• Calculating Evaluation Ratings

    For most teachers, the 2017-18 Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation end of year rating will be determined by a composite score made up of individual scores from components in each of the two categories of effectiveness being measured. When performance data is available for all components in the Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation, the "professional practice" and "student growth" components each account for 50-percent of a teacher's overall evaluation and include the following weighted measures:
    2014 15 Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation
    Each individual rating (raw score) is converted to a 100-point scale, weighted and combined to yield a single overall composite rating. This overall annual evaluation rating is based on where a teacher's Teacher Effectiveness Composite Score is within the annual evaluation score ranges. For the 2017-18 school year, the Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation annual evaluation score ranges remain consistent with the score ranges since the 2014-15 school year. Specifically:
      

    Final effectiveness rating

    Overall score range

    Highly effective

    86 and above

    Effective

    70 to 85

    Developing

    55 to 69

    Ineffective

    54 and below

     

    City Schools will be using the following rating calculations for the 2017-18 Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation. To generate this rating, City Schools follows a four-step process that you can see in the following example: 
     
    (For more information on calculating your annual evaluation, please review this 1-page overview guide).
     
    Note: As has been the practice since the 2014-15 school year, annual evaluations for teachers with missing performance data from one or more evaluation components will be reweighted
     
      Example scores for one teacher

    Effectiveness measure

    Teacher's raw score

    Explanation

    Classroom observations 3.25 The average of a teacher’s formal observations (from either two or three formal observations) from the 2017-18 school year on a scale of 1 to 4.
    Professional expectations 54 The professional expectations task is rated on a 64-point scale that includes 16 indicators grouped into four competencies: communication, professionalism, professional practice, and district expectations. This form was revised in the 2014-15 school year with input from a range of stakeholders, including a teacher focus group. Each indicator is rated on a scale from 1-4 points.
    Student Learning Objectives  77  Student Learning Objectives are specific, measurable academic goals for a particular group of students in an academic year created by teachers in collaboration with their school leaders. Completed SLOs are scored on a scale of 54 to 100.
    School Performance Measure  46.78
    The teacher's school performance measure (SPM) consists of multiple quantitative indicators that reflect a whole school’s year-long performance in terms of student growth and the extent to which the school’s learning environment is conducive to student growth.This measure is scored on a 100-point scale.

    Step 1: Compare apples-to-apples: Determine the scaled score

    Effectiveness measure

    Score

    Scale of raw scores

    Scaled score (100 point scale)

    Explanation

    Classroom observations 3.25 4
    81.25
    (3.25 x 25)
    Because the Instructional Framework is on a 4-point scale, a multiplier of 25 is used to place the score on a 100-point scale
    Professional expectations 54 64 84.375
    (54 ÷ 64 x 100)
    The teacher’s Professional Expectations score is on a 64-point scale
    (i.e., like grading assignments; 54/64)
    Student Learning Objectives  77  100 77

    The teacher's Student Learning Objective score is already on a 100-point scale
    School Performance Measure 46.78   100 46.78   The teacher’s School Performance Measure score is already on a 100-point scale

    Step 2: Multiply the scaled score for each measure by its weight to create the weighted score 

    Effectiveness measure

    Scaled score

    Weight (in %)

    Weighted score

    Classroom observations 81.25 40
    32.5
    (81.25 x .40)
    Professional expectations 84.375 10
    8.4357
    (84.375 x .10)
    Student Learning Objectives 77  35   26.95
    (77 x .35)
    School Performance Measure  46.78  15   7.017
    (46.78 x .15)

    Step 3: Add together the weighted scores to yield an overall weighted score. This is the Teacher Effectiveness Composite Score.

    Effectiveness measure

    Weighted score

    Classroom observations 32.5
    Professional expectations 8.4375
    Student Learning Objectives 26.95 
    School Performance Measure 7.017 
    Overall weighted score
    74.905
    Overall weighted score (rounded)

    75

    Step 4: Final annual evaluation rating is based on this Teacher Effectiveness Composite Score.

    Final effectiveness rating

    Overall score range

    Highly effective 86 and above
    Effective 70 to 85
    Developing 55 to 69
    Ineffective 54 and below

    The teacher in this example would receive an Effective annual evaluation rating based on the rounded overall weighted score of 75.