CTESS ebook

July 2025

Table of Contents

Introduction to CTESS ​

2

•​ CTESS Elements​

2 4 4 5

•​ CTESS Evaluation Cycle​

•​ CTESS Requirements for Educators with Special Circumstances/Late Hires​

•​ CTESS Support and Remediation​

CTESS Domains and Standards At-A-Glance ​

7

Teacher CTESS Requirements and Timeline ​

8

CTESS Element 1: Instructional Quality ​

9

•​ Self-Assessment & Professional Learning Goal​

10 13 15 17 18

•​ Observations (IPOP)​

•​ Teaching and Learning Evidence​ •​ Meeting Participation Checklist​

•​ Ethical Conduct Checklist​

CTESS Element 2: Student Growth ​

19

CTESS Element 3: Stakeholder Input ​

22

CTESS Summative Overall Rating ​

25

Educator Resources and Support ​

26

Appendices ​

•​ A – Canyons MTSS Framework​ •​ B – Stakeholder Input Surveys​

28 29 34 51

•​ C – CTESS Standards: Lines of Evidence and Benchmark Criteria​

•​ D – IPOP Coding Manual​

1

Introduction

Effective Teaching Matters What a teacher does - or does not do - in the classroom has a substantial impact on student achievement. In fact, instructional delivery is one of the most important variables that bring about academic excellence in students. Teaching based on strong instructional practices is powerful and Canyons District is dedicated to helping every teacher improve her or his pedagogical skills. How Teaching Improves Providing teachers with explicit feedback improves instructional practices and leads to better student outcomes. Improving instruction through performance feedback is a highly researched, evidence-based practice with which to assist teachers in implementing effective teaching practices. Teachers deserve accurate and actionable feedback. In order to be most effective, performance feedback should focus on the proven components that research, especially meta-analyses, indicate have the biggest impact on achievement. The Canyons Teacher Effectiveness Support System, commonly referred to as CTESS, aims to provide actionable feedback on evidence-based strategies that are most likely to positively impact student achievement and the supports teachers need to implement them. The Purpose of CTESS CTESS is designed to ensure that every student in Canyons School District receives high-quality instruction every day, prioritize professional growth and support for all educators, improve feedback to educators about effective instruction, measure implementation of Canyons District’s Multi-Tiered Systems of Support framework, increase collaboration through professional learning communities, and recognize and support effective teachers. How CTESS Standards were Developed Initial development began when an updated version of the Utah Effective Teaching Standards was adopted by the Utah State Board of Education in 2012. These standards were then aligned with the CSD MTSS Framework, which brings together the components, beliefs, and critical elements of effective schools. The framework includes key elements of high quality teaching and learning, safe and supportive learning environments, data-based decision making, a tiered system of supports, and educator growth. The CTESS standards are designed specifically to measure implementation of the CSD framework. The CSD Joint Educator Evaluation Committee, which is made up of parents, teachers, and administrators, is the primary group of individuals responsible for ongoing updates to CTESS in accordance with Utah laws and regulations.

CTESS Elements There are three elements of CTESS: •​ Instructional Quality

•​ Student Growth •​ Stakeholder Input

In 2015, the Utah State Board of Education determined that an educator’s Summative Overall Rating (SOR) be based on 70% from the Instructional Quality Rating (IQR), 20% from the Student Growth Rating, and 10% from the Stakeholder Input Rating. This formula was adopted by Canyons School District.

2

An educator in a summative evaluation year will complete all components of the CTESS evaluation. An educator in a formative evaluation year will complete Professional Learning and Student Growth goal creation with mid-year and end-of-year goal reflections and two formal observations.

CTESS Effectiveness Ratings Educator performance results in an effectiveness rating for each of the three elements as well as a Summative Overall Rating. These are the ratings that can be achieved through the CTESS process:

The expectation in Canyons School District is that all teachers earn at least an “Effective” rating. Teachers who achieve such a rating are accomplished teachers who provide their students with valued instruction every day. Students with teachers who have earned “Effective” or “Highly Effective” ratings make great strides in acquiring knowledge and skills to progress through the curriculum.

3

CTESS Evaluation Cycle As outlined in CSD Board Policy 410.08, licensed employees entering or returning to Canyons School District are placed on provisional status for a period of three (3) years and, as required by Utah State law, are summative-evaluated annually using CTESS. Career Educators, educators who have successfully completed provisional status, are evaluated annually as required by Utah State law. Career 1, 2, and 3 educators will complete a formative evaluation while Career 4 educators will complete a summative evaluation. CTESS consists of classroom observations (IPOPs), learning and teaching evidence, student growth, and stakeholder feedback. CTESS has four ratings: Highly Effective, Effective, Emerging/Minimally Effective , and Not Effective . All Canyons educators are expected to be rated as Effective or Highly Effective . However, Emerging is considered satisfactory for Provisional 1 and 2 Educators. Provisional 3 Educators should be rated Effective or Highly Effective by the end of year P3. Those who are not rated Effective or Highly Effective at the end of the Provisional 3 evaluation may not advance to Career status. Career Educators rated as Minimally Effective or Not Effective will be placed on a Plan of Assistance. A Career educator may be placed on a summative evaluation year (Career 4) at the request of the administrator at any time for reasons including, but not limited to: concerns identified through observations, feedback, student performance, etc. Resigning and retiring educators must complete all CTESS requirements unless the administrator receives a signed resignation form and a statement in writing that an evaluation is not desired from the resigning/retiring educator. In that case, resigning/retiring educators complete the following: •​ Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal •​ Student Growth Goal •​ Mid-year and End-of-year Goal Reflections CTESS for Part-time Educators (.5 FTE and above) All part-time educators complete all CTESS requirements based on their corresponding status (Provisional or Career) and phase (P1, P2, P3, C1, C2, C3, C4). CTESS for Hourly Educators (below .5 FTE) All hourly educators will complete the same CTESS formative evaluation elements as Career 1 educators: •​ Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal and reflections •​ Student Growth Goal and reflections •​ Two (2) formal observations and reflections Note: Hourly educators will not complete the summative CTESS cycle. CTESS for Educators hired from start of school through October 31 Educators will complete the Provisional 1 CTESS requirements (full summative evaluation) using the following deadlines: •​ Self-Assessment – Professional Learning Goal – November 15 •​ Student Stakeholder Survey Window – December 1-15 •​ Student Growth Goal – December 15 •​ Teachers only: IPOP Cycle completed within first ten weeks of hire (from start date) •​ Remainder of deadlines as outlined in CTESS Timeline CTESS Requirements for Educators with Special Circumstances/Late Hires CTESS for Resigning and Retiring Educators

4

CTESS for Educators hired November 1-December 31 The following components of CTESS are required by April 30: •​ Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal •​ Student Growth Goal •​ Two (2) formal observations Note: Educators hired after November 1 will be placed in Provisional 1 status the following school year. CTESS for Educators hired after January 1 The following component of the Provisional 1 CTESS is required by April 30: •​ One (1) formal observation Goal Setting – Professional Learning & Student Growth – are optional Note: Educators hired after January 1 will be placed in Provisional 1 status the following school year. CTESS Support and Remediation As outlined in CSD Board Policy 400.31, the Board authorizes the District Administration to implement an evaluation process that is reasonable, fair, valid, and reliable in measuring educator effectiveness, compliant with state statutes, state regulations, and Canyons School District policy while measuring implementation of the Utah Effective Teaching Standards and the Canyons MTSS Framework. All educators have Tier 1 Supports available to them regardless of formative or summative evaluation status: ●​ CTESS Orientation Provisional 1, 2, and 3 Educators (summative evaluation) Instructional Quality Rating Result: If the IQR rating for P1 and P2 educators is Emerging , Effective , or Highly Effective , the educator is advanced to the next CTESS cycle. If the IQR rating for P1 and P2 educators is Not Effective , the following remediation will take place: ●​ Implementation of Tier 2 Supports o​ Master Teacher Observations o​ Instructional Support Resources ●​ Memo of Concern with specific directives for improvement ●​ Notification that employment is in question The educator will complete the next year’s evaluation cycle under their remediation guidelines. If the subsequent IQR rating is Emerging , Effective , or Highly Effective , remediation is complete and the educator is advanced to the next CTESS cycle. NOTE: If the IQR rating for P3 educators is Emerging or Not Effective , the following may occur: ●​ Provisional 3 status is extended for an additional year, or o​ Tier 1 Supports o​ Informal IPOPs o​ Targeted Professional Development ●​ CTESS Academy Training ●​ CTESS Online Resources ●​ School Administrators ●​ Instructional Coaches ●​ District Specialists ●​ Professional Learning

5

●​ Notification of contract non-renewal

Career 4 Educators (summative evaluation) Instructional Quality Rating Result:

If the IQR rating is Effective or Highly Effective , the educator is advanced to the next CTESS cycle. If the IQR rating is Minimally Effective or Not Effective , the following remediation will take place: ●​ Implementation of Tier 2 Supports

o​ Tier 1 Supports o​ Informal IPOPs

o​ Targeted Professional Learning o​ Master Teacher Observations o​ Instructional Support Resources ●​ Plan of Assistance (not to exceed 120 school days) ●​ Notification that employment is in question The educator will complete the next evaluation cycle under their remediation guidelines. If the subsequent IQR rating is Effective or Highly Effective , Plan of Assistance remediation is complete and the educator advances to the next CTESS cycle. If the subsequent IQR rating is Minimally Effective or Not Effective, the following second remediation will take place: ●​ Implementation of Tier 3 Supports o​ Tier 1 & 2 Supports o​ Informal IPOPs o​ Targeted Professional Learning o​ Master Teacher Observations o​ Instructional Support Resources ●​ Formal IPOPs (completed by a team of three: Administrator, HR Representative, Educator-selected Administrator) ●​ Plan of Assistance (continued) ●​ Notification of probation If the subsequent IQR rating is Effective or Highly Effective , the second remediation is complete and the educator is removed from probation and advanced to the next CTESS cycle. If the subsequent IQR rating is Minimally Effective or Not Effective, termination of employment will take place.

6

CTESS Domains and Standards At a Glance The CTESS Standards are based upon the Utah Effective Teaching Standards (2024) and Canyons School DIstrict’s MTSS Framework. NOTE: To determine specific requirements corresponding to each standard, refer to Appendix C: CTESS Standards Lines of Evidence and Benchmark Criteria

Standard 1: Classroom PBIS (Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports) Implements rules and procedures to effectively maintain a positive learning environment Standard 2: State Core Standards Uses the Utah State Core Standards or approved state curriculum when planning lessons Standard 3: Collaboration

Actively problem solves as a collaborative team member by problem solving with data; giving and receiving feedback; building a productive shared culture of learning; and enhancing the knowledge and skills of self and others Standard 4: Connections and Relevance Makes connections to purposefully engage learners in learning tasks relevant to the learner Standard 5: Student Engagement Uses a variety of evidence-based instructional techniques to promote student engagement, learning, and communication skills through various questioning strategies (CSD instructional priorities) Standard 6: Feedback Uses effective feedback practices in the instructional setting to provide timely and descriptive feedback that will promote high quality student work Standard 7: Cognitive Rigor Provides students with meaningful opportunities to engage in higher level thinking to solve applied problems using academic skills such as analyzing, synthesizing, and decision making Standard 8: Data Use Independently and collaboratively uses assessment data to document student progress to promote student growth of all Standard 9: Scaffolding Designs, adapts, and delivers appropriate and challenging learning experiences based on students’ diverse strengths and needs Standard 10: Professional Learning Engaging in and valuing constructive feedback, reflective practices, professional learning, and collaborative activities that support professional, instructional, and schoolwide improvement Standard 11: Advocacy Advocates for learners, the school, the community, and the profession Standard 12: Ethical Behavior Demonstrates the highest standards of legal, moral, and ethical conduct as specified in Utah State Board Rule R277-515-10 and CSD policies

7

Teacher CTESS Requirements and Timeline

Provisional 1, 2, 3 and Career 4 SUMMATIVE Teacher Evaluation

Career 1, 2, and 3 FORMATIVE Teacher Evaluation

Due Dates

Provisional 1 Teachers only: CTESS Academy - Monthly Teacher Evaluation Training Sept-Dec

-

Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal due

August 30

Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal due

September 30 Student Growth Goal due

Student Growth Goal due

Student Stakeholder Survey window open (proctored in a class) Parent Stakeholder Survey window open (sent by district) Provisional 1 only: Two formal IPOPs with administrator feedback Stakeholder Input Part 1 - Analysis/Response due

October 10 – 30

-

November 10 – 30

-

By November 30

-

December 15

-

Provisional 2 & 3 only: Learning and Teaching Evidence due

By January 30

-

January 30

Mid-year Goal Reflections due

Mid-year Goal Reflections due

Provisional 2 & 3 only: Two formal IPOPs; IQR (see below) Provisional 1 & Career 4 only: Learning and Teaching Evidence due Provisional 1 & Career 4 only: Two formal IPOPs; IQR (see below)

February 15

-

By March 10

-

March 30

-

April 30

Stakeholder Input Part 2 - Reflection due

-

April 30

-

Two formal IPOPs

May 15

End-of-year Goal Reflections due

End-of-year Goal Reflections due

By the last day of school

Administrator conference and feedback on Goal Reflections

SOR Conference and administrator feedback

Five (5) school days after each formal IPOP - IPOP reflection due IQR for Teachers include: two formal IPOP Observations ( Admin - spring IPOPs for Provisional 1 teachers ), Meeting Participation Checklist ( Admin ), Ethical Conduct Checklist ( Admin ), Teaching and Learning Evidence Tracker (Admin)

8

CTESS Element 1: Instructional Quality The Instructional Quality elements of CTESS consists of: •​ Self-Assessment and Professional Goal Setting •​ IPOP Observations

•​ Learning and Teaching Evidence •​ Meeting Participation Checklist •​ Ethical Conduct Checklist The Instructional Quality Rating (IQR) is 70% of the Summative Overall Rating (SOR) and is the cumulative rating of a teacher’s performance) on each of the twelve CTESS standards. The following table summarizes the decision rules used for determining an IQR: If… Then IQR is… Standards 1, 2, and 5 are Highly Effective AND remaining standards Effective… Highly Effective

7 or more standards are Highly Effective AND remaining standards are Effective… Highly Effective

All standards are either Effective or Highly Effective…

Effective

Emerging Effective or Minimally Effective Emerging Effective or Minimally Effective

3 or more standards are Emerging Effective or Minimally Effective…

1 Standard is Not Effective…

2 or more standards are Not Effective…

Not Effective

Standard 1, 2, 5 or 12 is Not Effective

Not Effective

Otherwise…

Effective

Classroom PBIS (Standard 1), State Core Standards (Standard 2), and Student Engagement (Standard 5) have the greatest impact on student achievement; therefore, these standards have a stronger emphasis in determining an IQR. Ethical Behavior (Standard 12), while not directly related to student achievement, is a foundational requirement for all Utah educators. If the teacher does not agree with any portion of the Instructional Quality Rating (IQR), the teacher has the right to submit a written response expressing his/her views. This written response must be submitted to the evaluator and to the Director of Human Resources within fifteen (15) calendar days and will be retained in the teacher’s personnel file.

9

Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal The annual Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal setting are required components of the USBE evaluation model designed to link instructional practices to student achievement, encourage professional growth, and foster meaningful reflection. Developing a Professional Learning Goal starts with completion of the Self-Assessment Checklist to gain insight as to one’s areas of instructional strengths and areas for potential growth. Developing a Professional Learning Goal involves reflecting on the self-assessment, prior evaluation feedback, and/or school-wide or team goals for the year, then creating a plan to achieve that goal, how best to monitor progress toward the goal, and reflect on progress toward that goal at mid-year and end-of-year. A teacher’s Self-Assessment and Professional Learning Goal are due by August 30. ●​ Administrators may grant an individual educator an extension to the due dates for special circumstances such as illness, extended leave, or family emergency. ●​ Administrators may provide feedback regarding individual Professional Learning Goals and/or request revisions as needed. Self-Assessment. The Self-Assessment Checklist is a self-reflection tool that is based on Utah Effective Teaching Standards (UETS) and aligned with Canyons Teacher Effectiveness System of Supports (CTESS) standards. The checklist is designed to help teachers identify areas of strength and opportunities for growth: Learners and Learning ○​ Personalized Learning (aligned to CTESS Standards 4, 8, 9) ○​ Building Relationships (aligned to CTESS Standard 1) ○​ Respecting Learner Backgrounds and Perspectives (aligned to CTESS Standards 1, 4, 11) ○​ Fostering Student Self-Awareness (aligned to CTESS Standards 6, 8) Instructional Design Clarity ○​ Content (aligned to CTESS Standards 2, 3, 4) ○​ Learning Progression (aligned to CTESS Standards 2, 3) ○​ Instructional Planning (aligned to CTESS Standards 2, 3, 6, 8, 9) ○​ Engagement (aligned to CTESS Standard 5) Instructional Practice

○​ Instructional Strategies (aligned to CTESS Standards 5, 7, 9) ○​ Assessment Practices (aligned to CTESS Standards 3, 5, 6, 8) ○​ Relevance (aligned to CTESS Standards 4, 9) ○​ Innovation and Technology (aligned to CTESS Standards 2, 4, 5) Classroom Climate ○​ Respectful Learning Environment (aligned to CTESS Standards 1, 5) ○​ Classroom Safety (aligned to CTESS Standard 1) ○​ Classroom Organization (aligned to CTESS Standard 1) ○​ Growth-Oriented Classroom Climate (aligned to CTESS Standards 1, 6, 7) Professional Responsibility ○​ Adherence to Laws, Rules, and Policies (aligned to CTESS Standard 12) ○​ Continuous Professional Learning (aligned to CTESS Standards 3, 10) ○​ Communication (aligned to CTESS Standard 11) ○​ Professional and Ethical Conduct (aligned to CTESS Standard 12)

10

Professional Learning Goal Process

Step 1: Teachers complete the Self-Assessment Checklist. ●​ For each checklist statement, the teacher self-assesses their level of skill in that instructional practice by selecting one of three choices: ○​ I would like to further develop my skills in this area ○​ I feel confident about by skills in this area ○​ I could teach others this skill Step 2: Teachers Develop a Professional Learning Goal. ●​ A Professional Learning Goal is a statement about the instructional practices that a teacher intends to implement to increase the likelihood that students will master the content . ○​ Annual Professional Learning Goals focus on individual educators’ professional growth and are linked to projected student outcomes. ○​ Teachers determine the instructional adjustments that are most likely to lead to students acquiring growth toward targeted skills (this is the Professional Learning Goal). ○​ Teachers identify what evidence will demonstrate progress toward the Professional Learning Goal and how frequently this evidence will be collected to monitor progress. ●​ Teachers craft their Professional Learning Goal using insights gleaned from: ○​ Self-Assessment Checklist ■​ What skill or instructional practice did you identify as an opportunity for growth in your self-assessment? ○​ Prior Year Evaluation Feedback ■​ What skill or instructional practice would you like to focus on improving based on administrative feedback? ○​ School-wide Goal ■​ What has your school identified as the focus for the upcoming year? What individual Professional Learning Goal would support your school’s larger focus? ○​ PLC Collaboration ■​ What is your team currently working on? What individual Professional Learning Goal can support or enhance your PLC’s efforts? ●​ Teachers then consider: ○​ What steps they need to take to achieve that goal. ○​ How to monitor progress on their goal. ●​ Teachers then write a Professional Learning Goal that enhances their instructional practice by: ○​ examining the information gathered ○​ identifying action steps to implement the goal ○​ specifying what evidence will demonstrate progress toward their goal ○​ determining how frequently evident will be collected in order to demonstrate progress toward their goal

11

●​ Prior to submitting a Professional Learning Goal, teachers are encouraged to consider how well it aligns with the SMART goal framework. ○​ The SMART goal criteria help provide goal direction, boost motivation, encourage prioritization, allow for goal tracking, and ensure a focus on the end results.

Specific and Strategic. My goal is clear, detailed, and narrowly focused, and likely to impact my instruction and/or student performance.

S

Measurable. My goal is quantifiable so that I can track my progress.

M

Attainable. My goal is achievable and realistic given the resources available and under my control..

A

Relevant . My goal has a purpose that will benefit students. Time-bound . My goal has a timeline to track my progress and results.

R

T

●​ Teachers who may need additional support at any time to accomplish their Professional Learning Goal are encouraged to reach out to their Instructional Coach.

Professional Learning Goals are monitored throughout the year and teachers submit a reflection on their progress toward each goal at mid-year and again at the end-of-year. Reflections on Professional Learning Goals help teachers identify their own strengths and areas of growth, take ownership of their professional skill development, embrace challenges and setbacks as opportunities for learning, and as a result, these reflections can lead to more impactful outcomes for students. Mid-year Goal Reflection. At mid-year, teachers reflect on their progress toward their Professional Learning Goal and the impact their efforts have had to date. The following prompts are provided to help guide their response: ●​ What actions or strategies have you implemented so far toward achieving your Professional Learning Goal? ●​ How have the changes you made influenced your instructional practices and/or enhanced student engagement or learning outcomes? ●​ What are the adjustments or refinements you need to make to reach your Professional Learning Goal? ●​ As you look toward the rest of the year, what are your next steps for continuing to work toward your Professional Learning Goal? End-of-Year Goal Reflection. At the end of the year, teachers again reflect on their efforts in striving to meet their Professional Learning Goal, by responding to each of the following prompts: ●​ How have your efforts toward meeting your Professional Learning Goal impacted your instruction and/or student learning? ●​ What challenges did you encounter while working toward your Professional Learning Goal, and how did you address them? ●​ What successes or breakthroughs have you experienced while working toward your Professional Learning Goal that you are most proud of?

12

Observation (IPOP) A key component included in the IQR is classroom observation. Canyons School District developed the Instructional Priorities Observation Protocol (IPOP) to provide performance feedback to teachers. The IPOP is a universal classroom observation tool that captures a broad array of key practices identified by research that significantly improve student learning. The IPOP provides teachers with actionable feedback on key indicators of quality instruction that increase the probability of student learning. NOTE: Please refer to Appendix D: IPOP Coding Manual for detailed information about the IPOP Observation including item definitions, examples, and benchmark criteria. It is the expectation in Canyons School District that quality instruction occurs every single day in every single class. With this premise, a formal IPOP observation can occur at any time. Formal IPOP observations are not scheduled or announced. The administrator can complete an IPOP at any time, including the beginning, middle, or end-of-class instruction. •​ There may be occasions in which an administrator enters a teacher’s classroom to conduct a formal IPOP at an inopportune time for the teacher. The teacher may request to postpone the formal IPOP observation for that day (only one postponement is permitted per year). •​ Student learning that may not be suited for observation using the IPOP include: Socratic seminars, student-directed inquiry labs, testing, and instructional video clips. The administrator may discontinue the observation. •​ If an emergency, such as a fire drill or a serious behavior management issue arises during an IPOP, the observation should be discontinued and redone at another time. Administrators are the only individuals who can conduct formal IPOPs for evaluation purposes. Only formal IPOPs are used for the Instructional Quality Rating (IQR). Administrators and Instructional Coaches can conduct informal IPOPs at any time to provide feedback on instruction. Focus of IPOP Observations. IPOPs are focused on directly observable teacher and student behaviors and the quality of instructional strategies. IPOP Behavior Coding •​ This section of the IPOP is a timed, direct observation of both teacher and student behaviors during classroom instruction. Formal IPOP observations are 20 minutes in length. •​ The teacher and student behaviors that are coded are directly observable, well-defined, and require minimal inference on the part of the observer. •​ During the observation, the observer will likely need to move about the classroom in order to view, hear, and accurately record student and teacher behaviors. •​ Student behaviors are recorded in 20-second intervals; a different student’s behavior is coded every 20 seconds in order to obtain a representative sample of typical student behavior in the classroom. This results in the number of intervals in which a particular student behavior occurred during the observation. •​ Teacher behaviors are recorded as they occur in real time, resulting in a number of instances that the specific teacher behavior occurred during the observation. •​ To ensure fairness and consistency across observations, interval and frequency counts of student and teacher behaviors are converted to rates per hour. IPOP Instructional Quality •​ These IPOP items include instructional strategies that an observer rates using rubrics. They include adherence to core standards, quality of engagement strategies, classroom management strategies, and feedback strategies. •​ Rubric ratings are completed immediately following the timed Behavior Coding based on the instruction that occurred during the 20-minute direct observation. Complete definitions and examples of all IPOP items as well as administration instructions can be found in the IPOP Coding Manual.

13

IPOP Feedback. The primary purpose of the IPOP is to provide teachers with actionable feedback on key indicators of quality instruction that have been shown to increase student learning. The IPOP has a “notes” section for each IPOP item in which the observer may add specific feedback comments. In addition, the IPOP includes an overall Feedback and Reflections section in order to support the teacher in ongoing professional growth. •​ Administrators must complete a formal IPOP by midnight the day after the observation to ensure that teachers receive timely feedback in order to incorporate that feedback into their practice. •​ Teachers receive an email notifying them that the IPOP has been completed and is available for their review in the CTESS Evaluation App. •​ An IPOP Summary is also available to review that links the teacher’s IPOP results to specific benchmark criteria on the CTESS standards. For example, if the IPOP results for Feedback meet benchmark criteria, the IPOP Summary will indicate that the teacher is “on track” for an Effective rating on Standard 6: Feedback. •​ The IPOP Summary includes a section for the teacher’s reflection on IPOP feedback. The teacher’s reflection needs to be submitted within 5 school days of receipt of the IPOP Summary. •​ A face-to-face feedback session between the administrator and teacher is ideal in order to address any questions the teacher may have regarding the administrator feedback. IPOP Timing. During an evaluation cycle, two formal IPOPs are required. The first observation can begin 15 days after the CTESS orientation. The second observation must occur no sooner than five school days and no later than 30 school days from the first observation except for Career 1, Career 2, & Career 3 teachers – there is no end date timeline for them. All formal IPOPs must be completed by April 30. A teacher can request an informal IPOP at any time to receive feedback to improve practice. IPOP Congruence. On occasion, the two formal IPOPs may reflect very different results. For example, the first IPOP may indicate a performance that is less than effective on several key instructional strategies. After receiving high quality feedback and coaching on student engagement strategies, the second IPOP may indicate significant improvement. In this case, the two IPOP results are not congruent, meaning they are substantially different. An administrator may seek input from other administrators as well as use their professional judgment to determine congruency. When two formal IPOPs are incongruent, a third formal IPOP must be completed by the administrator in order to substantiate consistency in a teacher’s performance. The two formal IPOPs that are most congruent will be used in the IQR.

14

Learning and Teaching Evidence Teachers in the summative evaluation year submit artifacts in the Learning and Teaching Evidence Tracker in order to provide a means to measure important aspects of teaching that cannot reliably be observed in a typical classroom observation, including documents from lesson preparation, teacher collaboration, rubrics, student work, etc. This collection of artifact evidence allows teachers to show that they know, understand, and routinely implement the CTESS standards. Below is a description of the Learning and Teaching Evidence that aligns with the relevant standard. NOTE: To determine specific requirements corresponding to each standard, refer to Appendix C: CTESS Standards Lines of Evidence and Benchmark Criteria Standard 4: Connections and Relevance Makes connections to purposefully engage learners in learning tasks relevant to the learner Learning and Teaching Evidence Evidence that Demonstrates Relevancy in Lessons Teachers show evidence that demonstrates how and why a particular lesson reflects relevancy based on the background knowledge and interests of current students. Evidence that Demonstrates Multiple Access Points for Instructional Content Teachers show evidence that provides students with multiple means of accessing instructional content based on the student’s learning preference (e.g., video, print, audio). Evidence of a Culminating Project that Shows Connections The teacher creates a project that allows students to demonstrate content mastery through submission of a choice of artifacts (e.g., essay, multimedia, oral report). Student work samples from the project are submitted. Standard 6 : Feedback Uses effective feedback practices in the instructional setting to provide timely and descriptive feedback that will promote quality student work Learning and Teaching Evidence Evidence of Providing Specific Feedback to Students The teacher provides evidence of a completed student assignment with specific feedback on how to improve toward meeting standards or learning objectives/intentions; (e.g., rubrics, task completion checklists). Providing descriptive feedback to students has a strong positive effect on student achievement. A copy of the student assignment(s) or work samples with specific feedback is submitted. Standard 7 : Cognitive Rigor Provides students with meaningful opportunities to engage in higher level thinking to solve applied problems using academic skills such as analyzing, synthesizing, and decision making Learning and Teaching Evidence Evidence of Rigor The evidence describes the complexity of mental processing that occurs for students to answer a question, perform a task, or generate a product that requires greater conceptual understanding and cognitive processing. PLC Notes, Lesson Planning Evidence, Cognitive Rigor Rubric, can be submitted.

15

Evidence of a Completed Student Assignment that Reflects Higher Level Thinking The teacher provides evidence of a completed student assignment/project that shows conceptual understanding and cognitive rigor or higher level learning. Student work samples are submitted.

Standard 8 : Data Use Independently and collaboratively uses assessment data to document student progress to promote student growth of all Learning and Teaching Evidence Evidence of Consistent Use of Assessment Data in PLC Meetings to Guide Instruction Assessments for student learning allow teachers to check for understanding during a lesson, identify concepts that students are struggling to understand, and identify standards that students have already met so that instructional adjustments can be made to increase student outcomes. Copies of PLC notes or products showing use of assessment data for instructional planning can be submitted. Data that Show Improved Student Performance (Highly Effective only) Assessment evidence needs to show improved performance and understanding by students on an academic skill or concept over time. Data within PLC notes or graphed data can be submitted. Standard 9 : Scaffolding Designs, adapts and delivers appropriate and challenging learning experiences based on students’ diverse strengths and needs Learning and Teaching Evidence Evidence of Student Work that Demonstrates Implementation of Scaffolds The teacher provides evidence of scaffolding strategies that were used in the classroom to support students in learning an objective. This evidence needs to show how the lesson incorporated one or more Common High Yielding Scaffolds to enhance learning for various groups of diverse learners. Student assessments or work samples showing how instruction was scaffolded are submitted. Standard 10: Professional Learning Engaging in and valuing constructive feedback, reflective practices, professional learning, and collaborative activities that support professional, instructional, and schoolwide improvement Learning and Teaching Evidence Evidence of Participation and Implementation of Professional Learning — Teachers document attendance at required professional learning and submit a statement of how they have implemented the learned techniques in the classroom. A statement is submitted.

16

Meeting Participation Checklist The Meeting Participation Checklist is designed to assist administrators in providing feedback to teachers on important skills and behaviors for productive teaming. Teachers are observed during team meetings to gain evidence and information about team functioning, effectiveness of problem solving and collaboration, and individual teacher participation. Administrators complete the Meeting Participation Checklist for all teachers in the Summative Evaluation Year or at the administrator’s discretion. Administrators provide a rating on each item of the Meeting Participation Checklist as to whether a teacher “Meets Expectations,” “Does Not Meet Expectations,” or if there is “Improvement Needed.” For any item rated “Does Not Meet Expectations” or “Improvement Needed,” the administrator provides a detailed rationale, which may include a memo of concern, in order to facilitate actionable feedback to the teacher. Meeting Participation Checklist items include: ●​ Prepared: Consistently arrives to meetings with assigned tasks completed, maintains attention, and fully participates in the meetings by avoiding: ○​ displaying disinterest ○​ having side conversations or cross-talk ○​ using personal electronic devices ○​ arriving late or leaving early ●​ Efficient Practices: Maintains professional conduct with colleagues by consistently following established meeting norms and sustaining positive interactions with all team members by avoiding: ○​ interrupting others ○​ dismissive comments ○​ negativity ●​ Uses Data: Reflects on and effectively uses available student performance data (district, screening, early warning, behavior, classroom assessment) to identify problems and potential barriers to learning. ●​ Inclusive Practices: Spends the majority of team time being proactive about issues and topics that are within the team’s control. ●​ Problem Solving: Engages in collaborative feedback and approaches problem solving by offering strategies, resources, and ideas that are solution oriented.

17

Advocacy for Learners and Ethical Conduct Checklist The Advocacy for Learners and Ethical Conduct Checklist is designed to give feedback to teachers on their advocacy efforts on behalf of students and families and on their own ethical behavior throughout the year. Administrators complete the Advocacy for Learners and Ethical Conduct Checklist for all teachers in the Summative Evaluation Year or at the administrator’s discretion. Items are used for an administrator’s ratings on CTESS Standard 11 (items 1 to 3) and Standard 12 (items 4 to 8). Administrators provide a rating on each item of the Advocacy for Learners and Ethical Conduct Checklist as to whether a teacher “Meets Expectations,” “Does Not Meet Expectations,” or if there is “Improvement Needed.” For any item rated “Does Not Meet Expectations” or “Improvement Needed,” the administrator provides a detailed rationale, which may include a memo of concern, in order to facilitate actionable feedback to the teacher. The Advocacy for Learners and Ethical Conduct Checklist items include: ●​ Uses strategies to identify and engage those students who seem to be least connected academically, socially, or emotionally. ●​ Makes concerted efforts to affect change to the school climate, curriculum, or policy when it would benefit students. ●​ Considers input from parents and the broader community regarding adjustments that can be made in the classroom to support learning. ●​ Promotes positive interactions about students and parents and proactively engages in constructive dialogue within the school and outside community. ●​ Promotes productive interactions with colleagues that support student learning. ●​ Demonstrates awareness and sensitivity of cultural, linguistic, and social backgrounds of students and families.

●​ Maintains records according to school, district, state, and federal expectations. ●​ Respects and maintains the confidentiality of student, family, and school expectations. ●​ Follows laws, rules, and policies of the district and state.

18

CTESS Element 2: Student Growth The Student Growth element consists of teacher reflections on student progress towards meeting the Student Growth Goal created at the beginning of the school year. The Student Growth Rating is 20% of a Summative Overall Rating (SOR) for teachers in the summative evaluation year. •​ Student Growth ratings are based on teacher reflections of student growth rather than on direct measures of student growth since characteristics of students can vary across classrooms. This levels the playing field for all teachers so that the rating is more likely to be representative of how a teacher teaches instead of who they teach. The following table summarizes the decision rules used for determining a Student Growth Rating: Administrator’s Rating of Educator’s Reflections on Student Growth

ALL of the following are true: •​ Educator met all criteria for an “Effective” rating. AND •​ Educator submitted documentation that: •​ student growth/progress was tracked using data,

Highly Effective

•​ strategies or instruction were adjusted to impact student growth, and •​ a measurable increase in student learning or growth occurred.

ALL of the following are true: •​ Educator thoroughly analyzed student growth data. •​ Educator reflected on their successes and/or challenges in working toward their student growth goal. •​ Educator reflected on the strategies/instructional adjustments implemented to address learning gaps and how they impacted student growth. Any of the following are true: •​ Educator’s reflection on students’ learning and growth did not include an analysis of student growth data. •​ Educator did not take actionable steps (implement strategies or instructional adjustments) that were likely to produce a measurable increase in student learning or growth.

Effective

Emerging Effective/ Minimally Effective

The following is true: •​ Educator’s Student Growth Reflection submission was incomplete.

Not Effective

I f the teacher does not agree with any portion of the Student Growth Rating, the teacher has the right to submit a written response expressing his/her views. This written response must be submitted to the evaluator and to the Director of Human Resources within fifteen (15) calendar days and will be retained in the teacher’s personnel file. Student Growth Goal Teachers (individually or with their team) establish an ambitious, but achievable, Student Growth Goal that targets desired growth in student performance for the school year. Establishing a Student Growth Goal helps guide instruction in a way that directly impacts student outcomes. It is also important to consider what action steps are needed to achieve the Student Growth Goal and how student growth and progress will be tracked. A teacher’s Student Growth Goal is due by September 30. ●​ Administrators may grant an individual teacher an extension, as needed, for special circumstances such as illness, extended leave, or family emergency. ●​ Administrators may provide feedback regarding individual Student Growth Goals and/or request revisions as needed.

19

Student Growth Goal Process

Step 1: Student Data Student growth goals are driven by the needs of students. Teachers review current student performance data (e.g., summative, formative, classroom) and then describe the data that demonstrate their students’ most significant learning needs. Step 2a: Target for Student Growth Teachers specify which content area standard(s) or target skill(s) will address their students’ identified learning needs and consider what specific skills their students need to be able to master the identified content area standard(s) or target skill(s). Step 2b: Expected Growth Outcome Teachers determine either the level of proficiency or increase in student growth they are expecting in order to meet the identified target. Step 2c: Measurement Teachers describe what assessment(s) they will use to measure evidence of student growth. Step 2d: Timeline Teachers detail when they expect to assess evidence of student growth. Step 3: Write a Student Growth Goal A Student Growth Goal is a statement that defines expectations for student achievement to address student learning needs. It includes all of the components of the Steps outlined above:

○​ Target for Student Growth ○​ Expected Growth Outcome ○​ Measurement ○​ Timeline

Prior to submitting a Student Growth Goal, teachers are encouraged to review the SMART goal criteria which help to provide goal direction, boost motivation, encourage prioritization, allow for goal tracking, and ensure a focus on the end results.

Specific and Strategic. My goal is clear, detailed, and narrowly focused, and likely to impact my instruction and/or student performance.

S

Measurable. My goal is quantifiable so that I can track my progress.

M

Attainable. My goal is achievable and realistic given the resources available and under my control.

A

Relevant . My goal has a purpose that will benefit students. Time-bound. My goal has a timeline to track my progress and results.

R

T

Teachers who may need additional support at any time to accomplish their Student Growth Goal are encouraged to reach out to their Instructional Coach.

20

Student Growth Goals are monitored throughout the year and teachers submit a reflection on their progress toward each goal at mid-year and again at the end-of-year. Student Growth Goal reflections help teachers see how adjustments to their instructional practices directly impact student learning, creates a culture of continuous improvement, and ultimately leads to better student outcomes. Mid-year Goal Reflection. Teachers reflect at mid-year on their students’ growth or progress to date and the adjustments needed to ensure students are able to meet the established Student Growth Goal. The following prompts are provided to help guide their response: ●​ What instructional adjustments or actionable steps have you implemented so far in order to impact student progress toward your Student Growth Goal? ●​ How have the changes you made impacted student progress/growth to date? ●​ What instructional adjustments or refinements do you need to make to increase the likelihood that students will meet your Student Growth Goal by your targeted timeline? ●​ As you look ahead to the remainder of the school year, what are your next steps for continuing to ensure that your Student Growth Goal is met? End-of-year Goal Reflection. At the end of the year, teachers analyze their student growth data and reflect on their efforts in adjusting their instruction so that students could meet their Student Growth Goal by responding to each of the following prompts: ●​ What do your data show about your students’ learning gaps and their progress/growth over the school year? ●​ What successes and/or challenges did you encounter in working to achieve your student growth goal? ●​ What strategies or adjustments to instruction did you implement that had the most impact on student growth? Reflections for Educators in the Summative Evaluation Year. For teachers in the summative evaluation year, meeting submission deadlines for reflections impact the effectiveness rating on CTESS Standard 10. Additionally, administrators review a teacher’s submitted mid-year and end-of-year reflections on Student Growth Goals and provide a rating for the Student Growth element of CTESS. Administrators’ ratings are based on the Student Growth Rating rubric (see CTESS Element 2: Student Growth section of the manual).

21

CTESS Element 3: Stakeholder Input The Stakeholder Input element consists of teacher analysis and reflection on feedback from student surveys and parent surveys that is used to create a plan for improvement. Student surveys address student perceptions of instructional rigor, learning opportunities, and classroom climate. Parent surveys are designed to assess parent perceptions of school climate and communication. The Stakeholder Input Rating is 10% of a Summative Overall Rating (SOR) for teachers in the summative evaluation year. A rating on the Stakeholder Input element of CTESS is based on teacher documented reflections. The following table summarizes the decision rules used for determining an Stakeholder Input Rating: Administrator’s Rating on Educator’s Analysis/Response to and Reflection on Stakeholder Input

ALL of the following: •​ Meets all criteria for an “Effective” rating •​ Teacher’s plan for improvement was exemplary in that it was detailed and comprehensive (addressed both primary and secondary concerns reflected in survey data) •​ Teacher presented data on the impact of implementing the plan for improvement ALL of the following: •​ Teacher reflected on and thoughtfully analyzed survey data •​ Teacher’s plan for improvement addressed the primary concern reflected in survey data •​ Teacher presented evidence that the plan for improvement was implemented Any of the following: •​ Teacher’s analysis of survey data was weak or half- hearted •​ Teacher developed a plan for improvement, but the plan did not address the primary concern reflected in survey data •​ Teacher only presented partial evidence that the plan for improvement was implemented Any of the following: •​ Teacher did not analyze survey data •​ Teacher’s plan in response to survey data deflected responsibility or did not address the primary concern reflected in survey data •​ Teacher did not present evidence that the plan for improvement was implemented

Highly Effective

Effective

Emerging Effective/ Minimally Effective

Not Effective

If the teacher does not agree with any portion of the Stakeholder Input Rating, the teacher has the right to submit a written response expressing his/her views. This written response must be submitted to the evaluator and to the Director of Human Resources within fifteen (15) calendar days and will be retained in the teacher’s personnel file.

Student Stakeholder Surveys. Student survey results give teachers the opportunity to understand their students’ experiences in their classroom. Each survey asks students to rate their classroom experience regarding key aspects of the instructional environment, such as student engagement and academic rigor. There are three versions of the student survey: Early Elementary (K-2), Elementary (3-5), and Secondary (6-12) (see appendix). In each version, students indicate the degree to which they believe each statement to be true.

22