in
Massachusetts Educator Evaluation Framework
Kathleen J. Skinner, Ed.D.
Director, MTA Center for Education Policy & Practice
Mark Sheehan
Director, MTA Affiliate Services
All Presidents’ Meeting, Waltham, MA
January 25, 2014
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Student Learning
A student learning goal focuses on the
learning needs of the students with
whom the individual or team of
educators works.
The educator's progress
toward attaining the goal
is one element of the six
informing the summative
evaluation rating.
The goals are developed
by the educator and
approved by the
evaluator at the goalsetting step of the
evaluation cycle
Educator progress
toward student
learning goal is not
reported to DESE.
Progress toward the goal
is determined through
educator and evaluator
evidence, which may
include that described in
the Educator Plan.
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
The STUDENT LEARNING GOAL is developed based on the educator’s
self-assessment of his/her practice using the appropriate
professional practice rubric and an analysis of the learning needs
of the current students in relation to the standards to be taught.
2
Moderate growth means students
accomplished a year's worth of learning in a
year. High growth is more than a year. Low
growth is less than a year.
DDMs must be
standards-based and
comparable across
grade or subject
districtwide.
Impact rating must be
based on a pattern of
at least two measures
and a trend of at least
two years .
The impact on
student learning
rating may determine
the length of the
Educator Plan.
Each educator’s
impact on student
learning rating will be
submitted to the
DESE .
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
The purpose of DISTRICT-DETERMINED MEASURES is to determine each
educator’s impact on student learning as high, moderate or low. This
determination is separate from and not part of the summative rating
of practice. The MCAS Student Growth Profile and/or ACCESS must be
used, if applicable.
3
4
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Evaluator
Educator-Centered Model
Evaluator
Colleagues
Educator
Educator
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
The Evaluator- Centered Model
5
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
The 5-Step Evaluation Process
6
Learning Goals
Professional
Judgment
Evidence of Learning
DDMs & Growth
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Learning Needs
Patterns & Trends
7
Self-Assessment
Draft Goals
Approve Goals
Develop Plan
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Self-Assessment to Educator Plan
8
•
•
•
•
•
SPECIFIC
MEASURABLE
ATTAINABLE
RELEVANT
TIME-BOUND
• EVALUATE
• REVISE
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
SMART-ER Student Learning Goal
9
• By the end of the school year, all of my students will actively
engage in small group reading activities (reading emergent
reader text) with purpose and understanding as evidenced by
an increase of 20-25 letters per minute on the Letter Naming
Fluency subtest of the DIBELS Next assessment, in at least 80
percent of my students.
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Inappropriate Kindergarten SLG
10
• By the end of the school year, all of my students will actively
engage in small-group reading activities using emergentreader texts with purpose and understanding [MA ELA
Reading Standards: Literature, K-10; Informational Text, K-10;
Foundational Skills, K-4].
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Appropriate Kindergarten SLG
11
• By May 2014, I will improve student performance related to
MA Arts Curriculum Frameworks 5.1 (Critical Response) and
8.2 (Concepts of Cultural Style) through the implementation of
3 new well-structured art lessons designed to support and
enhance the new Kindergarten “Tools of the Mind” units of
study. Ancient Egypt, Oceans and Space will be the topics.
Instruction will include highly engaging resources, activities,
and materials to challenge students’ higher order thinking
skills. By May, 90% of students will have demonstrated
proficiency in both Standards, as measured by a rubric
assessing key skills for each Standard.
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Inappropriate GRADE 2 ARTS SLG
12
• Students will improve their skills in listing images seen in a
work of art and in identifying color and shapes in the work.
[MA Arts Framework K-12 Standard 5 and PK-4 Standard 5.1]
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Appropriate GRADE 2 ARTS SLG
13
• In order to address historically low scores on open response
items and help to raise the school’s overall AYP on the state
mandated ELA test, 100 percent of our students will increase
their average ELA open response scores by at least ½ point
from the prior year.
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Inappropriate
GR. 10 ENGLISH-HISTORY-ESL SLG
14
• In all of our instructional areas, students will learn to write
routinely over short time frames, such as a single sitting or a
day or two, on a range of tasks, and for different purposes and
audiences. [MA ELA Grade 10 writing standard 10].
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Appropriate
GR. 10 ENGLISH-HISTORY-ESL SLG
15
Student Learning Goal
Educator Activities
Student Activities
District Support
Evidence
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Educator Plan for Student Learning
Goal
16
Have students explain their thinking about the content area through writing tasks.
Initial SL
Goal
Properly compose a response to a writing prompt using a three- to five-paragraph
format: introduction, details and conclusion.
Final SL Goal
In all of our content areas, students will learn to write informative/explanatory texts to
examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly.
(Related to MA ELA Writing Standard 2, kindergarten-Grade 12)
1.
Educator
Activities
2.
1.
Student
Activities
District
Support
2.
Samples of student work that reflect the range of ability at the beginning, middle
and end of the year.
Assessment of students’ understanding of academic language related to writing,
such as: topic, topic sentence, supporting details, textual evidence, sentence
structure, transitional words and phrases, introduction, conclusion.
To accomplish this goal, the district will provide us with 1) professional development in
creating content-area-specific writing prompts connected to our common scoring
rubric and 2) assistance from a district writing coach.
1.
Evidence
Develop common rubric; common lessons about the rubric; common lessons
about the elements of informative/explanatory writing.
Develop individual lessons, classwork assignments, homework assignments, and
test elements requiring students to respond to writing prompts appropriate to
the content area but judged by the common rubric.
2.
Lesson plans, classwork and homework assignments, tests and other assessments
of student writing, formative analysis of student work.
Completed classwork and homework assignments, tests and other assessments of
student writing.
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
SL Goal Idea
17
18
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Assess,
Revise as
needed
Implement
DDM
Development
and
Implementation
Process
PD Programs
Pilot,
Evaluate,
Revise
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
DDMs &
Protocols
19
Massachusetts
Curriculum
Frameworks
District Scope
& Sequence
Grade &
Subject
Content
Knowledge &
Skills
Selected
Knowledge &
Skills for
DDMs
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Content Validity
20
Five students on
IEPs:
•
One with mild
Asperger
•
Two with ADHD
•
Two with
language‐ based
learning
disabilities
MCAS ELA
SGP
Trade
book
independ
ent
reading
level with
reading
inventory
Content
Validity
Not fully
aligned to
what is
taught.
Generally
well‐aligne
d with what
is taught.
Complexity
Remember
Somewhat Understand
complex
Apply
Complex
especially for
ELL and LD
students
Sept‐June
Writing
Portfolio
with rubric
Well‐aligne
d with what
is taught.
Bloom’s
Very
Complex
Remember
Understand
Apply
Understand
Apply
Analyze
Create
Student
Growth
Low
(37.2)
14 out
of 25
students
made or
exceeded
a year’s
worth of
learning
(Low)
20 of 25
students
made or
exceeded
a year’s
worth of
learning
(High)
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
• Inadequate
Four ELLs:
supply of trade
books for all
• Two with
students to move
Beginning
English language ahead at their
own pace,
• One with
especially those
Developing
reading above
English language grade level
• One with
• Lack of access
Bridging English
to information
language
technology,
DDM 2
Nine Students with
learning issues:
Assessment
DDM 1
Learning Context
DDM 3
Students
21
Year 2
Pattern
Educator
Evaluator
Impact on
Student
Learning
Year 3
Pattern
Evidence
Professional
Judgment
Decision
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Year 1
Pattern
22
Collective Bargaining - Process
• Identify district‐DDMs and a process for reviewing and
modifying DDMs;
• Specify what meetings should take place between the
educator and the evaluator to discuss DDM outcomes, growth
patterns, trends and the educator’s student learning impact.
• Define the professional development required for
implementation.
23
Collective Bargaining - Selection
• Determine the type and number of measures that are used to
identify the patterns and trends of student performance
across multiple measures;
• Establish what constitutes a baseline and final performance
measure (and interim measures if the district uses them), and
the resulting growth score;
• Determine the number of years that constitute a trend, which
must be at least two years but may be more;
• Determine how the educator’s impact on student learning is
derived from the pattern and trend data.
24
Collective Bargaining - Attribution
• Establish the amount of time that students must be physically
present before the educator in order to be included in any
impact metrics; and
• Establish the method by which students are attributed to
specific educators.
25
Student Learning & Educator Evaluation Framework
Go to www.massteacher.org
26