A.C.C.E.S.S. Newsletter Now Your Resource for Teacher Evaluation Redesign
|
|
The teacher evaluation rubric revision is moving forward. The 2019-2020 school year is focused on testing and finalizing the new rubric and identifying updates to the observation process. This A.C.C.E.S.S. newsletter will serve as your quarterly, one-stop-shop for all the information you need to prepare for implementation of the revised evaluation system. This month's issue includes an overview of the work done to date, shares with you an overview of the rubric and provides a resource for you to use when updating your teachers. In the winter issue, we will update you on the rubric testing process and what we’ve learned. In our spring issue, you’ll find out more about plans for the statewide pilot to take place during the 2020-2021 school year.
If you have any questions about the evaluation revision, or wish to share feedback, contact us at
DPASII.trrp@doe.k12.de.us
.
|
|
Digging Deeper: How Did We Get Here, and Where Are We Headed?
|
|
In response to educator feedback, the Delaware DOE set out in 2018 to revise the teacher evaluation rubric. Educators said the DPAS-II rubric was too cumbersome, with too many items to rate, and that teachers were not receiving feedback that was truly helpful to their careers. Plus, the DPAS-II rubric was adopted before the implementation of the Delaware Content Standards and before Delaware’s adoption of the InTASC Standards for Teaching.
The goal of the rubric revision has been to create a tool that focuses on what really matters in ensuring great outcomes for kids. The goal is also to make certain that the rubric aligns with best practices in teaching and learning articulated in the InTASC standards, and aligns with expectations for students as articulated in the Delaware Content Standards.
In the fall of 2018, a Steering committee comprised of teachers, principals, district leaders and representatives from higher education began work on designing a new rubric for use across Delaware. The committee consulted several resources, including the
InTASC Standards
, Common Core
Instructional Practice Guides
,
The Skillful Teacher
, and
T
he Opportunity Myth.
The Committee also reviewed several exemplar rubrics in use in other states, and reviewed research by Jon Saphier, John Hattie, and other leading researchers in teaching and learning.
Together, the
committee identified the most important teacher and student actions
that should be included in the rubric, based on what is both most critical for student learning AND what is directly observable in a classroom lesson. The committee iterated on the rubric several times, testing it in classrooms and with video.
The steering committee reconvened this past fall to engage in formal, systematic testing across the state. Each of the almost 30 committee members calibrated on the rubric, and will test the rubric in at least seven classrooms each. Committee members will test in all grade levels, subject areas, and contexts with a goal of ensuring that the rubric is usable for observers, supportive of teacher feedback, and applicable across the state.
The steering committee expects to have a final rubric by February 1, 2020.
Concurrently, a smaller working group of steering committee members is focused on process revisions. Because the rubric is dramatically changing, we expect some parts of the observation and evaluation process to change as well. Our efforts to systematically test the rubric will support us to identify process changes that will best support successful implementation of this rubric across the state.
The working group expects that updates to the process will be identified by March 1, 2020.
This spring, a separate working group will develop training and resources for use by districts and schools that participate in a pilot of the evaluation system during the fall of 2020. The pilot will support the state to prepare for full implementation of the revised evaluation rubric and system beginning with the 2021-2022 school year.
|
|
|
Share this with your teachers!
|
|
The PowerPoint slides linked to the right contain a brief presentation for you to share more about the rationale for the system revision and approach to rubric design. Please review it for additional details and use the talking points to share with your teachers.
If you have any questions about the revision process or want to provide additional feedback for the steering committee to consider, please email
DPASII.trrp@doe.k12.de.us
.
|
|
|
Practice Perfect: Get to Know the Draft Rubric
|
|
This section provides a high-level overview of the structure of the rubric as well as some of the content. We expect to share the final rubric in February 2020, once it has been systematically tested in classrooms across the state.
Note that while we don't expect the information in this overview to change, the rubric is still in draft form, so information may change as a result of testing.
The draft rubric is split into three performance areas. Each performance area outlines a key element of teaching and learning that is critical to student success. Each performance area is accompanied by an essential question that educators can use to guide their overall reflections about instruction. The performance areas and essential questions are:
- Learning Environment: To what extent does the classroom environment support all students to learn?
- Engagement in Learning: To what extent does the instruction support and engage all students?
- Maximizing Learning: To what extent do all students retain and apply their learning?
For each performance area, there are three Indicators that detail what each performance area looks like and sounds like in the classroom. There are four performance levels in this rubric (much like the current DPAS-II rubric) and descriptors for what each indicator looks like at each performance level.
One key difference about the language of the new rubric is that observers are prompted to assess instruction based both on what teachers are doing as well as what students are doing. Many descriptors outline what students say and do to evidence learning.
The rubric has fewer items to rate than the previous rubric and is designed to be less cumbersome.
Another key difference in the language of the new rubric is that it only includes behaviors that can be directly observed in a lesson. This means that elements of professionalism and planning are not included in the rubric indicators. Those elements are captured in core teacher skills, which follow each performance area. Core teacher skills describe the skills, actions, and mindsets of teachers that lead to the outcomes described in the indicators. Core teacher skills are not rated. Instead they are provided as a resource and a common language for teachers and leaders to use in pursuing professional growth and improvement. Leaders can use core teacher skills to guide feedback, coaching and support for teachers. Teachers can use core teacher skills as a guide for reflection on their own practice, and how they implement instruction. While core teacher skills in the rubric are not a comprehensive list of all things good teachers know and do, they are a foundational list that can support teacher reflection and growth.
|
|
|
What's on the evaluation system revision agenda?
|
|
Do you want to learn more about the evaluation redesign and provide your feedback? Join us for one of two focus groups this fall to preview the rubric and the process, and to provide your input!
|
|
 |
Tuesday November 12
5:00-6:00 p.m.
Middletown High School
120 Silver Lake Rd, Middletown
|
|
|
|
Thursday Decemberr 12
5:00-6:00 p.m.
Mariner Middle School
16391 Harbeson Rd, Milton
|
|
|
|
Focus groups for teachers and other educators will be scheduled in early 2020.
Below are a list of upcoming milestones in the evaluation system revision process. You can find up to date information on the process and work of the committees
here
.
- Rubric Revision Steering Committee Meeting - November 13
- Round 2 of Rubric Testing - November 14-December 20
- Process Working Group meeting - December 11
- Rubric Revision Steering Committee meeting - January 8
- Training Working Group meeting - January 22
- Winter Edition of ACCESS Newsletter - early February
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
