The [Oregon Education] Association advocates for the active assessment of all teachers through regular and comprehensive evaluation procedures. - OEA Resolution V.14 The Oregon Education Association believes evaluations should be fair and objective for all school employees. Evaluations should be conducted improve the quality of instructions and environment offered to students based on written criteria, and following the procedures mutually developed by, and acceptable to, the association and the governing board in compliance with state law.” - OEA Resolution V.22

Teacher Evaluation

Educators: Please take our survey on evaluation standards!

OEA's Fact Sheet on teacher evaluations

Collaboration & Teacher Evaluations

SUMMARY
OEA believes a robust and meaningful evaluation system, co-created by teachers and administrators, will benefit everyone, students especially.

The NEA Summit on Teacher Evaluation in Washington, D.C. followed on the heels of the adoption by the 2011 NEA Representative Assembly of NEA's Policy Statement on Teacher Evaluation and Accountability, as well as the Oregon State Legislature passing Senate Bill 290.

As state and local budgets dwindle, funds have been supplemented by the federal government and the philanthropic community, such as the states that competed for the $4.35 billion Race to the Top funds and/or the millions offered by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Measures of Effective Teaching (MET).

These monies have prompted many state legislators to address teacher evaluation by proposing new laws and regulations, virtually all of them focused on using evidence of student learning or achievement in the evaluation process. With more than 25 new or proposed state laws and regulations on teacher evaluation nationwide, the goal of the NEA Summit was to begin to identify ways state and local affiliates can co‐create evaluation systems that reflect a shared vision of teaching effectiveness. Similar to findings from OEA’s own Teacher Evaluation Workgroup, the NEA Summit affirmed that teacher evaluation should not be treated as a stand‐alone process, but as part of a comprehensive approach to professional growth and development to improve teaching and learning. At the Summit, NEA leaders and staff from around the nation worked together to address:

1.) A working definition of “Effective Teaching” as influenced by such leaders in the field as Linda Darling‐Hammond, and the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality
2.) Principles of Professional Practice
3.) Ways to define and incorporate Multiple Measure of Effective Teaching for use in evaluation
4.) Value‐Added Assessment/Measurement (VAM) and its strengths and limitations, along with other multiple measures of student learning
5.) Selecting and adapting other teacher evaluation tools
6.) How to work with school district when piloting the selected model

The effort dovetails with CTL’s continued work to monitor and inform the work of Oregon's Teachers Standards and Practices Commission (TSPC) and the State Board of Education on the adoption of model core teaching standards for use in teacher evaluation systems. Under Senate Bill 290, the State Board of Education, in consultation with TSPC, must adopt new statewide standards by January 1, 2012. School Districts must then adopt evaluation systems based on these standards by July 1, 2013.

The findings from the NEA Summit and additional evaluation tools and resources will be made available to state affiliates in the coming months. CTL will be working to compile and distribute this information as part of a toolkit we are in the process of developing on educator evaluation.

TALKING POINTS
• Students enrolled in our public schools deserve competent, caring, and effective teachers. Every day, dedicated education professionals enter classrooms across Oregon intent on doing their best to make sure students succeed.

• The central principle of any teacher assessment system must be to improve knowledge, skills, and classroom practice of professional educators with the ultimate goal of enhancing student learning. The ‘reward and punish’ philosophy of many administrators and policymakers is wrong. It excludes teachers from the process and does little to improve classroom learning or further the profession.

• Comprehensive assessment, evaluation, and professional development systems should be designed in tandem with the goal of improving the knowledge, skills and effectiveness of the teacher workforce. This requires a sustained social, political and financial commitment.

SENATE BILL 290
By January 2012, in consultation with TSPC and after receiving input from teachers, administrators, school boards, and other stakeholders the Oregon State Board of Education will adopt core teaching standards that comply with the rules in Senate Bill 290 (SB 290). State Board will most likely be looking to adopting the InTASC Standards. Let us know your thoughts on these prospective standards by taking our online survey!

These adopted standards will apply to all evaluation systems of teachers and administrators in districts across the state by July 2013. OEA firmly believes students enrolled in our public schools deserve competent, caring, and effective teachers. Every day, dedicated education professionals enter classrooms across Oregon intent on doing their best to make sure students succeed.

OEA asserts the central principle of any teacher assessment system must be to improve knowledge, skills, and classroom practice of professional educators with the ultimate goal of enhancing student learning. OEA supported SB 290 and its following components:

Important rationales for identifying core teaching standards designed to improve student growth:
- Assist districts to determine effectiveness of teachers and administrators and to make human resources decisions (based on consistent standards across the state)
- Improve professional development in districts
- Improve classroom and administrative practices

Important features of these core teaching standards:
- Use of multiple measures of teacher effectiveness
- Use of evidence of student growth using multiple measures
- Research-based practice
- Separately developed for teachers and administrators
- Allows for customization between districts
- Aligns to and refines support and professional growth opportunities in the district (inclusion of formative growth process)
- Allows for individualization in specialty areas and assignments
- Aligns with curricular standards targeted to the needs of specific educators

A critical feature of the evaluation systems that meet these core teaching standards:
- These systems need to be collaboratively designed by the district and the exclusive bargaining unit.

NEA's New Policy on Teacher Evaluation
On July 4, Delegates to the 2011 National Education Association Representative Assembly (NEA-RA) adopted a Policy Statement on Teacher Evaluation and Accountability. By a majority vote of more than 8,000 delegates, the Policy Statement focuses on what is best for students and the teaching profession. It puts NEA on the record, for the first time, as calling for a comprehensive overhaul of both teacher evaluation and accountability systems to advance student learning.

OEA’S EDITORIAL COMMENTS IN BOLD
Such systems must provide both ongoing non-evaluative, formative feedback and regular, comprehensive, meaningful and fair evaluations. [...] Such systems must provide both ongoing non-evaluative, formative feedback and regular, comprehensive, meaningful and fair evaluations.

Evaluations must be comprehensive – based on multiple indicators to provide teachers with clear and actionable feedback to enhance their practice – and must include all three of the following components:
• Indicators of Teacher Practice
• Indicators of Teacher Contribution and Growth
• Indicators of Contribution to Student Learning and Growth (Such indicators must be authentic, reflect that there are multiple factors that impact a student’s learning beyond a teacher’s control, and may include the “various indicators” chosen by local or state affiliates). The strongest indicators of contribution to student learning and growth should come from multiple sources.

Unless such tests are shown to be developmentally appropriate, scientifically valid and reliable for the purpose of measuring both student learning and a teacher’s performance, such tests may not be used to support any employment action against a teacher and may be used only to provide non-evaluative formative feedback. At this time no such instrument exists!

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Senate Bill 290
- The Oregonian Bill Tracker with votes, action, archived audio of hearings
- Final text of bill, as adopted

OEA
- Profile of Teacher Evaluations in Springfield (January 2011 Today's OEA)

NEA
- New Policy on Teacher Evaluation (from 2011 NEA-RA)
- Teacher Evaluation & Assessment: The NEA's Framework
- Principles for Teacher Evaluations & Systems (form)
- Systemic Approach for Teacher & Student Success
- Understanding Multiple Measures of Student Learning

Glossary of Terms: Teacher Evaluation & Assessment

InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards
- Summary of InTASC
- Performances, Essential Knowledge, and Critical Dispositions Sub-standards (in both Word & PDF)