PUSD Teacher EvaluationSY 13/14

Governing Board Presentation

May 9, 2013

Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent

Presentation Overview

Legislative History The Peoria Unified Journey New Required Legislation Process Recommended Changes Next Steps

Arizona Revised Statutes§ 15-203(A)(38)

The State Board of Education shall…”on or before December 15, 2011 adopt and maintain a model framework for a teacher and principal evaluation instrument that includes quantitative data on student academic progress that accounts for between thirty-three percent and fifty percent of the evaluation outcomes and best practices for professional development and evaluator training. School districts and charter schools shall use an instrument that meets the data requirements established by the State Board of Education to annually evaluate individual teachers and principals beginning in school year 2012 – 2013.”

HB 2823

Effective June, 2012 Allowed governing boards to delay the

implementation of the Teacher and Principal Evaluation data component until SY13-14

Administration recommended we move forward

HB 2500

Currently on the Governor’s desk to be signed

Makes changes to required observations Has several policy implications for:

Transfers Length of time for improvement Definition of Inadequacy of Classroom

Performance Impact on continuing teachers status based

on evaluation performance classification

ADE Adopted Model Framework

ADE Adopted Model Framework for Educator Effectiveness April, 2011

Classroom observation tool must be: Rubric-based Tied to Arizona Teaching Standards

33% to 50% of the evaluation must be based on student achievement data

PUSD began to make the shift in evaluation practices in SY 11/12

Overview of the Peoria Model Professional Practices – Implemented

11/12 Self-Evaluation Goals Reflection Rubric Components

Aligned to Arizona Teaching Standards Professional Expectations

Student Achievement Data – Implemented 12/13

Peoria Data Model

Standing Data Committee Recommendation

Group A

Group B

Instructional Practices

Classroom-level Data

School-level Data

Data Model Guiding Principles Collaborative thinking Guiding principles

Equity Comprehensive Manageable Choice – Menu Driven Balance Transparency First Year’s Needs Spirit of the Law

Alignment ACT and Freshman College

Success PUSD Data Model

and AZ Learns

Group A – 33/7/40

6 Overall Data Points 33%

4 Choices 2 are mandatory

7% - Surveys Pick 2

1 Survey Mandatory Parent Student

Choices are made at the end of the year 60%- Professional Practices

Danielson/PUSD Framework

Group B – 33/67

5 Overall data points 33%

1 Mandatory – Survey Parent Student

If a valid and reliable data point exists, that is mandatory

Choices are made at the end of the year 67% Professional Practices-

Danielson/PUSD Framework

Where We Are Today

All teacher evaluations are completed electronically Teacher Administrator

Data components are also done electronically

Web-based application developed by Peoria IMT

Quality assurance Facilitates data collection and analysis

Continuous Improvement of Process Reconvened Governing Board appointed

Certified Teacher Evaluation Committee (CTEC) to look at current evaluation tool and system In order to gain broader teacher representation

the remaining CTEC and Standing Data Committees were combined

Volunteers were asked to move forward with CTEC Administration is bringing back CTEC’s

recommended changes to the tools and process to the Governing Board for approval this evening

CTEC Process

Held two meetings Reviewed current legislation Reviewed and consolidated Danielson

language from the components in Domains 1-4

Reflection on current practices Formulated updated Definition of

Inadequacy of Classroom Performance

Recommended Changes for 13/14 Wording changes to components in

Domains 1-4 Changes to required observational minutes Aligns final performance classifications to

ADE required framework Add definitions page Revised Definition of Inadequacy of

Classroom Performance Reviewed Critical Attributes

Probationary Teacher - Revised Minimum 70 minutes per semester Minimum of TWO classroom observations –

one scheduled, one unscheduled – each semester

Mid-Year Review Domains 1-4 Professional Responsibilities

Scheduled Observation Length is agreed upon at pre-conference Includes pre-conference and post-conference Continuous and uninterrupted lesson

Continuing Teacher - Revised Minimum of 70 minutes of observation Minimum of Two observations

Must be 60 days apart At least one observation must be scheduled

Length is agreed upon at pre-conference Includes pre-conference and post-conference Continuous and uninterrupted lesson

Continue the Mid-Year Conference to collect evidence on Domains 1 and 4 Completed no later than February 1st.

19

Overall Performance Classifications Current

Unsatisfactory Developing Proficient Excelling

Will remain the same in Domains 1-4

Proposed for 13/14 Ineffective Developing Effective Highly Effective

Required by SB 2823

Inadequacy of Classroom Performance

Currently is any one Unsatisfactory rating in any one component in Domains 1-4

Changes required by HB 2500 If a teacher scores in the ineffective

performance classification on their evaluation, they will be deemed inadequate This will require a Preliminary Notice of

Inadequacy of Classroom Performance

Next Steps with Data Component There are no recommended changes to

the data component at this time A full cycle is needed to see if the

current model has the desired result CTEC will reconvene in the fall to analyze

the data and make necessary adjustments

Changes will be procedural Student achievement percentages will

remain the same

Performance Pay

There is Currently there is no pay tied to the evaluation

performance classification

Requirement for 14/15

HB 2823 requires 33% of Fund 12 from the Classroom Site fund to be tied to the individual performance on the evaluation

A committee will be formed in 13/14 to realign our current 301 Performance Plan with the requirements of HB 2823

The current 301 Performance Plan and processes will remain unchanged this year and in 13/14

24

Questions