1 INVER GROVE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY SCHOOLS ‘TENURED TEACHER DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION PLAN INTRODUCTION Inver Grove Heights Community Schools (“the District”) and IGH-EM Local 1718 (IGH-EM”) collaboratively have developed the following Inver Grove Heights ‘Tenured Teacher Development and Evaluation Plan ("TDE Plan”). This Plan, which meets the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, is intended to recognize and support the skilled professionals in the Inver Grove Heights Community Schools in their continued professional growth and development. The District and IGH-EM believe Inver Grove Heights teachers exhibit high levels of professionalism and accomplishment, performing at high levels daily. There are three components to the TDE Plan: Teacher Growth, Student Engagement, and Measurement. Sixty-five percent of a teacher's summative evaluation will be determined by the teacher growth and student engagement components. See “Teacher Growth” and “Student Engagement’, II and Ill. Thirty- five percent of a teacher's summative evaluation will be determined by the measurement component. See “Measures of Student Growth”, IV. “Teacher” is defined as a person under the Agreement between Independent School District 199 and Education Minnesota Inver Grove Heights, Article 3, Section 2. TEACHER GROWTH ‘Teacher growth and student engagement comprise 65% of a teacher's summative evaluation. A. Individual Growth and Development Plan: Teachers will be required to complete an Individual Growth and Development Plan (“IGDP”) in the iObservation system each year. Components of the IGDP include: Self-Evaluation in all four domains in iObservation Selection of two Target Elements; one from Domain 1 - Design Questions 5-9, and the other from any element within the system Identification of action steps Submission of the IGDP to the supervisor for approval Collection of evidence throughout the school year within the IGDP in the form of student work samples, PLC meeting minutes, peer observation, or other activities designed by the teacher ‘* Submission of the final IGDP at the end of the school yearB. Review Cycle: The three year review cycle will include an IGD? each year. Every tenured teacher will have at least one summative evaluation in each three-year review cycle. Teachers who are scheduled for teacher evaluation in the 2014- 2015 school year will be evaluated with the old teacher evaluation model. See ‘Attachment A for more details. C. Standards of Effective Practice: IGH Community Schools has adopted the teacher effectiveness model of the iObservation system, whichis aligned to the MN Standards for Effective Practice. The Marzano Teacher Evluation Model is based on a number of previous, related works, including What Works in Schools, (Marzano, 2003), Classroom Instruction That Works (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001), Classroom Management That Works (Marzano, Marzano, & Pickering, 2003), Classroom Assessment and Grading That Work (Marzano, 2006), The Artand Science of Teaching (Marzano, 2007), and Effective Supervision: Supporting the Art and Science of Teaching (Marzano, Frontier, & Livingston, 2011). Each of these works was generated from a synthesis of the research and theory. Thus, the model can be considered an aggregation of the research on those elements that have traditionally been shown to correlate with student academic achievement. The model includes four domains: Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors Domain 2: Preparing and Planning Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching Domain 4; Collegiality and Professionalism ‘The four domains include 60 elements: 41 in Domain 1, 8 in Domain 2, 5 in Domain 3, and 6 in Domain 4. For detailed information on each Domain and related elements, see Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Framework Learning Map, Attachment B, D. PLC As part of the IGDP, each teacher will participate in a Professional Learning Community (PLC). For the purposes of the IGDP, teachers will be allowed to choose another tenured teacher/peer in their same curricular area to support their IGDP, if possible. Each year, the committee will agree upon a calendar to develop the IGDP, E, Peer Review We are waiting on the legislature to decide how a peer review plays a part in the IGDP process.Mm. Iv. STUDENT ENGAGEMENT Evidence of student engagement will be used as a part of a teacher's final summative evaluation. Data will be collected over the course of the three-year review cycle. Documentation will include evidence from one or more classroom observations conducted by a summative evaluator. The model for collecting data will be found in Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors, Design Questions 5-9, Instructional Categories 24-41, of the iObservation system. Documentation may also include the results of student interviews conducted by the summative evaluator in the course of classroom observation. In addition to the above, a teacher may submit other evidence of student engagement, which could be included in a teacher's portfolio. Data gathered by the teacher could include, but is not limited to, the following: * Results ofa student survey(s) administered by the teacher to the students in their classroom Documentation from administrative “walk-throughs” Peer reviewer observations Teacher's self-assessments Student attendance rates, tardy rates, grades, discipline referrals, and/or assignment completion rates, especially if the data is longitudinal. The teacher should submit their documentation of student engagement to their summative evaluator in advance of their summative evaluation, MEASURES OF STUDENT GROWTH Thirty-five percent of a teacher’s summative evaluation will be determined by student growth and achievement. The 35% will be broken down as follows: * 17.5% - individual class goals developed in conjunction with collaborative team/PLC growth goals 5% - student proficiency 5% - student growth 5% - achievement gap reduction 2.5% - graduation rate Student proficiency, growth and achievement gap reduction will be collected through the multiple-measurement rating (MMR) from each building. Graduation rate will be determined by the four-year graduation rate and applied to all teachers in the district. When a teacher is not assigned to a building, or is in multiple buildings throughout the district, a teacher's measure of student growth will be determined by the teacher and the administrator.Teachers will be responsible for demonstrating student growth through their SMART goals, as determined through their collaborative teams/PLCs. SUMMATIVE EVALUATION The summative evaluation will take place during the teacher's post-observation conference, Evaluators will be prepared with data to give a summative evaluation of the teacher. Teachers can present evidence in their individual growth and development plans or their personal portfolios to be considered as part of the summative evaluation at the pre-observation conference for the evaluator to review. In addition, the summative evaluation will include the 35% student growth measures. ‘TEACHER IMPROVEMENT PROCESS (TIP) ‘The purpose of the TIP is to provide support and assistance to teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating on a summative evaluation. The TIP is not discipline, but a teacher who does not make adequate progress in this process is subject to discipline, as required by Minnesota Statutes. Awareness Phase ‘As required by Minnesota Statute, a summative evaluation occurs at least once every three years, typically near the end of the three -year review cycle. However, a summative evaluator may determine that performance concerns warrant a summative evaluation before the final year of the three-year cycle. In this case the teacher must be informed that the summative evaluator has concerns about performance. The summative evaluator must document these concerns and share those concerns in a face-to-face meeting. Performance concerns should be documented and communicated as they occur. Documentation should include available evidence of teacher practice, available evidence of student learning and achievement, available evidence of student engagement, and the results of a minimum of two formal observations in the area(s) of concern. ‘At the end of the awareness phase, a summative evaluation is conducted. A teacher may or may not show improvement in the identified areas. If the overall summative performance rating is unsatisfactory, then the teacher receives assistance through the TIP phase. Otherwise, the teacher transitions back into the regular three-year review cycle. The summative evaluator, however, may require the teacher to amend an IGDP to focus on one or more areas of concern.Following an unsatisfactory rating on the summative evaluation, the summative evaluator must notify the teacher and document the performance concerns in writing, including: * An explanation of concerns identifying specific standards of teacher practice or student outcomes * An outline of evidence supporting the concerns and the teacher's summative evaluation * Notification that the teacher may bring evidence related to the stated concerns to any future meetings * Notification that the teacher has a choice to resolve identified performance concerns in collaboration with the summative evaluator (Option 1) or a Teacher Assistance Team (Option 2) Option 1: The teacher and summative evaluator should meet in a timely manner to collaborate on resolving identified performance concerns through the development of the improvement plan. The teacher may request a union representative to be present in this process. The following information should be documented in the plan: * Areas of concern related to teacher practice and/or student outcomes * Specific teacher actions or practices that should result in the teacher meeting standards ‘+ Improvement goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, results-based and time-bound, otherwise known as SMART goals * Support strategies which could be used to meet the SMART goals * Methods the summative evaluator will use to gather evidence of improvement ‘The type, form and frequency of the formative feedback the teacher will receive from the summative evaluator during this phase + Areasonable time frame for a summative assessment of progressAt the end of the time frame established above, the summative evaluator and the teacher will meet to assess progress of the teacher toward resolving the areas of concern. A union representative may be present to observe the process. The assessment of progress will be documented in writing and include the following: All documents generated to this point in the process Measures of progress aligned with the goals Additional evidence the teacher wants considered Evidence gathered by the summative evaluator Past summative evaluations Data generated in the Teacher Assistance Plan, if applicable Criteria for decision-making should include: «Progress toward meeting the goals identified for improvement © Current performance level At the conclusion of the meeting, the summative evaluator will make one of the following determinations about the teacher's status: ‘© Exit the teacher improvement process and re-enter the three-year professional review cycle ‘Revise or begin a new improvement process; repeating the process above © Discipline a teacher for not making adequate progress in the teacher improvement plan. Option 2: The teacher may choose to collaborate with a Teacher Assistance Team that supports the teacher in the teacher improvement process. The Teacher Assistance Team uses data and information from the summative evaluator and the teacher to collaborate with the teacher in the development of an improvement plan. Composition of the Teacher Assistance Team may include one teacher appointed by the summative evaluator, one summative evaluator other than teacher's summative evaluator who is appointed by the superintendent or designee to lead the teacher improvement process and will serve as a resource, and one teacher recommended by the teacher. The teacher member of the team will be paid the hourly staff development rate for their time spent meeting with the team. One member of the Teacher Assistance Team will serve as a facilitator. The facilitator will meet with the teacher to schedule the meetings with the Teacher Assistance Team. At the first meeting of the Teacher Assistance Team the areas of concern as documented by the summative evaluator will be reviewed. The Teacher Assistance Team, in collaboration with the teacher, will follow the process forOption1 in developing an improvement plan. The following information should be documented in the plan: identifying specific teacher actions or practices that should result in the teacher meeting standards, setting up improvement goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, results-based and time-bound, otherwise known as SMART goals support strategies which could be used to meet the SMART goals methods the summative evaluator will use to gather evidence of improvement details about the kinds of feedback the teacher can expect from the Teacher Assistance Team, and areasonable time frame for a summative assessment of progress The Teacher Assistance Team is also in a unique position to provide direct observational feedback to the teacher and offer peer coaching, Additional expectations of the Teacher Assistance Team include: ‘The facilitator keeps a log of meetings in order to document the actions and recommendation taken to assist the teacher. The log will not include evaluation statements regarding progress towards the improvement goals. ‘Team member observations and dialogues with the teacher are not recorded in writing or reported to the summative evaluator Strict confidentiality is to be maintained The facilitator will communicate with the summative evaluator regarding the completion of the action steps At the completion of the plan, the log of meetings which documents the completion of action steps is submitted to the teacher and the summative evaluator At this point in the process the teacher is re-asserted into the teacher improvement Process at the point in Option 1 where the summative evaluator meets with the teacher to assess progress towards resolving the areas of concern. The process follows the remainder of the steps in Option 1.