Concurrent Sessions III: Implementation Challenges for A System Approach to Informed Data Use

In this interactive session, presenters discussed the use of performance data to support the equitable distribution of teachers from different perspectives. Researchers described the efforts that districts across the country are making to address inequities in using performance measures, and the challenges and opportunities of using value-added models to examine teacher distribution. State-level policies and practices to support this work were also discussed, with Georgia as an example. Participants were given the opportunity to discuss barriers, strategies, and solutions to using performance data to ensure equitable access to effective teachers. Following are some highlights:

• During the discussion, participants were asked to work in small groups to identify challenges they face in improving the equitable distribution of effective teachers, share successful solutions or strategies they would like to try, and discuss areas where they would like to investigate more or understand better how to improve equitable distribution.
• Participants and presenters agreed that there are many challenges in improving the equitable distribution of teachers, including recruiting and retaining effective teachers in rural areas, developing evaluation systems that provide accurate data that can be used to inform equitable distribution decisions, incentivizing effective teachers to work in low-performing schools, preparing teachers to work with challenging students and assigning new teachers strategically, and cultivating  school leadership that recruits and retains effective teachers for high-need schools.
• Several possible solutions or strategies were discussed, including providing incentives for teachers in high-need schools and classrooms, recognizing and celebrating achievements in closing the achievement gap, offering e-mentoring for new teachers in rural areas, setting accountability measures for principals and superintendents, surveying staff about working conditions, and working with preparation institutions to better train teachers to work in high-need schools and classrooms.
• Participants raised a number of questions and areas for future investigation, such as whether any districts are including student race and ethnicity in their evaluation systems, how districts are measuring the impact of Title IIA funds, what statewide policy levers will enhance the equitable distribution of teachers and administrators, and how states may expand e-mentoring for new teachers in rural areas.

As states and districts develop more data-rich evaluation systems, it is critical that the new teacher and principal effectiveness data are used to inform instructional improvement. In this session, participants first learned about the development of the two major components of Florida's new evaluation system: instructional and leadership practice and student learning growth. The session then explored how the process of development aided the state in achieving positive implementation results as well as the challenges that remain for realizing the desired improvements in instructional and leadership practice and student learning. Participants also explored how states can turn value-added data into a useful instructional tool. Following are some highlights:

• Kathy Hebda, deputy chancellor of educator quality at the Florida Department of Education, gave an overview of the Florida Teacher and Principal Evaluation Systems, which are designed to improve instruction and learning at all levels. The state focused on the needs of individual districts and the support they would need to ensure that the system truly provides information on how to improve instructional effectiveness. The state found that it was important to consult with national experts face-to-face and to provide districts with in-person support in order to create a common language around effective instruction and practices. The state also found that communication and district-level decision making are crucial.
• The state provided a number of supports to districts to ensure that evaluation data would promote improvements in teaching and learning, such as Common Core Institutes for principals to help connect the new standards to the evaluation system. The state also provided direct technical assistance to districts on connecting induction support, professional development, and evaluation data. The state  worked with national experts to ensure that the state's value-added model was accurate, fair, and designed to provide information on what students were actually learning. To ensure transparency, the state made the work of the Student Growth Implementation Committee publically available via live webcast.
• Tony Bagshaw, managing director of human capital at Battelle for Kids, described the work Battelle for Kids did with the Tennessee Department of Education to empower educators to use value-added data to improve teaching and learning outcomes, highlighting best practices. It is important to introduce value-added as a method for improvement rather than just accountability, and provide resources and support to all educators (including district advocates) during implementation. By using a blended-learning model focused on formative instructional practices, including in-person trainings and online resources, the state ensured participation and understanding. Finally, Tony Bagshaw stressed that alignment to other state and higher education systems, communication and branding, and monitoring of both formative and summative results were critical in ensuring the success of the evaluation system in Tennessee.  

From preparation to evaluation and professional development, states must ensure they have the data capacity needed to effectively guide policy and practice. In this session, Paige Kowalski from the Data Quality Campaign discussed the critical role that data must play in state efforts to improve teacher effectiveness. Representatives from SEAs in Louisiana and South Carolina discussed their states' efforts in using teacher and student performance data to inform the human capital pipeline. Following are some highlights:

• Paige Kowalski, director of state policy initiatives at the Data Quality Campaign, stated that states and districts have not consistently identified/defined the term "teacher of record (TOR)," which may make high- stakes decisions difficult. Because only one teacher can currently be assigned in measuring student growth, states and districts may not capture which teachers actually have the greatest impact on the student's learning. Additionally, districts and states do not systematically collect information about teacher and student mobility, making it difficult to properly link teacher-student data.
• Some promising practices include developing a common statewide TOR definition, linking multiple teachers to students, establishing roster verification, and collecting data at multiple times throughout the school year.
• One serious issue is that many district Information Technology (IT) directors are inadvertently making critical decisions on teacher effectiveness by making the actual student–teacher links themselves. It is critical that qualified district staff work with IT personnel to ensure that these links are accurate and valid.
• Kathy Meeks, ADEPT coordinator at the South Carolina Department of Education, discussed how South Carolina is considering data use, with a focus on teacher evaluations. Currently, the South Carolina Department of Education collects data on every teacher in the state, including student teacher candidates, so that they have a history of how they are performing/have performed throughout their career. The state also provides each institute of higher education with data on their graduates once they are hired by a district in the state. Districts are able to receive a teacher's full history so that poor-performing teachers are not circulated among districts.
• Molly Horstman, COMPASS director at the Louisiana Department of Education, shared best practices for data use, such as emphasizing data in all aspects of human capital management systems and demystifying evaluation scores to empower both families and educators.