Educator Effectiveness System

The Educator Effectiveness System (EES) is a comprehensive evaluation system that sets clear expectations for effective teaching, provides educators with quality feedback and support to improve their effectiveness with students, and informs professional development. Highly effective teachers can be identified for recognition and to serve as leaders to their colleagues.

​​​​​​​​Update for 2014-15​​

In School Year (SY) 2013-14, the EES was implemented statewide following a two-year pilot program that ended with a total of 81 schools. A review and improvement process was built into the first year of statewide implementation to inform design for SY 2014-15, with feedback from teachers, principals, administrators, and Complex Area and state staff.

Based on feedback and lessons learned, the Department is implementing 18 changes for SY2014-15. These changes are designed to SIMPLIFY the system to make it clearer and easier to understand, STREAMLINE its components to eliminate redundancies, and DIFFERENTIATE the approach for teachers based on performance and need to ensure administrators can spend more time with teachers who need and want it most. These changes will serve to improve the quality of the feedback and coaching teachers receive and reduce burden on teachers and administrators.

  • VIEW overview of SY 2014-15 changes
  • VIEW timeline of SY 2013-14 feedback, sources
  • VIEW our list of frequently asked questions

​​​​​​EES overview

To help students succeed in college and careers, it is imperative that the Department support our educators to become highly effective in their schools and classrooms. This means that administrators and teachers need feedback, coaching and data that inform them about how to improve their practice and make an impact. We are holding ourselves accountable at all levels of the organization for providing support and getting results for students. You can view the video below for a detailed overview, and/or read on for additional information.

​​

In accordance with Board of Education Policy 2055, the EES is centered on two equally weighted categories – Teacher Practice and Student Learning and Growth. Within those two categories, teachers receive feedback, support, and evaluation on four components:

  • Classroom Observations, using the Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching for classroom teachers, or Working Portfolios for non-classroom teachers
  • Core Professionalism, using the Tripod Student Survey and Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching
  • Student Growth, using Student Growth Percentiles (SGP) from the Hawaii Growth Model
  • Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) / School-System Improvement Objectives (SSIO), focusing on learning goals aligned with the Hawaii Common Core and integrating the data team process to monitor student progress

The weight of these measures in evaluating classroom and non-classroom teachers can be seen in this graphic:
The EES is differentiated for teachers based on performance and need to ensure administrators have the time to spend more time with the teachers that need and want it most.

TEACHER PRACTICE STUDENT LEARNING AND GROWTH

Classroom Teachers

Classroom Observation

Core Professionalism

Hawaii Growth Model

Student Learning Objective (SLO)

Highly Effective
Based on final rating in SY 2013-14

Teachers “carryover” their overall evaluation rating from the previous year. It is not required that teachers re-complete any of the components. Teachers can request observations for non-evaluative purposes and are expected to participate in SLOs as part of department, grade-level, or data teams as relevant for non-evaluative purposes. Teachers who display documented performance deficiencies may be moved into a regular rating cycle.

Effective
Based on final rating in SY 2013-14

1 or more observations, which may be scheduled at any time during the year

Option to carryover SY2013-14 rating of core professionalism OR provide additional evidence for SY2014-15

Median Student Growth Percentile (SGP)

1

Marginal/Unsatisfactory
Based on final rating in SY 2013-14

2 or more observations, with at least one observation in first semester

Evidence will be based on progress on principal-directed professional development plan

Median SGP

1

Beginning Teachers

2 or more observations, with at least one observation in first semester

Evidence will be based on progress on professional development plan

Not applicable

1
(Professional development plans will include building capacity around SLOs in this first learning year. New teacher mentors will support this effort.)

Non-Classroom Teachers

Working Portfolio

Core Professionalism

Hawaii Growth Model

SLO or School System Improvement Objective (SSIO)

Highly Effective
Based on final rating in SY 2013-14

Teachers “carryover” their overall evaluation rating from the previous year. It is not required that teachers re-complete any of the components. Teachers can request observations for non-evaluative purposes and are expected to participate in SLOs as part of department, grade-level, or data teams as relevant for non-evaluative purposes. Teachers who display documented performance deficiencies may be moved into a regular rating cycle.

Effective
Based on final rating in SY 2013-14

Rated on 5 components from Framework1 or HTSB2 standards via portfolio or observation.

Option to carryover SY2013-14 rating of core professionalism OR provide additional evidence for SY2014-15

Median SGP (not applicable to non-school level)

1

Marginal/Unsatisfactory
Based on final rating in SY 2013-14

Rated on 5 components from Framework1 or HTSB2 standards via portfolio or observation.

Evidence will be based on progress on principal-directed professional development plan

Median SGP (not applicable to non-school level)

1

Beginning Teachers

Rated on 5 components from Framework1 or HTSB2 standards via portfolio or observation.

Evidence will be based on progress on professional development plan

Not applicable

1
(Professional development plans will include building capacity around SLOs in this first learning year. New teacher mentors will support this effort.)

1 Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching
2 Hawaii Teacher Standards Board


More information about these components can be found in the Educator Effectiveness System manual​, which has been revised for SY 2014-15. The EES replaces the Department's former evaluation system, the Professional Evaluation Program for Teachers (PEP-T). The 2014-15 EES will inform pay increases slated for 2015-16. Questions relating to the teacher contract and pay should be directed to the Hawaii State Teachers Association.

Feedback groups

The Department established several formal mechanisms for gathering feedback to inform improvements to the EES. See a timeline of that feedback here.

  • Teacher Leader Workgroup (TLW): Since 2010, the Teacher Leader Workgroup has met regularly to inform EES design and implementation. In 2013, the TLW was expanded to over 118 people from all 15 complex areas and five subcommittees focused on Non-Classroom Teachers (NCT); Student Learning Objectives (SLO); Student Growth Percentile (SGP); Classroom Observations/Core Professionalism; and Student Survey. This group provided the following formal recommendations. They also teamed with the Hawaii State Teachers Association on a joint meeting in April 2014 to coalesce feedback on the components into this overview.
  • HSTA-HIDOE Joint Committee: Reviews the EES for continuous improvement of design and implementation. Per the Collective Bargaining Agreement, the HSTA-HIDOE Joint Committee consists of four HSTA and four Department members and provides formal recommendations to the Superintendent.
    Members: Terry Holck, Nanakuli-Waianae Complex Area; Shannon Kaaa, Fern Elementary School; Stacie Kunihisa, principal, Kanoelani Elementary School; Diane Mokuau, teacher, Molokai High School; Suzanne Mulcahy, Kailua-Kalaheo Complex Area Superintendent; Ronn Nozoe, Deputy Superintendent; RJ Rodriguez, HSTA; Stephen Schatz, Assistant Superintendent, Strategic Reform.

    Meeting notes and recommendations:
  • EES Technical Advisory Group (TAG): The TAG is comprised of national, regional, and local experts and provides recommendations on how to define technical to ensure EES fairly assesses the effectiveness of educators. Based on a review of existing Department policies and practices, data, and other state and district policies and practices, the TAG provides recommendations to the Joint Committee on possible EES design modifications for SY 2014-15.
    Members: Elena Diaz-Bilello (National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment); Chris Domaleski (National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment); Suzanne Mulcahy (Complex Area Superintendent, Kailua-Kalaheo); Ronn Nozoe (Deputy Superintendent); Tammie Picklesimer (EES Project Manager); Irene Pu‘uohau (Hawaii Government Employees Association); Raymond Rodriguez (Hawaii State Teachers Association); Richard Seder (Emergent Policy and Systems, Inc.); and Donald Young (University of Hawaii at Manoa).

    Meeting Agendas:February 2014, April 2014, June 2014

    Reports:
    • Recommendations to the Joint Committee from the EES Technical Advisory Group, April 3, 2014.
    • Recommendations to the Joint Committee from the EES Technical Advisory Group, May 15, 2014.
    • Growth and Assessment Transition: Evaluating Implications for the EES: Report.
  • EES Principal Working Group: On April 25, 48 principals participated in a workgroup meeting that was open to all principals. This report summarizes the recommendations and includes a link to the Google Document that includes the raw data and original comments submitted by participants during the meeting.

  • HGEA Unit 6: Hawaii Government Employees Association's Elected Board of Directors for Unit 6 met with the Department leadership and provided feedback on the Joint Committee’s recommendations for differentiating EES.

  • HIDOE-HSTA Joint Survey: The Department and the teachers union teamed up to gather teacher feedback on their experiences and opinions regarding the EES to help better understand its strengths and identify areas for improvement. Results were announced in April 2014.
Comprehensive Evaluation System for School Administrators

The EES equivalent for principals includes evaluation, mentoring and support to maximize principals' effectiveness with teachers and students.​

Contact Information

Tammie Picklesimer

Phone: 808-348-4102

Email: tammie_picklesimer@hawaiidoe.org

How do I...?

Go

View all FAQ's

Tweets