Massachusetts Educator
Evaluation System
Paul Toner, MTA, President
Heather Peske, ESE, Associate Commissioner for Ed
Quality
Teachers Union Reform Network Conference
November 1, 2013
Agenda for Today
History
Description of Massachusetts’ Educator
Evaluation Framework
Focus on the role of student growth in the
system
Lessons Learned (so far!)
Discussion
2
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
History & Context
Massachusetts Context
2 unions (MTA/NEA and AFTMA)
About 400 districts (including charter schools)
1800 schools
79,000 teachers
950,000 students
3
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
History
 Pre-RTTT: ESE begins discussion about re-vamping
teacher evaluation to include student learning outcomes.
 RTTT announced: 2009
 Achievement Gap Bill: January 2010
 MTA Annual Meeting: Yes, we should do RTTT.
 40-person Ed Eval Task Force announced (Paul and
Heather serve)
 MTA unveils proposed Evaluation Framework (included
student learning outcomes as part of a multi-measure
evaluation): December 2010
 Board approves Educator Evaluation Framework: June
2011 (includes much of MTA Framework)
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
4
Description of Massachusetts’
Educator Evaluation
Framework
With its emphasis on professional judgment, the Massachusetts model gives
evaluators more flexibility in determining individual performance ratings than
they would otherwise have under a system that imposes numerical weights or
values to individual components of an evaluation. In contrast to formulaic systems
that calculate ratings based on set values or percentages, this system allows
evaluators to be responsive to local context or individual needs, emphasize
trends and patterns of practice rather than rely on individual data points, and
better target feedback and resources to individual educators. All of these
factors contribute to a more holistic, comprehensive assessment of educator
practice that is designed to promote an ongoing cycle of continuous improvement.
This system also assumes at its heart that educators are professionals with
critical knowledge, skills, and judgment necessary to make each and every
evaluation meaningful and productive.
--ESE Guidance
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Summative Rating
The Educator Evaluation Framework
Exemplary
1-yr Self-Directed
Self-Directed
2-yr Self-Directed
Growth Plan Growth Plan
Growth Plan
Proficient
Needs
Improvement
Directed Growth Plan
Unsatisfactory
Improvement Plan
Low
Moderate
High
Rating of Impact on Student Learning
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
8
9
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Summative Performance Rating
Sources of Evidence
Inform judgments about
To determine the
Practice Goal
Practice
Learning
Engagement
Curriculum, Planning,
Assessment
Teaching All Students
Family Engagement
Summative/
Formative
Evaluation
Rating
Professional Culture
Student Learning Goal
10
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
The Role of Student Growth
12
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Student Impact Rating
 Evaluators must assign a rating based on trends (at
least 2 years) and patterns (at least 2 measures)
 Options:
Statewide growth measure(s) must be used, where
available (MCAS SGP for math and ELA, grades 310)
District-determined Measure(s) of student learning
comparable across grade or subject district-wide
(can be off-the-shelf or teacher or district-created
or chosen from exemplars from ESE).
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
13
14
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
DDM Key Questions
Is the measure aligned to content?
Does it assess what the educators intend to teach
and what’s most important for students to learn?
Is the measure informative?
Do the results tell educators whether students are
making the desired progress, falling short, or
excelling?
Do the results provide valuable information to
schools and districts about their educators?
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
15
DDMs: 4 Key Messages
1. DDMs are part of a multidimensional framework.

Decisions about an educator’s impact or effectiveness will
never be based of the results of a single DDM.
2. Focus is on students, not just educators.

DDMs must yield information that will be useful to educators
in improving student outcomes.
3. This is about building capacity.

DDMs provide districts a good reason to consider ways to
refine and improve existing assessment practices.
4. Teachers have the necessary skills to lead the
process of identifying DDMs – You can do this!

Many districts will have success leveraging teacherdeveloped assessments to develop DDMs.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
16
Lessons Learned (so far!)
Educators must be at the table.
Trust is critical.
Leadership is critical.
Sometimes, we disagree without being
disagreeable.
Sometimes, we have to have a sense of
humor.
17
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Sense of Humor: “I owe you a
bier!”
18
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Lessons Learned (so far!),
cont’d…
We both have stakeholders to whom we must
respond.
Sometimes, we have to compromise.
The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good.
The outcomes will be better if we work
together.
19
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Don’t let “perfect” be the
enemy of “good.”
20
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
And finally,
The outcomes will be better if we work
together.
21
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Resources
ESE website on Educator Evaluation
http://www.doe.mass.edu/edeval/
MTA website on Educator Evaluation and
Toolkit
http://www.massteacher.org/news/archive/2012/ev
aluation_guidance.aspx
http://www.massteacher.org/advocating/Evaluation.
aspx
22
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education
Discussion and Thanks!
Paul Toner, President, MTA
 ptoner@massteacher.org
 617.878.8214 (office line)
Heather Peske, Associate Commissioner for
Educator Quality, ESE (Massachusetts)
hpeske@doe.mass.edu
781.605.5162 (cell)
23
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education