Effective Teachers and Leaders


NCDPI will use student performance on End-of-Grade (EOG) and End-of-Course (EOC) assessments, Common Exams, and Career and Technical Education (CTE) Exams to produce value-added data using EVAAS for teachers who teach students in courses in which these assessments are administered. SECC will assist the NCDPI in gathering information to inform decisions measures of student learning (MSLs) for teachers who teach in grades and subjects where EOG, EOC, Common Exams, and CTE exams are not administered and in providing professional development support for implementation.

This project is in the following state: North Carolina.

This project relates to the following ED Priorities:

  • Identifying, recruiting, developing, and retaining highly effective teachers and leaders
  • Identifying and scaling up innovative approaches to teaching and learning that significantly improve student outcomes
  • Using data-based decision-making to improve instructional practices, policies, and student outcomes

Related work:
REL Southeast
School Leadership Alliance

icon

icon

icon

Previous Work Updates

2016

September

On September 5, SECC staff forwarded REL Central webinar information to NCDPI staff in the Educator Effectiveness division. The webinar was scheduled for September 12 and was titled “How School Districts Monitor New Teachers: What a Multi-State Study Reveals.” Agency staff indicated they would register and attend the webinar. SECC staff also forwarded the EASN resource on the Talent Management Self-Assessment and the Educator Effectiveness Research Alliance webinars.

August

On August 4, SECC staff provided an overview of the Year 4 Effective Teachers and Leaders project work and how that work will transition into the Year 5 work plan. SECC staff participated in a webinar with NCDPI staff on August 10, which was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education titled “Equity in IDEA in ESSA.” Resources regarding “Opportunities within ESSA to Support College and Career Readiness” were provided to the SEA on August 29, and on August 30, SECC staff completed the Talent for Turnaround Assessment to gauge the SEA’s readiness for participation in the T4T Academy.

July

On July 15, SECC staff forwarded information regarding the FY16 TIF Grant competition to the NCDPI director and assistant director of the Division of Educator Effectiveness. An additional resource on “Monitoring and Improving School Climate” sponsored by WestED was forwarded to SEA staff responsible for ESSA planning. On July 5, SECC staff sent a Year 5 project planning document to SEA staff for their update on progress and the impact of Year 4 technical assistance and to identify TA needed for the upcoming project year.

June

On June 3, SECC staff participated in the NCDPI External Stakeholder meeting along with NCDPI staff and representatives from approximately 40 other state organizations. This meeting allowed participants to provide feedback on ESSA plan components including Standards, Assessment and Accountability, District and School Improvement and Educator Equity. SECC staff captured questions and comments from participants and provided that information in a document to the NCDPI ESSA Plan leaders on June 11.

May

On May 6, SECC staff were contacted and requested to assist with the upcoming NCDPI ESSA External Stakeholder meeting to receive input to inform the state plan that will describe the statewide accountability system, interventions and support for districts and schools, academic standards and assessments for student achievement, and the professional qualifications of teachers. The meeting is scheduled for June 3 and will be held at the North Carolina School Boards Association offices. SECC staff will partner with NCDPI staff as previously done with the external stakeholder meeting to receive input on the Educator Equity Plan. SECC staff received information to prepare for the meeting on May 10.

April

On April 7, SECC staff participated in a webinar facilitated by the Center on Great Teachers and Leaders and Public Impact titled “Recruit, Select, and Support Turnaround Leadership Competencies.” Information regarding the modules developed from the three webinar series was shared with staff from NCDPI. On April 18, SECC forwarded save the date information regarding the upcoming national Talent for Turnaround: Support for Systemic Change national meeting scheduled June 15–17. SECC staff followed up to request information regarding conference attendance on April 21.

March

SECC staff continue to support NCDPI by providing resource information and requesting information regarding the implementation of ESSA. On March 14, SECC staff participated in a conference call to discuss implementation strategies and to gauge elements of needed support. On March 17, SECC staff provided an update on the Effective Teachers and Leaders Project during a face-to-face meeting with the SEA contact at NCDPI. On March 23, SECC staff forwarded information from the March 15 Title II ESSA Briefing on Educator Effectiveness to Donna Brown, director of Federal Program Monitoring and Support, and Lou Fabrizio, director of Data, Research, and Federal Policy. In addition, SECC offered to provide assistance as needed with any aspect of the implementation process.

February

During February, the SECC team provided resource information to NCDPI staff in the Educator Effectiveness Division on a webinar titled Transitioning to ESSA. Communication with SEA staff to request a status update on the implementation of the Educator Equity Plan revealed that the state plan was aligned and fit well with ESSA. The SEA is discussing the analysis of their teacher effectiveness data to determine next steps in the implementation process. SECC staff continue to work to provide support as requested regarding additional information needed for measuring student growth for teachers without standardized or state tests that are not engaged in the analysis of student work process.

January

The SECC project team had a virtual meeting on January 7 to discuss the research requested by the SEA and to review documents shared with the team regarding one district’s approach for determining student growth for dual language teachers. On January 29, the team held a conference call with NCDPI staff from Educator Effectiveness and K–12 Curriculum and Instruction to share the research collected on methods for measuring student growth for teachers without standardized or state tests that are not currently engaged in the analysis of student work (ASW) process. Following the review of the research, NCDPI staff requested additional information regarding ELL and K–2 dual language teachers. The research document will be shared with other staff to determine if additional needs can be identified and whether specific content expertise is required for the next team meeting.

2015

December

SECC team members continued to research possible options for measuring student growth for teachers of K–2 Dual Language, EC, ELL and CTE middle grade students. A draft plan for providing research and assisting NCDPI with identifying options will be provided early in the new calendar year.

November

On November 2, NCDPI staff provided information to SECC staff to assist them in their investigation of potential options for student growth measures for teachers of K–2 Dual Language students. The K-2 TRC French and German language materials were developed by Charlotte-Mecklenburg school district staff and shared Reading 3-D translations along with a data analysis. The information provided responses to questions regarding the process used in the development of the translations, whether the documents were direct translations, how the materials were used to track progress monitoring, whether the process could be replicated, and how it related to DIBELS. Materials were shared with SECC team members to assist them as they are researching options to meet the Standard 6 teacher evaluation requirement.

October

The SECC project team held a conference call on October 13 with Tracy Weeks, the NCDPI chief academic and digital learning officer, along with staff members Tiffany Perkins, Sneha Shah-Coltrane, Bill Hussey, and Tom Tomberlin to discuss the activities in the Year 4 Work Plan. NCDPI staff discussed a need to determine student growth (Standard 6) methods for teachers that have no standard assessment in place to meet this requirement in the evaluation process. The AIG, EL, EC, CTE middle grades, and K–2 dual language teachers were identified as teachers who provide student support but are often not the teachers of record and therefore need an alternate method for determining their impact on student growth. The group discussed how this TA might be provided and potential next steps. On October 15, the SECC team discussed specific tasks and a potential plan for getting the information needed by NCDPI. A conference call was held on October 28 with SECC staff and NCDPI staff from Educator Effectiveness and Global Education to gather additional information about each teacher area identified and to discuss why the processes in place for determining student growth could not be used for these groups of teachers. SECC team members will use the information gathered to develop a work plan and timeline to be shared with NCDPI staff.

September

SECC staff worked with the NCDPI administrative support staff for the chief academic and digital learning officer, K–12 director of Curriculum and Instruction, director of Exceptional Children, and the director of Advanced Learning to schedule a conference call to begin planning for the Year 4 work. The call is scheduled for Tuesday, October 13, 2015. During this call, the project team from SECC and NCDPI will review work plan activities, confirm outputs and outcomes, and adjust timelines as needed.

August

On August 12, SECC staff had a conference call with the director of Curriculum and Instruction to provide an overview of all the Year 3 projects and to discuss technical assistance needs for Year 4. Activities to be included in the Year 4 Work Plan were outlined and outcomes discussed. The activities were presented in the Year 4 planning meeting on August 25.

April

On April 16, SECC staff held a conference call with the NCDPI chief academic and digital learning officer and the K–12 director of curriculum and instruction to discuss the status of the North Carolina projects. Department staff provided an update on the Teacher and Leader Effectiveness project activities and requested that the development of Standard 6 options for teachers of EC, EL, and AIG teachers be delayed until Year 4. NCDPI staff also requested that Year 4 include research on methods for evaluating student growth for middle school Career and Technical Education (CTE) teachers. The modular format for the CTE classes is determined by the number of staff allotted to provide instruction. The classes could range from six weeks to nine weeks and sometimes as long as a semester.

March

NCDPI staff from the Educator Effectiveness area informed the SECC project team that inclement weather and other staff obligations continued to delay the development of the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) Reviewer Module. SEA staff indicated that the draft module would not be online for review until mid-May. SECC staff will provide technical assistance by reviewing the early drafts of the module. SECC project team members met during the month to complete the logic model for this project.

February

During February, the SECC project team contacted NCDPI staff to determine the status of the Reviewer Module for the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) process. Staff from Educator Effectiveness indicated that the rollout of the ASW process had been delayed, and the deadline for completing the Reviewer Module had to be pushed back to some degree. SEA staff responded to the comments and suggestions provided by SECC staff and shared that NCDPI was finishing up culling through evidence and finalizing the choices to be used in the calibration meetings. SECC staff were asked to assist with reviewing the early drafts of the module that is expected to be ready in March.

January

On January 6, the SECC project team responded to an outline for the Reviewer Module for the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) process that had been developed by the content team at NCDPI. The response included questions regarding the ASW Quality Rubric, the alignment of ratings, and how content experts will identify examples to be used in the modules. Additionally, comments and suggestions were provided along with how SECC staff would be able to assist the NCDPI content team with the work outlined. The SEA staff was asked to review the SECC response and provide comments regarding other support that was needed and available times to discuss them.

2014

December

On December 3, 2014, SECC staff participated in a conference call with NCDPI staff from the Educator Effectiveness area to review resources gathered by SECC partner AIR regarding options for evaluating the Standard Six component of the North Carolina Effective Educator System (NCEES) for teachers of AIG, EC, and ELLs. The resources reviewed were to be shared with an NCDPI internal stakeholder team on December 11 to determine how these resources might be used toward meeting the project goals. SEA staff were advised to have the internal stakeholder group consider the following to get started (a) a list of available assessments and any gaps that might exist, (b) grouping standards if possible, and (3) how to engage principals to insure alignment of school and district goals. On December 18, SECC staff were notified that the December 11, NCDPI internal stakeholder meeting was postponed and that technical assistance was needed to assist SEA staff in the content component of the ASW Reviewer Module. A conference call was held on December 29 with SECC and NCDPI staff from Educator Effectiveness to review a module outline and discuss the areas of technical assistance needed. On December 31, NCDPI staff provided access to a file that contained the 2013–2014 ASW Spring Pilot Evidence and the narrative context for the evidence. The SECC team agreed to review the information and provide a response as soon as possible regarding available support.

November

On November 24, SECC staff communicated with NCDPI staff from Educator Effectiveness to provide information gathered by SECC partner AIR that identified researched options for evaluating the Standard Six component of the North Carolina Effective Educator System for teachers of AIG, EC, and ELL. Standard Six measures student growth. A conference call was scheduled for December 3 to review the resources gathered and receive direction regarding additional research required. The SEA staff were scheduled to share the information from the December 3 call with a larger stakeholder group at NCDPI on December 11.

October

On October 20, SECC staff held a conference call with the NCDPI section chief for K–12 Programs and Educator Effectiveness staff to discuss the Year 3 work plan. Three specific areas of technical assistance were identified: (a) assist in researching and providing a list of options for AIG, EC, and ELL teachers for Standard 6 of the NC Educator Evaluation System (NCEES); (b) assist in the review of Analysis of Student Work (ASW) spring pilot data; and (c) assist with the development of a professional development module for ASW reviewers. A second conference call was held on October 29 with the SECC team and the NCDPI module design team consisting of staff from World Languages, Health/Physical Education/Athletics/Title IX Consultant, Educator Effectiveness, World Languages, Theater and Visual Arts, and the online module developer. The process for module development was discussed and the purpose of the module defined. The module is to serve as a calibration and certification tool for ASW reviewers. Reviewers must successfully complete the module training and calibration in order to participate as a reviewer in the ASW process. Two teams were identified (Content and ID). SECC staff will participate as members of the content team.

September

SECC staff communicated with Jen DeNeal, NCDPI, Educator Effectiveness, on September 14 to provide information from the project team quarterly meeting and to request a conference call to address the ASW Pilot Survey results and review activities and timelines for Year 3. In addition, a conference call was held on September 19 with Robin McCoy, NCDPI, Office of Curriculum and Instruction, to make minor revisions in the Year 3 Plan. The Year 3 project description was modified to include assistance in developing a reviewer module for ASW reviewers, determining revisions in the ASW process, and expanding the process to other content area teachers.

August

The SECC communicated with Christie Lynch-Ebert, section chief K–12 Programs, to discuss the status of the evaluation survey results for the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) spring pilot. The department is still waiting to receive the results of the survey and will inform SECC of assistance needed to analyze the data. Year 3 technical assistance was briefly discussed to determine the accuracy of identified project needs in the draft plan.

July

During July, NCDPI staff continued work to complete the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) spring pilot review process and the collection of survey data from pilot participants. SECC staff communicated with Jennifer DeNeal, Educator Effectiveness,to determine the status of the work and additional SECC support needed. SECC staff will collaborate with NCDPI staff and Education Policy Initiative at Carolina (EPIC) staff to analyze pilot survey data as requested. An additional pilot and full implementation of the ASW process for Arts Education, Healthy Living, World Languages, and Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate (AP/IB) will occur during Year 3.

June

During June, SECC staff continued to work with Jennifer DeNeal, Educator Effectiveness and EPIC staff, to revise and refine the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) spring pilot survey. SECC reviewed the Fall 2013 interview protocol used for teachers of End-of-Course/End-of-Grade or Final Exam courses to inform decisions made regarding the scale to be used in the ASW pilot survey and to consider open-ended questions that might be included. Following the submission of final revisions, the survey was to be completed and open to participants for the period from June 6 to July 18. Completion of the survey was required to receive credit for pilot participation. SECC staff will continue to collaborate with NCDPI staff to analyze survey data when it is finalized.

May

The SECC staff provided technical assistance during May to assist NCDPI staff in developing documents required for submitters and reviewers participating in the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) 2014 Pilot. During a conference call on May 7 with SECC staff and Jennifer DeNeal, Educator Effectiveness, the team continued to revise reviewer tools and expectations for submitters. The team reviewed and refined alignment and growth rubrics and made decisions regarding how they would be used. This information will inform the completion of Module 9: Content Specific Aspects of the Review Process. Submitters’ artifacts are due by June 6, and reviews of those artifacts will be completed by July 11. Upon the request of NCDPI staff, SECC staff began collaborating with RttT Evaluators from Education Policy in Carolina (EPIC) to provide input and expertise on the structure and content of a survey for pilot participants. A conference call on May 28 allowed SECC staff, EPIC staff, and NCDPI staff from Educator Effectiveness, Healthy Living, and World Languages to discuss survey items developed by SECC staff and plan for the completion of the survey.

April

SECC staff continued to collaborate with the North Carolina Analysis of Student Work (ASW) workgroup to determine the process to be used by reviewers of student artifacts submitted by teachers participating in the ASW pilot. A conference call was held April 28 with staff from Educator Effectiveness, Healthy Living, Theatre Arts/Visual Arts, and World Languages to review a draft alignment document and discuss possible ways to measure student growth. The criterion for pilot reviewers was shared with SECC staff, and a timeline for project tasks was developed. A conference call was scheduled May 7 to review and refine rubrics developed for alignment and growth and guidance documents for the reviewer process. Final documents will be used to complete the module that explains the review process and to inform professional development for those selected as ASW pilot reviewers.

March

During March, SECC and NCDPI staff from the offices of Educator Effectiveness, Theater Arts/Visual Arts, and Social Studies continued their discussions regarding the development of a process for Analysis of Student Work (ASW) reviewer calibration and professional development. Conference calls were held on March 3 and March 27. SECC staff traveled to NCDPI on March 13 for a face-to-face meeting to review documents and make plans to move the project forward. Prior to the March 13 meeting, SECC staff conducted research and generated a list of questions for consideration regarding inter-rater reliability, training, and potential rubric development. An April 8 follow-up conference call was planned to continue discussions regarding artifacts alignment to standards, rubric language, and how best to assess evidence of growth.

February

A conference call to introduce a new SECC team member and to discuss specific support needed for Analysis of Student Work (ASW) reviewer calibration and professional development was held on February 26. Representatives from the state education agency from Educator Effectiveness, Exceptional Children and Social Studies participated in the call. The support needed aligns with ASW Module #8 (Overview of the Review Process) and Module #9 (Content Specific Aspects of the Review Process). Staff from SECC and the SEA discussed possible ways to address the identified needs during the call. Staff from the SECC will research and develop possible solutions to be shared with the ASW team during a face-to-face meeting scheduled for March 13 at NCDPI.

January

The SECC staff continued their collaboration with the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) Workgroup during a conference call on January 9 to share recommendations regarding content and design for ASW Module #3 (ASW Submission Form). In addition, Modules #4 and #5 drafts were made available for review. Wiki site access was provided to SECC staff so they could monitor the development of the modules and provide input. The Module #4 (How to Choose Objectives) review was completed and shared with the workgroup on January 30. Module #4 was to be made available to the pilot group on January 31. Module #5 (The Principal’s Role) is the next module for review. A conference call to introduce a new SECC team member and continue defining ASW research work is scheduled for late February.

2013

December

In response to the NCDPI’s request for the identification and review of research on ways to capture measures of student learning in content areas without statewide assessment data, SECC staff facilitated a conference call on December 18, 2013, with representatives from Educator Effectiveness, Theatre Arts/Visual Arts, Curriculum and Instruction, and Healthy Living. Staff from SECC provided research on various options used in other states for NCDPI to consider and also began to discuss data needs to assist them in determining what would be necessary to ensure comparability between the rating system used for ASW and the rating system used for teachers not using ASW. A list of possible ways SECC might assist the SEA was developed with a plan for a possible face-to-face meeting in January.

November

The SECC staff continued its collaboration with the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) workgroup to support the development of the first two of six professional development modules to be used as a part of the ASW pilot process. The workgroup consisted of NCDPI staff from World Languages, Educator Effectiveness, Curriculum and Instruction, Healthy Living, and SECC staff. A Go-to-Meeting review of the first modules was conducted on November 5, to work with the SEA staff to provide recommendations regarding design and content. A second Go-to-Meetingon November 18 provided an opportunity for a final review of the modules before they were made available to the pilot group. The ASW is proposed as the Standard 6 student growth measure for educators teaching AP, IB, Arts Education, Healthful Living, and World Languages.

October

The SECC staff facilitated a conference call with Robin McCoy, NCDPI Curriculum and Instruction director, to review and refine the Year 2 Effective Teachers and Leaders Project. The SECC support was defined and timelines were adjusted. The SECC staff also collaborated with the Analysis of Student Work (ASW) workgroup with NCDPI representatives from World Languages, Educator Effectiveness, Curriculum and Instruction, and Healthy Living to assist with the development of the first professional development module to be used with the ASW Pilot for Standard 6 of the Educator Evaluation Program.