AchieveNJ : Improved Evaluation and Support for Teachers and Principals

AchieveNJ: Improved Evaluation and Support for Teachers and

Principals

May 2013

Updated May 3, 2013

2

Today’s Presentation

• Welcome to our Regional Presentation on AchieveNJ

• We are here to inform, to learn, and to provide an opportunity for feedback.

• While this presentation is primarily an informational session, the will be more formalized opportunities for public testimony in June, and July.

• Opportunities for questions:• Index cards with questions will be collected after

each segment• E-mail us at [email protected]

Updated May 3, 2013

mailto:[email protected]

3

Agenda

Introduction to AchieveNJ

Overview of Teacher Evaluation

Overview of Principal Evaluation

Teach. Lead. Grow.

3Updated May 3, 2013

4

What is AchieveNJ?

• Teach: Help educators better understand their impact and ultimately improve student outcomes.

• Lead: Align leadership responsibilities with practices that we know have the greatest influence on learning.

• Grow: Foster an environment of continual growth for all students and educators in New Jersey.

AchieveNJ is a comprehensive educator evaluation and support system


5

AchieveNJ is Part of Broader Reforms

Evaluation and Support

PARCC

Common Core

Student AchievementStudent

Achievement

AchieveNJ, together with the initiatives to implement Common Core Standards and

PARCC assessment, form the key elements to improve student achievement.


Instruction

6

Our Goal: Improved Student Achievement• Parents are a child’s first teachers, but teachers and principals

have the biggest in-school impact on student learning.• Research shows effective teaching can be measured.• Better educator evaluations will improve teaching and learning

so that all teachers — and students — perform at high levels.

6Introduction to AchieveNJ

ADMINISTRATORS

PRINCIPALS

TEACHERS

STUDENTS

7

Effective Teachers Make a Significant Difference

Source: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, MET Project

+4.8months+2.9months

+1.4 months

+5months

-2.7months -3.2months-1.4 months

-5.8months

Months of Learning Gained (Lost) Compared to Average Teacher

Top 25% of Teachers Bottom 25% of Teachers

State Math Test Balanced Assessment of

Mathematics

State ELA Test

SAT9/Open-Ended Reading

AverageTeacher

7

The difference between an effective and ineffective teacher can approach 11 months of learning for a

student in one year.Introduction to

AchieveNJ

8

Goals of New Evaluation and Supports

Improved student

achievement

Common language and

clear expectations

Accurate and differentiated

levels of performance

Timely, actionable, data-driven feedback

Aligned and targeted

professional development


9

Key Provisions of TEACHNJ

9

Support

• Required training on the evaluation system• Targeted feedback to drive professional development• School Improvement Panel conducts evaluations,

leads mentoring, and identifies professional development opportunities

• Corrective Action Plan for Ineffective/Partially Effective rating

Evaluation

• Implementation in 2013-2014• Four levels of summative ratings• Educator practice instruments used for multiple

observations• Multiple objective measures of student learning for

teachers, principals, VPs/APs

Tenure• Teachers earn tenure after 4 years based on

effectiveness• Effective ratings required to maintain tenure• Dismissal decisions decided by arbitrators


10

NOW PROPOSEDPerfunctory In-depth

One measure Multiple measuresOne observer Multiple observers

No connection to student growth Student growth counts

No evaluation training Comprehensive training required

Disconnected from professional development

Will provide for more targeted professional

developmentMinimal educator involvement Educator-driven

State Evaluation Framework

NOW* Perfunctory

Measured by observation onlyOne observer

No connection to student growth

Training not requiredDisconnected from

professional development Minimal educator involvement

10

*This is reflective of current minimum requirements by state, and may not reflect practice in all districts.


11

Careful, Deliberate Path Towards New System

2010 2011 2012 2013

Educator Effectiveness

Task Force formed

Task Force releases

recommendations

EPAC, Pilot 1 launched

$38 million Race to the

Top award for NJ

Pilot 2 selected

TEACHNJ Act passed

2nd round of

evaluation regulations proposed

All districts launch

improved evaluations

11

EPAC and external Rutgers

reports issued

1st round of evaluation regulations proposed


12

AchieveNJ is Driven by Educator Input

14 Evaluation Pilot Advisory Committee (EPAC) meetings between 2011 and 2013

100 EPAC members (on average) in attendance

30 Pilot districts

287 Pilot schools311 Principals and assistant principals

14,858 Teachers

168,125 Students

570+ Districts have established District Evaluation Advisory Committees (DEACs)

6,650 Teacher and leaders involved in School Improvement Panels at the school level


13

Thanks to Our Pilots for Leading the WayTeacher Evaluation

Pilot:• 2 separate 1-year pilot

programs • 22 pilot districts• Rutgers study outlining

challenges and successes

12

3 2 11

1

23

3 2 1

1

1

21

1

1

21

11

*Does not include Newark and SIG schools

1

1

Principal Evaluation Pilot:• 14 pilot districts• Forthcoming study by REL

Mid- Atlantic

Number of participating districts

in each county

Number of participating districts

in each county


14

Lessons Learned from PilotsSuccessesTraining has additional benefits for professional development, school cultureCommon language emergingBetter, more frequent feedback for teachers from administratorsBuilding momentum for PLCs, data-driven instructionLinking teacher practice data to professional development

ChallengesCapacity to conduct observationsQuality evaluation training and proof of masterySome key policy questions not fully answered in year 1:• Use of growth measures• Calculating summative rating• Determining measures for non-tested grades and subjects


15

Agenda

15




Teach. Lead. Grow.

Updated May 3, 2013

16

Evaluations Use Multiple Measures• The TEACHNJ Act requires evaluations to include

multiple measures of student progress and multiple data sources.

TeacherPracticeBased on classroom

observations

Student Growth

Percentile (SGP)Based on

NJ ASK performance

Student Growth

Objective(SGO)

Set by teacher and principal

Summative RatingOverall

evaluation score

All teachers and

principals

Less than 20 percent of teachers

TEACHERS

Practice Student Achievement

17

Districts Choose Their Own Observation Measure

42%

16%

11%

9%

9%

6%1% 5% Teacher Practice Instruments

Danielson 2011 Danielson 2007 Stronge McRELMarzanoMarshall Rhode Island ModelOther

TEACHERS: PRACTICE

Other: Instruments that have been approved but are being used in fewer than 5 districts; this includes approved “homegrown” models.

Practice SGPSGO Summat

ive

18

Teacher Observations Vary• Long: 40 minutes, with post-conference• Short: 20 minutes, with post-conference

Teacher Categories Total # of Observations Observers

Non-Tenured

Years 1–2 3(2 long, 1 short) Multiple Observers

RequiredYears 3–4 3(1 long, 2 short)

Tenured 3(0 long, 3 short)

Multiple Observers Recommended

Notes:• Corrective Action Plans: After the first year, teachers who receive an

Ineffective or Partially Effective rating are required to have one additional observation, and multiple observers are required.

• Within the minimum requirements, all teachers must have at least one unannounced and one announced observation.

TEACHERS: PRACTICE


ive

19

Observers Will Be Well-Trained Staff Member Training

All teaching staff members

Must be trained on all components of the evaluation rubric

All observers

Must be trained in the practice instrument before observing for the purpose of evaluation

Must participate in two “co-observations” (double-scored observations)

Must participate in yearly refresher training

Superintendents/Chief school

administrators (CSAs)

Must certify every year that observers have been trained

TEACHERS: PRACTICE


ive

20

Student Growth Percentile Overview


observations

Student Growth


NJ ASK performance

Student Growth

Objective(SGO)



evaluation score

All teachers and

principals



TEACHERS

21

Calculating Student Growth Percentiles

• Student Growth Percentiles (SGPs) measure how much a student has learned from one year to the next compared to peers with similar academic history from across the state.

• Growth baseline information is established by a student’s prior learning as measured by all of student’s NJ ASK results.All students can show growth.

TEACHERS: SGP


ive

22

Why Student Growth?

Proficiency does not tell the whole story. Under our current system, a school or teacher might only notice that Maria is

“Proficient” and that Albert is “Partially Proficient.”

Partially Proficient

Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5

100

200

250

150 160 165

NJ Ask Scale Score by Grade

NJ A

SK S

cale

Proficient

Advanced Proficient

230205

220

Albert Maria


ive

TEACHERS: SGP

23

Example: Calculating an SGP

Albert’s NJ Ask Scale Score by Grade

NJ A

SK S

cale

Albert is a 5th Grade student in Ms. Jones’ Math Class. He has scored “Partially Proficient” in 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade, but each year his scale score has improved.

Ms. Jones notices that he scored a 165 scale score this year, but doesn’t quite

know what that means about

Albert’s growth.


Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5

100

200

250

150 160 165Proficient

Advanced Proficient

TEACHERS: SGP


ive

24

Example: Identifying Academic Peers

Albert’s Prior Scores

Academic Peers’ Prior Scores

In order to figure out what that growth means, we first identify

Albert’s “Academic Peers”; these are students who

performed similarly to Albert in the past.

3rd Gr. 1504th Gr. 160

3rd Gr. ≈150

4th Gr. ≈160

These “Academic Peers” are

represented by students from across the state in many different school districts.


ive

TEACHERS: SGP

25

29%70%

Example: Assigning an SGP

1%

99%

70th%

This comparison helps us put Albert’s growth into context,

and assign him a Student Growth Percentile on a scale

from 1 to 99.

Albert’s Current Score

Academic Peers’ Current Scores

5th Gr. 165 5th Gr.

Scores ranged from 130 - 185

Albert’s SGP score is 70, which conveys that his 5th grade score is higher than 70% of his academic

peer group.Albert’s academic peers scored

between 130 and 185 on the 5th grade NJ ASK, with the majority of them

scoring below Albert’s score of 165.


Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5

100

200

250

150160

Proficient

Advanced Proficient


ive

TEACHERS: SGP

26

Teachers Receive Median SGP Score on Roster

26

Ms. Jones would then receive an

effectiveness rating by taking the median

SGP score on her roster.

In this scenario, Ms. Jones would receive a

rating of 51.Practic

e SGPSGO Summative

Student SGP ScoreHugh 12Eve 16Clarence 22Clayton 24Earnestine 25Helen 31Clinton 35Tim 39Jennifer 44Jaquelyn 46Lance 51Roxie 53Laura 57Julio 61Selena 65Ashlee 66Albert 70Mathew 72Maria 85Charles 89Milton 97

Albert’s SGP score is then placed on Ms. Jones’ course

roster so that we can see how she did with all of her

students.

Median SGP Score

TEACHERS: SGP

27

SGP Technical Rules

• She has at least 20 student scores on her roster;– If she does not have 20 students in year 1,

she may receive an SGP score if she accrues 20 student scores over a period of up to 3 years.

• Students are enrolled in class at least 70 percent of the time before the test; and

• She has worked for at least 60 percent of the time before the test.

Ms. Jones can only receive a median SGP score if the following is true:


ive

TEACHERS: SGP

28

SGP Technical Rules

In future years, Ms. Jones should know that: • If two or three years of data

are available, the Department will use the best available score — either the teacher’s median score of their current roster or the median of all student scores over the years available.

Student SGP ScoreHugh 12Eve 16Clarence 22Clayton 24Earnestine 25Helen 31Clinton 35Tim 39Jennifer 44Jaquelyn 46Lance 51Roxie 53Laura 57Julio 61Selena 65Ashlee 66Albert 70Mathew 72Maria 85Charles 89Milton 97

Mel 56Laura 57Regina 58Marissa 60Julio 61Faye 63Selena 65Ashlee 66Jackie 67Courtney 68Albert 70Matthew 72Laura 77Jack 78Jared 80Rick 84Maria 85Charles 89Michelle 92Molly 95Milton 97

Student SGP Score

Hugh 12Eve 16John 16Charles 20Annie 20Clarence 22Clayton 24Earnestine 25Jake 27Helen 31Rachel 33Clinton 35Tim 39George 41Amber 42Jennifer 44Jaquelyn 46Bobby 50Lance 51Roxie 53Mike 55

Median over 2 years = 56Median this Year = 51

Her SGP score will then be placed on a 1-4 scale.*


ive

*Guidance is forthcoming on how SGP will be converted from a score on 1-99 scale to 1-4 scale.

TEACHERS: SGP

29

Understanding Student Growth Objectives


observations

Student Growth


NJ ASK performance

Student Growth

Objective(SGO)



evaluation score

All teachers and

principals



All teachers will set academic goals for their students at the beginning of each school year – called Student Growth

Objectives (SGOs).TEACHERS

30

All Teachers Set Student Growth Objectives (SGOs)

• SGOs: Annual, specific, and measureable academic goals for groups of students that are locally developed and assessed

• Creating an SGO: ― Collaborative process between teacher and immediate

supervisor― Principal has final decision

• SGOs can be based on:― Appropriate national, state or LEA-developed

assessments― Rubric-measured portfolios or performance

assessments

Teachers with an SGP score 1 - 2 SGOs

Teachers without an SGP score 2 SGOs

TEACHERS: SG0


ive

31

Basic Steps for Creating an SGO

In setting SGOs, teachers should take the following steps:1. Choose or develop a quality measurement tool (examples

follow) that is aligned to applicable standards.

2. Determine students’ starting points based in available data.

3. With supervisor input and approval, set ambitious yet achievable student learning goals.

4. Track progress and refine instruction accordingly.

5. Review results and discuss score with supervisor.


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

32

September By Nov. 15* By Feb. 15 By end of school year

TEACHERSThe SGO Process

Teachers, supervisors meet to discuss and set SGO w/ principal’s

approval

Adjustments to SGOs can be

made with approval

*For 2013–14 only. In subsequent years, SGOs must be set by Oct. 15.

Step 1: Choose or develop a

quality assessment

aligned to state standards

Step 2: Determine

students’ starting points

Step 3: Set ambitious and

feasible student growth objectives

Step 4: Track progress, refine instruction

Step 5: Review results and score

Teachers, supervisors meet to discuss SGOs and other measures

Recommended steps for setting a good SGO

Official SGO process in regulationsKEY


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

33

SGOs: Some Possible Assessment Types


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

Traditional Assessments

Portfolio Assessments

Performance Assessment

• National/State tests (e.g., Advanced Placement exams, DIBELS, EOC Biology)

• District, school and departmental tests (e.g., final exams, benchmark tests)

• Gold® (pre-K, K)• Writing and

reflection samples (ELA)

• Laboratory research notebook (sciences)

• Student project-based assessments (all subjects)

• Portfolio of student work (art, photography, graphic design, etc.)

• Lab Practicum (sciences)

• Sight reading performance (music)

• Dramatic performance (drama)

• Skills demonstration (physical education)

• Persuasive speech (public speaking)*Note: The use of the New Jersey Assessment of Skills and Knowledge (NJ ASK)

for SGOs is prohibited for teachers who will also receive SGP scores based on those tests.

34

Types and Examples of SGOs


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

Type of SGO Definition Examples (from Algebra I class)

General

Focused on the teacher’s entire student population for a given

course. Includes large proportion of curriculum

standards.

Covers all students in a teacher’s Algebra I classes

and aligned comprehensively with

course standards.General - tiered goal

Same as above, but with student goals tiered by

preparation levels

Same as above, but with student goals tiered by

preparation levels.Specific — student group

Focused on a subgroup of students that need specific

support.

Covers a group of students that scored below 45

percent on the pre-test.

Specific — content/skill

Focused on specific skills or content that students must

master.

Covers New Jersey Common Core State Standards related to quadratic

functions and modeling.

35

General SGO: Elementary Literacy

Measuring Progress

For a teacher to earn a rating of ... 4 3 2 1

*90% or more students met goal

*80% or more students met goal

*70% or more students met the goal

*Less than 70% of students met goal

Goal80% students increase at least one proficiency level on the Text Reading and Comprehension (TRC) assessment.

*These numbers will be determined by teacher and principal based on knowledge of students to create a rigorous and attainable goal.


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

36

General SGO: 6th-Grade Music

Measuring Progress


90% or more students met goal


70% or more students met the goal

Less than 70% of students met goal

Goal 80% students will master 7 of 9 skills measured by the district-developed 6th grade music rubric


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

37

Tiered General SGO: Physics 1

Preparedness Group Number of Students in Each Group Target Score on Post-Assessment (%)Low 36/65 70

Medium 21/65 80High 8/65 90

Measuring Progress

For a teacher to earn a rating of ...

4 3 2 1

Low 85% or more students in the tier met goal

75% or more students in the tier met goal

65% or more students in the tier met the goal

Less than 65% of students in the tier met goal

Medium

High

Goal 75% students will meet their designated target scores on the Physics 1 post-assessment


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

38

Specific Goal: Targeted Biology Standard

Specific Goal:

Targeted Standard

The average student score on questions related to Standard 5.1.12.B (scientific thinking and design) will increase from 40% to 80% on final exam.

Measuring Progress




70% or more students met the goal

Less than 70% of students met goal


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

39

Specific Goal: Targeted Students (8th-Grade LAL)


ive

TEACHERS: SG0

Specific Goal:

Targeted students

6/8 students who scored in the low range on the pre-assessment will increase 10 words per minute over their baseline score on the Oral Reading Fluency Assessment.

Measuring Progress


7-8 students met goal.

5-6 students met goal.

3-4 students met the goal.

0-2 of students met goal.

40

55%15%

30%

2013–14

Component Weighting: Tested Grades

45% Student Achieve

ment

55%Teacher Practice

Student Growth PercentileStudent Growth Objectives

Teacher Practice

TEACHERS

Tested Grades and Subjects (Currently grades 4-8, LAL and math): • 55% teacher practice• 45% student

achievement

The Department will look to

incorporate other measures

where possible and percentages

may change as system evolves.


ive

41

Component Weighting: Non-Tested Grades

TEACHERS

85%

15%

2013–14

Teacher PracticeStudent Growth Objectives

50%50%

Future Target*

Teacher PracticeStudent Growth Objectives/ Other Measures of Student Learning

Teacher in Non-Tested Grades and Subjects: Student Achievement will be 15% in SY13-14, Teacher Practice will be 85%.

50% Student

Achievement

50% Teacher Practice

85%Teacher Practice

15% Student

Achievement

*The Department will look to incorporate other measures where possible and percentages will change as system evolves.


ive

42

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly

Effective1.0Points

1.75Points

2.5 3.5

Points Points

4.0Points

Teachers’ Summative Ratings

Component

Raw Score

Weight

Weighted Score

Teacher Practice 3.0 x 55% 1.65Student Growth Percentile 2.2 x 30% .66

Student Growth Objective 3.0 x 15% .45

Sum of the Weighted Scores 2.762.76

TEACHERS

This is a sample scale. The NJDOE will determine the actual scale prior to September 2013.Practic

e SGPSGO Summative

43

Summative Rating Timeline RationaleTeachers in tested grades and subjects in New Jersey will not receive their SGP scores in time for their summative conference. There are several reasons for this delay:

1. Full Year Snapshot of Growth: New Jersey does not give the NJASK until May.

2. Emphasis on Writing: The NJASK has more constructed response and long answer questions than many other states, so the test takes longer to score.

3. Careful Process: Once scores are finalized, there is a careful process for calculating student and teacher level SGP scores.


ive

TEACHERS

44

Summative Rating Timeline Details

June October November/ December January

Annual summary conference includes:

available component measures.

Department collects all other component measures for teachers

with SGP.

NJASK scores released. Department calculates SGP

data and sends to districts the SGP and summative rating of

each teacher with an SGP score.

Summative rating added to personnel

file.

• At the summative conference, all available component scores (teacher practice, SGO results) will be discussed.

• SGP data will be available on the following timeline.


ive

TEACHERS

45

Implications of Ratings

• Teachers rated Ineffective or Partially Ineffective receive support through Corrective Action Plans

• Once the system is fully implemented, districts will be able to identify Highly Effective teachers for recognition such as:– Differentiated observation protocols– Expanded career pathways and leadership opportunities– Awards and recognition initiatives

TEACHERS


ive

46

Teachers on Corrective Action Plans

Plan content: • Clear improvement needs• Specific goals and timeline

Progress toward goals in plan: • One extra observation and

conference required mid-year• Tenured teachers must have

multiple observers

TEACHERS

By February 15: Extra observation done if CAP

was created at beginning of school year

May – September: Non-SGP Teachers, CAP is developed

by September 15

June – December: If SGP isn’t available, teachers use Practice

measure until data is ready


ive

47

Agenda

47 4747




Teach. Lead. Grow.

Updated May 3, 2013

48

Multiple Measures for Principals

Principal

PracticeObservation instrument

School SGP

Average of school-wide

ELA and Math SGP scores

Admin. Goals

Set towards measure of

student achievement

SGO Average

Average of teacher SGOs

Summative Rating

Overall Evaluation Score

Evaluation

Leadership

Implementation and

training on evaluation


All principalsOnly schools

with SGP grades

receive this score

PRINCIPALS

49

Principal Practice Requirements

• 2 observations for tenured principals, 3 for non-tenured.

• Observations may be completed using a variety of information sources.

• Observations conducted with lens of principal practice instrument, which is locally-adopted, and may include:– School walk-through– Case studies– Observation of staff meeting, school assembly– Parent conference observation– Teacher conference observation

PRINCIPALS: PRACTICE

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

50

School SGP for Principals

• Principals will be broken into 3 categories:• Multi-Grade SGP Schools: 2 or

more SGP grades in school• Single-Grade SGP Schools: 1

SGP grade in school• Non-SGP Schools: No SGP grades

in school

PRINCIPALS: SGP

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

51

SGO Average for Principals Principals are rated on how well their teachers do on their SGOs each year through a calculated average of teachers’ aggregate scores.

PRINCIPALS: AVERAGE SGO

Number of SGOs in School

SGO Score

Aggregate for School

2 1 28 2 1614 3 424 4 1628 Total

Score:76

SGO Average for Principal: 76/28 = 2.71

#SGOs x Individual Score = Aggregate for School

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

52

Principals Goals

• In consultation with the superintendent, a principal sets achievement goals for the students in his/her building (Administrator Goals).– Advanced Placement scores– SAT, ACT scores– College acceptance rates– HSPA scores– Annual measurable objectives (AMOs)– Graduation rates (in schools under 80 percent)– Nationally norm-referenced tests

PRINCIPALS: ADMINISTRATOR GOALS

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

53

Evaluation Leadership

Principals are rated on their effectiveness in implementing the new evaluation system at the school level, using a state rubric:Domain 1: Building Knowledge and Collaboration

Domain 2: Executing the Evaluation System Successfully

Component 1a: Preparing teachers for successComponent 1b: Building collaboration

Component 2a: Fulfilling requirements of the evaluation systemComponent 2b: Providing feedback, coaching, and planning for growthComponent 2c: Ensuring reliable, valid observation resultsComponent 2d: Ensuring high-quality SGOs

PRINCIPALS: EVALUATION LEADERSHIP

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

54

Components Multi-GradeSGP Schools Non-SGP Schools Single Grade

SGP Schools

Principal Practice Instrument 30% 30% 30%

Evaluation Leadership 20% 20% 20%

SGO Average 10% 10% 10%

School SGP 30% 0% 20%

Principal Goals 10% 40% 20%

Total Percentage 100% 100% 100%

Inputs

Student/TeacherOutcomes

Weights for Principals in 2013-14

Shaded percentages are the same across all principal types.

PRINCIPALS

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

55

30%

20%10%

20%

20%

Single-Grade SGP Principals

30%

20%

10%10%

30%

Multi-Grade SGP Principals

30%

20%10%

40%

Non-SGP Principals

50%

Stu

dent

Ac

hiev

emen

t 50% Principal

Practice50

% S

tude

nt

Achi

evem

ent 50%

Principal Practice

50%

Stu

dent

Ac

hiev

emen

t 50% Principal

Practice

Weights for Principals in 2013-14

SGO AverageAdministrator GoalsSchool SGP

Principal PracticeEvaluation Leadership

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

PRINCIPALS

56

Principals’ Summative Ratings

ComponentRaw Score (1–4 Scale) Weight

Weighted Score

Principal Practice 3.4 x 30% 1.02Evaluation Leadership 3.0 x 20% .60Student Growth Percentile 3.1 x 30% .93Student Growth Objective 3.7 x 10% .37Administrator Goals 3.6 x 10% .36Sum of the Weighted Scores 3.28

3.28

Ineffective

Partially Effective

Effective

Highly Effectiv

e

This is a sample scale. The NJDOE will determine the actual scale prior to September 2013.

1 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.0

Practice School SGP

Admin. Goals

SGO Average

Summative

Leadership

PRINCIPALS

57

Agenda

57 5757




Teach. Lead. Grow.

Updated May 3, 2013

58

Meaningful Feedback and Support Increased number of conferences (goal setting, post-observation) allows for increased and better professional conversation.

More objective and nuanced observation ratings allow educators to reflect on practice with more depth.

Student achievement scores based on student growth give teachers a more accurate idea of their impact and let them work with administrators to improve results.• All information gathered helps tailor professional

development to meet staff needs.

TEACH. LEAD. GROW.

59

Commitment to Communication and Support

Support Examples

Informational Materials and Sample Forms

• Informational guide and presentation•Overviews of new measures•Summative evaluation forms, Goal-setting forms, Sample templates•Evaluation leadership rubric

Presentations and Training

•8 regional presentations• Implementation managers visit districts and schools•Superintendent /Curriculum Directors roundtables•Conferences and symposiums

Guidebooks•Goal-setting methodology and examples• Principal evaluation• Teacher evaluation

Ongoing Communication

•Redesigned website: www.nj.gov/education/achievenj• Phone support: (609) 777-3788•Email support: [email protected]•Regular communication to school leaders and teachers

TEACH. LEAD. GROW.

http://www.nj.gov/education/achievenj


60

2013–14

Final pilot reportSupport for statewide implementationLearning from implementation challengesLearning from implementation resultsAppropriate course adjustmentsPotential additional regulatory changes

2014–15

and Beyond

Cycle of continuous improvement Ongoing data collection and analysisApplying lessons learned and modifying practices as needed

Key Milestones

TEACH. LEAD. GROW.

61

Helping All Students Achieve

• NJ students outperform children in most US states on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

• But gaps persist, and student achievement still needs to improve in order to prepare our children to compete in a global economy.

61TEACH. LEAD. GROW.

FIND OUT MORE:

www.nj.gov/education/AchieveNJ [email protected]

609-777-3788

http://www.nj.gov/education/AchieveNJ



Documents

AchieveNJ : Improved Evaluation and Support for Teachers and Principals