trained administrator,or trained independent evaluator
Any remaining leadershipstandards not addressed in theassessment of the educators
practice must be assessed at leastonce a year
At least a majority (31) of the 60points shall be based on broadassessment of practice based onthe approved rubric
Any remaining points shall beassigned based on: results of one
or more ambitious andmeasurable collaborativelyestablished goals
60% Other Measures
35
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
36/60
Conducting Observations
District developed rubric focusing on
Instructional leadership
Organizational leadership
60 total points
Observations/school visits
Probationary/non-tenured
2 observations by supervisor and 1 by trained administrator
Tenured
2 observations by supervisor
36
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
37/60
APPR for Principals
37
60%Other
Measures
20%
Local
20%State
Growth
100%
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
38/60
Elementary, Middle, and K-8Principals
High School Principals
Reduce students scoring atLevel 1 in Math and ELA by 10
percentage points (Each countsfor a maximum of 3.75 points)
Increase students scoring atLevels 3 & 4 in Math and ELAby 5 percentage points (Eachcounts for a maximum of 3.75points)
Increase by 5 percentage points thenumber of students in the 2012cohort promoted from grade 9 to 10
compared to the promotion rate ofthe 2011 cohort (5 point maximum)
Increase by 5 percentage points thenumber of students in the 2011cohort promoted from grade 10 to 11compared to the promotion rate ofthe 2010 cohort (5 point maximum)
Increase by 4 percentage points thenumber of students graduatingusing the August graduation rate forthe 2012 13 school year (5 point
maximum)
Local Measures-School Growth
38
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
39/60
APPR for Principals
39
60%MultipleMeasures
20%
Local
20%State
Growth
100%
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
40/60
State Growth
Principals in Elementary, Middle and K-8 Schoolswith Grades 4-8
Student growth on state assessments in ELA andmathematics as prescribed by the Commissioner of the New
York State Department of Education
Principals in High Schools
Student growth on Regents exams assessments asprescribed by the Commissioner of the New York StateDepartment of Education
40
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
41/60
2012 2013 APPR Results41
Al t 6 t f t h it ( ll)
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
42/60
Almost 60 percent of teachers composite (overall) scoresplace them in the Effective range on the HEDI scale.
42
2%
58%
33%
7%
Teacher Composite APPR Ratings
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
Th l j it f t h i l t K 8 d hi h
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
43/60
The large majority of teachers in elementary, K-8, and highschools have Effective or Highly Effective ratings.
43
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Elementary K-8 Middle High
Ratings by School Level
Highly EffectiveEffective
Developing
Ineffective
State gro th scores about 200 pro ided b the State and
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
44/60
State growth scores about 200 provided by the State andthe rest based on SLOs average 11 points out of 20 possible.
44
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
1312
8
11 11
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Elementary K-8 Middle High All
Average State Growth Scores
Local measure scores based on school wide measures of
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
45/60
Local measure scores based on school-wide measures ofstudent achievement average 6.1 points out of 20 possible.
45
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
5.6
7.2
4.6
8.1
6.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Elementary K-8 Middle High All
Average Local Measures Scores
Professional practice scores based mostly on observations
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
46/60
Professional practice scores based mostly on observationsby administrators and Peer Observers are very high.
46
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
58.2
58.3
58.1
58.558.3
55
55.556
56.5
57
57.5
58
58.5
59
59.5
60
Elementary K-8 Middle High All
Average Professional Practice Scores
Below you can see HEDI rating distributions for teachers
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
47/60
Below, you can see HEDI rating distributions for teachersacross the 3 APPR components compared to overall ratings.
47
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
State - 20 Local - 20 Other - 60 Composite - 100
Teacher Ratings by APPR Component
Highly EffectiveEffective
Developing
Ineffective
Almost three quarters of principals composite (overall)
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
48/60
Almost three-quarters of principals composite (overall)scores place them in the Effective range on the HEDI scale.
48
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
73%
7%
20%
Principal Composite APPR Ratings
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Below you can see HEDI rating distributions for principals
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
49/60
Below, you can see HEDI rating distributions for principalsacross the 3 APPR components compared to overall ratings.
49
All numbers are prel imin ary, sub ject to add it ional ver i f icat ion.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
State - 20 Local - 20 Other - 60 Composite - 100
Principal Ratings by APPR Component
Highly EffectiveEffective
Developing
Ineffective
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
50/60
Improvement Plans50
New Yorks APPR statute sets up a special process for
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
51/60
Focus on those with Developing or Ineffective ratings:
Educators who receive a developing or ineffective ratingwill be required to work with a supervisor to develop a
Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP) or Principal Improvement Plan(PIP).
The TIPs and PIPs are developed collaboratively with theeducator, their manager, and their union representatives.
These plans outline how we will work together to driveimprovement in instructional practice and student achievement.
New York s APPR statute sets up a special process forensuring we support educators continuous improvement.
51
Observation rating data provides a clear starting point when
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
52/60
Observation rating data provides a clear starting point wheneducators are developing Improvement Plans.
52
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
53/60
B O N U S E S A N D C A R E E R P A T H W A Y S T H R O U G HT H E T E A C H E R I N C E N T I V E F U N D
Rewarding and Retaining
Effective Educators53
Knowing that our people are our greatest resource we devote
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
54/60
Amount of
Total Budget
Used for
Compensation
81%Memphis
68%Chicago
73%Syracuse
80%Boston
65%New York City
77%Los Angeles
74%Houston
Sources: SCSD Budget 2013-14 and Fiscal Year 2012-13 budgets available on the websites of:Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Memphis, and New York City
Knowing that our people are our greatest resource, we devotemuch of our annual budget to compensation.
54
However a perceived lack of competitive pay and opportunities
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
55/60
10%
18% 17%13%
35%
65%71% 72%
75%
87%
Offers acompetitive
starting salary
Salary wouldincrease quickly
Paysappropriately for
skill/effort
Financiallyrewards goodperformance
Offersopportunities to
advance
Teaching Preferred Occupation
Top-Third Graduates' Agreeing with Statements about Occupations
55
However, a perceived lack of competitive pay and opportunitiesto advance has diminished opinions of a teaching career.
Percentage of graduates who agreed or strongly agreed. Sources: Closing the Talent Gap,McKinsey & Company, September 2010. http://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gap.
Now SCSD is leveraging Teacher Incentive Fund bonuses and
http://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gaphttp://mckinseyonsociety.com/closing-the-talent-gap7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
56/60
Now, SCSD is leveraging Teacher Incentive Fund bonuses andcareer pathways to reward teachers and principals.
56
$6,000
Group 1 /Non-Study
Highly
EffectiveTeachers
Performance
Bonuses
$9,000
Group 1 /Non-Study
Highly
EffectivePrincipals
4 PrincipalLevels with
Stipendsup to
$3,000
Career
Pathways
4 TeacherLevels with
Stipendsup to
$2,500
A variety of career pathway roles can also extend the reach of
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
57/60
Educators who continuallydemonstrate effectiveness can
have access to roles that:
Allow them to extend their reach tostudents and colleagues
Provide opportunities to specialize inparticular skills
Have clear and consistent job descriptions
Have rigorous selection criteria and a
standardized selection process Allow them to earn additional
compensation for taking on additionalresponsibilities
57
A variety of career pathway roles can also extend the reach ofthe most effective teachers and principals.
The Teacher Incentive Fund program supports the Districts
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
58/60
Bonuses and Career Pathways can help us:
Recruit talented teachers and school leaders
Provide more development opportunities
Retain talented teachers and school leaders longer
Give more students access to the best teachers and leaders
Align efforts of teachers and school leaders with District goals
The Teacher Incentive Fund program supports the District sgoals related to talent recruitment, development and retention.
58
The TIF grant also provides funding for ongoing differentiated
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
59/60
Current and Potential Uses of TIF for Informing andDelivering PD:
Salaries for Peer Observers, who are responsible for
identifying strengths and weaknesses based on expert contentknowledge
Cost of online platform for APPR data
Payment for Professional Development attendance
Creation or purchase of additional PD offerings
The TIF grant also provides funding for ongoing, differentiatedprofessional development to support TIPs and PIPs.
59
Additional analysis of data will help us provide the right
7/27/2019 Syracuse city school board presentation on teacher evaluations
60/60
Boost effectiveness of allteachers through effectiveevaluation and targetedprofessional development.
Improve or exit the
persistently leasteffective teachers.
Retain andleverage themost effectiveteachers.
C
A
B
Effectiveness in Improving Student Achievement
Framework for Improving Teacher and Principal Effectiveness
60
Additional analysis of data will help us provide the rightsupports to all educators to ensure we get better and better.
Current performance Potential performance
Recommended