Rhode Island Model Edition II, Module 1 Personnel Evaluating Building Administrators

1. Rhode Island ModelEdition II, Module 1Personnel Evaluating Building Administrators

2. Housekeeping • Equity of voice • Active listening • Safety to share different perspectives • Confidentiality • Respectful use of technology • Parking Lot • Others? Norms Resources RIDE website: http://www.ride.ri.gov/ Evaluation email: EdEval@ride.ri.gov *RIDE staff members will respond to your context-specific questions.

3. Framing the Work: Edition II High Quality Full Implementation Support • Ongoing Support and Resources: • Context-specific ISP support • Assistant Superintendent SLO workshop • Updated guidance • Online library of teaching videos (FFTPS and FFTES) • Webinars and regional workshops • Dedicated email for evaluation

4. Framing the Work: Module 1 for Personnel Evaluating Building Administrators MODULE OBJECTIVES & AGENDA • Prepare evaluators for Mid-Year Conferences with an emphasis on priority feedback • Understand mid-year SLO revisions for the Teacher Evaluation and Support System • Establish next steps regarding the implementation of the evaluation systems

5. SECTION 1: Preparing for Mid-Year Conferences

6. Evaluation Criteria Support System Objectives Evaluators will: • Discuss and agree upon how to sort and score Professional Practice and Professional Foundations evidence • Understand when revisions are necessary for a Building Administrator student learning objective • Craft specific and actionable feedback that will inform a Mid-Year Conference

7. Deepening Our Understanding of the Rubrics Rubric starts on p. 66 Rubric starts on p. 91 All components are holistically scored

8. Professional Practice: Quick Sort p. 67

9. Professional Practice: Quick Sort • Quick Sort Directions: • Read the evidence • Review p. 67 Rubric at a Glance • Select a Professional Practice Domain where you would place this evidence

10. Professional Practice: Quick Sort 1: Mission, Vision, and Goals

11. Professional Practice: Quick Sort 3: Organizational Systems

12. Professional Practice: Quick Sort 2: Teaching and Learning

13. Professional Practice: Quick Sort 4: Community; 1: Mission, Vision, and Goals

14. Professional Practice: Close Analysis of Domain 2: Teaching & Learning Highlight key verbs Refer colleagues to rubric language; Mark up your text p. 91

15. Professional Practice: Close Analysis of Domain 2: Teaching & Learning Connect and Plan: • Will these performance level distinctions impact how you collect evidence? If so, how?

16. Professional Foundations: Rubric- At-A-Glance PerformanceLevels p. 91

17. Interpreting Evidence: A Principal Case Study 10 min. 15 min. 15 min. Rubrics start on p. 66 and 91

18. Support System Evaluation Criteria Student Learning Objectives at the Mid-Year • Building administrators should not have a need to revise their SLOs mid-year. • Only extenuating circumstances would allow for revision, the evaluator would make the final decision.

19. Support System Evaluation Criteria Mid-Year Conference Tips: • Objective and data-based • Responsive to teacher’s developmental needs • Based on Rhode Island Model Rubric • Actionable and prioritized • Delivered in an approachable voice • Assumes good intentions • Utilize the suggested agenda (p. 58)

20. Mid-Year Conference: Completing the Mid-Year Conference Form

21. Professional Practice and Professional Foundations Connect and Plan: What is one piece of positive feedback that you would provide to this educator at the Mid-Year Conference regarding their Professional Practice and Professional Foundations? What is one area of priority feedback that you would want to articulate to this educator during a Mid-Year Conference?

22. SECTION 2: Understanding mid-year SLO revisions for the Teacher Evaluation and Support System

23. Evaluation Criteria Support System Objectives Evaluators will: • Determine if an SLO needs or does not need revision mid-year • Reflect on ways to support teachers in regard to student learning • Craft specific and actionable feedback about SLO progress that will inform a mid-year conference

24. Student Learning Objectives: Leading up to the MYC September June Teachers continuously monitor student learning, adjust instructional practices as needed, and document student progress. They communicate and problem-solve regularly with colleagues and evaluators to ensure all students are on track to succeed. Some teachers may voice concerns if students are not “on track” to meet their targets. This should trigger a more in-depth conversation, in which the evaluator decides whether or not the SLO needs revision. Most teachers will be making progress with their SLOs and the Mid-Year Conference will be an opportunity to formally check-in.

25. Student Learning Objectives: Mid-Year Options If a Student Learning Objective needs attention at the Mid-Year Conference the evaluator has two options: In either case, the evaluator provides feedback, guidance, and support, as necessary. NOTE: Just not being “on track” to meeting an SLO is not adequate as the only criteria for revision

26. Student Learning Objectives: Identifying an SLO that Needs Revision Revisions should be rare There may be extenuating circumstances that do not fit these four categories in which the evaluator must use professional judgment p. 43 NOTE: Just not being “on track” to meeting an SLO is not adequate as the only criteria for revision

27. Student Learning Objectives: Process for SLOs that Require Action Discuss SLO progress and any areas of concern at MYC • Evaluator will determine if the SLO should be maintained or revised and offer feedback • SLO needs REVISION • Evaluator and educator discuss reasons for revising the SLO • Evaluator provides feedback on how to revise SLO • Evaluator unlocks SLO in EPSS; teacher revises and resubmits • Evaluator approves or sends back with feedback for additional revision • Evaluator and teacher discuss options for supports throughout the remainder of the year, if necessary, and determine next steps • SLO DOES NOT NEED REVISION • Evaluator and educator discuss reasons for not revising and how the original SLO can be met • Evaluator and teacher discuss options for supports throughout the remainder of the year, if necessary, and determine next steps

28. Student Learning Objectives: The Connection to Professional Practice At the mid-year, if students are not making appropriate progress, it is important for teachers and evaluators to investigate WHY this is occurring with a sense of urgency to help students get back on track for success. One place to look is Professional Practice of a teacher. Are there areas that need focused support in order to impact student learning? Student Learning Objectives articulate WHAT students will learn Professional Practice components highlight HOW educators effectively teach students

29. Student Learning Objectives: Teacher Support • In all cases emphasize: • A solution-focused approach • Collaboration with teachers and administrators • Teacher initiative • Utilizing resources and people already at your disposal

30. Student Learning Objectives: Survey Start • Please enter the address below into you web browser and complete page one of the survey, which asks for basic information. • https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/RYH2HB2

31. Examining Mid-Year Scenarios: Guided Practice Mr. Dewey wrote an SLO with a tiered target for his 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade Visual Art classes, based on his original schedule, which allowed him to meet with the groups twice per week for 60 minutes. However, in late October, the 1st and 2nd grade Visual Art teacher unexpectedly quit. The schedule was reorganized so that the younger students could continue taking art. Now Mr. Dewey meets with the 1st-5th graders once per week for 60 minutes. Mr. Dewey has earned all 3s and 4s in observations so far, but when asked about his SLO, he reports that the older students are substantially behind his original mid-year benchmarks because of the schedule change and would like to revise his targets.

32. Examining Mid-Year Scenarios: Providing feedback • Mr. Dewey: SLO needs REVISION • Explain your reasoning for approving a revision: • An adjustment would be appropriate because the amount of instructional time Mr. Dewey had with the 3rd-5th graders was reduced by half, which is significant. His targets might be unreasonable given the interval of instruction. His teaching assignment has also changed, so he might want to include the 1st-2nd graders in his SLO, if appropriate. • Provide feedback on how to revise SLO (be specific as to which elements require revision): • In this case Mr. Dewey should revise the targets to be appropriate to the revised interval of instruction. If he wants, he could also incorporate the 1-2nd graders into the SLO, with tiered targets for them. • Provide options for supports, as necessary: • If possible, hiring another art teacher to replace the one who left • would be ideal.

33. Examining Mid-Year Scenarios: Example 3 Ms. Oberhas been teaching 6th grade mathematics for eight years. At the beginning of the year, when first drafting her SLOs, she reviewed the end-of-year performance of last year’s 6th grade class. But when she began teaching this year, she found that many of her students did not have the foundational mathematical skills that her students had in the past. After examining student’s performance on September tasks she tried to set SLO targets accordingly. However, by November it became apparent to her that students’ gaps were wider than she initially thought and she needed to do quite a bit more remediation in order to get students prepared to access the 6th grade material. She reports that 75% of students are on track to meet their goals and would like to adjust her targets to account for her students’ lack of foundational knowledge and the re-teaching she has had to do.

34. Examining Mid-Year Scenarios: Example 4 Mr. Palazola set his SLOs in October but needed knee surgery and had to take medical leave for the months of November and December. Before he left he created clear lesson plans, with materials and assessments for the permanent substitute teacher and met with him to discuss the students and the upcoming units. When he returned in January he was disappointed to find his students far behind where they should have been. After talking with students and viewing their collected work it is clear to him that the substitute did not adhere to the plans and pacing. He feels he will not be able to meet the targets he initially set now and has requested to adjust them.

35. Examining Mid-Year Scenarios: Scenario 5 Mr. Washington has created an SLO for his three sections of 8th grade ELA. He thought out the targets carefully but when you meet with himat the mid-year conferencehe is discouraged by the fact that only 69% of students are on track to meet the targets based on the midterm. When asked to explain, he shows his class attendance records, which indicate that 16 of his 66 students (24%) miss school approximately once per week, and 4 students (6%) miss class approximately twice per week. All but three of the students who failed the midterm fall into one of these groups of frequently absent students. He expresses his belief that he would be able to get most students to meet the learning objective if he had more time with them.

36. SECTION 3: Evaluation System Implementation

37. Evaluation Criteria Support System Objectives Evaluators will: • Review component 3c • Discuss and strategize with colleagues next steps

38. Implementing the Building Administrator Model: Component 3c Establishing Next Steps: • What are the data collection implications of this component? • Is there anything that you may do differently this year based upon this component? If so, what? • Are there any decisions that you could make to further support the local implementation of the teacher model? If so, what?

39. Edition II, Module 1 for Personnel Evaluating Building Administrators Please complete the online survey at • https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/RYH2HB2 Resources • RIDE website: http://www.ride.ri.gov/ • Evaluation email: EdEval@ride.ri.gov *RIDE staff members will respond to your context-specific questions.