23
Alaska Educator Evaluation Overview
Alaska Educator Evaluation Overview
• Background & Purpose
• System Requirements
• District Reporting
• System Revision
Background Purpose
• Evaluation statutes, 1996
• SFSF Assurances/ESEA Flexibility Waiver
• Significant changes to educator evaluations
• Student learning data provides essential information
• Help the educator grow professionally
• Improve the effectiveness of instruction
• Relate to the future employment of the educator
System RequirementsInformation, Evaluation, & Actions
Educator Evaluation System Requirements
*Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments
·Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)
·Information from parents, students, etc.
·Other information (as determined by the district)
Information Sources Evaluation Components Results & Actions
Professional Learning Focus for district & teacher.
_______________Annual Evaluation Alternative for the
following school year (as determined by
the district)
District Support OR
Plan of Professional Growth (optional)
Plan of Improvement
Proficient or higher on 7 standards and basic or higher on 1 standard.______________Exceeds the districts performance standards (as determined by the district)
Basic on 2 or more standards
Unsatisfactory on 1 or more standard
Student Learning Standard
Professional Practice
Family & Community
Learning Environment
Assessment
Content Knowledge& Instruction
Understanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Cultu
ral
Stan
dard
s
Performance Rating on each of the eight (8) standards.
·Unsatisfactory
·Basic
·Proficient
·Exemplary
Information SourcesDistricts:
• may select a nationally recognized observational framework approved by the department or continue to use the observation tools they have previously adopted.
• must have a procedure and a form to collect information concerning an educator’s performance from students, parents, and other stakeholders.
• may use other information like surveys, self-assessments, portfolios, etc. to gather information concerning an educator’s performance.
Qualitative
·Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)
·Information from parents, students, etc.
·Other information (as determined by the district)
Information Sources
*Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments
Districts must:
• Select appropriate measures of student growth with the input of the educators being evaluated.
• Establish standards and performance levels for student learning data.
• Develop procedures based on objective & measurable criteria to ensure that data used accurately reflects student growth based on the educator performance.
• Use statewide assessment data for teachers who provide instruction in the content areas assessed.
Quantitative
Aligning Information Sources to Evaluation Components
Information Sources Educator Evaluation Components
*Two to four valid, reliable measures of student growth including statewide assessments
·Observations (district may select a nationally recognized framework approved by the department)
·Information from parents, students, etc.
·Other information (as determined by the district)
Student Learning Standard
ProfessionalPractice
Family & Community
LearningEnvironment
Content Knowledge& Instruction
Assessment
UnderstandingStudent Needs
Differentiation
Cultu
ral
Stan
dard
s
Performance Rating on each of the
eight (8) standards.
·Unsatisfactory
·Basic
·Proficient
·Exemplary
Levels of Performance
Standards
Performance Levels
E P B UUnderstanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & InstructionAssessment
Learning Environment
Family & Community
Professional Practice
Student Learning
Performance Rating on
each of the 8 standards.
·Unsatisfactory (U)
·Basic (B)
·Proficient (P)
·Exemplary (E)
Inter-rater Reliability
• A district’s evaluation training must include training that provides for an assurance of inter‐rater reliability.
Linking Levels of Performance to Results & Actions
Professional Learning Focus for district & teacher.
_______________Annual Evaluation Alternative for the
following school year (as determined by
the district)
District Support OR
Plan of Professional Growth (optional)
Plan of Improvement
Proficient or higher on 7 standards and basic or higher on 1 standard.______________Exceeds the districts performance standards (as determined by the district)
Basic on 2 or more standards
Unsatisfactory on 1 or more standard
Standards
Performance Levels
E P B UUnderstanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & InstructionAssessment
Learning Environment
Family & Community
Professional Practice
Student Learning
Plan of Improvement
If, at the conclusion of a plan of professional of improvement, the educator’s performance does not meet district standards the educator may be non-retained.
Standards
Performance Levels
E P B UUnderstanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & InstructionAssessment
Learning Environment
Family & Community
Professional Practice
Student Learning
Results & Actions
District Support
or
A Plan of Professional Growth (optional)
If, at the conclusion of a plan of professional growth, the educator’s performance is not proficient or exemplary, the district may place the educator on a plan of improvement.
Standards
Performance Levels
E P B UUnderstanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & InstructionAssessment
Learning Environment
Family & Community
Professional Practice
Student Learning
Results & Actions
Results & Actions
Professional Learning Focus
for teachers & district
Standards
Performance Levels
E P B UUnderstanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & InstructionAssessment
Learning Environment
Family & Community
Professional Practice
Student Learning
District ReportingCalculating Educators’ Overall Ratings
Evaluation Results vs. District Reporting
Evaluation Results District Reporting• Leads to professional
learning, district support, and/or plan of improvement
• Confidential—between administrator(s) and the individual being evaluated
• Educator evaluations provide the information the district will use to calculate the overall rating
• Number and percentage of educators at each overall ratings will be reported to the department by each school district beginning in July, 2016
• Information will only be made available to the public at levels that maintain individual confidentiality
Overall Rating & Student Learning Data
• A district will evaluate whether an educator’s overall performance is exemplary, proficient, basic, or unsatisfactory.
• A district shall include student learning data in teacher and administrator’s overall rating according to the following schedule:
o SY 2015‐16 & SY 2016‐17, at least 20% o SY 2017‐18 at least 35% o SY 2018‐19 and after, at least 50%
• A district may not give an educator an overall performance rating of proficient or higher if the educator has been evaluated to be performing at a level of basic or lower on one or more of the content standards or other criteria for which evaluation is required.
Overall Rating
District Reporting School Year 2015-2016 & School Year 2016-2017
Student Learning Standard
20%
Student Learning Standard
·Exemplary
·Proficient
·Basic
·UnsatisfactoryContentStandard
80%
Alaska Teacher Standards
Student Learning Standards
Exemplary Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory
Proficient or higher on all standards
Basic or Unsatisfactory on any one standard
Professional Practice
Family & Community
Learning Environment
Assessment
Understanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & Instruction
Cultu
ral
Stan
dard
s
Rating on each of the 7 ContentStandards.
·Exemplary
·Proficient
·Basic
·Unsatisfactory
District Reporting School Year 2017-2018
Student Learning Standard
·Exemplary
·Proficient
·Basic
·Unsatisfactory
Alaska Teacher Standards
Student Learning Standards
Student Learning Standard
35%Content
Standard 65%
Exemplary Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory
Proficient or higher on all standards
Basic or Unsatisfactory on any one standard
Professional Practice
Family & Community
Learning Environment
Assessment
Understanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & Instruction
Cultu
ral
Stan
dard
s
Rating on each of the 7 ContentStandards.
·Exemplary
·Proficient
·Basic
·Unsatisfactory
District Reporting School Year 2018-2019
Exemplary Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory
Alaska Teacher Standards
Student Learning Standards
Student Learning Standard
50%
Content Standard
50%
Proficient or higher on all standards
Basic or Unsatisfactory on any one standard
Student Learning Standard
·Exemplary
·Proficient
·Basic
·Unsatisfactory
Professional Practice
Family & Community
Learning Environment
Assessment
Understanding Student Needs
Differentiation
Content Knowledge & Instruction
Cultu
ral
Stan
dard
s
Rating on each of the 7 ContentStandards.
·Exemplary
·Proficient
·Basic
·Unsatisfactory
System RevisionStakeholders & Next Steps
Stakeholders• District School Board• Administrators• Teachers• Special Service Providers• Students• Parents• Community members
Next Steps• Build awareness around new requirements with
all stakeholders
• Compare existing system to new requirements
• Identify gaps
• Identify decision points• Develop a transition plan for district’s evaluation
system
