Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Evaluating Teachers Across Content Areas
School Accountability Growth
25.39%
31.75%
42.86%
Percentage of Schools by Growth Rating (2014)
Does Not Meet Expected GrowthExceeds Expected GrowthMeets Expected Growth
28.73%
28.57%
42.70%
Percentage of Schools by Growth Rating (2013)
Does Not Meet Expected GrowthExceeds Expected GrowthMeets Expected Growth
Better Evaluation of Teachers In order to improve practice, teachers need
feedback that is accurate, authentic, and actionable. Accurate: Feedback precisely reflects the
teacher’s practice in the classroom (not just during observation).
Authentic: Feedback recommends action that is consistent with established best practice.
Actionable: Feedback provides concrete examples of what teachers can do to improve.
The feedback that teachers receive should be specific to the content that the teacher delivers.
Standards 3 and 4
Standard 3 (Content Knowledge) and Standard 4 (Facilitate Learning) should be strongly related to student achievement and growth.
Standard 3 is the “what” and Standard 4 is the “how” of student learning.
While teacher behavior measured by Standard 4 could be uniform across subject areas, Standard 3 is highly variable across content domains.
How well do higher ratings on Standard 3 relate to student growth (as compared to ratings on Standard 4)?
Standards 3 and 4 (Math)Standard 4 (Proficient) Standard 4 (Accomplished)
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
-1.52
-0.88*
Difference in Math Growth (2012-13)
Index
Stan
dard
3 (Pro
ficien
t)
Stan
dard
3 (Acc
omplishe
d)
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
-1.52-1.43
Difference in Math Growth (2012-13)
Index
Value-Added Index Grades 6 and up
Standards 3 and 4 (ELA)Standard 4 (Proficient) Standard 4 (Accomplished)
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
-0.33
-0.07*
Difference in ELA Growth (2012-13)
Standard 3 (Proficient) Standard 3 (Accomplished)
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
-0.33
-0.10*
Difference in ELA Growth (2012-13)
Value-Added Index Grades 6 and up
Principal Content Expertise
Principa
l Not
Mat
h-Cer
tified
Principa
l Mat
h-Cer
tified
Principa
l Not
ELA
-Cer
tified
Principa
l ELA
-Cer
tified
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
-1.52-1.42
-0.33
-0.15*
Differences in Growth by Principal's Teacher Certification
Value-Added Index Grades 6 and up
Conclusions
Differences in Standard 4 ratings (the how) in math are more predictive of student growth than differences in Standard 3 ratings (the what).
This doesn’t mean that content knowledge doesn’t matter, but that, on average, we aren’t measuring this aspect of teaching as well the facilitation of learning.
We cannot determine from these data whether the issue of evaluating math content knowledge is “skill” or “will”.
Our READY Principals meetings will focus on improving the observation and evaluation of mathematics instruction.
Analysis of Student WorkPrincipal Updates
ASW - Principal Role
Approve the Teacher’s Schedule Principal receives notification from TNL
Signature step in TNL looks exactly like signature steps in the evaluation platform.
Practice Schedule Validation Approval window in January 2015
Final Schedule Validation Late January - Early February 2015
ASW - Principal Role
Approve Chosen Objectives Approve objectives chosen by Teacher
Approval window opens in early February No final deadline – can be done in the system at
any time. Guidance
Review objectives with the Teacher, and then approve in TNL system.
Strands and Standards Guidance Charts available on the ASW Wiki for each content area.
ASW - Resources
ASW Wiki: ncasw.ncdpi.wikispaces.net Implementation Timeline Strands and Standards Guidance Charts ASW Memos from NCDPI Participation Requirements for ASW List of Courses included in the ASW Process Information on Standard 6 Waivers Teacher Resources FAQ
