Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Educator Effectiveness:
September 2014
June 26, 2014
1
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Teacher Effectiveness System in Act 82 of 2012
Building Level Data/School Performance Profile
Teacher Observation/ Practice
Planning and Preparation
Classroom Environment
Instruction
Professional Responsibilities
Indicators of Academic Achievement
Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, All Students
Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, Historically
Underperforming Students
Indicators of Academic Growth/ PVAAS
Extra Credit for Advanced Achievement
Building Level
Data 15%
Teacher Specific
Data 15%
Observation/
Practice 50%
Teacher Specific Data
Student Performance on Assessments
PVAAS 3-Year Rolling Average
IEP Goals Progress*
LEA Developed Rubrics*
Elective Data*
Elective
Data 20%
District Designed Measures and Examinations
Nationally Recognized Standardized Tests
Industry Certification Examinations
Student Projects Pursuant to Local Requirements
Student Portfolios Pursuant to Local Requirements
*Student Learning Objective Process
June 26,2014
2
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Classroom Teachers
• Provide Direct Instruction to students
– Plan, Instruct and Assess
• Use Rating Form 82-1
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/commun
ity/educator_effectiveness_project/20903/p/1173845
• At the local level, districts must categorize
professionals under Teaching Professionals, NonTeaching Professionals, or Principal Effectiveness
• Example: Guidance Counselors
3
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Transfers from One Building to
Another
• If a teacher transfers from one building to
another building within an LEA, they will have the
option of using the teacher specific data in place
of the Building Data (SPP) for two years starting
on the date the teacher begins the new
assignment.
• A teacher who elects this option shall sign a
statement of agreement with the LEA giving the
LEA permission to calculate their final rating in
this manner.
4
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Temporary Professional Employee
• There must be 4 months between
observations
• Final Rating Form (82-1) must be completed
twice a year. BOTH final rating forms must
include Teacher Specific Data and Elective
Data.
5
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Teacher Specific Data
• Given the recent release of Educator Effectiveness
FAQ, many LEAs have asked how they should go
about meeting the legislative intent of the data
defined in teacher specific. In order to support our
districts, PDE worked with a group of diverse
educators representing special education and
general education to come up with some policy
recommendations and guidance
documents/resources on how LEAs can met the
legislative intent of Act 82 while also making the
process feasible for districts.
6
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Teacher Specific Data
• Implementation of Teacher Specific Data
should be decided through a conversation
with your district’s solicitor, bargaining unit,
teachers, and administrators.
• PDE legal will not talk specifics beyond what is
stated in Act 82 with this section of the pie
because implementation of this piece is to be
determined at the local level.
7
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Teacher Specific Data
• 15% Total – Data must be included if it is available
and applicable
1. Student Performance (Advanced and Proficient) on
state assessment – not more than 5%
•
Conversion in Table H in the rules and regulations
2. PVAAS – at least 10%
3. Progress on meeting IEP goals – not more than 5%
4. Locally developed rubrics (LDR) – not more than 15%
when none of the other measures are available – using
SLO process; for teachers with PVAAS data available it is
not more than 5%
8
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
SLO Process for IEP Progress
SLO process for IEP Progress- a simple
streamlined SLO process to account for the IEP
progress. Per Act, any teacher with available and
applicable IEP progress must have that data
attributed (general education and special
education teachers). This template will allow
you to address the provisions of Act 82 by filling
out a one page summary of the aggregated case
load data for students
9
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
• LDR – Locally Developed Rubrics
– Defined in Rules and Regulations as LDR designed
by the LEA or used from the elective data which
includes the following:
•
•
•
•
•
District designed measures and assessments
Nationally recognized standardized tests
Industry certification examinations
Student project pursuant to local requirements
Student portfolios pursuant to local requirements
• The SLO process must be used to develop your
LDR.
10
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Scenarios
• Scenario One - If a teacher has PVAAS data available they
have to use at least 10% from PVAAS and then they could
have up to 5% from a combination of IEP, student
achievement (P or A) or LDR. (Teachers make this decision)
• Example 1:
– PVAAS 10%
– IEP Goals 1%
– Student Achievement 3%
– LDR 1%
• Example 2:
– PVAAS 12%
– Student Achievement 2%
– LDR 1%
11
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Scenarios without PVAAS
• If a teacher does not have PVAAS or any of the other data
(IEP, or number Advanced or Proficient on a
state assessment) available then they will have 15% LDR.
– So, in the past we said that teachers that did not have PVAAS
would have 35% from SLO. It is really still the same…
• Example 1: This could mean 1 SLO for all 35% (15% Teacher Specific
and 20% Elective Data). Each part of the SLO will be weighted based
on the section you will be applying the data and it will specifically
state what section the data will fall under on the pie chart. (Ex: IEP
targeted group)
• Example 2: This could mean 2 SLOs. One SLO for 15% under Teacher
Specific and a different SLO for 20% under Elective Data.
• Example 3: This could also mean 3 or 4 SLOs as long as it is a total of
15% under Teacher Specific and 20% under Elective Data.
• Teachers decide how many SLOs they want to write to
achieve their Teacher Specific Data Score.
12
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
How do I arrive at a score for 15%
Teacher Specific Data?
• Districts will decide locally how to arrive at this
final 0-3 score for Teacher Specific Data based on
the conversion tables in the rules and regulations
for PVAAS and Achievement Data in addition to
their own local decisions around LDR and IEP
Goal conversions.
• A Teacher Decision Making Guide will prompt
LEAs to address all data defined in teacher
specific data per Act 82 and provides a logical
guidance document on how to address each
component.
13
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
14
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
15
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
SLO Policy Decisions: The “n” count
• LEAs are encouraged to utilize a “n” count of 11 across
teacher specific and elective data. This is consistent with
the “n” count PDE utilizes for other data sources such as
the SPP and PVAAS.
• In absence of teacher specific and elective data the
observation and practice components of the evaluation
system could be substituted.
• It is a local decision whether an LEA chooses to utilize a
lower “n” count for teacher specific and elective data.
Hence, an LEA could chose to develop a SLO for less than
eleven students, if they believe that they can attribute
student achievement to the teacher.
• An LEA should discuss any decision to use the “n” count of
11 or a lower “n” count with its solicitor.
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Non Teaching Professional Employee
Effectiveness System in Act 82 of 2012
Observation and Practice
Planning and Preparation
Educational Environment
Delivery of Service
Professional Development
Student Performance/School Performance Profile
(SPP)
Student
Performance
20%
Observation/
Practice
80%
June 26, 2014 17
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Non Teaching Professional Employee
• 3 Groups of Professionals are included
– Instructionally Certified
– Educational Specialist
– Non-Teaching Professional Supervisors
• Use Rating Tool 82-3
• Rubrics and Guiding Questions Posted on the PDE
website
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/com
munity/educator_effectiveness_project/20903/p/1
173848
18
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Non Teaching Professional Employee
Group 1
Instructionally Certified
• Is the employee working under an instructional
certification?
• Does the employee provide direct instruction?
– Plan, Instruct and Assess
• Crosswalk with Danielson Framework
• All Domains 25%
• Example: Full time instructional coach
19
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Non Teaching Professional Employee
•
•
•
•
•
•
Group 2
Educational Specialist
Dental Hygienist
Elementary and Secondary School Counselor
Home and School Visitor
Instructional Technology Specialist
School Nurse
School Psychologist
20
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Non Teaching Professional Employee
•
•
•
•
•
Group 3
Non-Teaching Professional Supervisors
Crosswalk with FFL
Supervisor of Curriculum and Instruction
Supervisor of Pupil Services
Supervisor of Special Education
Supervisor of Single Area (subject)
Supervisor of Vocational Education
21
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Principal Effectiveness System in Act 82 of 2012
Observation/ Practice
Framework for Leadership Domains
Strategic/Cultural Leadership
Systems Leadership
Leadership for Learning
Professional and Community Leadership
Building Level Data/School Performance Profile
Indicators of Academic Achievement
Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, All Students
Indicators of Closing the Achievement Gap, Historically
Underperforming Students
Academic Growth PVAAS
Other Academic Indicators
Extra Credit for Advanced Achievement
Building
Level Data,
15%
Observation
/Practice
50%
Correlation
Data Based on
Teacher-Level
Measures,
15%
Elective
Data
20%
Correlation Data/Relationship
Based on Teacher Level Measures
Elective Data/Student Learning Objectives
District Designed Measures and Examinations
Nationally Recognized Standardized Tests
Industry Certification Examinations
Student Projects Pursuant to Local Requirements
Student Portfolios Pursuant to Local Requirements
June 26, 2014
3
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Principal Effectiveness
• Applies to:
– Principal
– Assistant Principal
– Vice Principal
– Director of CTC
• Use Rating Tool 82-2
23
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Policy Decisions to consider…
• Has your district categorized all of your staff
under contract under either teaching or nonteaching employees?
• Has your district discussed the “n” count and
SLOs? How will this look in your district?
• Has you district discussed how teacher specific
data will be calculated for each teacher in your
district?
• Has your district discussed how the SLO Process
will be used to measure IEP progress?
24
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Questions??
25
Measuring Educator Effectiveness
Tom Corbett, Governor
▪
Carolyn C. Dumaresq, Acting Secretary of Education
www.education.state.pa.us
Contact Information for Educator
Effectiveness
Intermediate Unit Contacts
• Jenny Lent
– jenny.lent@iu1.org
– 724-938-3241 ext. 268
• JoBeth McKee
PDE Contacts
PDE email for Questions
Related to Educator
Effectiveness
ra-edeff@pa.gov
– jobeth.mckee@iu1.org
– 724-938-3241 ext. 267
26