SB 290: The Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation
and Support Systems
A District Self-Assessment Regarding the Required Elements
Introduction:
SB 290 Work Plan
These materials are designed to help district teams organize their work related to
SB 290. The worksheets are focused on each of the five required elements and can
be used separately so that individuals or small groups can work on multiple tasks
simultaneously.
The answers to the questions that follow each of the required elements of SB 290
will determine the tasks/work to be accomplished by teachers/administrators
during 2012-2013. Every school district in Oregon must redesign its current
performance evaluation system for teachers and administrators to align with the
requirements of this law.
The questions are organized into Level I Compliance and Level II Implementation
questions. Compliance is required by the end of the 2012-2013 school year, but
compliance is not, of course, the final goal. Once SB 290 requirements are met, it is
critical that the Level II questions regarding successful implementation of each
district’s newly redesigned performance evaluation system serve as a long-term
focus. Districts are encouraged to expand the Level II questions to include other
areas of interest/need as they strive to successfully implement their new
performance evaluation systems and use the performance data generated as a result
of SB 290 legislation.
Whether a district is a TIF 3 district, has received SB 252 or CLASS design funds, or
has no additional resources to tackle these requirements, we believe that these
questions can help guide the work that needs to be done. We hope that these
materials are helpful to you and your district as you meet the challenges of SB 290
implementation.
Respectfully,
Chalkboard Project
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
1
Element #1: Standards of Professional Practice
Requirements:
Adopt the Model Core Teaching Standards (INTASC) and Education
Leadership/Administrative Standards (ISLLC)
Include the four domains for teachers
1.The Learner and Learning
2.Content
3. Instructional Practice
4. Professional Responsibility
Include the six domains for administrators
1.Visionary Leadership
2.Instructional Improvement
3.Effective Management
4. Inclusive Practice
5. Ethical Leadership
6. Socio-Political Context
Self-Assessment Questions:
Level I (Compliance)
Is our current evaluation system based on clear standards of performance that
promote excellence?
Are the INTASC/ISLLC standards/domains reflected in our current evaluation
system?
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are NO, this is a priority
task. Begin work now. Complete the action plan below.
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are YES, begin work on
Level II implementation tasks after Level I questions are addressed in
each of the required elements. Complete the action plan below:
Level II (Implementation)
If we have INTASC/ISLLC already in place, how well do our teachers/
administrators understand them? Did we train all staff on the standards prior to
adopting them?
What are our plans to train our teachers/administrators on using the standards to
promote effective instruction?
How will we determine if our use of standards is improving the evaluation process
itself? Teaching and learning to benefit our students?
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
2
Element #1: Standards of Professional Practice
Action Plan
Who
What
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
When
3
Element #2: Differentiated Performance Levels
Requirements:
Adopt a rubric with differentiated performance levels/descriptors
for each of the INTASC/ISLLC standards
Use a four-point scale with Level 1 being the lowest level and Level 4
being the highest level
The names of the levels are up to the district
Use ODE provided rubrics or adopt your own at the local level
Self-Assessment Questions:
Level I (Compliance)
Do we currently have a rubric in place?
If so, does our rubric have four levels of performance?
Is our rubric aligned with the INTASC/ISLLC standards?
How does our rubric compare with the ODE provided samples? Do we want to
make changes in our rubric/adopt or adapt one provided?
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are NO, this is a priority
task. Begin work now. Complete the action plan below.
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are YES, begin work on
Level II implementation tasks after Level I questions are addressed in
each of the required elements. Complete the action plan below:
Level II (Implementation)
What is our staff’s level of understanding of our rubric?
How should we use our rubric to inform our plans to provide professional
development to teachers/administrators?
How will our rubric improve instruction? How will we know?
Do we use our levels of performance to identify teacher leaders who work with
peers?
Are there specialists who need a different rubric to more accurately describe what
they do?
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
4
Element #2: Differentiated Performance Levels
Action Plan
Who
What
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
When
5
Element #3: Multiple Measures for Teacher and Administrator Evaluations
Requirements:
 Must include two or more measures for evaluating evidence of a
teacher’s and an administrator’s professional practice.
 Must include two or more measures for evaluating evidence of a
teacher’s and an administrator’s professional responsibilities.
 Must include two or more measures for evaluating evidence of
student learning and growth in a teacher’s classroom or an
administrator’s building.
 The measures of student learning and growth must include student
progress across two or more points in time AND proficiency/
mastery at a single point in time. Both of these measures must be in
relation to state or national standards.
 Teachers and administrators, in collaboration with their evaluators,
must establish student-learning goals. Valid evidence must be
collected and regular assessment on the progress towards these
goals monitored.
 Teachers in tested subjects and grades must include state
assessments as one of their measures. They must also include other
evidence of student learning form classroom, school, district, or
national measures.
 Teachers in non-tested subjects and grades must use measures that
are valid representations of student learning as demonstrated in
relation to state or national standards, at least one measure that is
comparable state or district-wide, or that has been approved by the
district for use across a building.
Self-Assessment Questions:
Level I (Compliance)
 Does our evaluation include measures for evaluating evidence of
professional practice, professional responsibilities, and student learning
and growth for both teachers and administrators?
 Do our measures include student progress across two or more points and
proficiency/mastery at a single point in time?
 Do we have goal setting practices and procedures emplace for teachers in
relationship to student learning and growth? (Note: Not in relation to
professional practice or professional responsibilities)
 What valid representations of student learning, besides OAKS, will we use
to measure student learning as demonstrated in relation to state or
national standards?
 What measure do we use that is comparable across the state or district
for non-tested grades and subjects?
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
6
 How will measures of student learning and growth levels be incorporated
into the evaluation process?
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are NO, this is a priority
task. Begin work now. Complete the action plan below.
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are YES, begin work on
Level II implementation tasks after Level I questions are addressed in
each of the required elements. Complete the action plan below.
Level II (Implementation)
 How will teachers and administrators receive professional development
around the use of multiple measures?
 How will we train teachers and administrators on writing goals around
student learning and growth?
 How will we support teachers and administrators with monitoring and
planning for student learning and growth goals?
 How will we determine a teacher’s and an administrator’s summative
performance level taking into account each of the multiple measures?
Will we weight or assign a percentage to each of the measures
(professional practice, professional responsibilities and student learning
and growth)?
Element #3: Multiple Measures
Action Plan
Who
What
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
When
7
Element #4: Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle
Requirements:
Evaluation Process Must Include Key Steps
Self Reflection
Goal Setting
Observation and Collection of Evidence
Formative Assessment
Summative Evaluation
Teachers/Administrators Will be Evaluated with Required Frequency
Probationary teachers – every year
Contract teachers – at least every two years
Probationary administrators – every year
Administrators – at least every two years
Self-Assessment Questions:
Level I (Compliance)
Do we currently have an evaluation process in place that includes these steps?
Do we evaluate staff currently as frequently as the law requires?
Does what we have now still make sense given standards/rubrics we will now use?
Do we ask teachers/principals for input on how to improve our current system?
Should we do that now?
Do we have forms/documents are we currently using to document performance
that we want to continue using? Are there ones that are not useful any longer?
Do we have documents and forms developed by others could we incorporate that
we think are better than what we currently have?
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are NO, this is a priority
task. Begin work now. Complete the action plan below.
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are YES, begin work on
Level II implementation tasks after Level I questions are addressed in
each of the required elements. Complete the action plan below.
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
8
Level II (Implementation)
What is our staff’s level of understanding of our current evaluation system?
How will our new evaluation system improve instruction? How will we know?
How do we make performance evaluation a more meaningful activity?
Element #4: Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle
Action Plan
Who
What
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
When
9
Element #5: Aligned Professional Development
Requirements:
Professional Development is to improve practice
Professional Development should be tailored to individual teacher
needs
Self-Assessment Questions:
Level I (Compliance)
Do we currently involve a broad range of stakeholders to decide how/when to
provide professional development?
Do we coordinate the resources we have (time, money, personnel) to provide
meaningful professional development that is not fragmented?
Do we ask teachers to plan PD for themselves/others?
Do we use evaluation data to inform our decisions about what we provide at the
individual teacher level? School level? District level?
Do we track many of our teachers/administrators participate in PD each year? Do
we have strategies in place to increase that number?
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are NO, this is a priority
task. Begin work now. Complete the action plan below.
If answers to Level I questions (Compliance) are YES, begin work on
Level II implementation tasks after Level I questions are addressed in
each of the required elements. Complete the action plan below.
Level II (Implementation)
What is our staff’s level of understanding of our current evaluation system?
How do we support teacher-to-teacher collaboration/learning from peers?
How do we make professional development a more meaningful activity?
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
10
Element #5: Aligned Professional Development
Action Plan
Who
What
From the Chalkboard Project, October 2012
When
11