Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA)
Bensenville School District 2
College Ready Career Ready
Innovation Ready
Triple iii Breakout Session: 11/21/14, 8:40-9:20
Emphasis: Student Growth Component
Professional Practice Component
---Teacher Evaluation Plan
BSD2.org Password:
Getting the Joint Committee Up & Running
[Power Point Slides back of handout]
PERA Objective
To improve teaching and
learning through the
alignment of
curriculum, instruction,
and assessment.
Resource Pages Back of Handout: Purpose & Rationale for PERA
PERA requires the establishment of a
valid and reliable performance
evaluation system for certified
employees, that assesses both
professional competence or practice
and student growth. This involves
district administrators working in
with teachers’ union
representatives.
partnership
Illinois Administrative Code Part 50
Under statute, the Joint Committee
• Develops the plan in 180 days
• Determines assessment type to be
used for each category of teacher
• Determines the percentage
that will represent student
growth: 70/30, 50/50
• Determines appropriate measurement model(s) to be
used to calculate student growth specific to
assessment chosen.
Type I Type II Type III
A
reliable assessment
that measures a certain
group or subset of
students in the same
manner with the same
potential assessment
items, is scored by a
non
-district entity, and is
widely administered
either statewide or
beyond Illinois.
[IAC Part 50]
Any assessment
developed
or adopted
and approved by the
school district and used
on a district
-wide basis
that is given by all
teachers in a given grade
or subject area.
[IAC Part 50]
Any
assessment that is
rigorous, aligned with the
course’s curriculum, and
that the evaluator and
teacher determine
measures student learning
.
[
IAC Part 50]
PARCC, NWEA,
Scantron, SAT, ACT
Teacher collaboratively
designed common
assessments, textbook
assessments
Teacher-created
assessments, student
work samples, textbook
assessments
PERA Requirements
Does not have to be
administered to ALL
students, like Type II
Evaluator and teacher
agree
IAC PART 50, P. 11
OR
Type I
Ensure standardization
Take less time to get up and
running
Type II
Directly aligned to local curriculum
Directly aligned to district/school
scope and sequence
Used to inform instruction &
provide ongoing feedback…better
potential for student growth
Can be pricey
Not necessarily aligned to
local curriculum & scope and
sequence or adjustable to
multiple disciplines
May be less sensitive for
student growth
Takes time to get up and running
Requires PD to develop
assessment literacy
OR
Balanced Assessment System
After Instruction: End of
Course/Common Assessments,
Portfolios, Performance Tasks
Between Instruction: Unit/Chapter /Common
Assessments, Fountas & Pinnell, Reading
Inventory, Portfolios, Performance Tasks,
Rubrics
Before and During Instruction: Checklists,
Observations, Questioning & Discussions,
Exit Slips, Graphic Organizers, Running
Records, Self-assessments,
Performance Tasks, Rubrics
Adapted from Perie, Marion, Gong, 2009
Created four sample
assessments from which staff
mirrored their
grade/department
assessments targeting three
key Standards of the
discipline.
Initial Process
A demonstrable change in a
student’s or group of students’
knowledge or skills, as evidenced by
gain and/or attainment on two or
more assessments, between two or
more points in time. (IAC Part 50)
Student Growth
Attainment
Students in
Mr. Brown’s Class
Baseline Data
Rubric Score
(1-2-3-4)
Actual Outcome
Rubric Score
(1-2-3-4-4+)
GROWTH
ACHIEVED?
YES
or NO
John Smith
2
2
NO
Geri Smith
1
2
YES
Erin Smith
4
4
NO
Josh Smith
2
3
YES
2/4 =
50%
No
Growth/Negative
Growth
1
Minimal Growth
2
Meets Growth
3
Exceeds Growth
4
Less
than 25%
of students
advanced 1
column on
rubric
or
regressed
0/25 6/25
25
-49% of
students
advanced 1 or
more
columns
on rubric
6/25 12/25
50
-77% of
students
advanced 1 or
more
columns
on rubric
13/25 19/25
78
-100% of
students
advanced 1 or
more
columns
on rubric
20/25 25/25
Determining Growth: Type II
13
Type III
Assessment
Score
4 Exceeds 3 Meets
2
Minimal Growth
1 No Growth
Type II
4
Exceeds
Exceeds
Meets Meets Minimal
Growth
Assess-
ment
3
Meets
Meets Meets Meets Minimal
Growth
Score
2
Minimal
Growth
Meets Meets
Minimal
Growth
No
Growth
1
No
Growth
Minimal
Growth
Minimal
Growth
No
Growth
No
Growth
Calculating Final Student Growth Rating
JOINT
COMMITTEE
Potential Process
A-38. Can a school district establish a PERA Joint
Committee and can that PERA Joint Committee
informally meet to generally discuss performance
evaluations and student growth without triggering
the 180-day clock?
YES!
ISBE Non-Regulatory Guidance on PERA & SB 7
December 5, 2011
Formal and Informal Meetings
Potential Steps for the Joint Committee
Establish Joint Committee beliefs and norms.
Review Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) Part 50.
Discuss/Clarify understanding of IAC Part 50.
Establish common language of terms.
Conduct an assessment inventory, think about...
What assessments are available?
What is the purpose of the assessment?
How do teachers currently use the data collected from
the assessment?
Determine what assessment type will be used for
each category of teacher.
Type I and Type III
Type II and Type III
Two Type IIIs
What are the advantages and disadvantages of a
specific assessment for each category of teacher?
How does the assessment meet the purpose and goal
of the evaluation plan?
Determine appropriate measurement model(s) to
be used to calculate student growth specific to
assessment chosen.
Determine the percentage that will represent
student growth: 70/30, 50/50
Determine a Game Plan.
Potential Steps for the Joint Committee
How will the Joint Committee monitor the design
and implementation of the evaluation plan? Who
will do what by when? Consider backwards
design for...
Scheduling meetings from start-to-finish
Developing professional practice & student
growth components of the plan
Determining assessment inter-rater reliability
Designing a communication plan
Resources
Rationale for a New Teacher Evaluation Process
The New Teacher Project:
http://widgeteffect.org/downloads/TheWidgetEffect.pdf
Videohttp://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_teachers_need_real_feedback
Balanced Assessment
Balanced Assessment: The Key to Accountability and Improved Student
Learning, NEA (2003). http://www.nea.org/accountability/nearesources-
accountability.html
Black, Paul & Wiliam, D.(2001). “Inside the Black Box -Raising Standards
Through Classroom Assessment”, King’s College London School of
Education.
Hattie, John,(2011). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 meta analyses
related to achievement.
Perie, Marion, Gong (Fall 2009) Educational Measurement: Issues and
Practice, V 28, Issue 3
Resources
PERA
Educational Reform in Illinois: Non-regulatory Guidance on the PERA
and Senate Bill 7, December 5, 2011 www.isbe.net
Guidance of Creating Operating Guidelines for Student Growth
Models in Teacher Evaluation Systems, February 2013 www.isbe.net
Illinois Administrative Code Part 50:
www.isbe.state.il.us/rules/archive/pdfs/50ARK.pdf
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. Classroom
assessment standards: Sound assessment practices for K-12 teachers.
Retrieved from:
http://www.jcsee.org/standards-development
Perie, Marion, Gong (Fall 2009) Educational Measurement: Issues and
Practice, V 28, Issue 3
