Killingly
Professional Learning & Evaluation
Program
1
2015-2016
Evaluation Plan Committee Members
2










Lorie Nordman
Jean Hemmig
Meredith Crabtree
Danielle Orbegozo
Steve Wheeler
Holly Bunning
Joyce Owen
Nicola Able
Paul Dipadua
Maryann McGillivray









Joan Gardner
Sara Schmidt
Sharon Ternowchek
Lisa Vance
Janine Paige
Michael Vose
Jacqueline Brooks
Lydia Miudo
Steve Rioux
 *Contributions by EASTCONN –
Jim Huggins/Scott
Nierendof/Amy Drowne
Professional Learning and Support
3
 System for evaluation-based
professional learning
 System for individual teacher
improvement and remediation
 Career growth and development
opportunities for teachers
Teacher/Ed. Specialist Evaluation Components
4
 45 % - Student Outcomes and
Achievement
 40% - Observation of Teacher
Performance and Practice
 5% - Whole School Student Learning
 10% - Parent Feedback
Teacher/Ed. Specialist Evaluation Components
5
Evaluation Process
6
The annual evaluation process for a teacher shall at least include, but not be
limited to, the following steps, in order:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Orientation by Sept 15
Goal-setting Conference October 15
Observations of practice by Nov 30, Jan 31, &
May 15
Mid-year Check-ins by February 28
End-of-year Summative Review by Last Day of
School
Rating revision Aug 15
Evaluation Summative Rating
7
Annual summative evaluations aligned
to one of four performance evaluation
designators
 Exemplary
 Proficient
 Developing
 Below Standard
Illustration of Steps to Final Rating
8
Student Outcomes
and Achievement
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Parent Feedback
(10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
9
Outcome Rating
45% Student Outcomes and Achievement
10
2 SMART Goals developed through mutual agreement




Take into account the academic track record and overall
needs and strengths of students that teacher is teaching
Align with school, district and state student achievement
objectives
Account for student learning needs based on relevant
baseline data
Be fair, valid, reliable and useful to the greatest extent
possible
45% Student Outcomes and Achievement
11
SMART Goals
 For the 2015-2016 academic year, the required use of state test
data is suspended.
 Shall not be determined by a single, isolated test score, but shall
be determined through the comparison of data across
assessments administered over time.
 Benchmark assessments of student achievement of school-wide
Expectations for Student Learning, measured by analytic rubrics
 Student portfolios of work in content areas, collected over time and
reviewed annually
 Educational specialist may utilize a Learning Portfolios as a SMART goal


Requires a generalized goal for student achievement or access to learning
Indicators of success may rely on qualitative or quantitative data
SMART Goal Example
12
 4th grade students will increase the average STAR
Math scale score from 440 to 490 by the end of the
15-16 school year.
Data
Baseline
MidYear
SMART
GOAL
#1
440
475
YearEnd
Target
Rating
496
490
???
SMART Goal Example
13
 4th grade students will increase the average STAR
Math scale score from 440 to 490 by the end of the
15-16 school year.
Exceeded (4)
All or most students met or substantially exceeded the target(s).
Met (3)
Most students met the target(s) contained in the indicator within
a few points on either side of the target(s)
Partially Met
(2)
Many students met the target(s), but a notable percentage missed
the target by more than a few points. However, taken as a whole,
significant progress towards the goal was made.
Did Not Meet
(1)
A few students met the target(s) but a substantial percentage of
students did not. Little progress toward the goal was made
SMART Goal Example
14
 4th grade students will increase the average STAR
Math scale score from 440 to 490 by the end of the
15-16 school year.
Exceed
ed (4)
All or most students met or substantially exceeded the
target(s).
MORE
THAN 550
Met (3)
Most students met the target(s) contained in the indicator
within a few points on either side of the target(s)
490-549
Many students met the target(s), but a notable percentage
Partiall
missed the target by more than a few points. However,
y Met
taken as a whole, significant progress towards the goal was
(2)
480-489
made.
Did
Not
Meet
(1)
A few students met the target(s) but a substantial
LESS THAN
percentage of students did not. Little progress toward the
440
goal was made
SMART Goal #1 Example
15
9th grade students will increase the average STAR
Math scale score from 740 to 790 by the end of the 1415 school year.
Exceeded (4)
All or most students met or substantially exceeded the target(s).
Met (3)
Most students met the target(s) contained in the indicator within
a few points on either side of the target(s)
Partially Met
(2)
Many students met the target(s), but a notable percentage missed
the target by more than a few points. However, taken as a whole,
significant progress towards the goal was made.
Did Not Meet
(1)
A few students met the target(s) but a substantial percentage of
students did not. Little progress toward the goal was made
SMART Goal #1 Example
16
9th grade students will increase the average STAR
Math scale score from 740 to 790 by the end of the 1516 school year.
Exceeded (4)
850
Met (3)
790-849
Partially Met
(2)
741-789
Did Not Meet
(1)
less than 740
SMART Goal Example
17
STAR MATH Example
18
SMART Goal #2 Example
19
 85% of students will produce a research-based argument in
favor of a particular energy source that meets at least 8 of
the 10 criteria on the teacher developed rubric for the mock
panel discussion performance task in the spring of the
academic year.
Data
Baseline
MidYear
SMART
GOAL
#1
42%
75%
YearEnd
Target
Rating
80%
85%
???
SMART Goal #1 Example
20
 85% of students will produce a research-based argument in
favor of a particular energy source that meets at least 8 of
the 10 criteria on the teacher developed rubric for the mock
panel discussion performance task in the spring of the
academic year.
Exceeded (4)
Met (3)
Partially Met
(2)
Did Not Meet
(1)
Student Outcome and Achievement (45%)
21
Illustration of Steps to Final Rating
22
Student Outcomes
and Achievement
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Parent Feedback
(10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
5% Whole School Indicators
23
 The rating shall be determined by the Principal’s rating on
his or her Student Learning Indicators (the combination of
the 2 Smart Goals)
 Certified staff will be asked to articulate in writing how they
will, through their instructional practice, contribute to the
achievement of the Whole School Learning Indicator.
EACH TEACHER WILL RECEIVE A RATING IN ONE OF
FOUR LEVELS.
Exemplary
Proficient
Developing
Below Standard
Teacher Practice Rating
24
Outcome Rating Matrix (50%)
23
Illustration of Steps to Final Rating
26
Student Outcomes
and Achievement
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Parent Feedback
(10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
25
Performance & Practice Rating
40% Teacher Performance and Practice
CCT Rubric for Effective Teaching 2014
28
 Domain 1 – Classroom Environment, Student
Engagement and Commitment to Learning
 Domain 2 – Planning for Active Learning
 Domain 3 – Instruction for Active Learning
 Domain 4 – Professional Responsibilities and Teacher
Leadership
** Ed Specialist Rubric has been revised and approved by
CDSE – PD and Eval Committee will review it
40% Teacher Performance and Practice
Observations
29
 Observation Process shall:
 Facilitate effective means for multiple in-class visits
 Provide constructive oral and written feedback
 Combination of formal, informal, announced and
unannounced observation and reviews of practice
 May include pre/post conferences
 Provide for training and on-going calibration of evaluators
Observation Cycles
30
Group A: Three Formal
- Less than two years experience; or
- Summative rating below Proficient
Group B: One Formal & Two Informal
- More than two years experience; and
- No formal observation in previous two years
Group C: Three Informal
- More than two years experience; and
- Formal observation in previous two years; and
- Summative rating Proficient and Above
All Teachers – At least one Review of Practice
Terms
31
 Formal Observation:
 A formal observation will be defined as at least a 45-
minute observation. Schools with periods that are
longer than forty-five minutes shall ensure that at least
one formal observation will consume an entire
teaching period as applicable. Formal observations
will include a pre-observation conference, observation,
post-observation conference (verbal feedback), and
written feedback. One pre-observation conference
may be omitted (as mutually agreed upon).
 Formal observation guidelines for educational
specialist may be modified.
Terms
32
Informal Observation:
 An informal observation will be defined as at least a
20-minute in-class observation. Informal
observation do not requires a pre-observation
conference. Either observer or observee may request a
post-observation conference, however it is not
mandated. Each informal observation must have
written feedback.
 In-formal observation guidelines for educational
specialist may be modified to reflect the parameters of
the position.
Terms
33
Written Feedback:

Written feedback must have, at minimum, a brief synapsis of
the observation, strengths, and recommendations.
Terms
34
Review of Practice:

Examples of non-classroom observations or reviews of practice include but are not limited to:

Discussion and review of lesson planning and teaching/student artifacts (Domain II)

Discussions relating to data team meetings (Domain IV)

Discussions relating to coaching/mentoring other teachers (Domain IV)

Up to four artifacts when conducting a review of practice in Domain II or IV

Artifacts to be submitted in advance (advance to be determined by evaluator)

A Review of Practice will be rated at the indicator level, but look at artifacts at the attribute level
(professional judgment)

The mid-year conference is in essence a review of practice, however only formative feedback will
be provided

Additional review of practices can be added as needed

Examples of non-classroom observations or reviews of practice include but are not limited to: observations of data
team meetings, observations of coaching/mentoring other teachers, review of lesson plans, other teaching artifacts,
PPT meetings, etc.
40% Teacher Performance and Practice
35
 Teacher practice goal set to guide professional
learning and improvements in practice
 Performance and practice evaluated using:


Teachers: CCT Instrument 2014 (4 Domains)
Education Specialist: CCT-SESS (4 Domains)
 Sources of Data:
 Conferences
 In-class observations – Feedback at the Indicator Level
 Non-classroom reviews of practice
 Artifacts and other evidence
40% Teacher Performance and Practice
36
All ratings made at the Domain Level
Rating
Criteria
Exemplary
Minimum of 3 exemplary ratings and no
ratings below proficient
Proficient
Minimum of 3 proficient ratings and no
rating below standard
Developing
Minimum of 2 proficient ratings and not
more than one rating below standard
Below Standard
Less than two proficient ratings at the
domain level or two or more ratings at the
domain level below standard
10% Parent Feedback
37
Annual Parent Survey





Parent responses anonymous
Surveys administered either online or paper
Develop one school-wide goal based on analysis of survey results developed by the principal & school improvement team
Teachers identify strategies they will implement to achieve the goal
Teacher and administrator must identify criteria for rating in this
category (i.e., 3 of 4 strategies meet for Proficiency
EACH TEACHER WILL RECEIVE A RATING IN ONE OF FOUR LEVELS.
Exemplary
Proficient
Developing
Below Standard
Illustration of Steps to Final Rating
38
Student Outcomes
and Achievement
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Parent Feedback
(10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
Teacher Practice Rating
39
Teacher Practice Rating Matrix
40
Illustration of Steps to Final Rating
41
Student Outcomes
and Achievement
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Parent Feedback
(10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
39
Summative Rating
Summative Rating
40
Illustration of Matrix to Final Rating
41
EOY TEVAL Ratings by Indicator
EOY TEVAL Ratings by Domain
EOY TEVAL Ratings by Category
EOY Teacher Ratings
(Percent n=221)
Below
Standard
Student Outcomes
0%
5%
51%
43%
Whole School
0%
0%
97%
3%
Performance
0%
3%
70%
27%
Parent Feedback
0%
1%
43%
56%
Summative Rating
0%
0%
48%
51%
Developing Proficient Exemplary
Illustration of Steps to Final Rating
48
SMART
Goal #1
SMART
Goal #2
Exemplary
Proficient
Developing
Below Standard
Student Outcomes
and Achievement
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
3 exemplary ratings and no ratings below proficient
3 proficient ratings and no rating below standard
2 proficient ratings and not more than one rating below standard
Less than 2 proficient ratings or 2 or more ratings at below standard
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Parent Feedback
(10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
42
Professional Assistance and
Support System (PASS)
Effective & Ineffective
50
 Teacher effectiveness will be based upon a pattern of





summative teacher ratings collected over time.
In order to be deemed effective, teachers will need to have a
summative rating of Proficient or Exemplary.
Teachers are required to be effective within two years of being
evaluated using this program.
Teachers who are not deemed effective by this criteria will be
deemed ineffective.
Any teacher having a summative rating of Developing or
Below Standard after one year of being evaluated with this
program may be placed on an individual improvement plan.
Professional Assistance and Support System, or PASS
PASS
51
 The plan must include the following components:








Areas of Improvement
Rationale for Areas of Improvement
Domain: List domain rated “developing” or “below standard.”
Indicators for Effective Teaching
Improvement Strategies to be Implemented
Tasks to Complete: Specific tasks the Teacher will complete that will
improve the domain.
Support and Resources: List of supports and resources the Teacher
can use to improve, e.g. professional learning opportunities, peer
observation, colleague mentor, books, etc.
Indicators of Progress: How the teacher will show progress towards
proficient/exemplary in identified domain(s) through observations,
data, evidence, etc.
PASS Improvement and Remediation Plan
52
 The evaluator(s) will help the teacher outline specific goals and




objectives with timelines, resources, and evaluative criteria.
Consistent supervision and, at minimum, a weekly observation
followed by timely feedback, will be provided by the evaluator(s).
This intervention will operate for a period of time that the evaluator
determines to be appropriate, but will normally conclude within 45
school days.
If the teacher demonstrates that he/she is Effective or better, the
evaluator will designate placement of that teacher to a normal plan
phase.
Effective shall be specifically defined as having Proficient ratings at
the indicator level of the CCT Instrument for a minimum of 80% of all
formal and informal observations during the Improvement and
Remediation phase.
PASS Intensive Remediation Plan
53
 The PASS Intensive Remediation Plan is the final attempt to provide





the help necessary to meet the requirements of the position.
The teacher, evaluator, and another appropriate administrator will
develop a plan that includes specific goals, timelines, resources, and
evaluative criteria.
The teacher may choose to include their bargaining representative.
At the conclusion of this phase, the evaluator will make a
recommendation as to whether the intensive supervision will be
terminated or extended.
If the teacher demonstrates that he/she is Effective (as defined
above) or better, the evaluator will designate placement of that
teacher to the normal plan phase.
If the teacher’s performance is below Effective, the evaluator will
recommend termination of that teacher’s employment to the
superintendent.
PASS Timeline
54
 Normal Phase - One Year
 PASS – One Year
 PASS Improvement and Remediation Plan (45 Days)
 PASS Intensive Remediation Plan (45 Days)
48
Resolution of Differences
Resolution of Differences
56
 Should a teacher disagree with the evaluator’s
assessment and feedback, the parties are encouraged to
discuss these differences and seek common
understanding of the issues.
 Observation and evaluation reports are not subject to the
grievance procedure.
 In the event that the teacher and evaluator are unable to
resolve their differences, they can submit the matter to
the superintendent for review and decision.
 Any such matters will be handled as expeditiously as
possible, and in no instance will a decision exceed thirty
(30) school days.
50
Overview
Administrator Final Summative
Rating
Teacher Final Summative
Rating
Outcome Rating 50%
5%
Teacher
Effectiveness
outcomes
45%
Multiple Student
Learning
Indicators
Outcome Rating 50%
These percentages
are derived from
the same set of data
These percentages
may be derived
from the same set
of data
Practice Rating 50%
5%
Whole-School
Student Learning
Indicators or
Student Feedback
40%
Observations of
Performance &
Practice
Observations of
Performance &
Practice
Stakeholder
Feedback
Student Growth
and
Development
Practice Rating 50%
40%
10%
45%
Survey data gathered from
the same stakeholder
groups should be gathered
via a single survey, when
possible
58
10%
Peer or Parent
Feedback
Illustration of Steps to Final Rating
59
Student Outcomes
and Achievement
(45%)
Whole-school
Student Learning
(5%)
Outcome Rating
(50%)
Performance and
Practice (40%)
Parent Feedback
(10%)
Practice Rating
(50%)
The matrix (on the next slide) is used in order to get a
Final Rating (100%)
(Reviewed when outcomes and practice are discrepant)
Questions
60
• Observation Cycles
• Goal Setting
• Student Outcome Data (45%)
• Whole-School Goal (5%)
• Teacher Practice (40%)
• Parent Feedback (10%)
• Summative Rating
• PASS