Скачать презентацию Data Reporting and the New Educator Evaluation Systems Скачать презентацию Data Reporting and the New Educator Evaluation Systems

2206f649d8643647f948c0e9cb3b4cdf.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 21

Data Reporting and the New Educator Evaluation Systems Required under Race to the Top Data Reporting and the New Educator Evaluation Systems Required under Race to the Top and the Student Success Act Kathy Hebda, Deputy Chancellor for Educator Quality Juan Copa, Director of Research and Analysis in Educator Performance 1

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements for 2011 -12 One revised data element in Review of New Data Reporting Requirements for 2011 -12 One revised data element in the staff information system Personnel Evaluation Five new data elements added to the staff information system 2 Personnel Evaluation, Instructional Practice Component Personnel Evaluation, Instructional Leadership Component Personnel Evaluation, Student Learning Growth Component Personnel Evaluation, Professional and Job Responsibilities Component Personnel Evaluation, Measures of Student Learning Growth

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Revised Element Personnel Evaluation - A code Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Revised Element Personnel Evaluation - A code to indicate the level of performance on the evaluation of the instructional staff member or school administrator status in accordance with Section 1012. 34, Florida Statutes Adds codes to capture the new categories established in the Student Success Act Highly Effective Needs Improvement Developing (for staff in first 3 years of employment) Unsatisfactory Must be reported on Survey 5; and Survey 3 for mid-year evaluations of newly hired teachers 3

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component – A twodigit code indicating the percent of an instructional staff member or school administrator’s evaluation that is based on each component: Instructional Practice (for instructional personnel) Instructional Leadership (for school administrators) Student Learning Growth Professional and Job Responsibilities Must be reported on Survey 5 4

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component – Purpose Section 1012. 34(3)(a), F. S. , outlines that performance evaluation criteria must include: Instructional Practice (for instructional personnel) Instructional Leadership (for school administrators) Student Learning Growth Professional and Job Responsibilities The law requires that at least 50% must be based on the performance of students (i. e. , student learning growth), though that percentage may be reduced to 40% if fewer than 3 years of student growth data are available. These data elements will help inform whether or not there are differences in evaluation results, based on the composition of an educator’s evaluation 5

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component - Example Report “ 60” for the element, Personnel Evaluation, Instructional Practice Component Mrs. Smith’s evaluation is composed of: 60% instructional practice 40% student learning growth Report “ 40” for the element, Personnel Evaluation, Student Learning Growth Component Report “ 00” for the element, Personnel Evaluation, Instructional Leadership Component (since Mrs. Smith is not a school administrator) Report “ 00” for the element, Personnel Evaluation, Professional and Job Responsibilities Component 6

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component, Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements (4 Elements) Personnel Evaluation, Component, Additional Considerations 7 If a district has incorporated “Professional and Job Responsibilities” into the “Instructional Practice” or “Instructional Leadership” components of their approved evaluation systems, the value of “ 00” (as shown in the previous example) should be reported for the element Personnel Evaluation, Professional and Job Responsibilities Component Data for these elements should vary from employee to employee over time, though in 2011 -12, it is possible that the composition of the evaluation may be the same for all employees All three components (Instructional Practice and Instructional Leadership are only applicable to instructional personnel or school administrators) should sum to 100

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements Personnel Evaluation, Measures of Student Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements Personnel Evaluation, Measures of Student Learning Growth – A code to indicate the measures upon which student learning growth, as defined by Section 1012. 34(7)(a)-(e) F. S. , is based in the personnel evaluation of a classroom teacher or school administrator Categories are: 8 Exclusively (100%) on statewide assessments Exclusively (100%) on district-developed or district-selected end-of-course assessments Exclusively (100%) on other standardized assessments, including nationally recognized standardized assessments Exclusively (100%) on industry certification examinations Exclusively (100%) on measureable learning targets Combination of assessments, with the state assessments accounting for largest component Combination of assessments, with the state assessments not accounting for the largest component Must be reported on Survey 5

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements 9 Personnel Evaluation, Measures of Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – New Elements 9 Personnel Evaluation, Measures of Student Learning Growth – Purpose Section 1012. 34(7)(a)-(e), F. S. , outlines the different methods of assessments that are required or can be used in educator evaluations to measure student performance Section 1008. 22(b), F. S. , lists assessments that can be used to measure mastery of content for courses This should vary from employee to employee – and is likely to vary more in future years, as more assessments are used This data element will help inform whether or not there are differences in evaluation results based, in part, on the assessments used to measure student learning growth

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Overall Purpose Section 1012. 34(1)(c), F. S. Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Overall Purpose Section 1012. 34(1)(c), F. S. , requires that by December 1, 2012, the Commissioner of Education report to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives the approval and implementation status of each school district’s instructional personnel and school administrator evaluation systems The report must include performance evaluation results of employees using the 4 levels of performance (in the aggregate) from the prior school year The data elements added and/or revised (and described in this presentation) will help to inform this report Per the law, this is an annual report due by December 1 each year 10

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Other Reports As part of Race to Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Other Reports As part of Race to the Top, the Department has contracted with MGT of America (through 2014) to conduct an evaluation of the initiatives and reforms described in the Great Teachers and Leaders portion of Florida’s RTTT initiative Their evaluation will include: 11 Annual comparison of results from district evaluation systems to assessed perceptions of relevance of those systems to teachers and principals Correlation of instructional practice and student learning growth portions of the evaluation Analysis of compensation systems Analysis of the impact of evaluation systems on dismissal process, equitable distribution of effective teachers and principals, and teacher and principal retention Descriptive analyses of district collective bargaining agreements and salary schedules from beginning of RTTT to the end of RTTT

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Timing of Reporting Student performance results for Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Timing of Reporting Student performance results for teachers as measured using Florida’s value-added model for FCAT are scheduled to be provided to districts in July 2012 After the data are delivered, districts will have an opportunity to review their data and indicate any changes (e. g. , the inclusion of students or any other discrepancy in a teacher’s score) to the Department The Department will have the ability to recalculate scores following this review period 12

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Timing of Reporting Given this schedule, it Review of New Data Reporting Requirements – Timing of Reporting Given this schedule, it is possible that final 2011 -12 evaluation results may not be available by the August 31 st Survey 5 reporting period close Finalized data is necessary to inform the statutorilyrequired report due December 1 Therefore, it is expected that all districts finalize data for all their Personnel Evaluation data elements by October 19, 2012 13

Review of New Data Reporting Requirements for 2012 -13 One new data element in Review of New Data Reporting Requirements for 2012 -13 One new data element in the staff information system Mentor/Supervising Teacher Created for districts to indicate if a staff member serves as a Mentor or Supervising Teacher Required on Survey 2, 3, and 5 As part of Race to the Top, districts are required to add to the requirements for selecting mentor and supervising teachers that they are rated as “effective” or “highly effective” Section 1004. 04(6), F. S. also requires that mentor/supervising teachers demonstrate “effective classroom management strategies that consistently result in improved student performance” 14

Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process Section 1012. 34(8), F. S. Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process Section 1012. 34(8), F. S. , requires a process to permit instructional personnel to review the class roster for accuracy and to correct any mistakes relating to the identity of students for whom the individual is responsible 15 Florida is one of five states participating in a Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation grant to develop a tool for roster verification (“Teacher. Student Data Link” project) A web-based process was developed whereby districts, schools, and teachers could view their rosters, based on data collected from school districts and verify its accuracy Florida worked with a small group of districts (Hillsborough, Escambia, and NEFEC) to pilot this process last fall (Survey 2 data) before deploying it statewide this past Spring using Survey 3 data

Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process The tool can be accessed Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process The tool can be accessed at: https: //app 3. fldoe. org/Roster. Verification/ 16

Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process The tool was open from Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process The tool was open from April 2, 2012 to June 1, 2012 this year, using Survey 3 data (as pulled on March 19, 2012) The tool provided an opportunity to confirm that the information first reported is an accurate reflection of the class roster as of the survey reporting week Teachers had the ability to indicate whether a student should have been added or deleted from their class roster Changes were only reported back to the state after school-level or district-level personnel confirmed the changes 17

Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process Though the vast majority of Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process Though the vast majority of districts used the tool, the tool was optional Districts choosing not to use the tool used a local process and made the data available to the Department following June 1 Any changes made through the tool were not reflected in Survey 3, unless a district chose to make changes to Survey 3 as well 18

Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process Though the tool was only Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process Though the tool was only available for use with Survey 3 data in 2011 -12, it will be available during two windows in 2012 -13, in conjunction with Survey 2 data and with Survey 3 data Specific dates for Roster Verification Tool review windows will be announced once they are set 19

Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process We are seeking feedback on Requirements of Student Success Act – Roster Verification Process We are seeking feedback on the Roster Verification Tool Any and all suggestions are welcome Please send those suggestions to us at: 20 Class. [email protected] org or Juan. [email protected] org

Contact Information Kathy Hebda, Deputy Chancellor for Educator Quality Kathy. Hebda@fldoe. org Juan Copa, Contact Information Kathy Hebda, Deputy Chancellor for Educator Quality Kathy. [email protected] org Juan Copa, Director of Research and Analysis in Educator Performance 21 Juan. [email protected] org