State vs. Local Decision Matrix

Download the table as a PDF.

Criteria
Criteria by which certificated classroom teachers, principals, and assistant principals will be evaluated beginning 2013-14.
State
Local
District
Eight criteria for certificated classroom teachers and eight criteria for principals and assistant principals.

Criteria: RCW 28A.405.100(Sec. 1)(2)(b) & (Sec. 5)(b)

School boards must adopt new criteria by Sept. 10, 2013.

Completed

Criteria Definitions
Definitions developed by TPEP districts during pilot development to help clarify criteria and assist in determining evidence and measures.
State
Local
District
Criteria Definitions: WAC 392-191A-030

-

-

Certificated Classroom Teacher
A certificated employee who provides instruction to students and holds one or more of the
certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140 (1) through (3) and (6)(a) through (e) and (g).
State
Local
District
Definition of certificated classroom teacher: WAC 392-191A-030Those that provide “academically-focused instruction to students” should be considered in the new evaluation system.

Local discussion should focus on the roles/responsibilities of the employee as related to the revised criteria and approved frameworks.

Particular consideration should be given to Teacher-Librarians and Instructional Coaches.
Determine which educators are included in the revised teacher evaluation system.
Certificated Principal and Assistant Principal
A person who is employed to supervise the operation and management of a school as provided by
RCW 28A.400.100 and holds certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140(4)(a) or (6)(h)
State
Local
District
Definition of certificated principal and assistant principal: WAC 392-191A-030Local discussion should focus on the roles/responsibilities of the employee as related to the revised criteria and frameworks.

Particular consideration should be given to roles such as Deans of Students, Athletic Directors, and those with split Superintendent/Principal roles.

For guidance, see the TPEP FAQ and the AWSP User’s Guide.
Determine which educators are included in the revised principal evaluation system.
Instructional & Leadership Frameworks
"Instructional framework" means one of the approved instructional frameworks adopted by the
Superintendent of Public Instruction to support the new evaluation system pursuant to RCW 28A.405.100.
"Leadership framework" means one of the approved leadership frameworks adopted by the
Superintendent of Public Instruction to support the new evaluation system pursuant to RCW 28A.405.100.
State
Local
District
Instructional Frameworks
  • CEL - 5D+ University of Washington
  • Danielson - Framework for Teaching FfT(2011)
  • Marzano - Teacher Evaluation Framework

  • Leaderhip Frameworks
  • AWSP - Leadership Framework
  • Marzano - School Leadership Evaluation Model
  • Districts must select one instructional and one leadership framework, then post selections somewhere on the district website.

    Completed

    District Implementation Plan
    RCW 28A.405.100(7)(c) Each school district board of directors shall adopt a schedule for implementation of the revised evaluation systems that transitions a portion of classroom teachers and principals in the district to the revised evaluation systems each year beginning no later than the 2013-14 school year, until all classroom teachers and principals are being evaluated under the revised evaluation systems no later than the 2015-16 school year.
    State
    Local
    District

    -

    School Board adopts a plan and implements the transition of all eligible teachers and principals to the revised evaluation system by September, 2015.Plan Adopted; Implementation continues through 2015-16 school year.
    Modification or Adaptations to Instructional Frameworks
    Minor modifications or adaptations to preferred instructional frameworks.
    State
    Local
    District
    The structure and text of frameworks and rubrics may only be changed by OSPI.

    With the framework authors, OSPI will create a process for reviewing and authorizing minor modifications or adaptations.
    RCW 28A.405.100 (Sec. 1)(2)(e)

    Instructions and more information can be found at http://tpep-wa.org/wp-content/uploads/TPEP Minor Modification Instructions.pdf
    Local decisions can be made regarding adding possible teacher observables and possible student observables to the 5D+ rubric, critical attributes to the Framework for Teaching, and possible teacher evidence and possible student evidence to the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model.

    Any local additions to the frameworks should be carefully considered.
    District (or a consortium of districts) submit an application to the TPEP Steering Committee, providing rationale for changes to be implemented no earlier than 2015-16.
    Four Level Rating System
    The continuum of performance that indicates the extent to which the criteria have been met or exceeded.
    State
    Local
    District
    1 - Unsatisfactory
    2 - Basic
    3 - Proficient
    4 - Distinguished

    RCW 28A.405.100

    -

    -

    Annual Report of Evaluation Data
    Districts report annually to OSPI the following for each employee group:
  • (i) Evaluation criteria and rubrics;
  • (ii) a description of each rating; and
  • (iii) the number of staff in each rating.
  • RCW 28A.150.230 (2)(a).
    State
    Local
    District
    OSPI reports performance data for all educators through the annual State Educator Evaluation Survey (SEES) to US Dept. of Education and posts district summaries on the TPEP website.How and when will performance data for all educators be collected? Where and how will data be stored? During the fall of each year, districts collect and report performance data of teachers aggregated by school and of other educators by district. Where applicable, four-level ratings are reported.
    Comprehensive Evaluation
    All eight criteria must contribute to the overall summative evaluation and must be
    completed at least once every four years. The evaluation must include an assessment of the criteria
    using the instructional framework rubrics and the superintendent of public instruction's approved student growth rubrics.
    State
    Local
    District
    Teachers & Principals
    Overall Summative Scoring Methodology using the OSPI summative scoring band (see definitions below).
    WAC 392-191A-080
    WAC 392-191A-090
    WAC 392-191A-140
    WAC 392-191A-160

    -

    -

    Focused Evaluation
    One of the eight criterion and must be assessed in every year that a comprehensive evaluation is not required.

    Assignment to a Focused evaluation is always at the discretion of the evaluator.

    The selected criterion must be approved by the teacher or principal’s evaluator.

    Must include an assessment of the criterion using the instructional or leadership framework rubrics and OSPI's approved student growth rubrics.
    State
    Local
    District
    Teachers
    The focused evaluation will include the student growth rubrics of the selected criterion. If criterion 3, 6 or 8 are selected, evaluators will use those student growth rubrics. If criterion 1, 2, 4, 5, or 7 is selected, evaluators will use criterion 3 or 6 student growth rubrics. WAC 392-191A-120

    Principals
    The focused evaluation will include the student growth rubrics selected by the principal or assistant principal and approved by the principal's evaluator. WAC 392-191A-190
    Comprehensive must be used at least once every four years; local schedule may vary. Identify district plan for rotating a portion of teachers to Comprehensive every year without overloading evaluator(s).

    District creates procedures for determining when a Focused evaluation is no longer appropriate.
    Summative Performance Rating Descriptors
    Description of summative performance at each of the four levels based on the work of the TPEP pilot districts.
    State
    Local
    District
    Summative Performance Rating Descriptors for both Certificated Classroom Teachers, Principals and Assistant Principals. WAC 392-191A-140

    -

    -

    Criterion Level Scoring Methodology
    Method for scoring the criterion-level scores using the instructional framework rubrics and student growth rubrics.
    State
    Local
    District
    A criterion score is comprised of two components:
  • The framework rubric elements identified by OSPI for that criterion.
  • The applicable student growth rubrics.

  • Criterion-level Scoring Methodology is a local decision.

    Please see guidance from the frameworks authors on Criterion Scoring Methodology.

    Please see guidance from framework authors and OSPI regarding student growth in the modules.
    District creates procedures and practices to establish criterion scores, which are summed equally to create a summative score.

    Utilize OSPI's Training Modules to define criterion-level scoring methodology
    Final Summative Scoring Methodology
    Common state-wide method for calculating the comprehensive and focused evaluation performance ratings for each of the approved instructional frameworks. RCW 281A.405.100.(2)(c).
    State
    Local
    District
    OSPI has defined the common method of calculating a final summative score at the end of each school year in WAC 392-191A-080, WAC 392-191A-090, WAC 392-191A-140, and WAC 392-191A-160.

    A Comprehensive summative score has two steps:
  • Districts create procedures and practices to establish criterion scores and they are summed equally to create a summative score. Framework rubric scores and student growth rubric scores are included in the calculation. The state’s scoring matrix assigns a corresponding label (U to D or 1-4).
  • Evaluators calculate the Student Growth Impact Rating, which is the sum of the five student growth rubrics (3,6,8 for teachers and 3,5,8 for principals). The Student Growth Impact Rating only has consequences when the rating is “Low” or any rubric score is “1”.


  • A summative score for Focused has one scoring step. The Final Summative Score is the same as the final score for the criterion that was selected for focus. Criterion scores result from a locally-determined process that includes both framework rubric scores and applicable student growth rubric scores. Scoring charts for each framework, both Comprehensive and Focused, are available on the TPEP website.
    Assure that evaluators understand and can accurately and reliably apply the procedures for scoring educator performance using OSPI’s framework rubrics, student growth rubrics and any locally-defined processes.

    Districts must decide how to derive a summative score when an educator ends service prior to the end of school or when an educator is hired late in the school year.
    Maximize rater agreement; refresh evaluator training at least one day each year.

    Clarify the district’s summative process for scoring educators who do not work the entire school year.
    Observation - (Teacher Only)
    The gathering of evidence made through classroom or worksite visits for the purpose of examining evidence
    over time against the instructional or leadership framework rubrics pursuant to this section.
    State
    Local
    District
    Comprehensive
    All classroom teachers shall be observed at least twice each school year in the performance of assigned duties for at least sixty minutes during each school year, plus at least two opportunities for confidential conferences with his or her immediate supervisor.
    Comprehensive (Provisional)
    Districts must observe new employees for at least thirty minutes during the first ninety calendar days of the new employee's employment period. No summative score is required.
    Provisional (3rd year)
    Observe at least three times in the performance of assigned duties for at least ninety minutes during the school year.
    Focused
    Observe at least twice each school year for at least sixty minutes in performance of duties related to the selected Focused criterion. (Observation is required for a focused evaluation only if the evaluation is on an observable criterion.)
    RCW 28A.405.100 (Sec. 1)(3)(a)
    WAC 392-191A
    Additional observations (either formal or informal) may be determined locally. Review School Board policies related to TPEP as well as negotiated agreements; consider alignment.
    Student Growth & Student Growth Impact Rating
    Student Growth: The change in student achievement between two points in time.
    Student Growth Data: The relevant and available multiple measures using classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools.
    State
    Local
    District
    Teachers & Principals
    OSPI approved student growth rubrics must be used in criterion level scoring. More than one measure of student growth data must be used in scoring the student growth rubrics. Rating must be determined by an analysis of evidence.

    Upon completion of the overall summative scoring process, the evaluator will combine only the student growth rubric scores to assess the certificated classroom teacher, principal or assistant principal’s student growth impact rating. The student growth impact rating will be determined by the superintendent of public instruction's student impact rating scoring band.

    A student growth score of "1" in any of the rubric rows will result in an overall low student growth impact rating. Evaluator must decide whether low impact rating alters final summative score.

    WAC 392-191A
    Determine available and relevant multiple measures.

    Determine how assessment literacy and best practices will be incorporated into educator training.

    Consider whether to design a menu of professional growth options for educators who receive a low student growth impact rating.
    Utilize the ESD Student Growth training materials and OSPI online Modules.
    Perception Data
    Student or building staff input to provide “360” data about the teacher or principal’s performance.
    State
    Local
    District
    Student input may be included in the (teacher) evaluation process. RCW 28A.405.100(Sec. 1)(2)(g)
    Building staff input may be included in the (principal) evaluation process: RCW 28A.405.100(Sec. 1)(6)(g)
    The role of student and staff input into evaluation is a local decision.Decide if, how and when student perception data will be used in teacher evaluation and staff perception data will be used in principal evaluation.
    Analysis of Revised Evaluation System During Implementation Period
    Representatives of OSPI and statewide associations shall analyze how the evaluation systems in RCW 28A.405.100 (2) and (6) affect issues related to a change in contract status. RCW 28A.405.102
    State
    Local
    District
    Teachers & Principals
    In 2015 and 2016, the TPEP Steering Committee will examine educator performance data (SEES) and contract issues related to implementation of the four-level rating system.

    -

    -

    Use of Evaluation Results in HR decision
    HR decisions include positive consequences (e.g., granting continuing contract status, preference in assignments, and teacher leadership roles) as well as negative consequences (probationary status, transfers, RIFs and displacement, and hiring staff). Access to professional development offerings based on teacher performance and/or district priorities can also be an HR decision.
    State
    Local
    District
    Teachers & Principals
    Beginning with the 2015-16 school year, evaluation results for certificated teachers and principals must be used as one of multiple factors in making human resource and personnel decisions. Human resource decisions include, but are not limited to: staff assignment, including the consideration of an agreement to an assignment by an appropriate teacher, principal and superintendent; and reduction in force. Nothing in this section limits the ability to collectively bargain how the multiple factors shall be used … with the exception that evaluation results must be a factor.
    RCW 28A.405.100(8)(a)
    Decide how evaluation results will be considered in a variety of personnel decisions for both teachers and principals.

    Decide what “multiple factors” will be considered, including evaluation results.
    Implement new policy in 2015-16.