The Leadership and Learning Center®
Name of School
Teacher Evaluation System
for Florida’s Charter
Schools
An Overview: The State Model
What do we
need to know
about educator
evaluation in
charter
schools?
Purpose of Evaluation
For the purpose of
increasing student
learning growth
by improving the quality of
instructional, administrative, and
supervisory services in the public
schools of the state, the district
school superintendent shall establish
procedures for evaluating the
performance of duties and
responsibilities of all instructional,
administrative, and supervisory
personnel employed by the school
district. Florida Statutes Section
1012.34 (1) (a).
This New Approach to Evaluation
Supports three processes:
 Self-Reflection by the teacher on current proficiencies
and growth needs. (What am I good at? What can I do
better?)
 Feedback from the evaluator and others on what needs
improvement.
 An annual summative evaluation that assigns one
of the performance levels required by law (i.e., Highly
Effective, Effective, Needs Improvement / Developing, or
Unsatisfactory).
Student Learning
Leader & Teacher
Performance
Objectives for Today



Examine foundational statutes and
rules related to teacher evaluation
systems.
• FEAPs – Florida Educator Accomplished Practices
• Common Language
• High Effect Size Practices
Review the requirements in the
evaluation system.
Discuss the timelines and logistics for
implementation of the system.
Objectives for Today

Examine and discuss the additional
metric: deliberate practice
 Discuss and understand
performance metrics
• Value-added measure
• Instructional practice
Today’s Agenda
 Part I: Foundational Information
 Part II: Requirements
 Part III: Contemporary Research
 Part IV: The State Model
 Part V: Logistics & Support
Foundational Information
Rewards states leading
the way in
comprehensive,
coherent, statewide
education reform
across four key areas:
1. Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to
succeed in college and the workplace
2. Building data systems that measure student growth and success,
and inform teachers and principals how to improve instruction
3. Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective
teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most
4. Turning around their lowest-performing schools.
Florida worked diligently to
bring together broad statewide
support from superintendents,
school board members,
teachers, and teacher
associations for the Race to
the Top application.
Senate Bill 736: Student Success Act
SB 736 Requires
 DOE approve school district
evaluation systems & monitor for
compliance
 DOE provide requirements and
criteria for evaluation systems
 Charter schools comply with
provisions related to performance
evaluations
SB 736 Requires
• District evaluation systems
• Support effective instruction &
student learning growth
• Provide appropriate instruments,
procedures, and criteria for
continuous improvement
• Use data from multiple sources
including input from parents
SB 736 Requires
 Four levels of performance
(highly effective, effective, *needs improvement, unsatisfactory)
 At least **50% of the evaluation is
based on student learning growth
 Based on contemporary research
 Indicators based on each of the
FEAPS
SB 736 Requires
 DOE annual reports to the public
on performance ratings including
the percent of teachers and
leaders receiving each rating
 School reports to parents when
their child’s teacher or principal
has received unsatisfactory
ratings for two consecutive years
SB 736 Requires
 The state Board of Education
shall adopt rules… to establish
uniform procedures for the
submission… and approval of
evaluations of teachers and
leaders.
SBE Rule 6A-5.065
The Educator Accomplished Practices
Florida's core standards for effective
educators. The Educator Accomplished
Practices are based upon three (3) foundational
principles; high expectations, knowledge of
subject matter and the standards of the
profession.
Each effective educator applies the
foundational principles through six (6)
Educator Accomplished Practices. Each of the
practices is clearly defined to promote a
common language and statewide
understanding of the expectations for the
quality of instruction and professional
responsibility.
Teacher Evaluation Requirements
Florida Educator Accomplished
Practices (FEAPS)
Common Language
of Instruction
The Common
Language Project is a
process to refine
conversations in ways
that increase the clarity
of exchanges and
deepen common
understanding of the
work in progress.
ADMR TM (p.40)
Common Language
…a tool of master practitioners in any profession
that is used to facilitate effective communications
about the essential concepts and practices of the
profession.
Examples of
Common Language
Causal Instructional Strategies
Key strategies revealed by
research to have the highest
probability of impacting student
learning when used
appropriately and in appropriate
instructional contexts. These
are the controllable actions in a
school that impact student
learning. DOE Form No. EQEVAL-2012-4
ADMR TM (p.40)
Examples of
Common Language
Learning Goal(s)
A learning goal is a statement of what
learners will know and/or be able to do. In
teaching situations, effective teachers state
learning goals in a rubric (or scale) format
where ascending levels of proficiency of the
goal are specified. The rubric form guides
learners in self-assessment of progress
toward mastery of the goal and guides
teachers in tracking student progress and
providing feedback on progress toward
accomplishing the goal.
ADMR TM (p.40)
DOE Form No. EQEVAL-2012-4
High-Effect Size Practices
Contemporary research
reveals a core of
instructional and
leadership strategies that
have a higher probability
than most of positively
impacting student learning
in significant ways.
High-Effect Size Strategies
Are components within the core standards and
expectations described in the FEAPs (Rule 6A5.065, F.A.C.) and FPLS (Rule 6A-5.080, F.A.C.) and
constitute priority issues for faculty development
and deliberate practice. A listing of these high-effect
size strategies will be posted for district use on
www.fldoe.org/profdev/pa.asp.
High-Effect Size Practices
Classroom teachers need a repertoire of strategies with
a positive effect size so that what they are able to do
instructionally, after adapting to classroom conditions,
has a reasonable chance of getting positive results.
What works BEST?
Hattie, J. (2009) Visible Learning. Rutledge. New York
Contemporary Research on
Teacher Evaluation
Research frameworks
pre-approved by the
Department are:
- Based on
contemporary
research
- Aligned with the
Student Success
Act, the FEAPs or
FPLS, as appropriate
Research Frameworks for Instructional
Evaluation
Behavioral Framework
Based on research and meta-analyses by Dr. Robert
Marzano, Dr. John Hattie, and other research findings
that identify instructional strategies or behaviors that,
done correctly and in appropriate circumstances, have
a positive probability of improving student learning.
Constructivist Framework
Based on research and
meta-analyses by Dr.
Charlotte Danielson, Dr.
Albert Miller, and other
research findings that
focus on principles and
methods of instruction
designed to generate
knowledge and meaning
from an interaction
between their experiences
and their ideas.
Comprehensive
Framework
Based on a merger of both Behavioral and Constructivist
insights into quality instruction. Relies on Behavioral
Framework strategies to establish a core repertoire of
teaching competencies and Constructivist methods for
planning instructional units, collegial work on adapting
core strategies to local conditions, and deliberate
practice work for deepening expertise.
The Florida state model relies on:
• Behavioral Framework
strategies to establish a
core repertoire of
teaching competencies.
• Constructivist methods
for planning instructional
units, collegial work on
adapting core strategies
to local conditions, and
deliberate practice work
for deepening expertise.
____ Charter School Evaluation Model
Florida State Model
The Model is Based on Contemporary
Research
New research conducted in
2012 by Learning Sciences
International and the Marzano
Research Laboratory has
examined the reliability of
classroom observations
using the Marzano Teacher
Evaluation Model. The results
of four studies demonstrated
positive correlations between
the Marzano Teacher
Evaluation Model and student
learning, with the first three
focusing on state test scores.
The Florida State Model for
Evaluation for Teachers …
 Reflects teacher performance across all
elements (4 domains)
 Accounts for teachers’ experience levels
 Assigns weight to the domain with greatest
impact on student achievement (Domain 1)
 Acknowledges deliberate practice by
measuring teacher improvement over time
on specific elements within the framework
Florida State Model
Framework for Teacher Evaluation
Domain 1: Classroom Strategies &
Behaviors
•
•
•
Domain 2: Planning & Preparation
•
•
•
Routine segments
Content segments
On the spot segments
Lesson and units
Use of materials & technology
Special needs of students
41 elements
8 elements
Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching
Domain 4: Collegiality &
Professionalism
•
•
•
•
•
Evaluating personal performance
Professional growth plan
5 elements
Promoting positive environment
Promoting exchange of ideas
Promoting district and school
development
6 elements
Total 60 Elements
www.stlucie.k12.fl.us/
Sample Evidence to Support Rating
Source: St. Lucie County School District Teacher Performance Appraisal System Documents, 2012
Domain 1: Classroom Strategies &
Behaviors
Domain 2: Planning & Preparing
• Formal observation(s)
• Informal Observations
• Student Interviews/Surveys
• Videos of classroom practice
• Artifacts (e.g. student work,
letters from parents)
• Pre-observation conference
• Lesson Planning Documents
• Evidence of differentiation
• Artifacts (e.g. student work
samples, assessments,
scales, rubrics)
Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching
Domain 4: Collegiality &
Professionalism
• Self-assessment
• Post-observation conference
• Individual Professional
Development Plan (IPDP)
• Conferences
• Student Work Samples
• Professional Learning Community
Agendas
• Participation in School Activities Log
• Lesson Study Agendas
• Documentation of Parent
Involvement/Communication
• Leading Professional Development
Converting Formative to Summative Ratings
Formative Ratings
Formative
Ratings
Used for
Each
Domain
Element
4
3
2
1
0
Innovating
Applying
Developing
Beginning
Not Using
State Required Ratings
4
Required
Ratings for
Each Domain
Element
Highly Effective
3
2
1
Effective
Needs
Improvement/
Developing
Unsatisfactory
Data Collection for Status Score
Ratings
Domain 1
Highly
Effective
//// (4)
Effective
Needs
Improvement/
Developing
Unsatisfactory
Weights
Domain 2
/// (3)
Domain 3
Domain 4
Totals
// (2)
/ // (3)
12
//////////
//// (5)
////// (16)
/////// (7)
//// (4)
32
/////// (7)
////// (6)
// (2)
// (2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
17
0
61
X 68%
X 13%
X 8%
x 10%
Proficiency Scales by Experience
Category 1 Teachers: 1-3 years experience
Domains
Combined
1-4
Highly
Effective (4)
At least 65%
and 0% at
Levels 1 or 0
Effective
(3)
Needs
Improvement (2)
Unsatisfactor
y (1)
65% or higher Less than 65% at
Greater than
Level 3 or higher and 50% at Level
less than 50% at
1 or 0
Level 1 or 0
Category 2 Teachers: 4 or more years
Domains
Combined
1-4
Highly
Effective (4)
At least 75%
and 0% at
Levels 1 or 0
Effective
(3)
Needs
Improvement (2)
Unsatisfactor
y (1)
65% or higher Less than 65% at
Greater than
Level 3 or higher and 50% at Level
less than 50% at
1 or 0
Level 1 or 0
Category 3 Teachers: 10 or more years (optional)
Domains
Combined
1-4
Highly
Effective (4)
At least 85%
and 0% at
Levels 1 or 0
Effective
(3)
Needs
Improvement (2)
Unsatisfactor
y (1)
85% or higher Less than 85% at
Greater than
Level 3 or higher and 50% at Level
less than 50% at
2, 1 or 0
Level 2, 1 or 0
Source: SB 763, 2011/St. Lucie County School District Teacher Performance Appraisal System Documents, 2012
State Model Evaluation Metrics
Student
Growth
50%
Status
Score
30%
Deliberate
Practice
20%
Instructional
Practice
50%
Deliberate Practice for Teachers
 Teachers take the lead
 Collaborate with the
principal to identify
personal growth goals
 Leaders provide
structure, resources,
and feedback for
ongoing practice
The end result is year to year development of
instructional expertise giving rise to improved
student achievement year to year.
Deliberate Practice Protocol
Monitor
Progress
Setting
Goals
Focused
Practice
Focused
Practice
Focused
Feedback
State Model Evaluation Metrics
Student
Growth
50%
Status
Score
30%
Deliberate
Practice
20%
Source: SB 763, 2011
Instructional
Practice
50%
Student Growth Measure?
The Student Success Act
requires the inclusion of
student learning growth
measures in teacher
evaluations, and it tasks the
education commissioner with
identifying and implementing
student growth models.
The Value-Added Model (VAM)
Value-added is a
statistical model that uses
student-level growth
scores to differentiate
teacher performance in
the area of student
learning growth.
The Value-Added Model (VAM)
A student’s predicted
performance serves as the
target. A student who meets or
exceeds his target has a
positive impact on the
teacher’s evaluation, and a
student not making his target
has a negative impact.
The Value-Added Model (VAM)
The percent of students
whose performance is
equal to or higher than
predicted forms the
foundation for the
student growth score in
the evaluation system.
VAM Scores
Students who
meet their
expected
performance
level
Students who
fall below their
expected
performance
level
Students who
exceed their
expected
performance
level
The Value-Added Model (VAM)
This overall percent is
transferred to a scale which
provides a rating for the
teacher at highly effective,
effective, needs
improvement / developing,
or unsatisfactory.
Florida’s
Value Added Model
Recorded Webinar for Charter Schools with
Kathy Hebda, Deputy Chancellor for Education Quality,
and Adam Miller, Charter Schools Director,
on the Florida Value-Added Model (VAM) is available at
http://www.floridaschoolchoice.org/Information/Charter_Schools/
(bottom of page).
This presentation provides an overview of Florida’s ValueAdded Model and how it should be used for teacher
evaluations.
State Model Evaluation Metrics
Student
Growth
50%
Source: SB 763, 2011
Status
Score
30%
Deliberate
Practice
20%
Instructional
Practice
50%
Logistics
How will our system work?
Implementation Components & Timelines
Completion of
Self-Assessment
on the Indicators
End of Year
Summative
Review and
Evaluation
During the summer
or early fall
Teacher & Principal
meet to Review Self
Assessment &
Establish
Performance Goals
Throughout
the Year
End of first
semester
Mid-Year Review
and Evaluation
Data Collection
and Progress
Monitoring
Our Plan to
Support
Teacher
Learning and
Development
Questions & Reflection