Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policy
The data and analysis on this page is from 2019. View and download the most recent policy data and analysis on Measures of Student Growth in Nevada from the State of the States 2022: Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies report.
The state should require instructional effectiveness to be the determinative criterion of any teacher evaluation. The bar for this goal was raised in 2017.
Impact of Student Growth: Nevada requires Student Learning Goals (SLGs)—district-level performance measures—to count for 20 percent of the total evaluation score for the 2017-2018 school year, and 40 percent beginning in the 2018-2019 school year. Student learning data must not be included in the teacher evaluation rating for a probationary teacher in his or her initial year of employment.
Nevada requires teachers to earn one of the three highest SLG rubric scores (two, three, or four) to be eligible for an overall rating of effective. To be eligible for an overall rating of highly effective, teachers must earn one of the two highest SLG rubric scores (three or four).
State's Role in Evaluation System: Nevada requires districts to develop their own teacher evaluation system consistent with the state's framework.
AB 447 (2015) 2017-2018 Protocol: http://www.doe.nv.gov/uploadedFiles/ndedoenvgov/content/Educator_Effectiveness/Educator_Develop_Support/NEPF/Tools_Protocols/NEPFTeacher_Admin_Protocolsrev.pdf
Ensure that teachers meet student growth goals to be rated overall effective.
Nevada should strengthen its policy and require that, in order to be rated overall effective, teachers must be rated effective for student growth. Specifically, teachers rated needs improvement for student growth should not be eligible to earn an overall rating of effective.
Nevada was helpful in providing NCTQ with the facts necessary for this analysis. The state also provided that federally reported statewide performance measures are no longer a required component of the student performance category. In addition, the board must establish by regulation the criteria for SLGs, which must measure growth against an objective academic standard and demonstrate at least one year of educational attainment. The department held a Public Workshop to establish these criteria on August 17, 2017.
Nevada further indicated that it will work with districts, the Teachers and Leaders Council, and other subject-matter experts to create a list of assessments that may be used by districts and schools to measure progress toward SLGs. District boards of trustees are required to ensure that SLGs measure student growth in accordance with the criteria established by the state board and must annually review the manner in which districts and schools implement the Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF). Lastly, the state board may establish regulations regarding the manner in which to include SLGs for certain categories of students (i.e., partial attendance, truancy, mobility).
7A: Measures of Student Growth
Many factors should be considered in formally evaluating a teacher; however, nothing is more important than effectiveness in the classroom. Value-added models are an important tool for measuring student achievement and school effectiveness. These models have the ability to measure individual students' learning gains, controlling for students' previous knowledge and background characteristics. While some research suggests value-added models are subject to bias and statistical limitations, rich data and strong controls can eliminate error and bias. In the area of teacher quality, examining student growth offers a fairer and potentially more meaningful way to evaluate a teacher's effectiveness than other methods schools use.
Unfortunately, districts have used many evaluation instruments, including some mandated by states, which are structured so that teachers can earn a satisfactory rating without any evidence that they are sufficiently advancing student learning in the classroom. Teacher evaluation instruments should include factors that combine both human judgment and objective measures of student learning.