61
Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation ProgramsMay 2013

Page 2: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Welcome

Please sit together as a team with your sponsoring organization

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

2

Page 3: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

3

Educator Effectiveness Pipeline

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 4: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Agenda for Today’s Session

Overview of the Statewide and National Perspective

Overview of the Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework

Connections between Educator Evaluation and Educator Preparation

Overview of Resources

Q&A

4

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 5: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Intended Outcomes

Know the key terms, steps and components of the educator evaluation framework

Articulate the critical information your candidates must know about educator evaluation as they transition from preparation to employment

Understand the structure and content of the model system performance rubric for teachers and administrators

5

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 6: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Intended Outcomes (continued) Determine the connections between

educator preparation and educator evaluation, including the connections between effectiveness ratings for educators and program accountability

Create a “take-back” packet to share with others in your preparation program and/or candidates

Know how to find additional resources about Educator Evaluation and how to use them

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

6

Page 7: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Session Logistics Norms Breaks Tabletop Parking Lots

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

7

Page 8: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

The Shifting Landscape

• The competition for talent

• Human capital practices across sectors

• Multidimensional response needed

• It’s not “business as usual” anymore

U.S. Department of Education most recent TIF awards

8

Page 9: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Teacher Evaluation: The National Picture 32 states + DC have made some change to their state

teacher evaluation policy in the last three years. Out of these, only 9 are silent on the requirement to include objective evidence of student learning.

23 states + DC include objective evidence of student learning in the form of growth and/or value-added data

17 states + DC have adopted legislation that specifically requires that student achievement and/or student growth will “significantly” inform teacher evaluations.

18 states + DC have policy in place that makes teachers eligible for dismissal based on teacher evaluation results. In only 13 of those states teacher evaluations are explicitly tied to student performance.

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

9

Source: National Council for Teacher Quality. State of the States: Trends early lessons on teacher evaluation and effectiveness policies. (2011). Washington, D.C.

Page 10: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Teacher Evaluation: The National Picture Three state-level approaches to teacher

evaluation:o Single state-mandated evaluation system (e.g. DE,

TN)o Optional state-created model framework; flexibility for

districts in implementation (e.g. MA, RI)o General state guidance to districts on meeting state

requirements with lots of local flexibility (e.g. NY, WA) Common features:

o Annual evaluation cycleo Use of multiple measureso Student learning as a “significant” factor in evaluation

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

10

Source: Center for Great Teachers and Leaders. Databases on State Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies. (2013). Washington, D.C.

Page 11: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Principal Evaluation: The National Picture of When Legislation was Passed

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

11

Source: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. State Policies on Principal Evaluation: Trends in Changing Landscape. (2012). Washington, D.C.

Page 12: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

12

Principal Evaluation: The National Perspective Implementation in RTTT States

o 4 states mandate statewide systemso 4 states mandate the implementation of a

state-developed system with local control granted over some components of the system

o 10 states mandate a minimum framework on which districts may base their own models

Page 13: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

13

Two separate ratings

Three types of evidence

Four common Standards

Educator Evaluation

13

What sets Massachusetts apart?

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 14: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Overview of the Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

14

Page 15: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

What is the current level of readiness around integrating the new MA evaluation system into within your educator preparation program?

A. We’re already doing itB. We’re planning on doing itC. We’re thinking about doing itD. It hasn’t been on our radar, not yet

Identifying Program Readiness

15

Page 16: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Judging Candidate Readiness

Professional Goal Setting Self-reflection against a performance

standard Collecting evidence related to a focused

goal Analyzing student data

16

Page 17: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Overall, what is the skill level of your candidates in the area of:Professional Goal settingA. HighB. ModerateC. Low

17

Page 18: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Overall, what is the skill level of your candidates in the area of:Self-reflection against a performance standard

A. HighB. ModerateC. Low

18

Page 19: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Overall, what is the skill level of your candidates in the area of:Providing evidence related to a focused goal

A. HighB. ModerateC. Low

19

Page 20: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Overall, what is the skill level of your candidates in the area of:Analyzing student dataA. HighB. ModerateC. Low

20

Page 21: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

21

Collaborative Development of the Educator Evaluation

FrameworkRace to the Top (August 2010)

(with district and local union agreement)

Task Force Report (March 2011) (wide representation from the field, Listening Tour)

New Regulations (June 2011) (500+ public comments)

Model System (January 2012)

(collaboration with Level 4 schools, Early Adopter districts, unions and state associations)

Building Effective Educators

Page 22: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Priorities of the new evaluation framework

Place Student Learning at the Center – Student learning is central to the evaluation and development of educators

Promote Growth and Development – Provide all educators with feedback and opportunities that support continuous growth and improvement through collaboration

Recognize Excellence – Encourage districts to recognize and reward excellence in teaching and leadership

Set a High Bar for Tenure – Entrants to the teaching force must demonstrate Proficient performance on all standards within three years to earn Professional Teacher Status

Shorten Timelines for Improvement – Educators who are not rated Proficient face accelerated timelines for improvement

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

22We want to ensure that each student in the Commonwealth

is taught by an effective educator, in schools and districts led by effective leaders.

Page 23: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Key Components of the New Evaluation Framework Summative Performance Rating

o New Performance Standards & Indicators

o Four Plans

Impact Rating on Student Performance

5-Step Cycle

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

23

Page 24: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Everyone earns two ratings

ExemplaryProficient

Needs ImprovementUnsatisfactory

HighModerate

Low

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

24

SummativePerformance

Rating

Impact Ratingon

StudentPerformance

*Most districts will not begin issuing Impact Ratings before the 2014-2015 school year.

Page 25: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Summative Performance Rating

ExemplaryProficient

Needs ImprovementUnsatisfactory

Rating reflects: Performance based on

Standards and Indicators of Effective Practice

Progress toward educator goals

Evidence includes:1. Multiple measures of

student learning, growth and achievement

2. Judgments based on observations and artifacts of professional practice

3. Additional evidence relevant to Standards (student/staff feedback)Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

25

SummativePerformance

Rating

Page 26: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

4 Performance Levels

Exemplary

Proficient

Needs Improvement

Unsatisfactory

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

26SummativePerformanc

e Rating

Page 27: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

4 Performance Levels

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

27

Page 28: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

28

4 Standards of Effective Practice

*Standards requiring Proficient rating or above to achieve overall Summative Rating of Proficient or above

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

School & District Administrators

Teachers & Specialized

Instructional Support Personnel

Instructional Leadership* Curriculum, Planning & Assessment*

Management & Operations Teaching All Students*

Family & Community Engagement

Family & Community Engagement

Professional Culture Professional Culture

Page 29: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

29

Standards and Indicators of Effective Teaching Practice

I. Curriculum, Planning, & Assessment

II. Teaching All Students

III. Family & Community Engagement

IV. ProfessionalCulture

A.Curriculum and Planning

B. Assessment

C. Analysis

A.Instruction

B.Learning Environment

C.Cultural Proficiency

D. Expectations

A. Engagement

B. Collaboration

C. Communication

A. Reflection

B. Professional Growth

C. Collaboration

D. Decision-making

E. Shared Responsibility

F. Professional Responsibilities

SummativePerformanc

e Rating

Page 30: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

30

Standards and Indicators of Effective Teaching Practice (with ESE Model Rubric elements)

I. Curriculum, Planning, & Assessment

II. Teaching All Students

III. Family & Community Engagement

IV. ProfessionalCulture

A. Curriculum and Planning1. Subject Matter

Knowledge2. Child and Adolescent

Development3. Rigorous Standards-

Based Unit Design4. Well-Structured

Lessons

B. Assessment5. Variety of Assessment

Methods6. Adjustments to

Practice

C. Analysis7. Analysis and

Conclusions8. Sharing Conclusions

with Colleagues9. Sharing Conclusions

with Students

A. Instruction1. Quality and Effort of

Work2. Student Engagement3. Meeting Diverse Needs

B. Learning Environment4. Safe Learning

Environment5. Collaborative Learning

Environment6. Student Motivation

C. Cultural Proficiency7. Respects Differences8. Maintains Respectful

Environment

D. Expectations9. Clear Expectations10.High Expectations11.Access to Knowledge

A. Engagement1. Parent/Family

Engagement

B. Collaboration2. Learning Expectations3. Curriculum Support

C. Communication4. Two-Way

Communication5. Culturally Proficient

Communication

A. Reflection1. Reflective Practice2. Goal Setting

B. Professional Growth3. Professional Learning

and Growth

C. Collaboration1. Professional

Collaboration

D. Decision-making1. Decision-Making

E. Shared Responsibility2. Shared Responsibility

F. Professional Responsibilities3. Judgment4. Reliability and

Responsibility

Page 31: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

31

Standards and Indicators of Effective Teaching Practice (with ESE Model Rubric elements)

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 32: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Four Model System Rubrics

Similarities across rubrics underscore common responsibilities and understandings

Role-Specific Indicators can supplement rubrics to provide differentiation by role

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

32

Superintendent Rubric(District-Level Administrators)

Principal Rubric (School-Level Administrators)

Classroom Teacher Rubric

Specialized Instructional

Support Personnel Rubric

SummativePerformanc

e Rating

Page 33: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Four Standards of Practice + Progress Toward Educator Goals

Exemplary – Proficient – Needs Improvement -- Unsatisfactory

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

33

SummativePerformance Rating

Page 34: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Summative Rating Determines Your Educator

Plan

Summativ

e Rating

Exemplary1-yr Self-Directed

Growth Plan2-yr Self-Directed Growth Plan

Proficient

Needs Improvement

Directed Growth Plan

Unsatisfactory Improvement Plan

*Developing Educator Plan: for new teachers & administratorsMassachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

34

Page 35: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Four Types of Educator Plans

Developing Educator Plan For educators without Professional Teaching Status, administrators in the first three years in a district, or at the discretion of an evaluator for an educator in a new assignment; one school year or less in length

Self-Directed Growth PlanFor experienced educators rated Proficient or Exemplary on their last evaluation; these plans can be one or two school years in length

Directed Growth PlanFor educators rated Needs Improvement on their last evaluation; up to one school year in length

Improvement PlanFor educators rated Unsatisfactory on their last evaluation;min. of 30 calendar days, up to one school year in lengthMassachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

35

Page 36: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Student Impact RatingRating reflects: At least 2 years of data

from which trends and patterns can be identified

Multiple measures of student learning, growth & achievement

Evidence must include: State-wide growth

measures, where available (e.g. MCAS student growth percentiles, ACCESS scores)

District-determined measures comparable across the district for all educators in the same grade or content area

HighModerate

Low

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

36

Impact Ratingon

StudentPerformance

*Most districts will not begin issuing Impact Ratings before the 2015-2016 school year.

Page 37: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Student Impact Rating Determines Plan Duration

Summativ

e Rating

Exemplary1-yr Self-Directed

Growth Plan2-yr Self-Directed Growth Plan

Proficient

Needs Improvement

Directed Growth Plan

Unsatisfactory Improvement Plan

Low Moderate High

Rating of Impact on Student Learning

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

37Impact

Ratingon

StudentPerformance

Page 38: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Student Impact Rating The Student Impact Rating must be based

on at least 2 years of data across multiple measures, and therefore is unlikely to be issued until the 2015-2016 school year

Districts will begin identifying and piloting district-determined measures* in 2013

* For more information on district-determined measures, see

Part VII: Rating Educator Impact on Student Learning Using

District-Determined Measures of Student LearningMassachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

38Impact

Ratingon

StudentPerformance

Page 39: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

39

5 Step Evaluation Cycle

Continuous Learning

Every educator is an active participant in their own evaluation

Process promotes collaboration and continuous learning

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 40: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Step 1: Self-Assessment Educators self-assess their performance

using: o Student data, ando Performance rubric

QBased on the Standards and Indicators of Effective Teaching Practice and/or Administrative Leadership

Educators propose goals related to their professional practice and student learning needs

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

40

Part II: School Level GuidePages 14-22

Page 41: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Step 2: Analysis, Goal Setting and Plan Development Educators set S.M.A.R.T. goals:

o Student learning goalo Professional practice goal

(Aligned to the Standards and Indicators of Effective Practice)

Educators are required to consider team goals

Evaluators have final authority over goals

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

41

Part II: School Level GuidePages 23-31

Page 42: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

42

A “S.M.A.R.T.er GOAL”

A Goal Statement+

Key Actions+

Benchmarks (Process & Outcome)

=Educator Plan

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 43: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Step 3: Implementation of the Plan Educator completes the planned action

steps of his/her plan Educator and evaluator collect evidence

of practice and goal progress, including:o Multiple measures of student learningo Observations and artifactso Additional evidence related to performance

standards Evaluator provides feedback

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

43

Part II: School Level GuidePages 32-39

Page 44: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Strategic Evidence Collection Prioritize based on goals and focus areas

Quality not quantity

Artifacts should be “naturally occurring” sources of evidence (e.g. lesson plans)

Consider common artifacts for which all educators are responsible

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

44

Page 45: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Observations

45

The regulations define Proficient practice with regard to evaluation as including “frequent unannounced visits to classrooms” followed by “targeted and constructive feedback to teachers” (604 CMR 35.04, “Standards and Indicators of Effective Administrative Leadership Practice)

The Model System recommends short, frequent unannounced observations for all educators, as well as at least one announced observation for non-PTS and struggling educators.

Page 46: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Step 4: Formative Assessment/ Evaluation Occurs mid-way through the 5-Step

Cycleo Typically Jan/Feb for educators on a 1-year

plan (formative assessment)o Typically May/June for educators on a 2-year

plan (formative evaluation)

Educator and Evaluator review evidence and assess progress on educator’s goals

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

46

Part II: School Level GuidePages 40-47

Page 47: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Step 5: Summative Evaluation Evaluator determines an overall

summative rating of performance based on:o Comprehensive picture of practice captured

through multiple sources of evidence

Summative Performance Rating reflects:o Ratings on each of the four Standards

o Progress toward goals

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

47

Part II: School Level GuidePages 48-53

Page 48: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

48

Every educator is an active participant in the evaluation process

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Continuous Learning

Collaboration and Continuous Learning are the focus

Every educator uses a rubric

and data about student learning

Every educator proposes at least 1 professional

practice goal and 1 student learning goal. Team goals must be

considered

Educators and their evaluator

collect evidence and assesses

progress.

Every educator earns one of four

ratings of performance

Every educator has a mid-cycle

review

Page 49: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Early Learnings Comprehensive, transparent communications

strategies across all educators are critical to implementation success in Year One (Early Adopters & Level 4 districts)

Key stakeholders view new evaluation system positively and believe it is a significant improvement (3rd party evaluator)

Establishing coherence with other initiatives plays key role in making this “meaningful” to educators (Early Adopters & Level 4 districts)

49

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 50: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

What can Educator Preparation Programs do to help prepare teachers? Creating SMART goals within a

professional context Self-reflection against a rubric Evidence collection Analyzing student data Understanding the value in being an

active participant in this process and having skills to do the above

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

50

Page 51: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

What Educator Preparation Programs can do to help prepare administrators? For their evaluation…

o Self-assessment of practice using the rubric

o How to analyze data on student learning, growth and achievement

o How to assess school progress, strengths, and areas in need of improvement

o Create SMART goals for professional practice, student learning, and school improvement

Don’t forget the skills necessary to conduct evaluations…o Discuss goals with

teacherso How to manage and

conduct observationso How to provide

actionable feedback to teachers

o How to review artifacts and evidence and assess progress

o How to manage many educator plans

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

51

Page 52: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Connecting Educator Evaluation and Educator Preparation

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

52

Page 53: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Making Connections: Based on what you’ve just heard, where does Educator Evaluation best fit in your program delivery?

A. In a stand-alone courseB. In pre-practicum courseworkC. In practicum performance assessmentsD. Integrated throughout program

courseworkE. NowhereF. Elsewhere

53

Page 54: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Making Connections: Consider the Key Features of the Educator Evaluation System

What do we already have embedded in our preparation program?

What do we need to incorporate that we may not be currently addressing in our preparation program?

What might we need to teach differently based on what we’ve learned here?

o Partner Discussionso Tabletop Sharing

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

54

Page 55: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Critical Documents to Share with Candidates

Annual Cycle (for educators without professional status)

Quick Resource Guideso Model Systemo Training

Performance Rubric: Rubric-at-a-Glance

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

55

Page 56: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

56

ESE Model Systemo Teacher & Administrator Contract Language

o School & District Implementation Guides

o 4 Model Performance Rubrics

ESE Training Materialso Modules & Workshops

Additional Resources & Supportso Forms, guidance documents, webinars,

presentations, newsletter, approved vendors56

ESE Educator Evaluation Resources

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 57: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Training Resources ESE Guide to Educator Evaluation Training Requirements (

www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/TrainingRequirements.pdf)

Quick Reference Guide: Training Requirements (www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/)

ESE Training Programs (www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/)

Approved Vendors (www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/training/vendors/)

Questions? Please contact us at [email protected]

57

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 58: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

ESE Ed Eval Website

More information: http://www.doe.mass.edu/edeval

Questions: [email protected]

58

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Page 59: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Stay Informed about Educator Evaluation

Sign up for the monthly newsletter

http://edeval-newsletter-signup.org

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

59

Page 60: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Q&A What questions do

you have for the Educator Evaluation and the Educator Preparation teams at ESE?

Tabletop Parking Lot

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

60

Page 61: Educator Evaluation 101: A Special Overview Session for Educator Preparation Programs May 2013

Conclusion What’s next on

the conference agenda?

How to make the most of the afternoon networking session time?

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

61End-of-Session Feedback Forms