An Overview of PGES

In the 2014-15 school year, every Kentucky teacher will be evaluated using the Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PGES). But, what is PGES and what does it mean for teachers?

This policy brief is designed to provide an overview of PGES — what it means, where it came from, and where teacher evaluation is headed in Kentucky.

The new evaluation system is a component of the “Next-Generation Professionals” pillar of Kentucky’s Unbridled Learning reform, passed in 2009 as Senate Bill 1. The system was field tested in limited districts from 2010 – 2013, and in the 2013 – 2014 school year, all districts
statewide piloted PGES. While all teachers will be measured by PGES in 2014 –2015, districts will not be required to use PGES evaluations for personnel decisions until the 2015 – 2016 school year.

PGES has been phased-in over time and will continue to be refined throughout the process.

PGES Timeline:

Phase 1: 2010-11
25 districts participated in a Field Test of PGES.

Phase 2: 2011-13
55 districts participated in a Field Test of PGES.

Phase 3: 2013-14
All districts participated in a Pilot of PGES (a minimum of 10 percent of schools per district).

Phase 4: 2014-15
Statewide implementation of PGES. Districts choose whether or not to use PGES for personnel decisions, but are not required to by the State.

Phase 5: 2015-beyond
Statewide implementation of PGES for personnel decisions. The system moves into the Unbridled Learning accountability model.

What’s in PGES?

PGES includes five domains for evaluating teachers: planning and preparation,
classroom environment, instruction, professional responsibility, and student growth.

  • The educator’s overall performance rating is determined by “professional practice” and “student growth” ratings, producing an ultimate evaluation of exemplary, accomplished, developing, or ineffective.
  • Four domains – planning and preparation, classroom environment, instruction, and professional responsibility – contribute to a professional practice rating of exemplary, accomplished, developing, or ineffective.
  • The local and state student growth metrics contribute to a student growth rating of high, expected, or low.

 

Table 1: PGES Structure and Sources of Evidence for Each Domain

Overall Performance Rating

(Exemplary, Accomplished,   Developing, Ineffective)

Professional Practice Rating

(Exemplary, Accomplished,   Developing, Ineffective)

Student   Growth Rating
(High, Expected, Low)

Planning   and Preparation

Classroom Environment

Instruction

Professional Responsibility

Student Growth

1) Pre and Post Conferences

2) Professional Growth Plans

3) Self Reflection

4) Lesson Plans

1) Observation

2) Student Voice Survey

3) Professional Growth Plans

4) Self Reflection

1) Observation

2) Student Voice Survey

3) Professional Growth Plans

4) Self Reflection

1) Pre and Post Conferences

2) Professional Growth Plans

3) Self Reflection

4) Lesson Plans

1) Local student growth goals

2) State student growth percentiles

Source: Kentucky Department of Education

What do the domains mean?

Student Growth

All Kentucky teachers will have “rigorous, locally-determined student growth goals, developed collaboratively between the teacher and evaluator.” Additionally, 4th – 8th grade English and math teachers will have a state growth measure based on student growth percentiles (change in an individual student’s performance over time) on state K-PREP tests.

Observations

Each district in Kentucky decides how many and what kinds of administrator observations will occur during a teacher’s summative cycle. These observations will be aligned with the Kentucky Framework for Teaching. Administrator observations are part of an educator’s overall professional practice rating. Teachers may also receive formative feedback from peer observations to help improve their practice.

Student Voice Survey

Third through 12th grade students provide formative feedback to teachers through an online survey, reporting on their classroom experiences including teaching practices and learning conditions. Student voice surveys are included in an educator’s overall professional practice rating.

Self Reflection and Professional Growth

Teachers self reflect on their instructional planning, lesson implementation, content knowledge, beliefs, and dispositions for the purpose of self-improvement. The goal of self-reflection is to improve teaching and learning through ongoing thinking on how professional practices impact student and teacher learning.

After doing a self-evaluation, teachers will decide on a professional growth goal, around which they will develop an action plan. To narrow their goal, teachers will answer three questions:

  1. What do I want to change about my instruction that will effectively impact student learning?
  2. What personal learning is necessary to make the change?
  3. What are the measures of success?

 

Carol Franks, an effectiveness coach with the Kentucky Department of Education, explained that the first question “really zeroes in about instruction that is going to impact students, the second identifies what teachers need to do to meet the goal, and the third is about what evidence teachers can use to show they have grown professionally.” The professional growth goal also incorporates students’ needs, feedback from observations, and supervisor input.

How will PGES be used?

The teacher’s PGES scores determine the next steps, including an improvement plan and the process for follow-up evaluation. The table below demonstrates:

Table 2: Improvement Plans Based on Teacher Student Growth
and Professional Practice Ratings

Student Growth Rating Professional Practice Rating Improvement Plan
Low Ineffective An up-to-12-month improvement plan   with goals determined by an evaluator, focus on low-performance areas and   another summative evaluation at the end of the plan
Low Developing A one-year directed plan with goals and activities   determined by the evaluator with input from the teacher, goals that focus on   the low performance/outcome areas, a formative review annually and a   summative review at the end of the plan
Low Accomplished or Exemplary A two-year self-directed plan with goals set by the   teacher with evaluator input, one goal must focus on the low outcome area and   an annual formative review
Expected or High Ineffective A one-year   directed plan with goals determined by the evaluator and activities   determined by the evaluator with input from the teacher, goals that focus on   the low performance/outcome areas, a formative review annually, and a   summative review at the end of the plan
Expected or High Developing A two-year self-directed plan with goals and activities   set by the teacher with evaluator input, goals must focus on the low   performance/outcome area and an annual formative review
Expected or High Exemplary A three-year   self-directed plan with goals set by the teacher with evaluator approval,   activities are directed by the teacher and implemented with colleagues, an   annual formative review and a summative review at the end of the third year

Source: KentuckyTeacher.org

By the 2015 – 2016 school year, the new evaluation system is intended to inform all personnel decision-making by schools, districts and the state, such as support for professional learning, additional compensation, raises, tenure, certification, and release decisions. The State will make approval of local evaluation systems contingent on integration of evaluations into personnel
decisions.

What’s next?

This is the first year every teacher will experience PGES. Through field tests, the process has been revised and refined. The next hurdle will be the development and implementation of improvement plans. Then, the mandate that districts use the information to inform personnel decisions in the 2015-16 year takes effect. District adaptation to that mandate could fundamentally change the way teachers are compensated and may inform professional development, hiring practices, and dismissal procedures.

*The research in this report was compiled by Colleen Maleski, a graduate student in education policy. Most of the information was compiled from the Kentucky Department of Education and KentuckyTeacher.org.

4 thoughts on “An Overview of PGES

  1. Pingback: Kentucky: A PGES Overview | Spears Strategy

  2. Pingback: Kentucky Education Report | PGES Skepticism

  3. Pingback: Kentucky Education Report | Why is Kentucky Losing New Teachers?

  4. Pingback: Kentucky Education Report | The PGES Student Growth Component

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>