2017-2018 BCCS TEACHER EVALUATION
 	PROCEDURE 	

PUBLIC ACT 173 OF 2015
The board of directors of a public school academy shall adopt and implement for all teachers and school administrators a rigorous, transparent, and fair performance evaluation system that does all of the following:
Evaluates the teacher’s or school administrator’s job performance at least annually while providing timely and constructive feedback
Establishes clear approaches to measuring student growth and provides teachers and school administrators with relevant data on student growth
Signed into law November 5, 2015

Ul'III> ER.ST	l'IIC> IN<ii IVII <= HI<:ii l'l* S l'IEW'
Educator EValuation I.aw
P.ubli c Act	17.3 c;,f .20 1..5
Teach er s 	
20•5-...& .....DU!!lh 20"'0-...B

Starte Asse:ss1T1Pent: Data
.(Te:seeds and	aoly.}-
Ad••••n•s •ra •ors 	
20-.5-"'1& -....u_. 2011--.a	2m&-"'l!I	-.. ••:vend

NOTE: Student" gl"owth fol" administ"l"at:Ol"S must: be measu1"ed using 1:he aggl"egat:e of t:he student: gl"OWl:h data used fol" t:he t"eachel"S in t:heil" building.. OI" fol" 1:he ent: l"e dist:l"ic::t:in t:he case of cent:...a Ioffice administ:r-at·ol"s.

WHO IS EVALUATED?
Per Michigan Department of Education:
Individual holding a valid Michigan teaching certificate or authorization, and
Is employed or contracted to deliver direct instruction to K-12 students

TEACHER EVALUATION TOOL
We will continue to use the Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (most prevalent as of 6/30/2014)
By 2016-2017, must post on website,
processes for:
Conducting classroom observations
Collecting evidence
Conducting evaluation conferences
Developing performance ratings
Developing improvement plans

INDIVIDUALIZED DEVELOPMENT PLAN (IDP)
Each probationary teacher each year (Years 1-3)
Tenured teachers rated Minimally Effective or Ineffective.
Development of IDP:
The school administrator shall develop in consultation with the teacher
Specify time period to demonstrate progress
towards IDP goals
Not to exceed 180 calendar days
IDP to be developed in conjunction with the
year-end evaluation

IDP BEST PRACTICES
No particular format or title.
Document that evaluator consulted with teacher.
Goals should relate to cited deficiencies or
growth areas, if any
Time period to demonstrate progress should
vary depending on the nature of the goal.
Include PD, instructional support, coaching.
Seek and consider teacher input.

PERFORMANCE GOALS
For each teacher, there must be specific performance goals and any recommended training that would assist the teacher in meeting these goals
For new teachers, the IDP serves this purpose
For non-probationary teachers, the Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) will serve this purpose

MIDYEAR PROGRESS REPORT (MYPR)
Required for all first year probationary teachers
Any teacher on an IDP because rated ME or IE the prior school year.
Content of MYPR:
Based at least in part on student achievement.
Aligned with the teacher’s IDP.
Spells out specific performance goals for the remainder of the year, developed by school administrator, along with training to assist teacher in meeting goals.
Results in a written improvement plan for rest of year.
Does not replace the year end annual evaluation.

CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS
Multiple Observations Required
2 Announced/2 Unannounced
If teacher rated E or HE on 2 most recent year- end evaluations, no statutory minimum, presumably, one
Shall include a review of lesson plan, state
curriculum standard, pupil engagement
Does not have to be for an entire class period
Feedback must be given within at least 30
calendar days

CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS
Performance evaluation system must describe
observation process
Evidence from walkthroughs count; whether walkthrough counts as observation depends upon content of walkthrough
Provide factual support for “conclusions.”
Take advantage of 30 calendar days for feedback,
but encourage “prompt and constructive” feedback
State what teacher should have done or not done to illustrate your points
May videotape or audio tape
Avoid educational jargon that is not commonly understood

END OF THEYEAR EVALUATION
Must rate IDP goals:
Achieved
Partially achieved
Not met
Consider all relevant information:
Observations, formal and informal
Walkthroughs
Student growth
Anecdotal incidents brought to teacher’s attention in some fashion
Parent input
Student input
Artifacts
Section 1248 criteria
Rating should align with evaluator’s opinion

SECTION 1248 CRITERIA
Individual performance criteria should be
included in your tool’s rubrics.
Then add:
Discipline; attendance.
Relevant accomplishments & contributions; special training

DISCIPLINARY RECORD (DOMAIN 4f)
Reduce initial score or rating due to disciplinary record.
Differentiate between lower level discipline and higher level discipline.
Depending on severity, multiple instances may impact the year end rating
more than a single instance.
Develop rubrics with respect to discipline.
Typically limit to discipline after July 19, 2011.
Consider discipline in year of evaluation and prior discipline to extent it affects overall assessment of teacher’s effectiveness.
Statute speaks of “disciplinary record.”

DISCIPLINARY RECORD (DOMAIN 4f)
Lower Level Discipline (minor violations of Employee Code of Conduct) will
impact Domain 4f (Showing Professionalism):
Highly Effective: No instances of Disciplinary Actions
Effective: 1 instance of Disciplinary Action
Minimally Effective: 2 instances of Disciplinary Action
Ineffective: 3 or more instances Disciplinary Action
Examples include violation of dress code, use/possession of tobacco products, failure to supervise students, non criminal misuse of technology, etc.
Higher Level Discipline (actions in violation of Employee Code of Conduct severe enough to warrant a personnel letter and/or termination) will result in an automatic Ineffective rating on Domain 4f and loss of 2 rating points

HIGH LEVEL DISCIPLINEVIOLATIONS
This includes, but not restricted to:
Theft, or willful damage of property
Dishonesty, embezzlement, forgery, falsifying records or other fraud
Involvement in any illegal activities on BCCS property in connection with BCCS business
Disclosure of confidential information or proprietary business information to unauthorized persons
Insubordination, failure to complete work, or grossly incompetent or negligent work performance
Excessive absenteeism
The use of profane or inappropriate language, gestures or pictures
Inappropriate physical contact with students, employees or visitors of BCCS
Possession of explosives, fireworks or weapons
Extortion and intimidation.
Possession, use, or distribution of intoxicants on BCCS property

TEACHER ATTENDANCE AT PLCs
Participating in a Professional Community
(4d):
Highly Effective: Teacher attends 100% of scheduled Professional Learning Communities (all 13)
Effective: Teacher attends 92% of scheduled Professional Learning Communities (12 of 13)
Minimally Effective: Teacher attends 76-85% (10 or
11 of 13)
Ineffective: Teacher fails attend at least 10 of the scheduled Professional Learning Communities
Attended is defined as being present for the scheduled duration of the PLC

TEACHER ATTENDANCE AT PDs
Growing and Developing Professionally (4e):
Highly Effective: Teacher attends 100% of scheduled Professional Development Sessions (all 12)
Effective: Teacher attends 92% of scheduled
Professional Learning Communities (11 of 12)
Minimally Effective: Teacher attends 75-83% (9 or
10 of 12)
Ineffective: Teacher fails attend at least 9 of the scheduled Professional Learning Communities
Attended is defined as being present for the scheduled duration of the Professional Development Session

Two ways to get them:

BONUS POINTS

Significant Relevant Accomplishment/Contributions
Relevant Training
Significant Relevant Accomplishment/Contributions (1/2 point):
Clear, significant and relevant
Above the normal expectations for the teacher peer group
That make an overall contribution to the school
And teacher has demonstrated a record of exceptional performance
Relevant Special Training (1/2 point):
Not PD required by district
Not training required by law
Teacher must also demonstrate integration of training into instruction in a meaningful way
Points applied to Domains 1-5

STUDENT GROWTH MANDATE
Applies to teachers and school administrators
Must provide clear approaches to measuring student growth
Must provide relevant data on student growth
May exempt a particular student upon approval
of evaluator and superintendent
Beginning 2015-2016, 25% student growth
Increases to 40% in 2018

STUDENT GROWTH MANDATE
Multiple measures –at least two
BCCS is using:
Nationally normed or locally developed assessments
aligned to state standards (NWEA; PSAT/SAT)
AND/OR:
Student Learning Objectives
Achievement of IEP goals (for Special Ed Teachers)

STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES (SLOs)
SLOs are a process for determining measures of student growth in both test and non-tested grades and subjects
Teachers in grades K-5 will use the opposite NWEA test from which they choose to use for Student Growth; objective is to achieve 50-th percentile growth
6-9 will need to use a Pre-Assessment given in September

STUDENT GROWTH SNAPSHOT

SIMPLE AVERAGE GROWTH CALCULATION
Growth targets are determined by a common formula, but each student has
a different growth target based on his or her pre-assessment score.
Example: Based on pre-assessment score, students will score halfway
between their baseline score and 100
If a student scored 50 on the pre-assessment, his or her growth target is 75. (100- 50=50/2=25….50+25=75)
If a student scored 40 on the pre-assessment, his or her growth target is 70. (100-
40=60/2=30…40+30=70)

SLO CONVERSION SCALE
Conversion Scale (K-5):
Highly Effective: Class met or exceeded 50th percentile growth goal
Effective: Class did not meet 50th percentile growth goal, but growth was displayed within 5 percentile points
Minimally Effective: Class did not meet 50th percentile growth goal, but growth was displayed within 4-10 percentile points
Ineffective: Class did not meet 50th percentile growth goal AND/OR percentile growth
was greater than 10 percentile points AND/OR negative growth was made
Conversion Scale (6-9):
Highly Effective: More than 90% of students achieved growth
Effective: 70%-89% of students achieved growth
Minimally Effective: 50% to 69% of students achieved growth
Ineffective: Fewer than 50% of students achieved growth

Scoring Individual Student Learning/Outcome Objectives
The process for scoring individual SLOs/SOOs begins with a review of the available ev idence submitted by the teacher, including a summary of the results. Evaluators will score each individual SLO/SOO as Exceeded (4), Met (3), Nearly Met (2), or Not Met (1) .

•This category applies when all or almost all students met the target(s) and many students exceeded the target(s). For example, exceeding the target(s) by a few points, a few percentage points, or a few students would not qualify an SLO/SOO for this category. Th is category should only be selected when a substantial number of students surpassed the overall level of attainment established by the target(s).

• This category applies when all or almost all students met the target(s). Results within a few points, a few percentage points, or a few students on either side of the target(s) should be considered "Met." The expectation for this category should be high and it should only be selected when it is clear that the students met the overall level of attainment established by the target(s).

•This category applies when many students met the target(s), but the target(s) was missed by more than a few points, a few percentage points, or a few students. This category should be selected when it is clear that students fell short of the level of attainment established by the target(s).

• This category applies when the results do not fit the description of what it means to have "Nearly Met." If a substantial proportion of students did not meet the target(s), the SLO/SOO was not met. This category also applies when results are missing, incomplete , or unreliable.

QUESTIONS?