Administrator Growth and Evaluation Handbook

A comprehensive system of growth and evaluation designed to support best practice in teaching and learning

Updated: April 30, 2013

Introduction

Springfield Public Schools

Administrator Evaluation System

In 2011, the legislature passed SB 290 and the Oregon State Board of Education adopted OAR 581-022-172, strengthening administrator and teacher evaluation systems in Oregon. Both state law and the ESEA Flexibility Waiver require that each district, in collaboration with its local Administrator group, align their current educator evaluation systems to the new requirements by July 1, 2013. In the fall of 2012, a team of administrators from Springfield came together to study the new requirements and to refine the current system as needed, keeping the strong foundation created in 2009. After the revisions were completed, a group of administrators volunteered to pilot the new elements.

In Springfield, teaching and learning is the heart of everything we do. It is our vision to provide excellent instruction for all of our students every school year throughout their career in Springfield schools. This evaluation system will help achieve that vision. It is designed not only to evaluate Administrator performance (accountability) but also to improve performance (growth) by providing many examples, models, and definitions of effective leadership. The goal of our system is to support each Administrator to reach Proficient in all standards so that all of our students can become graduates with bright and successful futures.

2012-2013 Administrator Evaluation Team 2012-2013 Pilot Members

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System i

Chad Towe
Jim Keegan
Brandi Starck
Brooke Wagner
Jeff Mather
Dawn Strong
Chad Towe
Jim Keegan
Mike Riplinger
Jeff Mather
Brooke Wagner
Brandi Starck
Kevin Rowan
Matt Coleman
Dave Collins


Table of Contents

I. Introduction & Table of Contents i-ii

II. Required Elements 2-11

A. Standards of Professional Practice 2

B. Differentiated Performance Levels 4

C. Multiple Measures 4

D. Professional Growth and Evaluation Cycle 6

E. Aligned Professional Learning 9

III. Appendix

A. Standards and Levels of Performance .A1-A18

B. Gap Analysis Tool B1-B8

C. Goals Template C1-C2

D. SLO Template Checklist D1

______

Springfield Public Schools Teacher Evaluation System ii

E. Multiple Measures Chart……………………… E1

F. Sample Summative Evaluation Score Sheet………………………………………… …...F1

G. Professional Development Intersect Graphic……………………………………… .G1


Springfield Administrator Evaluation System

The state required elements (SB 290) for administrator evaluation systems include the following:

1.  Standards of Professional Practice.

2.  Differentiated (4) Performance Levels.

3.  Multiple Measures

4.  Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle

5.  Aligned Professional Learning

Element 1: Standards of Professional Practice. The standards of professional practice are the cornerstone of an evaluation system. Professional standards outline what administrators should know and be able to do to ensure that every teacher is an effective teacher and that every student is ready for college, careers and engaged citizenship in today’s world (Oregon Framework, pg. 13).

Oregon has adopted model core standards (ISLLC) for administrators, which are based on six domains:

1.  Setting a widely shared vision for learning

2.  Developing a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth

3.  Ensuring effective management of the organization, operation, and resources for a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment

4.  Collaborating with faculty and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources

5.  Acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner

6.  Understanding, responding to, and influencing the political, social, legal, and cultural context

Springfield has adapted the model standards as the basis for its evaluation system (see crosswalk in Appendix B).

Standard #1: Visionary Leadership

An educational leader integrates principles of cultural competency and equitable practice and promotes the success of every student by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by stakeholders.

Educational Leaders:

  1. Collaboratively develop and implement a shared vision and mission;
  2. Collect and use data to identify goals, assess organizational effectiveness, and promote organizational learning;
  3. Create and implement plans to achieve goals;
  4. Promote continuous and sustainable improvement; and

Monitor and evaluate progress and revise plans.

Standard #2: Instructional Improvement

An educational leader integrates principles of cultural competency and equitable practice and

promotes the success of every student by sustaining a positive school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth.

Educational Leaders:

  1. Nurture and sustain a culture of collaboration, trust, learning and high expectations;
  2. Create a comprehensive, rigorous and coherent curricular program;
  3. Create a personalized and motivating learning environment for students;
  4. Supervise and support instruction;
  5. Develop assessment and accountability systems to monitor student progress;
  6. Develop the instructional and leadership capacity of staff;
  7. Maximize time spent on quality instruction;
  8. Promote the use of the most effective and appropriate technologies to support teaching and learning; and
  9. Monitor and evaluate the impact of instruction.

Standard #3: Effective Management

An educational leader integrates principles of cultural competency and equitable practice and

promotes the success of every student by ensuring management of the organization, operation, and resources for a safe, efficient, and effective learning environment.

Educational Leaders:

  1. Monitor and evaluate the management and operational systems;
  2. Obtain, allocate, align and efficiently use human, fiscal and technological resources;
  3. Promote and protect the welfare and safety of students and staff;
  4. Develop the capacity for adaptive leadership; and
  5. Ensure teacher and organizational time is focused to support quality instruction and student learning.

Standard #4: Inclusive Practice

An educational leader integrates principles of cultural competency and equitable practice and

promotes the success of every student by collaborating with faculty and community members, responding to diverse community interests and needs, and mobilizing community resources in order to demonstrate and promote ethical standards of democracy, equity, diversity, and excellence, and to promote communication among diverse groups.

Educational Leaders:

  1. Collect and analyze data pertinent to equitable outcomes;
  2. Understand and integrate the community’s diverse cultural, social and intellectual resources;
  3. Build and sustain positive relationships with families and caregivers; and
  4. Build and sustain productive relationships with community partners.

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 5

Standard #5: Ethical Leadership

An educational leader integrates principles of cultural competency and equitable practice and

promotes the success of every student by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner.

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 5

Educational Leaders:

a.  Ensure a system of accountability for every student’s academic and social success;

  1. Model principles of self-awareness, reflective practice, transparency and ethical behavior;
  2. Safeguard the values of democracy, equity and diversity;
  3. Evaluate the potential ethical and legal consequences of decision-making; and
  4. Promote social justice and ensure that individual student needs inform all aspects of schooling.

Standard #6: Socio-Political Context

An educational leader integrates principles of cultural competency and equitable practice and

promotes the success of every student by understanding, responding to, and influencing the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context.

Educational Leaders:

  1. Advocate for children, families and caregivers;
  2. Act to influence local, district, state and national decisions affecting student learning; and

c.  Assess, analyze and anticipate emerging trends and initiatives in order to adapt leadership strategies.

Element 2: Differentiated (4) Performance Levels. In addition to adopting the model standards, school districts are required to define four levels of performance for each standard:

1 - Unsatisfactory

2 - Developing Proficiency

3 - Proficient

4 - Distinguished

You will find Springfield’s complete rubric of standards and performance levels in Appendix A.

Element 3: Multiple Measures. The evaluation system must include a variety of evidence-based measures to evaluate administrator performance and effectiveness based on the standards. To provide a balanced view of administrator performance, evaluations of all building administrators (i.e., principals, vice-principals) must include evidence from the following three categories: (A) Professional Practice, (B) Professional Responsibilities, and (C) Student Learning and Growth. Determining multiple measures for the district’s evaluation system is key. The measures listed under each category are provided as examples.

Professional Practice: Evidence of school leadership practices, teacher effectiveness, and organizational conditions (Standards 1 – 4).

Observation and review of artifacts (choose at least 2 pieces of evidence):

Examples: 360 o feedback, feedback to teachers, surveys developed collaboratively with staff (re: instructional leadership, teacher/student climate), staff communication, teacher development, student/staff handbooks, records of mentoring/coaching, teacher use of data, staff meetings, teacher observations, summative and formative teacher evaluation

Professional Responsibility: Evidence of administrators’ progress toward their own professional goals and contribution to school-wide and district goals (Standards 5 – 6).

Examples (choose at least 2 pieces of evidence): administrator reflection, self-report, professional goal setting, school-wide improvement goals, data committee meetings, portfolios, parent and community involvement, decision-making, professional development log, staff retention rate, collaborative leadership, school-wide budget, master schedule, teambuilding, teacher evaluations

Student Learning and Growth: Evidence of administrators’ contribution to school-wide student learning and growth.

Administrators, in collaboration with their supervisor/evaluator, will establish at least two student growth goals (See Appendix B and C) from the three categories below. One goal must be related to student learning and growth using state assessment (Category 1) as a measure (e.g., building- level data on proficiency and growth in reading and math, including all subgroups).

Types of Measures for Student Learning and Growth for Administrator Evaluations

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 5

Category / Types of Measures (aligned to standards) / Examples include, but are not limited to:
1 / State or national
standardized tests / Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS),
SMARTER Balanced (when adopted), English Language Proficiency Assessment (ELPA), Extended Assessments
2 / Common national,
international, regional, district-developed measures / ACT, PLAN, EXPLORE, AP, IB, DIBELS, C-PAS, other
national measures; or common assessments approved by the district or state as valid, reliable and able to be scored comparably across schools or classrooms
3 / Other school-wide or district-
wide measures / Graduation rate, attendance rate, drop-out rate,
discipline data, college ready indicators (PSAT, AP/IB tests, dual enrollment, college remediation rates), college and career readiness measures, and other measures of student learning and growth

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 7

*See Appendix E for a list of measures currently used in Springfield schools.

Student growth goals and measures should align with Achievement Compact indicators where applicable:

·  Grade 3 proficiency in reading and math, as measured by meeting or exceeding benchmark on the Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS);

·  Grade 6 on-track, as measured by rates of chronic absenteeism;

·  Grade 9 on-track, as measured by rates of credit attainment and chronic absenteeism;

·  Earning college credit in high school, through Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), dual enrollment, or college enrollment;

·  Four- and five-year cohort graduation and completion rates; and

·  Post-secondary enrollment, as collected through the National Student Clearinghouse.

Element 4: Professional Growth and Evaluation Cycle. Administrators are evaluated on a regular cycle of continuous improvement that includes self reflection, goal setting, observations, formative assessment and summative evaluation. Probationary Administrators will be evaluated every year and Contract Administrators at least every two years.

·  Probationary Administrators – Administrators in their first three years of administrating. Administrators will complete a self-assessment using the district adopted standards and rubric. In addition, each Administrator will develop one professional learning goal and two student learning goals.

·  Contract Administrators – Administrators in year 4 or beyond of administrating in Springfield. Administrators will complete a self-assessment using the district adopted standards and rubric. In addition, each Administrator will develop one professional learning goal and two student learning goals.

All Administrators will collect evidence throughout the year to show progress toward reaching their professional and student learning goals. Administrators will have a chance to review progress with their supervisor in mid-year and end of the year conferences.


The following diagram illustrates the critical steps in the professional growth and evaluation cycle. This cycle can be adapted to local district processes:

Evaluation and Professional Growth Cycle

Self-Reflection

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 7

Summative

Evaluation

Goal Setting

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 7

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 7

Formative Assessment/ Evaluation


Observation/ Collection of Evidence

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 7

Steps in a Professional Growth and Evaluation Cycle:

Step 1: Self-Reflection Based on the standards of professional practice, the first step of an evaluation system is self-reflection. The educator reflects on and assesses his/her professional practice and analyzes the learning and growth of his/her students in preparation for goal setting.

______

Springfield Public Schools Administrator Evaluation System 7

Step 2: Goal Setting (Student growth goals and professional goals) Based on the self-assessment, the educator identifies goals aligned with the standards of professional practice that encompass both practice and impact on student learning. The educator sets both professional practice goals and student learning goals. SMART goals and/or learning targets are used as a tool for effective goal setting.

Step 3: Observation and Collection of Evidence (Multiple measures) The educator and evaluator collect evidence using multiple measures regarding student learning and growth, professional practice, professional responsibilities, and student learning to inform progress throughout the process of evaluation.

Step 4: Formative Assessment/Evaluation (Analysis of evidence, Professional conversations, and Professional growth) The evaluator and educator review the educator’s progress toward goals and/or performance against standards. This step includes three interdependent and critical parts: analysis of evidence, professional conversations, and professional growth. Both the educator and the observer analyze the evidence leading into a collaborative professional conversation. Feedback through professional conversations promotes awareness of growth that has occurred, and highlights professional growth needs. These conversations help the educator make adjustments in his/her practice and select relevant professional learning opportunities.

Step 5: Summative Evaluation This step is the culmination of multiple formative observations, reflections, professional conversations, etc. Evaluator assesses the educator’s performance against the standards of professional practice, attainment of student learning goals, and attainment of professional practice goals.

Summary Scoring

All probationary Administrators and contract Administrators who are on the summative cycle will receive ratings for each of the standards as well as a summary evaluation score at the end of the year conference: