Completing the Classroom Teacher and Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluations f or 2012-2013

1. Presented by: The Office of Talent Development Employee Evaluations Department Heather Parente, Director KhandiaPinkney, Evaluation Coordinator Tanya Thompson, Evaluation Coordinator Farrah Wilson, Evaluation Coordinator Diego DeRose, Research Specialist Completing the Classroom Teacher and Non-Classroom Teacher Evaluations for 2012-2013

2. Live presentations will take place today, October 16th at: • 9:30 am, 11:00 am, 12:30 pm • If Principals or District Supervisors have questions during the presentation, • please email the question(s) via CAB to Teacher Evaluations. • Questions will be answered during the presentation. • The presentation will be recorded and available as of Thursday, October 17, 2013 • beginning at 9:00 am. The link will be emailed directly to Principals and District Supervisors and available on our website. Procedures for presentation…..

3. The 2012-2013 Overall Evaluation for Classroom and Non-Classroom Teachers was completed based on the following: Classroom and Non-Classroom Teachers

4. Instructional Practice Score 2012-2013

5. Classroom Teachers were observed through iObservation using Domain 1. Classroom Teachers – Instructional Practice Score

6. Non-Classroom Teachers were observed/attended meeting and received • Datamarks through iObservation using Domain 1. Non-Classroom Teachers – Instructional Practice Score

7. All teachers had the opportunity to earn datamarkswithin Domains 2, 3, and 4. All Teachers – Instructional Practice Score

8. Observations were conducted: • Formal (30+ minutes) • Informal (15-25 minutes) • SnapShot (3-10 minutes) • Pre-conferences, post-conferences, meetings and/or evidence was reviewed. • All Teachers received Datamarks based on rubrics. • The rubric ratings were: Instructional Practice Score

9. Datamarks were as follows: Instructional Practice Score

10. Datamarks were calculated (averaged). • Teachers received a Final Instructional Practice Score • based on Datamarks in May, 2013. • Administration met with classroom teachers to share Final Instructional • Practice Scores: • Highly Effective • Effective • Needs Improvement • Unsatisfactory Instructional Practice Score

11. Administrators shared the Instructional Practice Score within iObservation: • The Instructional Practice Score was based on the scale: • Highly Effective 3.400 - 4.000 • Effective 2.450 - 3.399 • Needs Improvement1.450 - 2.449 • Unsatisfactory1.000 - 1.449 Instructional Practice Score

12. Following is the list of student & classroom-level characteristics used in the state’s VAM model to calculate a student’s expected score: • Up to two prior years of achievement scores • Number of subject-relevant courses in which student is enrolled • Students with Disabilities status • English Language Learner status • Gifted status • Attendance • Mobility • Difference from average age in grade (indicating retention) • Class size • Homogeneity of prior test scores in the class • Note: Under State statute, socio-economic status, race, and gender cannot be used. • For VAM model technical information, including the courses included, please go to this link on the DOE page. Student Growth Score/VAM Reminders

13. Student Growth Score/VAM Reminders Value-Added: The difference between the expected performance and the actual performance. Expected Score: Expected student performance after accounting for student and classroom characteristics through the VAM.

14. Student Growth/VAM for Classroom Teachers 2012-2013

15. Assessments used in calculating the 2012-2013 VAM Score: • FCAT 4th-10th Grade Reading scores for Reading/Language Arts teachers. • FCAT 4th-8th Grade Math scores for Math teachers. • Classroom Teachers received a Student Growth score based on their own assigned students if: • He/she taught FCAT students in Reading/Language Arts and/or Math. • He/she had at least 10 VAM expected scores. • He/she had at least 60% FCAT VAM eligible students (those with at least 2 years of FCAT scores). • Classroom Teachers not meeting these conditions used the school-wide VAM score. Classroom Teachers – Student Growth Score NOTE: Students were included in the VAM model only if they were assigned to the teacher during Survey 2 AND Survey 3.

16. Example for Classroom Teacher using his/her own VAM score: • 10 out of 20 students (50%) met/exceeded their expected score. • The teacher’s percentage meeting/exceeding expectation was ranked within school level and subject area (analyses were conducted separately for Elem Reading, Elem Math, Elem Reading & Math, Middle Reading*, Middle Math*, and High Reading) • The percentages were then converted to percentiles and teacher received a Student Growth rating based on the following scale: • * Middle school teachers who taught both Reading and Math used the higher of their two subject area ratings for their final Student Growth Rating. Classroom Teachers – Student Growth Score

17. Example for Classroom Teacher using his/her school’s VAM score: • 400 out of 800 students (50%) at the school met/exceeded their expected score. • This percentage was used and the teacher received a Student Growth rating based on the following scale: Classroom Teachers – Student Growth Score Note 1: Remember, these are Classroom Teachers meeting one of the following criteria: (1) <60% of students FCAT VAM eligible, (2) <10 VAM expected scores, or (3) at a Center site. Note 2: For all school and district locations, the percent meeting/exceeding expectation was between 9% and 86%. Therefore, all classroom teachers using the school-wide VAM score received an "Effective" rating on their 40% Student Growth Rating. ** Please note that a teacher using the school score may or may not have the same rating as their administrator. Teachers’ Student Growth Score is based on a percentage and the administrators’ Student Growth Score is based on a percentile.

18. A “ceiling effect” occurs when an assessment has a distinct upper limit and therefore a student near that upper limit has limited room for growth. • This effect was noted in VAM calculations for 2011-12 teacher and school administrator evaluations. • To adjust for this in 2012-13 for both FCAT Reading and Math, any student who achieved at Level 5 was counted as “meeting/exceeding expectation”, regardless of their VAM Expected Score. • For each teacher and school administrator, the Student Growth analysis was calculated with and without the Ceiling Effect Adjustment, and the employee received the higher of the two Student Growth ratings. Student Growth Score/VAM: Ceiling Effect Adjustment

19. Classroom Teachers – Student Growth Score Classroom Teacher VAM Student Growth Output Following is the 1st classroom teacher data file you will receive via email. Note 1: If teacher has individual student data within the first 9 columns of this table, the teacher received a VAM score based on his/her own student’s data; otherwise, the teacher has dashes in those columns and used school or district scores. Note 2: Attached to this file, administration will receive backup documentation describing the column headers and explaining the “Percentile” column. These can be used when meeting with classroom teachers to review their Student Growth Score and the Overall Final Score.

20. Classroom Teachers – Student Growth Score Student by Student VAM Data, 2012-13 Following is the 2nd classroom teacher data file you will receive via email. Note: Administration will only receive data in this file for those teachers who received a Student Growth/VAM score based on their own assigned students.

21. Now that Student Growth Scores have been received: • Student Growth Ratings will be uploaded into iObservation. • Those scores are as follows: • Highly Effective = 4.0 • Effective = 3.0 • Needs Improvement = 2.0 • Unsatisfactory = 1.0 Classroom Teachers – Student Growth Score

22. Student Growth/VAM for Non-Classroom Teachers 2012-2013

23. These are the Job Classifications used to identify Non-Classroom Teachers for 2012-13: Non-Classroom Teachers – Instructional Practice Score

24. Student Growth will count 40% towards the final evaluation. • Non-Classroom Teachers will use school or district scores depending on their work location in 2012-13, and will receive a Student Growth rating based on following table: • Note : For all school and district locations, the percent meeting/exceeding expectation was between 9% and 86%, with and without the Ceiling Effect Adjustment. Therefore, all non-classroom teachers received an "Effective" rating for their Student Growth Score. Non-Classroom Teachers – Student Growth Score

25. Completing the 2012-2013 Teacher Evaluations

26. Administration will receive the following information via email. • Classroom Teacher VAM Student Growth Output and Explanation • 2012-13 Student by Student VAM Data (file name: #### TEACHER VAM DATA) • Non-Classroom Teacher Student Growth Backup Documentation • VAM Backup Documentation • Student Growth and Overall Final scores will be uploaded into iObservation for each teacher Student Growth/VAM Supporting Documents

27. Completing the Final Evaluation for Classroom Teachers and Non-Classroom Teachers The Principal, Assistant Principal or District Supervisor meets with each teacher individually when giving him/her their evaluation. Complete the evaluation instrument by printing and signing the document. Use blue or black pen only. (Do not use pencil or colored ink.) All evaluations must be signed by the employee (or witness) and the Principal, Assistant Principal or District Supervisor.

28. Completing the Final Evaluation for Classroom Teachers and Non-Classroom Teachers Send Evaluations to Personnel Records: Principal/District Supervisor must print an Employee List from BI Reports and ensure that evaluations are completed for all employees by the required deadlines. The Employee List Report must be signed at the bottom by the Principal/District Supervisor verifying that an evaluation or memo has been completed for each employee. Principal/District Supervisor will send all original Classroom and Non-Classroom Teacher Final Evaluations to Personnel Records.

29. Special Circumstances Teacher was at a different location last year: Complete the memorandum stating that the teacher was at a different location last year. Memorandum is attached to original Final Evaluation and sent to Personnel Records (along with all other Final Evaluations).

30. Special Circumstances Teachers who will not receive a 2012-2013 Evaluation: The Principal or District Supervisor must submit a memo to Personnel Records stating that the employee will not be receiving an evaluation for 2012-2013 because: The employee was not in attendance and/or actively teaching for one day more than half of the school year. OR The employee is on a Board Approved Leave. (Upon return, the teacher will receive the final evaluation for 2012-2013.) OR The employee was reassigned to an alternate location. (Upon return, the teacher will receive the final evaluation for 2012-2013.) OR The employee resigned/retired.

31. Special Circumstances Teachers who will not receive a 2012-2013 Evaluation:

32. Special Circumstances Teacher refuses to sign: All evaluations must be signed by the employee (or witness) and the supervisor. If witnessed, supervisor signs and a witness (another administrator or confidential secretary): Witness writes, “Employee received a copy and chose not to sign.” Witness signs and dates the statement.

33. Special Circumstances Teacher files a grievance: Hold all signed Final Evaluations per the Grievance Procedure (at least 15 work days). Article 18 - Notification To Employee: Items may not be placed in an employee's official personnel file unless the item has been made known to the employee, pursuant to the methodology described in Florida Statute 1012.31(2)(c). In addition, items challenged under the provisions of the grievance procedure may not be placed in the employee's file until the grievance has been resolved pursuant to the provisions of Article Thirty-Four of this contract. The employee shall have the right to respond to any item(s) to be placed in his/her personnel file and to have the response attached to such item. The employee's signature shall indicate only that he/she has read the item and shall not necessarily indicate agreement with its contents.

34. School-Based Administrators The Principal/Assistant Principal Final Evaluations for 2012-2013 will be released within the next few weeks. We will be emailing you the details needed in order to complete these evaluations.

35. 10/21/13 - Student Growth/VAM data will be emailed to Principals/District Supervisors • 10/21/13 - A Brainshark of this presentation will be posted on our website for teachers to view • 10/28/13 - Final Evaluations for teachers will be available within iObservation • 10/28/13 – Administrators may begin final evaluation conferences with each teacher • 12/6/13 – All final evaluations are sent to Personnel Records • * Timeline may be adjusted! Tentative Dates

36. Additional Questions……. Heather Parente 954-806-8903 KhandiaPinkney 954-804-2788 Farrah Wilson 954-614-7702 Tanya Thompson 954-632-1416 Diego DeRose 754-321-5065