State vs Local Decision Matrix
LanguagesA-Z IndexPrinter Friendly Image
Search
 



General Questions
tpep@k12.wa.us
360-725-6430

Sue Anderson, Program Director
sue.anderson@k12.wa.us
360-725-6116

 

The Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program

Development and Implementation

Legislation
State vs Local Decision Matrix
Steering Committee

 


State vs Local Decision Matrix

Download file (PDF)

Criteria
Criteria by which certificated classroom teachers, principals, and assistant principals will be evaluated beginning 2013-14.

  • STATE: Eight criteria for certificated classroom teachers and eight criteria for principals and assistant principals.
    Criteria: RCW 28A.405.100 (Sec. 1)(2)(b) & (Sec. 5)(b)
  • LOCAL: School boards have adopted new criteria by Sept. 10, 2013.
  • DISTRICT: Have adopted.

Criteria Definitions
Definitions developed by TPEP districts during pilot development to help clarify criteria and assist in determining evidence and measures. Criteria Definitions: WAC 392-191A-030

Certificated Classroom Teacher
A certificated employee who provides instruction to students and holds one or more of the certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140 (1) through (3) and (6)(a) through (e) and (g).

  • STATE: Definition of certificated classroom teacher: WAC 392-191A-030
  • LOCAL: Those who provide “academically-focused instruction to students” should be included in the evaluation system.
    Local discussion should focus on the roles/responsibilities of the employee as related to the criteria and approved frameworks.
    The framework authors met to discuss this issue. Particular consideration should be given to certificated teachers whose assigned job does not require instructional practice. Possible examples of roles that would not be evaluated using an instructional framework: a certificated teacher who manages student transition, an on-time graduation specialist who monitors progress toward a diploma, a media specialist who does not teach students as a key job responsibility, an instructional coach, a certificated teacher who monitors students in an online program but does not plan instruction, a certificated teacher who teaches in a juvenile justice system in which the majority of students attend for short periods of time (1-15 days). See OSPI Study Group Report: Guidance for Specific Learning Environments under your Framework’s “Document List” for additional guidance.
  • DISTRICT: Determine which educators are included in the teacher evaluation system. Those who should not be included should be evaluated using the previous evaluation process or another model chosen by the district.

Certificated Principal and Assistant Principal
A person who is employed to supervise the operation and management of a school as provided by RCW 28A.400.100 and holds certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140 (4)(a) or (6)(h)

  • STATE: Definition of certificated principal and assistant principal: WAC 392-191A-030
  • LOCAL: Local discussion should focus on the roles/responsibilities of the employee as related to the criteria and frameworks.
    Particular consideration should be given to roles such as Deans of Students, Athletic Directors, and those with split Superintendent/Principal roles.
    For guidance, see the TPEP Questions and Answers and the AWSP User’s Guide.
  • DISTRICT: Determine which certificated principals and assistant principals are included in the evaluation system.

Instructional & Leadership Frameworks
"Instructional framework" means one of the approved instructional frameworks adopted by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to support the evaluation system pursuant to RCW 28A.405.100.
"Leadership framework" means one of the approved leadership frameworks adopted by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to support the evaluation system pursuant to RCW 28A.405.100.

  • STATE: Instructional Frameworks
    • CEL - 5D+ University of Washington
    • Danielson - Framework for Teaching FfT(2011)
    • Marzano - Teacher Evaluation Framework
  • Leaderhip Frameworks
    • AWSP - Leadership Framework
    • Marzano - School Leadership Evaluation Model
  • LOCAL: Districts must select one instructional and one leadership framework, then post selections on their district website.
  • DISTRICT: Completed

Modification or Adaptations to Instructional Frameworks
Minor modifications or adaptations to preferred instructional frameworks.

  • STATE: The structure and text of frameworks and rubrics may only be changed by OSPI.
    With the framework authors, OSPI has created a process for reviewing and authorizing minor modifications or adaptations.
    RCW 28A.405.100 (Sec. 1)(2)(e). Instructions and more information.
  • LOCAL: Local decisions can be made regarding adding possible teacher observables and possible student observables to the 5D+ rubric, critical attributes to the Framework for Teaching, and possible teacher evidence and possible student evidence to the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model.
  • DISTRICT: Districts (or a consortium of districts) submit an application to the TPEP Steering Committee, providing rationale for changes to be implemented.

Four Level Rating System
The continuum of performance that indicates the extent to which the criteria have been met or exceeded.

  • STATE:
    1 - Unsatisfactory
    2 - Basic
    3 - Proficient
    4 - Distinguished
    RCW 28A.405.100
  • LOCAL: None
  • DISTRICT: None

Annual Report of Evaluation Data
Districts report annually to OSPI the following for each employee group:
(i) Evaluation criteria and rubrics;
(ii) a description of each rating; and
(iii) the number of staff in each rating. RCW 28A.150.230 (2)(a).

  • STATE: OSPI reports performance data for all educators through the annual State Educator Evaluation Survey (SEES) to US Dept. of Education and posts district summaries on the TPEP website.
  • LOCAL: How and when will performance data for all educators be collected? Where and how will data be stored?
  • DISTRICT: During the fall of each year, districts collect and report performance data of teachers aggregated by school and of other educators by district. Where applicable, four-level ratings are reported.

Comprehensive Evaluation
All eight criteria must contribute to the overall summative evaluation and must be completed at least once every four years. The evaluation must include an assessment of the criteria using the instructional framework rubrics and the superintendent of public instruction's approved student growth rubrics.

Focused Evaluation - One of the eight criterion must be assessed every year that a comprehensive evaluation is not required. Assignment to a Focused evaluation is always at the discretion of the evaluator. The selected criterion must be approved by the teacher or principal’s evaluator. Must include an assessment of the criterion using the instructional or leadership framework rubrics and OSPI's approved student growth rubrics.

  • STATE:
    Teachers - The focused evaluation will include the student growth rubrics of the selected criterion. If criterion 3, 6 or 8 are selected, evaluators will use those student growth rubrics. If criterion 1, 2, 4, 5, or 7 is selected, evaluators will use criterion 3 or 6 student growth rubrics. WAC 392-191A-120.
    Principals The focused evaluation will include the student growth rubrics selected by the principal or assistant principal and approved by the principal's evaluator. WAC 392-191A-190.
  • LOCAL: Comprehensive must be used at least once every four years; local schedule may vary.
  • DISTRICT: Identify district plan for rotating a portion of teachers to Comprehensive every year without overloading evaluator(s).
    Evaluatees who are to be moved/wish to move from a Focused evaluation to the Comprehensive evaluation during the school year must be informed of this decision in writing on or before December 15 of that school year.

Summative Performance Rating Descriptors
Description of summative performance at each of the four levels based on the work of the TPEP pilot districts.

  • STATE: Summative Performance Rating Descriptors for both Certificated Classroom Teachers, Principals and Assistant Principals. WAC 392-191A-140
  • LOCAL: None
  • DISTRICT: None

Criterion Level Scoring Methodology
Method for scoring the criterion-level scores using the instructional framework rubrics and student growth rubrics.

  • STATE:
    A criterion score is comprised of two components:
    • The framework rubric elements identified by OSPI for that criterion.
    • The applicable student growth rubrics.
  • LOCAL: Criterion-level Scoring Methodology is a local decision.
    Please see guidance from the frameworks authors on Criterion Scoring Methodology.
    Please see guidance from framework authors and OSPI regarding student growth in the modules.
  • DISTRICT: District creates procedures and practices to establish criterion scores, which are summed equally to create a summative score.
    Utilize OSPI's Training Modules to define criterion-level scoring methodology.

Final Summative Scoring Methodology
Common state-wide method for calculating the comprehensive and focused evaluation performance ratings for each of the approved instructional frameworks. RCW 28A.405.100 (2)(c).

  • STATE: OSPI has defined the common method of calculating a final summative score at the end of each school year in WAC 392-191A-080 , WAC 392-191A-090, WAC 392-191A-140, and WAC 392-191A-160.
    A Comprehensive summative score has two steps: (NOTE: tab in the following)
    • Districts create procedures and practices to establish criterion scores and they are summed equally to create a summative score. Framework rubric scores and student growth rubric scores are included in the calculation. The state’s scoring matrix assigns a corresponding label (Unsatisfactory to Distingished or 1-4).
    • Evaluators calculate the Student Growth Impact Rating, which is the sum of the five student growth rubrics (3,6,8 for teachers and 3,5,8 for principals). The Student Growth Impact Rating only has consequences when the rating is “Low” or any rubric score is “1”. Certificated classroom teachers with low student growth rating will engage with their evaluator, in a student growth inquiry pursuant to WAC 392-191A-100.

    A Focused summative score is determined as follows: (NOTE: tab in the following)

    • A summative score is assigned using the summative score from the most recent comprehensive evaluation. This score becomes the focused summative evaluation score for any of the subsequent years following the comprehensive summative evaluation in which the certified classroom teacher, certified principal or assistant principal is placed on a focused evaluation. Should a teacher, principal or assistant principal provide evidence of exemplary practice on the chosen focused criterion, a level 4 (Distinguished) score may be awarded by the evaluator. WAC 392-191A-120 (Teachers) WAC 392-191A-190 (Principals and Assistant Principals). Should a teacher or principal need or wish to be moved from a Focused to a Comprehensive evaluation during a school year, that decision must be communicated in writing by December 15, of each year.
    • LOCAL: Assure that evaluators understand and can accurately and reliably apply the procedures for scoring educator performance using OSPI’s framework rubrics, student growth rubrics and any locally-defined processes.
      Districts must decide how to derive a summative score when an educator ends service prior to the end of school or when an educator is hired late in the school year.
    • DISTRICT: Maximize rater agreement; yearly refresh evaluator training at minimum one day. See the AIR memo on rater agreement research and strategies. The Observation and Rater Agreement Training Module, is an additional resource to support district and school leadership teams in developing a common understanding of the new evaluation legislation, criteria, frameworks, and opportunities for professional growth and development.
      Clarify the district’s summative process for scoring educators who do not work the entire school year.

    Observation - (Teacher Only)
    Observe or observation means the gathering of evidence made through classroom or worksite visits, or other visits, work samples, or conversations that allow for the gathering of evidence of the performance of assigned duties for the purpose of examining evidence (Evidence means observed practice, products, or results of a certified classroom teacher or certified principal’s work that demonstrates knowledge and skills of the educator with respect to the four-level rating system.) over time against the instructional or leadership framework rubrics pursuant to this section. WAC 392-191A-030

    • STATE:
      Comprehensive
      All classroom teachers shall be observed at least twice each school year in the performance of assigned duties for at least sixty minutes during each school year, plus at least two opportunities for confidential conferences with his or her immediate supervisor.

      Comprehensive (Provisional)
      Districts must observe new employees for at least thirty minutes during the first ninety calendar days of the new employee's employment period. No summative score is required.

      Provisional (3rd year)
      Observe at least three times in the performance of assigned duties for at least ninety minutes during the school year.

      Focused
      School districts must insure that all classroom teachers are observed for the purpose of focused evaluation at least twice each school year in the performance of their assigned duties. As appropriate, the evaluation of the certified classroom teacher may include the observation of duties that occur outside the classroom setting. School districts must ensure that all certified classroom teachers are subject to a focused evaluation and observed for a period of no less than sixty minutes during each school year.
      RCW 28A.405.100 (Sec. 1)(3)(a)
      WAC 392-191A.110
    • LOCAL: Additional observations (either formal or informal) may be determined locally.
    • DISTRICT: Review School Board policies related to TPEP as well as negotiated agreements; consider alignment.

    Student Growth & Student Growth Impact Rating
    Student Growth: The change in student achievement between two points in time. Student Growth
    Data: The relevant and available multiple measures using classroom, school, district, and state-based tools.

    • STATE: Teachers & Principals - OSPI approved student growth rubrics must be used in criterion level scoring. More than one measure of student growth data must be used in scoring the student growth rubrics. Rating must be determined by an analysis of evidence.
      Upon completion of the overall summative scoring process, the evaluator will combine only the student growth rubric scores to assess the certificated classroom teacher, (WAC 392-191A-090) principal or assistant principal’s (WAC 392-191A-170) student growth impact rating. The student growth impact rating will be determined by the superintendent of public instruction's student impact rating scoring band. For additional details on student growth impact ratings view the Comprehensive and Focused diagrams.
    • LOCAL: Determine available and relevant multiple measures.
      Determine how assessment literacy and best practices will be incorporated into educator training.
      Consider whether to design a menu of professional growth options for educators who receive a low student growth impact rating.
    • DISTRICT: Utilize the ESD Student Growth training materials and OSPI online Modules.

    Perception Data
    Student or building staff input to provide data about the teacher or principal’s performance.

    • STATE: Student input may be included in the (teacher) evaluation process. RCW 28A.405.100(Sec. 1)(2)(g)
      Building staff input may be included in the (principal) evaluation process: RCW 28A.405.100 (Sec. 1)(6)(g)
    • LOCAL: The role of student and staff input into evaluation is a local decision.
    • DISTRICT: Decide if, how and when student perception data will be used in teacher evaluation and staff perception data will be used in principal evaluation.

    Analysis of Evaluation System - Representatives of OSPI and statewide associations shall analyze how the evaluation systems in RCW 28A.405.100 (2) and (6) affect issues related to a change in contract status. RCW 28A.405.102

    • STATE: Teachers & Principals - Annually the TPEP Steering Committee will examine educator performance data (SEES) and contract issues related to implementation of the four-level rating system.
    • LOCAL: None
    • DISTRICT: None

    Use of Evaluation Results in HR decision
    HR decisions include positive consequences (e.g., granting continuing contract status, preference in assignments, and teacher leadership roles) as well as negative consequences (probationary status, transfers, RIFs and displacement, and hiring staff). Access to professional development offerings based on teacher performance and/or district priorities can also be an HR decision.

    • STATE: Teachers & Principals - Beginning with the 2015-16 school year, evaluation results for certificated teachers and principals must be used as one of multiple factors in making human resource and personnel decisions. Human resource decisions include, but are not limited to: staff assignment, including the consideration of an agreement to an assignment by an appropriate teacher, principal and superintendent; and reduction in force. Nothing in this section limits the ability to collectively bargain how the multiple factors shall be used … with the exception that evaluation results must be a factor. RCW 28A.405.100 (8)(a)
    • LOCAL: Decide how evaluation results will be considered in a variety of personnel decisions for both teachers and principals.
      Decide what “multiple factors” will be considered, including evaluation results.
    • DISTRICT: Completed in 2015-16.

 

   Updated 5/22/2017

Old Capitol Building, PO Box 47200, 600 Washington St. S.E., Olympia, WA  98504-7200  360-725-6000  TTY 360-664-3631
Contact Us    |    A-Z Index    |    Site Info    |    Staff Only    |    Education Data System (EDS)