The document discusses updates to Washington State's Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP). It outlines a timeline for implementation of new evaluation models between 2010-2014. All districts will use the new models starting in 2013-14. The new models will include 4 tiers of evaluation (exemplary, proficient, basic, unsatisfactory). Teacher and principal evaluation criteria are aligned around areas like instruction, data use, culture and community. Student growth data from multiple measures must be incorporated. The document recommends various resources and task forces to help with training and implementation of the new evaluation systems.

1. Washington StateTeacher and Principal EvaluationProjectUpdate

3. ??????

4. What the hell kind of call was that!?!

5. ??????

6. The BasicsWhat are the details of the TPEP process?

7. The CriteriaHow do the newteacher and principal criteria relate to each other?

8. A 4-Tiered SystemHow does using a four-tier system change people’s thinking?

9. Next StepsIn the end, what should be taken into account in the evaluation?

10. The BasicsWhat are the details of the TPEP process?

11. 4-TiersCriteriaStateBasiclanguagelinking achievementDetails ofachievement linkageSpecific protocolsand timelinesPilot DistrictsRubricsforcriteriaFramework ofInstructionFormula forsummative ranking

12. Timeline2010-11Pilot districts develop “models” to use in implementing the new evaluation standards. These models will likely include indicators, rubrics and protocols.2011-12The pilot districts will use the new models.End of 2011-12Superintendent Dorn is charged with analyzing the work of the pilots and making a recommendation to the legislature.

13. 4-TiersCriteriaStateBasiclanguagelinking achievementDetails ofachievement linkageSpecific protocolsand timelinesPilot DistrictsRubricsforcriteriaFramework ofInstructionFormula forsummative ranking

14. 4-TiersCriteriaStateBasiclanguagelinking achievement???Details ofachievement linkageSpecific protocolsand timelinesPilot DistrictsRubricsforcriteriaFramework ofInstructionFormula forsummative ranking

15. Timeline2010-11Pilot districts develop “models” to use in implementing the new evaluation standards. These models will likely include indicators, rubrics and protocols.2011-12The pilot districts will use the new models.End of 2011-12Superintendent Dorn is charged with analyzing the work of the pilots and making a recommendation to the legislature.2012-13All districts will do the preparation work needed to use the new models.2013-14All districts will use the new models as the basis for evaluating their teachers and principals.

16. Timeline2010-11Pilot districts develop “models” to use in implementing the new evaluation standards. These models will likely include indicators, rubrics and protocols.2011-12The pilot districts will use the new models.End of 2011-12Superintendent Dorn is charged with analyzing the work of the pilots and making a recommendation to the legislature.2012-13All districts will do the preparation work needed to use the new models.2013-14All districts will use the new models as the basis for evaluating their teachers and principals.Regional Implementation Grants5-10 Districts in each ESD may apply to receive resources for implementing the new evaluation models one year early.

17. Timeline2010-11Pilot districts develop “models” to use in implementing the new evaluation standards. These models will likely include indicators, rubrics and protocols.2011-12The pilot districts will use the new models.End of 2011-12Superintendent Dorn is charged with analyzing the work of the pilots and making a recommendation to the legislature.2012-13All districts will do the preparation work needed to use the new models.2013-14All districts will use the new models as the basis for evaluating their teachers and principals.Regional Implementation Grants5-10 Districts in each ESD may apply to receive resources for implementing the new evaluation models one year early.Regional Implementation Grant districts use the new evaluation models for at least 20% of their teachers, all provisional and all principals.

18. The CriteriaHow do the newteacher and principal criteria relate to each other?

19. TEACHEREVALUATIONCRITERIA

20. PRINCIPALEVALUATIONCRITERIA

21. Teachers:“fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment.”“collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning.”Principals:“creating a school culture that promotes the ongoing improvement of learning and teaching for students and staff.”“providing for school safety.”

22. Teachers:“using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning.”Principals:“development, implementation, and evaluation of a data-driven plan for increasing student achievement, including the use of multiple student data elements.”

23. Teachers:“providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and curriculum.”Principals:“assisting instructional staff with alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessment with state and local district learning goals.”

24. Teachers:Implementing the instructional frameworkPrincipals:“monitoring, assisting, and evaluating effective instruction and assessment practices.”

25. Teachers:“communicating and collaborating with parents and school community.”Principals:“partnering with the school community to promote learning.”

27. A 4-Tiered SystemHow does using a four-tier system change people’s thinking?

28. SatisfactoryUnsatisfactory

29. ExemplaryProficientBasicUnsatisfactory

30. SatisfactoryUnsatisfactory

32. Exemplary?Proficient?BasicUnsatisfactory

33. Under what circumstances might teachers and principals consider evidence gathering as a positive thing in their evaluations?

34. Wary/Welcome ActivityWhy might teachers and principals be wary of a 4-tier evaluation system?Why might they welcome it?

36. Satisfactory,That is not enough as to say one is average, or adequate or moderate. I want to be loved for who I am.

37. Next StepsIn the end, what should be taken into account in the evaluation?

39. TeacherEvaluationCriteria

40. PrincipalEvaluationCriteria

44. E2SSB 6696When available, student growth data that is referenced in the evaluation process must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. As used in this subsection, “student growth” means the change in student achievement between two points in time.SIG (MERIT)Implement rigorous, transparent and equitable evaluation systems for teachers and principals which are developed with staff and use student growth as significant factor. Identify and reward school leaders and teachers who have increased student achievement and graduation rates; identify and remove those who, after ample opportunities to improve professional practice, have not done so.Implement such strategies as financial incentives and career ladders for recruiting, placing and retaining effective teachers

47. DataContentInstructionCultureCommunity

48. ThreeTask ForcesTraining

51. Many Present Teacher-Evaluation Models

52. Governors State UniversityPrincipal Evaluation Model

53. SIG/Merit Evaluation Model

54. Arne Duncan’sPrincipal Evaluation Model

55. Resources

57. Gallupstudentpoll.comTrack your students’ engagement, hope and well being

58. Success at the Corehttp://successatthecore.comVideos and facilitators’ guides designed to develop schools’ leadership teams and individual teachers’ skills in the classroom.

59. AWSP’s Online GPS(Great Principals’ Strategies)

60. PRINCIPALEVALUATIONCRITERIA

62. CollegeEntranceRequirementsAt Stewart Elementary School, we want students to begin thinking about college early, so we display the college entrance requirements in our hallway. This helps to set the tone that this is a place to learn, and if students work hard, they will all be prepared for learning after high school.