Understanding the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 42

Julie Brilli, Director Teacher Education, Professional Development & Licensing PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 131 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Understanding the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness System May 16, 2012 State Superintendent’s Advisory Council on Rural Schools, Libraries, and Communities. Julie Brilli, Director Teacher Education, Professional Development & Licensing [email protected] Presentation Overview.

Download Presentation

Julie Brilli, Director Teacher Education, Professional Development & Licensing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Understanding the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness SystemMay 16, 2012State Superintendent’s Advisory Council on Rural Schools, Libraries, and Communities

Julie Brilli, Director

Teacher Education, Professional Development & Licensing

[email protected]


Presentation overview

Presentation Overview

  • The vision of State Superintendent Tony Evers

  • The charge of the Educator Effectiveness Design Team

  • Five phases of work

  • Understanding the Framework

  • Current work on system development

  • State and Federal Policy

  • Next steps


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

State Superintendent’s Vision

“Every Child a Graduate”

  • Research shows that the greatest impact on student learning is teacher effectiveness; second only to that is the effectiveness of a principal.

  • The primary purpose of this system is to support teachers and principals and provide the necessary resources for all educators to be successful.

    “Done right, I believe the systems will improve student achievement and provide a tremendous benefit to educators by identifying the strengths they bring to the profession, as well as areas that can be targeted for improvement.”


The design team process

Educator Effectiveness

The design team process


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Charge of the Design Team

  • To develop:

    • definitions of key guiding principles of a high-quality educator effectiveness program,

    • model performance-based evaluation systems for teachers and principals,

    • a regulatory framework for implementation that includes how student achievement data will be used in context, and

    • recommendations for methods to support improvement and incentives for performance.


Design team

Design Team

Design Team

American Federation of Teachers (AFT)

  • (Bryan Kennedy)

    Association of Wisconsin School Administrators

  • (Jim Lynch)

    Office of the Governor

  • (Michael Brickman)

    Professional Standards Council (PSC)

  • (Lisa Benz)

    Wisconsin Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (WACTE)

  • (Julie Underwood)

Wisconsin Association of Independent Colleges & Universities (WAICU)

  • (Kathy Lake)

    Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB)

  • (John Ashley)

    Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators (WASDA)

  • (Miles Turner)

    Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

    - (Mike Thompson)

    Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC)

  • (Mary Bell)


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Supporting the Process

  • Wisconsin Center for Educational Research (WCER)

  • American Institutes for Research (AIR)

  • Great Lakes West (GLW)

  • National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality (NCCTQ)

    Further Informing the Work:

  • Wisconsin participation in the State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness (SCEE) as part of the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)

    • 28 states collaborating on the policies and practices to improve student learning with a focus on the effectiveness of our nation's educators


Design implementation

Educator Effectiveness

Design  implementation


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Educator Effectiveness Timeline


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Five Phases of Work in Three Stages

Phase 1 – Design Phase (December 2010 to October 2011)

  • Design Team review of existing research and best practices

  • Major design features decided for teachers and principals

  • Publish Wisconsin Framework for Educator Effectiveness

    Phase 2 – Development Phase (November 2011 – June 2012)

  • Convene State Superintendent’s Coordinating Council on Educator Effectiveness

  • Workgroups develop rubrics and process manuals for all elements of the system

    Phase 3 – Developmental Pilot Phase (July 2012 – June 2013)

  • Train Pilot Districts, Support Pilot Districts, Evaluate Pilot

  • Revise and/or refine the model based upon data from pilot process

  • Evaluate model

  • Development of rubrics and process manuals for educators other than teachers and principals

    Phase 4 – Full Pilot Phase (July 2013 – June 2014)

  • Revise and/or refine model based upon data from pilot process

  • Expand pilot, training, and implementation

  • Evaluate model

    Phase 5 – Implementation (July 2014 – June 2015)

  • Refine model based upon data from two year pilot

  • Train and prepare districts for statewide implementation

  • Statewide implementation of Educator Effectiveness system


The framework

Educator Effectiveness

The framework


Guiding principles of the system

Guiding Principles of the System

An educator evaluation system must deliver information that:

  • Guides effective educational practice that is aligned with student learning and development

  • Documents evidence of effective educator practice

  • Documents evidence of student learning

  • Informs appropriate professional development

  • Informs educator preparation programs

  • Supports a full range of human resource decisions

  • Is credible, valid, reliable, comparable, and uniform across districts


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Definition of Effective Educators

Effective Teacher: An effective teacher consistently uses educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways.

Effective Principal: An effective principal shapes school strategy and educational practices that foster the intellectual, social and emotional growth of children, resulting in measurable growth that can be documented in meaningful ways.


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Seamless Transitions


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Standards for Teacher Practice

The Foundation for Teacher Practice

InTASC Teaching Standards (2011)

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium Model Core Teaching Standards

2011 Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Model Core Teaching Standards,

http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Programs/Interstate_Teacher_Assessment_Consortium_(InTASC).html

Framework for Teacher Evaluation

Based on Charlotte Danielson’s Domains & Components

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation

Domain 2: The Classroom Environment

Domain 3: Instruction

Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Standards for Principal Practice

Foundation for Principal Practice

2008 Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards

Framework for Principal Evaluation

Subordinate functions of ISLLC standards

http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/school-leadership/principal-evaluation/Documents/Educational-Leadership-Policy-Standards-ISLLC-2008.pdf


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Educator Practice

Teacher Practice

Each component should be evaluated on multiple sources of evidence. These could include:

Observations of teacher practice

Review of documents

Surveys and/or other data sources

Discussions with the teacher

Principal Practice

Each component should be evaluated on multiple sources of evidence. These could include:

Observations of principal practice

Review of documents

Interviews with stakeholders

Surveys and/or other data sources

Discussions with the principal


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

System Weights

Educator

Practice

Student

Growth


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Models of Practice Detail

  • (50% of evaluation)


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Flexibility in the Framework

  • Districts will have the flexibility to create their own rubrics for the EDUCATOR PRACTICE portion of the evaluation system if they choose to; the rubrics must be aligned to the state system.

  • Application must be made to and approved by the State Superintendent in order to utilize an equivalent process to evaluate educator practice.

  • The Equivalency Review Process will be developed in 2012-13 school year. Until the principal and teacher rubrics are fully developed, it is difficult to spell out criteria needed for an Equivalency Review Process.


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Equivalency Review Process

Educator Practice - Teachers

The rubrics for teacher practice must be based on the InTASC standards and Danielson’s four domains.

Districts may combine components (but not domains) into fewer categories.

Districts may add domains and components.

Educator Practice - Principals

The rubrics for principal practice must be based on the ISLLC standards and the subordinate functions.


Student outcome detail

Student Outcome Detail

  • (50% of evaluation)

State Assessment – Value-Added Scores

Models of Practice

District Assessment

Student Learning

Objectives

School-wide Reading (Elementary-Middle)

Graduation (High School)

District Choice


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Student Outcome Weights – PK-8

  • State assessment, district assessment, SLOs, and other measures

  • SLOs and other measures


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Student Outcome Weights – 9-12

  • State assessment, district assessment, SLOs, and other measures

  • SLOs and other measures


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Educator Effectiveness System Matrix

Student Outcomes

Models of Practice

  • Asterisks indicate a mismatch between educator’s practice performance and student outcomes and requires a focused review to determine why the mismatch is occurring and what, if anything, needs to be corrected.


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Multiple Performance Categories

Developing: does not meet expectations and requires additional support and directed action

Effective: areas of strength and improvement addressed through professional development

Exemplary: expand expertise through professional development and use expertise in leadership


Understanding phase 2

Educator Effectiveness

Understanding phase 2


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

State Superintendent’s Coordinating Council

CESA Statewide Network

  • (Jesse Harness)

    CESA 6

  • (Joan Wade)

    Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association (MTEA)

  • (Sid Hatch)

    Southeastern Wisconsin Teacher Evaluation Consortium (SWTEC)

  • (Patricia Deklotz)

    Wisconsin Council of Administrators of Special Services (WCASS)

  • (Gary Myrah)

    Wisconsin State Legislature

  • (The Honorable Steve Kestell)

    Wisconsin State Legislature

  • (The Honorable Sondy Pope-Roberts)

    Wisconsin State Senate

  • (The Honorable Timothy Cullen)

    Wisconsin State Senate

  • (The Honorable Luther Olsen)

American Federation of Teachers (AFT)

  • (Bryan Kennedy)

    Association of Wisconsin School Administrators

  • (Jim Lynch)

    Office of the Governor

  • (Michael Brickman)

    Professional Standards Council (PSC)

  • (Lisa Benz)

    Wisconsin Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (WACTE)

  • (Julie Underwood)

    Wisconsin Association of Independent Colleges & Universities (WAICU)

  • (Kathy Lake)

    Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB)

  • (Deb Gurke)

    Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators (WASDA)

  • (Jon Bales)

    Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC)

  • (Dave Harswick)


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Fundamental Developmental Tasks

  • Teacher Practice Rubric Development

  • Principal Practice Rubric Development

  • Student/School Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

  • Data Systems Development & Management Framework

  • Pre-Pilot Process

  • Evaluation Process and Manuals


Work teams of phase 2

Work Teams of Phase 2

  • Teacher Practice Work Team

  • Principal Practice Work Team

  • Student/School Learning Outcomes Work Team

  • Data Systems & Management Work Team


Membership of work teams

Membership of Work Teams

Representation from:

Practicing educators, board members, professional organization members, and educator preparation program faculty nominated by members of the Coordinating Council

Diverse regions of the state: central, northwest, northeast, southwest, southeast, etc.

Diverse district sizes and locations: rural, suburban, urban

Diverse school levels: elementary, middle, high, etc.

Diverse content areas: science, English/language arts, math, social studies, special education, English as a second language, music, art, etc.


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Teacher Practice Work Team

  • Evidence & rubric weight scoring determination process completed by end of June 2012

  • Evidence collection forms & processes completed by end of June 2012

  • Development of Draft Teacher Practice Evaluation Manual to delineate the process for evaluating teacher practice by the end of July 2012

Actions & Products:

  • Rubric review, development, adaptation, and/or adoption

    • Draft teacher rubric developed by March 2012

    • Final rubric completed by May 2012

  • Identification of evidence sources determined by end of April 2012


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Principal Practice Work Team

Actions & Products:

  • Rubric review & adaptation.

    • Draft principal rubric developed by March 2012

    • Final rubric completed by May 2012

  • Identification of evidence sources determined by end of April 2012

  • Evidence & rubric weight scoring determination process completed by end of June 2012

  • Evidence collection forms & processes completed by end of June 2012

  • Development of Draft Teacher Practice Evaluation Manual to delineate the process for evaluating teacher practice by the end of July 2012


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Student/School Learning Outcomes Work Team

Actions & Products:

Create “checklist” for selecting and creating SLOs by reviewing existing versions and modify as necessary:

  • Denver

  • Rhode Island

  • Charlotte-Mecklenburg

  • Austin

    Create a scoring rubric for evaluators (principals and/or content experts) to use in evaluating SLO evidence submitted by teachers; beginning with guidance developed previously by other districts and states, and adapting as necessary.

Development of Draft SLO Process Manual to delineate the process for utilizing SLOs in the evaluation of teachers and principals by the end of July 2012

This manual describes the entire process for:

  • Creating SLOs

  • Gathering evidence

  • Rating evidence

  • Timelines for each step in the process


Understanding phase 3

Educator Effectiveness

Understanding phase 3


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Practice and SLO Pilot Evaluation

An evaluation design and pilot process will need to be determined for the 2012-2013 pilot testing of the teacher and principal practice measures and SLO measures.

This evaluation plan will be initiated in May and June of 2012 and will be completed during the summer of 2012 in preparation for pilots to begin in Fall 2012.


Phase 3 work

Phase 3 Work

Pilots, Evaluation of Pilots, Refinement of Model (July 2012 – June 2013)

  • Teacher Practice

  • Principal Practice

  • Student/School Learning Outcomes

  • Data Systems & Management

    Get Involved: Volunteer to serve as a pilot school and/or district

  • Watch for an upcoming email inviting schools and/or districts to apply for consideration to participate in the pilot


State federal policy

Educator Effectiveness

State & federal policy


2011 wisconsin act 166

2011 Wisconsin Act 166

State legislation requires that:

  • DPI develop a state model evaluation system for teachers and principals

  • DPI submit an estimate on the cost of creating and maintaining a state model system for the 2013-2015 biennial budget

  • Fifty percent of the total evaluation score assigned to a teacher or principal be based on measures of student performance, and fifty percent based upon observation/ evidence of practice

  • Every school district implement an evaluation process, consistent with this legislation, by 2014-2015

    http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/proposals/sb461


Esea waivers

ESEA Waivers

  • USED is offering states the opportunity to waive certain ESEA/NCLB provisions. In exchange, states must implement:

    • career-and-college ready standards & assessment system

    • differentiated accountability system

    • educator effectiveness system

  • Wisconsin’s waiver plans are based entirely on the Framework for Educator Effectiveness.

    • Design Team recommendations were in alignment with the waiver requirements around educator effectiveness

    • As such, the plans in the waiver mirror the Framework


Julie brilli director teacher education professional development licensing

Staying Informed and Involved

Getting Involved:

Districts will be invited to serve as pilot school(s) and/or a pilot district

  • Emails sent to districts on Monday, May 14th from

    dpiformsmanagment.

    Registration Due on Friday, May 25th at 3 PM

    Questions about the pilot/registration?

    Kris Joannes- Education Consultant

    [email protected]

    608.267.2348


Getting involved in the developmental pilot

Getting Involved in the Developmental Pilot

  • Districts will be invited to serve as pilot school(s) and/or a pilot district

  • Emails sent to districts on Monday, May 14th from

  • dpiformsmanagment.

  • Registration Due on Friday, May 25th at 3 PM

  • Questions about the pilot/registration?

  • Kris Joannes- Education Consultant

  • [email protected]

  • 608.267.2348


  • Login