October 2011 Stock Take Progress Report

Memphis City Schools Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Stock Take Progress Report October 1st, 2011
Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011
Memphis City Schools Board of Commissioners

Martavius D. Jones, President Betty J. Mallott , Vice President Stephanie Gatewood Patrice Jordan Robinson Dr. Jeff Warren Sara L. Lewis Tomeka R. Hart Dr. Freda G. Williams Dr. Kenneth T. Whalum, Jr.
Superintendent
Dr. Kriner Cash
Deputy Superintendents
Irving Hamer, Jr. Hitesh Haria Memphis Education Association Keith Williams Ken Foster
1 Memphis City Schools does not discriminate in its programs or employment on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, handicap/disability, sex or age. For more information, please contact the Office of Equity Compliance at (901) 416-6670.

I. Executive Summary Although Year Three of Memphis City Schools (MCS) Teacher Effectiveness Initiative (TEI) will be the first year of intensive district-wide implementation via the introduction of our new Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) evaluation system, there is much to celebrate and reflect on due to increased organizational capacity and early implementation successes in Year Two. The Department of Teacher Talent & Effectiveness (DTTE), MCSs primary management entity for TEI, made a total of nine new hires in Year Two to coordinate this work and established additional external partnerships to support teacher compensation and career path planning, school leadership development and strategic communications about TEI. Early results of increased capacity and a growing body of experience with these unprecedented reform efforts in our district include: State approval of our multi-dimensional TEM evaluation system in June 2011; A high-quality pool of over 1,800 new teaching candidates for the 2011 staffing season; The launch of several high-profile programs of work including the I Teach I Am public campaign, innovative reflective practices strategies such as classroom video capture and real-time coaching, and the TEI Teacher Ambassador Program It is worth acknowledgment that our cross-functional TEI management team of MCS departments and external partners was able to accomplish these milestones and more during Year Two of our Intensive Partnership Site (IPS) grant despite some extenuating circumstances that we must continue to monitor and address proactively today. As with school systems across the nation, MCS experienced a major budget shortfall during the 2011 fiscal year leading to class size leveling, a larger-than-typical teacher surplus pool and layoffs in subject areas with substantially more certified teachers than vacancies such as Career and Technology Education (CTE). Nevertheless, the district in conjunction with external staffing partners has been able to meet all staffing milestones for this year and introduced new strategic staffing work detailed in the Strategy Two subsection below. One other external factor worth noting is the pending school governance reconfiguration from MCSs current nine member Board of Commissioners to a twenty-three member countywide school board in October 2011 to govern both Memphis City Schools and Shelby County Schools until the systems merge in August 2013. Additionally, a separate twenty-one member merger commission of both city and county representatives has been established to manage the transition processes surrounding this changeover. Although all current MCS Commissioners will remain a part of the unified twenty-three member board, we will have to ensure that all new representatives on the board and transition committee have the knowledge basis and support needed to move our future teacher effectiveness efforts forward. These factors are outlined with more detail in Section VI, Risks. The following report details the four strategies of our TEI plan and shares evidence of what has happened since our last Stock Take Progress Report of April 21st, 2011. In addition, this report provides reflections on our comprehensive IPS data dashboard and corresponding key performance indicators that continue to guide our teacher effectiveness work. Major progress towards each strategy is summarized below. Strategy One: Create a Common Measure of Effective Teaching Arguably the single most significant milestone achieved during Year Two of TEI has been the state of Tennessees approval of 1

MCSs Teacher Effectiveness Measure evaluation system for the 2011-12 school year. The stateapproved components and weightings of the TEM are: 50% Student Growth and Achievement (measured by TVAAS and other student performance data); 40% Observation of Practice (assessed with a new MCS-developed Teaching & Learning Framework); 5% Stakeholder Perceptions (measured by the TRIPOD student survey); and 5% Teacher Knowledge (based on a menu of options such as Praxis scores, teacher work portfolios and completion of content-specific professional development). MCS teachers played a vital role in shaping this first iteration of TEM. The Teacher Evaluation Working Group helped develop MCSs framework and corresponding observation rubric, chose the measures for Stakeholder Perceptions and Teacher Knowledge, and selected the component weightings for the whole TEM.1 Their recommendation to the TEI Executive Committee is provided in Appendix C and MCSs new observation framework is provided in Appendix D. Additionally, content-specific teacher groups refined specialized observation rubrics for non-traditional groups such as guidance counselors and special education teachers as well as the menu of options for Teacher Knowledge throughout the summer of 2011. A TEI White Paper on Content Knowledge is provided in Appendix E. Strategy Two: Make Smarter Decisions about Who Teaches Another highlight of Year Two of TEI implementation was that MCS and external partner STARS (the Memphis-based New Teacher Project office) met all major teacher staffing targets for the 2011-12 school year. These targets include filling 100% of vacancies that were identified prior to August 1st by the first day of classes; meeting all partner program placement targets, totaling 190 candidates from Teach For America, Memphis Teaching Fellows, and Memphis Teacher Residency; and assembling a high-quality new teacher pool of over 1,800 candidates through earlier, more streamlined staffing timelines and intensive recruiting efforts. The collaborative efforts between STARS, internal staffing and budgeting offices, and the Memphis Education Association (MEA) to allow for earlier, more flexible staffing in hard-to-staff subjects and high-priority schools have been instrumental to the success of this work. Moreover, MCS has taken the first strides in enabling more strategic school staffing processes on multiple fronts. The STARS office implemented MCSs first-ever online teacher transfer application process, which helped contribute to over 92% of all teacher placements (internal, external and surplus) occurring through mutual consent between principals and candidates. Two elementary schools and two high schools also participated in new performancebased strategic staffing approaches that have the potential to be scaled up in 2012. Staffing progress from STARS perspective is provided in Appendix F. Strategy Three: Better Support, Utilize, and Compensate Teachers A major component of improving the evaluation process to support teachers during this reporting period was to prepare all teachers and school leaders for the many changes and improvements to teacher evaluations in Year Three. At this time, almost 700 MCS personnel have completed a two-day training on the new Teaching & Learning Framework and over 570 administrators have obtained certification to conduct classroom observations. More details are provided in Appendix G. All teachers have also received in-person training from DTTE staff on TEM and the new observation framework at a district-wide Practitioners Summit teachers conference in August and again in smaller group sessions at the start of the 2011-12 school year. The district has also increased organizational capacity needed to better support and
1
It should be noted that state law mandates that the Student Growth & Achievement components of TEM comprise 35% and 15%, respectively, for a total of 50% of all teacher evaluations.

compensate teachers in ways that are integrated with rigorous, TEM-based evaluations. DTTE recently hired a Coordinator of Career Management to spearhead planning for our new teacher compensation and career path structures to be introduced in 2012-13. MCS is also prepared to scale up the innovative technology and reflective practice resources that were piloted in Spring 2011namely classroom camera technology and real-time coachingto achieve district-wide access to individualized forms of teacher support in 2011-12. We are in the process of finalizing our district video use policy and increasing our inventory of cameras to 185 to support this effort. Plans for these programs are described in Appendix H. Finally, just as we are asking more of our teachers through a more rigorous evaluation process, we have also scaled up efforts and local philanthropic support to recognize our top-performing teachers through the I Teach. I Am public campaign, a Teacher Tenure Celebration, a district-wide end of year celebration for teachers in May 2011 and monthly recognition events based on teacher performance data. Our teacher recognition progress and planning is described in Appendix I. Strategy Four: Improve the Surrounding Context to Foster Effective Teaching The Efficacy Institutes Student Envoy Project continues to be a critical part of Strategy Four implementation. This organization has already recruited and trained over 1,150 students and nearly 200 faculty supporters in 76 schools to participate in the 2011-12 cohort, enabling student-driven culture and climate work in our schools. Envoys work is detailed in Appendix J. Another important piece of this strategy has been improving school and district leadership capacity through the TEI-aligned Leadership Effectiveness Initiative (LEI). In order to bolster organizational capacity to roll out this work, MCS has engaged with partner organization New Leaders for New Schools (NLNS) to lead project management for LEI. Now that the initial groundwork has been laid, Year Three will be a proof point for increased LEI implementation. Finally, a major new development for Strategy Four is the introduction of technology tools to support principals in making data-driven human capital decisions, specifically through the online TEM observation software program (formerly called the Online Principal Teacher Evaluation System, or OPTES) and through Tableau software that provides school leaders with real-time student and teacher data dashboards. A comprehensive long-term technology solution for managing data at the district level is yet to be finalized at this time; however, these early solutions for school-level management needs show great potential and have been received very positively among MCS administrators. In addition to documenting our progress on all Year Two activities and outcomes (based on our milestones and data dashboard indicators, respectively), this year-end report highlights the major reprioritizations, successes and challenges we have identified since our previous Stock Take in April 2011. They reflect our ongoing efforts to build upon our momentum around TEI internally and in the community and to anticipate risks associated with policy and governing structure changes that lie ahead. The financial report and corresponding dashboard on our Teacher Effectiveness Initiative describes our expenditures for Year Two of the IPS grant. We have also updated our sustainability plans to ensure lasting impact across the short- and long-term initiatives in the TEI scope of work. In sum, these reflections on our work as it transitions fully to district-wide execution reinforce our continued focus on our common vision: a future in which every child in Memphis graduates high school with the skills and abilities to grow, prosper and thrive, transforming our city by transforming our schools. 3

II. Progress on Activities, Milestones, Outcomes, and Impact Dashboard Reflections Metrics and reflections regarding the MCS Data Dashboard can be found in the Excel file that is being submitted with this report.
Milestone Reflections The following section describes MCSs progress towards accomplishing its Year Two activity-based milestones as outlined in Appendix A.

Accomplished Not Accomplished
STRATEGY 1: CREATE A COMMON, AGREED UPON DEFINITION OF EFFECTIVENESS Key Strategic Initiatives
1. Execute on the objectives of the Gates Research Plan
Year 2 Targets
Capture value-added data Capture content knowledge data Conduct video observations of 500 teachers Administer TRIPOD student survey Develop a summary document of implications of MET project to inform TEM (From Years 1 7) Hire coordinator and additional staff; formalize roles
Accomplished
Rationale
MCS completed all major milestones for the MET Project and has received additional funding for a Year 3 MET Extension.
2. Establish the Office of Teacher Effectiveness Measurement
The TEM Office continues to operate under the direction of Coordinator Dr. Rorie Harris, who has two additional research analysts to help support this work. All teachers and principals received online training on value-added data. The state provided additional in-person trainings for administrators on value-added data through Battelle for Kids. However, no assessment of stakeholders understanding of value-add has been completed.
3. Conduct intensive training of MCS teachers and principals to improve awareness of valueadd metrics
Create training materials and host trainings: value-added data (Fall 2010) 80% of teachers report that they understand how value-added data are calculated Create materials and host trainings: all TEM components (Spring 2011) 80% of teachers report that they understand how the TEM will be calculated Conduct a benchmarking analysis of how TEM components are used in other districts Growth: Develop and launch a campaign to secure access to TVAAS data Collect/analyze value added data in core subjects (Mathematica, TVAAS if available) Develop proposal for growth component for non-core grades and subjects; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Observation: Select rubric for use in 2011-12 based on pilots of three rubrics a) develop operational plan to test the rubrics b) conduct pilots
4. Develop and implement each component of the TEM
MCS received official state approval of its TEM evaluation system to implement districtwide in 2011-12. Growth: TVAAS data have been secured from the state. By state law, non-tested subjects will utilize school-level TVAAS data for 2011-12 teacher evaluations, but MCS will continue to develop measures for non-tested subjects in collaboration with the state and MCS teacher groups. Observation: An observation rubric has been developed with the Teacher Evaluation Working Group and approved to use for teacher evaluations.

c) develop report and recommendations for 2011-2012 Knowledge: Field test knowledge measurements; develop proposal for content knowledge component of TEM; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Stakeholder: Field test modified stakeholder feedback measurements; develop proposal for stakeholder perspectives component of TEM; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Knowledge: A menu of options has been developed and finalized by MCS teachers to measure Teacher Knowledge for 201112 Stakeholder: The TRIPOD student survey will be utilized for all teachers except for Special Education in 2011-12. Measures of parent and peer perceptions will be developed during 2011-12 for the 2012-13 TEM model.
STRATEGY 2: MAKE SMARTER DECISIONS ABOUT WHO TEACHES Key Strategic Initiatives
1. Improve the recruitment and hiring of high potential teachers
Year 2 Targets
Develop a process to incent early notification and confirmation of vacancies Develop a process to synergize TNTP and HR efforts to ensure optimum hiring processes/timelines Develop a recommended approach and implement policy and practice changes Develop and implement a plan to ensure early identification of and offers to teachers in high-needs areas Winter/spring/early summer: staff all vacancies within 30 days of identification Vacancies identified by July 1st: staff 100% of vacancies by July 15th Between July 15th and start of school: staff all vacancies within 1 week of identification Develop and implement improved processes and communications with partner organizations to facilitate placement A significant portion of partner candidates are placed in highpriority schools and feeder patterns Define the goals of and plan for partner clustering
Accomplished
Rationale
100% of vacancies identified st by August 1 were filled as of on the first day of classes. STARS, HR and other internal MCS offices improved the hiring and transfer timelines in 2011-12 by 1-2 months and implemented electronic transfer and vacancy identification processes to further improve efficiency.
2.
2. Better coordinate and leverage outside partnerships that recruit and place high potential teachers in MCS
Through successful negotiations with the MEA teachers union, MCS was able to leverage partner candidates for placement in its high needs schools. In collaboration with STARS, the district met all partner placement targets, totaling 190 candidate hires.

Key Strategic Initiatives
3. Increase retention of effective teachers, particularly early in their careers
Year 2 Targets
Develop comprehensive recognition and retention strategy for teachers Develop a program of support for struggling teachers Develop a reliable method of identifying high performers for targeted outreach Performance-based retention bonus designed and communicated
Accomplished
Rationale
The Prestige Awards, Teacher Tenure Celebration and end-of-year teacher celebration were held to recognize and appreciate teachers in Spring 2011 and the I Teach I Am monthly performance awards will launch in Fall 2011. However, a comprehensive retention strategy is still in development for high-performing teachers and other target populations. DTTE offered several professional development opportunities for teachers and one-on-one guidance for principals on the current teacher evaluation, leading to a more than twofold increase in non-reelections that were upheld by Labor Relations. Policy development has been initiated to support new tenure hearing processes in 2011-12 but this has yet to be finalized. Teacher attendance is now regularly monitored by the district, and principals will have the capability to monitor individual teachers through the Tableau technology platform in 2011-12. However, district policy has not yet been drafted delineating professionalism expectations for teachers.
4. Raise the bar and improve the process for granting tenure
Generate a plan for tenure review process in order to: a) improve the processes for granting tenure and tenure hearings b) improve the tenure hearing process for tenured teachers Implement processes to ensure rigorous tenure decisions are made in 2010-11 utilizing existing tools and processes
5. Increase turnover of the districts most ineffective teachers
Develop and promulgate Gold Standard for Teacher Professional Behavior
STRATEGY 3: BETTER SUPPORT, UTILIZE AND COMPENSATE TEACHERS Key Strategic Initiatives
1. 11. Improve the teacher evaluation process
Year 2 Targets
Develop and provide training and tools to support principals in making better evaluation decisions using current evaluation Pilot new comprehensive evaluations with a select group of teachers Plan for smooth transition to full scale evaluation roll-out, capturing
Accomplished
Rationale
The observation field test was successfully completed with 500 teacher participants and 65 observers and an MCS observation rubric based on DC IMPACT was developed for 2011-12. All teachers and over 600 administrators have

Key Strategic Initiatives Year 2 Targets
relevant learnings from observation pilot Plan and execute training for observers for 2011-12 2. Connect professional support to individual need Design and pilot formative observation process Align formative observation tool with menu of options for professional development and provide training to observers and administrators on use of this tool
Accomplished
Rationale
completed training on the 2011-12 TEM evaluation system and rubric. Reflective Practice pilots for written feedback, coinvestigation and real-time coaching were successfully completed in Spring 2011. A PD/Teacher Support Resource Guide aligned to new observation rubric and other TEM components is now available. Individualized teacher growth plans will be a necessary component of all teacher observations in 2011-12. We recognize the need to align this work with the TEM evaluation tool, which will be implemented initially in 201112. The timeline and milestones for differentiated career paths have thus been adjusted to extend planning into SY 2011-12.
3. Create new and differentiated career paths based on effectiveness and accomplishment
Field test differentiated roles and utilization strategies a) develop criteria for selection of teachers b) plan for field testing (including utilization of technology, modified schedules, etc.) c) execute field testing Develop plan to support and incent principals to test differentiated role and utilization strategies
4. Compensate teachers Plan for new base compensation based on differentiated structure is developed roles and performance
Capacity to accomplish this work has increased significantly with a new internal hire to coordinate compensation work, partnerships with private firms and a joint MEA/MCS Compensation committee. However, planning did not begin until 2011-12 to allow for district-wide implementation of TEM. The EPIC program meets current need for group bonuses. MCS specific approach will be developed in conjunction with other compensation and career path elements above to correspond with implementation of the TEM.
5. Provide performancebased bonus opportunities to groups of teachers based on group attainment of student achievement goals
Plan for new base compensation structure is developed Continue with EPIC

Key Strategic Initiatives
6. Strategically place our best teachers where they are needed most
Year 2 Targets
Solicit excellent teachers for movement to high-priority schools through communication campaign
Accomplished
Rationale
MCS and MEA completed negotiations to increase hiring flexibility and placement at SSZ and other high-priority schools to meet early hiring targets. Further, 92% of all hires were accomplished through mutual consent and four schools were able to participate in Fresh Start strategic staffing approach. MCS and MEA completed negotiations to open two feeder patterns for placing partner program teachers in high-priority schools and to increase hiring flexibility and placement at SSZ and ASD schools. All major staffing targets were met for 2011-12 including the placement of 190 partner program teachers in MCS schools.
7. Cluster high Define high potential for internal potential teacher candidates recruits in schools that Develop process for tracking and have high reporting on success of clustering concentrations of candidates high-need students Cluster high potential teachers in high priority schools and feeder patterns 70% of high-potential [partner program] teachers are placed in a school with 2+ other high potential teachers 70% of high-potential [partner program] teachers are placed in a priority feeder pattern with 8+ other partner program teachers 8. Build a service oriented culture in the district towards teachers Research service needs of teachers Build a teacher portal
Although MCS has made progress in capturing teacher feedback about district performance, no further implementation occurred in 2010-11.
STRATEGY 4: IMPROVE CONTEXT TO SUPPORT EFFECTIVE TEACHING Key Strategic Initiatives

1. Improve school culture to create conditions that foster effective teaching/learning
Year 2 Targets
Efficacy Institutes executes Student Envoy Project with current cohort of ~1700 students and conducts training with a fall cohort ~700 students and a summer cohort ~500 students; ~150 teachers trained in this model Analyze Teacher Working Conditions and TRIPOD data to identify culture/climate needs, ties to student achievement and
Accomplished
Rationale
~800 Student Envoys in 52 schools were recruited and trained to execute goals of Efficacy Institute during 2010-11 school year. Over 1,150 students in 76 schools have been trained to participate in 2011-12. The Culture/Climate Task Force continues to meet and identify data reporting needs.

Key Strategic Initiatives Year 2 Targets
produce school-level reports Support regional superintendents and principals in developing school-wide improvement plans based on these data, ensuring utilization of PBIS resources 2. Improve principal leadership capacity Develop and implement training and tools to support principals in delivering more robust evaluations Develop comprehensive principal syllabus with a monthly training element for TEI Develop LEI execution plan in alignment with TEI Strategically place high-performing principals to high-need schools and remove low-performing principals Training sessions were conducted and teacher performance metrics shared with principals throughout 2010-11 to improve human capital management decisions. Over 600 administrators have completed training on TEM and new observation rubric and continue to receive monthly norming training to improve inter-rater reliability. New Leaders for New Schools has been officially commissioned to manage LEI; however, additional traction and alignment with TEI is still needed to keep this work on track. Principals have received electronic tools and training to manage the observation process (RANDA) and school-level data analysis (Tableau). However, a vendor still has not been finalized for developing whole-TEM electronic tool. More long-term technology solutions must be explored to improve district-level performance in lieu of an ERP.
Accomplished
Rationale
3. Develop a new technology platform that will support the data-driven decisionmaking that is crucial to the success of TEI
Assess state of RFP and ensure RFP is put out to bid Reengineer business process to inform ERP selection and implementation Interim solution for HR/Evaluations launch by Spring 2011
10

Milestone Reflections: Reprioritizations Going Into Year Three MCS made significant progress across all four strategies towards completion of our Year Two milestones. Although some strategic initiatives were more successful than others, we were still able to accomplish our most critical, non-negotiable milestones including state approval of the TEM for 2011-12, drastically improved recruitment and staffing processes, and the introduction of technology tools to better facilitate evaluation, staffing and school management going forward. Yet new and refined priorities have also emerged upon completing two full years of TEI given the changing context of our public education reform work, our growing experience with implementation and the feedback we have received from teachers in the field that continues to inform our long-term trajectory. Summarized in more detail in Appendix B, our major reprioritizations moving into Year Three are as follows:2 1. Develop and implement each component of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM). Based on changes in state law and on the feedback MCS has received directly from teachers, the TEM Office has developed plans to refine components of the new evaluation tool, specifically student growth measures for non-tested subjects and measures of parent and peer stakeholder perceptions. At this time, the state of Tennessee requires teachers in non-tested subjects to utilize school-wide composite TVAAS data for 35% of their evaluations whereas teachers in tested subjects will utilize individual-level TVAAS for this portion of their evaluations. Those in non-tested subjects have consistently expressed concerns about the fairness of using school composite TVAAS; thus, the TEM Office is committed to working in conjunction with the state to develop additional individual-level student growth measures for non-tested teacher groups. The TEM Office and the Teacher Evaluation Working Group will also explore various methods to assess peer and parent stakeholder perceptions that may be incorporated into the 2012-13 TEM evaluation system, since these components were part of the original Memphis TEI proposal.3 2. Determine district-wide strategic uses of TEM data. Because Year Three will be the first year of district-wide TEI implementation via the TEM, we have established a new milestone to expand our use of TEM data beyond individual teacher evaluations. Potential TEM data uses that have already been identified include analyzing and validating teacher recruitment and staffing models; aligning teacher TEM profiles with individualized support and growth opportunities; and informing planning for the new teacher compensation and career path system. The success of this milestone will depend greatly on our ability to integrate TEM data systems with staffing, human resources and professional development systems and on establishing clear and consistent methods for sharing and reporting this data to relevant stakeholders. 3. Provide innovative and collaborative professional growth opportunities for teachers, and Evaluate teacher support and professional development offerings. In addition to strategic initiatives to improve the evaluation process and connect professional support to individual need for teachers, MCS has established a new Strategy Three initiative to provide innovative and collaborative growth opportunities for teachers. This reprioritization is largely in response to the success of the reflective practice pilots and Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Project and Sub-Study that allowed teachers to
2
It should be noted that a major reprioritization for Year Threeoriginally planned for Year Twois designing and planning the new teacher compensation system. However, this is covered in detail in the April 2011 Stock Take. 3 For 2011-12, only student perceptions as measured by the TRIPOD survey will be incorporated into teachers TEM scores.
11

utilize innovations such as camera technology and real-time coaching to improve and refine effective teaching practices in their classrooms. Given the introduction of more rigorous teacher evaluations in Year Three and the many positive experiences early adopters have reported from the field regarding these innovations, MCS is committed to scaling up these resources so that all schools will have opportunities to access them in the coming year, as outlined in Appendix H. A related new milestone is to evaluate teacher support and professional development offerings to ensure that we invest in the growth opportunities for teachers that are most appropriate, effective and highly targeted according to individual teachers needs. This new initiative is also in alignment with project sustainability plans to create cost savings through the integration of professional development resources with other teacher support offerings. Although further planning has not yet been solidified, MCS is exploring potential technology platforms to integrate teacher performance outcomes with our professional development course management system to begin this process. 4. Increase district-wide teacher engagement and recognition opportunities. Because the long-term success of TEI relies greatly on teacher acceptance and buy-in, we have introduced this new implementation milestone for Year Three to continue increasing teachers understanding of and involvement in the development and implementation of TEI. Further details are provided in Section VI of this report and in Appendix I. 5. Provide performance-based bonus opportunities to groups of teachers based on group attainment of student achievement goals. Our original proposal called for the design of performance-based group bonuses for teachers in Year Three to be disseminated beginning in Year Four. Although some form of group-based bonuses may ultimately become a part of our new teacher compensation structure, we have eliminated this implementation milestone for a few reasons. First, we have not yet seen evidence that suggests performances bonuses are directly tied to significant changes in teacher performance, retention or student outcomes. Second, MCS has obtained additional funding for the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF 3) via federal Race to the Top dollars that satisfies current group bonus needs. These factors have allowed our TEI plans regarding teacher compensation to be more flexible and adaptable as we plan for true implementation in Year Four.
12

III. Implementation Successes Year Two of TEI represented an organizational shift from designing and planning needs to preparation for full-scale implementation in Year Three. Across strategic initiatives, our greatest accomplishments this year have been largely due to several of the following success enablers: Successful interdepartmental and partner collaboration Increased organizational capacity Organizational and cultural shifts in support of teacher effectiveness Improved and streamlined processes Specific initiatives that embody the success enablers identified above include: Develop and implement each component of the TEM. Arguably our districts most significant accomplishment during Year Two was the states approval of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) in June 2011. The TEM will now serve as the foundation for teacher evaluations, individualized teacher support and the restructuring of our compensation and career path system. Additionally, other districts in Tennessee may also adopt the TEM model as a common measure of effective teaching now that it has received official state approval. Success Enabler Successful interdepartmental and partner collaboration TEM Manifestation The Memphis Education Association (MEA)-led Evaluation Working Group continues to be an exemplar in collaboration between teachers and administrators to shape the work of TEI. The Working Group was instrumental in developing the TEM over a period of 18 months, during which it helped develop MCSs framework and corresponding observation rubric found in Appendix D, chose the measures for Stakeholder Perceptions and Teacher Knowledge, and determined component weightings for the whole TEM. The Working Groups recommendation to the TEI Executive Committee regarding the TEM can be found in Appendix C. Additionally, content-specific teacher groups refined the menu of options for Teacher Knowledge throughout the summer of 2011 as well as specialized observation rubrics for non-general education teachers such as guidance counselors and special education teachers. This continual, intensive collaboration has helped ensure that teachers have had a critical, active role in developing a more rigorous but fair evaluation system for our district. More details on the development of content knowledge measures with teachers is located in Appendix E. Since the beginning of Year Two, MCS has created a TEM Office with three staff members and DTTE has hired nine additional staff members to manage TEI centrally. These hires have been key in developing and implementing TEM, specifically in completing the Observation Field Test with 500 teachers and 65 observers (as mentioned in the April Stock Take successes), training and certifying over 570 administrators on the new TEM observation rubric, and conducting in-person training with nearly 7,000 teachers 13
Increased organizational capacity

on TEM in preparation for Year Three at the district-wide Practitioners Summit and in subsequent smaller group sessions. Because the implementation of TEM is so critical to TEIs success, the impact of a nearly complete internal team to manage this work cannot be understated in terms of ensuring all stakeholders are supported in executing evaluations. Finally, cultural shifts within and outside of MCS in support of teacher effectiveness have been a tremendous success enabler with regard to the approval of the TEM. Teacher buy-in through the MEA Working Group and other teacher groups mentioned above are an example of this. TEM has also gained legitimacy through its alignment with a growing body of research from the MET Project and with state First to the Top legislation that now requires all districts to incorporate student growth and achievement data in their teacher evaluation systems. All of these factors led to a seamless state approval process for MCS to utilize the TEM in 2011-12.
Organizational and cultural shifts in support of teacher effectiveness
Strategically place our best teachers where they are needed most. In addition to meeting all major staffing and recruiting milestones this year through earlier hiring timelines and improved processes,4 MCS in conjunction with STARS has made great strides in introducing strategic staffing initiatives in the district to place high-potential and highly effective teachers in schools where they are needed most. More details regarding Memphis staffing work to date can be found in Appendix F.
Success Enabler Successful interdepartmental and partner collaboration Observation Field Test Manifestation Staffing partner STARS continues to be among the highest impact external organizations collaborates with MCS on TEI work; however, it has been the coordinated efforts between STARS personnel and district offices that has allowed TEI staffing work to gain traction over the course of this grant reporting period. STARS worked in conjunction with School Operations, Budget and MEA to identify and grant flexibility to hard-to-staff subjects and schools in which high-potential partner candidates (TFA, MTF and MTR) could be placed in strategic clusters and feeder patterns. Two major organizational culture shifts have occurred in Year Two. First, our staffing work has shifted from tactical improvements, such as intensive recruiting and earlier hiring timelines, to strategic improvements to ensure that administrators and teachers are better positioned to create best fit school teams. For example, MCS implemented a Fresh Start staffing strategy in two elementary and two high schools to increase hiring flexibility based on teachers prior performance. Second, a more dramatic staffing culture shift is the fact that 92% of positions have been filled on the basis of mutual consent between principals and teachers instead of direct placement. According to national TNTP research, mutual consent hiring can increase teacher effectiveness by up to 25%.
Organizational and cultural shifts in support of teacher effectiveness
See April Stock Take Section IV, Implementation Successes for additional details.
14

Improved and streamlined processes As stated in the April 2011 Stock Take, improved and integrated processes between STARS and MCS offices contributed to earlier hiring for external teaching candidates this year. This in turn contributed to a high-quality external pool of over 1,800 teaching candidates for 2011-12. In a recent survey, MCS principals reported 90% agreement that the quality of this years staffing pool has increased over last years pool. Another improved process for a strategic staffing has been implementing fully electronic vacancy identification and teacher transfer processes to shorten school staffing lag time and promote far more mutual consent hiring through transparent, real-time updates on open positions. These capabilities now allow teachers and principals alike to match qualifications with position openings.
15

IV. Implementation Challenges Implementation challenges emerged for some initiatives during the 2010-2011 school year that present opportunities for improvement and highlight external issues that we may be better able to anticipate moving forward. Improve the recruitment and hiring of high potential teachers. The staffing process improvements that MCS and the STARS office have achieved since Year One cannot be understated. Increased collaboration through the cross-functional Staffing Task Force led to drastically streamlined, earlier hiring timelines, which in turn contributed to a high-quality teacher pool of over 1,800 candidates. MCS was able to hire 490 teachers from this pool including 190 partner program candidates; however, the district faced a major budget shortfall in Spring 2011 that has since led to increased class sizes, a larger than typical teacher surplus population (~450 in May 2011), and even layoffs for some teachers and district personnel. Thus, despite much progress on our staffing processes, we have not been able to take full advantage of the candidate pool that has been generated for the 2011-12 school year. These conditions may also limit our ability to build upon our initial strategic staffing work. The district is still committed to minimizing direct placement practices and teacher surplusing wherever possible in order to promote mutual consent and stabilize high-performing school teams that are essential to increasing teacher effectiveness. However, current budget conditions in conjunction with seniority-based collective bargaining agreements have restricted strategic staffing flexibility and our ability to hire new, highpotential teacher candidates. Moreover, the teacher layoffs and large surplus population that resulted from these Year Two budget challenges have had some impact on teacher morale, which poses risks to acceptance and buy-in in the field about TEI and other district reform efforts going forward. Teacher buy-in is critical to the success of TEI in Year Three, particularly in terms of introducing a more rigorous evaluation system and in building on the momentum of our initial strategic staffing work. Present conditions reinforce the need for improving communications around TEM as a support and continuous growth mechanism for teachers and for implementing a comprehensive, high-quality teacher support system in Year Three. Improve the teacher evaluation process. As with our recruitment and hiring work mentioned above, the progress we have accomplished thus far with our evaluation process has been dramatic: all four components of TEM will be implemented district-wide in Year Three; all teachers and principals have received training on TEM; and observations will be processed electronically for the first time rather than through a paper-based system. However, a persistent challenge has been working in tandem with the State of Tennessee to finalize policies, rules and regulations concerning the evaluation process in a timely manner. This challenge is due in part to the gubernatorial political transition that delayed the appointment of a new Commissioner of Education until March 2011. As a result, several state decisions regarding teacher evaluations were also delayed including granting final approval of the TEM evaluation system, providing MCS access to TVAAS student growth data, and finalizing scoring methodology for the TEM and its componentsa decision that is still pending at the time of this publication. Moreover, newly enacted legislation regarding teacher tenure now permits local districts to utilize evaluation data as grounds to dismiss under-performing teachers but gives no guidance on the decision-making process for these dismissals. 16

These factors have complicated our local-level policy development processes and timelines, which have lagged behind the finalization of the TEM evaluation tool itself. While we are on track to finalize new teacher tenure and evaluation policies in the very near future, we have been limited thus far in our ability to communicate clear expectations to teachers and principals regarding what processes and outcomes may occur if teachers are found to be performing below expectations in Year Three. A summary of this work is provided in Appendix L. Moreover, uncertainty remains concerning when and how the state will provide student growth and achievement data and/or any other data inputs to calculate individual teacher TEM scores, which may present serious implementation challenges if not resolved before Spring 2012. Policy alignment challenges like these have underscored both, MCSs need to better anticipate policy implications prior to and following state-based education decisions as well as the need for improved collaboration and communication between state and local education authorities throughout the decisionmaking process.
17

V. Organizational Capacity Since the beginning of Year Two, the Department of Teacher Talent & Effectiveness (DTTE) has made nine key hires to support Memphis roll-out and implementation of TEI work and the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) Office has been fully staffed. New staff members for DTTE and the TEM Office since the April 2011 Stock Take are as follows: Ms. Carole Anderson, TEI Research Analyst Ms. Anderson previously worked in a research and data analysis capacity for the BMGF-funded Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Project Memphis site. She will extend these skills to TEI-related work to assist with program evaluation and implementation benchmark analyses. Ms. Jennifer Chandler, Special Projects Coordinator for Reflective Practice Ms. Chandler was a language arts teacher at White Station Middle School and real-time coach as part of the MET Project Sub-Study prior to joining DTTE in September 2011. She is assisting new Coordinator of Reflective Practice Monica Jordan in increasing teachers access to innovative support resources such as camera technology and real-time coaching as part of TEI Strategy Three. Mr. Marqui Fifer, Special Projects Coordinator for Teacher Evaluation Mr. Fifer was most recently an administrator at American Way Middle School before joining DTTE in May 2011. He is assisting Coordinator of Teacher Evaluation Carla Holloway in preparing teachers and principals to implement the new TEM evaluation system, especially in conducting more rigorous classroom observations. Ms. Anasa Franklin, Research Analyst for the MET Extension Ms. Franklin will continue her current work as a Research Analyst for the MET Project Extension, albeit with a focus on professional growth and support offerings rather than teacher evaluation. She, along with Ms. Chandler and Ms. Jordan, will provide additional organizational capacity to implement Strategy Three initiatives. Ms. Monica Jordan, Coordinator of Reflective Practice Ms. Jordan came to DTTE in May 2011 after serving as Coordinator for the MET Project during the second year of this national research study and sub-study. With her expertise as a former high school English teacher, literacy coach and coordinator for MET, she has begun scaling up innovative support resources and programs for teachers as part of TEI Strategy Three. Mr. Mike Neal, Coordinator of Teacher Career Management Mr. Neal is a recently appointed Resident from the Broad Center for the Management of School Systems who joined the DTTE team in August 2011. He will manage planning, design and eventual implementation of a new career and compensation structure for teachers, a major execution milestone for Strategy Three of TEI. The hires above have bolstered the organizational capacity of our TEI team. However, we recognize that the key to truly successful implementation of our work still relies on the broader, cross-functional support 18

of all of our administrative offices and on the buy-in from principals and teachers needed for ground-level execution in the field. We must continue to make the integration of our work with that of these offices and stakeholders a primary focus of our plans throughout the duration of our IPS grant. Because increased collaboration and communication were key themes of this years TEI Cross-Functional Team retreat, we have resolved to reinstate interdepartmental, time-bound and project-specific task forces for TEM implementation, teacher support and teacher compensation work.
19

VI. Risks In the original proposal, the following risks to the success of TEI in MCS were identified: Human Resources Capacity Teacher Acceptance and Buy-In Fidelity of Implementation and Consistent Follow-Through Potential Changes in Administration MCS has been methodically making efforts to contend with each of these risks as follows: Human Resources Capacity As noted in the previous Stock Take, the cross-functional structure of the Staffing Task Force and, subsequently, increased cooperation in general between various MCS offices has contributed to a more streamlined, competitive timeline for hiring new teaching candidates. However, the Task Force has identified key areas for continued improvement including cross-organizational alignment of staffing benchmark metrics and reporting, shared performance targets and staffing timeline milestones, and increased collaboration regarding potential staffing and budget challenges in future staffing seasons. Moreover, continued efforts to clarify roles, responsibilities and integrated staffing processes are needed to build upon the improvements of Year Two and increase interdepartmental efficiency. In terms of more intermediate and long-term plans to increase human resources capacity, MCS is currently conducting a national search for a new HR Executive Director, as the current department head is in an interim position. A recent technology audit of MCSs human capital data systems has also provided new insights into current infrastructure gaps and potential technology solutions to increase organizational capacity and efficiency. A long-term technology solution has not yet been identified, however. Teacher Acceptance and Buy-In MCS continues to experience both successes and challenges related to teacher acceptance and buy-in, especially as we introduce the more rigorous TEM evaluation system in the field. Throughout Year Two, teachers have continued to voice concerns about the fairness and accuracy of a more rigorous, multidimensional system, particularly as it pertains to student growth measures for non-tested subjects and having multiple observations for all teachers annually. Although both of these dimensions were shaped by state law, we believe it is critical to demonstrate the potential power of TEM as a tool for continuous growth, feedback and support for effective teaching, not as a means to sort or dismiss ineffective teachers. There is still much work to be done familiarizing both teachers and administrators with the new TEM evaluation system and supporting processes as well as fostering a culture of continuous growth and self-reflection around effective teaching. However, MCS has employed the following communications strategies and mediums to increase teachers understanding of and engagement with TEM and other TEI initiatives:
1. DTTE has conducted several training sessions about TEM, first at the August 2011 Practitioners Summit (a two-day professional development conference for all teachers), and then at various school sites where staff provided all teachers with a deep dive session on the new TEM observation rubric.
20

2. The MCS Foundation has launched a new TEI website5 that will serve as the primary information portal for teachers, principals, and other MCS stakeholders about the TEM and other TEI-related district reforms. The website is also a platform for teacher-driven social media that stands to increase field-driven engagement with TEI. 3. Under the direction of MCS Foundation Communications Strategist Diane Terrell, the I Teach. I Am public recognition campaign has been launched to acknowledge high-performing and early adopter MCS teachers in the teacher effectiveness movement. 4. MCS will continue several of its teacher engagement strategies that were initiated earlier in Year Two including the TEI Teacher Ambassadors program, which provides selected teachers with ongoing training about TEI messaging that they can share with their respective schools, and the TEI Institutes, Saturday half-day events that promote intensive discussions and interactions with teachers through rotating breakout sessions about various aspects of TEI.
Given dramatic changes to the teacher evaluation system, political uncertainties about the pending citycounty school merger in August 2013, and the budget challenges contributing to recent district layoffs, the need for continued, responsive and impactful work to increase morale and engagement in the field has never been greater. Our teacher recognition work is highlighted in more detail in Appendix I. Fidelity of Implementation and Consistent Follow-Through As mentioned in Section V on Organizational Capacity, DTTE and the TEM Office are now almost fully staffed, which has enabled our internal team to accomplish all major milestones to date and improve our consistency and follow-through across nearly all strategies and initiatives. In terms of improving interdepartmental and organizational collaboration, our bi-weekly TEI Cross-Functional Team meetings, biweekly Staffing Task Force meetings, weekly TEI coordinators meetings and weekly regional superintendents meetings have come to serve as the primary vehicles for communicating and coordinating teacher effectiveness efforts with numerous internal offices and external partners. Due to the large-scale goals to implement numerous TEI work strands district-wide over the course of Year Three, the reinstatement of interdepartmental task forces for TEM implementation, teacher support and teacher compensation work will bolster our ability to complete these milestones consistently and with fidelity. Yet the most critical factor in the success of TEI moving forward is enabling consistency and fidelity of implementation among teachers and administrators in the field, especially as it pertains to completing all components of TEM for every teacher in Year Three. DTTE and the TEM Office have made early progress by conducting initial trainings with teachers and principals about TEM throughout Spring 2011 and at the onset of the 2011-12 school year. Nearly all (N = 6,624) teachers also attended deep dive training sessions on the new TEM observation rubric and now have access to a TEM Toolkit information portal on the TEI website. As mentioned in the subsection on teacher acceptance and buy-in, DTTE will also continue to host more intimate, interactive TEI Institutes with a focus on TEM components and corresponding support strategies throughout Year Three to promote deeper
5
www.mcstei.com
21

understanding in the field. DTTE has also created a TEM Manual (exhibited in Appendix K) that all MCS staff and community stakeholders can access online to gain a better understanding of TEM components and processes. In terms of improving leadership capacity to implement TEM-related processes, over 600 MCS administrators including all principals and assistant principals completed two-day trainings on the TEM observation rubric over the summer. Administrators were then required to complete a certification process, during which they rated video vignettes of teaching lessons using the TEM observation rubric in order to demonstrate inter-rater reliability and objectivity. At the time of this publication, 573 administrators have successfully obtained certification out of 579 (99%) of those who have attempted this process and out of 659 (87%) of all MCS administrators who are eligible6 to conduct observations during 2011-12. More details on the training and certification process can be found in Appendix G. Principals and other administrators will receive ongoing support and training to improve inter-rater reliability throughout 2011-12 at the districts monthly Principals Meeting and with the assistance of external partner Insight Education Group, which developed the TEM observation rubric and Teaching & Learning Framework in collaboration with the Teacher Evaluation Working Group. Although these initial trainings have laid the foundation for a basic understanding of TEM in the field, it is a top priority of TEI staff to monitor and respond to any teachers and principals misunderstandings about this complex new evaluation tool and foster a deeper knowledge of TEM among all key stakeholders through multiple communications avenues regularly. Furthermore, now that all observation data and other TEM components will be housed electronically, MCS has powerful new tools at our disposal to monitor the quality of TEM data, identify trends in teacher and observer performance in completing TEM processes and respond to the needs of the field in real time. Potential Changes in Administration Although there are no anticipated changes to our internal administrative team in the immediate term, MCS will experience a major school governance transformation in October when the current nine member MCS Board of Commissioners will become part of a twenty-three member unified, countywide school board. The unified board will also include all seven current members of the Shelby County Schools (SCS) Board of Commissioners and seven new members appointed by the Shelby County Commission. This body will oversee the winding down of operations of Memphis City Schools and the currently all-suburban Shelby County Schools, while also assuming responsibility for adopting a transition plan for a consolidated school system that begins with the 2013-14 school year.7 Additionally, as required by recent state legislation known as the Norris-Todd bill, the Shelby County Commission has established a separate twenty-one member merger panel charged with creating a transition plan to be approved by the state Department of Education and then the unified local school board. The transition panel includes five members appointed by MCS, five members appointed by SCS, five members appointed by Shelby County mayor Mark Luttrell, three members appointed by state officials Governor Bill Haslam, Lieutenant Governor Ron Ramsey and Speaker of the House Beth
6 7
Eligible administrators are those who hold administrative licensure and are not currently teaching. McMillin, Zack. Deal puts new 23-member board in control of Memphis, Shelby County schools Oct. 1. Commercial Appeal. Aug. 24, 2011.
22

Harwell, and three non-voting members: current MCS Board President Martavius Jones, current SCS Board President David Pickler, and Mayor Mark Luttrell. Although these new governing and policy-shaping entities will include several members who have deep knowledge of TEI and who have historically supported our efforts, there is much traction to be made with those stakeholders who are not familiar with TEI as a reform platform or as an intensive, strategic approach to meeting the needs of our student population. Our most important strategies to address the challenges of these governance transitions are outlined in further detail in Section IX, Sustainability Plans, in terms of the enduring bonds we have fostered with external partners, philanthropic and business leaders, and community-based advocates. Yet we are also working internally to sustain our work at this time through the development and implementation of TEIrelated district policies concerning teacher evaluation, tenure and classroom camera usage. Not only will these policies provide a framework to enforce fidelity of implementation, they will also lay the foundation for carrying this work forward with administrative changes ahead. Details of these policies in development and additional legislative changes with policy implications are outlined in Appendix L.
23

VII. Financial Report The MCS Budget-to-Actual financial report has been completed and is being submitted in Excel along with this Progress Report.
24

VIII. Budget Narrative Our TEI Executive Committee, which consists of senior leadership from the MCS administration, the MCS Board of Commissioners and MEA teachers union, approved a reforecasted budget for Year Two in December 2010 to reflect changing priorities and work plans for Spring 2011 and to amend potential variances from the original budget. Along the same lines, the Executive Committee also approved a reforcasted budget for Year Three in August 2011. The variances and anticipated future revisions outlined below summarize the programmatic, philosophical and strategic shifts we have experienced since our initial TEI proposal in November 2009. These variances are a result of our best thinking on how to address both, what we have learned from research evidence and our stakeholders insights over the past two years and the adjustments we now propose in order to maximize long-term sustainability and feasibility. It deserves emphasis that MCS is still fully committed to executing against all major milestones; however we have revised some programmatic work to support these strategies that we believe will have greater impact with the resources we have allocated. Budget Variances and Anticipated Revisions Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) MCS has begun planning for the creation of a PAR program in which rigorously selected and trained high-performing teachers would serve the role of both mentor and evaluator for early-career and struggling teachers. PAR also contains a joint teacher and administrator panel review process for new and struggling teachers to drive retention, dismissal and support strategies. Based on our research on other districts that utilize PAR (such as Minneapolis, Montgomery County, MD, and Columbus, OH), we believe this program of work can have significant impacts on our milestones related to improving the tenure and evaluation processes, providing individualized support to teachers and determining potential Master Teacher roles and responsibilities. We will use the funding originally allocated towards the implementation of a tenure review board, professional evaluators, and Lead Teacher pilots for the development of this related but more highly integrated work. It should be noted that, implemented with fidelity, the review panel component of PAR has significant implications for reducing labor and litigation costs associated with improving the rigor of our evaluation process and dismissing chronically underperforming teachers. More details about Memphis plans to implement PAR can be found in Appendix M. Teacher Compensation and Performance Bonuses As stated in our previous April 2011 Stock Take, we have delayed the implementation timeline for introducing a new compensation and career path structure for strategic reasons. Namely, we determined that we could not proceed with differentiating compensation until we have established a common measure of effective teaching, the TEM, to differentiate teacher performance. Our revised budget shows extended planning and technical assistance to design this work into Year Three rather than initiating field tests and pilots throughout Years Two and Three or introducing the new compensation system to new teachers in Year Three. Moreover, we feel that any work concerning performance and/or retention bonuses should align with planning for the new compensation system. The research8 we have encountered since submitting the proposal shows no significant correlation between
8
Springer, Matthew. 2010. Teacher Pay for Performance: Experimental Evidence from the Project on Incentives in Teaching. http://www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=TiVh1dwM7fk%3D&tabid=1646&mid=10218 Fryer, Roland G. 2011. Teacher Incentives and Student Achievement: Evidence from New York City Public Schools. http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/fryer/files/teacher%2Bincentives.pdf
25

performance bonuses and improved teacher performance, retention or student outcomes. MCS has obtained additional funding for the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF 3) via federal Race to the Top dollars that satisfies current group bonus needs. These factors have allowed our TEI plans regarding teacher compensation to be more flexible and adaptable as we plan for initial implementation in Year Four. Innovative Support and Reflective Practice Resources Another significant Strategy Three development since the onset of our IPS grant has been the introduction of new and innovative resources to support teachers in reflecting upon and improving their classroom practices, namely camera technology and real-time coaching utilized in our MET Project Sub-Study. This pilotscale works significant early successes in terms of both teachers receptiveness and the growing number of functions we have identified for these resources have compelled us to increase access district-wide in Year Three and beyond. We will increase our camera inventory in Year Three to ensure every school has access to this technology for purposes of self-reflection, peer-to-peer sharing and even teachers formal TEM evaluations on a voluntary basis. A detailed outline of this program of support is provided in Appendix H. Technology Solutions Our original proposal called for the implementation of an ERP system to overhaul the current IT infrastructure and establish a central data repository. From a feasibility standpoint, we have since determined that a large-scale overhaul like this would be cost-heavy and require a prolonged period of development before implementation that could compromise our work in the short and intermediate term. We have shifted to implementing more flexible and immediately effective bridge solutions including our data management system, Tableau, which allows for school-level business intelligence analysis for principals as well as district-level blending of data systems for broader human capital analysis to inform our decisions. However, we are still exploring potential long-term solutions that pose more financial and administrative feasibility. Stakeholder Development and Engagement Due to the political and governmental uncertainties associated with the pending school system merger, we have injected more of our resources into stakeholder development and engagement strategies for our Board of Commissioners, MEA teachers union and into teacher engagement efforts. Investment in stakeholder development during this time of transition is critical to the sustainability of teacher effectiveness efforts and discussed in more detail in Section IX. Technical Assistance Two cost-drivers associated with technical assistance for our internal TEI team have carried over into our upcoming Year Three work. First, we have engaged external partner the Parthenon Group to assist with reforecasting our seven-year TEI budget and revising our sustainability plans for this work. Given the strategic changes listed above and the current MCS budget climate, we have judged that revisions are necessary to maximize both financial feasibility and the programmatic impact of TEI. Second, we have allocated additional funds towards district litigation costs this year in anticipation of increasing the rigor and multidimensionality of our evaluation system. Recent high-profile incidents in New York and D.C. suggest teachers may attempt to test the validity of TEM in the courts, so we have increased resources to mitigate this risk.
26

Additional Funds MCS Foundation Local Contributions Local private contributions continue to be a major point of success regarding community support for TEI. The MCS Foundation has now raised over $19 million towards its original seven-year fundraising goal of $21.5 million to supplement BMGFs original IPS grant. Because of this unexpectedly rapid outpouring of local support, Memphis is now more than 90% of the way towards its fundraising goal. The details on the funds raised are as follows: Funding Source Hyde Family Foundation Anonymous FedEx Plough Foundation The Assisi Foundation International Paper Foundation First Tennessee Foundation AutoZone Jabie and Helen Hardin Charitable Trust Kemmons Wilson Foundation The Community Foundation Individual Donor 1 Individual Donor 2 Individual Donor 3 Individual Donor 4 Individual Donor 5 Individual Donor 6 Individual Donor 7 Individual Donor 8 Individual Donor 9 TOTAL $ Amount 3,091,250 3,091,250 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 1,250,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 750,000 250,000 250,000 15,000 10,000 2,000 1,000 500 100 100 50 25 19,311,175 Grant Start Date 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2011 2012 2011 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2011 2010 2009 2011 2009 2010 Grant End Date 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 2014 2015 2016 2015 2014 2014 2014 2014 2012
2011 Leader|Share Conference MCS received grant funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) separate from our IPS grant to host the second annual Leader|Share conference with leadership from 30 other districts in Fall 2011. The conference is an opportunity for nearby districts to learn more about Memphis TEI work and also to participate in critical dialogue about how to improve, refine and expand this work across districts. A new development for this years conference is that BMGF will provide an additional $150,000 in order for visiting school districts to apply for $5,000 grants to begin designing and planning elements of teacher effectiveness in their own jurisdictions. The Educational Testing Service (ETS) has also provided additional sponsorship and will bring representatives to explore new ways of measuring teacher knowledge.
27

MET Project Extension Following Memphis noteworthy success upon completing the national BMGF-sponsored Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) research project, our district has received additional funding and support to conduct a MET Extension in 2011-12 that focuses on the creation of a video library of teaching practices for the purposes of professional development and support. More details can be found in Appendix H.
28

IX. Sustainability Plans Funding MCS is in the process of revising its sustainability plan with technical assistance from the Parthenon Group. More details regarding revenue and expenditure adjustments and reforecasted budget assumptions will be made available in preparation for our October Stock Take Convening. Beyond the redeployment of existing resources to sustain TEI, there is a requirement to raise $21.5 million to support the MCS program of work. According to the original plan, the MCS Foundation had the responsibility of raising the $21.5 over a seven year period. With enormous skill and dispatch, over $19 million has already been raised, as can be seen in the Budget Narrative section of this report. Advocacy Although community advocacy was not a major plank in the original request for proposal, it continues to be a central element of sustaining teacher effectiveness work in a period of great political change and transition. It is clear that raising local money to support long-term TEI goals would not have happened had we not developed the TEI Advisory Board, a representing many of the largest employers, philanthropic organizations, and social/civic organizations in the Memphis area. The Board continues to be a critical voice in the transformative work of placing an effective teacher in every classroom and is a linchpin to the long term viability of transforming local public education. The Board includes representatives from: Belz Enterprises, the Memphis Leadership Foundation, Stand For Children, the Memphis Education Association, the Shelby County Government, the City of Memphis Government, the Memphis Urban League, FedEx, the Center for Education Progress, the Shelby County Office of Early Childhood and Youth, the MCS Parent Assembly, the Poplar Foundation, the University of Memphis, La Prensa, First Tennessee Bank, the Plough Foundation, the Hyde Family Foundation, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, SCORE, Sun Trust Bank, Memphis Tomorrow, Christian Brothers University, the Childrens Foundation, the University of Tennessee and the International Paper Company Foundation. In order to further bolster the influence of TEIs largest resident supporters, our Local Funders group has also established a quarterly meeting structure to increase understanding and opportunities to utilize their influence with policymakers and other civic leaders. Representatives from these advisory bodies as well as other local philanthropic and business leaders have also begun to play larger roles in TEIs efforts to support teachers through regular community-led recognition and appreciation opportunities. To date, MCS has received private sponsorship from a number of entities including Valero Energy Corporation, Cisco Systems, Inc, Turner Dairy and the Memphis Zoo to support the peer nomination-based Prestige Awards in Spring 2011 and the first I Teach. I Am monthly performance-based teacher recognition event. Momentum also continues to build with our community advocacy partners, particularly Stand for Children, United Way, the Memphis Urban League, and new partner Communities for Teaching Excellence, all of which have been leading the charge in establishing a community coalition for education reform. Since the last Stock Take reporting period, these organizations have been working collaboratively to build a coalition for education to engage the broader community in focusing on student achievement. The purpose and the work of the coalition are to support and advocate for teacher 29

effectiveness reform work, especially in the face of budget constraints and consolidation of Memphis and Shelby County schools. In June, United Way convened the first coalition meeting consisting of individuals from the not-for-profit sector and faith-based community. Attendees gained an understanding of the teacher effectiveness work, including progress to date from Memphis City Schools perspective. Stand for Children, the Memphis Urban League, and United Way shared an update on community advocacy and engaged participants in dialogue around how to get involved in the work. Over 60 people attended, and of those, 54 signed a pledge to support teacher effectiveness and become a member of the coalition. Our community advocacy partners now plan to convene a meeting of all partners to develop a community engagement plan for 2012 that will include expansion of the coalition to additional community stakeholders. Research & Evidence A major component of MCSs TEI work is the capture, utilization and dissemination of research as we forge unchartered paths to reform. Among these efforts is the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Project and Sub-Study, national research studies funded at our Memphis field site through a BMGF grant separate from our IPS funding. With a full release of early findings coming in Fall 2011, the MET Project has great promise in further refining our TEM evaluation tool and its individual components. Moreover, the MET Sub-Study has had an indelible impact on our strategic initiatives to better support teachers using innovative technology and resources such as classroom video capture and real-time coaching. MCS will continue to be at the forefront of this research in Year Three of our IPS grant, namely through its participation in the MET Extension and TRIPOD research projects, which will build on the findings of the original MET Project by exploring how measures of teacher performance influence and are influenced by professional development offerings for teachers. Details on progress and planning for MET Sub-Study, Extension and Tripod-related projects as they have shaped our program of support for teachers can be found in Appendix H. In Fall 2011, MCS will also participate in beta testing for the American Institute for Researchs (AIR) Validation Engine, a technology tool designed to determine inter-rater reliability among classroom observers. Each of these intensive research opportunities have and will continue to contribute to the robustness and validity of our TEM evaluation tool, and more importantly, of the linkages between these performance measures and the support resources that serve to cultivate and increase effective teaching in all of our classrooms. MCS has gone to great lengths to capture and disseminate this research and all other aspects of our TEI work to date through the case studies and reports of a full-time district archivist, Dr. Kristin Walker. Dr. Walker serves as the self-reflective voice of the district and documents all major changes, successes and challenges that come with implementing systemic reform both at the central administrative level and individual schools executing reform on the ground. Her ethnographic research of our Memphis teams most recent progress and outcomes is forthcoming in the TEI Year Two Case Study publication.
30

Strategic Partners The array of external strategic partners associated with the Teacher Effectiveness Initiative is a cornerstone of our sustainability plan, and they continue to add tremendous value to the quality and overall impact of our work. The list of partners working with MCS is extensive, including: Teach Plus, Teach For America, The New Teacher Project (STARS), Memphis Teacher Residency, New Leaders for New Schools, the United Way, SCORE, Southern Strategies, Stand For Children, Efficacy Institute, and the Parthenon Group. Partners who have taken on notable new roles since the previous reporting period include Communities for Teaching Excellence, New Leaders for New Schools (NLNS) and Teach Plus. Communities for Teaching Excellence first began partnering with MCS in Summer 2011 to assist with community advocacy efforts. Additionally, while NLNS has been a part of the TEI Cross-Functional Team for over a year, the organization recently took on project management responsibilities for the Leadership Effectiveness Initiative (LEI), a strategic approach for principals that is parallel to TEI. Finally, Teach Plus has been a critical partner in capturing teacher voice about TEI and other education reform efforts through its Teaching Policy Fellows and T+ Network events. Teach Plus served as an external facilitator for our district teams meetings with MCS teachers and principals participating in the observation field test in Spring 2011 and with the Teacher Evaluation Working Group in determining key aspects of the 2011-12 TEM evaluation system. The programmatic contributions and outcomes of Teach Pluss work is described further in Appendix N. Beyond these strategic partners, MCS will host its second-annual Leader|Share conference in September 2011 to share TEI reform work to date with 30 surrounding school districts and engage these administrative representatives in critical discussions about the nature and quality of this work. Due to additional funding from BMGF this year, visiting districts will have the opportunity to apply for small grants to initiate planning of teacher effectiveness work in their respective jurisdictions.
31

X. Reports/Publications Memphis City Schools recognizes its critical role as a thought-leader due to its distinction of being an Intensive Partnership Site. Documents supplementing this report include: Appendix A TEI Seven-Year Milestones Appendix B Year Three Revised Milestones Appendix C Memorandum: Recommendations for the 2011-12 Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) Appendix D MCS Teaching & Learning Framework, General Education Teachers Appendix E Development of a Measure of Teacher Effectiveness: Update on the Teacher Knowledge Component Appendix F Improving the Staffing Process: A Report from The New Teacher Project Appendix G Improving Administrative Capacity with the New TEM Teaching & Learning Framework and Observation Rubric Appendix H Support Strategies for Teachers: Reflective Practice in Action and Additional Action Research Appendix I I Teach. I Am: The Public Campaign Appendix J The Envoy Project: Letting Students Lead Appendix K The TEM Manual Appendix L Teacher Effectiveness Initiative: Policy Implications Appendix M Designing a Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) Program to Improve Teacher Effectiveness Appendix N Teach Plus: Opportunities for Teachers, Results for Urban Students
32

XI. Evaluation MCS does not have plans to conduct a formal evaluation by other means than the Intensive Partnership Site evaluation at this time.
33

XII. Financial Dashboard The MCS TEI Financial Dashboard has been completed and is being submitted in Excel along with this Progress Report.
34
Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative 7-Year Milestones (as of 9/30/10)

Anticipated Progress Year 1 2009-2010 Anticipated Progress Year 2 2010-2011 Anticipated Progress Year 3 2011-2012 Anticipated Progress Year 4 2012-2013 Anticipated Progress Year 5 2013-2014 Anticipated Progress Year 6 2014-2015 Anticipated Progress Year 7 2015-2016
Current Status
STRATEGY 1: We will create a common, agreed upon definition of effective teaching
Execution Milestones
Execute on the objectives of the Gates Research Plan (MET Project) n/a Capture value added data and content knowledge data Administer TRIPOD 1. Capture value added data 2. Capture content knowledge data 3. Conduct video captures of m 500 teachers 4. Administer TRIPOD Develop a summary document of implications of MET project to inform the TEM
Execution Milestones: Common Definition
Establish the Office of Teacher Effectiveness Measurement
No specific office exists to measure teacher effectiveness No training exists on value-added data
Hire coordinator and additional staff; formalize roles
Conduct intensive training of MCS teachers and principals to improve awareness and understanding of value-added metrics
Create training materials and host trainings
Create materials and host trainings: value added data (Fall 2010); X%1 of teachers report that they understand how value added data is calculated Create materials and host trainings: all TEM components (Spring 2011); X% 1 of teachers report that they understand how the TEM will be calculated Conduct a benchmarking analysis of how TEM components are used in other districts Growth: Develop and launch a campaign to secure access to TVAAS data Collect/analyze value added data in core subjects (Mathematica, TVAAS if available)
Develop and implement each component of the TEM
Evaluation tool is not comprehensive and based on best thinking about teacher effectiveness
Growth: Collect/analyze value added data in core subjects; develop approach for value-added data for specialist teachers Observation: Select and test rubric Knowledge: Determine best approach (e.g. Praxis, etc)
Exact percentage goals to be set in Task Forces
Memphis City Schools Plan | Revised September 30, 2010
Page
STRATEGY 1 (continued)
Current Status
Develop and implement each component of the TEM (continued)
Anticipated Progress Year 1 2009-2010

Stakeholder: Develop surveys and administer pilots

Develop proposal for growth component for noncore grades and subjects; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Observation: Select rubric for use in 2011-2012 based on pilots of three rubrics a) develop operational plan to test the rubrics b) conduct pilots c) develop report and recommendations for 20112012 Knowledge: Field test knowledge measurements; develop proposal for content knowledge component of TEM; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Stakeholder: Field test modified stakeholder feedback measurements; develop proposal for stakeholder perspectives component of TEM; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee
Executive Milestones: Common Definition
Implement TEM District-wide
Page
Current Status
STRATEGY 2: We will make smarter decisions about who teaches our students
Improve recruitment and hiring of high potential teachers through partnership with TNTP MCS handles teacher recruiting/ staffing internally TNTP partnership finalized and initiated Develop a process to incent early notification of vacancies Develop and implement process to synergize TNTP and HR efforts to ensure optimum hiring processes and timeline Develop a recommended approach and implement policy and practice changes
Execution Milestones: Smarter Decisions
Develop and implement a plan to ensure early identification of and offers to teachers in highneeds areas Winter/ spring/early summer: staff all vacancies within X days of identification Vacancies identified by July 1st: staff 100% of vacancies by July 15th Between July 15th and start of school: staff all vacancies within 1 week of identification Better coordinate and leverage outside partnerships that recruit and place high potential teachers in MCS Limited coordination of outside partnerships OTTE established and coordinates outside partners Develop and implement improved processes and communications with partner organizations to facilitate placement A significant portion (X%) 1 of partner candidates are placed in high priority schools and feeder patterns Define the goals of and plan for clustering
Page
Current Status
Better coordinate and leverage outside partnerships that recruit and place high potential teachers in MCS (continued) Increase the retention of effective teachers, particularly early in their careers Current volume: TFA = ~50 MTF = ~45 MTR = 0 No targeted retention program in place
# of new teachers: # of new teachers: # of new teachers: # of new teachers: # of new teachers: # of new teachers: # of new teachers: TFA = ~50 MTF = ~50 MTR = ~20 Data collected from teachers on retention Outreach to highperforming teachers for purposes of retention TFA = ~100 MTF = ~50 MTR = ~20 Develop comprehensive recognition and retention strategy for teachers Develop a program of support for struggling teachers Develop reliable method of identifying high performers for targeted outreach and conduct outreach Performance based retention bonus designed and communicated Implement program of support for struggling teachers Conduct outreach to high performers Performancebased retention bonus implemented Tenure reviews conducted for all tenure-eligible teachers using full Teacher Effectiveness Measure Financial rewards distributed at beginning of year based on previous year(s) performance TFA = ~100 MTF = ~50-60 MTR = ~30 TFA = ~100 MTF = ~60-70 MTR = ~40 TFA = ~125 MTF = ~75 MTR = ~50 TFA = ~125-150 MTF = ~75 MTR = ~50 TFA = ~125-150 MTF = ~75 MTR = ~50
Execution Milestones: Smarter Decisions
Raise the bar and improve the process for granting tenure
Tenure decision process dependent primarily on individual principal decision
Principals individually raised the bar for tenure Audit conducted of tenure decisions
Generate a plan for tenure review process in order to: a) improve the process for granting tenure b) improve the tenure hearing process for tenured teachers Implement processes to ensure rigorous tenure decisions are made in 2010-2011 utilizing existing tools and processes
Increase the turnover of our most ineffective teachers
Dismissal of existing teachers done on ad hoc basis
Low performing teachers flagged for review & targeted for intensive support and monitoring
Develop and Promulgate Gold Standard for Teacher Professional Behavior
Tenure review boards review identified tenured teachers based on full Teacher Effectiveness Measure
Page
Current Status
STRATEGY 3: We will better support, utilize, and compensate our teachers
Improve the teacher evaluation process Teacher evaluations based mostly on principals classroom observation Detailed plan for Year 2 evaluation pilots completed Develop and provide training and tools to support principals in making better evaluation decisions using current evaluation Pilot new comprehensive evaluations with a select group of teachers Plan for smooth transition to fullscale evaluation roll-out, capturing relevant learnings from observation pilot Plan and execute the training for observers for 2011-2012
Execution Milestones: Support, Utilize and Compensate
New evaluation process using TEM launched districtwide
Connect professional support opportunities to individual need
Professional development is focused primarily through sit and get sessions
Detailed plan for Year 2 formative observation pilots completed
Design and pilot Pilot large-scale formative observa- formative observation process tion process Align formative observation tool with menu of options for professional development and provide training to observers and administrators on use of this tool Field test differentiated roles and utilization strategies: a) develop criteria for selection of teachers b) plan for field testing (including utilization of technology, modified schedules, etc.) c) execute field testing Develop plan to support and incent principals to test differentiated role and utilization strategies Pilot programs of differentiated roles conducted (approximately ~300 lead teachers across 5075 schools) Decisions made regarding the ROI of different ways of utilizing Master (i.e. lead) teachers
New formative observation process implemented district-wide with Master Teachers
Create new and differentiated career paths that promote teachers to increasing levels of impact and influence based on their effectiveness and accomplishment
All teachers have same level of responsibility (regardless of effectiveness)
Concept of differentiated teacher roles and differentiated compensation introduced Detailed plan for Year 2 lead teacher pilot completed
~500 Master teachers named based on the new Teacher Effectiveness Measure
~600 Master teachers district-wide, based on the new Teacher Effectiveness Measure
Page
Current Status
MCS implements a new base compensation structure based on teacher role/performance rather than service time and degree attainment Existing salary schedule rewards service time and additional degrees rather than effectiveness

All teachers on current compensation schedule

Plan for new base compensation structure is developed

Existing teachers remain on current compensation schedule; New teachers given expectation that salary schedule post-tenure will be based on performance

New compensation schedule introduced New teachers begin on new schedule Existing teachers opt-in to new plan and are converted to preliminary Professional or Master status based on their performance on the Teacher Effectiveness Measure Teachers that optout continue on current salary schedule District Group bonus incentive program rolled out district-wide

New compensation system to run in parallel with old system for those that opted out New teachers begin on new schedule
Execution Milestones: Support, Utilize and Compensate
MCS provides performancebased bonus opportunities to groups of teachers based on group attainment of student achievement goals MCS places the most effective (i.e. Master) teachers with the highest-need students within and/or across schools
EPIC Grant provides ~$1.2MM in annual performance bonuses based on school level value-added scores There are no requirements for the most effective teachers to teach specific high-needs students Requirements/ Role of Master teachers developed
Plan for new group District group compensation bonus program structure is devel- designed oped
Solicit excellent teachers for movement to SSZ and ASD through communication campaign (X# 1 of strong teachers transition to SSZ for start of 20112012) Define high potential for internal candidates Develop process for tracking and reporting on success of clustering of candidates Cluster high potential teachers in high priority schools and feeder patterns X%1 of high potential teachers in a school with 2+ other high potential teachers X%1 of high potential teachers in a priority feeder pattern with 8+ other high potential teachers Research service needs of teachers Build a teacher Portal
Pilots of Master Teacher (i.e. lead teacher) role conducted
Master Teachers teach classes with the highest-need students Master Teachers moved to schools with too few Master teachers as needed
Cluster high potential teacher recruits in schools that have high concentrations of high-need students
No concerted system-wide placement effort
High-needs schools within feeder patterns identified
High potential candidates targeted for placement in Striving Schools Zone
Build a serviceoriented culture in the district towards teachers
Page
Current Status
STRATEGY 4: We will improve the surrounding contexts for teachers and students to foster effective teaching
Improve school culture to create conditions that foster effective teaching/learning Climate surveys illustrate school culture challenges and discipline issues at many MCS schools Efficacy Institute engaged, plan for student envoys developed Efficacy Institute executes student envoy project with current cohort of ~170 students and conducts training with a fall cohort ~700 students and a summer cohort ~500 students; ~150 teachers trained in model Analyze Teacher Working Conditions and TRIPOD data to identify culture and climate needs and develop school-level reports on this data Support regional superintendents and principals in developing school-wide improvement plans based on this data, ensuring utilization of PBIS resources Improve principal leadership capacity Climate surveys illustrate a wide range in teachers perception of principals effectiveness Implemented a Principal Task Force to identify needs Executive Director of Principal Effectiveness Initiative hired High performing principals moved to highest need schools; low performing principals removed Develop and implement training and tools to support principals in delivering more robust evaluations Develop comprehensive principal syllabus with a monthly training element for TEI Develop LEI execution plan in alignment with TEI X%* 1 high performing principals moved to high-need schools; X%1 low performing principals removed Assess state of RFP and ensure RFP is put out to bid Reengineer business processes to inform ERP selection and implementation Interim solution for HR/Evaluations launched by Spring 2011 Performance evaluation tool launched (link to all components of Teacher Effectiveness Measure)
Execution Milestones: Improve Surrounding Context
Develop a new technology platform that will support the data-driven decision-making that is crucial to the success of the Teacher Effectiveness Initiative
MCS operates Initial screen conas a network of ducted on Enterprise independent Resource Planning databases that tool vendors do not share a common language or an ability to combine data from various systems
Page
MCS TEI Implementation
Year 3 Implementation Dashboard (July 1, 2011 June 30, 2012)
Complete
DRAFT
Timeline of Year 3 Work

July August September October November
Future Work
December
Rubric & OPTES Training TEM Content Knowledge Developed
Ongoing Training at Principals Mtg Teacher Observations Ongoing Reflective Practice Offerings Launched & Implemented Compensation/Career Path Planning Ongoing
Teacher Input/Involvement Across All Strategies Planned and Executed
January
February
March
April
May
June
Teacher Observations Ongoing Reflective Practice Implemented
TEM Profiles & Teacher Evaluations Complete Program Evaluation of Reflective Practice/PD Complete
Major Teacher Hiring and Placement for 2012-13 Completed Compensation/Career Path Planning Ongoing Planning Finalized for Implementation
Teacher Input/Involvement Across All Strategies Planned and Executed

2
Year 3 Dashboard: July 1, 2011 June 30, 2012
Strategy #1 Create a Common, Agreed-Upon Metric to Define and Measure Effective Teaching
Key Strategic Initiatives 1. Execute on the objectives of the Gates Research Plan (MET Project) Year 2 Targets Capture value added data Capture content knowledge data Conduct video captures of 500 teachers Administer TRIPOD Develop a summary document of implications of MET project to inform the TEM Create materials and host trainings: value added data (Fall 2010) 80% of teachers report that they understand how value added data is calculated Year 3 Targets Utilize MET Project findings to refine TEM evaluation tool (R. Harris) Execute on the objectives of the MET Project Extension (Owner TBA):
Owner: M. Jordan, J. Barker
2. Conduct intensive training of MCS teachers and principals to improve awareness of value-add metrics
Host trainings for all TEM components 100% of teachers and principals report that they understand how TEM components and whole TEM scores are calculated
Owner: M.Whitney
3. Conduct intensive training of MCS teachers and principals to improve awareness of the TEM Owner: R. Harris New Milestone 4. Determine district-wide strategic uses of TEM data. Owner: R. Harris
Create materials and host trainings: all TEM components (Spring 2011) 80% of teachers report that they understand how the TEM will be calculated
N/A
Identify district stakeholders who may benefit from aggregate TEM data and disseminate corresponding reports (R. Harris) Link TEM data with Gates Foundation Data Dashboard metrics (R. Harris)
Strategy #1 Create a Common, Agreed-Upon Metric to Define and Measure Effective Teaching
Key Strategic Initiatives 4. Develop and implement each component of the TEM a) Growth Year 2 Targets Conduct a benchmarking analysis of how TEM components are used in other districts Growth: Develop and launch a campaign to secure access to TVAAS data Collect/analyze value added data in core subjects (Mathematica, TVAAS if available) Develop proposal for growth component for noncore grades and subjects; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Observation: Select rubric for use in 2011-2012 based on pilots of three rubrics a) develop operational plan to test the rubrics b) conduct pilots c) develop report and recommendations for 2011-2012 Knowledge: Field test knowledge measurements; develop proposal for content knowledge component of TEM; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Stakeholder Field test modified stakeholder feedback measurements; develop proposal for stakeholder perspectives component of TEM; get proposal vetted by field and approved by Executive Committee Year 3 Targets Implement TEM district-wide (R. Harris; J. Barker; C. Holloway) Validate and refine TEM components (R. Harris) Growth: Develop measures for non-tested subjects Observation: Monitor feedback quality and verify inter-rater reliability of IMPACT observation data Knowledge: Develop and implement indicators/assessments of teacher content knowledge Stakeholder: Finalize method for collecting teacher and parent feedback
a) Observation
a) Content Knowledge
a) Stakeholder Perceptions
Owner: R. Harris, J. Barker, C. Holloway
Strategy #2 Make Smarter Decisions About Who Teaches

Key Strategic Initiatives 1. Improve the recruitment and hiring of high potential teachers
Owner: T. Banks, STARS, HR
Year 2 Targets Improved Processes: Develop a process to incent early notification and confirmation of vacancies Develop process to synergize TNTP and HR efforts to ensure optimum hiring processes and timeline Develop a recommended approach and make required policy and practice changes Develop a plan to ensure early identification and offers to teachers in high-needs areas (e.g. advance contracts) Early Identification of Vacancies: Identify known vacancies by January 2011. Early Staffing: Winter/spring/early summer: staff all vacancies within 30 days of identification; Vacancies identified by July 1st: staff 100% of vacancies by July 15th; Between July 15th and start of school: staff all vacancies within 1 week of identification
Year 3 Targets Improved Processes: (STARS/HR; T. Banks) Continue to ensure early identification and offers to teachers in high-needs areas (e.g. advance contracts) Continue synergizing TNTP and HR to ensure optimum hiring processes and timeline Early Identification of Vacancies: (STARS/HR; T. Banks) Identify known vacancies by January 2012 Early Staffing: (STARS/HR; T. Banks) - 70% of all vacancies identified by Feb. 2 staffed by Mar. 11 - 90% of all vacancies identified by Apr. 25 staffed by June 1 - 100% of all vacancies identified by July 25 staffed by Aug. 1 - 100% of all vacancies identified by Aug 1 staffed by Aug 12

Key Strategic Initiatives 2. Better coordinate and leverage outside partnerships that recruit and place partner program candidates in MCS Year 2 Targets Develop and implement improved processes and communications with partner organizations to facilitate placement Define the goals of and plan for clustering A significant portion (e.g. 65%) of partner candidates are placed in high priority schools and feeder patterns; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a school with 2+ other partner candidate teachers; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a priority feeder pattern with 8+ other partner program teachers # of new teachers: TFA ~100; MTF ~ 50; MTR ~20 Generate a plan for tenure review process in order to: a) improve the process for granting tenure b) improve the tenure hearing process for tenured teachers Implement processes to ensure rigorous tenure decisions are made in 20102011 utilizing existing tools and processes Year 3 Targets A significant portion (X%) of partner candidates are placed in high priority schools and feeder patterns; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a school with 2+ other partner candidate teachers; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a priority feeder pattern with 8+ other partner program teachers # of new teachers: TFA ~100; MTF ~ 50-60; MTR ~30 Develop process for tracking and reporting on success of clustering of candidates Cluster partner program teachers in high priority schools and feeder patterns : A significant portion (e.g. 65%) of partner candidates are placed in high priority schools and feeder patterns; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a school with 2+ other partner candidate teachers; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a priority feeder pattern with 8+ other partner program teachers
Owner: T. Banks, STARS
3. Raise the bar and improve the process for granting tenure
Finalize and implement processes for evaluating and granting tenure to pre-tenured teachers based on TEM (C. Holloway) Develop Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) program for pre-tenure teachers (S. Holloman)
Owner: C. Holloway, S. Holloman, HR

Key Strategic Initiatives 4. Increase retention of effective teachers, particularly early in their careers
Owner: S. Holloman
Year 2 Targets Develop comprehensive recognition and retention strategy for teachers Develop a program of support for struggling teachers Develop reliable method of identifying high performers for targeted outreach and conduct outreach Performance based retention bonus designed and communicated Long-term: Develop plan for how to dismiss ineffective teachers based on the TEM Short-term: Develop and promulgate Gold Standard for Teacher Professional Behavior
Year 3 Targets Develop retention and support strategies for targeted teacher groups (PreK 3; math and literacy; Level 4 5 teachers) (S. Holloman) Convene focus groups/working groups of high-performing teachers to determine long-term retention strategies (S. Holloman) Utilize school culture/climate data to determine additional retention strategies (S. Holloman)
5. Increase turnover of the districts most ineffective teachers

Owner: C. Holloway, R. Harris, HR. I. Hamer
Finalize and implement plan to use TEM data for turnover of ineffective teachers (C. Holloway) Implement accountability measures for principals conducting evaluations (C. Holloway) Create and implement accountability tools for teacher professionalism standards policy (C. Holloway)
Strategy #3 Better Support, Utilize, and Compensate Teachers

Key Strategic Initiatives 1. Improve the teacher evaluation process
Owner: C. Holloway, R. Harris
Year 2 Targets Develop and provide training and tools to support principals in making better evaluation decisions using current evaluation Pilot new comprehensive evaluations with a select group of teachers Plan for smooth transition to full scale evaluation roll-out, capturing relevant learnings from observation pilot Plan and execute the training for observers for 2011-2012 Design and pilot individualized feedback process Test video technology to inform connecting professional support to individual need Align observation rubrics with menu of options for professional development and provide training to observers N/A
Year 3 Targets New evaluation process using TEM launched district-wide (C. Holloway; R. Harris) Ensure successful implementation of electronic observation tool and observation requirements for all teachers (C. Holloway) Create and disseminate teacher/principal manuals based on TEM and new evaluation requirements/tools (C. Holloway) Develop and implement process to monitor quality of observation feedback/TEM results for teachers (C. Holloway)
2. Connect professional support to individual need

Owner: S. Holloman, M. Jordan
Create and disseminate PD resource guide based on TEM components and Teaching & Learning Framework observation rubric (S. Holloman, M. Jordan) Align teacher TEM profiles with individualized professional growth and support plans (S. Holloman)
New Milestone: 3. Provide innovative and collaborative professional growth opportunities for teachers
Owner: M. Jordan
Create a teacher professional culture of continuous growth and innovation (M. Jordan) Ensure district-wide access to innovative support resources: camera technology, realtime coaching and remote coaching (M. Jordan) Provide regular opportunities for teacher collaboration and reflective practice (M. Jordan)

Key Strategic Initiatives 3. Create new and differentiated career paths based on effectiveness and accomplishment
Owner: M. Neal
Year 2 Targets Field test differentiated roles and utilization strategies: a) develop criteria for selection of teachers b) plan for field testing (including utilization of technology, modified schedules, etc.) c) execute field testing Develop plan to support and incent principals to test differentiated role and utilization strategies Plan for new base compensation structure is developed
Year 3 Targets Identify teacher candidates for differentiated roles work based on TEM profiles (M. Neal) Finalize plans to implement pilot of differentiated roles and Master Teacher role(s) for SY 2012-13 (M. Neal)
4. Compensate teachers based on differentiated roles and performance

Owner: M. Neal
Ensure all teachers understand expectations around new compensation structure prior to implementation (M. Neal) Finalize plans to implement new compensation system based on differentiated roles and TEM evaluation tool for SY 2012-13 (M. Neal)
5. Provide performancebased bonus opportunities to groups of teachers based on group attainment of student achievement goals
Owner: I. Wilson (EPIC)
Plan for new group compensation structure is developed
ELIMINATE MILESTONE This initiative now falls under the purview of other funding sources (i.e., TIF 3 & RTTT) Encompassed in RTTT Alignment strategic initiative

Key Strategic Initiatives 6. Strategically place our best teachers where they are needed most
Owner: STARS, Regional operations
Year 2 Targets Solicit excellent teachers for movement to SSZ and ASD through communication campaign (X# of strong teachers transition to SSZ for start of 2011-2012)
Year 3 Targets Determine criteria to identify high-potential non-partner candidates and highperforming current teachers for placement strategies (STARS; M. Neal) Determine placement strategies and goals for non-partner high-potential candidates and current high-performing teachers in high priority, SSZ and ASD schools (STARS, Regional Operations)
7. Cluster high potential teacher recruits in schools that have high concentrations of high-need students
Owner: STARS
Develop process for tracking and reporting on success of clustering of candidates Cluster partner program teachers in high priority schools and feeder patterns : A significant portion (e.g. 65%) of partner candidates are placed in high priority schools and feeder patterns; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a school with 2+ other partner candidate teachers; 70% of partner program teachers are placed in a priority feeder pattern with 8+ other partner program teachers Define the goals of and plan for clustering Research service needs of teachers Build a teacher portal
INITIATIVE 3.7 CONSOLIDATED WITH INITIATIVE 2.2
8. Build a service oriented culture in the district towards teachers

Owner: M. Jordan
Develop a teacher scope of work to minimize non-instructional time demands (M. Jordan) Facilitate collaboration/coordination among district offices to reduce duplicative or unnecessary paperwork (M. Jordan)
10

Key Strategic Initiatives New Milestone: 9. Evaluate teacher support and professional development offerings.
Owner: TBD
Year 2 Targets N/A
Year 3 Targets Develop and implement strategies to evaluate the effectiveness of current teacher support and professional development opportunities. (Owner TBD) Make recommendations to TEI Executive Committee to simplify/integrate teacher support & PD opportunities (Owner TBD) Determine budget/sustainability implications of recommendations (Owner TBD)
New Milestone: 10. Increase district wide teacher engagement and recognition opportunities
N/A
Host teacher recognition events based on teacher performance and TEM criteria (S. Holloman) Implement internal communications strategy through TEI Teacher Ambassador Program (L. Boyd) Facilitate regular opportunities for teachers, administrators and community members to promote understanding and dialogue about TEI (L. Boyd)
Owner: S. Holloman; L. Boyd
11
Strategy #4 Improve Surrounding Context

Key Strategic Initiatives 1. Improve principal leadership capacity Year 2 Targets Develop and implement training and tools to support principals in delivering more robust evaluations Develop comprehensive principal syllabus with a monthly training element for TEI Develop LEI execution plan in alignment with TEI X% of high performing principals moved to high-need schools; X% of low performing principals removed
Efficacy Institute executes student envoy project with current cohort of ~170 students and conducts training with a fall cohort ~700 students and a summer cohort ~500 students; ~150 teachers trained in model Analyze all available culture data (including Teacher Working Conditions, TRIPOD, Safety, PBIS, student and teacher attendance) to: a) identify culture and climate needs, b) determine correlations with student achievement, and c) develop school-level reports based on these Support regional superintendents and principals in developing school-wide improvement plans based on this data, ensuring utilization of PBIS resources
Year 3 Targets Develop and implement training and tools to support principals in delivering more robust evaluations Develop comprehensive principal syllabus with a monthly training element for TEI
Owner: Professional Development Office and T. McCarter
2. Improve school culture to create conditions that foster effective teaching/learning

Owner: Efficacy Institute, M. Fifer
Efficacy Institute executes student Envoy Project with current cohort of ~800 students and conducts training with a new cohort ~800 students ; ~XX teachers trained in model (Efficacy Institute) Utilize all available culture data (including Teacher Working Conditions, TRIPOD, Safety, PBIS, student and teacher attendance) to inform schoollevel culture and teacher retention strategies (M. Fifer)
3. Develop a new technology platform that will support the data-driven decisionmaking that is crucial to the success of TEI
Owner: IT
Develop technology tool to support all teacher and principal evaluations being conducted electronically in SY 2011-2012 Identify other human capital activities that require a technology treatment and develop solutions (e.g., staffing)
Performance evaluation tool launched (link to all components of TEM) (Owner: IT) Implement long-term technology solutions based on tech audit findings and district needs(Owner: IT)
12
Other Strategic Activities Related to the Success of TEI

Key Strategic Initiatives 1. Establish the MCS Foundation to facilitate grant management and lead the local funders campaign
Owner: V. McCaskill
Year 2 Targets Raise $XXMM from XX sources
Year 3 Targets (No Original Plan Given) Launch TEI public campaign (V. McCaskill) Set fundraising targets for Year 3 (V. McCaskill)
2. Influence and track policies to support TEI
Owner: A. Green
Identify remaining policy needs and develop campaign to support changes Participate in and inform state level conversation about evaluation Teachers and principals understand TEI work and are engaged in it
Identify policy needs and develop campaign to support changes (A. Green) Participate in and inform state level conversation about evaluation (A. Green)
3. Develop communications strategy around TEI
Implement communications strategy to support TEI public campaign (D. Terrell; Reingold) Implement internal I Teach. I Am. campaign (D. Terrell) Monitor internal and external perceptions about TEI (D. Terrell; Reingold; L. Boyd)
Owner: MCS Communications Office; External Communications Firms
4. Manage the implementation of the TEI Gates Dashboard

Owner: J. Barker
Interim solution for Gates reporting requirements launched for October 7th Stock Take
Collaborate with Wireless Generation to complete data dashboard Stock Take requirements (J. Barker)
13
Other Strategic Activities Related to the Success of TEI (continued)

Key Strategic Initiatives 5. Manage the TEI Budget
Owner: L. Cathey, AOTI (J. Lotz)
Year 2 Targets Re-forecast budget for Year 2 and develop process for future reforecasting
Year 3 Targets (No Original Plan Given) Re-forecast budget for Year 3 (L. Cathey; J. Lotz) Adjust long-term budget based on sustainability projections and compensation planning changes (Owner TBD)
6. Hire staff to support TEI

Owner: T. Banks, R. Harris
Create and confirm organizational charts reflective of changing landscape Make critical hires by Fall 2010 (an owner for each initiative plus several support staff) Develop protocol for communicating back and forth to community-based organizations and begin implementation
Complete additional hiring needs: - Coordinator of Strategic Staffing - Research Analyst - Research Assistant - Special Projects Managers (2)
7. Ensure/increase alignment between MCS/TEI and community-based organizations

Owner: T. Banks, United Way, Communications
Support community organizations in aligning resources with individual school and student needs (T. Banks; United Way) Facilitate dialogue with community organizations on TEI progress and education reform (T. Banks; Communications; Stand For Children)
8. RTTT/TEI Integration and Management

Owner: I. Hamer
Develop map of synergies that exist between RTTT and TEI and alter management structure to leverage synergies Ensure that TEI initiatives to be rolled out in the ASD/SSZ are aligned with RTTT initiatives Identify sources of funding that can be re-purposed o ensure the ongoing sustainability of TEI
TBD (I. Hamer)
9. Develop Sustainability Plan for TEI Reforms

Owner: TBD
Set revised sustainability goals for TEI (Owner TBD) Determine clear ownership/management structure for sustainability work (Owner TBD)
14
MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: TEI EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DR. RORIE HARRIS, BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE TEACHER EVALUATION WORKING GROUP RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2011-12 TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS MEASURE (TEM) 4/8/2011
The Teacher Evaluation Working Group convened for a one-day retreat, on Friday, April 8th, to prepare recommendations on the components of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure. The intent of this memo is to brief the TEI Executive Committee on the background of the Teacher Evaluation Working Group, the objectives of the Spring 2011 retreat and agenda, and the key recommendations from the group. Context The Teacher Evaluation Group had its inaugural meeting on October 22, 2009. The group has continued to meet on a monthly basis during both the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 school years. Chaired by MEA President Stephanie Fitzgerald, the committee began with a membership of eight teachers and seven principals /assistant principals and four district staff. Responding to the need to include a broader group of teachers -- especially those from non-tested subjects -the group membership widened to ~40 teachers in Spring 2010. The objectives for the Teacher Evaluation Working Group include: Providing practitioner input into development of the new evaluation Representing a teacher and principal voice in the teacher evaluation development process Serving as TEI advocates for the greater district population The group has had a number of important accomplishments to help meet these objectives, including: Development of a communication to all teachers to introduce TEI and the Teacher Evaluation development process (February 2010) Production of an all-district survey to solicit teacher feedback on evaluations (February 2010) Development of initial recommendations on short-term changes to evaluation Deep-dive study of nationally recognized evaluation rubrics Recommendation of observation rubrics to field test in 2010-2011 Development of a second all-teacher survey to gauge teacher opinions on proposed state evaluation measures and experiences with existing support resources Retreat Objectives and Agenda The agenda for the Spring 2011 retreat was aligned to the following retreat objectives: To review data and feedback from the Observation Rubric Field Test and make a recommendation about which rubric to include in the TE Appendix C: 1
To approve recommendations to improve evaluation next year, namely strategies for capturing stakeholder feedback and teacher knowledge To recommend weightings for the components of the TEM The focus of the retreat was to have the group make recommendations about the components of the TEM model to be implemented in the 2011-2012 school year. Background data, analyses, and other information collected by the Office of Teacher Effectiveness Measurement and the Department of Teacher Talent and Effectiveness were presented, and for each component, options for consideration were presented. The session was facilitated by Tamala Boyd, Executive Director of Teach Plus Memphis; Ms. Boyd provided the real-time feedback/voting technology that was useful for determining the group preferences for recommendations. Retreat Outcomes As a result of the hard work on the part of the working group, final recommendations were made for the observation, stakeholder feedback, and teacher knowledge components of the TEM. Observation. Three observation rubrics were field tested in 50 schools across the district. The rubrics are a modified version of the Tennessee Framework for Evaluation (MCS Revised), the DC IMPACT Teach Domain rubric, and the TAP rubric (developed by the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching). Field test observers included 33 principals, 21 assistant principals, 8 district-level content specialists, 5 regional office personnel, and 6 former MCS principals. All participating observers completed training on their assigned rubrics in December 2010 and January 2011. Approximately 500 teachers were observed via these in-person observations. Feedback from teachers who were observed by at least one of the three rubrics suggested that teachers preferred any of the pilot rubric over the current evaluation framework rubric. Similarly, observers shared feedback on the ease of use of the different rubrics. Those observers trained on all three rubrics indicated a preference for the IMPACT rubric. After hearing an overview of the early findings from the Observation Rubric Field Test and having working group members who experienced training and/or use of the three rubrics present the pros and cons of each, the majority of the group members selected the IMPACT rubric for inclusion in the TEM. Several members noted the simplicity of the language of the IMPACT rubric, and its clear examples of the different levels of performance for each indicator. Stakeholder Perceptions. The original intent around the stakeholder perceptions component was to provide 360 feedback from students, other teachers, and parents. As weve moved toward implementation plans for collecting valid perceptions data, weve seen promising results related to the use of the Tripod Student Perception Survey. The early results from year one of the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) research project reported correlations between student perceptions of classroom conditions and teacher behaviors (the 7 Cs) and student achievement outcomes. Similar results were shown through our analyses of data we collected in our Spring 2010 district-wide Tripod administration. After considering the progress and analyses completed by the TEM office, members of the evaluation working group recommended the inclusion of student perceptions as indicated by the Tripod survey (with work to tweak the data collection methodology for grades PreK-2 and some special education populations), and moving toward having robust measures of teacher and parent perceptions incorporated into teacher evaluations in 2012-13.
Teacher Knowledge. Our plans for Spring 2011 originally included a pilot administration of the Teacher Knowledge Assessment that is being given to participating MET Teachers this school year. After further discussions with ETS, we determined that the instruments designed for the MET project were not yet at the stage of being appropriate for piloting in the context of a data point for an evaluation system. Additionally, those existing assessments were only available for Language Arts and Mathematics in grades 4-8. We shifted our focus to identifying alternative methods for assessing teacher content knowledge, keeping in mind the breadth of content areas that we would need to cover. This spring the TEM Office has engaged teachers in the discussion by including an item related to content knowledge on the TEI In-Service survey, which was administered in February 2011. We have also sought teacher feedback during the February TEI Institute, through discussions with Teach Plus Policy Fellows, and meetings with the Teacher Evaluation Working Group. In working on a path forward for addressing the measurement and implementation concerns of the teacher knowledge component, the TEM staff suggested three options for consideration at the Teacher Evaluation Working Group retreat. In all cases, the plan includes convening teachers grouped by content areas into work teams that would determine appropriate assessments of knowledge during the Summer of 2011. The working group recommended that the plan for teacher knowledge include having teachers be able to select from a menu of options until such time as alternate methods of assessment are identified. Even with the agreement with this strategy for moving forward, many members of the working group expressed concern at the idea of teachers being asked to take tests as a part of their annual evaluations. A final recommendation from the Teacher Evaluation Working Group related to the amount of weight applied for each component of the TEM in 2011-2012. Given that state statute dictates that 50% of a teacher's evaluation will be comprised of student growth measures and student achievement measures, the original ideas around how TEM components would be weighted had to be adjusted. Discussion on this topic included comments about the early talks on weighting observation at the same percentage as student growth, and the development work still taking place around the teacher knowledge component. The group recommended the following weighting percentages for the "other 50%" of the TEM: 40% observation of practice, 5% stakeholder perceptions, and 5% teacher knowledge. The knowledge and experience contained within the Teacher Evaluation Working Group has been critical to the initial development of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure. As we move forward with development and implementation of the TEM, we will continue to engage teachers in discussions around the value of the data from the TEM components and appropriate ways to capture the data. Additionally, the existing working group has the expertise to help develop and communicate the new evaluation process. It is important that the TEI staff continue to engage this group in the various aspects of the work.
MemphisCitySchools TeachingandLearningFrameworkRubric RevisedJuly28,2011
PLAN1:KNOWYOURSTUDENTSINORDERTOPLANYOURINSTRUCTIONEFFECTIVELY
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellastwoormoreofthefollowing: Teacherproactivelyandappropriately sharesinformationwithotherindividuals whocanimpactstudentachievement(e.g. resourceteachers,othercontentarea teachers,counselors). Studentsand/orfamilyinputistakeninto accountduringtheplanningprocess. Teacherplansmakecontentpersonally meaningfulandrelevanttostudents. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleastoneofthefollowing: Teacherproactivelyandappropriately sharesinformationwithotherindividuals whocanimpactstudentachievement(e.g. resourceteachers,othercontentarea teachers,counselors). Studentsand/orfamilyinputistakeninto accountduringtheplanningprocess. Teacherplansmakecontentpersonally meaningfulandrelevanttostudents. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Threeormoresourcesofdataareregularly usedtoattainstudentscurrentlevelsof performance.1 Teachersknowledgeofstudentslevelsof performanceisregularlyusedtoplan instruction.2 Teacherusesknowledgeofstudents interests,backgrounds,andlearningneedsin theplanningprocess. 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Onetotwosourcesofdataareusedtoattain studentscurrentlevelsofperformance and/orresourcesusedmaynotaccurately determinestudentscurrentlevelsof performance. Teachersknowledgeofstudentslevelsof performanceissporadicallyoroccasionally usedtoimproveinstruction. Teachersporadicallyoroccasionallyuses knowledgeofstudentsinterests, backgrounds,andlearningneedsinthe planningprocess. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherdoesnotusedatatodetermine studentscurrentlevelsofperformance. Teachersknowledgeofstudentscurrent levelsofperformanceisnotusedtoplan instruction. Teacherdoesnotuseknowledgeofstudents interests,backgrounds,andlearningneedsin theplanningprocess.
Note:
Teachersshouldnotshareinformationthatmaybeconfidentialorsensitivetostudentswithoutfirstobtainingappropriatepermissiontodoso.
1Sourcesthatcanbeusetoattainstudentscurrentlevelsofperformanceincludeendofyearassessment,throughcourseassessments,interestsurveys,learningstyleinventories,pre/posttests,andteachercreatedassessments.
2Instructionalplanscanincludecreatingflexiblegroups,targetedinstructionalstrategies,andreteaching.
PLAN2:SETTHROUGHCOURSEANDENDOFCOURSEGOALS
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellastwoormoreofthefollowing: Teacherdevelopsambitiousand measurablethroughcourseandendof coursestudentachievementgoal(s)for individualsandtheclassthatarealignedto thecontentstandards. Allornearlyallstudentscancommunicate thegoal(s)andassessment(s). Familymembersareengagedin understandingstudentgoalsandhowthey areassessed. Note: 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellasatleastoneofthefollowing: Teacherdevelopsambitiousand measurablethroughcourseandendof coursestudentachievementgoal(s)for individualsandtheclassthatarealignedto thecontentstandards. Allornearlyallstudentscancommunicate thegoal(s)andassessment(s). Familymembersareengagedin understandingstudentgoalsandhowthey areassessed.
3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherdevelopsmeasurablethrough courseandendofcoursestudent achievementgoalsforindividualsandthe classthatarealignedtothecontent standards. Moststudentscancommunicate3thegoal(s) andassessment(s).
2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherdevelopsmeasurablethrough courseandendofcoursestudent achievementgoalsfortheclassbutnotfor allindividualstudents. Halfofthestudentscancommunicatethe goal(s)andassessment(s).
1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Studentachievementgoalsarenot measureableorteacherdoesnotdevelopa goalatall. Lessthanhalfofthestudentscan communicatethegoal(s)andassessment(s).
Throughcoursegoalsrefertoongoing/formativegoalswhileendofcoursegoalsrefertosummative/annualgoals.
3Goalsshouldbecommunicatedinamannerthatisappropriateforstudentsgradelevelsanddevelopmentallevels.
PLAN3:CREATEORADAPTSTANDARDSBASEDINSTRUCTIONALPLANSANDASSESSMENTSGUIDEDBYPACINGANDCONTENTFROMINSTRUCTIONALMAPS
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: Commonstudentmisconceptionsare anticipated. Rubricsorexemplarsaredevelopedpriorto teaching. Studentsparticipateinthedevelopmentof formativeassessments. Plansarecreatedtoensurethatmoststudents willbeabletodescribehowsuccesson assessmentswillbemeasured 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleasttwoofthefollowing: Commonstudentmisconceptionsare anticipated. Rubricsorexemplarsaredevelopedpriorto teaching. Studentsparticipateinthedevelopmentof formativeassessments. Plansarecreatedtoensurethatmoststudents willbeabletodescribehowsuccesson assessmentswillbemeasured. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Usingtheinstructionalmapsasaguide,the teacherselects,adaptsorcreatesinstructional plansbydoingallofthefollowing: 1) identifyingcontentstandardsthat studentswillmaster. 2) aligninginstructionalplansto throughcourseandendofcourse goals. Teacherensureslessonsincludeallofthe following: 1) formativeandsummative assessmentsthatmeasurestudent masteryofstandards. 2) lessonobjectivesalignedtothe contentstandardsandconnectedto priorlearning. 3) instructionalstrategiesand activities4aimedatbringing studentstomeetingthelesson objectives. 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Usingtheinstructionalmapsasaguide,the teacherselects,adaptsorcreatesinstructional plansbydoingoneofthefollowing: 1) identifyingcontentstandardsthat studentswillmaster. 2) aligninginstructionalplansto throughcourseandendofcourse goals. Teacherensureslessonsincludesomeofthe following: 1) formativeandsummative assessmentsthatmeasurestudent masteryofstandards. 2) lessonobjectivesalignedtothe contentstandardsandconnectedto priorlearning. 3) instructionalstrategiesalignedto lessonobjectives. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teachersinstructionalplansdonot: 1) identifycontentstandards. 2) alignwiththroughcourseorend ofcoursegoals. Lessonsdonotinclude: 1) formativeandsummative assessmentsthatmeasuremastery ofstandards. 2) lessonobjectivesthatarealignedto contentstandards. 3) instructionalstrategiesalignedto lessonobjectives.
Note:
Rubricsandexemplarsmaynotbeapplicableforalllessons.
4RefertoTeach4fortheelementsofdifferentiatinginstructionalstrategies.
TEACH1:ENGAGESTUDENTSINOBJECTIVEDRIVENLESSONS
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: Teacherclearlyexplainswhatmasteryofthe objectiveslookslikesothatallstudentscan describehowtheirlearningwillbeassessed. Studentscanauthenticallyexplainwhatthey arelearning,beyondsimplyrepeatingthe statedorpostedobjectives. Studentscanauthenticallyexplainwhywhat theyarelearningisimportant,beyond simplyrepeatingtheteachersexplanation. Studentsunderstandhowtheobjectivesfit intothebroadercontentandcoursegoals. Teacheractivelyandeffectivelyengages studentsintheprocessofconnectingthe lessontotheirpriorknowledge. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleasttwoofthefollowing: Teacherclearlyexplainswhatmasteryofthe objectiveslookslikesothatallstudentscan describehowtheirlearningwillbeassessed. Studentscanauthenticallyexplainwhatthey arelearning,beyondsimplyrepeatingthe statedorpostedobjectives. Studentscanauthenticallyexplainwhywhat theyarelearningisimportant,beyond simplyrepeatingtheteachersexplanation. Studentsunderstandhowtheobjectivesfit intothebroadercontentandcoursegoals. Teacheractivelyandeffectivelyengages studentsintheprocessofconnectingthe lessontotheirpriorknowledge.
3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teachercommunicateslessonobjectivesto studentsusingdevelopmentallyappropriate language. Teacherexplainswhatmasteryofthe objectiveslookslikesothatmoststudents candescribehowtheirlearningwillbe assessed5. Almostallstudentscanexplainthelesson objectivesandhowtheyrelatetowhatthey arelearning.6 Teacherprovidesmultipleopportunitiesfor engagementinlessonobjectivesby connectingpriorknowledge,explainingthe importanceoftheobjectives,orasking studentstoretelltheobjectivesintheirown words.
2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teachercommunicateslessonobjectivesto studentsusinglanguagethatisnot developmentallyappropriate. Teacherexplainswhatmasteryofthe objectiveslooklikebutexplanationis unclearandonlyfewstudentscandescribe howtheirlearningwillbeassessed. Studentscanretelltheobjectivesordescribe thetaskstheyarecompletingbutareunable tomakeconnectionstowhattheyare learning. Teacherprovideslimitedopportunitiesfor engagementinlessonobjectives.
1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Lessonobjectivesarenotcommunicatedto students. Teacherdoesnotexplainwhatmasteryof theobjectiveslooklike.Studentsdonot knowhowtheobjective(s)willbeassessed. Studentscannotretelltheobjectivesor explainthetaskstheyarecompleting. Teacherdoesnotprovideopportunitiesfor engagementinlessonobjectives.
Notes:
Examplesofhowateachermightexplainmasteryofobjectivesincludesharingexemplarsofhighqualityworkwhenengagingstudentsinthelesson,modelingeffectivestrategies/thinkingrequiredtomastertheobjectives,oraskingstudentstostatewhat theythinkmasterywouldlooklikeandclarifyingexpectationsthroughQ&A. Studentsunderstandinghowtheobjectivesfitintothebroadercontentorgoalsmaybeshownthroughaneffectiveteachersexplanationofhowthelessonconnectstoessentialquestions,oritcanbereflectedinstudentsdemonstratinganunderstanding throughtheircomments. Theteachercanconnectthelessontopriorknowledgebyaskingstudentstoconnectconceptstotheirownexperiencesortowhattheyhavelearnedinotherclassesorcourses. Incaseswheretheobserverisnotpresentwhentheteacherintroducesthelesson,theobservermayassesstheteachersuseofthelessonobjectivethroughquestioningstudents.
teachercreatedexemplars.
5Studentsshouldseeexamples,andnonexamplesinsomecases,thatrelatetotheinstructionalactivitybeingusedforstudentstodemonstratetheirunderstanding.Examplescanbefrompreviousstudentsworkwiththeobjectivesor 6Todetermineifstudentscanexplainthelessonobjectives,observetimeswhentheteacherengagesstudentsinthelessonobjectivesand/ortimeswhenteacherfacilitatesaconversationwithstudentsaboutthelessonobjectives.
TEACH2:EXPLAINCONTENTCLEARLYANDACCURATELY
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellastwoormoreofthefollowing: Whenappropriate,theteacherexplains conceptsinawaythatactivelyinvolves studentsinthelearningprocess,suchas facilitatingopportunitiesforstudentsto explainconceptstoeachother. Explanationsprovokestudentinterestinand excitementaboutthecontent. Studentsaskhigherorderquestionsand makeconnectionsindependently, demonstratingthattheyunderstandthe contentatahigherlevel. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleastoneofthefollowing: Whenappropriate,theteacherexplains conceptsinawaythatactivelyinvolves studentsinthelearningprocess,suchas facilitatingopportunitiesforstudentsto explainconceptstoeachother. Explanationsprovokestudentinterestinand excitementaboutthecontent. Studentsaskhigherorderquestionsand makeconnectionsindependently, demonstratingthattheyunderstandthe contentatahigherlevel. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Explanationsofcontentareclear,coherent, concise,andaccurate,andtheybuildstudent understandingofcontent. Teachereffectivelymakesconnectionswith othercontentareas,studentsexperiences andinterests,orcurrenteventsinorderto makethecontentrelevantandbuildstudent understandingandinterest. Teacherusesdevelopmentallyappropriate languageandexplanations. Teachergivesclear,precisedefinitionsand usesspecificacademiclanguageas appropriate.7 Teacheremphasizeskeypointswhen necessary. Whenanexplanationisnoteffectively leadingstudentstounderstandthecontent, theteacheradjustsquicklyandusesan alternativewaytoeffectivelyexplainthe concept. Studentsaskrelativelyfewclarifying questionsbecausetheyunderstandthe explanations.However,theymayaska numberofextensionquestionsbecausethey areengagedinthecontentandeagertolearn moreaboutit. 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Explanationsaregenerallyclear,coherent, andaccurate,withafewexceptions,butthey maynotbeentirelyeffectiveinbuilding studentunderstandingofcontent. Teachermakesconnectionswithother contentareas,studentsexperiencesand interests,orcurrentevents,butthe connectionsdonotmakethecontentrelevant orbuildstudentunderstandingandinterest. Somelanguageandexplanationsmaynotbe developmentallyappropriate. Teachersometimesgivedefinitionsthatare notcompletelyclearorprecise,orsometimes maynotuseacademiclanguagewhenitis appropriatetodoso. Teacheronlyoccasionallyemphasizeskey points,thusstudentsaresometimesunclear aboutthemainideasofthecontent. Whenanexplanationisnoteffectively leadingstudentstounderstandtheconcept, theteachermaysometimesmoveonorre explaininthesamewayratherthanprovide aneffectivealternativeexplanation. Studentsmayasksomeclarifyingquestions showingthattheyareconfusedbythe explanations. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Explanationsmaybeunclear,incoherentor inaccurate,andtheyaregenerallyineffective inbuildingstudentunderstandingofcontent. Teacherdoesnotmakeconnectionswith othercontentareas,studentsexperiences andinterests,orcurrentevents. Muchoftheteacherslanguagemaynotbe developmentallyappropriate. Teacherfrequentlygivesunclearor imprecisedefinitions,orfrequentlymaynot useacademiclanguagewhenitisappropriate todoso. Teacherrarelyorneveremphasizeskey pointswhennecessary,suchthatstudents areoftenunclearaboutthemainideasofthe content. Teacheradheresrigidlytotheinitialplanfor explainingcontentevenwhenitisclearthat anexplanationisnoteffectivelyleading studentstounderstandtheconcept. Studentsmayfrequentlyaskclarifying questionsshowingthattheyareconfusedby theexplanations,orstudentsmaybe consistentlyfrustratedordisengagedbecause ofunclearexplanations.
7Academiclanguageincludestheusageofcorrectgrammarandpronunciation,inbothwrittenandverbalcontexts.
TEACH3:ENGAGESTUDENTSATALLLEARNINGLEVELSINAPPROPRIATELYCHALLENGINGWORK
5 4 3 2 SignificantlyAboveExpectations AboveExpectations MeetingExpectations BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: present,aswellasatleasttwoofthefollowing: present,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: Teachermakesthelessonaccessibleto Teachermakesthelessonaccessibletosome Teachermakesthelessonaccessibletoall Teachermakesthelessonaccessibletoall almostallstudents8;thereisevidencethat students. studentsatdifferentlearninglevels. studentsatdifferentlearninglevels. theteacherknowseachstudentsleveland Teachermakesthelessonchallengingto ensuresthatthelessonmeetsalmostall Theteachermakesthelessonchallengingto Theteachermakesthelessonchallengingto somestudents. studentswheretheyare. allstudentsatdifferentlearninglevels. allstudentsatdifferentlearninglevels. Althoughstudentshavesomeopportunities Teachermakesthelessonchallenging9to Lessonincorporatesadditionalresources Lessonincorporatesadditionalresources topracticemeaningfully,apply,and almostallstudents;thereisevidencethatthe thatextendbeyondthedistrictscurriculum. thatextendbeyondthedistrictscurriculum. demonstratewhattheyarelearning,thereis teacherknowseachstudentsleveland moreteacherdirectedinstructionthan Teacherengagesallstudentsinthelessonby Teacherengagesallstudentsinthelessonby ensuresthatthelessonpushesalmostall appropriate. usingvisualstoestablishthepurposeofthe usingvisualstoestablishthepurposeofthe studentsforwardfromwheretheyare.10 lesson,previewitsorganization,and lesson,previewitsorganization,and summarizingitscontent. summarizingitscontent. Note: Examplesofadditionalresourcesincludemanipulatives,teachercreatedmaterials,anditemsfromvariousrealworldsources(e.g.,banks,libraries,museums,etc.).
1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Lessonisaccessibletofewstudents. Thelessonisnotchallengingtostudents. Lessonisalmostentirelyteacherdirected, andstudentshavefewopportunitiesto practicemeaningfully,apply,and demonstratewhattheyarelearning.
8Tomakecontentaccessibleforallstudents,ateachermightdifferentiatecontent,process,orproduct(usingstrategiesthatmightincludeflexiblegrouping,leveledtexts,ortieredassignments)inordertoensurethatstudentsareableto 9Forexample,theteachermightaskmorechallengingquestions,assignmoredemandingwork,orprovideextensionassignmentsinordertoensurethatallstudentsarechallengedbythelesson. 10Inorderforstrategiestoleadstudentstoadeeperunderstandingofthecontent,ateachermustunderstandstudentscurrentlevelsofperformanceandthenpurposefullydesigninstructionalstrategiesthatwillscaffoldstudent
accessthelesson.
learningtoadeeperlevel.
TEACH4:PROVIDESTUDENTSMULTIPLEWAYSTOENGAGEWITHCONTENT
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellastwoormoreofthefollowing: Studentsareprovidedwithchoicesand taughthowtoselfselectstrategiesthatwill helpthemmasterlessonobjectives. Allstudentscanexplainlessonobjectiveand howitrelatestowhattheyarelearning. Studentsexplainconceptstoeachotherwith thesupportofteacherfacilitation. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellasatleastoneofthefollowing: Studentsareprovidedwithchoicesand taughthowtoselfselectstrategiesthatwill helpthemmasterlessonobjectives. Allstudentscanexplainlessonobjectiveand howitrelatestowhattheyarelearning. Studentsexplainconceptstoeachotherwith thesupportofteacherfacilitation. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Allstrategiesarealignedtothelesson objectives. Allstrategieshaveaclear,intentional purposebeyondkeepingstudentsengaged orbusy. Strategiesenableallstudentstomeetor exceedlessonobjectivesthrough appropriatescaffoldinganddifferentiation.11 Thereisanappropriatebalancebetween teacherdirectedinstructionandrigorous12 studentcenteredlearningduringthelesson, suchthatstudentshaveadequate opportunitiestomeaningfullypractice, apply,anddemonstratewhattheyare learning. 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Somestrategiesarealignedtothelesson objectives. Someinstructionalactivitiesclearlyhavea purposerelativetoaccomplishingthe objectivewhileotherskeepstudentsbusy withoutapurposefuluseoftime. Differentiationandscaffoldingstrategies usedbytheteacherarenotappropriatefor allstudentsandonlysomestudentsmeet lessonobjectives. Whilestudentshavesomeopportunitiesto meaningfullypractice,apply,and demonstratewhattheyarelearning,thereis moreteacherdirectedinstructionthan appropriate. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Strategiesarenotalignedtothelesson objectives. Instructionalactivitiesdonothaveaclear purposeandkeepstudentsbusywithouta purposefuluseoftime. Strategiesdonotenablestudentstomeet lessonobjective. Lessonisalmostentirelyteacherdirected, andstudentshavefewopportunitiesto meaningfullypractice,apply,and demonstratewhattheyarelearning objectives.
Note: Todetermineifstudentscanexplainthelessonobjectives,observetimeswhentheteacherengagesstudentsinthelessonobjectiveand/ortheteacherfacilitatesaconversationwithstudentsaboutthelessonobjective.
11Appropriatescaffoldinganddifferentiationoccursbyusingstudentperformancelevelstodifferentiatetheprocessstudentsusetoengageincontentand/ortheproductsstudentsarerequiredtoproduceaslongasthedifferentatied 12Rigorisdeterminedbythelevelthinking(asmeasuredbyBloomsTaxonomy)requiredbythestrategy.Insomecases,therigorofstrategiesinalessonmayexceedtherigororthelessonobjectivesifthegoalistoprovideavarietyof
productsareultimatelyalignedtothelevelofrigorrequiredbylessonobjectives.
activitiesthatallowstudentstoextendtheirlearningbeyondthelessonobjectivesshouldtheybereadyforthat.Inothercases,therigorofinstructionalstrategiesmaystartlowerthantherigorrequiredbythelessonobjectivesbut slowlybuildsothatstudentsareultimatelymeetingobjectivesthroughscaffoldedstrategies.
TEACH5:USESTRATEGIESTHATDEVELOPHIGHERLEVELTHINKINGSKILLS
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel 3ispresent,aswellastwoormoreofthe following: Teacherusesstrategiesthatchallenge studentstoprobeforhigherorder understanding,synthesizecomplex materials,andarriveatnew understanding. Studentsquestions(oftheirpeersand teacher)pushstudentsbeyondtheir initialthinking. Teacherprovidesstudentswiththe opportunitytomonitortheirownthinking toensurethattheyunderstandwhatthey arelearning. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleastoneofthefollowing: Teacherusesstrategiesthatchallenge studentstoprobeforhigherorder understanding,synthesizecomplexmaterials, andarriveatnewunderstanding. Studentsquestions(oftheirpeersand teacher)pushstudentsbeyondtheirinitial thinking. Teacherprovidesstudentswiththe opportunitytomonitortheirownthinkingto ensurethattheyunderstandwhattheyare learning. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherengagesstudentsintasksand activitiesthatbuildonasolidfoundationof knowledgeandbringstudentstocriticaland analyticalthinkingrelativetothecontent. Questionsareclearandscaffoldedinaway thatleadsstudentsfromtheircurrentlevelof thinkingtoahigherlevel.Questionsrequire studentstoapply,evaluateand/orsynthesize. Teacherexplicitlymodelshisorherown thoughtprocessforgeneratingandasking questions,andasksstudentstodeveloptheir ownquestionsforeachotherasaresult. Teacherprovideshelpfulandpositive suggestionswhenstudentsareunableto answerquestionsratherthansimply providingtheanswertothestudents. 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherengagesstudentsintasksand activitiesthatbuildonasolidfoundationof knowledgebutrarelybringsstudentsto criticalandanalyticalthinkingrelativetothe content. Somequestionsmaybeunnecessarily complexorconfusingtostudentsandmay lackscaffolding.Questionsrarelybring studentstocriticalthinking. Teachershareshisorherownthought processforgeneratingandaskingquestions, butdoesnotaskstudentstodeveloptheir ownquestionsasaresult. Teachergenerallydefaultstoanswering his/herownquestionsorgivingstudents answerswhenstudentsgetstuck. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherdoesnotengagestudentsintasks andactivitiesthatextendtheirthinking. Teacherasksprimarilylowlevelquestionsor questionsareconfusingtostudents. Teacherdoesnotmodelhisorherown thoughtprocessforgeneratingandasking questions,anddoesnotasksstudentsto developtheirownquestionsforeachother. Teacherdoesnotprovidesuggestionswhen studentsareunabletoanswerquestions.
TEACH6:CHECKFORUNDERSTANDINGANDRESPONDAPPROPRIATELYDURINGTHELESSON
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasfourormoreofthefollowing: Teacherchecksforunderstandingatallkey moments. Everycheckgetsanaccuratepulseofthe classsunderstanding. Teacherusesavarietyofmethodsof checkingforunderstanding. Theteacherseamlesslyintegrates informationgainedfromthechecksby makingadjustmentstothecontentor deliveryofthelesson,asappropriate. Teacheranticipatesstudent misunderstandingsandpreemptively addressesthem,eitherdirectlyorthrough thedesignofthelesson. Teacherisabletoaddressstudent misunderstandingseffectivelywithouttaking awayfromtheflowofthelessonorlosingthe engagementofstudentswhodounderstand. Notes: 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleastthreeofthefollowing: Teacherchecksforunderstandingatallkey moments. Everycheckgetsanaccuratepulseofthe classunderstanding. Teacherusesavarietyofmethodsof checkingforunderstanding. Theteacherseamlesslyintegrates informationgainedfromthechecksby makingadjustmentstothecontentor deliveryofthelesson,asappropriate. Teacheranticipatesstudent misunderstandingsandpreemptively addressesthem,eitherdirectlyorthrough thedesignofthelesson. Teacherisabletoaddressstudent misunderstandingseffectivelywithouttaking awayfromtheflowofthelessonorlosingthe engagementofstudentswhodounderstand.
3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherchecksforunderstandingofcontent atkeymoments. Teachermaintainsanaccuratepulseofthe classunderstandingfromalmostevery check,suchthattheteacherhasenough informationtoadjustsubsequentinstruction. Teachermakesappropriateandeffective adjustmentstothelessonwhenneeded. Whenpossible,theteacherusesscaffolding techniquesthatenablestudentstoconstruct theirownunderstandingsratherthansimply reexplainingaconcept. Ifanattempttoaddressamisunderstanding isnotsucceeding,theteacher,when appropriate,respondswithanotherwayof scaffolding.
2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teachersometimeschecksforunderstanding ofcontent,butmissesseveralkeymoments. Teachergetsapulseoftheclass understandingfrommostchecks. Teacherattemptstomakeadjustmentstothe lessonbuttheadjustmentsarenoteffective. Teachermayprimarilyrespondto misunderstandingsbyusingscaffolding techniquesthatareteacherdrivenwhen studentdriventechniquescouldhavebeen effective. Teachermaysometimespersistinusinga particulartechniqueforrespondingtoa misunderstanding,evenwhenitisnot succeeding.
1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherrarelyorneverchecksfor understandingofcontent,ormissesnearly allkeymoments. Teacherdoesnotgetanaccuratepulseof theclassunderstandingfrommostchecks.13 Teacherdoesnotattempttoadjustthe lesson. Teachermayonlyrespondto misunderstandingsbyusingscaffolding techniquesthatareteacherdrivenwhen studentdriventechniquescouldhavebeen effective. Teachermayfrequentlypersistinusinga particulartechniqueforrespondingtoa misunderstanding,evenwhenitisnot succeeding.
Ateacherdoesnotnecessarilyhavetocheckwitheverystudentinordertogaugetheunderstandingoftheclass(getthepulse).Aseriesofquestionsposedtotheentireclasscanenableateachertogetthepulseoftheclassiftheteacherchecksthe
understandingusingstrategieslikefisttofive,wholeclasswhiteboardresponses,etc.Iftheteacherfindsthatmanystudentsdidnotunderstandsomepartofthelesson,andimmediatelyreteachesthatparttotheentireclass,thisshouldcountaseffectively gettingthepulseoftheclassbecausetheteachergainedenoughinformationtobeabletoadjustsubsequentinstruction. Forsomelessons,checkingthepulseoftheclassmaynotbeanappropriatestandard.Forexample,ifstudentsarespendingthemajorityoftheperiodworkingonindividualessaysandtheteacherisconferencingwithafewstudents,itmaynotbenecessary fortheteachertochecktheunderstandingoftheentireclass.Inthesecases,theteachershouldbejudgedbasedonhowdeeplyandeffectivelys/hechecksfortheunderstandingofthestudentswithwhoms/heisworking. Insomelessons,itisappropriatetocheckforunderstandingofdirections,inadditiontocheckingforunderstandingofcontent.However,ateacherwhoonlychecksforunderstandingofdirectionsandrarelyorneverchecksforunderstandingofcontentis noteffectivelycheckingforunderstanding. Inadditiontoperformingchecksforunderstanding,thechecksshouldbewellexecutedandappropriatetothelessonobjectives.However,anycheckforunderstandingtechniquecanalsobeusedineffectively.Inordertobeaneffectivecheckfor understanding,thetechniquemustbeappropriatetotheobjectivesandyieldinformationthatcaninforminstructionandthussucceedingettingthepulseoftheclasssunderstanding. Atsomepointsinalesson,itisnotappropriatetoimmediatelyrespondtostudentmisunderstandings(forexample,atthebeginningofaninquirybasedlesson,orwhenstoppingtorespondtoasinglestudentsmisunderstandingwouldbeanineffectiveuse ofinstructionaltimefortherestoftheclass).Insuchcases,aneffectiveteachermightwaituntillaterinthelessontorespondandscaffoldlearning.Observersshouldbesensitivetothesesituationsandnotpenalizeateacherforfailingtorespondto misunderstandingsimmediatelywhenitwouldbemoreeffectivetowait,providedthattheteachermakessomearrangementtoaddressthemisunderstandingslaterandmakesthiscleartothestudents. Scaffoldingisdefinedbybreakingtasksdownintosmallerelements.Examplesofscaffoldingincludeactivatingpriorknowledge,breakingthetaskintosmallerparts,modelingorhavingstudentsverbalizetheirthinkingprocess.Therearemanyeffective techniquesforscaffoldinglearning,howeverscaffoldingshouldbewellexecutedandappropriatetothelessonobjectives.However,thetechniquescanalsobeusedineffectively.Inordertobeeffective,thescaffoldingtechniquemustbewellexecutedand
13Forexample,theteachermightneglectsomestudentsoraskverygeneralquestionsthatdonoteffectivelyassessstudentunderstanding.
MemphisCitySchools TeachingandLearningFrameworkRubric RevisedJuly28,2011 appropriatetotheobjectives,andthussucceedinaddressingthestudentsmisunderstanding.
TEACH7:MAXIMIZEINSTRUCTIONALTIME
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellastwoormoreofthefollowing: Lessonprogressesatarapidpacesuchthat studentsareneverdisengaged. Studentswhofinishassignedworkearly havesomethingelsemeaningfultodo. Realtimeadjustmentstolessonpacingand studenttasksaremadefrominformation gatheredfromchecksforunderstanding. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleastoneofthefollowing: Thelessonprogressesatarapidpacesuch thatstudentsareneverdisengaged. Studentswhofinishassignedworkearly havesomethingelsemeaningfultodo. Realtimeadjustmentstolessonpacingand studenttasksaremadefrominformation gatheredfromchecksforunderstanding. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherhasallinstructionalmaterials preparedatthestartofclass. Instructionaltimeiseffectivelymaximized andstudentsareonlyidleforverybrief periodsoftime14whilewaitingforthe teacher.15 Teacherspendsanappropriateamountof timeoneachpartofthelesson. Lessonprogressesatanappropriatepace16, suchthatstudentsarealmostnever disengagedorleftwithoutanything meaningfultodo.17 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherhasmostinstructionalmaterials preparedatthestartofclass. Instructionaltimeisnotalwaysmaximized andstudentsmaybeidleforshortperiods18 oftimewhilewaitingfortheteacher. Teachermayspendtoomuchtimeonone partofthelesson.19 Lessonprogressesatamoderatepace,but studentsaresometimesdisengagedorleft withoutanythingmeaningfultodo. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherdoesnothaveinstructionalmaterials preparedatthestartofclass. Instructionaltimeisnotusedeffectivelyand studentsmaybeidleforsignificantperiodsof timewhilewaitingfortheteacher. Teachermayspendaninappropriateamount oftimeononeormorepartsofthelesson.20 Lessonprogressesatanotablyslowpace,and studentsarefrequentlydisengagedorleft withoutanythingmeaningfultodo.
14Asageneralruleofthumb,briefperiodsoftimeshouldbenomorethan23minutes. 15Forexample,whiletheteachertakesattendance,distributesmaterials,ortranisitionstothenextlessonoractivity. 16Thepacingspeed(quick,moderate,andnotablyslow)shouldreflectcontentcoveredandinstructionalstrategies. 17Forexample,afterfinishingtheassignedwork,orwhilewaitingforonestudenttocompleteaprobleminfrontoftheclass. 18Asageneralruleofthumb,shortperiodsoftimeisdefinedbystudentsbeingidleformorethan3minutes. 19Forexample,theteachermayallowtheopeningofthelessontocontinuelongerthannecessary. 20Forexample,theteacherspends20minutesonthewarmup.
CULTIVATELEARNINGENVIRONMENT1:BUILDARESPECTFUL,LEARNINGFOCUSEDCLASSROOMCOMMUNITY
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: Studentsdemonstratefrequentpositive engagementwiththeirpeers. Thereisevidencethattheteacherhas strong,individualizedrelationshipswith studentsintheclass. Studentsareinvestedinthesuccessoftheir peers. Studentsmaygiveunsolicitedpraiseor encouragementtotheirpeersforgoodwork, whenappropriate. Studentcommentsandactionsdemonstrate thatstudentsareexcitedabouttheirwork andunderstandwhyitisimportant. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellasatleasttwoofthefollowing: Studentsdemonstratefrequentpositive engagementwiththeirpeers. Thereisevidencethattheteacherhas strong,individualizedrelationshipswith studentsintheclass. Studentsareinvestedinthesuccessoftheir peers. Studentsmaygiveunsolicitedpraiseor encouragementtotheirpeersforgoodwork, whenappropriate. Studentcommentsandactionsdemonstrate thatstudentsareexcitedabouttheirwork andunderstandwhyitisimportant. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacherdemonstratespositiverapportwith students,apositiveaffect21,evidenceof relationshipbuilding,andexpressionsof interestinstudentsthoughtsandopinions. Teacherreinforcespositivebehaviorand goodacademicwork. Teacherpromotesanenvironmentwhere studentsworkhard,remainfocusedon learningwithoutfrequentreminders,and perseverethroughchallenges. Theclassroomisasafeenvironmentfor studentstotakeonchallengesandrisk failure.22 Studentsarealwaysrespectfuloftheteacher andtheirpeers.23 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teachermayhaveapositiverapportwith somestudentsbutnotothers,ormay demonstratelittlerapportwithstudents. Teachermayrarelyreinforcepositive behaviorandgoodacademicwork,maydo soforsomestudentsbutnotforothers,or maynotdosoinameaningfulway. Teacheroccasionallypromotesan environmentwherestudentsworkhard. Studentsaregenerallyengagedintheirwork butarenothighlyinvestedinit.24 Somestudentsarewillingtotakeacademic risks,butothersmaynotbe.25 Studentsaregenerallyrespectfulofthe teacherandtheirpeers,buttherearesome exceptions. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Theremaybelittleornoevidenceofa positiverapportbetweentheteacherandthe students,ortheremaybeevidencethatthe teacherhasanegativerapportwithstudents. Teachermayneverreinforcepositive behaviorandgoodacademicwork,ors/he maydosoforonlyafewstudents. Teacherdoesnotpromoteanenvironment wherestudentsworkhard.Studentsmay demonstratedisinterestorlackof investmentintheirwork. Studentsaregenerallynotwillingtotakeon challengesandriskfailure. Studentsmayfrequentlybedisrespectfulto theteacherortheirpeers.
Notes: Ifthereareoneormoreinstancesofdisrespectbytheteachertowardstudents,theteachershouldbescoredaLevel1forthisstandard. Anexampleofstudentsbeinginvestedinthesuccessoftheirpeersisstudentscollaboratingandhelpingeachotherwithoutpromptingfromtheteacher. Briefinterruptionsduetostudentexcitement(forexample,whenastudentaccidentallyshoutsoutananswerbecauses/heisexcitedtorespondtothequestion)shouldnotbecountedagainstateacherunlesstheyoccurconstantlyandsignificantlyinterfere withthelessonorwiththeabilityofotherstudentstorespond.
21Ateachercandisplayapositiveaffectthroughhisorherdemeaner,choiceofwords,andhowheorshechoosesaffirmations. 22Forexample,studentsareencouragedtoanswerquestionsandfeelcomfortableaskingtheteacherforhelp. 23Forexample,studentslistenanddonotinterruptwhentheirpeersaskoranswerquestions. 24Forexample,studentsmightspendsignificanttimeofftaskorrequirefrequentreminders;studentsmightgiveupeasily;ortheteachermightcommunicatemessagesabouttheimportanceofthework,butthereislittleevidencethat
studentshaveinternalizedthem.
25Forexample,somestudentsmightbereluctanttoanswerquestionsortakeonchallengingassignments;somestudentsmightbehesitanttoasktheteacherforhelpevenwhentheyneedit;orsomestudentsmightoccasionallyrespond
negativelywhenapeeranswersaquestionincorrectly.
MemphisCitySchools TeachingandLearningFrameworkRubric RevisedJuly28,2011 5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellastwoormoreofthefollowing: Routinesandproceduresrunsmoothlywith minimalpromptingfromtheteacher; studentsknowtheirresponsibilitiesanddo nothavetoaskquestionsaboutwhattodo. Transitionsareorderly,efficient,systematic, andrequirelittleteacherdirection. Studentsshareresponsibilityforthe operationsandroutinesintheclassroom. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleastoneofthefollowing: Routinesandproceduresrunsmoothlywith minimalpromptingfromtheteacher; studentsknowtheirresponsibilitiesanddo nothavetoaskquestionsaboutwhattodo. Transitionsareorderly,efficient,systematic, andrequirelittleteacherdirection. Studentsshareresponsibilityforthe operationsandroutinesintheclassroom. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Routinesandproceduresrunsmoothlywith somepromptingfromtheteacher;students generallyknowtheirresponsibilities. Transitionsaregenerallysmoothwithsome teacherdirection. Routinessupporttheeffectiveuseof instructionaltime. 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Routinesandproceduresareinplacebut requiresignificantteacherpromptingand direction;studentsmaybeunclearabout whattheyshouldbedoingandmayask questionsfrequently. Transitionsarefullydirectedbytheteacher andmaybelessorderlyandefficient. Someinstructionaltimeislostdueto ineffectiveroutines. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Routinesandproceduresarenotevident,so theteacherdirectseveryactivity;students areunclearaboutwhattheyshouldbedoing andaskquestionsconstantlyordonotfollow teacherdirections. Transitionsaredisorderlyandinefficient. Ineffectiveroutinesorthelackofroutines resultinasignificantlossofinstructional time.
CULTIVATELEARNINGENVIRONMENT2:DEVELOPCLASSROOMPROCEDURESANDROUTINES
CULTIVATELEARNINGENVIRONMENT3:USECLASSROOMSPACEANDRESOURCESTOSUPPORTINSTRUCTION
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: Spaceandmaterialsareutilizedtoenrich learningofcurrentorrecentcontent. Studentshavetheoptionofchoosing resourcesortoolstosupportandextend theirlearning. Resourcestakestudentinterestsinto account. Studentsactivelycontributetotheselection ofresourcesandtakeresponsibilityfor findingrelevantresourceswhenappropriate. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellatleasttwoofthefollowing: Spaceandmaterialsareutilizedtoenrich learningofcurrentorrecentcontent. Studentshavetheoptionofchoosing resourcesortoolstosupportandextend theirlearning. Resourcestakestudentinterestsinto account. Studentsactivelycontributetotheselection ofresourcesandtakeresponsibilityfor findingrelevantresourceswhenappropriate.
3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Useofspaceandmaterialspromotes learning. Classroomresourcesstimulatestudent interestintheappropriatecontent. Resourcessupportactivitiesthathelp studentsachievemasteryofstandards.26 Resourcesareleveledordifferentiated specificallybasedonstudentneeds.
2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Useofspaceandmaterialsrarelypromotes learning. Classroomresourcesinconsistentlystimulate studentinterestinthecontent. Resourcesinconsistentlysupportactivities thathelpstudentsachievemasteryof standards.
1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Useofspaceandmaterialsdonotpromote learning. Classroomresourcesdonotstimulate studentinterestinthecontent. Resourcesdonotsupportactivitiesthathelp studentsachievemasteryofstandards.
Note: Examplesofhowresourcescanextendlearningincludepostingindictorsofmasterywithstudentfriendlyexplanationsormaterialsthatstudentscanusetoextendtheirlearningaftertheyhavecompletedinstructionalassignments.
26Resources(includingcoretexts,interventionprogramsorsupplementarymaterials)areselectedbasedontheiralignmenttostandardsandstudentsneedswhereappropriate.Resourcesarenotsimplyusedbecausetheyareadopted;
rather,theteacheristhoughtfulandstrategicabouthowtousetheresourcesgiventhestudentsneedsintheclassroom.
CULTIVATELEARNINGENVIRONMENT4:MANAGESTUDENTBEHAVIOR
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: Behavioralexpectationsarecleartoall studentsandthereislittletonoevidenceof offtaskbehaviorintheclassroom. Studentsleadconversationsregarding behaviorandtheyselfmanageandmonitor theirpeers. Expectationsforstudentbehaviorareso clearlyunderstoodthatthereislittle,ifany needtocontinuouslyrefertothem. Flowofthelessonisneverimpededby inappropriateorofftaskstudentbehavior, eitherbecausenosuchbehavioroccursor becausewhensuchbehavioroccursthe teacherefficientlyaddressesit. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3 ispresent,aswellasatleasttwoofthefollowing: Behavioralexpectationsarecleartoall studentsandthereislittletonoevidenceof offtaskbehaviorintheclassroom. Studentsleadconversationsregarding behaviorandtheyselfmanageandmonitor theirpeers. Expectationsforstudentbehaviorareso clearlyunderstoodthatthereislittle,ifany needtocontinuouslyrefertothem. Flowofthelessonisneverimpededby inappropriateorofftaskstudentbehavior, eitherbecausenosuchbehavioroccursor becausewhensuchbehavioroccursthe teacherefficientlyaddressesit. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Behavioralexpectationsarecleartomost studentsresultinginonlyoccasionalofftask behavior. Teacherregularlypromotesandreinforces positivebehavior.27 Offtaskbehaviorisredirectedinamanner thatsolvestheissueandmaximizes instructionaltime. Disruptivebehavior28isdeescalatedwith littleinterruptiontoinstructionaltime. 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Behavioralexpectationsmaybeunclearor inconsistentresultinginfrequentofftask behaviorintheclassroom. Teacherrarelypromotesandreinforces positivebehavior. Offtaskbehaviorisredirectedinamanner thatmaynotsolvetheissueand/or interruptssomeinstructionaltime. Disruptivebehaviorisdeescalatedwith someinterruptiontoinstructionaltime. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Behavioralexpectationsarenotconsistent orclear. Teacherdoesnotpromoteorreinforce positivebehavior. Offtaskbehaviorisnotredirectedina mannerthatsolvestheissueand/or significantlyinterruptsinstructionaltime. Disruptivebehaviorcausessignificant interruptiontoinstructionaltime.
27Positivereinforcementscanincluderewards(i.e.,callshome,stickers,raffletickets,notes,etc.)orverbalpraise.Forteacherswhohaveastrongcultureanddonotusetangiblerewards,positivereinforcementcanbemoresubtle. 28Disruptivebehaviorcanbedefinedasbehaviorthatrequiressignficantteacherinvervention.
REFLECTANDADJUST1:MONITORPROGRESSRELATIVETOTHROUGHCOURSEANDENDOFCOURSEGOALS
5 SignificantlyAboveExpectations ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: Teacherproactivelyleadsdataanalysiswith colleaguesandofferspositivesuggestions. Moststudentsknowtheirprogresstowards masteryofthroughcourseandendofcourse goals. Familiescanarticulatestudentsprogress usingdataasareference. Families,students,andteacherengagein discussionsaboutstudentsstrengthsand areasofgrowthandcreateanactionplanto supportstudents. Note: Studentprogresscanincludeareassuchasacademics,behavior,andattendance. 4 AboveExpectations ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is present,aswellasatleasttwoofthefollowing: Teacherproactivelyleadsdataanalysiswith colleaguesandofferspositivesuggestions. Moststudentsknowtheirprogresstowards masteryofthroughcourseandendofcourse goals. Familiescanarticulatestudentsprogress usingdataasareference. Families,students,andteacherengagein discussionsaboutstudentsstrengthsand areasofgrowthandcreateanactionplanto supportstudents. 3 MeetingExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacheranalysisofstudentdataincludesthe useofassessmentsthatmeasuremany aspectsofstudentprogress29. Teacher: 1) routinelyusesassessmentstomeasure studentmasteryofcontentstandards andprogresstowardsthroughcourse andendofcoursegoals. 2) providesstudentswithmultiplewaysof demonstratingmastery.30 Teacheristimelyinrecordingthestudent progressdataandusesasystem31thatallows foreasyanalysisofstudentprogresstoward mastery.32 2 BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacheranalysisofstudentdataincludesthe useofassessmentsthatmeasureonetotwo aspectsofstudentprogress. Teachersometimesusesassessmentsto measurestudentmasteryofcontent standards. Teacherrarelyrecordsthestudentprogress data. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Teacheranalysisofstudentdatadoesnot includetheuseofassessmentsthatmeasure additionalaspectsofstudentprogress. Teacherdoesnotroutinelyuseassessments tomeasurestudentmasteryofcontent standards. Teacherdoesnotroutinelyrecordstudent progressdata.
29Aspectsofstudentprogresscanincludeareassuchascriticalthinking,behavior,attendance,andmasteryofcontentknowledge. 31Systemsforrecordingstudentprogressincludegradebooks,spreadsheets,andcharts. 30Examplesofmultiplewaysthatmasterycanbedemonstratedincludeassessmentmethodslikeselectedresponse,constructedresponse,performancetask,andpersonalcommunication. 32Examplesofdataanalysiscanincludeidentifyingtrends,itemanalysis,and/oridentifyingareasforreteaching.
REFLECTANDADJUST2:USESTUDENTDATATOINFORMANDMODIFYINSTRUCTIONALPRACTICE
5 4 3 2 SignificantlyAboveExpectations AboveExpectations MeetingExpectations BelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: ForLevel5,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is ForLevel4,alloftheevidencelistedunderLevel3is Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: present,aswellasthreeormoreofthefollowing: present,aswellasatleasttwoofthefollowing: Teacherrarelymodifiesinstructionbasedon Teacherroutinelymodifiesdailyinstruction Opportunitiesforstudentstoselfmanageon Opportunitiesforstudentstoselfmanageon resultsofdatawhenneeded,orchangesin basedonresultsofdata. goingpracticeofaskillareprovidedin goingpracticeofaskillareprovidedin instructionoccurbuttheyarenotbasedon Longtermplansareroutinelyadjustedto additiontoformalreteaching,if additiontoformalreteaching,if data. accommodatereteaching. developmentallyappropriate. developmentallyappropriate. Longtermplansareinfrequentlyadjustedto Reteachingmeetstheneedsofindividualsand Teacheractivelyseeksfeedbackfrompeers Teacheractivelyseeksfeedbackfrompeers accommodatereteaching. groupsinordertoensurestudentprogress.33 and/orstudentsandmakesadjustmentsto and/orstudentsandmakesadjustmentsto Anattempt34ismadeatreteachingbutitdoes instructionasaresult. instructionasaresult. notmeettheneedsofindividualsand/or Skillsandconceptsarespiraledtoensure Skillsandconceptsarespiraledtoensure groups. maintenanceofknowledge. maintenanceofknowledge. Interventionistargetedandstrategically Interventionistargetedandstrategically designedbasedondeficienciesinskillsor designedbasedondeficienciesinskillsor knowledgeasidentifiedbydataresults. knowledgeasidentifiedbydataresults. Notes: Anexampleofanopportunityforstudentselfmanagementcanincludestationsthatstudentscangotowhentheyarefinishedwiththeirassignmentsthatfocusondifferentskillsorstandard. Examplesofspiralingincludeprovidingplansforwhenreteachingwillhappenforindividualsandgroupsofstudentsandadjustmentsofcurrentlessonplans. Interventionforstudents,whoaredeficientwithcertainskillsandconcepts,shouldoccurdaily.Formativeassessmentsshouldbeusedtodeterminedeficiencies. 1 SignificantlyBelowExpectations Thefollowingbestdescribeswhatisobserved: Instructionisnotmodifiedbasedonresultsof data. Longtermplansarenotadjustedto accommodatereteaching. Teacherdoesnotmakeanattempttoreteach.
33Studentprogressisdefinedbyprogresstowardmasteryoflessonobjectives,throughcoursegoals,andendofcoursegoals. 34Anunsuccessfulattemptatreteachingcanbetheresultofreteachinginthesamemannerthecontentwasoriginallytaught,demonstratingalackofunderstandingofwhythefirstattemptwasunsuccessful.
Development of a Measure of Teacher Effectiveness: Update on The Teacher Knowledge Component

Tracey Wilson, Rorie Harris
TEI Brief (July 2011)
The Context Research shows that the teacher is the single most important determinant of student achievement (Hanushek, Kain & Rivkin, 2005).1 Even when students hail from economically disadvantaged households, an effective teacher can facilitate them in making gains comparable to those of peers from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. According to the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards,2 there are five core propositions that embody characteristics that the most effective teachers possess and exemplify. Effective teachers are knowledgeable of the content that they teach, possess the ability to differentiate instruction and convey this knowledge to diverse learners, motivate students to learn subjects that typically disinterest them, and facilitate students in making real-world connections to what is learned. As part of the Teacher Effectiveness Initiative, Memphis City Schools has developed a model of effectiveness to serve as the evaluation measure for educators throughout the district. The Tennessee Department of Education model uses results of classroom observations and student achievement data to assess overall teacher performance; the TEM addresses a series of additional factors that affect achievement: teacher knowledge and stakeholders perceptions, each constituting 5% of an educators annual evaluation. Although the concepts of content knowledge and pedagogy are viewed as essential components of effective instruction, large scale studies have failed to examine the relationship between true measures of teacher content knowledge, content pedagogical knowledge, and student achievement (Hill, Ball & Schilling, 2008).3 The Praxis Series Tests, which serve as proxies for teacher knowledge and pedagogy in the TEM model, are utilized in the majority of states across the nation as the sole measure of teacher knowledge. In the initial analyses with existing TEM data, pass rates, which were equivalent to the ratio of a teachers score to each tests qualifying score, were calculated for teachers in the areas of content and pedagogy. These Praxis pass rates were then correlated with the remaining constructs in the model to determine whether or not true relationships were present. The majority of content and pedagogical knowledge scores were either negatively correlated with or not significantly correlated with the remaining constructs in the model. Consequently, a conclusion was made that, although this traditional measure of teacher content and pedagogical knowledge may serve its purpose for individuals entering
1 2
Hanushek,E., Kain, J., & Rivkin, S. (1998). Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement. National Bureau of Economic Research. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, The Five Core Propositions. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from nbpts.org/the_standards/the_five_core_propositio. 3 Hill, H., Ball, D., & Schilling, S. (2008). Unpacking Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Conceptualizing and Measuring Teachers Topic-Specific Knowledge of Students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, (4), 372400.
the teaching profession, it is a static measure that fails to take into account curriculum changes and educator growth. New methods for measuring teacher knowledge should be implemented to ensure that all educators possess the knowledge and skills necessitated by the push for effective teachers and effective teaching. Results of In-Service Survey In an effort to capture the perceptions and ideas of teachers regarding teacher knowledge as an element of their annual evaluation, a survey was administered during school in-services held in February 2011. Graph 1 demonstrates how survey respondents felt teacher knowledge should be measured. Graph 1. Teacher Responses about Content Knowledge (n=3,564)
My Praxis Score
6.60% 15.90%
A Standardized Test in My Content Area

11.30%
28.30%
An Observation from a Content Specialist in My Area A Portfolio of My Work/My Student's Work
37.90%
Other
As shown in the graph above, more than a third of surveyed teachers (1,349 teachers) suggested that an observation from a content specialist serve as their knowledge component. The percentage of respondents, who proposed that a portfolio (1,010 teachers) be employed as an indicator of the knowledge that they possess, slightly surpassed those teachers who preferred a test score (970 teachers) to serve as a measure of their knowledge. There were 235 teachers who felt that a combination of the identified options would be the only seamless way to measure teacher knowledge. Interestingly, less experienced teachers were more likely to suggest employing Praxis scores as a measure of their knowledge, whereas more experienced teachers suggested that observations would be more effective. While teachers who interact with younger student populations would like to see portfolios implemented as measures of teacher knowledge, teachers of middle and high school students favored observations. Results of Focus Group Sessions In April 2011, focus groups were held with all teacher subgroups to address the topic of teacher knowledge. Past discussions were revisited to ascertain whether or not the teachers who elected to attend focus group sessions held the same ideas that were evidenced in the survey administered
previously. Whereas previous discussions and surveys only breached the idea of measuring a teachers content knowledge, teachers who participated in the focus groups were unanimous in their belief that measuring content would be remiss if a measure of a teachers pedagogical knowledge was not simultaneously established. Although many teachers felt a paper-and-pencil assessment simply measuring content knowledge would fail to capture the essence of what a teacher knows and is able to accomplish in the classroom, they did feel that multiple choice items measuring content knowledge coupled with scenarios measuring pedagogical knowledge would be a viable option for determining the range of skills that a teacher possesses. While portfolios were a popular choice by teachers in the focus groups, they asserted that utilizing this option to measure knowledge would lend itself to bias and subjectivity. According to the in-service survey, an observation from a content specialist was the most popular method by which teachers felt content knowledge should be measured. However, several teachers in the focus groups expressed concern that although the observer may differ, measuring teacher knowledge in this manner would result in observations essentially accounting for 45% of a teachers effectiveness score. Suggestions were also made that included using graduate coursework and completion of National Board Certification as indicators of teacher knowledge. Next Steps The body of work conducted around the construct of teacher knowledge makes it clear that the inclusion of both teacher knowledge and pedagogy are essential in a model addressing teacher effectiveness. However, the inclusion of some of the desired measures introduces implementation challenges. After being presented with the findings shared above, the Teacher Evaluation Working Group made a recommendation of a menu of teacher knowledge measures that teachers could select from for inclusion in their evaluations. The list of options includes the following: Nine hours of content-related professional development (within the 57 required hours) A web based or hard copy portfolio measured by a content-specific rubric; Grade Point Average from any degree earned; Observation by a content specialist; National Board Certification; Score from a published, nationally normed test. During the Summer of 2011, approximately 90 teachers were selected from a pool of qualified applicants to serve on the Committee for TEM Teacher Knowledge Instruments that is specific to the content area that they teach. The pool of applicants was derived from a database of Teach Plus Memphis Teaching Policy Fellows, principal and supervisor recommendations, and teachers with exceptional classroom observation and value-added data. Each committee met for three days during the summer to review the recommended options, identify needs for content-specific professional development, and to develop rubrics for portfolio construction. Possessing a substantial degree of content knowledge and a sound understanding of educational pedagogy facilitates educators in effectively delivering instruction and conveying knowledge to students. Participants in every focus group made it obvious that you cannot teach what you dont know and you can use better strategies if you know and feel comfortable with the content. Since it is apparent that content and pedagogical knowledge are integral components of effective teaching, implementing true measures for this construct is an important challenge to meet.
Context
Improving the Staffing Process: A Report from The New Teacher Project (TNTP/STARS)
Despite a challenging hiring season that included unprecedented budget cuts resulting in the displacement of more than 500 surplus teachers, the Strategic Teacher Recruitment and Staffing (STARS) office oversaw a highly successful recruitment, selection and staffing campaign, filling close to 500 vacancies with high-potential external candidates including 190 partner program participants from Teach for America, Memphis Teaching Fellows and Memphis Teacher Residency. As a result, 100% of all vacancies identified by the week before school began were filled 1 by the first day of school. Our Year Two Focus: Year Two staffing work was focused on six key items, which we will provide a progress update on in this report: Streamlining processes that slow down the time it takes for candidates to enter the classroom including the application process, the school-level budget and vacancy approval process, former MCS employee reviews, compliance reviews and document processing and tracking Strengthening cross-team collaboration between STARS, HR, Budget, partner programs (TFA, MTR, MTF) and other stakeholders whose work impacts staffing Establishing a stronger staffing focus on the districts highest-need Striving Schools Zone (SSZ) and Achievement School District (ASD) schools Improving customer service delivery and turnaround times Managing a projected large surplus teacher population while continuing to recruit high-potential teachers for high-need subject areas and continuing to ensure mutual consent hiring practices Ensuring schools open fully staffed on the first day of school
Implementation Summary Budgeting As reported in April, STARS, Budget Services, School Operations and Budget Center Managers collaborated to move the school-based allocation process to a significantly earlier point in the year, midJanuary. The earlier timeline allowed principals to post all known vacancies in the first transfer period during the second week in February and to identify any surplus teachers earlier. A total of 84 positions were posted for the internal transfer period, and positions not filled by internal candidates were opened to external hires beginning the third week in February. Because of budget cuts, staffing allocations had to be adjusted in most schools in May, decreasing the teacher workforce and resulting in a large number of displaced teachers. Despite these late allocation changes, the initial push to communicate and staff to early school-level budgets was an improvement
1
Vacancies classified as filled were those in which teacher candidates had been selected for positions and sent to Human Resources for processing.
Appendix F: 1
for the district and a step toward moving up the hiring timeline to ensure the best teachers are not lost to other districts or private schools. We will continue to push for early school-level budget communications in Year Three. The vacancy approval and submission progress proved to be another significant win for the district, increasing efficiency and accountability across teams. The electronic vacancy form was highly praised by principals and resulted in vacancies getting approved by budget in an average of two days. Building on this success, STARS has set an ambitious goal for next year of converting all paper processes to an electronic format that will increase efficiency and accountability, and allow better cross-team collaboration with the Human Resources department. Streamlined Application and Approval Processes As a result of the streamlined application, improved applicant turnaround times continued into peak staffing season with an average prescreening turnaround time of less than two business days for all external applicants (those not former employees of MCS). Applicants who responded immediately to interview invitations and required documentation could thus be approved to enter the Teach Memphis candidate pool within a week of submission in many cases. Turnaround times for reviews of former MCS employees improved but still resulted in an average delay of about 10 days. STARS is working to develop a shared electronic system with MCS offices that will help prioritize reviews of high-potential candidates and ensure that candidate files are reviewed in the order they are received. This new electronic system will also permit candidates to be approved on a rolling basis rather than with a weekly spreadsheet update from Human Resources. File approval from the NCLB Compliance Office was also greatly improved, and capacity was added to the office in the peak season. Many files were reviewed within two or three business days during this time. However the average turnaround time across the application season was five days. A strategy was proposed to allow STARS to approve files initially of certain types of candidates (in-state certified, firstyear alternate route candidates), but the HR Compliance Office did not consent to this strategy. Allowing STARS to approve such files initially may have reduced the number of files submitted for final approval for those candidates who were recommended for positions. Instead, all candidate files were required to be submitted to the Compliance Office for approval before gaining admission to the Teach Memphis candidate pool. However, MCS offices now show greater flexibility in allowing conditional approvals for May graduates and partner program candidates (TFA, MTR and MTF) so that candidates are able to interview for positions earlier in the hiring season. We will continue to work with Human Resources to increase candidate file approval autonomy to improve efficiency in the hiring process. We saw large increases in the number of candidates engaged in the hiring process with Memphis City Schools over Year Two, resulting in a robust pool of applicants that provided principals the opportunity to interview multiple external candidates for their vacant positions. Appendix F: 2
Application and Pool Data: o Nearly 8,000 candidates started an application since launching in November. o More than 5,000 candidates have submitted applications. o 3,200 external candidates met the eligibility and quality requirements through the prescreen and phone interview. o More than 1,900 candidates met our quality requirements, submitted the required documentation and were placed into the Teach Memphis candidate pool for hire. o The total number of candidates who met eligibility and quality requirements for our hardest-to-staff subjects were as follows: 137 Math 20 Japanese 62 Band 22 Physics 27 Chinese o STARS achieved a ratio of 12 math teacher candidates for every one math vacancy in the weeks leading to the start of the 2011-12 school year. o 61% of our current candidates have received Overall Quality Scores of a 1 (Highly Recommended) or 2 (Recommended). Staffing High-Needs Schools STARS continued to prioritize high-needs Striving School Zone (SSZ) and Achievement School District (ASD) schools in Year Two. Successful negotiations with the MEA allowed for greater flexibility to hire the best-fit candidates to these schools (internal and external) as early as February. The number of schools falling under the SSZ staffing director will be increased from 28 to 54 moving forward. While making several position cuts elsewhere, we are adding an additional staff member to assist with the human capital management in these schools including using the Instructional Culture Survey and Index findings to set goals and develop strategies for improving instructional culture and having school-based Effectiveness Rating Assessment (ERA) conversations to inform staffing decisions. The ERA conversations will take place in an additional 40-50 schools outside of the SSZ this year. Customer Service The development of a customer service tracking system ensured that all incoming calls, emails and walkins to the STARS office were logged and tracked, resulting in the team consistently exceeding its customer satisfaction survey results. The office fielded more than 8,000 customer service interactions since November 2010. More than 87% of all respondents (1,000+) said they were satisfied with the customer service provided by the STARS office. Additionally, we tracked our response times, which averaged 30 hours (including weekends and holidays). Some comments from survey respondents include: "The STARS representative did her best to put me in contact with the right people when she did not have the answer to my concern. I think if I had not contacted STARS, I would be still waiting on my confirmation, despite being reassured by so many others that I had been approved/cleared."
Appendix F: 3
"I came to the office today. It was well organized. The two ladies in front were very informative and had great attitudes in helping me seek employment." "I called and left a voice mail. Someone called in the next fifteen minutes. She knew the answer to my question and could refer me to where I needed to look further" Thanks for taking care of me in a timely manner. Often, our fast-paced lives require even faster resolutions to problems... everyone working together as professionals, such as you, has provided me with those needed answers and resolutions! Much appreciated!" The Surplus Population - An Update As we noted in our earlier report, the budget cuts did, in fact, result in a record number of surplus teachers in the district more than 500 total. Past practice would have dictated that surplus teachers would be slotted or directly placed by seniority into existing positions. However, understanding that mutual consent hiring practices account for up to 25% of a teachers effectiveness, the district pushed to give principals more choice in selecting the teachers who would lead instruction in their building by allowing mutual consent hiring and expanding the pool to partner program candidates. As a result, to date, 92% of all hires surplus, transfer and external were done with mutual consent. A recent survey of principals showed that 90% agreed that the teachers hired this year (internal and external) have the potential to be more effective than the teachers who resigned, retired or transferred out of their schools in the last year. In past years, a large surplus pool would have resulted in a hiring freeze across the district. However, this year, the administration approved a proposal that tiered vacancies by subject area to allow principals to hire partner programs and/or external candidates in certain subject areas for which there were no surplus teachers or for which we projected we would have increased vacancies throughout the staffing season. This strategic approach to staffing ensured that principals were able to hire strong external talent throughout the spring and summer months when internal surplus teachers could also be accommodated. Strategic Staffing Work In addition to staffing existing vacancies with high-potential candidates from our partner programs and other external sources, STARS worked with AOTI to pilot a fresh start strategic staffing model in several schools that were on a negative student achievement trajectory, meaning scores had dipped significantly across subjects over the last several years. As an example, the first school to pilot this approach was an elementary campus with a strong principal who used data and a robust school-based selection model to hire new instructional staff. Because the school had a large number of level 1 and 2 teachers (70%) who were struggling to improve their practices, the principal was given the opportunity to surplus a few teachers based on performance and hire from the external pool. However, the principal also retained two low-performing teachers in order to use the new TEM evaluation process to improve these teachers effectiveness throughout the 2011-12 school year. Appendix F: 4
For the vacancies created by the process, the principal selected new staff from the Teach Memphis candidate pool who were referred based on the following competencies considered most important to high performance at this school: o o o o o o Achievement proven success or strategies to improve student achievement Commitment must be willing to tutor before or after school Communication Skills- team players Constant Learning has to be willing and excited about completing PD Critical Thinking Personal Responsibility- teachers who take their TVAAS data and test scores personally
Our Focus in Year Three: 1. Incorporate the TEM into all aspects of STARS work, specifically: a. Determine connections to our candidate selection model and performance/teacher outcomes, and modifying the model as needed b. Use TEM and the new support systems to inform strategic staffing decisions c. Support principals in human capital decisions that impact staffing (non-renewals and tenure recommendations, surplus and staff structure changes, support and interventions to retain or develop current staff, growing or adding new programs of study at the school level) 2. Staff 100% of vacancies by the first day of school, with continued early hiring and vacancy identification as well as clustering of high potential teachers a. Create and maintain a shared responsibility with other departments not only to ensure principals recommend a high quality candidate, but to process selected candidates quickly so that teachers are in the classroom on the first day of school b. Determine a cross-department approach to the school budget process that provides staffing allocations to principals as early as possible and increases transparency in decision-making process c. Work with partner programs to determine subject targets for greater flexibility in clustering and feeder pattern placements 3. Continue to have a high % of mutual consent hires between principals/school hiring teams and teachers, both external and internal 4. Develop innovative solutions or improve processes and systems to increase efficiency in district hiring processes both internal to STARS and shared across multiple district departments. This includes better support to principals and teachers through the placement process a. Establish shared metrics across departments and teams to improve implementation and monitor progress b. Explore the development of electronic recommendation forms, electronic candidate files and electronic transcripts, capitalizing on the initial success of the electronic vacancy form 5. Increase flexibility for principals and schools to select, recommend and retain high-performers that meet unique needs of their students and school community a. Secure MOU with MEA for final year of contract Appendix F: 5
Context
Improving Administrative Capacity with the New TEM Teaching & Learning Framework and Observation Rubric
Memphis City Schools developed and submitted an alternate evaluation model to the Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE) that includes four components. The components that are a part of the MCS Teacher Effectiveness Measure are TVAAS Student Growth (35%), Student Achievement (15%), Observation of Practice (40%), Teacher Content Knowledge (5%) and Stakeholder Perceptions (5%). Aside from having two additional components, the TEM rubric that is now used to observe instructional practices was created by MCS educators in June 2011 and approved by the MCS Board of Commissioners and the State Department of Education. Overview During the spring of 2011 the Department of Teacher Talent and Effectiveness (DTTE) piloted three observation rubrics to determine which instrument would be used to observe instructional practices of teachers. Observations were conducted using the TAP, DC Impact and a revised version of the thencurrent Tennessee Framework. Based on feedback from observers and teachers who participated in the pilot, the Evaluation Working Group chose the DC Impact rubric as the instrument that would be used to observe teachers as part of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM). Memphis City Schools partnered with Insight Education Group to develop the framework and rubric for the district. Along with dramatic changes to the observation rubric itself, DTTE in collaboration with Insight, has begun implementing intensive training and ongoing support with administrators to ensure a high degree of inter-rater reliability and the dissemination of action-oriented, evidence-based feedback for teachers that supports continuous improvement. Implementation Summary In June 2011, a cross-functional team of educators met with Insight Education Group over a two day period to develop the MCS framework and rubric. After the rubric was developed, training sessions were conducted for MCS principals, assistant principals, instructional facilitators, content specialists, instructional coaches, regional and central administrators who were eligible to conduct observations. A total of 691 MCS educators completed the two day initial training including teachers, community partners and teacher union leaders in addition to those with administrative licensure who are eligible to conduct formal observations in 2011-12. Nearly all (n=6,624) MCS teachers also received in-person training from DTTE staff on the new observation rubric at the beginning of the 2011-12 school year. Following the initial trainings, eligible observers were then required to complete a certification process before they were permitted to begin the formal teacher observation process. A seventeen member Certification Committee comprised of teachers, principals and district-level administrators first viewed a number of teacher video vignettes and had to establish ratings by consensus of the teachers lessons using the new observation rubric. Eligible observers then attended certification sessions during which they watched and rated the same video vignettes. Using the TEM rubric, observers had to rate at least three of eleven Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment indicators with the same scores as the
Appendix G: 1
Certification Committee and could not deviate by more than one point on a five-point scale from the Committees composite observation score to obtain certification.
Improving Administrative Capacity with the New TEM Teaching & Learning Framework and Observation Rubric
Outcomes and Implications The results of the observer training and certification processes at the time of this publication are provided below. It should be noted that many of those who were not successful in obtaining certification the first time have received follow-up training and have been given additional opportunities to complete certification. Number of individuals who have completed two-day observer training on the TEM observation rubric Number of licensed administrators eligible to conduct formal observations Number of licensed administrators who have attempted certification Number of administrators who have obtained certification Certification pass rate of administrators who have attempted certification Certification pass rate of all eligible administrators 691 659 579 573 99% 87%
In addition to improving administrative instructional capacity to conduct observations with the TEM rubric, MCS has also implemented a fully electronic observation software system to increase efficiency and data collection capacity for this process. MCS partnered with Randa Solutions, Inc. to develop the software, which can be accessed online by teachers and principals to store all observation evidence, scoring and documentation. Observers also now have the opportunity to input evidence on handheld iPad technology during classroom observations that can then be uploaded online using the software. These are dramatic improvements from MCSs previous entirely paper-based evaluation system, as they allow teachers and administrators to have access to records simultaneously and more transparently, reduce the possibility of lost or incomplete records, and allow for unprecedented degrees of data analysis on the quality and completeness of observation data and feedback, observer inter-rater reliability and teacher performance on rubric indicators. Next Steps Now that all 7,000 MCS teachers must receive multiple observations annually in accordance with state law, we have projected that the district will need to conduct over 31,000 observations during the 201112 school year. The first observation cycle will be completed by mid-October, allowing for the TEI team to begin data analysis and adjust support and professional development offerings for teachers and administrators accordingly. DTTE and Insight will also continue to provide follow-up norming training for administrators on a monthly basis to increase inter-rater reliability among observers as well as the quality of feedback sessions with teachers to support continuous growth.
Appendix G: 2
Context
Support Strategies for Teachers: Reflective Practice in Action and Additional Action Research
One of the strategies of our teacher effectiveness reform is to better utilize and support our teachers. To that end, we devised and launched a series of Reflective Practice pilots to identify the frameworks and resources that make our teachers feel more supported and to gain a deeper understanding of what is needed to bring these resources to scale for all teachers across the district. Reflective practice starts with the tenet that all teachers, no matter how effective or seasoned, continuously strive to improve their practice. They reflect on their own strengths and weaknesses; they seek feedback from peers, mentors, coaches, and principals; and they adjust their practice in order to better prepare their students for success in the classroom and beyond. We contend that a more rigorous evaluation system necessarily demands rigorous, equally robust and differentiated teacher support. We will continue to work as a district to streamline processes so that we get to the core of what really matters - ensuring we have the best, most effective teachers leading the instruction of our students everyday. This year will be spent scaling up the reflective practice pilots and implementing additional action research that address many challenges and desired outcomes teachers have expressed to us regarding support, namely the need for individualized, interactive forms of support that tie directly to the continuous improvement of ones teaching practices for the betterment of student learning outcomes. Overview Memphis City Schools is scaling up our Reflective Practice resources to district-wide implementation to respond to the needs associated with delivering increased and differentiated support to teachers. Additionally, MCS is pursuing action research this year to further identify the practices that hold the most promise for providing differentiated teacher support and to better understand the extent to which technology might facilitate those practices. Ultimately, our goal is to engage teachers in various support activities and capture teacher feedback throughout the process as a way of demonstrating the districts commitment to involving teachers every step of the way in building a robust program of teacher support. Teacher and school involvement are as follows: Video enhanced self-reflection, collaboration, observation, and innovation No-Nonsense Nurture training Real-time coaching Tripod professional development and support Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Project Extension
Implementation Summary Teachers will volunteer to participate in Reflective Practice opportunities. Recruitment efforts will involve demonstrating to teachers a connection between each reflective practice activity and its potential impact on teacher effectiveness as measured by the Teacher Effectiveness Measure.
Appendix H: 1
Video Enhanced Self-Reflection, Collaboration, Observation, and Innovation Taking the time for self-reflection is an essential task of an effective teacher. To begin supporting teachers in this effort, MCS will place cameras in every school. Beginning with the 62 MET schools, camera equipment will be updated in order for teachers to upload videos to a protected site where a copy of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure observation rubric is located. This will enable teachers to review videos of themselves teaching while comparing what is evident in their classrooms to the standards of the TEM rubric. The presence of the rubric will trigger a higher level of review on the part of teachers and prepare them for the rigorous evaluation system that will be in place this school year. The updated cameras and reflection software will be in place by early fall, 2011. Making this deadline will involve training School Project Coordinators (SPCs) on the new software and the viewing website so that they are able to assist teachers locally. MCS will conduct several face-to-face trainings for teachers to prepare them to use the cameras; MCS will also create an online course on AVATAR including videos. Both training opportunities will allow teachers to earn professional development hours on AVATAR and the opportunity to schedule time with the cameras. Once the MET schools have working cameras, other cameras will be delivered to school sites and professionals will be trained so that by the end of the school year all teachers will have an opportunity to use a camera to capture their classroom practices. Self-reflection toolkits, collaboration road-maps, and observation protocols will be available to teachers as they engage in video-enhanced self-reflection. No-Nonsense Nurture training and Real-Time Coaching Support During the previous school year, MCS piloted the No-Nonsense Nurture training and real-time coaching support model. 10 coaches were trained to coach within their school sites. Over 300 teachers from various regions within the district voluntarily attended a three-hour No-Nonsense Nurture training to learn more about improving the classroom environment and to have the opportunity to request realtime coaching on the method. Coaches spent time working with teachers at various schools including Kirby Middle, Kirby High, White Station Middle, Cherokee Elementary, American Way Middle, Knight Road Elementary, Orleans Elementary, and Ridgeway Middle. Teachers who were coached expressed an appreciation for the hands-on assistance and support from an outside source that appeared to be objective, even though many found it challenging to improve their management style and to work on specific areas of instruction. This year, the goal of MCS is to train the majority of teachers in the district on the No-Nonsense Nurture method of classroom management. According to research completed by Lee Canter, a nationally recognized classroom management expert, the most important difference between an effective teacher and an ineffective teachers is his/her ability to manage the learning environment. Memphis City Schools is working to bring in experts from the Center for Transformative Teacher Training to increase training opportunities so that every teacher in the district has the chance to improve his/her classroom management style and increase time on task during any given class period. The Department of Teacher Talent and Effectiveness will work with all other teacher support providers within the district to ensure the model has interdepartmental alignment. Our focus will be to provide job-embedded school
Appendix H: 2
support and training so that teachers are continuing to build capacity and effectiveness during instructional time.
Tripod Professional Development and Support MCS is partnering with Cambridge Education to recruit and train 6-10th grade science and math teachers as part of a new research study to determine connections between the Tripod student survey and professional growth and support resources. The professional development aspect of the program will launch in early November, 2011 and will be most intensive from January to March, 2012. Participating teachers will administer Tripod surveys in two of their classes on three occasions during the year. These teachers will receive feedback from the Tripod survey responses through an online reporting system and participate in training on how to interpret these results and link them to teachers own plans for professional growth and improvement. The design and implementation for this project will employ established materials and methods that are focused on improving teachers practices in three areas: 1. 2. Improved control of class time use and management of student behavior; Improved clarity of communication in presenting material to students and offering explanations; Improved effectiveness at challenging students to think critically and to persist in the face of difficulty.
3.
The primary purpose for the research is to test an intervention that is highly scalable and capable of reaching a large number of teachers in a short period of time without a dependence on a large staff of outside experts for implementation. Teachers will also have access to video cameras to capture lessons in their classrooms that can then be shared on a voluntary basis with trainers, coaches and/or peers. In terms of engaging with participants, the program will include a number of in-person training days in large-group settings, rather than one-to-one support exclusively. Regular communication with teachers during the intervention will rely mainly upon written materials, webinars, periodic telephone and email conversations with coaches and peers. Participants will also engage in face-to-face meetings with peers in the program, including for example, sessions where teachers exchange ideas about effective strategies. Cambridge Education will work collaboratively with the service provider and will provide aspects of the professional development program that involve online reporting tools for Tripod results, tools and protocols to promote ongoing communication, and an online community where resources, ideas, and plans can be shared.
Appendix H: 3
Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) Project Extension The goal of the MET Project Extension is to create a library of practice that consists of videotaped lessons from approximately four hundred 4th 9th grade Mathematics and English Language Arts teachers across six school districts. This library, maintained by an external partner in a secured database, will house videos that showcase a wide range of teaching practices, and will be made available to researchers and practitioners to inform professional development. The recruitment process for the MCS sample began in early September. Data collection is set to begin in mid-January 2012. Teachers will submit a total of 50 video captured lessons each over the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years. With each capture, teachers will submit instructional and planning information, including lesson objectives, outcomes, and instructional standards, along with any necessary handouts or supplementary materials. Additionally, teachers will participate in up to two non-video student data collection activities each year. These activities may include a common task with work samples, content assessments, and/or a perception survey. It is anticipated that teachers will spend a total of 18 hours per year of noninstructional time participating in the study. Outcomes and Implications Plans to roll out district-level Reflective Practice teacher support put us on what we believe is a promising path to providing teachers with resources and professional growth opportunities that are responsive to individual needs and desired outcomes. The continuation of Reflective Practice activities and the creation of a forum for continuous teacher feedback regarding the district-wide implementation will help us determine which types of support frameworks, coaching and mentorship roles, technology and training resources teachers are most receptive to and eager to apply to their practices. Furthermore, as we collect teacher performance data in our new TEM evaluation system, we will be able to identify trends among those teachers participating in Reflective Practice activities versus those who elect not to take advantage of these new support opportunities. Our Reflective Practice work continues to offer a critical opportunity for teacher-led decisions and feedback for how best to use our IPS grant resources towards the betterment of the teaching profession and respective student outcomes. Next Steps A series of teacher check-ins will occur to determine how the use of technology and other Reflective Practice activities is making a difference in their teaching experience. Focus groups, teacher collaboratives, surveys, interviews, school-visits, and virtual meetings will strengthen our efforts to keep teachers needs and input at the forefront of tour work as we forge a comprehensive program of individualized teacher support. Maintaining and responding to a continuous stream of teacher feedback will allow the flexible and dynamic teacher support system we are striving to create and sustain.
Appendix H: 4
Context
I Teach. I Am: The Public Campaign
In the original proposal, Memphis City Schools included a $21.5 million minimum contribution from local funding sources to be raised over the course of the grant period. The MCS Foundation took a leadership role in developing the fundraising strategy, outlining a private campaign with a target of $20m, to be followed closely by a public campaign to meet remaining goals. In both cases, a primary intent was to position TEI as a shared community investment. The private campaign exceeded expectations reaching its goal in under a year. Planning for the public campaign went into motion immediately, however, it coincided with the divisive debate over charter surrender. With the future of the MCS in limbo, it was clearly not the right moment to launch a discretionary effort on behalf of the district. The decision was made to delay public outreach - just long enough to re-imagine the strategy and build a program infrastructure robust enough to address new imperatives. While fundraising remains a goal and a necessity, with the merger now decided, MCS can no longer take for granted the political will to continue the work beyond consolidation. As important as raising the dollars required to sustain the TEI implementation is the need to deeply root the work in the broader culture. This led to development of a circular Inside Out engagement strategy that begins in the classroom fostering teacher buy-in of new expectations; extends out into the community mobilizing strong community commitment to the goals, process, and outcomes of reform; and, brings that commitment back into the schools in the form of increased engagement, participation and donations. Overview School districts dont teach children, teachers do. I teach. I am is a teacher-centric campaign designed to humanize and personalize the reforms underway in Memphis City Schools. A fully integrated engagement strategy, I teach. I am is built across four (4) platforms to encourage shared ownership among stakeholder groups: 1) In School Recognition; 2) Public Space Promotion; 3) Grassroots Engagement; and, 4) Digital & Social Media Connection. (1) The monthly TEM Professional Teacher Award forms the basis of the I teach. I am In-School campaign. It is a district-wide program that employs consistent criteria to recognize and reward teachers who demonstrate progress against TEM performance goals. As we ask more of teachers, we must be prepared to give more in return: Providing direct line-of-sight to District goals Reinforcing desired behaviors Incenting high performance Rewarding success (2) Through the Public Space Promotion, the I teach. I am campaign has taken TEI into the streets of Memphis, elevating the teaching profession through the stories of some of our most distinguished teachers. The aim is to seed a constructive public dialogue about teacher effectiveness that begins at the top of the performance spectrum: Who are our most effective Appendix I: 1
teachers? What makes them effective? What are they doing to grow their skill sets in response to new expectations? And, how well are we (MCS) supporting teachers so that they can all be more effective? Communication channels include print ads, PSAs, billboards, buses, bus transits, and the new iteachiam.com website (3) I teach. I am enables Grassroots Participation in support of our Teachers through public donations of time and/or money. In collaboration with MCS Volunteer Services, the campaign leverages our most engaged stakeholders in the business community. A new district project under the banner of our Adopt-a-School program called, Touch a Teacher Lounge will bring together more than 600 adopters eager to do whatever it takes to create a safe, clean, inspirational space for teachers in every school building. From small gifts a new coffeemaker, a coat of paint to large - new furniture, complete renovation, we are uniting our adopters to make a difference for teachers by impacting the school culture and climate. (4) All elements of the I teach. I am Campaign converge on the new MCS websites (mcstei.com and iteachiam.com). Here we deploy digital and social media tools and technologies to connect our audiences to our reform agenda, our teachers, our schools, and to each other. State of the art web technologies allow direct participation in the work. Implementation Strategy The campaign concept was created and vetted internally in May 2011. Once approved, full-scale development began with equal prioritization given to all four platforms. Under the constraint of very tight deadlines, I teach. I am was soft-launched in a 1.0 version on August 3, 2011 to coincide with the advent of the Practitioners Summit. Subsequent revisions, refinements and additions have been added to the campaign - a 2.0 version including the In School and Grassroots elements is now in the field. Personify TEI: our Featured Teachers I teach. I am publicly recognizes those teachers who are making the greatest strides with our studentswhose talents and skills move students along a path of growth that positions them to be competitive in college and the workplace. To establish a performance benchmark for Year 3, a set of proxy criteria was created in July 2011 to identify our most accomplished teachers. The metrics included one or more of the following criteria: Performance Based Data (TCAP); Tripod Survey Data (correlated to align with performance based on preliminary findings from the MET study); National Board Certification (PreK-2); EPIC Spotlight Teachers; and Peer Recognition. These filters yielded a pool of more than 300 teachers for public recognition, all of whom have been contacted to be filmed, photographed or otherwise featured on a variety of public-facing channels: billboards, buses, bus transits and public building exhibits over the next 12 months. Amplify Teacher Voice: the PSA campaign Teachers have been an integral part of the TEI strategy from the beginning and, as such, are leading the change in Memphis. The goal of the PSA campaign is to acknowledge and amplify Teacher Voice - to signal that, yes, we have a core of effective teachers in Appendix I: 2
our classrooms, and help create a groundswell of demand for more - an effective teacher in every classroom. To date, the I teach. I am PSA campaign showcases 35 teachers discussing their teaching philosophy in their own words. These videos will enjoy broad distribution through the following channels: Malco Theaters as part of ScreenVision previews Online distribution at iteachiam.com Viral distribution via Facebook, Twitter, Vimeo and Partner sites Teacher Video Blogs from interviews Create Ubiquity: the Public Spaces campaign Working with an internal media buyer, the MCS Foundation has been able to secure very favorable rates for an extended campaign presence across all public channels. Every teacher currently in the Featured Teacher pool is promised some sort of public recognition: 4 billboards every 8 weeks through June 2012 (locations TBD, in closest proximity to Featured Teachers schools) 15 buses every 4 weeks through April 2012 12 Bus Shelters every 4 weeks though June 2012 (locations TBD, in closest proximity to Featured Teachers schools) I teach. I am traveling Teacher Exhibit public buildings across Shelby County Simplify the Meaning: the Teacher Credo In June 2011, the State approved the alternate evaluation model proposed by MCS. That policy decision paved the way for the district, via I teach. I am, to articulate a clear set of behaviors, actions, and values aligned to the new TEM tool. That document was validated by the Teacher Working Group focused on Recognition and Retention and became known as the TEM Teacher Credo (iteachiam.com/teachercredo). The Credo: Acts as supporting selection criteria for the TEM Professional Teacher Award Helps to define effective teaching in simple terms accessible to teachers and the general public Provides a rallying point for the teacher community in its demand for effective teaching Recognize and Reward Teacher Progress: the In School Campaign Every month for six months, one teacher from each school will be eligible for special recognition based on the rigorous achievement criteria laid out in the TEM and reinforced in the TEM Teacher Credo. Teacher winners will be celebrated both within the school and online environments. TEM Professional Teachers will also be eligible for peer selection for the newly restructured TEM Prestige Award. As our most accomplished teachers, Prestige winners will join TEM 5 Teachers as the Public Face of TEI in the 2011-2012 school year. (iteachiam.com/TEMteacheraward) Enable Broad Teacher Support: Grassroots Participation To date, the Touch a Teacher Lounge project has relied on word of mouth to raise awareness among schools and Adopters. The joint I teach I am / MCS Volunteer Appendix I: 3
Services team presented the concept to Adopters over several days in July. Word has spread quickly and systems are being finalized to capture teacher voice in determining each schools list of needs. The match between schools and Adopters will take place on line at iteach.iam.com/touchateacherlounge Engage at every turn: Digital & Social Media Strategies In August 2011, two new websites were launched linking TEI and the I teach. I am campaign. The sites are completely connected from an editorial perspective reinforcing the role the public campaign places in supporting strategy. The sites are innovative and state of the art in terms of social technologies, which will be fully leveraged as Year 3 progresses.
Next Steps Rather than a risk disconnected strategies to drive teacher reward and recognition, community advocacy and engagement, this public campaign attempts to unify all stakeholder groups - In School and In Community - within a single framework. During Year 3, we will focus on plans to leverage and expand the campaign in the following areas: Joint Communications strategy to maximize program infrastructure Partner Collaboration in the field to deepen stakeholder engagement in the campaign Social Media strategies to ensure bottom up ownership Launch of an Online Teacher Community to foster collaboration as an effectiveness measure Engage the teachers in the Public Space aspect of the campaign and the monthly TEM Professional Awardees as ambassadors for TEI.
Appendix I: 4
Context
The Envoy Project: Letting Students Lead
Memphis City Schools has collaborated with the Efficacy Institute to develop and implement the Envoy Project, a student leadership project that equips youth in grades 5 through 12 to serve as change agents to create positive shifts in the culture and climate of their schools. Overview The Envoy Project is a student-centered response to Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Strategy 4: Improve the surrounding contexts for teachers and students to foster effective teaching. On the journey to proficiency, students should not be idle passengers. MCS wants to achieve the Envoy Mission (Academic Proficiency & Strong Character for All Students) by enabling students to be a major force in the reform effort. The Envoy Project prepares students who have already shown strong leadership in both traditional and non-traditional ways to be positive change agents in their schools. They learn the secrets to building a quality life so that they pursue their vision of personal success and help their peers to do the same. Student Envoys serve their schools in three capacities: Role Model, Vector and Leader.
Role
Definition
Responsibilities Students: Lead from their Strong Sides by doing their best and being their best Tenaciously engage others Use data to make feedback Regard failure and difficulty as feedback Approach new and challenging tasks with a Learning Orientation (How can I improve?) Students: Identify effective ways to communicate messages to their peers Create messaging so the Efficacy Secrets infiltrate the day-to-day environment of their schools Students: Identify behaviors that are negatively impacting their schools Use the Efficacy Secrets to confront and change these behaviors to improve their school climate Speak truth to power
Role Model
Students use and demonstrate Efficacy Secrets in their daily lives, setting a positive example for others.
Vector
Students effectively transmit Efficacy Secrets to their peers, spreading them so they "go viral."
Leader
Students listen to their peers concerns, identify and address issues in their schools to direct positive change within them.
Appendix J: 1
The Five Secrets Envoys convey to their Peers: 1. The Get Smart Model: People arent born smart; they get smart. With confidence and effective effort, all of those who work can learn. 2. The Data/Feedback/Strategy Method: Successful people use data as feedback and build strategies for improvement. This method engages students effective effort to get smarter. 3. Learning Orientation People in a Learning Orientation are guided by the question "How can I get better? As a result they dont give up after failure because they realize that every difficulty presents an opportunity to improve. 4. FADAF Failure And Difficulty Are Feedbackthey are simply information about how to improve. 5. Strong Side Everyone has the capacity to show strong character by being good to others and working hard. When people do this, they are choosing to act from their Strong Sides, and when peoples Strong Sides connect, they build a positive network like the Envoy community. Implementation Summary Since the summer of 2011, another 25 schools (elementary, middle and high) were inducted into the Envoy Project. To date, there are 76 schools actively engaged in the project. Prospective Teacher Envoys went through a rigorous screening process that included application and training components. Students were nominated by their principals, counselors, teachers, and/or self nominations to participate. Selected students were trained to serve as Student Envoys through participation in a Student Leadership Camp. The Envoys are supported by the MCS Department of Student Support and Efficacy Institute Liaisons who help conduct regular visits, learning community meetings, and training seminars. Teacher Envoys also complete bi-weekly reports on their implementation efforts. Recruitment Drive 2011 During the spring of 2011, an active recruitment drive was launched to meet the goal of inducting another 700 students into the Project. This process began with a special dinner for prospective principals to explain the Project and the necessity of their support to ensure its success in each building. Currently participating principals, teachers, and parents shared the impact and importance of the project. Following the dinner, each school identified students to participate in the project using the nomination process outlined above. The nominees included traditional leaders students who were already engaged in school sanctioned leadership activities and non-traditional leaders, or those students identified as having leadership skills who were not necessarily leading in positive directions. Student Leadership Camp (Summer 2010, Fall 2010, and Summer 2011) Another 350 students engaged in the dynamic 5 day induction process, bringing the total number of students in 5th -8th grades to 1,155. Each of these students has learned about the Appendix J: 2
Envoy Project, the five Efficacy Secrets, and their 3-part roles as Envoys. Following this experience, students were certified as MCS Envoys and launched the Project in their schools. Teacher Envoys (Spring 2009, Fall of 2010, Spring 2011, and Fall of 2011) These teachers support the Student Envoys and larger student body to shift the school culture and climate from the inside out. The Teacher Envoy Coach, who is selected to serve in the Envoy Project for demonstrating his/her commitment to students and the Envoy mission, supports the Student Envoys. The Efficacy Teacher provides direct instruction in Efficacy to students at specified grade levels. Envoy Coach (76): There is one Envoy Coach at each school who directly coaches and supports Student Envoys in their work. During the 2011-12 school term, teachers are expected to spend two hours a week supporting their Student Envoys in completion of their tasks and subsequent lessons to support their Efficacy knowledge and skills. Coaches meet once a week with their Student Envoys and use designated curriculum to help students become Role Models, Vectors, and Leaders. This is a stipend position, as teachers meet their students outside of regular class time. Efficacy Teacher (25): Initially this was a larger population of teachers because schools opted to have as many as 8 Efficacy Teachers certified to teach Efficacy to the student body at large using the Efficacy Student Workbook and Get Smart Journal. The number of teachers in this nonstipend position has decreased as a result of the loss of the additional hour in the ASD schools and scheduling complications in the new school term. While there are still 50 teachers trained to serve in this capacity, fewer of them are actively engaged this school term. Guidance Counselors as Envoy Liaison (76) Each schools guidance counselor serves as a member of the Envoy Team with the responsibility of coordination the communications and engagement between all constituents, including the principal, Teacher Envoy, and Efficacy Institute. After these liaisons are inducted, they receive subsequent training including an Efficacy Experience Seminar and Envoy Training.
Envoy Show on C19 A group of Telecommunications Center students were also trained to serve as Student Envoys. Their involvement in the project supported the production of training videos and e-learning experiences for the Envoy group. This development was also the catalyst for an idea to create an Envoy T.V. show on C19 to be broadcast across the city. The show provides another medium for the Envoys to complete their work as Vectors. In addition to showcasing Envoy efforts across schools, it will be an essential medium for reaching all students in the district including those who are not actively involved in Envoy schools.
Appendix J: 3
Outcomes and Implications
Active Engagement of Students and Teachers in Envoy Projects Presently the Envoy Project has actively engaged over 1,150 students and 100 teachers in the work of changing school culture from the inside out. Participating in Envoy events, such as leadership camps and summits, the students have learned the 5 Secrets, expanded their Envoy networks, and enriched their capacities to serve as advocates for their own learning. As a result of their learning engagements, these youth have actively engaged their peers with the 5 Secrets through asynchronous conversations, mini-lessons, signage, and surveys. These accomplishments exceeded the Project goals for this time frame. Active Engagement of Students and Teachers in District and Community Events In addition to their service to the project, Envoys are now being solicited for their leadership and participation in other district and community events. They participated in major district events such as the Teacher Tenure Celebration, Forum for Innovative Leadership, Practitioners Summit, and planning for the Golden Apple Awards and American Educator Week. They are also beginning the work of coordinating with other community groups including Stand for Children, United Way, and Girl Scouts of America. Project Evaluation In order to collect information about the impact of the project, we have commissioned the MCS Research, Evaluation and Assessment department to conduct a deep analysis of the Project. This evaluation will provide insight on the impact of the project relative to the academic, character, and influence levels of each Envoy. It will also reveal any shifts in school culture and climate relative to PBIS and school safety data as well as working conditions and Tripod survey data. Differentiated Support As we transition into more schools, the need for differentiation of services has become increasingly apparent. Some schools are at the highest level of implementation, 2.0; they require less support due to their being on target in implementation. Other schools are making moderate progress, 1.5; these schools are approaching target rate of implementation and require additional support to accelerate progress. The last population of schools are off target in their implementation, and these schools require the greatest levels of support. Each school is supported by an Efficacy Liaison, a specially trained representative of the Efficacy Institute who support the schools in achieving the necessary progress to meet or exceed the target. The induction of Envoy Liaisons, specially trained guidance counselors to support project coordination is another strategic approach to ensuring that the schools have the internal infrastructure to ensure project success. Whole School Awareness of the Envoy Project Teachers outside of the Project have reported a lack of clarity about our goals, which presents the risk of Envoys operating in a vacuum. To increase school-wide support of the Project, we Appendix J: 4
need to provide an overview to the staff at large in Envoy Schools about the work and the roles the students are expected to play in order to shift the culture and climate. These overview sessions must be followed up with regular implementation updates. Parental Involvement We have begun the process of initiating a track for Parents who are interested in using Efficacy to support other parents and ensure that Efficacy is understood and used in homes throughout the district. We have designed a plan to train and certify four parent trainers who will serve the district by offering training to each region.
Next Steps During the 2011-12 school term, we will continue to focus on capacity development of all the Envoys engaged in the Project. This will include the full induction of 700 students via a winter retreat to train another 350 high school students, the induction of new Efficacy Liaisons, and routine support via onsight visits, electronic support, and summits for teachers and students. Our organization will provide additional opportunities for students to establish leadership in the Project via an Envoy Executive Council. Finally, we will also work to increase the impact and range of the Envoy project message by coordinating with other district and community efforts, such as the I Teach, I Am campaign, Teacher Support activities, and TEI Ambassadors program.
Appendix J: 5
The Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) Manual 2011-121
This is an early version of the TEM Manual. As additional information on scoring and the TEM components becomes available from the state of Tennessee, we will continue to provide updates. A complete version of the Manual will be printed and shared with all teachers and principals.
TEM Manual: Table of Contents
Teacher Credo .. 1 Putting Growth First . 2 TEM Components Overview 4 Student Growth & Achievement . 5 Observation of Practice . 7 Stakeholder Perceptions .. 9 Teacher Knowledge . 10 Putting It All Together: Getting to a Complete TEM Profile . 11 TEM: A Process and a Tool .. 12 Glossary of Terms .. 13
Teacher Credo
Asking More of Our Students, and Ourselves We have a big job ahead of us in Memphis. Our district has a long history of low student expectations and low graduation rates. But we have started to turn things around. We are holding our students to higher standards, and offering them the encouragement and support they need. And just as we knew they could, they are embracing the challenge and striving to meet new goals. We are also asking more of our educators. Because just as the young people who walk our halls must strive to meet new challenges, so must we. And as we grow as educators, we are better positioned to lead our students down the path of learning. The work of effective teachers reverberates far outside of school walls. Their students develop a love of learning and a belief in themselves that they carry with them throughout their lives. They go on to college and to productive careers. They take the foundation they developed in schoolguided by their teachersand build on it, improving their own lives and improving their communities. All teachersfrom the most accomplished to those new to the profession are capable of improving, of becoming more effective. We owe it to our young people to help every teacher be their best so they can do their best in the classroom. Our Credo explains and celebrates the qualities that make teachers effective. By embracing this Credo, and upholding its tenets during each and every class period, you are playing a pivotal part in transforming our district and improving the future for our students. Teaching Effectiveness means: 1. Accepting no excuses for moving any student along the path of learning, and building the skills and confidence required to do so. 2. Taking responsibility for student achievement advancing students one grade level or more per year. 3. Mastering pedagogy as well as content knowledge to ensure student engagement with the subject matter. 4. Continuously developing ones own skills and professionalism in order to increase student achievement through active self-assessment as well as the integration of principal, peer, and parental feedback. 5. Leading the classroom with purposeful planning, objective-driven lessons, and sound management techniques providing encouragement, discipline, and praise as warranted. 6. Engaging students at all levels of ability rather than teaching to the middle, and readily identifying those levels in students. 7. Building strong relationships with students that cultivate them socially as well as intellectually. 8. Working collaboratively with other teachers and administrators, to create a culture of excellence and active encouragement - align lesson plans, fill gaps in student learning, and address issues that impede academic success. 9. Strengthening trust-based relationships with families to help bridge a students home and school life. Appendix K: 1
Putting Growth First

How does the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) support my professional growth? The primary purpose of the TEM is to help you become more effective in your work. Our commitment to continuous learning applies not only to our students, but to you as well. The TEM supports your growth by: Clarifying Expectations TEM outlines clear performance expectations for all school-based employees across multiple measures of teaching performance. Providing Feedback Quality feedback is a key element of the improvement process. Feedback from classroom observations and data from other TEM components including student test outcomes, student TRIPOD surveys and measures of teacher knowledge will also help guide your growth and development. Facilitating Collaboration By providing a common language and multiple measures to discuss performance, the TEM helps support the collaborative process. This is essential, as we know that communication and teamwork create the foundation for student success. Driving Professional Development and Support Resources The TEM Resource Guide provides a complete list of all professional development and teacher support resources aligned to the Teacher Evaluation Model (TEM) components. Both teachers and principals will now have the ability to determine targeted support and growth opportunities based on individual TEM profiles.
What are the school districts plans for Teacher Support? The Department of Teacher Talent and Effectiveness (DTTE) was created in 2009 to further support district strategies to improve teacher effectiveness. Since its inception the department has worked in collaboration with multiple stakeholders such as the Professional Development (PD) Department, Curriculum & Instruction, Memphis Education Association and multiple teacher working groups among others. We recognize that a comprehensive approach is vital to teacher support and to our belief in continuous improvement for children and adults. We recognize that the best schools are focused on both. This is why we are working aggressively to provide you with outstanding teacher support. Over the past three years, we have dramatically changed our professional development delivery mode in innovative ways. We have also improved our professional development courses in order to correspond to areas of desired enrichment and most recently to align with the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM). DTTE and PD have worked together to create a TEM Resource Guide that will be available in hard copy and electronically in 2011-12. Teachers will also have the chance to participate in regular observation framework training opportunities including the ability to use the observation rubric to view and rate teacher classroom and lesson videos. Additional online resources and in-person sessions will allow teachers and administrators alike to gain a fluent understanding of all TEM components and how they relate to individualized professional growth.
Appendix K: 2
Moreover, we have provided opportunities for more innovative approaches to professional growth through the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project. As a direct result of this project MCS teacher will have increased opportunities to self-select participation in real-time coaching, video enhanced self-reflection, and video enhanced real time coaching. We are even more excited, though, about our teacher support plans for the future. For example, teachers will eventually have access to video clips of exemplary practice of fellow MCS teachers as well as lesson plans and assessment tools. In addition, educators will be able to connect with one another to develop virtual professional learning communities. All of these efforts will be guided by the performance data captured in your TEM profile, ensuring that our teacher support is targeted to your unique needs.
Appendix K: 3
TEM Components Overview

What are the components of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM)? TEM is comprised of four main components described briefly below. Each TEM component is explained in greater detail in the following sections of this manual. Student Growth & Achievement (50%): o Student Growth (35%) Student growth is calculated via the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS). TVAAS measures whether a teachers class has achieved less than one year, one year, or more than one year of academic growth for one year of instruction. o Student Achievement (15%) Student achievement will be calculated according to one of several possible measures. The teacher and his or her principal will select a measure from a menu of options provided by the state of Tennessee. Observation of Practice (40%): Observation scoring will be based on the Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment portions of the MCS Teaching & Learning Framework. All teachers will receive multiple observations in 2011-12. Stakeholder Perceptions (5%): MCS will survey students using the TRIPOD survey to gather insights about their classroom experiences. Questions focus on specific observable teaching practices to limit the impact of any subjective student opinions. Teacher Knowledge (5%): Teacher knowledge will be measured according to one of several possible measures. The teacher will select a measure from a menu of options recommended by the Teacher Evaluation Working Group.
How is the TEM scored? At the end of the evaluation process, each component of a teachers TEM and the TEM as a whole will receive a performance level of 1 - 5 in which: 1 means Significantly Below Expectations 2 means Below Expectations 3 means Meeting Expectations 4 means Above Expectations 5 means Significantly Above Expectations. A more detailed description of TEM scoring can be found in the Putting It All Together: Getting to a Complete TEM Score section of this manual.
Appendix K: 4
Student Growth & Achievement

What is TVAAS (Student Growth)? TVAAS is a measure of growth in performance from one year to the next on state-mandated tests. The TVAAS system calculates growth from tests covered under the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) in reading/language arts, math, science, and social studies. The general expectation for TVAAS is that a years worth of instruction should result in a years worth of student growth. Is TVAAS the same as Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? No. AYP is a required measurement under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. In short, AYP refers to whether or not a student, class, school, district, or state met a pre-set target of proficiency on a criterionreferenced test (CRT). TVAAS, by contrast, is a growth measure. It is based on the gains students make (or dont make) compared to their test outcomes in previous years. Which teachers have individual-level TVAAS results? Teachers whose students are assessed at the end of the year by a state-mandated test have TVAAS results. At the present time, that means core subject teachers in grades 3 8 and teachers in Algebra I, Algebra II, Biology I, English I, English II, and U.S. History have TVAAS results. In 201112, English III will be a tested subject that counts for TVAAS, but not for AYP. What if I dont have individual-level TVAAS? According to state law, teachers in non-tested subjects must use school-level TVAAS data for 35% of their evaluation (TEM) score until the state approves a system for measuring value-add in non-tested subjects. In 2011-12, we are expecting that the work of several state-level committees will provide a more direct measurement of the impact of teachers in non-tested subjects. For the first time this year, a school-level composite TVAAS score will be calculated. This new statistic will combine TVAAS results from all the teachers in a school and report that as a single number: the TVAAS Composite. How will Student Growth (35% of TEM) be scored? As with all TEM components, TVAAS will be scored on a scale of one through five, and these scores will be provided by the state of Tennessee. Those teachers and schools whose students demonstrate less than a year of growth will either receive a score of 1 (Significantly Below Expectations) or 2 (Below Expectations). Teachers and schools with students demonstrating one year of growth will receive a score of 3 (Meeting Expectations). Those with Students demonstrating more than one year of growth will receive a score of 4 (Above Expectations) or 5 (Significantly Above Expectations). When will TVAAS scores be available? The state will provide teacher-level TVAAS results based on student test outcomes from 2010-11, by November 2011. Schools already have access to the TVAAS website, where school-level, grade-level, and studentgrouping-level analyses can be reviewed.
Appendix K: 5
How will student achievement (15% of TEM) be scored? According to state law, 15% of the TEM evaluation score must include a measure of student achievement outcomes based on a menu of options that teachers and principals will jointly select from. As with all TEM components, each these achievement outcomes will be scored on a scale of one through five, and these scores will be provided by the Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE). The options identified by the state are: Standardized state assessment scores (TCAP, Gateway, & End of Course) School-wide or individual TVAAS ACT/SAT suites of assessments AP/IB/NIC suites of assessments Off the Shelf national and state assessments approved by the state School graduation rate CTE student graduation rate Post-secondary enrollment and continuation rates Student completion of advanced or dual enrollment coursework 9th grade promotion rate to 10th grade
Who decides which of the items from the menu above gets picked? The TDOE intends for teachers to make the selection from the list above. Principals and teachers should work together to pick the measure that makes the most sense for the person being evaluated. For example, a kindergarten teacher might want to choose AIMSweb scores for her 15%, while a second grade teacher might want to choose his students SAT 10 results. Both of these examples are likely inclusions under the off the shelf tests. High school teachers may want to choose a measure like promotion rate or the schools graduation rate as their indicator for the 15%.
Appendix K: 6
Observation of Practice: The MCS Teaching & Learning Framework and the Observation Process
MCS Teaching &Learning Framework Overview What is the Teaching & Learning Framework? The Teaching & Learning Framework defines effective teaching behaviors that are expected to be seen inside our MCS classrooms. It outlines the key strategies that we believe lead to increased student growth and achievement. The MCS Teaching & Learning Framework has four domains: Plan, Teach, Cultivate a Learning Environment, and Reflect & Adjust. Why do we need a Teaching & Learning Framework? The Teaching & Learning Framework is our districts way of creating a common language for effective teaching that will guide how teachers are evaluated, supported and equipped to bring about student growth. The Framework provides clear expectations for teachers about classroom performance by serving as the foundation for our observation rubric, which comprises 40% of teacher evaluations. Who developed the Teaching & Learning Framework? The MCS Teaching & Learning Framework is the result of 18 months of collaborative efforts between teachers, principals and district-level staff via the Teacher Evaluation Working Group. After a Spring 2011 field test involving 500 teachers, 65 trained observers and 3 possible rubrics, the Working Group selected DC IMPACT as the basis of for MCSs observation component. The Framework has been adapted to fit our districts specific goals of teacher effectiveness based on additional teacher and administrator feedback. Observation Process Overview Will I be assessed on the entire Teaching & Learning Framework this year? No. Although we believe all four domains of the MCS Teaching & Learning Framework are critical to identifying and guiding highly effective teaching practices, only the Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment domains will be incorporated into teachers TEM scores. This is because the Teach and Cultivate domains are easily observable during a classroom lesson whereas Plan and Reflect and Adjust should inform preparation prior to a lesson and modifications after a lesson. How will my observations (40% of TEM) be scored? During a formal observation, the observer will rate each standard within the Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment domains on a scale of 1 5 with a score of 1 meaning Significantly Below Expectations and a score of 5 meaning Significantly Above Expectations. All teachers will have multiple formal observations during 2011-12 school year. The cumulative average of these observations will also be scored on the same 1-5 scale and will account for 40% of each teachers TEM score.
Appendix K: 7
How many formal observations will I have? How long will they last? According to state law, tenured teachers will be observed a minimum of 4 times each academic year, for a combined total of no fewer than 60 minutes. Pre-tenure teachers will be observed a minimum of six times, for a combined total of no fewer than 90 minutes. Will formal observations be announced or unannounced? Both. Tenured teachers must have at least 2 unannounced observations. Pre-tenure teachers must have at least 3 unannounced observations. Who will conduct formal observations? Either your principal or your assistant principal will conduct the first and last observations for each teacher. However, school-level and/or district-level administrators, such as content specialists, instructional facilitators or others who have administrative licensure and training certification with the MCS Teaching & Learning Framework may conduct other observations. Will there be a conference after the formal observation? Yes. According to state law, the teacher and observer must have a conference within 7 days of the observation. Teachers and observers will discuss the observation ratings and scoring, identify areas of strength and areas to strengthen and determine next steps for professional growth, development and support. What documentation is required for the observation and post-conference processes? Observation records consist of the four documents outlined below. All documentation will be collected electronically for ease of use beginning in 2011-12. Self-Assessment All teachers will complete a self-assessment that includes 1) self-scoring on the indicators in all four domains of the Teaching & Learning Framework (Plan, Teach, Cultivate a Learning Environment, and Reflect & Adjust); 2) Comments on Areas of Strength; and 3) Comments on Areas to Strengthen prior to the first observation post conference. Observation Rubric Score Each observer will complete a scored rubric for each classroom observation conducted based on all indicators in the Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment domains of the Framework. The observer and teacher will discuss the scores at each post-observation conference. Professional Growth & Support Plan (PGSP) Following a teachers first observation, the teacher and observer (either a principal or assistant principal) will develop individualized PGSPs during their first observation post-conference. For the PGSP, the teacher and observer will identify four areas to strengthen based on Teaching & Learning Framework indicators. The teacher and observer will then outline growth goals, planned actions to achieve these goals and plans for administrators to support these goals for each area to strengthen. Teachers and observers will revisit the PGSP after each subsequent observation to determine if additional support is needed. Post-Observation Conference Record To ensure compliance with state law, teachers and observers must jointly complete a document confirming that a post-observation conference occurred within seven days of each observation.
Appendix K: 8
Stakeholder Perceptions
How does Stakeholder Perceptions relate to TEM? The Stakeholders Perceptions component of the TEM refers to the ways that a teachers stakeholderssuch as students, parents and other teachersassess his or her performance. Whereas MCSs previous evaluation system consisted solely of principals perceptions of teacher performance, this component allows teachers to get feedback from a variety of perspectives. For the 2011-12 school year, only student perceptions will factor into teachers TEM evaluation scores. How will Stakeholder Perceptions be measured? For 2011-12, Stakeholder Perceptions will be measured through the TRIPOD Student Survey, which students from your class(es) will take twice during the course of the school year. The TRIPOD survey does not measure students subjective opinions about how much they like their teachers. Rather, the survey asks students to assess observable practices in their classrooms according to the Seven Cs : Caring about students (encouragement and support) o Ex: My teacher in this class makes me feel that s/he really cares about me Controlling behavior (press for cooperation and peer support) o Ex: Our class stays busy and doesnt waste time Clarifying lessons (success seems feasible) o Ex: My teacher explains difficult things clearly Challenging lessons (press for effort, perseverance and rigor) o Ex: My teacher wants me to explain my answers why I think what I think Captivating students (learning seems interesting and relevant) o Ex: My teacher makes learning enjoyable Conferring with students (students sense their ideas are respected) o Ex: My teacher wants us to share our thoughts Consolidating knowledge (ideas get connected and integrated) o Ex: My teacher takes the time to summarize what we learn each day
Will TRIPOD questions vary by student population? Yes. Currently, there are three versions of the TRIPOD student survey according to grade bands: Kindergarten 2, 3 5 and 6 12. These multiple versions are designed to cater to students different stages of academic development and reading comprehension skills and are based on several years of research and evidence. Student measures for Pre-K teachers and non-classroom educators are still in development at this time. How will Stakeholder Perceptions (5% of TEM) be scored? As with all TEM components, Stakeholder Perceptions will be scored on a scale of 1 5 based on results from the TRIPOD student survey. Surveys will be administered to students during both the fall and spring semesters. Teachers should have all scores by April 2012.
Appendix K: 9
Teacher Knowledge
What does Teacher Knowledge mean? Teacher Knowledge refers to a teachers level of mastery of the content area(s) he or she teaches as well as his or her knowledge of pedagogy, or the teaching methods needed to foster learning among students. Because content and pedagogical needs for students vary immensely across teachers subject areas and grade bands, we acknowledge the need to make this TEM component adaptable for different teacher populations. How will Teacher Knowledge (5% of TEM) be measured? Teacher Knowledge will be measured according to one of several possible measures listed on a menu of options. These measures were recommended by the Teacher Evaluation Working Group as a first step in looking at teacher knowledge for various teacher populations. The Teacher Knowledge menu includes: Nine hours of content-specific professional development (within the 57 hour requirement) Web-based or hard-copy portfolio National Board Certification GPA (from any degree, earned at any time) Observation by a content-area specialist Score from a published and normed test (Praxis, NTE, MKT, etc.)
How will Teacher Knowledge be scored? As with all TEM components, each these achievement outcomes will be scored on a scale of 1 5. Specifics for the scoring of each menu option will be provided prior to teacher selection.
Appendix K: 10
Putting It All Together: Getting to a Complete TEM Profile

This section is designed to help you understand how all of the components of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM) will come together to form an overall TEM score and profile. When will each TEM component be measured? The graphic below provides a timeline for when each TEM component will be measured. It should be noted that the dates for observations are not exact and may vary by school and individual teachers.
TEM Data Population Timeline

TEM
Component
SEP.
OCT.
NOV.
DEC.
JAN.
FEB.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
Student Growth/ Achievemt.
2010-11 test results available no later than November
TCAP, Gateway and End-of-Course testing occur for 2011-12 TVAAS
Observations
Pre-tenure teachers observed 6 times; Tenured teachers observed 4 times
Stakeholder Perceptions
TRIPOD Student Survey administered in Fall and Spring
Teacher Knowledge
Teacher knowledge measures collected during a window of time

4
How will the TEM as a whole be scored? Consistent with state policy, each component of the TEM will be scored on a scale of 1 5, and then the TEM as a whole will be scored on a scale of 1 5 for each teacher based on the scores and weightings of the four main components. What do these TEM scores mean? A teachers TEM composite score, based on the 4 TEM components, will inform his or her evaluation outcomes for the year. MCS policy is currently in development with various stakeholders concerning the evaluation outcomes and review process for teachers receiving any given TEM score. Yet TEM is not simply meant to sort teachers as being effective or ineffective. Rather, TEM provides teachers with a performance profile that enhances professional growth and ultimately leads to student success.
Appendix K: 11
TEM: A Process and a Tool

As educators, we all want to be the best we can for our students. TEM can help. Through the four components of TEM, principals can thoroughly evaluate what their teachers know, the extent to which they grow their students in learning, which practices they employ that resonate with students, and how students react to those practices. Through targeted feedback from their principals and self-reflection using TEM data, teachers can assess their own performance, take advantage of suggested supports to foster continuous improvement, and chart their progress over the course of the year. Through this cycle of feedback, reflection and growth, all of our teachers have a vital opportunity to become pioneers in the field of public education. With TEM, every educator in Memphis City Schools can be a model of teaching effectiveness. The tool is in our hands.
Appendix K: 12
Glossary of Terms
Descriptor A descriptor contains all observable teaching behaviors associated with a specific score on a Teaching & Learning Framework indicator. For example, under the Teach Indicator 7 (Maximize Instructional Time), one of the descriptors for a score of 5 is Lesson progresses at a rapid pace such that students are never disengaged. Domain A domain is a broad category within the Teaching & Learning Framework containing multiple indicators of effective teaching. The MCS Framework contains four domains: Plan, Teach, Cultivate a Learning Environment, and Reflect & Adjust. Teachers will be observed and scored on the Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment domains as part of their TEM scores in 2011-12. Evaluation Whereas evaluation has been synonymous with observation previously in MCS, evaluation now refers to a teachers whole TEM score and profile. Observation is one component of the TEM evaluation system, which also includes student growth & achievement data, stakeholder perceptions and teacher knowledge. Formal Observer A formal observer is a licensed administrator who has received training and certification on the Teaching & Learning Framework and can conduct classroom observations contributing towards a teachers TEM score. In 2011-12, both school-level administrators (such as principals and assistant principals) and district-level administrators (such as content specialists) will be formal observers. Indicator An indicator is a sub-component of a domain within the Teaching & Learning Framework. For example, the first indicator for the Teach domain is Engage Students in Objective-Driven Lessons. Each domain has multiple indicators outlining effective teaching practices, and these indicators can each be scored on a scale of 1 5. Observation of Practice Observation of Practice is one of four main TEM components and will account for 40% of each teachers evaluation in 2011-12. Observations will be scored using the Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment domains of the Teaching & Learning Framework. Observation Rubric Score (OPTES Document) See OPTES OPTES: Online Principal-Teacher Evaluation System OPTES refers to the electronic system in which all classroom observation scoring and documentation will be stored during 2011-12. The following documentation is required in order to achieve a complete score on the observation component of the TEM: o Self-Assessment A teachers self-assessment includes 1) self-scoring on the indicators in all four domains of the Teaching & Learning Framework (Plan, Teach, Cultivate a Learning Environment, and Reflect & Adjust); 2) Comments on Areas of Strength; and 3) Comments on Areas to Strengthen.
Appendix K: 13
Observation Rubric Score A scored observation rubric must be completed after each classroom observation based on the indicators in the Teach and Cultivate a Learning Environment domains of the Framework. Professional Growth & Support Plan (PGSP) A teachers PGSP includes four areas to strengthen based on Teaching & Learning Framework indicators. The teacher and observer will then outline growth goals, planned actions to achieve these goals and plans for administrators to support these goals for each area to strengthen. Post-Observation Conference Record The post-observation conference record is a document confirming that a post-observation conference occurred within seven days of each observation as is required by state law.
Performance Level A performance level is the score of 1 5 teachers will receive on each TEM component, on each indicator in the Teaching & Learning Framework, and on the TEM as a whole. The performance levels are as follows: o 1 means Significantly Below Expectations o 2 means Below Expectations o 3 means Meeting Expectations o 4 means Above Expectations o 5 means Significantly Above Expectations. Post Observation Conference Record (OPTES Document) See OPTES Professional Growth and Support Plan (OPTES Document) See OPTES Self-Assessment (OPTES Document) See OPTES Stakeholder Perceptions Stakeholder Perceptions is one of four main TEM components and will account for 5% of each teachers evaluation in 2011-12. Stakeholder Perceptions will be measured using the TRIPOD student survey. Student Achievement Student Achievementalong with Student Growthcontributes to one of four main TEM components and will account for 15% of each teachers evaluation in 2011-12. Teachers and principals will select a Student Achievement measure from a menu of options. Student Growth Student Growthalong with Student Achievementcontributes to one of four main TEM components and will account for 35% of each teachers evaluation in 2011-12. State law requires that Student Growth is measured by individual-level TVAAS data for teachers in tested subjects and by school-level TVAAS data for teachers in non-tested subjects. Teacher Knowledge Teacher Knowledge is one of four main TEM components and will account for 5% of each teachers evaluation in 2011-12. Teachers and principals will select a Teacher Knowledge measure from a menu of options.
Appendix K: 14
Teaching & Learning Framework The Teaching & Learning Framework defines effective teaching behaviors that are expected to be seen inside all classrooms. The MCS Framework has four domains: Plan, Teach, Cultivate a Learning Environment, and Reflect & Adjust, and these domains each contain multiple indicators and descriptors detailing effective teaching practices. The Framework provides common language and clear expectations for teachers about classroom performance by serving as the foundation for our observation rubric, which comprises 40% of teacher evaluations. TEM: Teacher Effectiveness Measure TEM is the evaluation system for all teachers beginning in 2011-12 as well as an individualized profile of performance that will inform how teachers are supported in the spirit of continuous improvement. The TEM consists of four main components: Student Growth & Achievement, Observation of Practice, Stakeholder Perceptions and Teacher Knowledge. TEM Resource Guide The TEM Resource Guide identifies teacher support, professional development and growth opportunities for each TEM component and for each domain of the Teaching & Learning Framework. This Guide can help teachers and principals create and adapt teachers Professional Growth and Support Plans (PGSP) throughout the school year. TRIPOD Student Survey The TRIPOD Student Survey is the instrument that will be used to measure teachers Stakeholder Perceptions component, which comprises 5% of the TEM. The survey will be administered in both fall and spring to the students in a teachers class(es). TVAAS: Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System TVAAS is a measure of growth in performance from one year to the next on state-mandated tests. The TVAAS system calculates growth from tests covered under the Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) in reading/language arts, math, science, and social studies. The general expectation for TVAAS is that a years worth of instruction should result in a years worth of student growth.
Appendix K: 15
Teacher Effectiveness Initiative: Policy Implications

I. Context and Overview - Transitioning from Policy to Implementation With the receipt of the Bill and Melinda Gate Foundation Intensive Partnership Grant in 2009, Memphis City Schools (MCS) has been moving at nearly break-neck speed to transform the system in order to realize dramatic improvements in student achievement through effective teaching. Memphis City Schools, as well as other school districts undertaking this type of work, has been in a mode of building or systemic rebuilding and, ultimately, transformation in order to achieve the positive academic results desired for students. The districts efforts over the past two (2) years have moved through the following three (3) stages of system building: 1) careful thought around educational issues affecting teacher performance such as the effectiveness of teacher evaluation and tenure systems nationwide; 2) conception and piloting of new ideas around teacher effectiveness such as instituting a multidimensional approach to evaluation, rather than relying solely on teacher observations; and finally, (3) actual construction of a skeletal structure that can be built upon as the reform work continues (e.g., development of technology systems to support implementation and focused policy development). From a district-level policy perspective, proof of this building is evident. Over the past two years, the Memphis City Schools policy work around improving student achievement through effective teaching has resulted in several policies designed to advance district reform. These policies are intended to provide Board-level oversight of the teacher effectiveness work by outlining goals, prescribing behavior, establishing constraints, and setting parameters to ensuring enduring reform. To date, MCS had developed or revised the following policies to support its efforts around effective teaching: 1) Teacher Effectiveness; 2) Teacher Effect Data; 3) Professional Development; and 4) Effective School Leadership. Additionally, new draft policies are under development in the areas of teacher evaluation, teacher tenure, and video captures of professional practices and possible revisions are proposed in the areas of teacher effect data and teacher support. II. Implications - Summary of Memphis City Schools Legislative and Policy Implications As the district begins to transition from policy development to nearly full scale implementation of the districts teacher effectiveness initiative system wide, there are certain factors affecting the remaining policy work going forward. State-level factors affecting MCSs efforts around effective teaching include the enactment by the Tennessee General Assembly of laws in the areas of teacher evaluation, teacher tenure, and collaborative conferencing. These laws are designed to guide the state and its local school districts in education reform. Below is a summary of the recently enacted laws, followed by the policy implications for each TEI strategy given the changes in Tennessee law:
MCS Office of Policy Development
Appendix L: 1

Tennessee First to the Top Act of 2010 In 2010, the Tennessee General Assembly enacted the Tennessee First to the Top Act (the Act). The Act includes provisions requiring annual teacher and principal evaluations based, in part, on student growth data and classroom/position observations. The Act also requires that the results from evaluations be used in employment decisions including, but not necessarily limited to, promotion, retention, termination, compensation, and attainment of tenure status. Moreover, the Act allows local districts to develop and gain state approval to use a compensation system different from the state. Tennessee Tenure Laws (Combined Laws 2011) In 2011, the Tennessee General Assembly revised several laws affecting tenure attainment and maintenance for teachers. The combined laws differentiate teacher performance into the following five effectiveness groups based on evaluation results: significantly above expectation, above expectations, at expectations, below expectations, and significantly below expectations. The revisions also define both tenure and inefficiency, including in the definition of inefficiency performance effectiveness levels that are below expectations or significantly below expectations. The revisions extend the probationary period for beginning teachers seeking tenure from three (3) to five (5) years. The revisions also change the licensure requirement for tenure attainment from a Tennessee professional teaching license to a valid license issued by the Tennessee State Board of Education. Additionally, the law requires as a component for tenure attainment evaluation results of above expectations or significantly above expectations in the 4th and 5th years of the probationary period. The revisions also include provisions requiring teachers tenured on or after July, 1, 2011, to return to probationary status if they receive evaluation results of below expectations or significantly below expectations for two (2) consecutive years. For teachers tenured on or after July 1, 2011, to regain tenure, two (2) consecutive years of evaluation results of above expectations or significantly above expectations are required. The provisions to the law prohibit the return to probation of teachers tenured before July 1, 2011, but maintain that such teachers shall lose tenure upon resignation, retirement, or dismissal. Additionally, regardless of the date of tenure, teachers shall lose tenure status for participation in a strike. As such, striking teachers require two (2) consecutive years of evaluation results of above expectations or significantly above expectations to regain tenure. Finally, the revisions extend the probationary period for transfers and rehires from one (1) year to two (2) years and allow the Board to waive the mandatory two (2) year probationary period at the Superintendents recommendation. Tennessee Collaborative Conferencing Law (2011) Additionally, during the 2011 Legislative Session, the Tennessee General Assembly enacted the Professional Educators Collaborative Conferencing Act of 2011 (PECCA), effectively repealing the MCS Office of Policy Development Appendix L: 2

Education Professional Negotiations Act (EPNA). The Act eliminates the traditional collective bargaining model of negotiating teacher contracts and embraces a more collaborative approach to making
decisions pertaining to key elements of a teachers employment relationship with the school district. Once a training program is developed, as provided by the PECCA, school districts are required to implement the training program no later than July 1, 2012. Collaborative conferencing may not begin until such training is complete. Moreover, the PECCA suspends negotiations indefinitely between local boards of education and local professional employees organizations as of the date of the Act. However, existing contracts remain in effect until their natural expiration. The PECCA explicitly recognizes principals, assistant principals, and supervisors as members of the local boards management team, preventing them from being represented by the local professional employees organization during conferencing or in a Memorandum of Understanding on the items agreed upon through collaborative conferencing. However, where the management team is excluded from being represented in the collaborative conferencing, the Act states that no professional employee, group of professional employees, or professional employee organization shall be denied the opportunity to represent themselves or groups of professional employees during conferencing. Once a majority of the teachers in a school district vote to enter into collaborative conferencing, local boards or their representatives are required to participate in collaborative conferencing to discuss the following: salaries and wages, insurance, fringe benefits, leave, grievance procedures, payroll deductions, and working conditions. The PECCA, unlike the EPNA, explicitly prohibits collaborative conferencing on the following subjects: differentiated pay plans; expenditure of grants; evaluations; staffing of innovative educational programs; personnel decisions concerning assignments (includes prohibiting placements based on seniority); and payroll deductions for political activities. The new Act does not require that the school district enter into a memorandum of understanding. In essence, there is no requirement that the district agree to any of the items discussed. If, however, agreement is reached on any discussion item, it must be memorialized in a memorandum of understanding valid for no more than three (3) years. Included in the new Act, is a provision permitting the director of schools (superintendent) to communicate with professional employees concerning any subject relevant to the operation of the school system, including the terms and conditions of professional service that are subject to collaborative conferencing, through any means, medium or format the director chooses. Strategy 1 Define and Measure Effective Teaching Legislative Evaluation With the enactment of the Tennessee First to the Top Act, the General Assemblys expectations for defining and measuring effecting teaching have been established through states evaluation standards. MCS Office of Policy Development Appendix L: 3

MCS Policy Evaluation and Videotaping Professional Practices Currently, work to develop a district evaluation policy that is aligned with the state evaluation law and regulatory guidelines continues. District policy work is also underway to develop a policy on video
captures of professional practices to use for evaluation, teacher support, and district-identified purposes within the system. In addition to the development of policy around evaluation and videotaping professional practices, MCS may consider revising the districts policy, agreements, and practices to address the implications that evaluation results have on employment decisions for individual teachers and system-wide organizational issues. System-wide organizational issues may include capacity and fidelity issues around evaluation implementation; the districts capacity to provide teacher support commiserate with needs identified through evaluation; employee/labor relations, grievance, and legal issues; evaluation implications for measuring and categorizing the districts teaching force; and evaluation implications for the recruitment, hiring, and staffing process. Strategy 2 Smarter Decisions about Who Teaches A. Tenure 1. Legislative With the revisions to the Tennessee tenure laws, the General Assemblys expectations for tenure attainment have been established. However, the laws are not prescriptive about how tenure attainment should be used by districts for personnel decisions or system-wide employment decisions. 2. MCS Policy Currently, the revision to the Tennessee tenure laws allow teachers who receive a valid license issued by the Tennessee State Board of Education, rather than a Tennessee professional teaching license as in the past, to receive tenure if the teacher meets the other tenure criteria. In the past, probation and non-tenure status could be considered synonymous; and a teacher without a professional teaching license would not have been considered officially tenured. However, under the new tenure laws which base tenure attainment on evaluation results, a teacher may receive tenure without holding a professional teaching license or a teacher could remain in probationary status while holding a professional teaching license. Additionally, due to the possibility for teachers tenured on or before July 1, 2011, to return to probationary status and the restriction against returning teachers tenured before July 1, MCS Office of Policy Development Appendix L: 4

2011, to probationary status, teachers with the same evaluation results may be classified differently depending on whether or not they fall under the new tenure system. Due to the possibility of these occurrences, there may be variability in the characteristic of teachers with the same classification. Therefore, MCS may consider deciding which criteria or combinations of criteria among licensure, tenure, or evaluation score should be used to
make individual teacher personnel decisions including decisions around continued employment or dismissal. B. Collaborative Conferencing 1. Legislative Currently, there is no direction from the state on how to conduct collaborative conferencing. However, the Act requires the Tennessee Organization of School Superintendents (TOSS), in conjunction with representative organizations of school leaders and administrators and professional employees organizations, to develop by January 1, 2012, a training program in the principles and techniques of interest-based collaborative problem-solving for use in collaborative conferencing. Each school district is then required to implement the training program, as appropriate, no later than July 1, 2012. Clarity is needed for the meaning of as appropriate. Additionally, the Act suspends indefinitely all bargaining being conducted pursuant to the EPNA but also specifically preserves existing collective bargaining agreements in effect at the time of its enactment. However, many terms of the bargaining agreements require bargaining on agreed upon terms pursuant to the EPNA. These are issues requiring state guidance. 2. MCS Policy Once the existing collective bargaining agreement expires, the district, if a majority of the teachers choose to, must engage in collaborative conferencing. However, the PECCA limits the discussion parameters, and does not require the district to agree to any terms, thus necessitating development of policies in each of the areas consistent with the districts goals around ensuring employment of effective teachers. For the items that are prohibited from discussion, specifically teacher assignments/placements and evaluations, the district must develop clear and well thought-out policies around the impact of evaluations on placements/assignments. Additionally, since the Act allows the superintendent to communicate with teachers on items that are subject to collaborative conferencing, and may or may not be the subject of a memorandum of understanding, again, sound and well MCS Office of Policy Development Appendix L: 5

thought-out policy is required to provide guidance for the superintendent to ensure consistency of process and goals.
Strategy 3 Better Support, Utilize, and Compensate Teachers A. Better Support Teachers 1. Legislative With the enactment of the Tennessee First to the Top Act, teacher retention is directly tied to evaluations. Districts must utilize evaluations when making employment decisions, including but not limited only to, promotion, retention, termination, compensation, and attainment of tenure status. As such, districts are not confined to these areas when utilizing evaluations to make decisions pertaining to a teachers employment status. Evaluations may also serve as a tool to identify areas of needed strengthening and support or areas of strength. Through legislation and/or state board of education policy, in an effort to allow more time and/or methods for receiving professional development, the following could be instrumental to ensuring teachers are provided access to effective and meaningful supports: waivers of state laws around in-service; expansion of the activities accepted by the state as professional development or in-service; and/or reallocation of state funding resources to facilitate access to or development of effective and meaningful teacher supports. 2. MCS Policy Given MCS goal of providing effective teachers in every classroom, every day, every year, effective and meaningful teacher supports are essential. MCS should consider providing a clear definition of teacher support and identification and access to those supports. Additionally, any policy developed will necessitate ensuring the district has the capacity (human and funding resources and time) to provide the teacher with the supports required and/or identified within a clearly defined time period. B. Better Utilize Teachers: Linking Teachers Strengths to Students Needs MCS Office of Policy Development Appendix L: 6

1. Legislative From a legislative perspective, the district may seek changes in law or waivers to state policy and/or regulation that restrict teachers influence to a set number of students. Areas of interest may include, but are not limited to, the following: limits on class size; restrictions regarding who is considered the teacher of record and how that is defined; and limits on the time and methods allowed for providing teaching and learning opportunities. 2. MCS Policy Although the Tennessee General Assembly addressed in law the areas of evaluation and tenure, it left it in the hands of districts to utilize information from teacher evaluations in
innovates ways to increase student achievement. The district may consider developing policies that increase students access to teachers who are most effective in meeting their instructional needs in individual areas (e.g., in addition to career and technical courses, allowing students to move among schools for certain academic courses; allowing students to take courses from teachers at other schools either in person or virtually). Similarly, the district may want to consider increasing teachers access to struggling students by matching teachers with the students who need them most regardless of the students assigned school or grade-level. This may include tailored delivery of instructional services such as expanding the virtual teaching opportunities within the district (e.g., allowing teachers to offer online courses to students within the district or create tutorial/enrichment classes in certain academic areas that would be available to students by region or district-wide). C. Better Compensate Teachers 1. Legislative The 2011 tenure laws solidify provisions proposed last year to extend the probationary period for teachers from 3-5 years and base tenure attainment, in part on satisfactory evaluation results. The tenure law itself does not specifically address the relationship between achieving tenure and compensation. However, the provisions regarding compensation outlined in the 2010 First to the Top Act remain applicable, allowing school districts to develop their own compensation systems as long as their proposed systems are approved by the Tennessee State Board of Education. The recent legislation regarding collaborative conferencing has implications for implementation of the districts TEI in the area of compensation. While salary and wages are subject to collaborative conferencing, differentiated pay plans are not. 2. Policy MCS Office of Policy Development Appendix L: 7

To support this strategy, the district should consider aligning any proposed teacher compensation system to the probationary period in the tenure laws. Support for this strategy also calls for the district to address how teachers will be compensated as they potentially move among salary scale categories whether the movement is based on evaluation results (between tenure and probationary status) or teacher choice (between professional and master teacher categories). Strategy 4 Improve Surrounding Context for Teaching Legislative and MCS Policy The current legislative and policy status for Strategy 4 remains consistent from SY 2010-2011 to SY 20112012. III. Next Steps Immediate next steps for the TEI policy work include: 1) continued district-level policy development around staffing and compensation and 2) review of current TEI implementation to identify potential needed change to state law, MCS policy, and/or collective bargaining agreements.
MCS Office of Policy Development
Appendix L: 8
Context
Designing a Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) Program to Improve Teacher Effectiveness
Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) is the brainchild of Dal Lawrence, former president of the Toledo Federation of Teachers (TFT). His proposal, first bargained in 1973, was radical, not only because it would have teachers reviewing the work of their peers, but also because it came from a teacher union leader. Lawrence was convinced that teaching would become a profession only when teachers themselves set standards for their work and decided who met those standards and deserved to continue teaching. The goal of PAR is to improve the quality of teaching across schools, and this program demonstrates great potential in shoring up TEI Strategies Two and Three to increase the rigor of teacher evaluations and better support teachers, respectively. The PAR Program provides assistance to new and veteran teachers in the areas of classroom management, subject matter knowledge, teaching strategies, and teaching methods of instruction. Overview The basic structure of PAR, which was first instituted in 1981, remains essentially unchanged today and has served as the teacher evaluation and support structure for programs in districts across the country. The program is administered by a PAR Panel (governance board) comprised of district administrators, union officials and teachers. Most districts have 7 to 9 panel members that play a central role in reviewing teacher evaluations to determine which teachers should be retained, dismissed, or entered into an intensive program of support. PAR panels also oversee the selection and training of Consulting Teachers (CTs) to provide targeted assistance and support for both new and struggling veteran teachers to improve their performance. Consulting Teachers are nearly always released from the classroom full time to support and evaluate participating teachers, to act as a liaison between the teacher and administrators, and to present evidence of the teachers progress to the Governance Board. Consulting Teachers evaluate their peers, but their focus is on aligned support and improvement. After several months of mentoring and continual peer observations, the CTs advise the PAR Panel about whether the teachers they assist should be renewed or dismissed. In turn, the PAR Panel decides each case and recommends re-employment or dismissal to the Superintendent. Designed to provide support and assistance to new and veteran teachers, most districts place allnew teachers in PAR. The Consulting Teacher has the responsibility of mentoring and evaluating first year teachers in collaboration with the teachers respective principals. In many instances, veteran teachers self-select or are recommended by a peer or administrator to participate in PAR when deemed as struggling. Implementation Summary and Next Steps MCS has just begun its intensive exploration and planning processes to implement a Memphis-designed PAR program. In September 2011, MCS invited consulting teachers and governance board representatives from three other districts (Montgomery County, MD; Columbus, OH; and Minneapolis, MN) with strong PAR programs to meet with MCS administrators, MEA officials and teachers to discuss Appendix M: 1
their experiences and offer advice on initiating a similar program in Memphis. Key findings from this PAR Day are as follows:
Designing a Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) Program to Improve Teacher Effectiveness
Visiting representatives advised that MCS establish a PAR Governance Board immediately to build out the Consulting Teacher program and play a role in teacher evaluations in Spring 2012. Visiting districts stressed that in order to be successful, PAR must be led by union efforts. Visiting districts recommended that Consulting Teachers be released full time from their classrooms with a supplement to their current salaries. Visiting districts reported that they have never had a decision/recommendation of the PAR panel overturned by other administrators. Montgomery County and Columbus, OH have been identified as key partners to train MCS Consulting Teachers. Memphis representatives suggested that veteran teachers placement in the PAR program should be determined by their composite TEM profiles.
Program Costs and Outcomes PAR programs are expensive due to the compensation needed to release Consulting Teachers from classrooms full-time, and districts often must be creative and draw on various sources to fund them. Despite the cost, administrators and union leaders utilizing these programs repeatedly state that PARs benefits in terms of improving teacher quality far outweigh its costs. District and union leaders at PAR Day talked about the program as an investment in their teachers and an effective way to attract, support, and retain top-performing teachers. PAR also shows significant potential as a way to improve instruction, increase teacher professionalism, positively change the culture of teaching, and improve labor-management relations. Implementation Timeline for PAR in Memphis As a result of these early planning and collaborative opportunities, Memphis teachers union and TEI personnel have proposed the following timeline to introduce PAR to MCS:
October -December 2011

Select & Train PAR Panel Members
January-May 2012
Panel will hear grievances, determine application process for consulting teachers, determine placement for veteran teachers in PAR.
April-June 2012
Consulting Teacher selection and training process.
Appendix M: 2
Context Memphis City Schools has partnered with Teach Plus to implement teacher leadership programs that engage second-stage teachers (with 3 10 years of teaching experience) around programs and policies that have a direct impact on their retention, especially in schools that need them the most. The result is the development of a cadre of highly informed teacher activists that bring voice and engagement to the work of the Teacher Effectiveness Initiative. Overview The mission of Teach Plus is to improve outcomes for urban children by ensuring that a greater proportion of students have access to effective, experienced teachers. It is founded on the premise that teachers want to learn and grow in the profession, and want to ensure that their development results in increased learning among their students. In order for schools to improve student achievement continuously, teaching must become a career that motivates and rewards continuous improvement among practitioners. Research makes clear that teachers are the most important school-based variable in student success. Teach Plus addresses the urgent need for effective, experienced teachers in urban classrooms. We work with both results-oriented teachers and education policy leaders in transforming the profession to reward excellence and results. This work is done through two teacher leadership programs the Teaching Policy Fellowship and the T+ Network. The Teaching Policy Fellowship focuses on demonstrably effective teachers in the second stage of their careers who want to continue classroom teaching while also expanding their impact as leaders in their schools and in national, state, and district policy. The T+ Network enables a community of solutions-oriented teachers to generate and exchange ideas for improving the teaching profession with education policy leaders and one another in person and online. In the T+ Network Forum, teachers can provide feedback on questions posed by policymakers who are grappling with important and timely questions. The following chart identifies and explains the roles of the teachers who are engaged in the work. Program Definition Participants Fellows are demonstrably effective classroom teachers who are in the second stage (years 3-10) of their teaching careers. Teaching Policy Fellows are all current classroom teachers who teach a variety of subjects and grades, spanning from Kindergarten through twelfth grade. All Fellows teach in urban district, pilot, or charter schools. Some Fellows have entered teaching through alternative teacher training programs such as Teach for America. Many Fellows are actively involved in their local teachers unions as building Appendix N: 1
Teach Plus Opportunities for Teachers, Results for Urban Students
Teaching Policy Fellowship
The Teaching Policy Fellowship is a highly selective program for teachers interested in having a voice in decisions that affect their profession. During a cohort experience that spans 18 months, Fellows meet in monthly sessions that offer: personal interaction with key education leaders, a challenging course of study in education policy, research, and

best practices from across the nation, and the opportunity to advocate for policies that will better serve students and retain excellent teachers.
reps and leadership committee members, and many are equally involved in school- or district-based leadership. Memphis Teaching Policy Fellows have been: selected to sit on the Teacher Evaluation Working Group, published in the Memphis Commercial Appeal and the Impatient Optimists blog, and featured as highly-effective educators in Tennessee SCORE and other publications. More than 1,300 results-oriented Memphis teachers participate in the T+ Network. They impact policy through a wide variety of live and virtual leadership opportunities, including: T+ Network Events: Using live audience response technology and discussion, teachers provide policymakers with direct feedback on teacher evaluation and support. Policymakers have included Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman, MCS Superintendent Dr. Kriner Cash, MCS Director of Policy Development Natalie McKinney, and others. National Working Groups: Through a combination of virtual working meetings and online collaboration, Memphis teachers are participating in national Teach Plus working groups on assessments for nontested grades and subjects and teacher retention in charter schools. Media: In addition to staying informed through weekly updates on education reform news and teacher leadership opportunities, Memphis teachers write opeds and letters to the editor, and provide input to reporters covering key education issues.
The T+ Network is a rapidly growing national movement of teachers who believe a critical voice has been missing from education policy decisionmaking: the voice of teachers for kids. With an expanding series of interactive in-person and virtual forums, we provide opportunities for teachers to: T+ Network
Connect with highly motivated peers and national and local policy leaders; Learn about innovative policies to empower and retain effective teachers; Be a voice for change within the teaching profession.
Impact: TEM Development Teach Plus collaborated with Memphis City Schools to elicit feedback to use in the design of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure (TEM). Teach Plus sponsored an event on evaluation and invited all MCS teachers to attend. At this event, using Teach Plus live polling technology, teachers expressed dissatisfaction with the old system, and openness to a new one. Specifically, 71 percent of teachers at the event said the current evaluation system did not Appendix N: 2
support and improve their teaching practice. Teachers were optimistic that a new system could be useful to improvement. See Figures 1 and 2 below. Figures 1 and 2.
Source: Memphis T+ Network Event: Teacher Evaluations: Supporting Improvement, Achieving Results October 28, 2010. (n=115)
Following MCS pilot of three teacher observation rubrics, Teach Plus conducted three focus groups to gather feedback from teachers and evaluators about the value of the rubrics and to make decisions about which observation tool to use. By a clear majority, teachers identified DC IMPACT as the best observation rubric, and overwhelmingly preferred to make classroom observations as consequential as possible (40% of the evaluation rather than 35%), with stakeholder perceptions and teacher knowledge comprising a collective 10%. Student value-added data will comprise the other 50% of the evaluation. Figures 4 and 5.
Source: MCS Department of Teacher Talent & Effectiveness Teacher Evaluation Working Group Session, April 8, 2011. (n=65)
Appendix N: 3
The District adopted the Teacher Evaluation Working Groups recommendations as centerpieces of the Teacher Effectiveness Measure. In addition, the Tennessee Board of Education unanimously approved the TEM and said that it could be adopted by districts across the state. Thanks to this work, MCS has now moved from a teacher evaluation system that only offered up-or-down ratings of satisfactory and unsatisfactory to a multi-dimensional teacher evaluation system with five ratings that range from significantly above expectations to significantly below expectations. With the Teacher Effectiveness Measure, MCS and any other Tennessee district that chooses to adopt it will be better able to discover and share best practices and identify teachers who are most in need of increased support. The TEM will also indicate which teachers would make the best mentors or be eligible for other leadership roles. The fact that MCS included teachers throughout the design process ensures it will be more impactful than if they were excluded. Says high school AP teacher and Teach Plus Teaching Policy Fellow Aimee Cothran, We have been working on a tool that will allow teachers to understand where they need to improve their craft. This process always had teachers involved. Therefore, it will be teacher friendly while also improving the teaching profession. In addition, teacher involvement has also helped to encourage essential teacher buy-in as the system is implemented. According to 7th grade Language Arts teacher Everlina Hull, The opportunity for input from those who serve on the frontline of student growth and achievement suggests that the district appreciates and respects the positive contributions teachers can make in education reform. I am sure this evidence of trust will result in teachers being more open to accept and embrace this document that addresses teacher performance, evaluation, and tenure. Next Steps During the 2011-12 school year, Teach Plus Memphis will implement Year Two of the Teaching Policy Fellowship with the current cohort of 20 teachers. Building on successful implementation, the second cohort of Fellows will be selected during the spring of 2012 (February 1-April 1). Additionally, because of the growth of the T+ Network, a second staff person will be added the T+ Network Coordinator. Teach Plus will continue to align our programs with strategic priorities outlined in the Teacher Effectiveness Initiative including TEM Implementation, the research and development of a Peer Assistance and Review program, and a reformed compensation structure that will attract and retain effective teachers. The goal of our teacher voice work is policy change that leads to improved retention of effective teachers and improved student outcomes.
Appendix N: 4

October 2011 Stock Take Progress Report

Cargado por

Información del documento

Descripción original:

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

October 2011 Stock Take Progress Report

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Memphis City Schools Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Stock Take Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis City Schools Board of Commissioners

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

2. Establish the Office of Teacher Effectiveness Measurement

4. Develop and implement each component of the TEM

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

5. Increase turnover of the districts most ineffective teachers

Develop and promulgate Gold Standard for Teacher Professional Behavior

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

STRATEGY 4: IMPROVE CONTEXT TO SUPPORT EFFECTIVE TEACHING Key Strategic Initiatives

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Increased organizational capacity

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Organizational and cultural shifts in support of teacher effectiveness

Organizational and cultural shifts in support of teacher effectiveness

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative Progress Report October 1st, 2011

Memphis Teacher Effectiveness Initiative 7-Year Milestones (as of 9/30/10)

STRATEGY 1: We will create a common, agreed upon definition of effective teaching

Execution Milestones: Common Definition

Establish the Office of Teacher Effectiveness Measurement

Hire coordinator and additional staff; formalize roles

Create training materials and host trainings

Develop and implement each component of the TEM

Exact percentage goals to be set in Task Forces

Memphis City Schools Plan | Revised September 30, 2010

Anticipated Progress Year 1 2009-2010

Anticipated Progress Year 2 2010-2011

Anticipated Progress Year 3 2011-2012

Anticipated Progress Year 4 2012-2013

Anticipated Progress Year 5 2013-2014

Anticipated Progress Year 6 2014-2015

Anticipated Progress Year 7 2015-2016

Executive Milestones: Common Definition

Implement TEM District-wide