Summative Evaluation Example – Overall Rating of Proficient

Evaluation Type: Summative Evaluation Overall Rating: Proficient

Evaluation Release Date: 5/15/2013 

I. Curriculum, Planning and Assessment Rating: Proficient II. Teaching All Students Rating: Proficient

III. Family and Community Engagement Rating: Proficient IV. Professional Culture Rating: Exemplary

Student Learning Goal

Based on the fact that 60% of my current students scored 0 on the practice MCAS open response rubric and the
remaining 40% scored 1, my goal is that by January, 100% of students will improve by at least 1 point on a similar
assessment and that by May, 80% will improve by 1 additional point. I will measure progress toward these goals with
biweekly assessments scored with the MCAS open response rubric.

Rating: Exceeded
Rationale:
Ms. P and her students have consistently tracked their performance on open-response writing in response to grade-level
text, and have shown very strong growth from September to April. The average points-gained from September to April
was 1.56, with 14/18  students with both BOY and EOY datapoints gaining >1.0; two of the four who gained less than
one point had gained 0.83, on-track to gain a full point by June. Only one of the four who gained less than one point
averaged less than 2.0 on her EOY open responses; the others averaged between 2.17 and 2.5, again on-track for solid
performance in absolute terms.

If we analyze not just how many students gained, but how much they gained in absolute terms on the rubric, the class's
progress is even clearer. In September, the class average on a four-point rubric was 1.07, with only 3/21 students
earning 2.0 or greater, and one-third of the class earning less than 1.0.  The average of students' scores from two
prompts in April shows dramatic growth: the class average was 2.78 (1.71 points gain), with 17/18 students earning 2.0
or greater (up from 3 in BOY).

I believe that this dramatic shift in the class's performance, and the strong gains of the majority of students who did
show growth, warrants a rating of "exceed goal."

Professional Practice Goal

I will maintain current detailed records for each individual student's progress toward priority learning targets in each ELA
unit and use this data to adjust what I teach and how.

Rating: Significant Progress

Rationale:
Ms. P made substantial progress toward maintaining current, detailed observational data about her students’ on-going
mastery of key ELA skills, and beginning to use that data to adjust her instruction. Working with her supervisor and the
writing specialist, she has developed and adapted a set of “skill-mastery grids” that lay out essential skills and concepts
she has taught. This proved unexpectedly challenging as Ms. P realized that the different nature of each units allowed
different opportunities to observe and assess students’ progress and often demanded different methods for
documenting progress. I have observed the skill-mastery grids in use with increasing consistency from November
through May, particularly during the MCAS-preparation unit. However, based on her own self-assessment and my
observations, Ms. P does not yet have routines for gathering and using this “formative” data deeply or consistently
established, and for that reason we agree that continuing with this professional practice goal next year will be
worthwhile and appropriate to support her in deeply ingraining the collection and use of formative data throughout her
instructional practice.

Standard I. Curriculum, Planning and Assessment

Rating: Proficient
Rationale:
Claim:
Ms. P consistently meets the standard for proficient practice in Standard I: Curriculum, Planning, and Assessment.

Evidence 1:
Ms. P makes use of appropriate curriculum materials and resources, both those from the WEX and Investigations
curricula and those developed by her grade-level team for reading. Ms. P has contributed to the 5 th grade team’s
collaborative long-term planning process by helping organize and prioritize Common-Core Standards, “backwards plan”
from those desired outcomes to short-term objectives/teaching points, and design learning experiences that give
students carefully targeted practice to gradually master the key standards and skills. Ms. P augments these curriculum
materials with a consistent set of graphic organizers to support her students’ acquisition of key concepts over time:
evidence of consistent use of an open-response organizer and other skill-specific graphic organizers has been visible in
use during lessons and posted for reference throughout the classroom.

Evidence 2:
Ms. P conveys standards-based content objectives and integrates grade-level goals, content standards, and learning
activities in her lesson and unit plans. Her posted objectives are typically clear, outcome-oriented, and student-friendly,
and are supported with clear criteria for success and anchor charts. Ms. P conveys learning objectives in an explicit and
clear way (increasingly explicit throughout the year) ensuring that her students understand and come to “own” her goals
for their learning each day.

Evidence 3:
Ms. P and her colleagues on the fifth grade team administer periodic Achievement Network assessments to measure
student proficiency in MCAS-assessed standards. After analyzing data results, she has led the other fifth-grade teachers
in selecting a priority skill and learning target, then developing and implementing targeted action plans or revised unit
plans. The team’s action plans have been consistently evidence-based and targeted. The resulting targeted skill
instruction takes place in the reading of grade-level texts and modeled, guided and independent practice of reading and
test-taking skills.

 As a result of Ms. P’s consistent efforts to provide coherent standards-aligned instruction, analyze and use a variety of
assessments, and give students constructive feedback, a majority of her students are demonstrating strong growth in
reading, comprehending, and responding to grade-level texts and in mastering appropriate math concepts.

Evidence for the rating on this standard is drawn from classroom observations on 10/19/12, 11/29/12, 1/30/13, and
3/6/13 as well as from weekly team meetings and data-team meetings. The artifacts “Unit 3 Plan,” “A3 Action Plan,”
“Tracking Sheet,” and “Final Student Data” also support this rating.

Standard II. Teaching All Students

Rating: Proficient
Rationale:

Claim:
Ms. P consistently meets the standard for proficient practice on Standard II: Teaching All Students.

Evidence 1:
Ms. P uses effective strategies that engage students and she provides students with clear explanations, relevant
examples, and ample, well-structured opportunities to engage with the material in whole-group, partner, and
independent settings. She supports students’ independent work by scaffolding instruction, offering students frequent,
specific feedback, and conveying clear, high expectations for her students’ effort and mastery of key content. In an
observation of a math lesson on 10/19/12, for example, Ms. P conducted over-the-shoulder conferences as students
worked independently, then periodically gave the class low-inference “data”/feedback about how they were doing on
the criteria for success for division with equal groups: “I see a majority of you are listing multiples … and I see a lot of
people stuck on Step 3, because we’re working with bigger numbers, right? This is when and why we use the strategy of
listing multiples, so when we get big numbers we can still be successful.” Further, she closed the lesson by having
students self-check their performance against the criteria for success: “Our goal was to … One part of that is to … Check
your work, show a thumbs-up if you__.” By putting a sticky note on the strategy that students were not yet consistently
using and telling students that tomorrow’s lesson would focus on that area, she promoted students sharing
responsibility for their learning and developed their investment in the following day’s lesson.
 
Evidence 2:
Ms. P consistently uses a variety of strategies and routines that support a collaborative learning culture that promotes
academic risk-taking. For instance, on 1-30-2013, she used cold-calling, non-verbal signals, wait time, prompts for 100%
participation, “good job points,” and reminders of the class’s long-term learning goals to help students hold a focus and
high degree of intellectual engagement during a math lesson. Ms. P consistently engages students in discussing key
concepts by asking them to “turn and talk.” Students are able to share their thinking and justify their reasoning with
evidence, while at the same time (as on 1/30/2013), she uses brief turn-and-talks as an opportunity to check for
understanding of an essential concept, or even re-teach it to a pair, and then immediately acts on the “data” she
gathers.
 
As a result, Ms. P promotes the learning and growth of all students through instructional practices that establish high
expectations and create a safe and effective classroom environment.

Evidence for the rating on this standard is drawn from classroom observations on 10/19/12, 11/29/12, 1/30/13, and
3/6/13 as well as from weekly team meetings and data-team meetings. The artifacts “Feb Math Groups” and “Tracking
Sheet,” also support this rating.

Standard III. Family & Community Engagement

Rating: Proficient
Rationale:

Claim:
Ms. P consistently meets the standard for proficient practice on Standard III: Family and Community Engagement.

Evidence 1:
Ms. P has participated in many school-wide family engagement activities, and works collaboratively with her peers to
design opportunities to engage families. For example, in her role as a team leader, she was instrumental in shaping the
plans for Family ELA Night on 3/12/13, at which students learned literacy skills, and earned raffle tickets by participating
in activities designed so parents could later replicate them at home. The event was dynamic, engaging and informative,
with a clear link to learning.

Evidence 2:
Ms. P often meets with parents and community agencies to address students’ learning and social emotional needs. She
demonstrates flexibility in planning meetings with her families and extends her work hours to before and after school to
accomplish this goal, holding fall parent conferences with 14 of her students, and conducting home visits with seven of
her students’ families between 9/13-11/16/2012. As a result, Ms. P has effective partnerships with families that promote
the learning and growth of students.
 
Evidence for this standard was gathered from observations of the ELA night and from the “home visit log,” and “parent
conference log” artifacts submitted by Ms. P.

Standard IV. Professional Culture

Rating: Exemplary
Rationale:
Claim:
Ms. P consistently meets the standard for “exemplary” practice on Standard IV: Professional Culture.

Evidence 1:
Ms. P is a valued member of the data team, and ILT, and a leader of the 5 th grade team. She participates fully and
constructively in all the teams she is a part of, bringing her deep content knowledge, a pragmatic sense of what’s “do-
able,” and a solutions-oriented mindset to bear on teams’ decision-making.  When she is the designated facilitator, she
fulfills that job skillfully, helping the group achieve its objectives, and when she is participating as a member of the team,
she monitors her participation to ensure her comments add value to the group – as in ILT, when her comments
frequently synthesize discussion, re-focus the group on shared goals, or catalyze action.
 
Evidence 2:
Ms P’s leadership extends to school-wide initiatives as well, such as through the ILT, where she has assumed a lead role
in developing, implementing, monitoring and refining the school literacy plan for achieving the school’s ELA annual
measurable goals. A key success this year has been the ILT’s success at engaging representatives from various grade-
level teams and the specialist team, so that the “face” of the ILT and ownership of the work is not centralized in just one
or two teacher-leaders; this result is due in large part of Ms. P’s vision of shared leadership and actions to develop team
members’ capacity to present at PD, design and develop instructional materials, and ensure steady two-way
communication with their grade-level teams. In addition, Ms. P has taken the lead on collaboratively planning writing
“anchor lessons” to support the teaching of open-response writing across grade-levels, drafting lessons that have been
peer-reviewed and now used by colleagues throughout the school.
 
Evidence 3:
Ms. P collaborates frequently with her grade-level colleagues to plan units, action plans and to review and comment on
student writing. Moreover, in data team meetings Ms. P is reflective about her practice and the effectiveness of her
interventions. Ms. P has participated in professional development opportunities district-wide and supports the school’s
literacy goals. She seeks support from her colleagues and administrators when facing challenges with her students and
reciprocates when need be, maintaining a solutions-oriented stance even in the midst of challenges. Ms. P has
consistently been willing to open her classroom to colleagues and visitors to our school. As a result, she contributes to
the learning of her colleagues – within and beyond the school -- and the success of all the school’s students.
 
Evidence for this rating was gathered at weekly Data Team meetings, weekly CPT meetings, data-analysis and action-
planning meetings on 10/23/12 and 2/19/13. The artifacts “ILT Notes” and “LASW,” also support this rating.