AchieveNJ: Improved Evaluation and Support for Teachers and Principals

AchieveNJ: Improved Evaluation and Support

for Teachers and Principals

October 2013

Updated October 2, 2013

2

Today’s Presentation

• Welcome to our presentation on AchieveNJ

• We are here to inform, to learn, and to provide an

opportunity for feedback.

• Opportunities for questions:

• Index cards with questions will be collected after each segment

• E-mail us at [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

3

Agenda

Introduction to AchieveNJ

Overview of Teacher Evaluation

Overview of Principal Evaluation

Teach. Lead. Grow.

3

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

Achievement

Student 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.

6 Introduction to AchieveNJ

ADMINISTRATORS

PRINCIPALS

TEACHERS

STUDENTS

7

Effective Teachers Make a Significant Difference

Source: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, MET Project

+4.8

months +2.9

months +1.4 months

+5

months

-2.7

months -3.2

months

-1.4 months

-5.8

months

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

Average

Teacher

7

The difference between an effective and ineffective teacher can

approach 11 months of learning for a student in one year.


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 PROPOSED

Perfunctory In-depth

One measure Multiple measures

One 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


Minimal educator involvement Educator-driven

State Evaluation Framework

NOW*

Perfunctory

Measured by observation only

One observer

No connection to

student growth

Training not required

Disconnected from


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 schools

311 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 Way

Teacher Evaluation Pilot:

• 2 separate 1-year pilot

programs

• 22 pilot districts

• Rutgers study outlining

challenges and successes

1

2

3 2 1 1

1

2 3

3 2 1

1

1

2

1

1

1

2 1

1

1

*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 Pilots

Successes

Training has additional benefits for professional development, school culture

Common language emerging

Better, more frequent feedback for teachers from administrators

Building momentum for PLCs, data-driven instruction

Linking teacher practice data to professional development

Challenges

Capacity to conduct observations

Quality evaluation training and proof of mastery

Some 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.

Teacher

Practice

Based on

classroom

observations

Student Growth

Percentile

(SGP)

Based on

NJ ASK

performance

Student Growth

Objective

(SGO)

Set by teacher

and principal

Summative

Rating

Overall 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%

7%

1% 5% Teacher Practice Instruments

Danielson 2011

Danielson 2007

Stronge

McREL

Marzano

Marshall

Rhode Island Model

Other

TEACHERS: PRACTICE

Other: Instruments that have been approved but

are being used in fewer than 5 districts; this

includes approved “homegrown” models. Practice SGP SGO Summative

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

Required Years 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

Practice SGP SGO Summative

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


20

Student Growth Percentile Overview

Teacher

Practice

Based on

classroom

observations

Student Growth

Percentile

(SGP)

Based on

NJ ASK

performance

Student Growth

Objective

(SGO)

Set by teacher

and principal

Summative

Rating

Overall evaluation

score

All teachers and

principals


teachers


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


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

AS

K S

ca

le

Proficient

Advanced Proficient

230 205

220

Albert

Maria


TEACHERS: SGP

23

Example: Calculating an SGP

Albert’s NJ Ask Scale Score by Grade

NJ

AS

K S

ca

le

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. Partially Proficient

Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5

100

200

250

150 160 165

Proficient

Advanced Proficient

TEACHERS: SGP


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. 150

4th Gr. 160

3rd Gr. ≈150

4th Gr. ≈160

These “Academic Peers” are represented by students from across the state in many

different school districts.


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.

Partially Proficient

Gr. 3 Gr. 4 Gr. 5

100

200

250

150 160

Proficient

Advanced Proficient


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.


Student SGP Score

Hugh 12

Eve 16

Clarence 22

Clayton 24

Earnestine 25

Helen 31

Clinton 35

Tim 39

Jennifer 44

Jaquelyn 46

Lance 51

Roxie 53

Laura 57

Julio 61

Selena 65

Ashlee 66

Albert 70

Mathew 72

Maria 85

Charles 89

Milton 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 students on her roster;

– If she does not have 20 students in year 1, she may receive

an SGP score if she accrues 20 students with scores over a

period of up to 3 years.

– If Ms. Jones has 15 students, who each receive 2 SGP scores

(ELA and Math), she will not receive a rating in year 1.

• 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:


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 Score

Hugh 12

Eve 16

Clarence 22

Clayton 24

Earnestine 25

Helen 31

Clinton 35

Tim 39

Jennifer 44

Jaquelyn 46

Lance 51

Roxie 53

Laura 57

Julio 61

Selena 65

Ashlee 66

Albert 70

Mathew 72

Maria 85

Charles 89

Milton 97

Mel 56

Laura 57

Regina 58

Marissa 60

Julio 61

Faye 63

Selena 65

Ashlee 66

Jackie 67

Courtney 68

Albert 70

Matthew 72

Laura 77

Jack 78

Jared 80

Rick 84

Maria 85

Charles 89

Michelle 92

Molly 95

Milton 97

Student SGP Score

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

Median over 2 years = 56 Median this Year = 51

Her SGP score will then be placed

on a 1-4 scale.*


*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

Teacher

Practice

Based on

classroom

observations

Student Growth

Percentile

(SGP)

Based on

NJ ASK

performance

Student Growth

Objective

(SGO)

Set by teacher

and principal

Summative

Rating

Overall evaluation

score

All teachers and

principals


teachers


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


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.


TEACHERS: SG0

32

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

TEACHERS

The 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 regulations KEY


TEACHERS: SG0

33

SGOs: Some Possible Assessment Types


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


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

Goal 80% 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.


TEACHERS: SG0

36

General SGO: 6th-Grade Music

Measuring

Progress


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

Goal 80% students will master 7 of 9 skills measured by the

district-developed 6th grade music rubric


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 80

High 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


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


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


TEACHERS: SG0

39

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


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


4 3 2 1

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

Achievement

55%

Teacher

Practice

Student Growth Percentile

Student 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.


41

Component Weighting: Non-Tested Grades

TEACHERS

85%

15%

2013–14

Teacher Practice

Student Growth Objectives

50% 50%

Future Target*

Teacher Practice

Student 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. Practice SGP SGO Summative

42

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly

Effective

1.0

Points

1.75

Points

2.5 3.5

Points Points

4.0

Points

Teachers’ Summative Ratings

Component

Raw

Score Weight

Weighted

Score

Teacher Practice 3.0 x 55% 1.65

Student Growth Percentile 2.2 x 30% .66

Student Growth Objective 3.0 x 15% .45

Sum of the Weighted Scores 2.76

2.76

TEACHERS

This is a sample

scale. The NJDOE

will provide the

final scale in the

coming weeks.


43

Summative Rating Timeline Rationale

Teachers 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.


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.


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


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


47

Agenda

47 47 47




Teach. Lead. Grow.

Updated May 3, 2013

48

Multiple Measures for Principals

Principal

Practice

Observation

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 principals

Only 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


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 2

8 2 16

14 3 42

4 4 16

28 Total Score: 76

SGO Average for

Principal:

76/28 = 2.71

#SGOs x Individual Score = Aggregate for School

Practice School

SGP Admin. Goals

SGO


52

Administrator 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


53

Evaluation Leadership

Principals are rated on their effectiveness in implementing the new

evaluation system at the school level, using a state instrument:

Domain 1: Building Knowledge

and Collaboration

Domain 2: Executing the Evaluation System

Successfully

Component 1a: Preparing teachers

for success

Component 1b: Building

collaboration

Component 2a: Fulfilling requirements of the

evaluation system

Component 2b: Providing feedback, coaching, and

planning for growth

Component 2c: Ensuring reliable, valid observation

results

Component 2d: Ensuring high-quality SGOs

PRINCIPALS: EVALUATION LEADERSHIP

Practice School

SGP Admin. Goals

SGO


Assistant/vice principals are rated on a similar instrument, which

includes each of the components in Domain 2 above.

54

Components Multi-Grade SGP Schools

Non-SGP Schools Single Grade SGP Schools

Principal Practice Instrument

30% 30% 30%


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/ Teacher Outcomes

Weights for Principals in 2013-14

Shaded percentages are the same across all principal types.

PRINCIPALS

Practice School

SGP Admin. Goals

SGO


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

% S

tud

en

t

Ach

ieve

me

nt 5

0%

Prin

cip

al

Pra

ctic

e

50

% S

tud

en

t

Ach

ieve

me

nt 5

0%

Prin

cip

al

Pra

ctic

e

50

% S

tud

en

t

Ach

ieve

me

nt 5

0%

Prin

cip

al

Pra

ctic

e

Weights for Principals in 2013-14

SGO Average

Administrator Goals

School SGP

Principal Practice


Practice School

SGP Admin. Goals

SGO


PRINCIPALS

56

Principals’ Summative Ratings

Component

Raw Score

(1–4 Scale) Weight

Weighted

Score

Principal Practice 3.4 x 30% 1.02

Evaluation Leadership 3.0 x 20% .60

Student Growth Percentile 3.1 x 30% .93

Student Growth Objective 3.7 x 10% .37

Administrator Goals 3.6 x 10% .36

Sum of the Weighted Scores 3.28

3.28

Ineffective Partially

Effective Effective

Highly

Effective

This is a sample

scale. The NJDOE

will provide the

final scale in the

coming weeks. 1 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.0

Practice School

SGP Admin. Goals

SGO


PRINCIPALS

57

Agenda

57 57 57




Teach. Lead. Grow.

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

• Goal-setting forms, Sample templates. Guidance

• Evaluation leadership instruments

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 report

Support for statewide implementation

Learning from implementation challenges

Learning from implementation results

Appropriate course adjustments

Potential additional regulatory changes

2014–15

and

Beyond

Cycle of continuous improvement

Ongoing data collection and analysis

Applying 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.

61 TEACH. 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