Domain 1: Aligning the four components to support district needs A: Meaningful Evaluations for Teachers and Administrators Level 1: 0pts Level 2: 2pts Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts. The description of the work vaguely indicates that work has been initiated and fails to include evidence of the school district’s implementation of an evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes little or no rubric and SLG training for educators, and IRR and feedback training for administrators. The description of the work indicates that work has been initiated but provides some evidence of the school district’s implementation of an evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes some rubric and SLG training for educators, and IRR and feedback training for administrators. The description of work describes and provides evidence that aligns with the critical attributes of the school district’s implementation of a evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes rubric and SLG training for educators, and IRR and feedback training for administrators. The description of work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence that aligns with the critical attributes of the school district’s implementation of a evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes deep rubric and SLG training for all educators, and IRR and feedback training for all administrators. Evidence that these trainings are moving practice is included. Critical Attributes: Handbooks that align to little or no components of the Framework Little or no training was provided to Critical Attributes: Handbooks that align to some of the components of the Framework Basic overview of the evaluation Critical Attributes: Handbooks that align to the Framework Documentation of training on the evaluation system with educators (e.g. professional cycle, rubric, Critical Attributes: Handbooks that align to the Framework Documentation of training on the evaluation system with all educators (e.g. professional cycle, rubric,
educators on SLGGs Little or no training was provided to evaluators system for educators Rubrics are distributed to educators SLGG training is limited to completing the template Some IRR training is provided for evaluators Some feedback training is provided for evaluators aligned PD, Oregon Matrix) Training on understanding and conceptualization of the rubric Documentation of training including agenda, & evidence of content in IRR Documentation of training including agenda, & evidence of content in effective feedback for evaluators Documentation of training including agenda, & evidence of content in that is aligned to state guidance aligned PD, Oregon Matrix) Training on understanding and conceptualization of the rubric with all educators Documentation of sustained training including agenda, & evidence of content in IRR for all evaluators Documentation of sustained training including agenda, & evidence of content in effective feedback for all evaluators Documentation of sustained training including agenda, & evidence of content in SLGGs that is aligned to state guidance for all educators Educator examples of SLGGs that demonstrate alignment to guidance, accurate scoring, pre and post assessment data, etc. Evaluator examples of calibration of evaluators
are not tied to instructional improvement or based on educator evaluation and/or student assessment data. and classroom practices based on educator evaluation and student assessment data. Leadership opportunities are not available to everyone. The process for selecting educators for leadership opportunities is not transparent. educator evaluation and student assessment data. Leadership opportunities are available to educators who have demonstrated effectiveness (rated at a level of proficient or higher) in area they are supporting. Access to the leadership opportunities is communicated with defined roles, responsibilities and qualifications. educator evaluation and student assessment data. Leadership opportunities are available to all educators who have demonstrated effectiveness (rated at a level of proficient or higher) in area they are supporting. Access to the leadership opportunities is transparent with clearly defined roles and responsibilities and qualifications. A rigorous selection process is in place. Specific training and support is provided to all leaders. D: New Compensation Models Level 1: 0pts Level 2: 3pts Level 3: 4pts Level 4: 5pts The description of work vaguely indicates that work has been initiated and provides little or no evidence The description of work indicates that the work has been initiated but provides limited The description of work describes and provides evidence that the school district’s compensation model aligns to The description of work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence that the school district’s
that the school district’s compensation model aligns to their values and beliefs around teaching and learning. evidence that the school district has developed compensation model aligns to their values and beliefs around teaching and learning. their values and beliefs around teaching and learning. compensation model aligns to their values and beliefs around effective teaching and learning. Critical Attributes: Little or no work has been done to redesign the compensation system of the district Stipends for additional roles and responsibilities may be available Critical Attributes: A plan for determining whether the compensation system matches the district's vision, beliefs, values and goals around student learning and educator effectiveness has been designed. A plan for how to determine if the salary schedule promotes educator effectiveness and student learning is designed. Critical Attributes: Critical Attributes: There is evidence that the compensation system matches the district's vision, beliefs, values and goals around student learning and educator effectiveness. Evidence that the compensation system is and includes money, influence, recognition, and released time is included. Stakeholder development and ownership are evident and teacher contract language reflects new compensation practices.
In theory the compensation system matches the district's vision, beliefs, values and goals around student learning and educator effectiveness. In theory the proposed salary schedule promotes educator effectiveness and student learning. Teacher contract language reflects new compensation practices. A process is in place for monitoring and evaluating the compensation system’s effectiveness to support goals. There is eveidence that the salary schedule promotes educator effectiveness and student learning. The compensation system is fiscally sustainable and there is an articulated plan for sustainability. A process is in place for monitoring and evaluating the compensation system’s effectiveness to support the goals. E: Integration of the Four Components to Support the Needs of the School District Level 1: 4 pts Level 2: 6 pts Level 3: 8 pts Level 4: 10pts The description of work provides little or no evidence on how the components The description of the work indicates that work has been initiated but provides The description of the work describes and provides evidence on how all four components are The description of the work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence on how all four
Domain 2: Implementation Plans A: Goals Level 1: 0 Pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts The implementation plan and/or narrative is vague and fails to describes how the goals are aligned to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs. The implementation plan and/or narrative has some goals which loosely align to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs. A plan for collecting evidence of implementation is incomplete. The implementation plan and/or narrative includes measurable goals and is aligned to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs. A plan for collecting data for evidence of implementation is included. The implementation plan and/or narrative includes rigorous measurable goals and is aligned to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs. A clear plan for collecting data for evidence of implementation is included as well as how the data will inform future practice Critical Attributes: The implementation plan does not to the goals. The plan is incomplete or disjointed The plan focuses on only Critical Attributes: are included and a process for collecting evidence of implementation in some component areas that support Critical Attributes: Measureable goals are included and a process for collecting evidence of implementation in all component areas that support Critical Attributes: Specific measurable are included as well as a clear process for collecting evidence of implementation in all component areas that support student
one or two components student and educator needs A process for the collecting data is incomplete The implementation plan is focused on only some of the components student and educator needs A process is in place for the collecting data The implementation plan is tied to identified needs and supports most of the four components and educator needs A process is in place for the review of data A clear description of the stakeholder group that will make recommendations based on the data is included The implementation plan is directly tied to identified needs and supports the four components B: Activities Level 1: 0 Pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts The activities, both short term and long term, are vague and fail to indicate how they support the goals of the implementation plan. The activities, both short term and long term support some of the goals of the implementation plan and the process for evaluating and reflecting on the success of the activities is limited. The activities, both short term and long term, include a description on how they will support the goals of the implementation plan and a process for evaluating and reflecting on the success of the activities is in place. The activities, both short term and long term, include a clear description on how they will support the goals of the implementation plan and a clearly defined process for evaluating and reflecting on the success of the activities is in place.
Critical Attributes: Activities are listed, but do not align with implementation plan Critical Attributes: Activities only support some of the implementation plan No clear process for evaluating impact of activities Critical Attributes: Activities align to the implementation plan Process for evaluating each activity and it’s impact is in place Critical Attributes: Activities directly support goals of the implementation plan An ongoing process of evaluating the impact of activities is in place as well as how to make midcourse adjustments if needed. C: Evidence of Impact Level 1: 0 Pts Level 2: 1pt 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts The district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and educator effectiveness does not exist. The district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and educator effectiveness is limited The implementation plan/narrative describes and provides evidence on the district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and The implementation plan/narrative clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence on the district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and educator effectiveness.
educator effectiveness. Critical Attributes: There is no plan for collecting and/or analyzing data regarding student learning and/or teaching practice Critical Attributes: is a description of needs in the areas of student learning and/or educator practice The system for measuring the impact on student learning and/or educator practice is not complete Critical Attributes: Measurable impact targets related to identified needs are evident for both increases in student learning and improvements in teaching practice Data will be collected and analyzed to determine impact of student learning and teaching practice Critical Attributes: Specific measureable impact targets directly tied to identified are evident for both increases in student learning and improvements in teaching practice It is clear what data will be collected and analyzed to determine impact of student learning and teaching practice Domain 3: Communication Plan A: Goals Level 1: 0 Pts 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts The district’s communication plan is vague and fails to mention how two-way, communication plan is essential for implementing the work. The district’s communication plan includes some methods for on-going communication. Some methods for evaluating the effectiveness of the plan are included. The district’s communication plan is stated and show an understanding of how two-way, on-going communication is essential for implementing the work and evaluating its The district’s communication plan is clearly stated, rigorous and shows deep understanding of how two-way, on-going communication is essential for implementing the work and
B: Cultural/ Shared Leadership Sustainability Level 1: 0 Pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts There is little or no description of a shared leadership model. There is some description of a leadership model, representing educators, that is loosely connected to district decision making around the four components There is a description of a shared leadership model, representing educators, that is connected to district decision making around the four components There is a clear description of a shared leadership model, representing a variety of educators, that is integrated into district decision making around the four components Critical Attributes: District and building leaders make decisions and share those with teachers Critical Attributes: Some teacher is gathered prior to the district and/or building leaders making decisions Critical Attributes: A committee made up of administrators and teachers is the decision making body for the continued refinement and implementation of the four components Roles of educators involved in the shared leadership model are defined and demonstrate their role in decision making A consensus model is used for making decisions. Critical Attributes: A governance board made up of administrators and teachers is the decision making body for the continued refinement and implementation of the four components Roles of educators involved in the shared leadership model are clearly defined and demonstrate their role in decision making A consensus model is used for making decisions, with each member of the governance board (or other committee) having an equal voice There is a process for gathering input from educators throughout the district that will be impacted by the decisions of the board C: Fiscal Sustainability Level 1: 0 Pts 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts There is no plan for sustainability. There is no evidence of the integration of other funding sources to support the focus areas. The sustainability plan only focuses on one of the focus areas. There is little evidence of the integration of other funding The sustainability plan only focuses on two or three of the focus areas. There is some evidence of the integration of The sustainability plan addresses how all of the four focus areas are an integrated piece of how you do business within the district. There is clear evidence of the integration