INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196

Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan Public Schools

Educating our students to reach their full potential
For additional Q&A and information leading up to the DCUE membership ratifcation
vote on Thursday, May 1, 2014, go to I-196 at http://staf.district196.org
District 196
Teacher Development and Evaluation
An Informational Summary Jointly Prepared by
Dakota County United Educators (DCUE)
and District 196 Administration
(April 2014)
Teacher Development and Evaluation 2
Table of Contents
Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................3
Timeline for Decision ...........................................................................................................................................................4
Ballot Question .......................................................................................................................................................................4
Three-Year Teacher Development and Evaluation Process ....................................................................................5
Non-Probationary (tenured) Teacher Summative Evaluation Year Timeline and Process ...........................6
Student Engagement and Connection .........................................................................................................................7
Student Growth Data ...........................................................................................................................................................7
What are the major diferences between the MDE plan and our districts plan? ...........................................8
Questions and Answers (available in brochure and online) ..................................................................................9
Additional Questions and Answers available online
Teacher Development and Evaluation Committee
The District 196 Teacher Development and Evaluation (TDE) Committee was formed in spring 2013.
Committee members thank you for taking the time to become informed about this plan and welcome any
questions you may have.
Administrative Representatives DCUE Representatives
Gary Anger, Red Pine Elementary Principal Joseph Angaran, Q Comp Peer Leader
Julie Boyd, Human Resources Coordinator Dan Bishop, Q Comp Coordinator
Renee Ervasti, K-12 Curriculum and EL Coordinator Lia Ess, Diamond Path Teacher
Mary Kreger, Director of Special Education Suzanne Heilman, Eagan High School Teacher
Jackie Magnuson, School Board Member Paul Katzenmeyer, Valley Middle School Teacher
Kim Martinson, Eastview High School Asst. Admin. Deb Mehr, Pinewood Elementary Nurse
Julie Olson, Director of Elementary Education Neil Michels, Apple Valley High School Teacher
Mark Parr, Director of Secondary Education Robin Mikiska, Valley Middle School Teacher
Tom Pederstuen, Director of Human Resources Ken Nygren, Cedar Park Elementary Teacher
Mary Thompson, Rosemount Middle School Principal Cheryl Rosheim, Education Minnesota Rep.
Steve Troen, Director of Teaching and Learning Kate Schmidt, Glacier Hills Elementary Teacher
Carla Sinz, Red Pine Elementary Teacher
Jim Smola, DCUE President
Tom Snyder, Shannon Park Elementary Teacher
Aaron VanMoorlehem, Education Minnesota Rep.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 3
Overview of the Teacher Development and Evaluation Plan
During a special session in the summer of 2011, the Minnesota Legislature passed new statewide teacher
development and evaluation requirements. Under the requirements, all public school districts in Minnesota
must have a teacher development and evaluation plan that meets statutory requirements in place by the
2014-15 school year. The plan could be locally developed by school boards and teachers or it could be
the state plan or a hybrid of the state plan with locally determined elements. The school board and the
teachers union through a Letter of Understanding (LOU) must agree and document the components and
implementation of the plan.
According to the statute, the plan must include:
a three-year professional review cycle with a summative evaluation in the third year, an individual
growth and development plan, a peer review process (Q Comp) and the opportunity to participate
in a professional learning community;
support and evaluation of all probationary teachers;
professional teaching standards;
an option for teachers to develop and present a portfolio demonstrating evidence of refection and
professional growth;
state or local measures of student growth as a component of the teacher evaluation, as well as
longitudinal data on student engagement and other student outcome measures aligned with the
curriculum for which teachers are responsible, and
a teacher improvement process for teachers not meeting professional standards that includes
established goals and timelines with appropriate discipline for teachers not making adequate
progress.
A core group of teachers and administrators attended state-sponsored meetings to clarify the requirements
of the legislation and design a process for developing the plan for District 196. A larger committee of
teachers and administrators from the district was formed to review those requirements and to create
the teacher development and evaluation plan for our district. The good news is that we already had
components that met, and in most cases, exceeded the requirements put forth in the legislation. We have:
A component of mentoring and support for new teachers;
Administrative observations and evaluation for probationary teachers based on Charlotte
Danielsons A Framework for Teaching identifed by the state as a positive model, which has been in
place for more than 10 years;
Peer review support through Q Comp with yearly individual growth plans tied to site and district
goals;
Professional learning communities or learning teams at all levels, and
Strong professional development support.
Using these components and the requirements of the legislation, the committee met frequently throughout
fall 2013 to develop recommendations in this document to present to DCUE members and the School Board.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 4
Timeline
April 2, 2014 Teacher Development and Evaluation (TDE) Task Force meeting
April 15, 2014 Informational Meeting 4 p.m., multipurpose room, Falcon Ridge Middle School (FRMS)
April 22, 2014 Informational Meeting 5:30 p.m., lecture room, FRMS
April 24, 2014 Informational Meeting 4 p.m., multipurpose room, FRMS
May 1, 2014 Dakota County United Educators membership vote
Fall 2014 General information shared with staf on engagement and connection
Fall 2014 Begin collection of engagement and connection data
Spring 2015 Lottery drawing to determine all teachers evaluation cycles
Fall 2015 Begin evaluation cycle for non-probationary/tenured staf
(Probationary teachers are evaluated yearly.)
SAMPLE BALLOT
Teacher Development and Evaluation Plan
Choose one:

District 196 Plan and Letter of Understanding (LOU)

OR

Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) Plan

Ballot Question
As required by MN statute, the District 196 teacher bargaining unit must select a Teacher Development and
Evaluation plan. Members may choose the District 196 plan and a Letter of Understanding (LOU) or the
Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) plan.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 5
Three-Year Teacher Development and Evaluation Process
Q Comp: All Staf TDE: Non-Probationary
(Tenured) Staf*
TDE: Probationary Staf
Year One Individual Growth Plan
Observations by Peer
Leader
Collegial forms
Summative conversation
with Peer Leader
Collect and save data on
student engagement and
connection
Participation in the
Performance Appraisal
System including
observations and
written evaluations by
administrator
Year Two Individual Growth Plan
Observations by Peer
Leader
Collegial forms
Summative conversation
with Peer Leader
Collect and save data on
student engagement and
connection
Participation in the
Performance Appraisal
System including
observations and
written evaluations by
administrator
Year Three:
Summative
Evaluation
Individual Growth Plan
(shared with the
administrator)
Observations by Peer
Leader
Collegial forms
Summative conversation
with Peer Leader
Share Individual Growth
Plan with administrator
Collect and save data on
student engagement and
connection
Observations by
administrator
Summative meeting with
administrator
Participation in the
Performance Appraisal
System including
observations and
written evaluations by
administrator
Year Four Continue Q Comp
responsibilities
Return to Year One of
Teacher Development and
Evaluation process
Begin Year One of
Teacher Development
and Evaluation process for
tenured teachers
Fall Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3
2015 Year Three Year One Year Two
2016 Year One Year Two Year Three
2017 Year Two Year Three Year One
2018 Year Three Year One Year Two
* In the spring of 2014-16 all tenured staf will be selected through a lottery by building administration/
supervising administrator and worksite representatives for the year in which their summative evaluation will
be completed.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 6
Non-Probationary (Tenured) Teacher
Summative Evaluation Year
Timeline and Process
The supervising administrator will conduct observations throughout the year. At least one formal or two to
three informal observations will be completed during each observation window.
Informal observations would be unscheduled and often for a shorter period of time.
Formal observations would be scheduled generally for longer periods of time with
pre- and post-observation conferences.
All observations should include a feedback component (e.g. verbal, notes, email).
Date Administrator Role Non-Probationary
(Tenured) Teacher Role
August-September Review process and timeline with
tenured staf in evaluation year
September-October Administrator and tenured teacher
meet to review IGP between
September 15 and October 31
Develop IGP
September-November Observation Window 1
(2-3 informal or 1 formal)
Review administrators comments
Continue to collect data on student
engagement and connection
Collect data on student
achievement
November-February Observation Window 2
(2-3 informal or 1 formal)
Review administrators comments
February-April Observation Window 3
(2-3 informal or 1 formal)
Review administrators comments
March 1-April 15 The teacher will complete:
Evidence of student growth data
Evidence of student longitudinal
engagement and connection data
Self-refection on summative
evaluation form
April 15-May 30 Summative Evaluation Meeting
Review:
Evidence of student growth
data
Evidence of student
longitudinal engagement
and connection data
Portfolio (optional)
Self-refection
Administrators comments
Summative Evaluation Meeting
Review:
Evidence of student growth data
Evidence of student longitudinal
engagement and connection data
Portfolio (optional)
Self-refection
Administrators comments
Teacher Development and Evaluation 7
Student Engagement and Connection
As part of the Teacher Development and Evaluation process, all teachers are required to collect
longitudinal data related to student engagement and connection each year to share with their
administrator during the summative evaluation.
Defnitions:
Longitudinal data is information collected repeatedly over time.
Student engagement and connection examines a students commitment to learning and includes
academic, behavioral, cognitive and afective components.
Some sources for student engagement and connection data may include:
Surveys of students and/or parents at the school or classroom level
Observations by trained observers (administrators or Peer Leaders) on any of the following
elements:
Activities and assignments
Grouping of students
Instructional materials and resources
Structure and pacing of lessons
Student enthusiasm, interest, thinking and problem-solving
Student behaviors when engaged in learning tasks that require high-level student thinking
Student motivation and persistence on challenging tasks
Observations in which a teacher monitors his/her students for evidence of engagement and
connection and then refects on the experience.
Student Growth Data
As part of the Teacher Development and Evaluation process, all teachers are required to collect student
growth data from assessments to share with their administrator during the summative evaluation.
Some sources for student growth data
may include:
Standardized assessments such
as MCA, MAP, ACT, etc.
Common and/or formative
assessments
Student achievement goals from
Individual Growth Plans
Teacher Development and Evaluation 8
What are the major diferences between the
MDE Plan and the District 196 TDE Plan?
There are four major diferences between the two plans.
MDE Plan District 196 TDE Plan
Weighted elements Percentages are assigned
to certain elements, such as
teacher practice and student
engagement. The elements are
weighted.
A holistic approach is used
when looking at teacher
practice and student
engagement.
Evaluators Administrators and teachers
can evaluate teachers.
Only individuals currently
employed as administrators can
evaluate teachers.
Student achievement goals A traditional classroom lens
is used to look at student
achievement data.
Many diferent types of
educational environments are
considered including those
of counselors, social workers,
nurses, etc.
Student engagement and connection A student survey for collecting
data on student engagement
and connection is required.
A student survey is not
required. Teachers have many
options for collecting student
engagement data.
Where can teachers fnd the MDE Plan?
The MDE Plan is available on the Education Minnesota website. Click on the link for more information.
http://education.state.mn.us/MDE/EdExc/EducEval/TeachEval/index.html
Teacher Development and Evaluation 9
Questions and Answers
Who created the District 196 TDE Plan and what was the process?
The districts plan was created by a committee of members of the teachers union and administrators. The
group met from May 2013 through March 2014 to work through and agree upon the plans basic structure
and elements.
Why are teachers voting on a plan?
If the district and the teachers union successfully collaborate and create a plan, as our district and teachers
union have, teachers will be given the opportunity to vote on which plan they prefer: the MDE Plan or the
TDE Plan created by the district and union.
What would have happened if our district and the teachers union could not agree on a plan?
If the district and the teachers union had not been able to work collaboratively and create a plan, the district
would have been required to use the plan created by MDE.
What will happen if DCUE membership does not vote for the District 196 TDE Plan?
If the plan created by the district and the teachers union is not approved by DCUE membership, under
statute, the district must implement the MDE Plan.
Once DCUE membership approves a plan, when would it take efect?
Once a plan is approved, all teachers would begin collecting data on student engagement during the 2014-
15 school year. Summative evaluations would begin in the 2015-16 school year.
Is the TDE Plan taking the place of Q Comp?
No, the TDE Plan is not taking the place of Q Comp. However, there are several Q Comp features that satisfy
the requirements of the TDE Plan.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 10
What components of Q Comp can teachers also use in TDE?
There are two components of Q Comp and other current district practices that can be used in TDE.
1. The Individual Growth Plan that teachers write at the beginning of their summative year is shared
with their administrator.
2. Teachers are required to collect longitudinal data on student engagement and connection.
Consequently, teachers may choose to use data collected by their Peer Leader as evidence of
student engagement and connection.
In addition, many of our current practices meet the requirements of TDE: collegial teams, Peer Leaders, the
Performance Appraisal System for probationary teachers, and Intensive Assistance, a process for supporting
teachers who have been identifed by their administrators as having serious performance defciencies.
Who will evaluate teachers?
Under the TDE plan, only an individual who is employed as a licensed administrator in the district
can evaluate teachers. In most cases, this individual is the building administrator or a member of the
administrative team.
A teacher works in two diferent buildings. Which administrator will do the observations and the
summative evaluation?
A conversation will be held between administrators and the teacher to determine what would be most
appropriate, given the responsibilities and FTE between the school sites. Each teacher will only have one
summative evaluation.
How does TDE afect probationary teachers?
Probationary teachers will continue to participate in the Performance Appraisal System and should consult
their administrator to review their responsibilities.
What standards of performance will administrators use to evaluate teachers?
Charlotte Danielsons A Framework for Teaching, the same framework used in Q Comp, will be used by
administrators.
How often will non-
probationary(tenured) teachers be
evaluated?
Once every three years teachers will be
observed and evaluated by a licensed
administrator.
Who decides which year the
summative evaluation with an
administrator will occur?
In the spring of 2014-15 all non-
probationary tenured staf will be
randomly selected by building
administration/supervising administrator
and worksite representatives for the year
in which their summative evaluation will
be completed.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 11
What happens if a teacher
does not agree with the
administrator on the
summative evaluation?
The teacher and the
administrator will
discuss the results of the
observations and evaluation
at the summative meeting.
Following the discussion, if
a teacher disagrees with the
administrators evaluation,
he/she may indicate his/her
disagreement in the comment
section of the summative
evaluation form.
What happens if a teacher does not meet the standards of performance in the summative
evaluation?
Teachers not meeting standards of performance will use the Intensive Assistance process, which includes
an improvement plan, goals and timelines. Administrators work with Human Resources to determine
disciplinary action when a teacher does not make progress in meeting performance standards.
After a probationary teacher becomes non-probationary (tenured), does that teacher have to be
evaluated again?
Although the teacher will move into the Teacher Development and Evaluation process for non-probationary
(tenured) teachers, the teacher will not be evaluated again until the third year out from the fnal
probationary year. For example: If the teacher became a non-probationary (tenured) teacher in the fall of
2015, the teacher would be evaluated again by an administrator during the 2017-18 school year. A principal
may adjust the schedule to help maintain a balance in the number of teachers evaluated in each year.
Whom should teachers contact if there are questions either before or after the vote?
You may contact Jim Smola at jim.smola@educationmn.org or at 952-431-4046 if you have questions.
Where can I fnd the Letter of Understanding (LOU)?
The Letter of Understanding (LOU) is posted on the DCUE website at www.dcue.org
What are the new requirements for teacher development and evaluation?
In 2011, the Minnesota Legislature passed new requirements for teacher development and evaluation. As
a result, all districts must have a plan for teacher development and evaluation that meets all the statutory
requirements by the beginning of the 2014-15 school year. In addition, the Minnesota Department of
Education (MDE) created a teacher development and evaluation plan that follows the new requirements.
Local unions and school districts have the option to use the MDE plan, create a plan that uses parts of the
MDE plan and develop other parts to make a hybrid local plan, or create a completely new local plan.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 12
What components must be included in the Teacher Development and Evaluation (TDE) plan?
Joint agreement: There must be an agreement between the school board and the teachers union
on the content and implementation of the plan.
Individual Growth Plan: Each teacher must write an Individual Growth Plan.
Three-year review cycle: There must be a three-year review cycle for each teacher.
Evaluation of probationary teachers: There must be three evaluations annually for all probationary
teachers.
Minnesota Standards of Practice: The evaluation process must be based on professional teaching
standards, such as Charlotte Danielsons A Framework for Teaching.
Professional Learning Communities: Teachers must be provided with the opportunity to work in
professional learning communities.
Staf development: Time during the day must be provided for staf development, including peer
coaching, collaboration and mentoring.
Peer coaching/review: There must be trained observers who serve as peer coaches (peer leaders).
Summative evaluation: There must be one summative evaluation performed by a qualifed and
trained evaluator during the three-year cycle.
Portfolio: Teachers must have an option to present a portfolio for the summative evaluation.
Teacher Improvement Plan: There must be an improvement plan in place for teachers who do not
meet the standards and who do not make progress on an improvement plan.
Growth data: Student growth data from state or local assessments must be shown.
Student engagement and connection: Teachers must collect longitudinal data on student
engagement and connection.
What is the diference between Q Comp and the Teacher Development and Evaluation (TDE) plan?
In our district, Q Comp focuses on increasing student achievement through high-quality professional
development and the work of collegial teams. In Q Comp, each year teachers evaluate their teaching using
objective data collected by peer leaders. In TDE, teachers are evaluated by licensed administrators every
three years with the goal of every educator receiving a constructive, meaningful evaluation that is tied to
quality professional development.
Will peer leaders be used to evaluate teachers?
No. Peer leaders will not evaluate teachers because they are not employed as licensed administrators in the
district.
If a teacher works in more than one building, which administrator will do the observations and the
summative evaluation?
In the past, the evaluation process for probationary teachers was generally either combined for the two
buildings or if a school administrator had many evaluations to do, then the other school administrator
picked up the extra evaluations. Special Education coordinators evaluated the itinerant teachers unless the
teacher spent a considerable amount of time in a single school. If that was the case, then the responsibility
for evaluation was shared.
If a teacher works in a secondary building with several administrators, which administrator will do
the observations and summative evaluation?
The administrative team in each building will decide how to divide the evaluations.
Teacher Development and Evaluation 13
What kind of training do administrators have in conducting teacher evaluations?
Administrators are trained in observing and evaluating teachers as part of their licensure requirements. In
addition, the district will provide training on the teacher development and evaluation model included in the
districts plan.
What will the year of the summative evaluation involve?
In the fall, the teacher will meet with an administrator to review their Individual Growth Plan. From
September through mid-April, a teacher can expect one formal observation (pre-conference/observation/
post-conference) and between six and nine informal observations. A teachers will receive feedback from the
administrator after each informal observation. Finally, sometime between mid-April and the end of May, the
teacher will meet with the administrator for a summative discussion on observation results, student growth
data, student engagement and connection data, and self-refection.
Can a teacher volunteer to have the summative observation done in a diferent year than the one
year assigned by the administrator?
Yes. A teacher may volunteer to change the year; however, administrators will be working carefully to
balance the number of teachers they observe every year and may not be able to honor each request.
If a teacher pursues and achieves certifcation by a national board, will it satisfy some of the teacher
development and evaluation requirements?
If a teacher pursues and achieves certifcation by a national board, he/she may use the portfolio that was
created as the entirety of the summative evaluation. Teachers must use the model created by the National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards or a similar organization if they are a nurse, social worker, or other
licensed personnel. The portfolio can only be used for one summative evaluation cycle. Administrators will
still have the right to observe and evaluate a teacher if the teacher chooses the portfolio/certifcation option.
When and where will teachers vote on the districts Teacher Development and Evaluation plan?
Voting will occur at each worksite on May 1, 2014.
Will requirements of TDE be reviewed in the fall of 2014?
Information will remain posted on the staf intranet for teachers who have questions about TDE. You may
also contact your building administrator.
Dept/Staf Dev/Teacher Development and Evaluation/2014_online.indd
District 196 Graphics/6-12-14
District 196 School Board
Rob Duchscher, Chairperson
Jackie Magnuson, Vice Chairperson
Gary Huusko, Clerk
Art Coulson, Treasurer
Joel Albright, Director
Mike Roseen, Director
Bob Schutte, Director
Jane K. Berenz, Superintendent