Orientation to Teacher Evaluation
2012-2013
4/8/2015
1

Equity of Voice

Attentive Listening

Safety to Share Different Perspectives

Commitment to the Work
4/8/2015
2

Connecticut Guidelines for Educator Evaluation
4/8/2015
3
Connecticut Educator Evaluation and
Support- Pilot Year 2012-2013




In June 2012, the State Board of Education formally adopted
the guidelines for Connecticut’s Educator Evaluation and
Support model.
Your district’s application to participate in the pilot was
accepted.
As a result, you and your district administrators will be working
with us to inform and improve the process.
Your participation in this pilot year is vital to the successful
implementation of the state’s initiative to improve learning.
4/8/2015
4
 When
teachers succeed,
students succeed.
◦ Research has proven that no school-level
factor matters more to students’ success
than high quality teachers.
4/8/2015
5
. . . we need to clearly define
excellent practice and results;
4/8/2015
6
To support teachers . .
…we need to give accurate, useful information
about teachers’ strengths and development
areas; and
…we need to provide opportunities for growth
and recognition.
4/8/2015
7
“Connecticut’s educators are committed to
ensuring that students develop the skills and
acquire the knowledge they will require to
lead meaningful and productive lives as
citizens in an interconnected world.”
4/8/2015
8
4/8/2015
9





Consider multiple standards-based measures
of performance
Promote both professional judgment and
consistency
Foster dialogue about student learning
Encourage aligned professional development,
coaching and feedback to support teacher
growth
Ensure feasibility of implementation
4/8/2015
10
Teacher Evaluation
Process Overview
4/8/2015
11
4/8/2015
12
Student Growth
and Development
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
Indicators or
Student Feedback
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Observations of
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Peer or Parent
Feedback (10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
All of these factors are combined to reach your final annual
rating (as described in the Connecticut guidelines).
4/8/2015
13
The annual evaluation process for a teacher shall at least include, but
not be limited to, the following steps, in order:
1. Goal-setting and Planning



Orientation on process
Teacher Reflection and Goal Setting
Goal-setting Conference
2. Mid-year Check-ins
3. End-of-year Summative Review
4/8/2015
14
By Nov. 15, 2012
Jan/Feb
By June 30
4/8/2015
15
 Orientation Process- teachers provided with information
about the evaluation process
 Teacher Reflection and Goal Setting- Teacher
examines student data, prior year evaluation and survey results and
CT Framework for Teaching and drafts proposed practice goal(s), a
parent feedback goal, student learning objectives and a student
feedback goal (if required) for the school year.
 Goal-setting Conference- Administrator and teacher
discuss proposed goals and arrive at a mutual agreement.
4/8/2015
16
Evaluator and teacher hold at least one midyear check-in.
 Evaluators and teachers will review progress toward the
goals/objectives at least once during the school year,
using available information, including agreed upon
indicators. This review may result in revisions to the
strategies or approach being used and a mutually
agreed upon mid-year adjustment of student learning
goals to accommodate may be made.
4/8/2015
17
Summative review /Self-assessment by teacher,
conference, then summative rating by end of
the school year
(Part One)
 Teacher Self-Assessment – The teacher
reviews all information and data collected
during the year and completes a selfassessment for review by the principal or
designee.
4/8/2015
18
(Part Two)
 End of Year Conference
Four Levels of Performance
◦
◦
◦
◦
(4) Exemplary – Substantially exceeding indicators of performance
(3) Proficient – Meeting indicators of performance
(2) Developing – Meeting some indicators of performance but not others
(1) Below standard – Not meeting indicators of performance
4/8/2015
19




Observations of Performance & Practice (40%)
1-3 goals
Parent Feedback (10%)
1 goal
Student Growth and Development (45%)
2 Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
Whole School Student Learning Indicators & Student
Feedback (5%)
1 goal for student feedback
4/8/2015
20
A framework for professional practice
has important uses in the service of
teaching and learning. These uses
demonstrate the framework’s power to
elevate professional conversations that
characterize the interaction of exemplary
teachers everywhere.

-Danielson, Improving Professional Practice, 2007
4/8/2015
21
CT Framework for
Evaluation
CCT Foundational Skills
6 Domains
4 Domains
1. Content and Essential Skills
2. Classroom Environment,
Student Engagement and
Commitment to Learning
3. Planning for Active Learning
4. Instruction for Active Learning
5. Assessment for Learning
6. Professional Responsibilities
and Teacher Leadership
1. Planning for Active Learning
2. Classroom Environment
3. Instruction
4. Professional Responsibilities
and Teacher Leadership
4/8/2015
22

Domain 1: Planning for Active Learning

Domain 2: The Classroom Environment

Domain 3: Instruction

Domain 4: Engaging in Professional
Responsibilities and Teacher Leadership
4/8/2015
23

Forty percent (40%) of a teacher’s evaluation shall be
based on observation of teacher practice and
performance

Sample Sources of Evidence:
◦ Observation (Domains 2 and 3)
◦ Artifacts, conferences (Domains 1 and 4)
4/8/2015
24

Please note: In the first year of implementation, all teachers should be
observed 6 times: 3 formal observations and 3 informal observations.
4/8/2015
25


Teacher sets 1 – 3 goals aligned to the CT
Framework for Teaching.
Goals provide focus for the observations and
feedback conversations.
4/8/2015
26

Ten percent (10%) of a teacher’s evaluation shall be based on
parent feedback, including surveys.

Process focuses on:
◦ Conducting whole-school parent survey
◦ Determining school-level parent goals based on survey
feedback
◦ Teacher and evaluator identifying one related parent
engagement goal
◦ Measuring progress
◦ Determining teacher’s summative rating
4/8/2015
27
Student Growth
and Development
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
Indicators or
Student Feedback
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Observations of
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Peer or Parent
Feedback (10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
All of these factors are combined to reach your final annual
rating (as described in the Connecticut guidelines).
4/8/2015
28

Multiple Student Learning Indicators
(45%)
 One half (22.5%) of the indicators of academic growth
and development used as evidence of whether
goals/objectives are met shall be based on:
 The state test for those teaching tested grades and subjects
(or)
 For other grades and subject areas another standardized
indicator where available.
4/8/2015
29

Multiple Student Learning Indicators
(45%) (continued)
 For the other half (22.5%) of the indicators of
academic growth and development, there may
be:
a. A maximum of one additional standardized
indicator, if there is mutual agreement, subject to
the local dispute resolution procedure.
b.
A minimum of one non-standardized indicator.
4/8/2015
30
Student Learning Objectives in SEED will support teachers in using
a planning cycle that will be familiar to most educators:
4/8/2015
31
Set 2 SLOs
(goals for learning)
4/8/2015
32


IAGDs:
◦ specific evidence
◦ quantitative targets
◦ demonstrate whether the objective was
met
Each SLO must include at least one indicator.
4/8/2015
33
4/8/2015
34
4/8/2015
35
Five
percent (5%) of a teacher’s evaluation
shall be based on whole-school student
learning indicators or student feedback. –
Purpose
 Teachers
are part of a learning community, as such,
responsibility for learning is shared among all of the
school’s staff. This measurement is designed to
reflect the importance of this shared responsibility.

The whole-school student learning indicators rating
or student feedback rating shall be among four
performance levels.
4/8/2015
36
 Five
percent (5%) of a teacher’s evaluation shall be
based on whole-school student learning indicators
or student feedback.
 Districts
decide to use whole-school student learning
indicators, student feedback, or a combination of the
two.
 Each teacher sets one measureable goal for this
component.
4/8/2015
37
Student Growth
and Development
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
Indicators or
Student Feedback
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Observations of
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Peer or Parent
Feedback (10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
4/8/2015
38
Student Related Indicators Rating
Teacher Practice Related Indicators Rating
Exemplary
Proficient
Developing
Below Standard
Exemplary
Exemplary
Exemplary
Proficient
Gather further
information
Proficient
Exemplary
Proficient
Proficient
Gather further
information
Developing
Proficient
Developing
Developing
Below Standard
Below Standard
Below Standard
Below Standard
Below Standard
Gather further
information
 Evaluation-based
 Improvement
 Career
Professional Growth Plan
and Remediation Plan
Development and Growth
4/8/2015
40

Linked to evaluation process outcomes related
to
-student learning
-observation of professional practice
-results of stakeholder feedback

Can occur a multiple points during the year

Linked to performance levels
4/8/2015
41

Targeted professional development

External learning opportunities

Differentiated career pathway

Coaching

Assisting peers

Leading PLCs

Leading data teams
4/8/2015
42
4/8/2015
43
Student Learning
(45%)
Teacher
Effectiveness (5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Observations of
Practice (40%)
Stakeholder
Feedback (10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
Administrator Evaluation Rating
4/8/2015
44
◦ The Neag School of Education at The University of Connecticut shall submit to
the State Board of Education, not later than January 1, 2014, a study and
recommendations concerning validation of the teacher evaluation and support
program core requirements. The results of the study will help determine any
changes needed to the core requirements.
◦ Should pilot districts identify promising practices within the Core Requirements,
to implement during the pilot that vary from the established guidelines, those
practices must be approved by the State Department of Education in
consultation with PEAC (Performance Evaluation Advisory Council) and be
incorporated into the scope of the Neag study.
4/8/2015
45






Review the district timelines and any other
local determinations.
Reflect on your own practice.
Be familiar with the core requirements.
Goal setting conference with your
administrator.
Know where to find help if you need it.
Remember – it’s a pilot. Its about
professional growth and student learning.
4/8/2015
46

Thank you for your participation in this pilot.
We welcome and value your contributions to
helping inform and improve teaching and
learning in the state of Connecticut.
4/8/2015
47