Dp as i i Presto State Board

8/18/2019 Dp as i i Presto State Board

1/20

DPAS II Sub

-

Committee

Recommendations


2/20

House Joint Resolution #6

“Directing the DPAS II AdvisoryCommittee to Establish a Sub-Committeeto Review and Make Recommendations

for Changes to the Current EducatorEvaluation System”

Report to be submitted to The Secretary

of Education, the State Board ofEducation, and the House and SenateEducation Committees


3/20

The Sub

-

Committee

Made up of voting representatives from: Delaware School Boards Association

The Delaware State Board of Education

Higher Education

Delaware Parent Teacher Organization Delaware State Educators Association (DSEA)

Delaware Association of School Administrators(DASA)

A Legislative Representative

And i

nput from non-voting participants:

The State Board of Education

The Delaware Department of Education


4/20

Identified Deficiencies

The Student Improvement portion(Component V) of the evaluation system wasweighted disproportionately among theother components.

Many of the student growth measures,especially at the outset, were of poor quality

and did not accurately measure studentgrowth with the fidelity necessary to buildan equitable educator accountability system.


5/20

Identified Deficiencies, Continued

There was not consistent rigor between themeasure B’s and C’s when they were appliedto employee groups. In addition, at theoutset, some measure C’s were growthmeasures, while others were completiongoals.

Initial issues with the measures have causedthe users of the current structure to lackconfidence in the accuracy and fairness ofthe system.


6/20

There were two

major

recommended changes


7/20

Recommendation #1

◦ Component V be weighted 20% of the total

Summative Evaluation, which will give it equal

weight with all of the other components. Itwill be divided into two parts of equal

measure:


8/20

Part A

50% of Component V will consist of an

individual goal agreed upon by the

educator and the administrator. The goal

will be based upon each individualinstitution’s School or District

Improvement Document, and must target

student improvement and the educator’sindividual efforts to foster positive change

in the school in which he or she works.


9/20

Part B

Student improvement results fromuniform accountability measures, foreach content measure and employee

group. Where applicable, this includes, but is not

limited to, state assessments, Pre-and Posttests by course, Portfolios, End-of-Course

projects, AP exam results, industry-standard measures for CTE courses,industry standard measures for specialists.


10/20

Part B (continued)

If not already completed, the agreed uponmeasures should be vetted for validity and

reliability on an ongoing basis by the

Department of Education. We also recognize that there must be a

balance between the validity and reliability

of a measure and the practical and flexiblenature of administering and scoring the

assessment.


11/20

Major Recommendation #2

Required annual summatives that will beinstituted as a result of the revisions of 14Delaware Admin Code 106A are not

necessary and should be rescinded. The discussion of Component V during

the required Measures and TargetsConference each year enables educators

and their supervisors to engage in annual,meaningful dialogue regarding teachingand learning.


12/20

Miscellaneous Recommendations

The committee made some additionalrecommendations, largely to foster

proper implementation of the modified

Component V.


13/20

Set Parameters

Professional development for Part A goalsis recommended for all users, to be led by

the Department of Education but

developed in conjunction with aCommittee of practitioners chosen by

DSEA and DASA.


14/20

Included should be guidelines andparameters for goal setting, such as

processes to address potential conflicts

over the selection of measures, as well asprocedures and examples to assist

practitioners with developing meaningful

goals.


15/20

Review and Keep Existing Measures

that are Effective

The committee recommends that existingmeasures that have been vetted for

reliability and validity be widely publishedto foster more confidence in the system,and that the usable measures be kept.The measures that show sub-par

reliability and validity will be revisedand/or replaced.


16/20

Use an Algorithm to

Determine Ratings. The committee recommends the use of

the mathematical algorithm developed by

the joint DSEA and DASA committee inthe Spring of 2015 to determine final

ratings for evaluations be piloted

The model was shared with the DPASAdvisory Committee in May 2015.


17/20

Don’t Rush

The committee proposes that the fullsystem be put into place in the 2017-2018

school year. 2016-2017 should be used

for measure refinement, professionaldevelopment on Part A of Component V, a

piloting of the mathematical algorithm,

and a piloting of the various measures inPart B.


18/20

Share!

The committee recommends that a PublicSchool District or Charter Schoolcontinue to be permitted to submit

locally developed assessments to beapproved by the Department ofEducation. Once developed and approvedby the DOE, the committee recommends

that the assessments become publicdomain, and available for use for alldistricts in Delaware.


19/20

Share More…

The committee recommends that a PublicSchool District or Charter Schoolcontinue to be permitted to develop

alternate teacher and/or specialistevaluation systems to be approved bythe Department of Education. Oncedeveloped and approved by the DOE, the

committee recommends that the systemsbecome public domain, and available foruse for all districts in Delaware.


20/20

Any Questions?

Documents

Dp as i i Presto State Board