Dr. Voltz presentation for IASB Triple I Conference

1. What School Board Members Need
To Know About Student Growth
Dr. Richard Voltz
IASA Associate Director

2. Student Growth Presentation for IASB
can be found at
???

3. In 2010, Illinois Governor Pat
Quinn signed the Performance
Evaluation Reform Act (PERA),
which changed how teachers’ and
principals’ performance is
measured in the state.

4. Important Question:
Is your district’s teacher evaluation
plan presently in the contract?

5. This process will test the TRUST and
RELATIONSHIPS between
Board/Administration and Teachers.

6. Two Parts
Teacher Practice Student Growth

7. Danielson Frameworks for
Teaching is the PEAC recommended
model, not the state default.

8. Step 3
Change the Focus

9. First Observe the Student
Then The Teacher

10. Observe
More

11. Teacher evaluation based on infrequent,
announced classroom visits is
inaccurate, ineffective, and dishonest.

12. No more…

14. Increased observations

15. Teacher
evaluations
typically look
like this...

16. Each teacher teaches 900 lessons per
year, 1,800 for two years

17. Instead it
should
look like
this.

18. It needs to look more like a Gallop Poll,
random and 10 times per cycle.

19. “Reflection is
Key”

20. Danielson definition of
engaged learning…
The student is
intellectually engaged in
the work.

21. Evaluators look for
“Engaged Learning Evidence”

22. What are the students learning?

23. Not what are the students doing.

24. PERA requires data and indicators of
student growth as a “significant
factor” for principal and teacher
evaluation.

25. RV Recommendation #1
Learn via Video

26. Will PERA change anything?

27. Main emphasis should be on
professional development of both
principals and teachers.

28. This new system is not about
dismissing teachers, it is about
improving teaching and learning.

29. Your district’s decision on how to
measure student growth may be the
single most important decision your
district will ever make.

30. For this to be done right, evaluators
and teachers need time to develop
and implement.

31. Medical Model Analogy

32. PERA Joint Committee
• Each district will convene a PERA joint
committee of equal representation of teachers
and administrators “Joint committee” means a
committee composed of equal representation
selected by the district and its teachers.

33. Collective Bargaining?
• Between teachers and administrators and not
school board.
• For student growth only.
• Once PERA Joint Committee officially starts
the parties have 180 days to develop plan OR
the plan will default to State Performance
Evaluation Model.

34. Timelines
• Chicago and RTTT Districts already in.
• Lowest 20% by September 2015
– Were notified by ISBE on 9/22/14
• All other districts by September 2016

35. Student Growth Decisions

36. “Demonstrable change in a
student’s learning between two or
more points in time”

37. Teachers will want the assessment
to match the content that the
teacher(s) intend to teach.

38. What percentage should student
growth count for PERA?

40. Round Up Model

43. Types of assessments?
Type I Type II Type III
An assessment that
measures a certain
group of students in the
same manner with the
same potential
assessment items, is
scored by a non-district
entity, and is widely
administered beyond
Illinois
An assessment
developed or adopted
and approved by the
school district and used
on a district-wide basis
that is given by all
teachers in a given
grade or subject area
An assessment that is
rigorous, aligned with the
course’s curriculum, and
that the evaluator and
teacher determine
measures student
learning
Examples: Northwest Evaluation
Association (NWEA) MAP tests,
Scantron Performance Series
Examples: Collaboratively
developed common
assessments, curriculum tests,
assessments designed by
textbook publishers
Examples: teacher-created
assessments, assessments of
student performance

44. Student Groups
• Districts may want to consider dividing
students into groups for evaluation purposes.
• Examples
– Regular education
– Special Education – by disability or maybe even by
individual
– ELL
– Low Income
– Other as is appropriate

45. Grouping students?

47. Scoring of student growth?

48. Default Student Growth Rating Scale
• Excellent = 76% to 100% of students met the
indicated growth target
• Proficient = 51% to 75% of students met the
indicated growth target
• Needs Improvement = 25% to 50% of students
met the indicated growth target
• Unsatisfactory = Less than 25% of students
met the indicated growth target

49. Potential Problems

50. Teachers do not agree that a Type I
or Type II assessment can be
“identified” and thus the default is
two Type III’s.

51. Type III Assessments are
teacher created.

52. All assessments SHALL be aligned
to Illinois Learning Standards and
the Common Core Standards.

53. Midpoint review could be THE
critical point, especially early in the
implementation phase.

54. What is the cut score?

55. Rating Example
“Divide by 2”
• Pre test students and then sort students by score
by student category (reg. ed., sp. ed., etc…)
• Group students together for scoring purposes
into levels
• Use “Divide by 2” strategy to determine growth
target
• Decide on growth goal – Example (80% of
students in this group will make target equals
excellent)

57. More Questions
• How will the district
– Assess non-core areas?
– Co-teaching?
– Students who change classes as semester?
– Student attendance?
– Student transfers?

58. What are SLO’s

60. Are SLO’s required?

61. School Service Personnel are not
required to have student growth as
a component for evaluation.

62. Is there any research to support
the use of student growth for
teacher evaluation purposes?

63. Some Problems
1. Non-teacher effects may cloud the results
2. Data may be inaccurate
3. Student placement in classrooms is not
random
4. Student’s previous teachers can create a halo
(or pitchfork) effect
5. Teacher’s year-to-year scores vary widely.

64. Amount of time required for both
teachers and administrators.

65. Teachers
may/will
want all
student
growth
assessments
to be directly
related to
what they
actually
teach.

66. Q. What happens to a school district that does not
meet the statutory deadlines?
A. Districts that are not compliance with either PERA
or SB 7 may have their recognition status reduced
pursuant to 23 Ill Admin. Code 1.20. In addition,
evaluation plans and tools that are not compliant
with the requirements of the law may undermine
dismissals (including non-renewals of nontenured
teachers), discipline, and reductions in force.

67. Student Growth Metrics should align
to Education Best Practices
• Standards based
• Team Teaching
• Professional Learning Communities
• Do not put teachers into competition with
each other
• Each teacher should be compared to a
standard so all could potentially receive
favorable ratings

68. RV Recommendation #2
• 30% Student Growth Rating should be based
on the following:
– 10% All school reading and math scores
– 10% Type III assessment tied to standards
– 10% Student survey of teaching based on a model
such as was reported in the MET Study

70. For additional information
contact:
Dr. Richard Voltz
rvoltz@iasaedu.org
217-741-0466
http://richvoltz.edublogs.org