Evaluation Systems for Instructional Personnel

2

The quality of instruction that students receive in their classrooms is the most important variable in student achievement. (Hattie, 2009; Marzano, 2003)

3

Teachers working alone without feedback will not be able to improve no matter how much professional development is received. (Dufour and Marzano, 2011)

Putnam’s Evaluation System for Instructional Personnel:•Is based on contemporary research

•Is designed to align with the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices (FEAPs)

•Conforms with the requirements of Florida’s Race to the Top (RTTT) plan and Memorandum of Understanding

•Conforms with the requirements in Senate Bill 736

•Provides the basis for Performance Based Compen-sation (PBC) for the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF)

Classroom Teachers in FCAT-covered subjects and grades• Evaluation is based on Teacher Practice (FLDOE Model – Marzano) (50%) and

Student Performance (50%)

• Evaluation does NOT make use of the options, available through SB 736 / RTTT, to reduce the weighting of the Student Achievement portion (to 40%) of the assessment for Classroom Teachers with less than 3 years of Student Achievement history.

• This option has not been chosen due to the fact that Putnam County has selected to implement a model of PBC which supplements, rather than replaces, the existing method of compensation based on years of service. It is expected that this principle of dual-compensation will remain, even if the details are modified in the future.

• Will be eligible for Performance Based Compensation under TIF beginning in School Year 2011-12.

– Teacher Performance Award

– Teacher Effort Award

Two Components of the Growth and Evaluation System

Instructional Practice measured by the District Instructional Evaluation Framework

Evaluation ModelTeachers in Math and Reading

subjects covered by FCAT

Student Performance 50% Instructional Practice 50%

Value-Added ModelDelivered by FLDOE

Marzano Framework(Pedagogy)

Classroom Teachers in subjects and grades NOT covered by FCAT• Evaluation is addressed by combining Teacher

Performance (Marzano model) and Student Performance using data from mastery/achievement instruments that may be available or, in the absence of these, specific learning targets outlined in the growth plan in collaboration between teacher and administration.

• Reduces the weighting of the Student Achievement portion (to 30%).

• Are eligible for PBC for Teacher Effort only.

Evaluation ModelTeachers in subjects or grades NOT

covered by FCAT

Student Performance 30% Instructional Practice 70%

Standardized Mastery Exams (AP Exams; Industry Certification, G-Made, Fair, SRI,

etc.)

Learning Targets specified by the Growth Plan

Marzano Framework(Pedagogy)

Instructional Personnel who are NOT Classroom Teachers

• Evaluation is addressed by combining Teacher Performance (Marzano model) and Student Performance using data on all students in the school or those students (e.g. specific grade) for whom the staff member has responsibility.

• Reduces the weighting of the Student Achievement portion (to 30%).

• Are eligible for PBC for Teacher Effort only.

Marzano Framework(Pedagogy)

Evaluation ModelNon-Classroom Teachers

Student Achievement 30% Instructional Practice 70%

Value-Added Model (Whole School or Grade Level)

Learning Targets specified by the Growth Plan

Marzano Framework

Additional Resources:A Handbook for the Art and Science of TeachingEffective Supervision: Supporting the Art and Science of Teaching

What will I do to:1.Establish and communicate learning goals, track student progress, and celebrate success? 2. Help students effectively interact with new knowledge?3. Help students practice and deepen their understanding of new knowledge? 4. Help students generate and test hypotheses about new knowledge? 5. Engage students? 6. Establish or maintain classroom rules and procedures? 7. Recognize and acknowledge adherence or lack of adherence to classroom rules and procedures? 8. Establish and maintain effective relationships with students? 9. Communicate high expectations for all students? 10. Develop effective lessons organized into a cohesive unit?

Dr. Marzano’s Instructional Design Questions

Teacher Practice evaluation is compiled through an extensive collection of data from observations ranging from formal observations to brief walk throughs. All observations, regardless of length and breadth, shall be accompanied by individual written feedback to the teacher. Observations are of three types, including:

• Formal Observations – Scheduled– Lasts an entire class period (but not less than 30 minutes)– In-person Pre- and Post-Observation Conference to gather additional

documentation

• Informal Observations– Unannounced– Lasts from 15 minutes to an entire class period– Post-Observation Conference is required but may be conducted electronically.

• Walk Throughs– Unannounced– Last anywhere from 5 minutes to 15 minutes. – Will be included in the overall evaluation score for a Classroom Teacher if data

has been collected by an administrator and may or may not be included in the overall evaluation score if data has been collected by a CRT/TOSA/ Mentor /Peer.

Scales• There are 60 scales. One for each of the 60 elements • 5 point rating system

Innovating

(4)Applying

(3)Developing

(2)Beginning

(1)Not Using

(0)

Example Scale Innovating (4) Applying (3) Developing (2) Beginning (1) Not Using (0)

Adapts and creates new strategies for unique student needs and situations.

Organizes students into small groups to facilitate the processing of new knowledge and monitors group processing.

Organizes students into small groups to facilitate the processing of new knowledge.

Uses strategy incorrectly or with parts missing.

The strategy was called for but not exhibited

• Observations are focused data collection opportunities and are intended to be used as a coaching tool.

• Observers will be trained by Marzano-certified instructional personnel– and to facilitate the development of a common language of successful

instruction – and to build capacity throughout the District, Classroom Teachers will

also be trained in the Teacher Practice model.

• Multiple observers will require training to assure results have high inter-rater reliability.

• Independent Observers will be used to enhance the objectivity of the observation and evaluation process.

• Maximize the number of observations on which an evaluation is to be based.

• No observations will count towards evaluation during the first nine weeks as we transition into this new system.

Teacher Practice Observation Process Formal

Observation (minimum number annually)

Informal Observation

(minimum number annually)

Walk Throughs

(minimum number quarterly)

Category I Teachers (teachers with 0-3 years in District) 4 4 9

Category II Teachers (teachers with 4 - 9

years in District) 2 2 4

Category III Teachers (teachers with 10 or

more years in District)

2 2 4

Struggling Teachers 4 4 9

Teacher Practice Observations – Personnel Conducting Observations

Principals Assistant Principals

District Administrators

Independent Evaluators

TOSA / CRT’s

Mentor / Peers

Formal Observations

● ● ● ● ☺ ☺

Informal Observations

● ● ● ● ☺ ☺

Walk Throughs ● ● ● ● ☺ ☺

● Used for evaluation after the first 9 weeks Used for coaching only☺

Experience Category

Highly Effective (4)

Effective(3) Needs Improvement / Developing(2)

Unsatisfactory(1)

Category I Teachers (teachers with 0-3 years in District)

At least 65%* at Level 4 and 0% at Level 1

At least 65%* at Level 3 or higher

Less than 65%* at Level 3 or higher and less than 50% at Level 1

Greater than or equal to 50%* at Level 1

Category II Teachers (teachers with 4 - 9 years in District)

At least 75%* at Level 4 and 0% at Level 1

At least 75%* at Level 3 or higher

Less than 75%* at Level 3 or higher and less than 50% at Level 1

Greater than or equal to 50%* at Level 1

Category III Teachers (teachers with 10 or more years in District)

At least 85%* at Level 4 and 0% at Level 1

At least 85%* at Level 3 or higher

Less than 85%* at Level 3 or higher and less than 50% at Level 1

Greater than or equal to 50%* at Level 1 or 2

The Marzano Model of Teacher Practice Observation and Evaluation-Performance Levels

For Year One, Category III teachers will be combined into Category II.

Marzano Professional Development• Every teacher has access to a self-paced, self-study

course of the Marzano work• Included in our District Contract (teachers do not

have to pay)• Is not mandatory• Can be accessed at www.learningaccount.net• Username is first part of putnamschools.org address

(ex. mhedstrom, or c3carter)• Click on “forgot password” if you did not receive one

and it will be e-mailed.

Value Added Model (VAM)

• A value added model is a set of statistical analyses applied to student performance data in order to quantify teacher effectiveness in terms of student growth.

• Growth results for individual students associated with a particular teacher are aggregated, then compared with the growth results of other teachers in the same school and across the state.

Value Added Model (VAM)What factors will be taken into account (i.e. “controlled for”) when calculating student growth expectations (e.g. ELL status, SWD status, student attendance, socio-economic status, ethnicity, class size, etc.)?•The following items were taken into account and found to be highly significant in accurately predicting student growth:

– Prior year FCAT scores (single prior year in grade 4, two prior years in grades 5-10)•The following items were taken into account and found to be significant in accurately predicting student growth:

– Enrolled in two or more courses associated with FCAT subject– Difference from modal age (total number of years held back)– Student Attendance (number of days present)

•The following items were taken into account and found to be somewhat significant in accurately predicting student growth:

– ELL Status– Language Impaired– Specific Learning Disability– Mobility (number of school transfers)– Class size– Class homogeneity (in terms of student ability levels)

•The following items were taken into account and found to be not significant in accurately predicting student growth:

– Gifted Status– Emotional/Behavioral Disability– Several Others

Value Added Model (VAM)Who came up with this model?•The specifics associated with the Florida VAM were recommended by the Student Growth Implementation Committee (SGIC) to Florida’s Commissioner of Education (Eric Smith) who accepted the recommendation without changes.•The SGIC committee is comprised of 25+ members, most of whom are either teachers or public education administrators. Two of the committee members (Ronda Bourn of NEFEC, Sam Foerster of Putnam County) are local.

When will VAM scores for 2009, 2010 and 2011 be released?•FLDOE released Putnam’s VAM scores for 2009-2011 on August 1. •The District Management Team is reviewing those results and formulating recommendations regarding how best to aggregate them and use them in the classification of teachers.•Recommendations will be shared with principals and teachers, and input will be solicited, before any policy decisions are made.•After the aggregation and classification policy decisions have been made, the VAM scores provided by FLDOE will be distributed to teachers, along with an explanation of the aggregation and classification schemes adopted by the district.

Performance Based Compensation

Instructional Category Compensation

Student Achievement Instructional Effort

HE EFF (top 50%)

HE EFF (Top 50%)

Classroom Teacher: FCAT-covered course (Returning Teachers must opt-in to be eligible)

10% 5% 5% 2.5%

Classroom Teacher: non-FCAT course or grade (Returning Teachers must opt-in to be eligible)

5% 2.5%

Instructional Personnel in Support (Guidance, Deans, Media, TOSA, CRT, etc.) (Must opt-in to be eligible)

5% 2.5%

Teacher Incentive Fund $7,266,036

Race to the Top$2,292,080

Senate Bill 736Unfunded Mandate

2011 – 2012

$$$ Performance Based Compensation 100% TIF

Evaluation System Revision -Evaluation System Revision-Modifications in Contract Status-Use of Value Added Model-Adopt a Grandfathered Salary Schedule

2012 – 2013

$$$ Performance Based Compensation 100% TIF

Evaluation System Review and Revision

2013 – 2014

$$$ Performance Based Compensation 75% TIF 25% District

Evaluation System Review and Revision

2014 – 2015

$$$ Performance Based Compensation 50% TIF 50% District

-Evaluation System Review and Revision-$$$ Ties the most significant salary gains to effectiveness

-Value Added Model used in Non FCAT Classes and Grades-Instructional Personnel choose salary options

Instructional EffortActivities Reflecting Effort Targeting Student Academic Growth Weighting

Certification/endorsement in area of need secured during current school year at the request of administration1.Subject area certification for ESE’s2.ESOL3.Reading4.Critical Shortage Certifications (state or district defined)5.Gifted6. Middle Grades Integrated7. 8.

1 pt each

Leadership of Professional Learning Communities 1 pt eachActive Participation in Lesson Study 1 pt each Documented Personal 1:1 contact with parents 100%=2 pts

95%=1 pt Documented electronic (through Skyward) contacts with parents 100%=2 pts

95%=1 pt

Documentation of community service 1 pt each projectParticipation in unpaid after-school tutorials 1 pt each sessionTeacher Attendance 100%=2 pts

95% = 1ptTeacher Punctuality 100%=2 pts

95% = 1ptStudent Attendance (points for attendance rates over school average) 100%=2 pts

95% = 1pt

Teacher Willingness to Relocate to a high needs school 10 pts

Student Load Number of Preps above contract specifications

TOTAL POINTS

Thank You for contributing to this PowerPoint!

• IES Marzano Team (Dev Stark, Rebecca Alexander, Mike Greenan, Danette Tomlinson, Heidi Hatton, Kim Fleming, Melanie Driver, Tracy Hornsby)

• Tammie Driggers

• Kellie Gullifoyle

• Jennifer Rivera

• J. T. Stout

• Melissa Coleman