Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

COMMITTEE ON JOINT EDUCATION

Date:01/25/2012
ATTENDANCE
Time:07:39 AM to 08:54 AM
Beezley
Hamner
Place:HCR 0112
Heath
Holbert
This Meeting was called to order by
Hudak
Senator Bacon
Johnston
Joshi
This Report was prepared by
Kerr A.
Kristen Johnson
King K.
Murray
Peniston
Ramirez
Renfroe
Schafer S.
Solano
Spence
Summers
Todd
Bacon
Massey
X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call
Bills Addressed: Action Taken:
Presentation by the Colorado Department of Education-


07:39 AM -- Presentation from Colorado Department of Education - CAP4K and Teacher Effectiveness

Senator Bacon, chair, welcomed the Colorado Department of Education to provide the Joint Education Committee with an update on the implementation of the educator effectiveness bill and the Colorado Achievement Plan for Kids (CAP4K). Dr. Diana Sirko, Deputy Commissioner of Education, Jo O'Brien, Assistant Commissioner, and Katy Anthes, Executive Director of Educator Effectiveness, Colorado Department of Education (CDE), came to the table and provided handouts to the members of the committee (Attachments A through C).

JtEd0125AttachA.pdf JtEd0125AttachB.pdf

JtEd0125AttachC.pdf






Dr. Sirko briefly discussed the recent educator effectiveness legislation.

Ms. Anthes introduced her team, Mike Gradoz and Toby King, Educator Effectiveness, CDE, and thanked them for their support. She discussed some of CDE's accomplishments in the area of educator effectiveness. She stated that the group has had a very productive year and has been working on getting the educator effectiveness system standing, piloting, and being tested. She stated that the first component they have rolled out under this system is the principal and assistant principal evaluation rubric. She referenced SB 10-191 which requires that 50 percent of a teacher's evaluation be based upon the educator's professional practice, and the other 50 percent of the evaluation be based on student outcome measures. She stated that the focus right now is on the development of a rubric and measurement tool for the 50 percent professional practice evaluation piece. She referred the committee to the map (Attachment B) which shows the districts that are participating as pilot, partner, and integration districts in the development of this system. She stated that the districts participating in the pilot are a representative sample from across the state. She added that work is currently being done by CDE's assessment division and through "content collaboratives" to create the tool that will measure the 50 percent student outcome piece of the educator evaluation.

Dr. Sirko provided additional information about "content collaboratives" saying that these groups bring in educators, principals, and parents from across the state to figure out what the components of these assessments should be. She added that the professional learning community and task forces are looking at specific content areas for these assessments. She stated that SB 10-191 made it clear that the assessments must contain multiple measures, so CDE's work centers around what those measures should look like.

Dr. Sirko and Ms. Anthes responded to questions from the committee concerning the piloting and implementation timelines. Dr. Sirko noted that even when the project is completed, it still needs to be seen as a continually improving process and system.


08:01 AM

Committee discussion with Dr. Sirko and Ms. Anthes continued. The committee asked what is being done to support school districts with the tools and resources they need in order to carry out these requirements. Dr. Sirko responded that the success of this program hinges on CDE's ability to deliver high quality professional development services and support. She stated that part of the budget request made by the State Board of Education (SBE) is for ongoing support for these professional development activities.

Ms. Anthes responded to a question from the committee about the distinction between pilot, partner, and integration districts as indicated on the map (Attachment B). She stated that partner districts are those that already have an educator evaluation system implemented; pilot districts are those that are participating in the pilot as part of SB 10-191; and integration districts are those that are implementing multiple parts of the evaluation system.

Dr. Sirko responded to questions from the committee concerning the role that school principals will play in the evaluation of teacher effectiveness. She stated that the rubric being developed will provide principals with an idea of what good educator behavior and performance looks like. She added that the tools will create structures that will make management more doable, and that the principal will be the key communicator who determines the success of this program in schools.










08:13 AM

The committee discussed how the components of the measurement tool will be weighted. Ms. Anthes stated that school districts are given the flexibility to weight certain performance measures more heavily than others, which is helpful for districts that have established certain goals for items they are currently addressing within their schools. She stated that CDE is working on different models for how to weight the measures, which are required by the bill to have a measurable impact. She added that there needs to be comparability in measurement tools across the district so that all educators understand the standards by which they are being evaluated.

Dr. Sirko stated that the intent is to create a comparable, fair, and reliable system where educators feel that they are being measured by the same standards. She added that the goal is to create comparability, while allowing districts the flexibility to address school-specific strengths and weaknesses.

Representative Solano asked about the appeals process under this system. Dr. Sirko stated that the department is waiting on a recommendation from the Educator Effectiveness Council concerning the appeals process that they will have to the legislature by mid-April, 2012.


08:20 AM

The committee asked questions related to the department's budget request. Dr. Sirko stated that the Governor's request built in money for one-time costs such as development; the request also focuses on the data system and transparency. She stated that the department's request is for ongoing expenses. Ms. Anthes added that the Governor's request is also about the creation of the rubric, evaluation of the training, and creation of the data system.

The committee asked about the implementation timeline. Dr. Sirko responded that, in states where they have tried to implement an evaluation system such as this all at once, it has been unsuccessful. She stated that CDE is taking this project piece by piece to ensure its success. She stated that it takes time, people, and resources to make this a success. Ms. Anthes stated that the system will be rolled out statewide in 18 months. Dr. Sirko stated that, while statewide implementation occurs during the 2013-14 school year, none of the consequences outlined in the legislation will be administered until the 2014-15 school year.

The committee discussed the contingency reserve fund.


08:43 AM

Committee discussion continued about uniformity in measuring student growth and progress. Representative Murray stated that each school may have very different goals as they try to address the needs of their students. She provided the example of schools that attract art students as opposed to those that attract students who are interested in the STEM skills of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. She stated that she is not a proponent of the same student progress measurement standards being implemented statewide. Representative Todd stated that she thinks that teacher evaluations are still applicable statewide because it is not the details that are being assessed, it is the measures. She stated that she thinks that creating consistency across the state is the intent of the legislation.









Representative Todd asked about the way in which assistant principals will be evaluated. Ms. Anthes responded that assistant principals are defined in the same way as principals and are assessed under the same rubric as principals.

Senator Heath commented that evaluation is very important.

Representative Hamner asked about the other 100 or so school districts in Colorado that are not participating in the piloting process. She stated that she is concerned about how those districts will be brought in on the process and what supports will be provided to them to implement this system. Ms. Anthes responded that the department is creating a workbook that will be shared with all districts. She also stated that support will include face to face professional development and online training.

Committee discussion returned to the topic of how each component of the measurement tool will be weighted. Senator Bacon commented that he thinks that a good deal of this will be done through self-evaluation once the expectations have been made clear.

Representative Todd stated that she would like to see the tools that are currently being used by the districts that already have an evaluation system in place.


08:54 AM

Senator Bacon made closing remarks. The committee adjourned.