The American Institutes for Research (AIR) released their findings from the fall 2012 survey that went out to over 60,000 teachers, principals, superintendents, and school directors. The results from the over 15,000 respondents touches on issues around the new evaluation system, including awareness, preparedness, hopes, and worries associated with implementing the new system as well as the new requirements of the Common Core State Standards. Read the report titled “Washington’s 2012 State of the State Educator Survey Report: Summary of Key Findings” or view all of our available reports, studies, presentations, and surveys.
Registration is now open for the Marzano School Leadership Evaluation Model webinar on February 19th at 2:00 pm PST. Here’s the description from the registration page:
This webinar introduces the Marzano School Leadership Evaluation Model and a set of rubrics that helps develop effective principals and administrators, and further, empower their teachers so leaders and teachers can focus together on the ultimate objective: improving student learning. The Marzano School Leadership Evaluation Model offers a comprehensive approach to school leadership evaluation that covers all eight of the state criteria in Washington.
Webinar participants will have the opportunity to ask questions during the webinar, which will be recorded and posted to our website for those unable to attend. Participants can register using this link.
ESSB 5895 directs OSPI to create rules or WACs for the new evaluation system. The process began in August 2012 and draft rules were available for review in our October bulletin. The rules were created by OSPI in partnership with the Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP) Steering Committee organizations. The rules reflect the new requirements in ESSB 5895 and the requirements under the new ESEA Flexibility Waiver. The final version of WAC 392-191A is not currently available online, but we’ve posted it as a PDF in the meantime.
Michaela Miller, TPEP Project Manager, provides an overview and update of the project to a RIG group out of ESD 113. Topics covered include summative scoring, student growth, and the implementation plan. Check out the video below for her presentation, or view the slides (PDF). Be sure to arrow through to view all five videos, including:
- the entire presentation,
- an overview of the evaluation components,
- a description of the comprehensive evaluation,
- the process for summative scoring, and
- and overview of the final summative rating, the raw score model, and how ESSB 5895 changed how student growth is used.
Interested in more in-depth information about eVAL? Watch Dana Anderson present some of eVAL’s features and options to a group of principal’s during an AWSP conference for principals.
Washington State’s Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project needs to add to its existing corps of Instructional Criteria and Framework Feedback Specialists (ICFFS) who support the state’s 2,800 principals as they implement a new evaluation system for teachers. Building from the work of the first cohort of ICFFS, the newly hired ICFFS will provide RIG 2 and non-RIG principals an introduction to their district’s chosen Instructional Framework. The ICFFS will be distinguished teacher leaders, principals, instructional coaches, mentors and other talented educators with a demonstrated ability to:
- Observe teaching and provide feedback regarding performance using rubrics connected to an instructional framework
- Conduct conversations that elicit additional evidence of teacher performance on criteria not directly observable in the classroom, and
- Facilitate reflection and goal-setting that supports educator growth over time.
- Apply at http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1120594/TPEP-Criteria-and-Framework-Feedback-Specialist-Application-RIG-II.
A new application for the Leadership Criteria and Framework Feedback Specialist (LCFFS) will be available soon.
The School Employee Evaluation Survey is due January 15, 2013. It is a mandatory data collection required by the U.S. Department of Education and state RCW. For more information on the survey, which is an EDS application titled “School Employee Evaluation Survey”, please read the Educator Evaluation Data section of Bulletin 064-12. This data is frequently subjected to Public Records Requests, so our goal is to get data from each of the state’s 295 districts. If you’re unsure about your district’s completion status, please email firstname.lastname@example.org. Answers to frequently asked questions can be found at the SEES Help page.
TPEP Project Manager Michaela Miller and AWSP Executive Director Gary Kipp presented an update on the status of the Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program to the House Education Committee last Friday. Check out the presentation slides (PDF), watch the video of the presentation embedded below, or watch it at TVW.org
House Education Committee Meeting
Our TPEP Project Director and Project Manager, Jim Koval and Michaela Miller, recently presented a TPEP update at WSSDA’s conference. They were joined by Helene Paroff, who’s lead the work of the ESD 101 Consortium and helps coordinate the work of the RIGs at the ESD level. Check out their presentation slides.
Summary: This bulletin provides information and updates on the Teacher and Principal Evaluation Project (TPEP). The bulletin describes the educator evaluation data collection (required action); ESSB 5895-directed OSPI rulemaking and guidance; the statewide evaluation perception and understanding survey; the OSPI approved instructional and leadership frameworks, a rater agreement working definition and evaluator training; and the eVAL management tool.
Key Audiences: Educational Service District Superintendents, School District Superintendents, School Building Principals, Assistant Superintendents for Business and/or Business Managers, Assistant Superintendents for Teaching and Learning, School District Personnel Directors, and School Public Relations Professionals.
Bulletin and Attachments:
- Bulletin 064-12
- Attachment 1: Draft Rules for School Personnel Evaluation of Professional Performance Capabilities
- Attachment 2: Rater Agreement document