Educator Evaluation System

Educator Evaluation

SystemHarvard Public Schools

August 22, 2012

RPS Educator Evaluation Wiki

Wiki with Resourceso http://rpseducatorevaluation.wikispaces.

com/

Dropbox with forms

http://rpseducatorevaluation.wikispaces.com/



Topics to Discuss Overview of the Five Step Process and What it Looks

Like How to Engage Educators in the Process Collective Bargaining Process Announced/Unannounced Observations District Determined Measures Additional Thoughts

Valve Handbook for New Employees

Risks (What if I screw up?)

“Nobody has ever been fired at Valve for making a mistake. It wouldn’t even make sense for us to operate that way. Providing the freedom to fail is an important trait of the company-we couldn’t expect so much of individuals if we also penalized people for errors. Even expensive mistakes, or ones which result in a very public failure, are genuinely looked at as opportunities to learn. We can always repair the mistake or make up for it.”

Valve (Continued)“Screwing up is a great way to find out that your assumptions were wrong or that your model of the world was a little bit off. As long as you update your model and move forward with a better picture, you’re doing it right. Look for ways to test your beliefs. Never be afraid to run an experiment or collect more data.

It helps to make predictions and anticipate nasty outcomes. Ask yourself “what would I expect to see if I’m right?” As yourself “What would I expect to see if I’m wrong?” Then ask yourself, “what do I see?” If something totally unexpected happens, try to figure out why.”

Valve“There are still some bad ways to fail. Repeating the same mistake over and over is one. Not listening to customers or peers before or after failure is another. Never ignore the evidence; particularly when it says you’re wrong.”

Reading Public School Translation

Risks (What if I make a mistake?)“Nobody has ever been fired in the Reading Public Schools for making an honest mistake that benefits students. It wouldn’t even make sense for us to operate that way. Providing the freedom to try new methods or ideas, and fail is an important trait of our organization-we couldn’t expect so much of individuals if we penalized our staff for taking risks and not succeeding. Even expensive mistakes, or ones which result in a very public failure, are genuinely looked at as opportunities to learn and grow. We can always repair the mistake or make up for it.”

Reading Public School Translation(Continued)

“Making mistakes is a great way to discover that your assumptions were wrong or that your method was a little bit off. As long as you update your method and move forward with an improved way, you’re doing it right. Look for ways to test your beliefs and values. Never be afraid to pilot a new idea or collect more data.”

“It helps to set goals and benchmarks and anticipate what would happen if you do not reach those goals. Ask yourself, “What would I expect to see if I am right? Or What would it look like if I am wrong?” Then ask yourself, “What do I see? What do I hear? What do I say?” If something totally unexpected happens, try to figure out why.”

Reading Public Schools TranslationContinued

“There are still some bad ways to fail. Repeating the same mistake or using the same instructional strategy over and over again without any positive results is one. Not listening to feedback from peers, supervisors, parents, or students before or after a mistake is another. Never ignore the evidence or the data; particularly when it says you’re wrong.”

“Remember, our overall collective goal, PreK-12 is to prepare all students to succeed in this ever-changing complex world that awaits them after high school. In other words, we need to prepare them for college and/or career readiness. The only way that we can do that is to continue to experiment with new ideas, make mistakes, learn from those mistakes, and grow from the experience.”

“We are all in this together”

“It will not be perfect”

“We will be making mistakes along the way.”

“We need your help to make the process better.”

Educator Evaluation Process New DESE Regulations approved on June 28, 2011 Collaboratively Designed by

o Massachusetts Teachers Associationo Massachusetts Association of Secondary School Principalso Massachusetts Elementary School Principals Associationo Massachusetts Association of School Superintendentso Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Requires evaluation of all educators on a license Designed to promote leaders and teachers growth

and development Designed to support and inspire excellent practice

Some of the concepts in the process

1. Focuses on “Growth” and not “Gotcha”2. Applies to everyone (in positions requiring licenses)3. 4 Levels of Performance4. Rubrics (describing performance at standard,

indicator, and element level)5. Self-Assessment (using rubrics and student learning

data)6. Educator Goal Setting and Monitoring (Evaluator has

final say)

Some of the concepts in the process

7. Team Goals (Have to be considered)8. Unannounced Observations (of practice, not just

classroom teaching)9. Formative or Midcycle Review10. Multiple Measures (of performance and student

learning)11. District Determined Measures of Student Learning

(Implemented in three years)12. Student Feedback ((Implemented in two years)13. Staff Feedback (For administrators)

Work that We Have Done Thus Far

Pilotedo Educator Plano Principal/Assistant Principal Evaluationo Superintendent Evaluation

Contract Language Approved Created Several Forms

o Self Assessmento SMART Goal Development Workbooko Educator Plano Formative Evaluationo Summative Evaluationo Unannounced/Announced Observations

Developed an Electronic Portfolio System (Baseline Edge)

What we have done so far…

Presented at Several Workshopso Blue Ribbono NEC/SEEMo MASS o Brookline Public Schoolso Peabody Public Schoolso Harvard Public Schools

Professional Development for Administrator, Team Chairs, Department Chairs, Directorso Difficult Conversations Workshopo SMART Goals/Supervision/Teacher Rubric Workshop

TAP Committee Meetingso Review of Formso Discussion of Process

TAP CommitteeA Key to the Process-Established 2003

Committee of Teachers, Building Administrators, Central Office Administrators

Representation from every school Compared current rubric with model rubric

system Reviewed model contract language Will be involved in development of forms for

September, 2012

How to Engage Educators

Harvard Public Schools Administrators

Engaging Educators FrameworkSource: Reform Support Network

Four Domains of Educator Engagemento I knowo I applyo I participateo I lead

Each domain expects levels of mastery and involvement and different habits of mind.

We must intentionally engage educators across all four of the domains.

A Framework for Engaging Educators

I Know I ApplyI

Participate

I Lead

I Know I know how the evaluation system in my district works. I also

know the rationale for the changes in policy.

I understand the observational framework used to assess my performance and I understand how it intersects with student growth measures.

I understand the rating system and how my rating information leads to different types of educator plans.

I know to whom I can turn for support in order to improve.

In short, the evaluation system is a set of clear signals I use to guide the improvement of my performance.

Strategies for “I Know” All stakeholders (SEA, LEA, Union) are responsible Develop feedback loops for misconceptions

o Surveys, Focus Group Sessions Communicate, Communicate, Communicate

o Guidebookso FAQo Websiteo Newslettero Emailo Information Sessionso Podcasts/Webinars

Train the Trainer Models

I Apply I apply what I know about the evaluation system to

improve my practice and get better results with the students I teach.

I think through the expectations of the observation rubrics and apply those expectations to the design of my lesson plans.

I also use the information for other measures of student growth, to set expectations for my students, and to decide how to differentiate instruction.

I use feedback from observers and consider my strengths and weaknesses as a practitioner.

I use student data and other forms of feedback to assess my own performance and consider what to do to continue improving the results I get with my students.

Strategies to Support “I Apply”

Make resources and tools available for educators to useo Model lesson plans aligned to standardso Instructional coachingo Mentoringo Professional Developmento Interim Assessmentso Videos of high quality instruction

I Participate I participate in the development, implementation and

refinement of my district’s teacher evaluation system at both the practical and policy levels.

At my school, I work with leaders and colleagues to set shared expectations for how evaluations will be conducted.

I collaborate with others to review the observation rubric so we can understand what it means for us.

I work with my colleagues to interpret student data to inform instructional decisions.

As a member of my union, I participate in union-management collaborative sessions to calibrate video teaching samples using the observation rubric.

I work with union and district leadership to reflect how the new system will change the way my colleagues and I will use our time in my school.

Supporting “I Participate”

Feedback Loopso Surveys that gauge frequency and quality of feedbacko Focus Group Sessions

Follow up on Feedback Joint Union/Administration Communication Teams

o Breaks down barriers and eliminates misconceptions Identify teachers for additional roles and

responsibilitieso Peer Observation Piloto Developing assessments for multiple measureso Tools and guidance with student learning objectives

I lead I lead my colleagues to improve their performance and to improve

the evaluation system as we go forward. I am recognized as an excellent practitioner, whose classroom

performance and student growth results stand out. At my school, my principal and colleagues seek me out for my

expertise. I open my classroom as a demonstration site, and I am called upon

to deliver model lessons. I mentor new teachers and support other teachers as they develop. At the district level, I collaborate with leaders from other schools, the

union and district administration to improve the faculty’s understanding of how to improve the evaluation system.

With other leaders, I visit schools around my district and help others know, apply, participate, and lead.

I make sure that things are done with teachers, not to them.

Supporting “I Lead” Identify excellent practitioners and give them

opportunities to leado Study groups which focus on particular evaluation

standards or development of assessmentso Participate on school/district evaluation advisory

committees Establish a culture that accommodates

disagreement, but does not accept the status quo

30

5 Step Evaluation Cycle

Continuous Learning

Every educator is an active participant in an evaluation

Process promotes collaboration and continuous learning

Foundation for the Model

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education31

5 Step Evaluation Cycle: Rubrics

31

Part III: Guide to RubricsPages 4-5

Rubric is used to assess

performance and/or progress

toward goals

Rubric is used to analyze

performance and determine

ratings on each Standard

and Overall

Every educator uses a rubric to

self-assess against Performance

Standards

Professional Practice goals – team and/or individual must be tied to one or more

Performance Standards

Evidence is collected for

Standards and Indicators;

rubric should be used to provide

feedback

32

32


33

Continuous Learning

Counselor reviews data and identifies three areas for improvement, grade 8 transition issues for special education students, YRBS data for students feeling emotionally safe at school, and low participation levels for students in Teen Screen program

Counselor works with Director of Guidance to develop a department professional practice goal on Grade 8 Transition. Works with health educators, social workers, and school psychologists on a team student learning goal to improve emotional safety of students, and works with Behavioral Health Coordinator on a team student learning goal increasing percentage of students who participate in Teen Screen program.

Counselor gathers and synthesizes evidence on progress on goals in Educator Plan. Director of Guidance focuses data collection on goal areas.

Midway through the cycle, the Director of Guidance and counselor and department/teams to review evidence and assess progress on goals: makes adjustments to action plan or benchmarks, if needed.

Counselor receives a rating on each standard plus an overall rating based on performance against standards and progress on the three goals.

5 Step Cycle in Action for Specialized Instructional

Support Personnel

Step 1: Self-Assessment Self Assessment Completed using one of three

rubrics and a summary of results is sent to Primary or Supervising Evaluator by October 1st.

Includeso An analysis of evidence of student learning, growth, and

achievement for students under the educator’s responsibilities

o An assessment of practice against each of the four Performance Standards of effective practice using the district rubric.

o Proposed goals to pursue.

Self-AssessmentAnalysis of Evidence of student

learning, growth and achievement

Assessment of Practice against performance standards

Proposed goals to pursue to improve practice and student learning.

Which Rubric Do I Use for Self-Assessment?

General Classroom Rubrico PreK-High Schoolo Special Educationo ELLo Vocational Educationo World Languageso Health, PE, Family and Consumer Science, Arts

Specialized Instructional Support Personnel for Counselorso School Social Workers and Adjustment Counselorso Guidance Counselorso School Psychologists

Specialized Instructional Support Personnel for Nurses and Specialistso School Nurseso Library Media Specialistso Technology Integration Specialistso Reading specialists

Step 2: Proposing the Goals

Grade level, subject area, department, team goals strongly encouraged.

Goals can be constructed for individuals, teams, departments, or groups of educators who share responsibility for student results.

Exceptionso First Year Teachers (Year 2 or 3 teachers at guidance of

Principal)o Teachers who have not received ratings of Proficient or

Exemplary

Goal Setting ProcessFocus-Coherence-Synergy

District Strategy Superintendent Goals School Committee

School Improvement Principal Goals Plans

Classroom Practice Teacher Goals

Student Achievement

Goal Setting Evaluator reviews goals the Educator has proposed

in the self-assessment. The evaluator retains final authority over goals to

be involved in an educator’s plan. Educators meet with the evaluator by October 15th

to develop their educator plan. New educators must meet by October 1st.

Educator plan should be completed by October 30

Educator Plans Designed to provide Educators with feedback for

improvement, professional growth, and leadership Plan must be aligned to the standards and indicators, as

well as, district and school goals. Shall include

o At least one goal related to the improvement of practice tied to one or more Performance Standards

o At least one goal for the improvement of the learning, growth, and achievement of the students under the Educator’s responsibility

o An outline of actions the Educator must take to attain the goals and benchmarks to assess progress. Actions must include specified professional development and learning activities.

o Examples could include, coursework, self-study, action research, curriculum development, study groups with peers, and implementing new programs.

Four Different Educator Plans

The Developing Educator Plan (Non-PTS Teachers and teachers new to a position) is developed by the educator and the evaluator and is for one school year or less.

The Self-Directed Growth Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Proficient or Exemplary and is developed by the educator. When the Rating of Impact on Student Learning is implemented (beginning in 2013-14), educators with a Moderate or High Rating of Impact will be on a two-year plan; educators with a Low Rating will be on a one-year plan.

The Directed Growth Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Needs Improvement and is a plan of one school year or less developed by the educator and the evaluator.

The Improvement Plan (PTS Teachers) applies to educators rated Unsatisfactory and is a plan of no less than 30 calendar days and no longer than one school year, developed by the evaluator.

Standards, Indicators and Rubrics Standards (4)-Required in Regulations

o Instructional Leadership (5 Indicators)o Management and Operations (5 Indicators)o Family and Community Engagement (4 Indicators)o Professional Culture (6 Indicators)

Indicators (20)-Required in Regulations Elements (32)-May be modified, but most keep

rigor Rubrics

o A tool for making explicit and specific the behaviors and actions present at each level of performance.

Standard I:Curriculum, Planning, and

AssessmentStandard II:

Teaching All Students

A. Curriculum and Planning Indicator1. Subject Matter Knowledge2. Child and Adolescent Development

3. Rigorous Standards-Based Unit Design

4. Well-Structured Lessons

A. Instruction Indicator1. Quality of Effort and Work2. Student Engagement3. Meeting Diverse Needs

B. Assessment Indicator1. Variety of Assessment Methods2. Adjustments to Practice

B. Learning Environment Indicator1. Safe Learning Environment2. Collaborative Learning Environment

3. Student MotivationC. Analysis Indicator

1. Analysis and Conclusions2. Sharing Conclusions With Colleagues

3. Sharing Conclusions With Students

C. Cultural Proficiency Indicator1. Respects Differences2. Maintains Respectful Environment

D. Expectations Indicator1. Clear Expectations2. High Expectations3. Access to Knowledge

Note: A teacher will need to receive at least a score of proficient on both Standard I and II to be eligible to receive an overall rating of proficient.

Standard III:Family and Community

EngagementStandard IV:

Professional Culture

A. Engagement Indicator1. Parent/Family Engagement

A. Reflection Indicator1. Reflective Practice2. Goal Setting

B. Collaboration Indicator1. Learning Expectations2. Curriculum Support

B. Professional Growth Indicator1. Professional Learning and Growth

C. Communication Indicator1. Two-Way Communication2. Culturally Proficient Communication

C. Collaboration Indicator1. Professional Collaboration

D. Decision-Making Indicator1. Decision-making

E. Shared Responsibility Indicator1. Shared Responsibility

F. Professional Responsibilities Indicator1. Judgment2. Reliability and Responsibility

The framework establishes four standards of practice, with supporting rubrics defining

four levels of effectiveness

Principals & Administrators Teachers

Instructional Leadership*

Management and Operations

Family & Community Partnerships


Curriculum, Planning & Assessment*

Teaching All Students*

Family & Community Engagement


47Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationRevised 9/30/2011

* denotes standard on which educator must earn proficient rating to earn overall proficient or exemplary rating; earning professional teaching status without proficient ratings on all four standards requires superintendent review

48

Model Rubrics: Structure

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary EducationPart III: Guide to RubricsPage 6

49

Model Rubrics: Structure


50

The Model Rubrics are Aligned


50

51

Exemplary “The educator’s performance

significantly exceeds Proficient and could serve as a model for leaders district-wide or even statewide. Few educators—principals and superintendents included—are expected to demonstrate Exemplary performance on more than a small number of Indicators or Standards.”


52

Proficient “Proficient is the expected,

rigorous level of performance for educators. It is the demanding but attainable level of performance for most educators.”


Needs Improvement Educators whose performance on a

Standard is rated as Needs Improvement may demonstrate inconsistencies in practice or weaknesses in a few key areas. They may not yet fully integrate and/or apply their knowledge and skills in an effective way. They may be new to the field or to this assignment and are developing their craft.

Unsatisfactory Educators whose performance on a Standard

is rated as Unsatisfactory are significantly underperforming as compared to the expectations. Unsatisfactory performance requires urgent attention.

Multiple Sources of Evidence Inform the Summative Performance Rating

55Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

SummativePerformance

RatingExemplaryProficient

Needs ImprovementUnsatisfactory

Attainment of Educator Practice Goal(s) and Student Learning

Goal(s) as identified in the Educator Plan

(Did Not Meet, Some Progress, Significant Progress, Met, Exceeded)

Standard 1Standard 2Standard 3Standard 4

RUBRIC

Outcomes for Educator:

• Recognition and rewards

• Type and duration of Educator Plan

Trends and Patterns in at Least Two Measures of Student Learning Gains

MCAS growth and MEPA gains where available;measures must be comparable across schools, grades, and subject matter district-wide

Products of Practice(e.g., observations)Multiple

Measuresof Student LearningOther Evidence

(e.g. student surveys)

Evidence

Rating of Impact on Student

Learning (2014-15)

Low, Moderate, or High

Standards

Revised 9/30/2011

Rating SystemUntil Impact on Student Learning is Implemented in 2013-14/2014-15

56

Summative

Rating

Exemplary 1-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH

PLAN

2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN

Proficient

Needs Improvement DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN

Unsatisfactory IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Low Moderate High


Summative

Rating

Exemplary 2-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED

GROWTH PLAN Proficient



Educators earn two separate ratings

57

Summative

Rating


PLAN


Proficient



Low Moderate HighRating of Impact on Student Learning

(multiple measures of performance, including MCAS Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where

available) Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Summative

Rating


PLAN


Proficient



Low Moderate HighRating of Impact on Student Learning

(multiple measures of performance, including MCAS Student Growth Percentile and MEPA where

available)

Phase-in Over Next 2 Years

Phase 1-Summative ratings based on attainment of goals and performance against the four Standards defined in the educator evaluation requirements (September, 2012)

Phase 2-Rating of educator impact on student learning gains based on trends and patterns of multiple measures of student learning gains (September, 2013)

Phase 3-Using feedback from students (for teachers) and teachers (for administrators)-(September, 2014)

District Determined Measures (DDM)Timeline

September 30, 2013-All Districts expected to identify their district determined measures and their process for rating educator impact on student learning.

2013-14 School Year: All districts implement the DDM. Non-level 4 districts may choose to use the 2013-14 school year as a pilot year to test out their DDM.

By October, 2014: Level 4 districts complete their collection of the first year of data on educator impact on student learning. No ratings assigned (2 Years required)o All other districts may either collect the first year of data

on educator impact on student learning or consider the 2013-14 school year as a pilot.

District Determined Measures (DDM)Timeline

By October, 2015: Level 4 districts report educator impact ratings to DESE. All other districts either collect the first year of data on educator impact on student learning or if they did not use 2013-14 school year as a pilot, report educator impact ratings to ESE based on ratings from the 2013-14 and 2014-15 school years.

By October, 2016: All districts report educator impact on student learning ratings to DESE based on the previous two years of impact data.

District Determined Measures

Timeline may be different for administrators for MCAS, MEPA, AP Results

Measures of student learning should focus on growth, not just achievement

Growth measures will only be useful if they pertain to a relevant group of students for the educator being evaluated.

Possible Examples of DDM

Direct Measures (Assess student growth in a specific subject area over time)o MCAS Growth Percentiles in Math and ELAo Other Standardized assessment of student achievemento Portfolios of student worko Performance assessments

Indirect Measures (Do not measure student growth in a specific subject area, but measure the consequences of that learning)o Changes in graduation rateso College enrollment rateso College remediation rates

Roles of Educators Teachers

o PreK-High Schoolo Special Educationo ELLo Vocational Educationo World Languageso Health, PE, Family and Consumer Science, Arts

Administratorso Superintendentso Other District Administratorso Principals, Assistant Principalso Teachers with supervisory responsibilities, including

department chairs

Roles of Educators Educators supporting specific teachers or

subjectso Instructional coaches or mentorso Reading specialists

Specialized Instructional Support Personnelo School Nurseso School Social Workers and Adjustment Counselorso Guidance Counselorso School Psychologistso Library Media and Technology Integration Specialists

Appropriate DDM Teachers

o Tests and other measures of learning specific to subjects and gradeso Student portfolios, projects, performances, artifacts

Administratorso Tests and other measures of learning specific to subjects and gradeso Indirect measures of student learning such as graduation rates

Educators supporting specific teachers or subjectso Measures of student learning of the students of the teachers with

whom they work Specialized Instructional Support Personnel

o Tests and other measures of learning specific to subjects and gradeso Indirect measures of student learning such as graduation rates.

Challenges for DDM Establishing Growth Credibility

o Validity• The extend to which the assessment measures what it is

intended to measure and provides sound evidence for decisions informed by its results.

o Reliability• A student who takes it multiple times should get a similar

score each time.o Fair and free of bias

• Items and tasks are appropriate for as many students as possible and students are not presented with unnecessary and unwarranted barriers to demonstrating their knowledge, skills, and abilities.

Challenges Attribution

o Designating responsibility among educators for their impact on students’ learning growth and achievement

• Primary, Shared, or Limited Roster Verification

o Confirming the accuracy of student-teacher links Determining the Impact on Student Learning

Ratingo What is low growth, moderate growth, and high growth?

Evidence and Artifacts Unannounced Observations

o Partial or full period classroom visitations, instructional rounds, walkthroughs, learning walks, or other means deemed useful by the evaluator.

o Educator will be provided with brief written feedback Evidence compiled and presented by educator Fulfillment of professional responsibilities and

growth Active outreach to and on-going engagement with

families Any other relevant evidence from any source that

the evaluator shares with the educator Student/staff feedback (2013-14)

Example of a two-fer or three-fer

Student and

Teacher Growth

Educator Evaluation

Common Core

Common Assessments

Example of a Three-fer

Common Core For Literacy has three expectationso Building knowledge through content rich non-fiction and informational

textso Reading and writing grounded in evidence from texto Regular practice with complex text and its academic vocabulary

Rubrico Element I-A-3 (Rigorous Standards-Based Unit Design)o Element I-B-1 (Variety of Assessment Methods)o Element II-A-2 (Student Engagement)

Goal setting would be focused ono Increasing the amount of non-fiction and informational text used in the

classroomo Increasing the amount of writing that focuses on using evidence from

texto Increasing student engagement by using quality questioning techniques.

Examples of a three-ferContinued

Classroom Observations Focus Ono Engaging Students Directly with High Quality Textso Quality of Questions and Instructional strategies used to

engage students with a high level of key academic vocabulary

o Assessing Student Work through Evidence of Speaking and Writing

Common Assessments Could Focus Ono MCAS/PARCCo Student Analytic Writing which shows growth over timeo Student presentations which shows evidence of drawing

information from texts over time

Next Steps for Reading Collective Bargaining Process for Areas Not in

Regulations Meeting with individual schools to discuss process

further Training for Primary and Secondary Supervisors

on Process and Calibration of Rubric TAP Committee Summer Work

o New Formso Planning professional development opportunities

September Inserviceo SMART Goal Development

Exciting Aspects of Initiative

Opportunity to change teaching and learningo Focused Conversationso Creating Opportunity for Educator Growtho Leads to Student Growtho Tie in initiatives to educator evaluation

Build trust with educatorso Committee Work on Teacher Evaluation Process

Educate the Communityo School Committee Meetingso Community Forums

77

or “The” organizing initiative?

“An” initiative?


Examples of District/School

Initiatives Adopting the new MA Curriculum Frameworks 21st Century/Global Skills Anti-Bullying Professional learning communities Examining student work Data Teams Project Based Learning Common course/grade level assessments Elementary Report Cards Social Emotional Health BYOD

78Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Some Thoughts As An Early Adopter

This may be the most important initiative that you undertake in your district

Look at this as your organizing initiative for all other initiatives Look at this as an opportunity to improve teaching and

learning and educator growth in your district Plan your strategy and process Train staff on how to write and implement SMART goals

o Use the Train the Trainer Modelo Use Special Education Teachers as Experts

Collaboration is critical to the success of this implementation Link this system to the common core and assessment

development Integrate the behavioral health framework into the system

Some Thoughts As An Early Adopter

Transparent and ongoing open honest communication is critical

Train all supervisors in the process to create inter-rater reliability

Use the DESE materials Adopt the model rubrics Develop a logic model on how you will implement this

process Involve your staff, school committee, and community

early and often in the communication process

Questions and Thank You

Wiki with Resourceso http://rpseducatorevaluation.wikispaces.com/

Dropbox with forms

Emailo [email protected]



mailto:[email protected]

Thank You!

Documents

Educator Evaluation System