Director of Learning Report

TO:         Michael Green, Superintendent

FROM:  Asha Riley


RE Director of Learning Monthly Update

New Teacher Evaluation Update:  Last month Shari Conditt and I made presentations to each staff regarding the new teacher evaluation.  Despite the significant changes introduced in the new evaluation process the staff received the information positively and with few questions. In order to make sure there is a solid awareness of the changes coming in the new evaluation I sent a follow up survey to all certificated teachers.  Below is a summary of their responses.

Participants: 61 certificated teachers from grades K-12 replied to this anonymous survey

Are you aware of the new teacher evaluation being implemented in our district?

Yes: 60 No: 0

Are you aware which framework was selected to define the 8 new criteria in the evaluation?

                53 of 61 participants correctly identified the Danielson Framework

How does the new evaluation differ from the old model?

                Significant Difference: 38 /61            Some Difference:  23/61    No Difference: 0/61

What do you see is the most significant difference/impact of the new evaluation model?

Most responses correctly identified the most significant shifts; the process now being a collaborative formative processes, teachers will provide artifacts, evidence and reflections on their practice, and that student growth measures will now be part of the evaluation criteria. I was also pleased to see that there are no significant misconceptions about the upcoming shifts.

What questions do you have regarding the new evaluation?

Similar to our experience during the staff meetings, few staff had questions at this time and left this part of the survey blank. The questions that were asked, we expected, and have been preparing upcoming communication to address them.  Most of these questions relate to when they will be expected to participate in the new evaluation, and what kinds of evidence and artifacts they can submit.

Administrative Professional Development Update: We have each received log in information to our inter-rater reliability online training.  A few of us have begun the 35 hour course but participation is sporadic as it requires undivided attention in a quiet place to complete (ie-not during the school day). I expect most of us will be working through the training during Spring break. We are scheduled to take our tests early June.


Assessment Operations:

State Assessment Operations: Previously Carla Kirkpatrick supported assessment operations by coordinating special material orders (accommodation kits and specialized tests) for students in our district with Individualized Education Plans.  Deb Kernen and I decided we would not have Carla’s replacement continue with those responsibilities. Now Sherri Franke and I will take care of all assessment operations.

WELPA: The Washington English Language Proficiency Assessment results determine eligibility for ELL services. This year the state had significant errors in the testing materials distributed for testing student acquisition of the English language. Fortunately our ELL department had not begun testing and we were able to postpone testing until after corrected resources were redistributed. Therefore, I do not expect student performance results will be impacted by the errors.

HSPE: We are all set for the upcoming high school Reading and Writing tests next week.  All staff have participated in proctor training and I look forward to a smooth testing week.

District Assessments: Last year we implemented common finals for all High school math classes (including one’s taught and the middle school level).  This year we have implemented common unit assessments for Algebra. Both Kari DeBower and Keith Clevenger have done a nice job of putting to paper the agreed upon design and content the math team committed to.  Steve Rippl has graciously expanded the database to include these assessments so we can collect and analyze our results.

Our next step will be to design and implement unit assessments for Geometry.

Data Analysis: When the state introduced the End of Course Math tests we had difficulty looking at our data by course. The results are not assigned to teachers, grade, or a course so it’s been hard to dig deep into the state data and analyze what the data tells us about particular cohort or teacher impact on student achievement. Steve Rippl met with me and agreed he can connect student EOC results to previous courses students’ have taken and create cohort data for us to review. We will have to wait until we have all the results next fall, but at that time I look forward to digging deeper in student math achievement in our three high schools.