2017 General Teacher Prep Programs Policy
The state should have a data system that contributes some of the evidence needed to assess teacher effectiveness. The bar for this goal was raised in 2017.
Teacher of Record: Indiana's evaluation policy defines teacher of record as the teacher whose primary responsibility is the instruction of students. However, this definition is not explicitly articulated in state policy.
Teacher Roster Verification: Indiana has a process in place for teacher roster verification. However, this process is not explicitly articulated in state policy.
Linking Student-level Data and Teacher Performance: Indiana has a statewide longitudinal data system, known as the Indiana Network of Knowledge. However, it does not appear to have the capacity to link student-level data to teacher performance.
Teacher Mobility Data: Indiana tracks teacher retention and attrition data by district and makes it publicly available.
Data Quality Campaign (2014 survey results) www.dataqualitycampaign.org Indiana Code 22-4.5-10-4 2015-16 Evaluation Ratings (ER) Data https://www.doe.in.gov/evaluations
Formalize a definition of teacher of record that can be used to provide evidence of teacher effectiveness.
Although Indiana appears to have a working definition for teacher of record, NCTQ strongly urges the state to incorporate this definition into articulated state policy; doing so will help ensure that data provided through the state data system are actionable and reliable.
Formalize a process for teacher roster verification.
Although Indiana appears to have a process in place for teacher roster verification, the state should make this process part of state policy. This is of particular importance for using the data system to provide evidence of teacher effectiveness.
Link student-level data to teacher effectiveness.
Indiana should ensure that it has a longitudinal student data system with the capacity to link student-level data to teacher performance, consistent with applicable privacy constraints. This will allow the state to identify whether certain groups of students are being systemically underserved by ineffective teachers.
Indiana was helpful in providing NCTQ with facts necessary for this analysis. The state also indicated that regarding teacher of record, it requires performance evaluations for all certificated employees, and that the applicable definition of teacher includes: a superintendent, principal, teacher, librarian, school counselor, and school psychologist.
Indiana further noted that it requires the use of individual growth model data from statewide assessments (calculated by the department) as the primary measure of student learning for applicable teachers—grades 4-8 English/language arts and mathematics teachers. For teachers of grade levels and subject areas not included in statewide assessments, the policy requires the use of assessments procured or developed by the school corporation for measures of student learning. Indiana utilizes the data collected from schools.
7E: Data Systems Needed for Evaluation
It is an inefficient use of resources for individual districts to build their own data systems for value-added analyses. States need to take the lead and provide districts with state-level data that can be used not only for the purpose of measuring teacher effectiveness, but also to track teacher mobility across the state. As such, multiple years of data are necessary to enable meaningful determinations of teacher effectiveness and to identify staffing trends.
Teacher effectiveness analysis, including teachers' value-added measures, requires both student and teacher identifiers and the ability to match test records over time. Such data are useful not just for teacher evaluation, but also to measure overall school performance and the performance of teacher preparation programs.
States need to have some advanced elements in place in order to apply data from the state data system fairly and accurately to teacher evaluations. Each state must have a clear definition of "teacher of record" that connects teachers to the students they actually instruct and not just students who may be in a teacher's homeroom or for whom the teacher performs administrative but not instructional duties. There should also be in place a process for roster verification, ideally occurring multiple times a year, to ensure that students and teachers are accurately matched. Systems should also have the ability to connect multiple educators to a single student. While states may establish different business rules for such situations, what is important is that the mechanism exists, in recognition of the many possible permutations of student and teacher assignments.
Additional elements are needed to use data to assess teacher supply and demand. For example, states should include in their data systems means of tracking when teachers leave schools or districts, as well as when they re-enter new ones, and should make these data publicly available. These data can support the state's effort to build a cohesive picture of the state's teacher labor market and workforce needs.