State Accountability Systems and the Policies that Support Them

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Alabama take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Alabama’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Alabama has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Alaska take the Performance Evaluation for Alaska’s Schools (PEAKS) assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Alaska’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 5% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Alaska changed its teacher dismissal policies in 2016 to match its new evaluation system, where student data must be part of a teacher’s effectiveness rating.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Arizona take Arizona's Measurement of Educational Readiness to Inform Teaching (AzMERIT).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Arizona’s evaluation of schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Instead of including chronic absenteeism, Arizona develops acceleration indicators for students exceeding growth objectives.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Arizona revamped its dismissal policies for teachers in 2017 and removed proficiency from these decisions.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system. http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/What_is_the_ESSA_School_Index.pdf

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

Arkansas students in grades 9 and 10 take the ACT Aspire Early High School Assessment. Those with Significant Cognitive Disabilities take the Dynamic Learning Maps assessment. The ACT is offered to all 11th-grade students.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of the Arkansas’s School Index for elementary and middle schools.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 35% of Arkansas’s School Index for high schools. http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/What_is_the_ESSA_School_Index.pdf

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in a composite measure for School Quality and Student Success (SQSS) that also includes reading at grade level, GPA, science achievement, science growth, computer science credits, ACT composite, ACT benchmark readiness, AP/IB/Concurrent, and community learning service.

 

http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/School_Quality_and_Student_Success_Components_by_Grade_Span_062618.pdf

 

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Arkansas uses their Teacher Excellence and Support System (TESS) to provide support to educators. Ineffective teachers are considered unsatisfactory and school districts have the authority to make the determination for recommendation for termination, after exhausting intensive support plan.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

California is 1 of 14 states who have identified themselves to the Council of Chief State School Officers using a non-summative rating for their accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All 11th-grade students in California take the Smarter Balanced assessment or the California Alternate Assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

California applies equal weight to growth and proficiency in its evaluation of schools, allowing each measure to standalone in its dashboard configuration. However, it is important to note, that California does not use the percent of students who are proficient or above in its evaluation of schools. Rather, the scale scores of all students are used to calculate an average scale score for the school and each student group. The results show, on average, the needed improvement to bring the average student score to proficiency, or the extent to which the average student score exceeds proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is a part of its accountability system as one of the multiple measures reported in the California School Dashboard.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

California has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies and has never tied them to student achievement.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

Colorado is using SAT for high school achievement.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 60% in elementary and middle schools and 40% of high schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

For high schools, 15% of the points come from dropout rate. For elementary and middle schools, 5% of the points come from change in chronic absenteeism, when that data become available (this is a new collection for Colorado).

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Colorado has not changed its laws related to grounds for dismissal.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students take the Connecticut Academic Performance Test.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Proficiency in math and ELA accounts for 30% (300/1000 points) of its overall evaluation of schools.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% (100/1000 points) of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Connecticut uses an overall evaluation score for teacher dismissals, but this no longer includes test scores as of 2017.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Delaware take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

A composite measure of proficiency and growth (the state does not specify the percentage of each) in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Delaware’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is part of the 35% of non-academic measures in the state’s accountability system, but the state does not specify how much each measure is weighted.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state continues to use achievement tests in decision-making processes for teacher dismissal.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in the District of Columbia take the PARCC, a consortia assessment aligned to the Common Core State Standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of DC’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 7.5% of the DC’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

DC maintains that teacher ineffectiveness is grounds for dismissal, even though it has shifted towards more growth than proficiency measures.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Florida take Florida Standards Assessments (FSA) end-of-course assessments aligned to state standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 400/700 points of Florida’s evaluation of elementary schools and 400/900 points for middle schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

For its additional measures, Florida focused on science and social studies achievement and acceleration without considering chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Florida has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2011 by only offering teachers annual contracts.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students participate in the Georgia Milestones Assessment System or Georgia Alternate Assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 31.5% of Georgia’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 6.67% of the state’s evaluation of school performance at the elementary and middle school levels and 3% at the high school level.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Georgia has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015, where low growth and proficiency scores can lead to dismissal. Georgia also has maintained a focus on gap closure with historically disadvantaged groups.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Hawaii take the Smarter Balanced test, a consortia assessment aligned with the Common Core State Standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Hawaii uses proficiency measures only and does not look at growth measures in any of their accountability systems, despite polling evidence that suggest growth measures are more fair in the minds of the general public.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

In 2016, Hawaii stopped using student proficiency as a measure of teacher performance and as grounds for dismissal, and instead only uses them for school performance.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

When identifying comprehensive and targeted support and improvement schools as described above, the school quality indicator will be weighted at 10% for all schools, with the remaining indicators weighted evenly across the remaining 90%.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Idaho take the Idaho Standards Achievement Tests (ISAT). 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Idaho uses both growth and proficiency in our statewide accountability system and the two are weighted equally.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Idaho uses college-and-career readiness indicators (such as Advanced Placement participation) instead of focusing on chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Idaho has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Illinois take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Illinois’s evaluation of schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 0-7.5% of Illinois’s school accountability weighting, depending upon a fine arts weighting.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Illinois has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students take the ILEARN assessment beginning in the 2018-2019 school year.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 42.5% of Indiana’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 5% of the state’s evaluation of school performance through its definition of a “model attendee.”

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Indiana has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

High school students in grades 9-11 in Iowa take the Iowa State Assessment for Student Progress (ISASP).

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 47% of Iowa’s evaluation of elementary/middle schools and 40% for high schools.

 

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state uses a postsecondary readiness indicator as well as a Conditions for Learning Survey and does not mention chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Iowa has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Kansas participated in the Kansas Assessment Program (KAP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Kansas focuses on proficiency and does not prioritize growth; rather, it relies on interim goals set by the state.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not appear in its approved ESSA plan.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Kansas has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Kentucky has multiple indicators in the new accountability system.  In 2018, the indicators include Proficiency, Separate Academic and Growth for elementary and middle schools and Proficiency, Transition Readiness and Graduation Rate for high schools. There is no single “weight” for any indicator; rather, the influence of each indicator varies by level in non-linear ways. Kentucky favors this profile approach because it allows very clear depiction of what is valued. Accountability standards are set by a panel using a profile approach with cut scores on each indicator.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

For 2018, all Kentucky 11th-grade students were assessed with the ACT, which is used for accountability in reading and mathematics. All high school students in Kentucky also take the Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress (K-PREP) in writing.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth is one indicator for elementary and middle school and its relative weight is outlined in regulation and implemented through the accountability standard setting process.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is a measure in the Opportunity and Access indicator of the state’s accountability system for schools but will not be operational in the accountability system until the 2018-19 school year.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Senate Bill 1 reconfigured the state’s rating and accountability system, but it did not substantively change how teachers were dismissed or not given tenure.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Louisiana take LEAP 2025, the state’s assessments for English I, English II, Algebra I, Geometry, U.S. History, and Biology.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Louisiana’s evaluation of elementary/middle schools and 12.5% for high schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not appear in the state’s accountability system; instead, there is a focus on science and social studies achievement as well as enrollment in advanced coursework for college- and career-readiness. However, Louisiana reports on chronic absenteeism on its school report cards.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

Louisiana has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system. The accountability indicators are applied to each student population within the applicable grade span (elementary/middle or HS) where there are more than 10 students.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Maine take the SAT instead of a test aligned to the state’s standards.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 38% of Maine’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism appears as one of the state’s accountability measures in its ESSA plan and was previously framed as consistent attendance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Maine has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Maryland take the PARCC assessment, though this is being phased out in the 2018-2019 school year.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

The state uses the percentage of students at and exceeding expectations to account for 20% of its schools’ summative scores.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 15% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Maryland has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Massachusetts take the MCAS 2.0.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Massachusetts weights achievement/growth at 3:1 in its accountability system. The exact percentage weight varies depending on whether the school is a high school or not and whether it has an English Learner subgroup. See http://www.doe.mass.edu/accountability/accountability-summary.docx

 

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is specified within the commonwealth’s non-academic measures.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Though student learning, growth, and achievement is no longer a standalone rating, Massachusetts has consistently tied teacher dismissal to effectiveness ratings, though no weights are applied to these decisions.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Michigan take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 38% of Michigan’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not figure into the state’s evaluation of school performance.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Michigan has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Minnesota does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Minnesota take the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA).

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Minnesota does not give any preference to growth or proficiency in its accountability systems.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

“Consistent attendance rates” are included in the accountability system for schools, but weights are not specified.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Minnesota has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Mississippi take the Mississippi Academic Assessment Program (MAAP) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 29% of Mississippi’s evaluation of schools. Additionally, growth of students performing in the lowest quartile also accounts for 29% of points for elementary/middle schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Missouri take the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30-37.5% of Missouri’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Montana take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Montana does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Nebraska’s unique accountability system, AQuESTT, does not prescribe weights to its indicators, ensuring schools cannot be ranked. Instead, a system of classification adjustments allows for the rating of schools into four categories—Excellent, Great, Good, and Needs Improvement.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Nebraska take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Nebraska does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency. For federal designation of schools for Comprehensive Support and Improvement and Targeted Support and Improvement, Nebraska uses three measures of student progress: Non-proficiency (reduction in the percentage of students who are not proficient), Growth (individual student-level growth from year to year), and Improvement (three-year trend of score improvement).

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Nebraska has included chronic absenteeism as both an indicator for classification and designation of schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Nevada take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of Nevada’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Nevada has increasingly de-emphasized student achievement in teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Hampshire take the SAT.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

New Hampshire does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Jersey take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of New Jersey’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Mexico take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 42% of New Mexico’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance in combination with school survey results.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

New York uses a Performance Index (PI) system that allows weights to vary accordingly depending on school type, grade level, subject, etc.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New York take the Regents Exams.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

In New York, the relative weight of growth and proficiency is related to the state’s long-term goals.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in the state’s evaluation of school performance, which has differential weights depending on state goals and performance indicators.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

New York has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

North Carolina uses an A-F rating system where 20% of weights are student growth, with the remaining factors comprising 80% of the summative score.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in North Carolina take the North Carolina end-of-grade assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of North Carolina’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

North Carolina de-emphasized student growth scores in its 2016 revision to its teacher evaluation systems.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

North Dakota high school students are assessed in math and ELA using the North Dakota State Assessment, which is produced by AIR.  This year, through the flexibility provided with ESSA, districts were offered the option to use the ACT as its high school assessment, in lieu of the grade 10 NDSA.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30% of North Dakota’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Ohio take the Ohio State Tests end-of-course assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of Ohio’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is part of the state’s 15% Prepared for Success metric in evaluating schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Oklahoma take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 33% of Oklahoma’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 11% of the state’s evaluation of schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

Ineffective growth is no longer grounds for dismissal in Oklahoma, whereas it was prior to a legislation change in 2016.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Oregon take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 44% of Oregon’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 11% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Pennsylvania is shifting to a dashboard system much like California’s where weights are not specified and there are no summative grades.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Pennsylvania take the Keystone exams.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

In its new dashboard model, Pennsylvania does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

In shifting to a dashboard model of school accountability, Pennsylvania is dramatically shifting its focus from previous models where growth and proficiency determined teacher dismissal.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Rhode Island does not specify exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Rhode Island take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Schools in Rhode Island receive a 1-5 star rating, with 8 points representing proficiency, and a maximum of 6 points representing growth. The maximum number of points possible varies by year and two-year averages.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in South Carolina participate in the End-of-Course Examination Program (EOCEP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 35% of South Carolina’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in South Dakota take the Smarter Balanced assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of South Dakota’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Tennessee take the TNReady end-of-course assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30% of Tennessee’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Texas take the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Texas does not specify the relative weights of proficiency and growth in its evaluation system.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Utah take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Utah’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Vermont specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Vermont take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Vermont’s assessment of schools is derived from a combination of growth and proficiency—50% growth, and 50% proficiency.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Virginia does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Virginia take the Standards of Learning (SOL) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Virginia does not specify weights or the extent to which growth versus proficiency in its emphasized in its accountability system.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in the state’s accountability indicators, though weights are not specified.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Washington take Smarter Balanced. Washington adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) as its state K-12 learning standards. Smarter Balanced is aligned to the CCSS.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Washington’s evaluation of schools in elementary and middle schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Washington’s School Quality and Student Success Indicator (SQSS) is weighted 5% in elementary and middle schools and 15% in high schools.  Regular attendance is one of three measures that comprise the SQSS indicator of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Weights are equally distributed and are a function of the number of measures attributed to respective programmatic levels (i.e., elementary/middle and high schools). No summative score is calculated to determine overall school performance.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All grade 11 high school students in West Virginia take the SAT School Day assessment. Alignment to state standards is under review.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Progress in math and ELA accounts for approximately 22% of West Virginia’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators. The measure is operationalized from an asset-based perspective (i.e., percent of student present for 90% or more of instructions days) rather than from a deficit-based perspective (i.e., percent of student absent for 10% or more of instructions days).

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Wisconsin take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 37.5% of Wisconsin’s evaluation of schools. More specifically, growth and achievement outcomes, when both available for a school, are equally weighted in Wisconsin’s ESSA accountability system.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Wisconsin’s measure of School Quality and Student Success is a chronic absenteeism measure. Specifically, schools are scored based on the percentage of students who are not chronically absent.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Wyoming take Wyoming Test of Proficiency and Progress (WY-TOPP) as well as the ACT. This is a model practice, ensuring assessment alignment with both state standards and college readiness.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Wyoming’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Alabama take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Alabama’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Alabama has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Alaska take the Performance Evaluation for Alaska’s Schools (PEAKS) assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Alaska’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 5% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Alaska changed its teacher dismissal policies in 2016 to match its new evaluation system, where student data must be part of a teacher’s effectiveness rating.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Arizona take Arizona's Measurement of Educational Readiness to Inform Teaching (AzMERIT).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Arizona’s evaluation of schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Instead of including chronic absenteeism, Arizona develops acceleration indicators for students exceeding growth objectives.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Arizona revamped its dismissal policies for teachers in 2017 and removed proficiency from these decisions.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system. http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/What_is_the_ESSA_School_Index.pdf

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

Arkansas students in grades 9 and 10 take the ACT Aspire Early High School Assessment. Those with Significant Cognitive Disabilities take the Dynamic Learning Maps assessment. The ACT is offered to all 11th-grade students.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of the Arkansas’s School Index for elementary and middle schools.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 35% of Arkansas’s School Index for high schools. http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/What_is_the_ESSA_School_Index.pdf

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in a composite measure for School Quality and Student Success (SQSS) that also includes reading at grade level, GPA, science achievement, science growth, computer science credits, ACT composite, ACT benchmark readiness, AP/IB/Concurrent, and community learning service.

 

http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/School_Quality_and_Student_Success_Components_by_Grade_Span_062618.pdf

 

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Arkansas uses their Teacher Excellence and Support System (TESS) to provide support to educators. Ineffective teachers are considered unsatisfactory and school districts have the authority to make the determination for recommendation for termination, after exhausting intensive support plan.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

California is 1 of 14 states who have identified themselves to the Council of Chief State School Officers using a non-summative rating for their accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All 11th-grade students in California take the Smarter Balanced assessment or the California Alternate Assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

California applies equal weight to growth and proficiency in its evaluation of schools, allowing each measure to standalone in its dashboard configuration. However, it is important to note, that California does not use the percent of students who are proficient or above in its evaluation of schools. Rather, the scale scores of all students are used to calculate an average scale score for the school and each student group. The results show, on average, the needed improvement to bring the average student score to proficiency, or the extent to which the average student score exceeds proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is a part of its accountability system as one of the multiple measures reported in the California School Dashboard.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

California has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies and has never tied them to student achievement.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

Colorado is using SAT for high school achievement.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 60% in elementary and middle schools and 40% of high schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

For high schools, 15% of the points come from dropout rate. For elementary and middle schools, 5% of the points come from change in chronic absenteeism, when that data become available (this is a new collection for Colorado).

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Colorado has not changed its laws related to grounds for dismissal.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students take the Connecticut Academic Performance Test.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Proficiency in math and ELA accounts for 30% (300/1000 points) of its overall evaluation of schools.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% (100/1000 points) of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Connecticut uses an overall evaluation score for teacher dismissals, but this no longer includes test scores as of 2017.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Delaware take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

A composite measure of proficiency and growth (the state does not specify the percentage of each) in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Delaware’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is part of the 35% of non-academic measures in the state’s accountability system, but the state does not specify how much each measure is weighted.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state continues to use achievement tests in decision-making processes for teacher dismissal.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in the District of Columbia take the PARCC, a consortia assessment aligned to the Common Core State Standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of DC’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 7.5% of the DC’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

DC maintains that teacher ineffectiveness is grounds for dismissal, even though it has shifted towards more growth than proficiency measures.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Florida take Florida Standards Assessments (FSA) end-of-course assessments aligned to state standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 400/700 points of Florida’s evaluation of elementary schools and 400/900 points for middle schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

For its additional measures, Florida focused on science and social studies achievement and acceleration without considering chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Florida has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2011 by only offering teachers annual contracts.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students participate in the Georgia Milestones Assessment System or Georgia Alternate Assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 31.5% of Georgia’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 6.67% of the state’s evaluation of school performance at the elementary and middle school levels and 3% at the high school level.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Georgia has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015, where low growth and proficiency scores can lead to dismissal. Georgia also has maintained a focus on gap closure with historically disadvantaged groups.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Hawaii take the Smarter Balanced test, a consortia assessment aligned with the Common Core State Standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Hawaii uses proficiency measures only and does not look at growth measures in any of their accountability systems, despite polling evidence that suggest growth measures are more fair in the minds of the general public.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

In 2016, Hawaii stopped using student proficiency as a measure of teacher performance and as grounds for dismissal, and instead only uses them for school performance.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

When identifying comprehensive and targeted support and improvement schools as described above, the school quality indicator will be weighted at 10% for all schools, with the remaining indicators weighted evenly across the remaining 90%.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Idaho take the Idaho Standards Achievement Tests (ISAT). 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Idaho uses both growth and proficiency in our statewide accountability system and the two are weighted equally.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Idaho uses college-and-career readiness indicators (such as Advanced Placement participation) instead of focusing on chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Idaho has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Illinois take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Illinois’s evaluation of schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 0-7.5% of Illinois’s school accountability weighting, depending upon a fine arts weighting.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Illinois has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students take the ILEARN assessment beginning in the 2018-2019 school year.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 42.5% of Indiana’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 5% of the state’s evaluation of school performance through its definition of a “model attendee.”

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Indiana has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

High school students in grades 9-11 in Iowa take the Iowa State Assessment for Student Progress (ISASP).

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 47% of Iowa’s evaluation of elementary/middle schools and 40% for high schools.

 

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state uses a postsecondary readiness indicator as well as a Conditions for Learning Survey and does not mention chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Iowa has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Kansas participated in the Kansas Assessment Program (KAP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Kansas focuses on proficiency and does not prioritize growth; rather, it relies on interim goals set by the state.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not appear in its approved ESSA plan.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Kansas has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Kentucky has multiple indicators in the new accountability system.  In 2018, the indicators include Proficiency, Separate Academic and Growth for elementary and middle schools and Proficiency, Transition Readiness and Graduation Rate for high schools. There is no single “weight” for any indicator; rather, the influence of each indicator varies by level in non-linear ways. Kentucky favors this profile approach because it allows very clear depiction of what is valued. Accountability standards are set by a panel using a profile approach with cut scores on each indicator.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

For 2018, all Kentucky 11th-grade students were assessed with the ACT, which is used for accountability in reading and mathematics. All high school students in Kentucky also take the Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress (K-PREP) in writing.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth is one indicator for elementary and middle school and its relative weight is outlined in regulation and implemented through the accountability standard setting process.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is a measure in the Opportunity and Access indicator of the state’s accountability system for schools but will not be operational in the accountability system until the 2018-19 school year.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Senate Bill 1 reconfigured the state’s rating and accountability system, but it did not substantively change how teachers were dismissed or not given tenure.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Louisiana take LEAP 2025, the state’s assessments for English I, English II, Algebra I, Geometry, U.S. History, and Biology.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Louisiana’s evaluation of elementary/middle schools and 12.5% for high schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not appear in the state’s accountability system; instead, there is a focus on science and social studies achievement as well as enrollment in advanced coursework for college- and career-readiness. However, Louisiana reports on chronic absenteeism on its school report cards.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

Louisiana has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system. The accountability indicators are applied to each student population within the applicable grade span (elementary/middle or HS) where there are more than 10 students.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Maine take the SAT instead of a test aligned to the state’s standards.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 38% of Maine’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism appears as one of the state’s accountability measures in its ESSA plan and was previously framed as consistent attendance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Maine has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Maryland take the PARCC assessment, though this is being phased out in the 2018-2019 school year.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

The state uses the percentage of students at and exceeding expectations to account for 20% of its schools’ summative scores.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 15% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Maryland has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Massachusetts take the MCAS 2.0.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Massachusetts weights achievement/growth at 3:1 in its accountability system. The exact percentage weight varies depending on whether the school is a high school or not and whether it has an English Learner subgroup. See http://www.doe.mass.edu/accountability/accountability-summary.docx

 

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is specified within the commonwealth’s non-academic measures.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Though student learning, growth, and achievement is no longer a standalone rating, Massachusetts has consistently tied teacher dismissal to effectiveness ratings, though no weights are applied to these decisions.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Michigan take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 38% of Michigan’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not figure into the state’s evaluation of school performance.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Michigan has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Minnesota does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Minnesota take the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA).

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Minnesota does not give any preference to growth or proficiency in its accountability systems.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

“Consistent attendance rates” are included in the accountability system for schools, but weights are not specified.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Minnesota has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Mississippi take the Mississippi Academic Assessment Program (MAAP) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 29% of Mississippi’s evaluation of schools. Additionally, growth of students performing in the lowest quartile also accounts for 29% of points for elementary/middle schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Missouri take the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30-37.5% of Missouri’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Montana take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Montana does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Nebraska’s unique accountability system, AQuESTT, does not prescribe weights to its indicators, ensuring schools cannot be ranked. Instead, a system of classification adjustments allows for the rating of schools into four categories—Excellent, Great, Good, and Needs Improvement.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Nebraska take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Nebraska does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency. For federal designation of schools for Comprehensive Support and Improvement and Targeted Support and Improvement, Nebraska uses three measures of student progress: Non-proficiency (reduction in the percentage of students who are not proficient), Growth (individual student-level growth from year to year), and Improvement (three-year trend of score improvement).

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Nebraska has included chronic absenteeism as both an indicator for classification and designation of schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Nevada take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of Nevada’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Nevada has increasingly de-emphasized student achievement in teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Hampshire take the SAT.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

New Hampshire does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Jersey take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of New Jersey’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Mexico take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 42% of New Mexico’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance in combination with school survey results.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

New York uses a Performance Index (PI) system that allows weights to vary accordingly depending on school type, grade level, subject, etc.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New York take the Regents Exams.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

In New York, the relative weight of growth and proficiency is related to the state’s long-term goals.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in the state’s evaluation of school performance, which has differential weights depending on state goals and performance indicators.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

New York has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

North Carolina uses an A-F rating system where 20% of weights are student growth, with the remaining factors comprising 80% of the summative score.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in North Carolina take the North Carolina end-of-grade assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of North Carolina’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

North Carolina de-emphasized student growth scores in its 2016 revision to its teacher evaluation systems.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

North Dakota high school students are assessed in math and ELA using the North Dakota State Assessment, which is produced by AIR.  This year, through the flexibility provided with ESSA, districts were offered the option to use the ACT as its high school assessment, in lieu of the grade 10 NDSA.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30% of North Dakota’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Ohio take the Ohio State Tests end-of-course assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of Ohio’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is part of the state’s 15% Prepared for Success metric in evaluating schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Oklahoma take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 33% of Oklahoma’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 11% of the state’s evaluation of schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

Ineffective growth is no longer grounds for dismissal in Oklahoma, whereas it was prior to a legislation change in 2016.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Oregon take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 44% of Oregon’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 11% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Pennsylvania is shifting to a dashboard system much like California’s where weights are not specified and there are no summative grades.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Pennsylvania take the Keystone exams.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

In its new dashboard model, Pennsylvania does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

In shifting to a dashboard model of school accountability, Pennsylvania is dramatically shifting its focus from previous models where growth and proficiency determined teacher dismissal.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Rhode Island does not specify exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Rhode Island take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Schools in Rhode Island receive a 1-5 star rating, with 8 points representing proficiency, and a maximum of 6 points representing growth. The maximum number of points possible varies by year and two-year averages.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in South Carolina participate in the End-of-Course Examination Program (EOCEP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 35% of South Carolina’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in South Dakota take the Smarter Balanced assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of South Dakota’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Tennessee take the TNReady end-of-course assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30% of Tennessee’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Texas take the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Texas does not specify the relative weights of proficiency and growth in its evaluation system.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Utah take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Utah’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Vermont specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Vermont take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Vermont’s assessment of schools is derived from a combination of growth and proficiency—50% growth, and 50% proficiency.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Virginia does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Virginia take the Standards of Learning (SOL) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Virginia does not specify weights or the extent to which growth versus proficiency in its emphasized in its accountability system.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in the state’s accountability indicators, though weights are not specified.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Washington take Smarter Balanced. Washington adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) as its state K-12 learning standards. Smarter Balanced is aligned to the CCSS.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Washington’s evaluation of schools in elementary and middle schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Washington’s School Quality and Student Success Indicator (SQSS) is weighted 5% in elementary and middle schools and 15% in high schools.  Regular attendance is one of three measures that comprise the SQSS indicator of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Weights are equally distributed and are a function of the number of measures attributed to respective programmatic levels (i.e., elementary/middle and high schools). No summative score is calculated to determine overall school performance.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All grade 11 high school students in West Virginia take the SAT School Day assessment. Alignment to state standards is under review.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Progress in math and ELA accounts for approximately 22% of West Virginia’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators. The measure is operationalized from an asset-based perspective (i.e., percent of student present for 90% or more of instructions days) rather than from a deficit-based perspective (i.e., percent of student absent for 10% or more of instructions days).

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Wisconsin take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 37.5% of Wisconsin’s evaluation of schools. More specifically, growth and achievement outcomes, when both available for a school, are equally weighted in Wisconsin’s ESSA accountability system.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Wisconsin’s measure of School Quality and Student Success is a chronic absenteeism measure. Specifically, schools are scored based on the percentage of students who are not chronically absent.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Wyoming take Wyoming Test of Proficiency and Progress (WY-TOPP) as well as the ACT. This is a model practice, ensuring assessment alignment with both state standards and college readiness.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Wyoming’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Alabama take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Alabama’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Alabama has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Alaska take the Performance Evaluation for Alaska’s Schools (PEAKS) assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Alaska’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 5% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Alaska changed its teacher dismissal policies in 2016 to match its new evaluation system, where student data must be part of a teacher’s effectiveness rating.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Arizona take Arizona's Measurement of Educational Readiness to Inform Teaching (AzMERIT).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Arizona’s evaluation of schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Instead of including chronic absenteeism, Arizona develops acceleration indicators for students exceeding growth objectives.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Arizona revamped its dismissal policies for teachers in 2017 and removed proficiency from these decisions.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system. http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/What_is_the_ESSA_School_Index.pdf

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

Arkansas students in grades 9 and 10 take the ACT Aspire Early High School Assessment. Those with Significant Cognitive Disabilities take the Dynamic Learning Maps assessment. The ACT is offered to all 11th-grade students.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of the Arkansas’s School Index for elementary and middle schools.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 35% of Arkansas’s School Index for high schools. http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/What_is_the_ESSA_School_Index.pdf

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in a composite measure for School Quality and Student Success (SQSS) that also includes reading at grade level, GPA, science achievement, science growth, computer science credits, ACT composite, ACT benchmark readiness, AP/IB/Concurrent, and community learning service.

 

http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/ESEA/Documents_to_Share/School_Quality_and_Student_Success_Components_by_Grade_Span_062618.pdf

 

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Arkansas uses their Teacher Excellence and Support System (TESS) to provide support to educators. Ineffective teachers are considered unsatisfactory and school districts have the authority to make the determination for recommendation for termination, after exhausting intensive support plan.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

California is 1 of 14 states who have identified themselves to the Council of Chief State School Officers using a non-summative rating for their accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All 11th-grade students in California take the Smarter Balanced assessment or the California Alternate Assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

California applies equal weight to growth and proficiency in its evaluation of schools, allowing each measure to standalone in its dashboard configuration. However, it is important to note, that California does not use the percent of students who are proficient or above in its evaluation of schools. Rather, the scale scores of all students are used to calculate an average scale score for the school and each student group. The results show, on average, the needed improvement to bring the average student score to proficiency, or the extent to which the average student score exceeds proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is a part of its accountability system as one of the multiple measures reported in the California School Dashboard.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

California has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies and has never tied them to student achievement.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

Colorado is using SAT for high school achievement.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 60% in elementary and middle schools and 40% of high schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

For high schools, 15% of the points come from dropout rate. For elementary and middle schools, 5% of the points come from change in chronic absenteeism, when that data become available (this is a new collection for Colorado).

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Colorado has not changed its laws related to grounds for dismissal.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students take the Connecticut Academic Performance Test.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Proficiency in math and ELA accounts for 30% (300/1000 points) of its overall evaluation of schools.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% (100/1000 points) of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Connecticut uses an overall evaluation score for teacher dismissals, but this no longer includes test scores as of 2017.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Delaware take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

A composite measure of proficiency and growth (the state does not specify the percentage of each) in math and ELA accounts for 40% of Delaware’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is part of the 35% of non-academic measures in the state’s accountability system, but the state does not specify how much each measure is weighted.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state continues to use achievement tests in decision-making processes for teacher dismissal.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in the District of Columbia take the PARCC, a consortia assessment aligned to the Common Core State Standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of DC’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 7.5% of the DC’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

DC maintains that teacher ineffectiveness is grounds for dismissal, even though it has shifted towards more growth than proficiency measures.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Florida take Florida Standards Assessments (FSA) end-of-course assessments aligned to state standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 400/700 points of Florida’s evaluation of elementary schools and 400/900 points for middle schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

For its additional measures, Florida focused on science and social studies achievement and acceleration without considering chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Florida has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2011 by only offering teachers annual contracts.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students participate in the Georgia Milestones Assessment System or Georgia Alternate Assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 31.5% of Georgia’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 6.67% of the state’s evaluation of school performance at the elementary and middle school levels and 3% at the high school level.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Georgia has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015, where low growth and proficiency scores can lead to dismissal. Georgia also has maintained a focus on gap closure with historically disadvantaged groups.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Hawaii take the Smarter Balanced test, a consortia assessment aligned with the Common Core State Standards.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Hawaii uses proficiency measures only and does not look at growth measures in any of their accountability systems, despite polling evidence that suggest growth measures are more fair in the minds of the general public.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

In 2016, Hawaii stopped using student proficiency as a measure of teacher performance and as grounds for dismissal, and instead only uses them for school performance.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

When identifying comprehensive and targeted support and improvement schools as described above, the school quality indicator will be weighted at 10% for all schools, with the remaining indicators weighted evenly across the remaining 90%.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Idaho take the Idaho Standards Achievement Tests (ISAT). 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Idaho uses both growth and proficiency in our statewide accountability system and the two are weighted equally.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Idaho uses college-and-career readiness indicators (such as Advanced Placement participation) instead of focusing on chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Idaho has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Illinois take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Illinois’s evaluation of schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 0-7.5% of Illinois’s school accountability weighting, depending upon a fine arts weighting.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Illinois has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students take the ILEARN assessment beginning in the 2018-2019 school year.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 42.5% of Indiana’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 5% of the state’s evaluation of school performance through its definition of a “model attendee.”

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Indiana has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

High school students in grades 9-11 in Iowa take the Iowa State Assessment for Student Progress (ISASP).

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 47% of Iowa’s evaluation of elementary/middle schools and 40% for high schools.

 

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state uses a postsecondary readiness indicator as well as a Conditions for Learning Survey and does not mention chronic absenteeism.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Iowa has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Kansas participated in the Kansas Assessment Program (KAP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Kansas focuses on proficiency and does not prioritize growth; rather, it relies on interim goals set by the state.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not appear in its approved ESSA plan.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Kansas has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Kentucky has multiple indicators in the new accountability system.  In 2018, the indicators include Proficiency, Separate Academic and Growth for elementary and middle schools and Proficiency, Transition Readiness and Graduation Rate for high schools. There is no single “weight” for any indicator; rather, the influence of each indicator varies by level in non-linear ways. Kentucky favors this profile approach because it allows very clear depiction of what is valued. Accountability standards are set by a panel using a profile approach with cut scores on each indicator.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

For 2018, all Kentucky 11th-grade students were assessed with the ACT, which is used for accountability in reading and mathematics. All high school students in Kentucky also take the Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress (K-PREP) in writing.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth is one indicator for elementary and middle school and its relative weight is outlined in regulation and implemented through the accountability standard setting process.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is a measure in the Opportunity and Access indicator of the state’s accountability system for schools but will not be operational in the accountability system until the 2018-19 school year.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Senate Bill 1 reconfigured the state’s rating and accountability system, but it did not substantively change how teachers were dismissed or not given tenure.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Louisiana take LEAP 2025, the state’s assessments for English I, English II, Algebra I, Geometry, U.S. History, and Biology.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Louisiana’s evaluation of elementary/middle schools and 12.5% for high schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not appear in the state’s accountability system; instead, there is a focus on science and social studies achievement as well as enrollment in advanced coursework for college- and career-readiness. However, Louisiana reports on chronic absenteeism on its school report cards.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

Louisiana has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system. The accountability indicators are applied to each student population within the applicable grade span (elementary/middle or HS) where there are more than 10 students.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Maine take the SAT instead of a test aligned to the state’s standards.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 38% of Maine’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism appears as one of the state’s accountability measures in its ESSA plan and was previously framed as consistent attendance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Maine has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Maryland take the PARCC assessment, though this is being phased out in the 2018-2019 school year.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

The state uses the percentage of students at and exceeding expectations to account for 20% of its schools’ summative scores.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 15% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Maryland has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Massachusetts take the MCAS 2.0.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Massachusetts weights achievement/growth at 3:1 in its accountability system. The exact percentage weight varies depending on whether the school is a high school or not and whether it has an English Learner subgroup. See http://www.doe.mass.edu/accountability/accountability-summary.docx

 

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is specified within the commonwealth’s non-academic measures.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Though student learning, growth, and achievement is no longer a standalone rating, Massachusetts has consistently tied teacher dismissal to effectiveness ratings, though no weights are applied to these decisions.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Michigan take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 38% of Michigan’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism does not figure into the state’s evaluation of school performance.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Michigan has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Minnesota does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Minnesota take the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments (MCA).

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Minnesota does not give any preference to growth or proficiency in its accountability systems.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

“Consistent attendance rates” are included in the accountability system for schools, but weights are not specified.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Minnesota has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Mississippi take the Mississippi Academic Assessment Program (MAAP) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 29% of Mississippi’s evaluation of schools. Additionally, growth of students performing in the lowest quartile also accounts for 29% of points for elementary/middle schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Missouri take the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30-37.5% of Missouri’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Montana take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Montana does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Nebraska’s unique accountability system, AQuESTT, does not prescribe weights to its indicators, ensuring schools cannot be ranked. Instead, a system of classification adjustments allows for the rating of schools into four categories—Excellent, Great, Good, and Needs Improvement.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Nebraska take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Nebraska does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency. For federal designation of schools for Comprehensive Support and Improvement and Targeted Support and Improvement, Nebraska uses three measures of student progress: Non-proficiency (reduction in the percentage of students who are not proficient), Growth (individual student-level growth from year to year), and Improvement (three-year trend of score improvement).

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Nebraska has included chronic absenteeism as both an indicator for classification and designation of schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Nevada take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of Nevada’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

Nevada has increasingly de-emphasized student achievement in teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Hampshire take the SAT.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

New Hampshire does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Jersey take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of New Jersey’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New Mexico take the PARCC.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 42% of New Mexico’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance in combination with school survey results.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

New York uses a Performance Index (PI) system that allows weights to vary accordingly depending on school type, grade level, subject, etc.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in New York take the Regents Exams.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

In New York, the relative weight of growth and proficiency is related to the state’s long-term goals.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in the state’s evaluation of school performance, which has differential weights depending on state goals and performance indicators.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

New York has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

North Carolina uses an A-F rating system where 20% of weights are student growth, with the remaining factors comprising 80% of the summative score.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in North Carolina take the North Carolina end-of-grade assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of North Carolina’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

North Carolina de-emphasized student growth scores in its 2016 revision to its teacher evaluation systems.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

North Dakota high school students are assessed in math and ELA using the North Dakota State Assessment, which is produced by AIR.  This year, through the flexibility provided with ESSA, districts were offered the option to use the ACT as its high school assessment, in lieu of the grade 10 NDSA.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30% of North Dakota’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Ohio take the Ohio State Tests end-of-course assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 20% of Ohio’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is part of the state’s 15% Prepared for Success metric in evaluating schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Oklahoma take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 33% of Oklahoma’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 11% of the state’s evaluation of schools.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015

Ineffective growth is no longer grounds for dismissal in Oklahoma, whereas it was prior to a legislation change in 2016.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Oregon take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 44% of Oregon’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 11% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Pennsylvania is shifting to a dashboard system much like California’s where weights are not specified and there are no summative grades.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Pennsylvania take the Keystone exams.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

In its new dashboard model, Pennsylvania does not specify the relative weights of growth versus proficiency.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

In shifting to a dashboard model of school accountability, Pennsylvania is dramatically shifting its focus from previous models where growth and proficiency determined teacher dismissal.

0

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Rhode Island does not specify exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Rhode Island take the SAT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Schools in Rhode Island receive a 1-5 star rating, with 8 points representing proficiency, and a maximum of 6 points representing growth. The maximum number of points possible varies by year and two-year averages.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in South Carolina participate in the End-of-Course Examination Program (EOCEP).

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 35% of South Carolina’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in South Dakota take the Smarter Balanced assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 40% of South Dakota’s evaluation of schools.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Tennessee take the TNReady end-of-course assessments.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 30% of Tennessee’s evaluation of schools.

2

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is 10% of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Texas take the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Texas does not specify the relative weights of proficiency and growth in its evaluation system.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Utah take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Utah’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Vermont specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Vermont take the Smarter Balanced assessment.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Vermont’s assessment of schools is derived from a combination of growth and proficiency—50% growth, and 50% proficiency.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Virginia does not specify the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

0

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Virginia take the Standards of Learning (SOL) end-of-course assessments.

 

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Virginia does not specify weights or the extent to which growth versus proficiency in its emphasized in its accountability system.

0

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Chronic absenteeism is included in the state’s accountability indicators, though weights are not specified.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Washington take Smarter Balanced. Washington adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) as its state K-12 learning standards. Smarter Balanced is aligned to the CCSS.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 50% of Washington’s evaluation of schools in elementary and middle schools.

4

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Washington’s School Quality and Student Success Indicator (SQSS) is weighted 5% in elementary and middle schools and 15% in high schools.  Regular attendance is one of three measures that comprise the SQSS indicator of the state’s evaluation of school performance.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

Weights are equally distributed and are a function of the number of measures attributed to respective programmatic levels (i.e., elementary/middle and high schools). No summative score is calculated to determine overall school performance.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All grade 11 high school students in West Virginia take the SAT School Day assessment. Alignment to state standards is under review.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Progress in math and ELA accounts for approximately 22% of West Virginia’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators. The measure is operationalized from an asset-based perspective (i.e., percent of student present for 90% or more of instructions days) rather than from a deficit-based perspective (i.e., percent of student absent for 10% or more of instructions days).

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Wisconsin take the ACT.

0

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 37.5% of Wisconsin’s evaluation of schools. More specifically, growth and achievement outcomes, when both available for a school, are equally weighted in Wisconsin’s ESSA accountability system.

3

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

Wisconsin’s measure of School Quality and Student Success is a chronic absenteeism measure. Specifically, schools are scored based on the percentage of students who are not chronically absent.

1

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Accountability

Specificity

Whether a state specifies certain weights within its accountability system.

The state specifies the exact weights for each of the measures in its accountability system.

1

Consistency

The state test for high school achievement is aligned to state standards. States that use a college entrance examination at the high school level are not assessing standards-based instruction.

All high school students in Wyoming take Wyoming Test of Proficiency and Progress (WY-TOPP) as well as the ACT. This is a model practice, ensuring assessment alignment with both state standards and college readiness.

1

Authority

The extent to which a state emphasizes growth instead of proficiency for elementary/middle schools. States that emphasize growth over proficiency are higher in authority as they are increasing support for accountability policies by distancing themselves from strict proficiency cut-offs.

Growth in math and ELA accounts for 25% of Wyoming’s evaluation of schools.

1

Power

Whether a state includes chronic absenteeism in its accountability systems. States that hold schools accountable for student attendance are imposing rewards and sanctions based on more than student achievement scores.

The state does not include chronic absenteeism as one of its non-academic indicators.

0

Stability

Whether a state has changed whether they articulate that ineffective teaching based on achievement growth or proficiency is grounds for termination since 2015.

The state has maintained the same teacher dismissal policies since 2015.

1

Attribute

Criteria

State Details

Strength of Attribute

Teacher Evaluation

Specificity

The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

Alabama strongly encourages districts to use a state evaluation system (EDUCATE), but they do allow districts to develop local systems if they are state-approved. The metrics of the evaluation system are:

  • 1/3 = “professional commitment" (self assessment, professional learning plan, etc.);
  • 1/3 = "professional practice” (observations = 20%, instructional design and impact [lesson development] = 10%, professional showcase [demonstration of teacher leadership, ongoing learning] = 5%); and
  • 1/3 = "impact on engagement & learning" (surveys from parents/students = 10%; student growth data = 25%).
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that student growth data accounts for 25% of a teacher's evaluation score. However, it only says that student growth data should come from "various assessments." It is up to districts to determine what data is considered meaningful and should be included. In addition, it is not required that a teacher meet their student growth goals to receive an overall effective evaluation rating.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as online training modules and guides on the evaluation system on their website. Additionally, the state provides differentiated technical assistance to districts to meet requirements.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Alabama does not support performance pay. They also do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations. They also do not explicitly make evaluation ratings of ineffective grounds for dismissal.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Alabama passed a new teacher evaluation law in 2016, scaling back Race to the Top reforms. They continue to support districts in the development, implementation, and assessment of their effectiveness processes.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Alaska provides criteria that districts must follow when designing their evaluation systems. The state provides requirements for evaluation systems, but does not actually specify what the metrics for the evaluation system must be. It does say that eval. systems must include observations, and must provide opportunities for parents/students/peers to provide feedback. Student growth data only counted if it's considered "relevant" to teacher's performance.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Alaska does not require measures of student growth. In June 2016, the board voted to repeal a proposed teacher eval. system which would have required student growth to account for 50% of a teacher's overall ranking. A district can use student growth data if it's considered "relevant" to a teacher's performance. However, it does not specify that student-level data come from a standards-based assessment, "Examples of student learning data include scores from curriculum-based measures, universal screeners, standardized assessments, portfolios of student work, student projects, performances, and career and technical certifications."

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as tools and templates that districts can use when designing their evaluation systems.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Alaska does not have policies that tie teacher compensation to positive evaluation scores. They also do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations. The state does say that if tenured teachers don't meet district standards after a performance improvement plan, they are eligible for nonrenewal. However, student growth is not a factor.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Alaska passed a law changing the teacher evaluation to include student learning data, which was piloted during the 2016-2017 school year. This data, however, does not have to come from standardized tests and could be tied to the teacher’s curriculum.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The state requirements are:

  • teaching performance (for which multiple measures must be used),
  • professional practice = 50-67%, and
  • student academic progress (for which multiple measures must be used) = 33-50%.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Arizona requires that student data account for 33-50% of all teacher evaluations. For "Group A teachers" (those with readily available and reliable student growth data), data from statewide assessments must be included as one indicator and must be a "significant factor" in student growth calculations. For "Group B teachers" (those with limited reliable student growth data), data must be augmented with school-level data as needed. The state does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals to be rated overall effective (if they meet all other goals).

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a state evaluation model, the teaching/school administrator standards that educators are held accountable to, and various rating tables for different types of educators.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Arizona has a "Classroom Site Fund" and some of the money is required to be allocated to teacher compensation based on performance. Arizona does not tie licensure advancement or renewal to teacher evaluations. Teachers who are up for tenure that are rated ineffective must retain their probationary status, and tenured teachers who receive an ineffective rating will be reverted to probationary status until earning an effective rating. Teachers who are consistently rated ineffective are also eligible for dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state board of education adopted revisions in 2017 that emphasize more flexibility, local control in decision making, and multiple measures of assessment of student achievement and instructional practice.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In Arkansas, districts/charters must use the Teacher Excellence and Support System (TESS) as a blueprint when approving their own evaluation systems. TESS has four domains:

  • planning and preparation,
  • environment,
  • instruction, and
  • professional responsibilities.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state model, TESS, does not specifically require standards-based measures of student growth data be included in a teacher's evaluation as a stand-alone component; however, student growth data is embedded in the design of every educator’s professional growth plan. Student growth data is embedded in evidence of planning and reflecting on instructional implementation required by TESS.

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a system for the organized collection and management of teacher and leader observations and ratings, EdReflect powered by BloomBoard. As well as additional information posted on the Arkansas Department of Education website for teacher and leader evaluation.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Arkansas does utilize performance-based pay. The state's Alternative Pay Program requires using "a variety of objective criteria that are credible, clear, specific, measurable indicators of student achievement, and generally accepted best practices to determine pay." This must represent at least 10% but not more than 50% of a teacher's salary. However, they do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state enacted major changes to their teacher evaluation system in 201. Act 295 of 2017 led our practice away from state-mandated, prescriptive procedures to state-communicated, general practice recommendations with policies created and approved locally by districts/charters to best serve the needs of the educator community. This move also laid the foundation for a definite link to self-selected, self-driven educator professional development.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    California law requires districts to use the following criteria when developing local evaluation systems:

  • progress of pupils towards standards,
  • instructional techniques and strategies used,
  • employee's adherence to curricular objectives, and
  • learning environment.
  • 0

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    California's policy states that, in their evaluation systems, districts should include "(1) The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments."

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides various resources that districts can use when developing their evaluation systems. These include the California Standards for the Teaching Profession and California Professional Standards for Educational Leaders and links to external websites.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    California does not have any policies that specifically offer teachers compensation based on performance, but they do encourage districts "to recognize teacher contributions to improving pupil achievement." The state does not tie evaluation ratings into renewal, licensure advancement, tenure, or dismissal decisions.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    California has not passed a major law affecting teacher evaluations, which are designed by local districts.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Colorado districts can either use the model evaluation system provided by the state or create their own as long as it meets the criteria set forth by the State Board of Education, including standards and elements. The State Board of Education’s rules require the following metrics for an evaluation system:

  • objective evidence of student growth;
  • using a variety of measures; and
  • teacher professional practice, which can include student surveys, peer feedback, feedback from parents, a review of lesson plans, and student work.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Colorado legislation requires that 50% of a teacher's evaluation rating be tied to measures of student learning, including multiple measures. State Board rule requires that statewide assessments must be included, where applicable. Local districts/BOCES are able to determine the weight of specific measures and the ways in which teachers determine their success or lack thereof with each measure. 

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    There are extensive resources provided to implement the state’s model evaluation system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Colorado legislation does not have policies that require linking teacher pay to performance. Colorado does not use teacher ratings to guide licensure advancement or renewal decisions. They do, however, explicitly link performance to the earning or losing of non-probationary status (tenure) and dismissal decisions. A teacher must receive effective or highly effective ratings for three consecutive years in order to earn non-probationary status (tenure). A non-probationary (tenured) teacher who earns two consecutive years of ineffective or partially effective ratings will revert to probationary status. In addition, if a probationary teacher earns an ineffective rating, an evaluator can recommend the teacher's dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Colorado has worked to continuously improve the State Model Evaluation Systems for teachers, principals and special services provider. There have been no new legislation related to evaluation since the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Connecticut requires districts to develop systems in line with the state's guidelines. The state provides a sample system called SEED. The state's required metrics for the evaluation system are:

  • 45% student learning objectives;
  • 40% standards-based observations;
  • 10% parent or peer feedback; and
  • 5% student feedback or whole-school measures of student performance.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Connecticut requires that 45% of a teacher's evaluation score come from student growth data, but expressly forbids standardized student test scores from being used in the evaluation process.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a fair amount of resources such as guidelines, rubrics, and guidance on how to develop student learning objectives.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Connecticut does not have policies that link teacher pay to performance. They also do not use teacher ratings to guide licensure advancement or renewal decisions. Tenure is based on effective evaluation rankings though, and teachers can be dismissed based on ineffective evaluation rankings.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state eliminated the use of test scores in evaluations in 2017.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Delaware requires all teachers to be evaluated using the statewide educator evaluation system, the Delaware Performance Appraisal System II (DPAS II). The metrics of the evaluation system (each of which represents 20% of the total system) are:

  • planning and preparation,
  • classroom environment,
  • instruction,
  • professional responsibilities, and
  • student improvement.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Delaware's state system requires that 20% of a teacher's eval. comes from student growth, which must be comprised of multiple measures. For ELA/math teachers in grades 4-8, half of that component must be the state assessment, while the other half can be another approved assessment or a student growth goal. However, teachers do not actually have to meet their goals for them to receive an overall effective evaluation rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide various resources to teachers and evaluators for helping them to understand the state evaluation system, such as rubrics and protocols, and helps them to understand the student improvement component.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Delaware offers two small salary stipends (between $750-2,000) that are loosely tied to performance. The state also considers teacher effectiveness ratings for licensure advancement, though not for licensure renewal. Delaware does require that probationary teachers show two years of satisfactory student growth (considered in the evaluation system) within three years before earning tenure. They also allow teachers to be dismissed for ineffective teaching.

    3

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    While Delaware has de-emphasized test scores, they maintain a specific teacher evaluation system tied to growth measures, which they have maintained since receiving Race to the Top funding.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system

    DC allows LEAs to design own evaluation systems, as long as they follow provided criteria and are approved. The criteria for included metrics are:

  • student growth is a "significant component" (50% in tested subjects; 15% in non-tested subjects) and;
  • include other multiple measures for performance, which may include a) commitment to school mission/community/values; b) lesson planning & instructional delivery; and c) positive learning environment.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    In tested subjects, DC requires student growth/achievement to count for 50% of a teacher's evaluation. Of that, a DC CAS-based measure of growth must be at least 30% for math and ELA teachers in grades 4-8. For nontested subjects, it's 35% and this could come from a) a measure of schoolwide growth based on DC CAS, b) Common Core-aligned student learning objectives or c) a standardized assessment that is Common Core-aligned. However, to receive an overall effective rating a teacher does not have to meet their student growth goals.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    DC has a resource library centered on its model teacher evaluation, which includes materials on teacher and leader evaluations. Some of these materials are links to external websites/resources. It does not provide guidance on self-designed teacher evaluation systems.

    3

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    DC does not have a policy around performance pay. The District allows, but does not require, evaluating rankings to be considered in decisions surrounding licensure advancement and renewal. Rankings do not play into decisions around tenure. DC has no policy governing teacher dismissal - it is up to local school district level. DCPS's system does make teacher ineffectiveness grounds for dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    DC adopted a new teacher evaluation system in 2016 that weakened previous rewards and sanctions.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Florida sets certain requirements that districts must follow when designing their evaluation systems. Requirements are:

  • at least 1/3 must be based on student performance;
  • at least 1/3 on instructional practice; and
  • other indicators can include surveys, peer reviews, job responsibilities, and other "valid and reliable measures of instructional practice."
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that at least 1/3 of a teacher's evaluation be based upon "data and indicators of a student's performance," but leaves it up to the districts to determine what measures are used.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide resources to districts to assist them in developing their evaluation systems, and in how to communicate out to teachers. They also provide a lot of resources on calculating and understanding Value- Added Measures based on student performance.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Florida requires all teachers hired on or after 7/1/2014 to be placed on a performance pay schedule, where the largest salary advances are given to teachers rated highly effective. Local districts can develop their own salary schedules but cannot tie compensation to anything other than classroom effectiveness.

     

    Per section 1012.22(1)(c), F.S., school districts must also provide for salary supplements for activities that must include, but are not limited to: (1) assignment to a Title I eligible school; (2) assignment to a school that earned a grade of “F: or three consecutive grades of “D”; (3) certification and teaching in critical teacher shortage areas; and 4) assignment of additional academic responsibilities.

     

    The state's requirements for licensure advancements and renewals are not based on teacher effectiveness. The state does not have tenure—all teachers hired as of July 1, 2011, are awarded annual contracts. Evaluation rankings do play in to the awarding of contracts every year, and also serve as grounds for dismissal for ineffective teachers.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has maintained its Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation systems, with strong connections between student achievement and teacher evaluations.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    By law, Georgia requires all districts to use the Teacher Keys Effectiveness System (TKES), which rates teachers based on:

  • 30% student growth,
  • 20% based on professional growth plans, and
  • 50% "Teacher Assessment on Performance Standards" (observations & documentation).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that 30% of a teacher's evaluation rating be based on student growth. For teachers of tested subjects, mean growth percentiles are used. For teachers of non-tested subjects, districts can determine measures of student growth, including using Student Learning Objectives, the school or district mean growth percentile, or other measures as determined appropriate by the district. It is possible for Georgia teachers to receive the lowest rating on student growth and be rated as effective overall.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides an annually updated handbook which includes state adopted rubrics and sample indicators. Online professional learning modules, FAQs, and quick guides as well as face-to-face professional learning opportunities are provided to support teachers in implementation of the teaching standards and to support evaluators during the evaluation process with particular emphasis on the provision of specific actionable feedback.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Georgia stipulates that teachers do not advance on the salary schedule for any year he/she receives an ineffective summative rating. Georgia also supports an initiative that allows local schools/districts to submit proposals for performance pay based on collective performance.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    In 2016, the Georgia general Assembly passed legislation that significantly changed teacher evaluation.  Student surveys were eliminated. Professional growth was added. The weighting percentages of components were altered.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Hawaii has a state evaluation system districts are required to use. The metrics of the state's evaluation system are:

  • 50% evidence of student growth (including one Student Learning Objective); and
  • 50% teacher practice (classroom observations, portfolios, professionalism etc.).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Hawaii requires 50% of a teacher's evaluation be based on student growth, which includes one Student Learning Objective or School System Improvement Objective that should be based in the standards. If teachers receive very low/unsatisfactory student growth scores, they cannot receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a video and a handbook about its teacher evaluation system.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Hawaii's compensation policy rewards effective teachers, but the state does not base decisions for renewal or licensure advancement on teacher performance. However, the state does require teachers to have two consecutive overall ratings of effective or better in order to earn tenure. Any teacher who earns an unsatisfactory rating must be dismissed.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state removed student achievement as an indicator of teacher performance in 2016.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Idaho districts can develop their own evaluation systems, as long as they are in compliance with criteria set forth by the state. Required metrics are specified broadly as follows, but exact percentages are not given:

  • inclusion of measurable student growth; and
  • professional practice (needs to include observations, student/parent input, and a teaching portfolio).
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Idaho requires that student achievement or growth data be included in evaluation systems. It does give a number of criteria that districts can choose from to use as measures of student growth, but not all of them are necessarily standards-based.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state only appears to provide an evaluation checklist and the professional teaching standards to help guide districts in creating their own evaluation systems.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Idaho does not require districts to include teacher performance when creating salary scales, but it does allow districts to do so. Idaho does require teachers to show "measurable student achievement" in order to advance to a renewable, professional certificate. Effectiveness does not play in to tenure decisions, but it does state that unsatisfactory performance is grounds for nonrenewal of a contract. However, teachers must be placed on a probationary period where they are closely supervised and evaluated before being dismissed.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Idaho has maintained its existing teacher evaluation policies, which are not overly specific nor prescriptive.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Illinois allows districts to create their own evaluation systems, as long as they follow the state's criteria. Districts can also adopt all or part of the state's model system, the Model Teacher Evaluation System. The system must have the following:

  • a performance component (observations, PD plans, etc.); and
  • a student growth component (which must count for at least 25% in the first two years of implementation, moving to at least 30% after that).
  • 1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Illinois requires student growth count for at least 30% of a teacher's overall rating, although the state system counts it for 50%. The student growth measure must include data from a state or district assessment, and then something aligned to the course curriculum. However, there are ways for teachers to have low student growth and receive ratings of overall effective.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does appear to provide resources (seemingly last updated in July 2015) that requires a state email address to access.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Illinois does not support performance pay. However, it does allow superintendents to suspend or revoke licenses based on unsatisfactory ratings. The state also factors teacher effectiveness into tenure and dismissal decisions.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Illinois has made no changes since 2015 to its teacher evaluation laws.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Indiana does have a model evaluation system (RISE) that districts can adopt. Districts can also set their own evaluation systems as long as they use criteria set forth by the state. The criteria include requiring student achievement/growth measures to "significantly inform" evaluation measures, including observation and feedback.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Indiana requires that for all teachers of tested subjects, statewide assessment results must be included in teacher evaluation scores. For teachers of nontested subjects, other forms of assessing student learning must still play a significant factor. Indiana also ensures that a teacher meet their student growth goals to be rated effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide some implementation resources for districts looking to implement their own evaluation systems, such as model plans and various fact sheets.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Indiana's compensation policy does reward teacher effectiveness, and it also plays a role in dismissal and tenure decisions, but effectiveness does not factor in to renewal or licensure advancements.

     

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Indiana has maintained its same teacher evaluation policies since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In Iowa, districts develop their own evaluation systems, following some guidance from the state. The state requires that districts include classroom observations and individual career development plans when developing an evaluation system, but it does not require measures of student growth. The state does not specify percentages for these metrics.

    0

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Iowa does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide some resources for districts around evaluation systems, including a model framework and sample evaluation forms.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Iowa does not associate rewards or sanctions with its effectiveness ratings. The state does not have compensation policies in place that reward effective teachers, based on performance, and it also does not take evaluations into account when making renewal, licensure advancement, tenure, or dismissal decisions.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Iowa has maintained its same teacher evaluation policies since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts are encouraged to use the state's eval. system, Kansas Educator Evaluation Protocol (KEEP), but can also submit their own for state approval. The metrics of evaluation systems must be as follows, but it doesn't specify the percentages allocated to each subcategory:

  • instructional practice (lesson plans, work samples, professional learning, attendance etc.); and
  • student performance.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Kansas requires student performance to be included in evaluation systems. However, districts can decide what counts as student performance indicators, and the state allows attendance, service learning, and community engagement to count as measures.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Kansas provides an evaluation handbook as the main resource available to districts developing their own evaluation systems.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Kansas does not have explicit policies around performance pay in place. It vaguely connects compensation with performance, by saying that districts have to "explain how their evaluation systems are used to inform decisions in areas such as retention, promotion, compensation and rewards." The state does not use teacher evaluations when considered teacher licensure or renewal decisions. The state only offers yearly contracts—it does not have tenure.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Kansas has maintained its same teacher evaluation policies since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts in Kentucky can create their own evaluation systems based in the Kentucky Framework for Teaching, which includes four  domains:

  • planning & preparation,
  • classroom environment,
  • instruction, and
  • professional responsibilities.
  • Districts determine the evidences to be used for each performance measure.

    0

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Kentucky does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems 

    The Kentucky Department of Education provides face-to-face and virtual support for districts as they develop local certified evaluation plans and approved all district plans for the 2018-19 school year to ensure alignment to new statute and regulation.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations

    Kentucky allows teachers to earn additional compensation for multiple reasons, including performance (individual, school-based, or student). However, there are few sanctions associated with performance, as decisions around licensure advancement and renewals, tenure, and dismissals are not explicitly tied to performance.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    In 2017, Senate Bill 1 eliminated the previous state teacher evaluation system and replaced it with the new Kentucky Framework for Personnel Evaluation, which provides guidelines but increased flexibility and local control of certified evaluation plans.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Louisiana has a statewide evaluation system, Compass, that uses 50% professional practice and 50% student growth (35% value-added measures & 15% student learning targets) to evaluate teachers.

     

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Louisiana requires that 50% of a teacher's evaluation come from student growth measures. For teachers of tested subjects, these measures must come from standardized state tests. For teachers of nontested subjects, other targets established by teachers and evaluators should be used. However, teachers do not have to meet their student growth goals to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide resources such as training materials (e.g., professional growth and goal setting plans), and webinars to help evaluators and teachers understand the state system.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Louisiana allows districts to adopt a compensation system that provides monetary incentives for performance. Louisiana requires that teachers meet a standard of effectiveness in order to advance to a professional license, and then to renew their professional license. Louisiana also requires teachers to be rated "highly effective" for 5 out of 6 years to be granted tenure. A tenured teacher will immediately lose tenure with one ineffective rating. However, the state does not explicitly connect teacher ineffectiveness with dismissals, though the state does allow for "disciplinary action" based on poor performance.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Louisiana has not changed its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Maine puts forth criteria that districts must follow when adopting their evaluation systems. The two required measures for educator effectiveness according to the state are:

  • professional practice, and
  • student learning growth (multiple measures must be used).
  • The state does not specify the exact weighting percentages, but does require that student growth play a "significant" role.

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Maine does require that student growth play a "significant" factor in a teacher's evaluation. Where standardized tests are applicable, they must be included. However, the state does not explicitly require that teachers reach student growth goals in order to be rated effective overall.

     

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state websites provide some tools but cautions that these have not been updated since legislative changes were made in 2015.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not take educator effectiveness into account when making licensure advancement, renewal, or tenure decisions, but teacher ineffectiveness does constitute grounds for dismissal. Two consecutive ratings of ineffective are just cause for nonrenewal.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state passed a new teacher evaluation law in 2015 and has not made any significant changes since then.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Maryland districts can either adopt the state's model system, or create their own evaluation system, using the state's framework, which must be approved by the state. The state model is:

  • 50% professional practice (12.5% planning & preparation, 12.5% instruction, 12.5% classroom environment, 12.5% professional responsibilities); and
  • 50% student growth.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Maryland requires student growth account for a "significant" portion of a teacher's evaluation rating, but no single criterion is allowed to be more than 35%. The state model counts student growth as 50%, and state assessments as 20% of that 50%. For elem/middle teachers of tested subjects, student growth is an aggregate measure of assessment ratings, student learning objectives, and the schoolwide index. For other teachers, student growth comes from student learning objectives and the schoolwide index. The state does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals to be rated overall effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Maryland provides extensive resources on its website for its model educator effectiveness system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Maryland does not have compensation policies based on teacher effectiveness. They do base licensure advancement decisions (advancing to a professional certificate) on effectiveness ratings, but not licensure renewal decisions. They also don't connect tenure decisions or explicitly connect dismissal decisions to effectiveness ratings.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Maryland has maintained its same teacher evaluation system since 2015. However, Maryland is in the process of convening a workgroup to revise the teacher evaluation system for the 2019-2020 school year.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Massachusetts requires that districts either adopt the state's model system or follow specific state criteria. The state suggests that plans include "products of practice" (i.e., observation data, lesson plans) and multiple measures of student learning, as well as other forms of evidence like student and staff feedback. It does not specify how these different criteria should be weighted.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Massachusetts does require that evidence of student learning be considered in teacher evaluation systems—however, it's no longer a separate rating, but embedded as an indicator. Teachers are not required to meet student learning goals in order to be rated effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide implementation resources, and other templates such as performance rubrics and tools for collecting student/staff feedback, for helping districts to understand and develop their own evaluation systems.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The commonwealth does not currently have performance pay but does allow districts to recognize teachers with exemplary performance, including through additional compensation. Massachusetts does not require evidence of teacher effectiveness in licensure renewal or advancement decisions. Teachers can be dismissed based on an ineffective rating. In addition, effectiveness is also incorporated into tenure decisions.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state eliminated the student impact rating component of teacher evaluations in 2017 and embedded this measure as an indicator rather than treating it as a standalone rating. Prior to this change, educators in Massachusetts received separate, but linked, ratings for practice and impact on student learning. Student learning is now embedded within a single overall rating.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Michigan provides metrics that districts must follow when creating their own evaluation systems:

  • 25% must come from student growth (moving to 40% in 2018-19 school year, 50% of which must come from state assessment); and
  • the rest is based primarily on teacher performance, as measured using an observation tool.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    By 2018-19, student growth must be 40% of a teacher's evaluation score. For teachers of tested subjects, half of that measure should come from state assessments. The state does not require though that teachers meet their student growth goals to receive an overall effective rating.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems 

    The state does provide resources for districts to use when designing their own evaluation systems, including state-approved observation tools, and resources and approaches to measuring student growth.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Michigan does require that teachers have been received an effective rating for three years in order to advance to a professional license but does not require evidence of effectiveness in licensure renewal. The state requires teachers to have three consecutive effective evaluations to gain tenure; any teacher with three consecutive ineffective evaluations is dismissed. The state also requires that districts create a compensation schedule that takes job performance into account and includes student growth.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Michigan passed teacher evaluation overhaul legislation in 2016.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system

    In Minnesota, districts can either adopt the state model or develop their own evaluation system. In the state model, the criteria are as follows:

  • 45% teacher practice,
  • 20% student engagement, and
  • 35% student learning and achievement.
  • If a district develops their own system, it is required that 35% of the evaluation come from student learning & achievement.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Minnesota requires that 35% of a teacher's overall rating must come from a value-added assessment model. The state's model system uses student learning goals, which are required to be aligned to the standards. However, the state does not explicitly require an effective rating in the student learning portion in order to receive an overall effective rating.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources for helping districts implement an evaluation system, including guidance on aligning to state requirements, and clearly shows when they were added/updated. Resources include sample rubrics and surveys.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations

    Minnesota allows districts to adopt an alternative pay system where 60% of compensation is determined by teacher performance. The state does not connect decisions around teacher licensure advancement or renewal or tenure to performance. However, teachers can be dismissed for "inefficiency." No teacher can be dismissed for ineffectiveness unless given time to attempt to correct his/her performance.

     

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Minnesota has maintained its Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Mississippi has a state Professional Growth System. Right now, evaluation scores are based on the four domains of the Teacher Growth Rubric:

  • lesson design,
  • student understanding,
  • learning environment, and
  • professional responsibilities.
  • The state is adding in student surveys and student outcomes for both tested and non-tested teachers, which is slated to go into effect in the 2020-2021 school year.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Mississippi's required state system does require that student outcomes play a role in the evaluation rating for teachers of both tested and nontested subjects. However, since they are still developing this component of their system, it is unclear what measures or indicators will be used to assess this, and thus whether those measures are standards-based. Over the next year, a set of measures are being piloted by eight school districts.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a guidebook as well as standardized forms and tools for teacher evaluation.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Mississippi's requirements for licensure advancement and renewal are not based on teacher effectiveness, and neither are their decisions around tenure or dismissal. The state does have a Performance Based Pay plan that "may provide monies from state funds to school districts for the purposes of rewarding certified teachers," but the award amount is not listed, and the plan only works if funding is available.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Mississippi has not changed its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts in Missouri can either adopt the state's model evaluation system, based in Missouri's Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation, or create their own that is aligned with the same principles. Plans must be approved by the state. The Essential Principles which are required by all school districts and charter schools include:

  • use of research-based performance targets;
  • differentiated performance levels;
  • special support for probationary teachers (less than five years’ experience);
  • use of student growth measures;
  • use of actionable feedback, includes training for evaluators; and
  • use of evaluation data for personnel determinations (contracts, PD, mentor selection, etc.).
  • Exact percentages are not specified, but student growth is required to be a "significant" component of a teacher's evaluation rating. 

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    While the state requires student growth to play a significant role in evaluation, it is left up to the districts how to assess this. It is not required to be based in the standards, as some of the examples the state gives for measures to assess student performance include "observable behaviors." However, use of student growth measures must highlight growth in student learning across two points in time.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides several resources to districts around evaluation systems, including feedback forms, surveys, protocols, and possible sources of evidence.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Missouri allows districts to use a compensation system that includes performance-based pay. It also requires any schools that are "academically deficient" to develop a program to reward teachers. The state does not connect decisions around teacher licensure advancement or renewal or tenure to performance. However, teachers can be dismissed "If sustained demonstration of unacceptable performance occurs."

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    No changes have been made to the state’s model educator evaluation system or to the requirements articulated in the Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation since they went into effect in 2014. The passage of ESSA has not resulted in any change in the expectations and requirements of educator evaluation in the state of Missouri.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Montana allows districts to develop evaluation systems based on state criteria, which include three domains:

  • professional growth,
  • continuous improvement, and
  • quality assurance.
  • The state does not require measures of student growth in its evaluation system.

    0

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Montana does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides some implementation resources for districts, including various forms and frameworks.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Montana does not require that PD activities be aligned to teacher evaluation results, nor does it specify that teachers with low/ineffective ratings be placed on improvement plans. Montana does not use evaluation ratings to make decisions around compensation, licensure advancement and renewal, tenure, or dismissal.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Montana has not changed its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Nebraska requires districts to develop their own evaluation systems based on state criteria. Each district's system must be approved by the state. Criteria include::

  • instructional performance,
  • classroom organization and management, and
  • personal and professional conduct.
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Nebraska does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state offers resources to districts such as forms/templates, rubrics, and guidance documents.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Nebraska does not support performance-based pay. It also does not incorporate effectiveness ratings into decisions around tenure, licensure advancement and renewal, and dismissal.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Nebraska has not had a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change with respect to its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Nevada follows the Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF), but districts can apply to use a different system as long as it follows the state framework, and uses the criteria set forth by the state which include:

  • instructional practice (60%);
  • professional responsibilities (20%); and
  • student growth (must count for 20% in 2017-18, and 40% in 2018-19).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Nevada requires that district-level performance measures (Student Learning Goals, SLGs) be used for all teachers, except those in their first year of employment. It does specify that SLGs should be aligned to the Nevada Academic Content Standards. In addition, Nevada does specify that teachers receive one of the three highest ratings on the SLG rubric in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides tools for teachers and administrators, as well as NEPF-specific tools.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state has implemented a performance pay system. Each school district has to reserve enough money to pay an increase in base salaries (no more than 10%), for at least 5% of teachers. The state does not use effectiveness when considering licensure advancement and renewal decisions. It does, however, require that probationary teachers show at least 2 years of effective performance within three years, in order to receive tenure. Once a teacher has tenure, if they earn two consecutive ineffective ratings they return to probationary status.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state enacted major teacher evaluation changes in 2017.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    New Hampshire's Task Force on Effective Teaching outlines a model evaluation system, but the state gives local school boards the authority to create their own evaluation systems. It is then the responsibility of school principals to carry out evaluations. The model evaluation system incorporates measures of students’ growth and other indicators, but the state does not actually have any required elements for district evaluation systems.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New Hampshire does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    No resources appear to be available for districts in creating their own evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    New Hampshire does not require districts to consider effectiveness when making decisions around licensure advancements and renewal, dismissals, compensation, or tenure.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state enacted major teacher evaluation changes in 2017.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In New Jersey, districts develop their own evaluation systems, based on the state's framework. Systems must be approved by the state. Teacher evaluation systems developed by districts must be comprised of two components:

  • teacher practice (based on classroom observations); and
  • student achievement (student growth objectives & student growth percentiles, 30-50% of the overall evaluation).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New Jersey requires that for teachers of tested subjects, student growth must be 30-50% of their overall evaluation. For teachers of nontested subjects, it should be 15-50%. For teachers of non-tested subjects, measures can include district or other standardized assessments, teacher-made assessments, teacher-set goals etc. Teachers are not required to be rated effective in the area of student growth in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state has an Implementation Quality Toolkit, which provides various resources for districts looking to implement and improve their evaluation systems. This includes instructions on developing protocols and rubrics, a video series, and calibration activities.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    New Jersey requires that teachers earn an effective evaluation for two of three years in order to advance to a standard certificate and gain tenure. They don't use effectiveness for licensure renewal though. If a teacher receives two years of ineffective ratings, a superintendent must file a charge of inefficiency. The state does not have policies that compensates teachers based on ineffectiveness.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state temporarily banned achievement measures in teacher evaluations in 2015, but they are being reintroduced.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The NMTEACH evaluation tool the state uses includes: student academic growth, classroom and school practice, contributions to peers/the school community, student surveys and attendance. The final evaluation is comprised of:

  • improved student achievement (35%);
  • classroom observations (40%);
  • planning, preparation and professionalism (15%);
  • student surveys (5%); and
  • teacher attendance (5%).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New Mexico's state evaluation system requires that student growth count for 35% of a teacher's evaluation rating. However, the state does not require that teachers receive an effective rating on student growth in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state has an online "toolbox" available that provides resources to districts, and an FAQ document that leads to other available resources and websites.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    New Mexico has a performance-based pay system that rewards teachers for their impact on student learning. New Mexico requires that teacher effectiveness be considered when making licensure advancement decisions, but not licensure renewal or tenure decisions. If a nonprobationary teacher is rated minimally effective or ineffective, they are placed on a 90-day performance improvement plan. After 90 days, a superintendent can decide whether to discharge or terminate an employee.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    New Mexico has revised its teacher evaluator system annually for the past several years.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In New York, districts can create their own evaluation systems, based on state criteria. The systems, which must be approved by the state, must have two categories:

  • effective practice (based on observations), and
  • student performance.
  • The state prohibits the inclusion of student/parent feedback in teacher evaluations.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New York requires student growth to be included in a teacher's evaluation score. Where state-provided student growth scores are available, that score must be included. Where unavailable, a SLO is used. Districts can add in another measure as well. The student growth measures are intended to be aligned with the standards. In addition, New York does not allow a teacher with an ineffective rating in the area of student growth to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    New York’s materials for implementing teacher evaluations are comprehensive and available through EngageNY.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not use effectiveness ratings to make decisions around licensure advancement and renewal. It also does not support performance-based pay. In terms of tenure, teachers must be rated effective 3 out of 4 years. Teachers can be dismissed if they are rated ineffective for 2+ consecutive years.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    New York has not made significant changes to its state teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The state evaluation system includes:

  • self-assessment,
  • PD plans, and
  • observations.
  • It does not require the inclusion of student growth measures. The state does specify that teachers must be evaluated using the state's evaluation rubric, the North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Rubric.

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    North Carolina has a state-mandated system aligned to end-of-course assessments.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a handbook—and many other resources including fact sheets, evaluation instruments, and manuals—for use in educator evaluation.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not use effectiveness to make decisions around licensure advancement and renewal, dismissal, or compensation. NC doesn't offer tenure to teachers that have been employed for less than three years—they can only get one-year contracts. After three years, a teacher can be recommended for a longer contract if they have "shown effectiveness as demonstrated by proficiency on the evaluation instrument."

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state made significant changes in 2016 to its teacher evaluation system.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts in North Dakota design their own systems, based on state guidelines. Plans must be approved by the state and include multiple measures that include:

  • student growth and achievement measures, and
  • observations.
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    North Dakota's requirements state that evaluation systems must "incorporate multiple valid measures, which are clearly related to increasing the standards-based teaching competencies, including a meaningful level of student growth, student academic achievement, and school performance." This must include standardized assessments, where conducted. However, teachers are not required to meet student growth goals in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    There are guidelines (last updated in 2014), and links to two external resources available. Overall, the selection of resources is very limited.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    North Dakota does not have any policies around performance pay. It also does not use effectiveness to make decisions about licensure advancement or renewal, tenure, or dismissal.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    North Dakota passed a new teacher evaluation law in 2016.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The Ohio Teacher Evaluation System requires teacher evaluation measures to constitute 50% student growth and 50% teacher performance on standards. In the alternative system, measures are 50% teacher performance, 35% student growth, and 15% "alternative components" (which can include student surveys, teacher self-evaluations, peer evaluations etc.). Districts can use either system.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Ohio requires student growth to count for between 35-50% of a teacher's evaluation score, depending on the availability of value-added measures. Value-added measures come from standards-based state tests. For teachers without value-added measures, approved vendor assessment and/or student learning objectives are used. The state does not require teachers to receive a effective student growth rating in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides several resources for evaluations, including a resource guide that has things like suggested PD activities around evaluation, coaching frameworks, and links to external resources.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Ohio requires that municipal school districts adopt a performance-based pay salary schedule. They do not use effectiveness ratings to make decisions about licensure advancement, renewal, or tenure. Evaluations are taken into consideration for dismissal decisions.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Ohio passed legislation in August 2018 to revise the teacher evaluation system.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Oklahoma requires that all teachers are evaluated using the Oklahoma Teacher and Leader Effectiveness System. The evaluation system uses various measures of teacher professional practice (PD plans, observations), but does not require measures of student growth.

     

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Oklahoma does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide a variety of resources for districts to implement the state's evaluation system, including webinars, PPTs, and instructions for completing the state forms.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Oklahoma allows districts to adopt performance-based pay systems. The state does not take effectiveness into considerationg for licensure advancement or renewal decisions. However, effectiveness ratings do come into play when making tenure decisions: a teacher must receive either a superior rating for 2 out of 3 years, or an effective rating for 4 years. If teachers receive multiple ineffective ratings, they are eligible for dismissal.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has maintained its same teacher evaluation system.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Oregon requires district evaluation systems to be based on Oregon adopted standards (ITASC and ISLIC). Teachers are evaluated based on the following criteria:

  • professional practice (quality of planning, delivery of instruction etc.);
  • professional responsibilities; and
  • student learning and growth.
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Oregon requires that all teachers have two student learning and growth goals, which must be incorporated into the evaluation system. One goal must be based on the standards for which the teacher is responsible for teaching, the other based on the same OR a related student area such as behavior. However, it is not required that state standardized assessments are used as measures of goal attainment. Other allowable measures include commercially or locally-developed pre- and post-assessments and portfolios of student work. Oregon does not require that teachers be rated effective in the area of student growth in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a toolkit with many different resources for districts, including sample goals for educators and differentiated rubrics.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state allows school districts to participate in a grant program, which provides funding to implement performance-based approaches to compensation. Oregon does not use effectiveness ratings in making decisions around licensure advancement or renewal, or tenure. A teacher may be dismissed for inadequate performance, but the link between dismissal and the evaluation rating is vague.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    There have been no changes to the teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    All teachers in the state are evaluated using the Pennsylvania's Teacher Effectiveness Tool. Student performance counts for 50% of a teacher's rating. The other 50% comes from classroom observation and practice. However, although this appears to be a requirement, the state website discusses how local districts can come up with alternatives to the teacher observation/practice component in the state system, if proper guidelines are followed and approval is received.

     

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Pennsylvania requires that student growth count for 50% of a teacher's evaluation rating, and that the 50% must be comprised of multiple measures including:

    1)    building-level data (15%), which includes both standards-based measures like assessments and non-standards-based measures like graduation rates;

    2)    teacher-specific data (15%), including assessment performance and progress towards meeting student goals; and

    3)    locally developed measures of student achievement (20%).

    However, a teacher could earn zero student growth points and still be rated proficient.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Pennsylvania provides extensive resources for implementing its state evaluation system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    PA requires that a teacher must have three years of satisfactory ratings before advancing to a professional license. There are no effectiveness requirements about renewal, once a teacher has received a professional license. However, the state automatically awards tenure (doesn't take effectiveness into consideration). A teacher is eligible for dismissal if he/she receives two consecutive unsatisfactory evaluations. The state does not have performance-based pay policies in effect.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Pennsylvania has maintained its Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Rhode Island has a state model evaluation system, but districts can adopt their own system. The three criteria in the eval. system are:

  • professional practice (classroom environment and instruction),
  • professional responsibilities, and
  • student learning (must be 30%).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Rhode Island requires that student growth make up 30% of a teacher's evaluation score, measured through academic goals and SLOs, which should be standards-based. The state does not require that teachers meet their student growth goals/be rated effective in student growth in order to be rated effective overall.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a guidebook, templates/forms, and various resources for evaluators and educators to orient them to the system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Rhode Island does not have performance-based compensation policies in place. The state does require that teachers have at least 1 rating of developing or higher within 3 years to advance to a professional certificate (pretty low bar...). Effectiveness ratings also tie into licensure renewal decisions. Effectiveness ratings do not factor in to tenure or dismissal decisions though.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    0. The state developed a new teacher evaluation system called Frontline in 2017.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    South Carolina requires districts to use the state system (Expanded ADEPT) or an equivalent. The system uses multiple measures to assess professional performance (including observations) and student growth measures.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    South Carolina's state system requires the use of one Student Learning Objective (SLO) for a teacher, which is aligned to the standards-based state assessments. In addition, the South Carolina Teaching Standards 4.0 rubric is aligned with the skills and characteristics of the Profile of the South Carolina Graduate.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as training, templates, webinars, and an online data management platform for implementing the Expanded ADEPT system.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations

    The state allows incentive pay, based on factors like student achievement and classroom observations (parts of the evaluation system). South Carolina uses effectiveness ratings to make decisions about licensure advancements, but not for renewal, or dismissal. Per 56-26-40, an educator may only advance to a professional certificate and continuing contract status after they have “successfully completed the formal evaluation process.”

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    2018-19 will be the first year of implementation of the state’s redesigned teacher effectiveness system. The system focuses on growth and development, emphasizing student growth measures (Student Learning Objectives) and teacher observation using the South Carolina Teaching Standards 4.0 Rubric.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    South Dakota requires districts to implement an evaluation system aligned to the SD Framework for Teaching (Danielson standards) and includes student learning objectives. The evaluation system must assign a professional practice rating and student growth rating. 

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    South Dakota does require the use of student growth scores in teacher evaluations and says they should play a "significant" role. The state uses SLOs, which are intended to be aligned to standards Student learning objectives must include district, school, or teacher-developed assessments.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a fair amount of resources (rubrics, training webinars, templates etc.) that are aligned to the state's model system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not have performance-based compensation policies in place. They also do not use effectiveness ratings to make decisions about licensure advancements or renewals, or tenure. The state does allow for dismissal due to "poor performance," but it's not explicitly linked to the teacher evaluation process.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state significantly revised its teacher evaluation system in 2017.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Tennesse has a state model (TEAM), but districts may also develop their own state models as long as they align with the state framework. The state requires that student achievement comprise 30-50% of the evaluation system (30% for teachers of non-tested subjects, 50% for teachers of tested subjects). The other 50% comes from observations.

     

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that student achievement comprise of 30-50% of a teacher's total evaluation score (30% for teachers of non-tested subjects, 50% for teachers of tested subjects). For teachers of tested subjects, 35% should be from the state's value-added model and 15% must come from another measure (which may or may not be standards-aligned) such as state assessments, ACT/SAT, or graduation rates. Tennessee does not require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated at least effective for student growth portion to be rated overall effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources for districts implementing the state’s teacher evaluation model, but not for districts to develop their own systems.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Districts in Tennessee can choose to include a performance-based component in their salary, but they must tie it directly to evaluation ratings. Licensure advancement and renewal decisions can be made one of two ways: either through effective evaluations or through earning PDPs (PD points) which can be accrued either through evaluation or through training & coursework. Evaluation ratings are used to make decisions around tenure and dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state passed new legislation in 2018 revamping its teacher evaluation system.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Texas' T-TESS includes three components:

  • a goal-setting and PD plan;
  • evaluation cycle (pre-conference, observation, post-conference); and
  • student growth.
  • For districts that use T-TESS, student growth must be 20%. Districts can also design comparable systems, instead of using T-TESS.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that student growth be included in a teacher's overall evaluation score. For districts using T-TESS (the state system), student growth must count for 20% and come from one of the following measures: student learning objectives (SLOs), portfolios, district-level pre- and post-tests, or value-added measures. Texas does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated effective in student growth to earn an overall rating of effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a plethora of resources associated with T-TESS.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Texas does not have specific performance pay policies, although it does have a grant program for districts with at least 50% ED students that can be used for implementing an alternative compensation system. The state also does not have any sanctions associated with the teacher evaluation system (i.e., licensure, renewal, tenure).

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Utah requires that district evaluation systems have the following multiple measures of evidence: professional performance, student academic growth, and stakeholder input.

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Utah does require student growth to be included in a teacher's rating and specifies that measures include "learning goals measuring long-term outcomes linked to the appropriate specific content knowledge and skills from the Utah Core Standards." Utah does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated effective in student growth to earn an overall rating of effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Utah provides the professional standards and an observation tool.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Utah's compensation policy does reward teachers based on effectiveness. Utah does include evaluation ratings when making decisions about licensure advancement and renewal, though it's not the sole component. They also allow teachers to be dismissed for unsatisfactory performance, but it's not explicitly tied to the evaluation system. The state automatically awards tenure—it is not tied to the evaluation system or any other effectiveness measure.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Utah removed proficiency and growth from its mandatory teacher evaluation system measures in 2017.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts determine their own evaluation systems, and states provide little guidance or required criteria. The state does suggest multiple indicators are used, that assess four different standards: "the learner and learning", content, instructional practice, and professional responsibility.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Vermont specifies that student growth and proficiency on state assessments plays a role in teacher evaluation.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides limited resources to districts for developing their own systems. This is mainly a few sample rubrics, and a link to the state's Education Quality Standards.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Vermont has no policies related to rewards and sanctions for teacher evaluation scores.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Virginia allows districts to develop their own evaluation systems, in conjunction with state requirements. The recommended system is to count student growth for 40% (required it plays a significant role) and to count the six other teaching professional standards for 10% each.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Virginia requires that student growth play a "significant" role in teacher evaluations and recommends 40%. The state suggests that tools such as standardized achievement tests, criterion-referenced tests, and "authentic measures (i.e. learner portfolio, recitation, performance)" are "appropriate" measures for assessing student achievement. Virginia does not require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated effective in student growth to earn an overall rating of effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide resources/materials for creating district evaluation systems that align with the state's Guidelines for Uniform Performance Standards and Evaluation Criteria for Teachers.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Virginia has a state grant that allows districts to submit proposals for funding to award incentive pay to teachers, which includes incentives for student growth. The state does not use evaluation ratings to make decisions around licensure advancement or renewal. It does require that probationary teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating may not be reemployed, and it also allows teachers who demonstrate "incompetence" through evaluation ratings to be dismissed.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system

    Washington requires teacher evaluations to include at least eight criteria:

    1)    centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement;

    2)    demonstrating effective teaching practices;

    3)    recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs;

    4)    providing clear and intentional focus on subject-matter content and curriculum;

    5)    fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment;

    6)    using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning;

    7)    communicating and collaborating with families and the school community; and

    8)    exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning.

    Student growth data must be a substantial factor in measuring standards 3, 6 and 8.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Washington requires student growth based on multiple measures to be a factor in the evaluation process. Measures can include classroom-, school-, district-, or state-based tools.

     

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides districts with many resources for creating their own systems, including links to state-approved instructional and leadership frameworks, training modules, and guidelines for using and measuring student growth, and grant funding for professional learning.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not support performance pay. Washington does take evaluation ratings into account when teachers want to advance to a professional license. However, teachers don't have to advance to a professional license—they can continue to renew their residency licenses. Teacher evaluations do not play a role in licensure renewal decisions. There can be consequences for tenure or dismissal based on teacher effectiveness ratings.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no major changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    West Virginia has a statewide evaluation system that counts student growth for 20%, and the other five teacher professional standards for a combined 80%, which cover curriculum and planning, learner/learning environment, teaching, and professional responsibilities.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    West Virginia Department of Education provides technical assistance to districts requiring support in the area of teacher evaluation. All evaluation tools are provided through the statewide teacher evaluation system.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does not appear to provide any resources.

    0

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    West Virginia does not support performance-based pay, and it also does not include evaluation ratings in decisions around licensure advancement, renewal, and tenure. It does allow for the evaluators to recommend the dismissal of teachers based on consistent unsatisfactory performance and a failure to remediate.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    As of 2018, West Virginia has a statewide evaluation system that counts student growth as measured by student learning goals for 20%. Previously, student growth was measured by student learning goals for 15%, and summative assessment data for 5%.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Wisconsin has a state evaluation system. The state requires 50% of a teacher's evaluation is based on student outcomes. The other 50% is based on performance, using a standards-based rubric.

     

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Wisconsin requires that 50% of a teacher's evaluation come from student growth, measured by one SLO which should be aligned to "specific content standards."

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources and trainings on understanding and implementing the state system. These include forms, online trainings, and user guides. The state also provides technical assistance sessions to help districts understand their implementation data and create strategic plans to improve implementation. Additionally, the state provides a learning series every year that focuses on implementing the work in a meaningful and authentic way.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Wisconsin does not have any sanctions in place related to unsatisfactory evaluation ratings. The state does not have any policies in place for performance pay, but it does say that performance pay initiatives are not subjective to collective bargaining.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Wisconsin implemented a new teacher evaluation system beginning in 2016.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Wyoming requires districts to develop evaluation systems based on the state framework. However, implementation is delayed until the 2019-20 school year. The state framework uses five equally weighted domains:

    1)    evidence of student learning,

    2)    learner and learning,

    3)    content knowledge,

    4)    instructional practice, and

    5)    professional responsibility.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Wyoming requires that student learning be one of five equally weighted domains in a district's evaluation system. Measures should come from SLOs or SGPs (student growth percentiles—used where there are tests in the same subject for two consecutive years). Teachers are not required to be rated effective in student growth to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state has a handbook that aligns to its model system.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Wyoming does not factor evaluation ratings into licensure advancement and renewal, or compensation decisions, but it does have use ratings for tenure and dismissal decisions.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Wyoming is implementing a new teacher evaluation system beginning in the 2019-2020 school year.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Alabama strongly encourages districts to use a state evaluation system (EDUCATE), but they do allow districts to develop local systems if they are state-approved. The metrics of the evaluation system are:

  • 1/3 = “professional commitment" (self assessment, professional learning plan, etc.);
  • 1/3 = "professional practice” (observations = 20%, instructional design and impact [lesson development] = 10%, professional showcase [demonstration of teacher leadership, ongoing learning] = 5%); and
  • 1/3 = "impact on engagement & learning" (surveys from parents/students = 10%; student growth data = 25%).
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that student growth data accounts for 25% of a teacher's evaluation score. However, it only says that student growth data should come from "various assessments." It is up to districts to determine what data is considered meaningful and should be included. In addition, it is not required that a teacher meet their student growth goals to receive an overall effective evaluation rating.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as online training modules and guides on the evaluation system on their website. Additionally, the state provides differentiated technical assistance to districts to meet requirements.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Alabama does not support performance pay. They also do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations. They also do not explicitly make evaluation ratings of ineffective grounds for dismissal.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Alabama passed a new teacher evaluation law in 2016, scaling back Race to the Top reforms. They continue to support districts in the development, implementation, and assessment of their effectiveness processes.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Alaska provides criteria that districts must follow when designing their evaluation systems. The state provides requirements for evaluation systems, but does not actually specify what the metrics for the evaluation system must be. It does say that eval. systems must include observations, and must provide opportunities for parents/students/peers to provide feedback. Student growth data only counted if it's considered "relevant" to teacher's performance.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Alaska does not require measures of student growth. In June 2016, the board voted to repeal a proposed teacher eval. system which would have required student growth to account for 50% of a teacher's overall ranking. A district can use student growth data if it's considered "relevant" to a teacher's performance. However, it does not specify that student-level data come from a standards-based assessment, "Examples of student learning data include scores from curriculum-based measures, universal screeners, standardized assessments, portfolios of student work, student projects, performances, and career and technical certifications."

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as tools and templates that districts can use when designing their evaluation systems.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Alaska does not have policies that tie teacher compensation to positive evaluation scores. They also do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations. The state does say that if tenured teachers don't meet district standards after a performance improvement plan, they are eligible for nonrenewal. However, student growth is not a factor.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Alaska passed a law changing the teacher evaluation to include student learning data, which was piloted during the 2016-2017 school year. This data, however, does not have to come from standardized tests and could be tied to the teacher’s curriculum.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The state requirements are:

  • teaching performance (for which multiple measures must be used),
  • professional practice = 50-67%, and
  • student academic progress (for which multiple measures must be used) = 33-50%.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Arizona requires that student data account for 33-50% of all teacher evaluations. For "Group A teachers" (those with readily available and reliable student growth data), data from statewide assessments must be included as one indicator and must be a "significant factor" in student growth calculations. For "Group B teachers" (those with limited reliable student growth data), data must be augmented with school-level data as needed. The state does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals to be rated overall effective (if they meet all other goals).

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a state evaluation model, the teaching/school administrator standards that educators are held accountable to, and various rating tables for different types of educators.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Arizona has a "Classroom Site Fund" and some of the money is required to be allocated to teacher compensation based on performance. Arizona does not tie licensure advancement or renewal to teacher evaluations. Teachers who are up for tenure that are rated ineffective must retain their probationary status, and tenured teachers who receive an ineffective rating will be reverted to probationary status until earning an effective rating. Teachers who are consistently rated ineffective are also eligible for dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state board of education adopted revisions in 2017 that emphasize more flexibility, local control in decision making, and multiple measures of assessment of student achievement and instructional practice.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In Arkansas, districts/charters must use the Teacher Excellence and Support System (TESS) as a blueprint when approving their own evaluation systems. TESS has four domains:

  • planning and preparation,
  • environment,
  • instruction, and
  • professional responsibilities.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state model, TESS, does not specifically require standards-based measures of student growth data be included in a teacher's evaluation as a stand-alone component; however, student growth data is embedded in the design of every educator’s professional growth plan. Student growth data is embedded in evidence of planning and reflecting on instructional implementation required by TESS.

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a system for the organized collection and management of teacher and leader observations and ratings, EdReflect powered by BloomBoard. As well as additional information posted on the Arkansas Department of Education website for teacher and leader evaluation.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Arkansas does utilize performance-based pay. The state's Alternative Pay Program requires using "a variety of objective criteria that are credible, clear, specific, measurable indicators of student achievement, and generally accepted best practices to determine pay." This must represent at least 10% but not more than 50% of a teacher's salary. However, they do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state enacted major changes to their teacher evaluation system in 201. Act 295 of 2017 led our practice away from state-mandated, prescriptive procedures to state-communicated, general practice recommendations with policies created and approved locally by districts/charters to best serve the needs of the educator community. This move also laid the foundation for a definite link to self-selected, self-driven educator professional development.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    California law requires districts to use the following criteria when developing local evaluation systems:

  • progress of pupils towards standards,
  • instructional techniques and strategies used,
  • employee's adherence to curricular objectives, and
  • learning environment.
  • 0

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    California's policy states that, in their evaluation systems, districts should include "(1) The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments."

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides various resources that districts can use when developing their evaluation systems. These include the California Standards for the Teaching Profession and California Professional Standards for Educational Leaders and links to external websites.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    California does not have any policies that specifically offer teachers compensation based on performance, but they do encourage districts "to recognize teacher contributions to improving pupil achievement." The state does not tie evaluation ratings into renewal, licensure advancement, tenure, or dismissal decisions.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    California has not passed a major law affecting teacher evaluations, which are designed by local districts.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Colorado districts can either use the model evaluation system provided by the state or create their own as long as it meets the criteria set forth by the State Board of Education, including standards and elements. The State Board of Education’s rules require the following metrics for an evaluation system:

  • objective evidence of student growth;
  • using a variety of measures; and
  • teacher professional practice, which can include student surveys, peer feedback, feedback from parents, a review of lesson plans, and student work.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Colorado legislation requires that 50% of a teacher's evaluation rating be tied to measures of student learning, including multiple measures. State Board rule requires that statewide assessments must be included, where applicable. Local districts/BOCES are able to determine the weight of specific measures and the ways in which teachers determine their success or lack thereof with each measure. 

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    There are extensive resources provided to implement the state’s model evaluation system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Colorado legislation does not have policies that require linking teacher pay to performance. Colorado does not use teacher ratings to guide licensure advancement or renewal decisions. They do, however, explicitly link performance to the earning or losing of non-probationary status (tenure) and dismissal decisions. A teacher must receive effective or highly effective ratings for three consecutive years in order to earn non-probationary status (tenure). A non-probationary (tenured) teacher who earns two consecutive years of ineffective or partially effective ratings will revert to probationary status. In addition, if a probationary teacher earns an ineffective rating, an evaluator can recommend the teacher's dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Colorado has worked to continuously improve the State Model Evaluation Systems for teachers, principals and special services provider. There have been no new legislation related to evaluation since the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Connecticut requires districts to develop systems in line with the state's guidelines. The state provides a sample system called SEED. The state's required metrics for the evaluation system are:

  • 45% student learning objectives;
  • 40% standards-based observations;
  • 10% parent or peer feedback; and
  • 5% student feedback or whole-school measures of student performance.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Connecticut requires that 45% of a teacher's evaluation score come from student growth data, but expressly forbids standardized student test scores from being used in the evaluation process.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a fair amount of resources such as guidelines, rubrics, and guidance on how to develop student learning objectives.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Connecticut does not have policies that link teacher pay to performance. They also do not use teacher ratings to guide licensure advancement or renewal decisions. Tenure is based on effective evaluation rankings though, and teachers can be dismissed based on ineffective evaluation rankings.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state eliminated the use of test scores in evaluations in 2017.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Delaware requires all teachers to be evaluated using the statewide educator evaluation system, the Delaware Performance Appraisal System II (DPAS II). The metrics of the evaluation system (each of which represents 20% of the total system) are:

  • planning and preparation,
  • classroom environment,
  • instruction,
  • professional responsibilities, and
  • student improvement.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Delaware's state system requires that 20% of a teacher's eval. comes from student growth, which must be comprised of multiple measures. For ELA/math teachers in grades 4-8, half of that component must be the state assessment, while the other half can be another approved assessment or a student growth goal. However, teachers do not actually have to meet their goals for them to receive an overall effective evaluation rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide various resources to teachers and evaluators for helping them to understand the state evaluation system, such as rubrics and protocols, and helps them to understand the student improvement component.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Delaware offers two small salary stipends (between $750-2,000) that are loosely tied to performance. The state also considers teacher effectiveness ratings for licensure advancement, though not for licensure renewal. Delaware does require that probationary teachers show two years of satisfactory student growth (considered in the evaluation system) within three years before earning tenure. They also allow teachers to be dismissed for ineffective teaching.

    3

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    While Delaware has de-emphasized test scores, they maintain a specific teacher evaluation system tied to growth measures, which they have maintained since receiving Race to the Top funding.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system

    DC allows LEAs to design own evaluation systems, as long as they follow provided criteria and are approved. The criteria for included metrics are:

  • student growth is a "significant component" (50% in tested subjects; 15% in non-tested subjects) and;
  • include other multiple measures for performance, which may include a) commitment to school mission/community/values; b) lesson planning & instructional delivery; and c) positive learning environment.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    In tested subjects, DC requires student growth/achievement to count for 50% of a teacher's evaluation. Of that, a DC CAS-based measure of growth must be at least 30% for math and ELA teachers in grades 4-8. For nontested subjects, it's 35% and this could come from a) a measure of schoolwide growth based on DC CAS, b) Common Core-aligned student learning objectives or c) a standardized assessment that is Common Core-aligned. However, to receive an overall effective rating a teacher does not have to meet their student growth goals.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    DC has a resource library centered on its model teacher evaluation, which includes materials on teacher and leader evaluations. Some of these materials are links to external websites/resources. It does not provide guidance on self-designed teacher evaluation systems.

    3

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    DC does not have a policy around performance pay. The District allows, but does not require, evaluating rankings to be considered in decisions surrounding licensure advancement and renewal. Rankings do not play into decisions around tenure. DC has no policy governing teacher dismissal - it is up to local school district level. DCPS's system does make teacher ineffectiveness grounds for dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    DC adopted a new teacher evaluation system in 2016 that weakened previous rewards and sanctions.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Florida sets certain requirements that districts must follow when designing their evaluation systems. Requirements are:

  • at least 1/3 must be based on student performance;
  • at least 1/3 on instructional practice; and
  • other indicators can include surveys, peer reviews, job responsibilities, and other "valid and reliable measures of instructional practice."
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that at least 1/3 of a teacher's evaluation be based upon "data and indicators of a student's performance," but leaves it up to the districts to determine what measures are used.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide resources to districts to assist them in developing their evaluation systems, and in how to communicate out to teachers. They also provide a lot of resources on calculating and understanding Value- Added Measures based on student performance.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Florida requires all teachers hired on or after 7/1/2014 to be placed on a performance pay schedule, where the largest salary advances are given to teachers rated highly effective. Local districts can develop their own salary schedules but cannot tie compensation to anything other than classroom effectiveness.

     

    Per section 1012.22(1)(c), F.S., school districts must also provide for salary supplements for activities that must include, but are not limited to: (1) assignment to a Title I eligible school; (2) assignment to a school that earned a grade of “F: or three consecutive grades of “D”; (3) certification and teaching in critical teacher shortage areas; and 4) assignment of additional academic responsibilities.

     

    The state's requirements for licensure advancements and renewals are not based on teacher effectiveness. The state does not have tenure—all teachers hired as of July 1, 2011, are awarded annual contracts. Evaluation rankings do play in to the awarding of contracts every year, and also serve as grounds for dismissal for ineffective teachers.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has maintained its Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation systems, with strong connections between student achievement and teacher evaluations.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    By law, Georgia requires all districts to use the Teacher Keys Effectiveness System (TKES), which rates teachers based on:

  • 30% student growth,
  • 20% based on professional growth plans, and
  • 50% "Teacher Assessment on Performance Standards" (observations & documentation).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that 30% of a teacher's evaluation rating be based on student growth. For teachers of tested subjects, mean growth percentiles are used. For teachers of non-tested subjects, districts can determine measures of student growth, including using Student Learning Objectives, the school or district mean growth percentile, or other measures as determined appropriate by the district. It is possible for Georgia teachers to receive the lowest rating on student growth and be rated as effective overall.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides an annually updated handbook which includes state adopted rubrics and sample indicators. Online professional learning modules, FAQs, and quick guides as well as face-to-face professional learning opportunities are provided to support teachers in implementation of the teaching standards and to support evaluators during the evaluation process with particular emphasis on the provision of specific actionable feedback.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Georgia stipulates that teachers do not advance on the salary schedule for any year he/she receives an ineffective summative rating. Georgia also supports an initiative that allows local schools/districts to submit proposals for performance pay based on collective performance.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    In 2016, the Georgia general Assembly passed legislation that significantly changed teacher evaluation.  Student surveys were eliminated. Professional growth was added. The weighting percentages of components were altered.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Hawaii has a state evaluation system districts are required to use. The metrics of the state's evaluation system are:

  • 50% evidence of student growth (including one Student Learning Objective); and
  • 50% teacher practice (classroom observations, portfolios, professionalism etc.).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Hawaii requires 50% of a teacher's evaluation be based on student growth, which includes one Student Learning Objective or School System Improvement Objective that should be based in the standards. If teachers receive very low/unsatisfactory student growth scores, they cannot receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a video and a handbook about its teacher evaluation system.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Hawaii's compensation policy rewards effective teachers, but the state does not base decisions for renewal or licensure advancement on teacher performance. However, the state does require teachers to have two consecutive overall ratings of effective or better in order to earn tenure. Any teacher who earns an unsatisfactory rating must be dismissed.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state removed student achievement as an indicator of teacher performance in 2016.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Idaho districts can develop their own evaluation systems, as long as they are in compliance with criteria set forth by the state. Required metrics are specified broadly as follows, but exact percentages are not given:

  • inclusion of measurable student growth; and
  • professional practice (needs to include observations, student/parent input, and a teaching portfolio).
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Idaho requires that student achievement or growth data be included in evaluation systems. It does give a number of criteria that districts can choose from to use as measures of student growth, but not all of them are necessarily standards-based.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state only appears to provide an evaluation checklist and the professional teaching standards to help guide districts in creating their own evaluation systems.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Idaho does not require districts to include teacher performance when creating salary scales, but it does allow districts to do so. Idaho does require teachers to show "measurable student achievement" in order to advance to a renewable, professional certificate. Effectiveness does not play in to tenure decisions, but it does state that unsatisfactory performance is grounds for nonrenewal of a contract. However, teachers must be placed on a probationary period where they are closely supervised and evaluated before being dismissed.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Idaho has maintained its existing teacher evaluation policies, which are not overly specific nor prescriptive.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Illinois allows districts to create their own evaluation systems, as long as they follow the state's criteria. Districts can also adopt all or part of the state's model system, the Model Teacher Evaluation System. The system must have the following:

  • a performance component (observations, PD plans, etc.); and
  • a student growth component (which must count for at least 25% in the first two years of implementation, moving to at least 30% after that).
  • 1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Illinois requires student growth count for at least 30% of a teacher's overall rating, although the state system counts it for 50%. The student growth measure must include data from a state or district assessment, and then something aligned to the course curriculum. However, there are ways for teachers to have low student growth and receive ratings of overall effective.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does appear to provide resources (seemingly last updated in July 2015) that requires a state email address to access.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Illinois does not support performance pay. However, it does allow superintendents to suspend or revoke licenses based on unsatisfactory ratings. The state also factors teacher effectiveness into tenure and dismissal decisions.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Illinois has made no changes since 2015 to its teacher evaluation laws.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Indiana does have a model evaluation system (RISE) that districts can adopt. Districts can also set their own evaluation systems as long as they use criteria set forth by the state. The criteria include requiring student achievement/growth measures to "significantly inform" evaluation measures, including observation and feedback.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Indiana requires that for all teachers of tested subjects, statewide assessment results must be included in teacher evaluation scores. For teachers of nontested subjects, other forms of assessing student learning must still play a significant factor. Indiana also ensures that a teacher meet their student growth goals to be rated effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide some implementation resources for districts looking to implement their own evaluation systems, such as model plans and various fact sheets.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Indiana's compensation policy does reward teacher effectiveness, and it also plays a role in dismissal and tenure decisions, but effectiveness does not factor in to renewal or licensure advancements.

     

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Indiana has maintained its same teacher evaluation policies since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In Iowa, districts develop their own evaluation systems, following some guidance from the state. The state requires that districts include classroom observations and individual career development plans when developing an evaluation system, but it does not require measures of student growth. The state does not specify percentages for these metrics.

    0

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Iowa does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide some resources for districts around evaluation systems, including a model framework and sample evaluation forms.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Iowa does not associate rewards or sanctions with its effectiveness ratings. The state does not have compensation policies in place that reward effective teachers, based on performance, and it also does not take evaluations into account when making renewal, licensure advancement, tenure, or dismissal decisions.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Iowa has maintained its same teacher evaluation policies since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts are encouraged to use the state's eval. system, Kansas Educator Evaluation Protocol (KEEP), but can also submit their own for state approval. The metrics of evaluation systems must be as follows, but it doesn't specify the percentages allocated to each subcategory:

  • instructional practice (lesson plans, work samples, professional learning, attendance etc.); and
  • student performance.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Kansas requires student performance to be included in evaluation systems. However, districts can decide what counts as student performance indicators, and the state allows attendance, service learning, and community engagement to count as measures.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Kansas provides an evaluation handbook as the main resource available to districts developing their own evaluation systems.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Kansas does not have explicit policies around performance pay in place. It vaguely connects compensation with performance, by saying that districts have to "explain how their evaluation systems are used to inform decisions in areas such as retention, promotion, compensation and rewards." The state does not use teacher evaluations when considered teacher licensure or renewal decisions. The state only offers yearly contracts—it does not have tenure.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Kansas has maintained its same teacher evaluation policies since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts in Kentucky can create their own evaluation systems based in the Kentucky Framework for Teaching, which includes four  domains:

  • planning & preparation,
  • classroom environment,
  • instruction, and
  • professional responsibilities.
  • Districts determine the evidences to be used for each performance measure.

    0

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Kentucky does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems 

    The Kentucky Department of Education provides face-to-face and virtual support for districts as they develop local certified evaluation plans and approved all district plans for the 2018-19 school year to ensure alignment to new statute and regulation.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations

    Kentucky allows teachers to earn additional compensation for multiple reasons, including performance (individual, school-based, or student). However, there are few sanctions associated with performance, as decisions around licensure advancement and renewals, tenure, and dismissals are not explicitly tied to performance.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    In 2017, Senate Bill 1 eliminated the previous state teacher evaluation system and replaced it with the new Kentucky Framework for Personnel Evaluation, which provides guidelines but increased flexibility and local control of certified evaluation plans.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Louisiana has a statewide evaluation system, Compass, that uses 50% professional practice and 50% student growth (35% value-added measures & 15% student learning targets) to evaluate teachers.

     

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Louisiana requires that 50% of a teacher's evaluation come from student growth measures. For teachers of tested subjects, these measures must come from standardized state tests. For teachers of nontested subjects, other targets established by teachers and evaluators should be used. However, teachers do not have to meet their student growth goals to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide resources such as training materials (e.g., professional growth and goal setting plans), and webinars to help evaluators and teachers understand the state system.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Louisiana allows districts to adopt a compensation system that provides monetary incentives for performance. Louisiana requires that teachers meet a standard of effectiveness in order to advance to a professional license, and then to renew their professional license. Louisiana also requires teachers to be rated "highly effective" for 5 out of 6 years to be granted tenure. A tenured teacher will immediately lose tenure with one ineffective rating. However, the state does not explicitly connect teacher ineffectiveness with dismissals, though the state does allow for "disciplinary action" based on poor performance.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Louisiana has not changed its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Maine puts forth criteria that districts must follow when adopting their evaluation systems. The two required measures for educator effectiveness according to the state are:

  • professional practice, and
  • student learning growth (multiple measures must be used).
  • The state does not specify the exact weighting percentages, but does require that student growth play a "significant" role.

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Maine does require that student growth play a "significant" factor in a teacher's evaluation. Where standardized tests are applicable, they must be included. However, the state does not explicitly require that teachers reach student growth goals in order to be rated effective overall.

     

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state websites provide some tools but cautions that these have not been updated since legislative changes were made in 2015.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not take educator effectiveness into account when making licensure advancement, renewal, or tenure decisions, but teacher ineffectiveness does constitute grounds for dismissal. Two consecutive ratings of ineffective are just cause for nonrenewal.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state passed a new teacher evaluation law in 2015 and has not made any significant changes since then.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Maryland districts can either adopt the state's model system, or create their own evaluation system, using the state's framework, which must be approved by the state. The state model is:

  • 50% professional practice (12.5% planning & preparation, 12.5% instruction, 12.5% classroom environment, 12.5% professional responsibilities); and
  • 50% student growth.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Maryland requires student growth account for a "significant" portion of a teacher's evaluation rating, but no single criterion is allowed to be more than 35%. The state model counts student growth as 50%, and state assessments as 20% of that 50%. For elem/middle teachers of tested subjects, student growth is an aggregate measure of assessment ratings, student learning objectives, and the schoolwide index. For other teachers, student growth comes from student learning objectives and the schoolwide index. The state does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals to be rated overall effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Maryland provides extensive resources on its website for its model educator effectiveness system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Maryland does not have compensation policies based on teacher effectiveness. They do base licensure advancement decisions (advancing to a professional certificate) on effectiveness ratings, but not licensure renewal decisions. They also don't connect tenure decisions or explicitly connect dismissal decisions to effectiveness ratings.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Maryland has maintained its same teacher evaluation system since 2015. However, Maryland is in the process of convening a workgroup to revise the teacher evaluation system for the 2019-2020 school year.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Massachusetts requires that districts either adopt the state's model system or follow specific state criteria. The state suggests that plans include "products of practice" (i.e., observation data, lesson plans) and multiple measures of student learning, as well as other forms of evidence like student and staff feedback. It does not specify how these different criteria should be weighted.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Massachusetts does require that evidence of student learning be considered in teacher evaluation systems—however, it's no longer a separate rating, but embedded as an indicator. Teachers are not required to meet student learning goals in order to be rated effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide implementation resources, and other templates such as performance rubrics and tools for collecting student/staff feedback, for helping districts to understand and develop their own evaluation systems.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The commonwealth does not currently have performance pay but does allow districts to recognize teachers with exemplary performance, including through additional compensation. Massachusetts does not require evidence of teacher effectiveness in licensure renewal or advancement decisions. Teachers can be dismissed based on an ineffective rating. In addition, effectiveness is also incorporated into tenure decisions.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state eliminated the student impact rating component of teacher evaluations in 2017 and embedded this measure as an indicator rather than treating it as a standalone rating. Prior to this change, educators in Massachusetts received separate, but linked, ratings for practice and impact on student learning. Student learning is now embedded within a single overall rating.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Michigan provides metrics that districts must follow when creating their own evaluation systems:

  • 25% must come from student growth (moving to 40% in 2018-19 school year, 50% of which must come from state assessment); and
  • the rest is based primarily on teacher performance, as measured using an observation tool.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    By 2018-19, student growth must be 40% of a teacher's evaluation score. For teachers of tested subjects, half of that measure should come from state assessments. The state does not require though that teachers meet their student growth goals to receive an overall effective rating.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems 

    The state does provide resources for districts to use when designing their own evaluation systems, including state-approved observation tools, and resources and approaches to measuring student growth.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Michigan does require that teachers have been received an effective rating for three years in order to advance to a professional license but does not require evidence of effectiveness in licensure renewal. The state requires teachers to have three consecutive effective evaluations to gain tenure; any teacher with three consecutive ineffective evaluations is dismissed. The state also requires that districts create a compensation schedule that takes job performance into account and includes student growth.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Michigan passed teacher evaluation overhaul legislation in 2016.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system

    In Minnesota, districts can either adopt the state model or develop their own evaluation system. In the state model, the criteria are as follows:

  • 45% teacher practice,
  • 20% student engagement, and
  • 35% student learning and achievement.
  • If a district develops their own system, it is required that 35% of the evaluation come from student learning & achievement.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Minnesota requires that 35% of a teacher's overall rating must come from a value-added assessment model. The state's model system uses student learning goals, which are required to be aligned to the standards. However, the state does not explicitly require an effective rating in the student learning portion in order to receive an overall effective rating.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources for helping districts implement an evaluation system, including guidance on aligning to state requirements, and clearly shows when they were added/updated. Resources include sample rubrics and surveys.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations

    Minnesota allows districts to adopt an alternative pay system where 60% of compensation is determined by teacher performance. The state does not connect decisions around teacher licensure advancement or renewal or tenure to performance. However, teachers can be dismissed for "inefficiency." No teacher can be dismissed for ineffectiveness unless given time to attempt to correct his/her performance.

     

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Minnesota has maintained its Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Mississippi has a state Professional Growth System. Right now, evaluation scores are based on the four domains of the Teacher Growth Rubric:

  • lesson design,
  • student understanding,
  • learning environment, and
  • professional responsibilities.
  • The state is adding in student surveys and student outcomes for both tested and non-tested teachers, which is slated to go into effect in the 2020-2021 school year.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Mississippi's required state system does require that student outcomes play a role in the evaluation rating for teachers of both tested and nontested subjects. However, since they are still developing this component of their system, it is unclear what measures or indicators will be used to assess this, and thus whether those measures are standards-based. Over the next year, a set of measures are being piloted by eight school districts.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a guidebook as well as standardized forms and tools for teacher evaluation.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Mississippi's requirements for licensure advancement and renewal are not based on teacher effectiveness, and neither are their decisions around tenure or dismissal. The state does have a Performance Based Pay plan that "may provide monies from state funds to school districts for the purposes of rewarding certified teachers," but the award amount is not listed, and the plan only works if funding is available.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Mississippi has not changed its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts in Missouri can either adopt the state's model evaluation system, based in Missouri's Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation, or create their own that is aligned with the same principles. Plans must be approved by the state. The Essential Principles which are required by all school districts and charter schools include:

  • use of research-based performance targets;
  • differentiated performance levels;
  • special support for probationary teachers (less than five years’ experience);
  • use of student growth measures;
  • use of actionable feedback, includes training for evaluators; and
  • use of evaluation data for personnel determinations (contracts, PD, mentor selection, etc.).
  • Exact percentages are not specified, but student growth is required to be a "significant" component of a teacher's evaluation rating. 

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    While the state requires student growth to play a significant role in evaluation, it is left up to the districts how to assess this. It is not required to be based in the standards, as some of the examples the state gives for measures to assess student performance include "observable behaviors." However, use of student growth measures must highlight growth in student learning across two points in time.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides several resources to districts around evaluation systems, including feedback forms, surveys, protocols, and possible sources of evidence.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Missouri allows districts to use a compensation system that includes performance-based pay. It also requires any schools that are "academically deficient" to develop a program to reward teachers. The state does not connect decisions around teacher licensure advancement or renewal or tenure to performance. However, teachers can be dismissed "If sustained demonstration of unacceptable performance occurs."

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    No changes have been made to the state’s model educator evaluation system or to the requirements articulated in the Essential Principles of Effective Evaluation since they went into effect in 2014. The passage of ESSA has not resulted in any change in the expectations and requirements of educator evaluation in the state of Missouri.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Montana allows districts to develop evaluation systems based on state criteria, which include three domains:

  • professional growth,
  • continuous improvement, and
  • quality assurance.
  • The state does not require measures of student growth in its evaluation system.

    0

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Montana does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides some implementation resources for districts, including various forms and frameworks.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Montana does not require that PD activities be aligned to teacher evaluation results, nor does it specify that teachers with low/ineffective ratings be placed on improvement plans. Montana does not use evaluation ratings to make decisions around compensation, licensure advancement and renewal, tenure, or dismissal.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Montana has not changed its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Nebraska requires districts to develop their own evaluation systems based on state criteria. Each district's system must be approved by the state. Criteria include::

  • instructional performance,
  • classroom organization and management, and
  • personal and professional conduct.
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Nebraska does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state offers resources to districts such as forms/templates, rubrics, and guidance documents.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Nebraska does not support performance-based pay. It also does not incorporate effectiveness ratings into decisions around tenure, licensure advancement and renewal, and dismissal.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Nebraska has not had a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change with respect to its teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Nevada follows the Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF), but districts can apply to use a different system as long as it follows the state framework, and uses the criteria set forth by the state which include:

  • instructional practice (60%);
  • professional responsibilities (20%); and
  • student growth (must count for 20% in 2017-18, and 40% in 2018-19).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Nevada requires that district-level performance measures (Student Learning Goals, SLGs) be used for all teachers, except those in their first year of employment. It does specify that SLGs should be aligned to the Nevada Academic Content Standards. In addition, Nevada does specify that teachers receive one of the three highest ratings on the SLG rubric in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides tools for teachers and administrators, as well as NEPF-specific tools.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state has implemented a performance pay system. Each school district has to reserve enough money to pay an increase in base salaries (no more than 10%), for at least 5% of teachers. The state does not use effectiveness when considering licensure advancement and renewal decisions. It does, however, require that probationary teachers show at least 2 years of effective performance within three years, in order to receive tenure. Once a teacher has tenure, if they earn two consecutive ineffective ratings they return to probationary status.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state enacted major teacher evaluation changes in 2017.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    New Hampshire's Task Force on Effective Teaching outlines a model evaluation system, but the state gives local school boards the authority to create their own evaluation systems. It is then the responsibility of school principals to carry out evaluations. The model evaluation system incorporates measures of students’ growth and other indicators, but the state does not actually have any required elements for district evaluation systems.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New Hampshire does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    No resources appear to be available for districts in creating their own evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    New Hampshire does not require districts to consider effectiveness when making decisions around licensure advancements and renewal, dismissals, compensation, or tenure.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state enacted major teacher evaluation changes in 2017.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In New Jersey, districts develop their own evaluation systems, based on the state's framework. Systems must be approved by the state. Teacher evaluation systems developed by districts must be comprised of two components:

  • teacher practice (based on classroom observations); and
  • student achievement (student growth objectives & student growth percentiles, 30-50% of the overall evaluation).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New Jersey requires that for teachers of tested subjects, student growth must be 30-50% of their overall evaluation. For teachers of nontested subjects, it should be 15-50%. For teachers of non-tested subjects, measures can include district or other standardized assessments, teacher-made assessments, teacher-set goals etc. Teachers are not required to be rated effective in the area of student growth in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state has an Implementation Quality Toolkit, which provides various resources for districts looking to implement and improve their evaluation systems. This includes instructions on developing protocols and rubrics, a video series, and calibration activities.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    New Jersey requires that teachers earn an effective evaluation for two of three years in order to advance to a standard certificate and gain tenure. They don't use effectiveness for licensure renewal though. If a teacher receives two years of ineffective ratings, a superintendent must file a charge of inefficiency. The state does not have policies that compensates teachers based on ineffectiveness.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state temporarily banned achievement measures in teacher evaluations in 2015, but they are being reintroduced.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The NMTEACH evaluation tool the state uses includes: student academic growth, classroom and school practice, contributions to peers/the school community, student surveys and attendance. The final evaluation is comprised of:

  • improved student achievement (35%);
  • classroom observations (40%);
  • planning, preparation and professionalism (15%);
  • student surveys (5%); and
  • teacher attendance (5%).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New Mexico's state evaluation system requires that student growth count for 35% of a teacher's evaluation rating. However, the state does not require that teachers receive an effective rating on student growth in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state has an online "toolbox" available that provides resources to districts, and an FAQ document that leads to other available resources and websites.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    New Mexico has a performance-based pay system that rewards teachers for their impact on student learning. New Mexico requires that teacher effectiveness be considered when making licensure advancement decisions, but not licensure renewal or tenure decisions. If a nonprobationary teacher is rated minimally effective or ineffective, they are placed on a 90-day performance improvement plan. After 90 days, a superintendent can decide whether to discharge or terminate an employee.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    New Mexico has revised its teacher evaluator system annually for the past several years.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In New York, districts can create their own evaluation systems, based on state criteria. The systems, which must be approved by the state, must have two categories:

  • effective practice (based on observations), and
  • student performance.
  • The state prohibits the inclusion of student/parent feedback in teacher evaluations.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    New York requires student growth to be included in a teacher's evaluation score. Where state-provided student growth scores are available, that score must be included. Where unavailable, a SLO is used. Districts can add in another measure as well. The student growth measures are intended to be aligned with the standards. In addition, New York does not allow a teacher with an ineffective rating in the area of student growth to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    New York’s materials for implementing teacher evaluations are comprehensive and available through EngageNY.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not use effectiveness ratings to make decisions around licensure advancement and renewal. It also does not support performance-based pay. In terms of tenure, teachers must be rated effective 3 out of 4 years. Teachers can be dismissed if they are rated ineffective for 2+ consecutive years.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    New York has not made significant changes to its state teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The state evaluation system includes:

  • self-assessment,
  • PD plans, and
  • observations.
  • It does not require the inclusion of student growth measures. The state does specify that teachers must be evaluated using the state's evaluation rubric, the North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Rubric.

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    North Carolina has a state-mandated system aligned to end-of-course assessments.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a handbook—and many other resources including fact sheets, evaluation instruments, and manuals—for use in educator evaluation.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not use effectiveness to make decisions around licensure advancement and renewal, dismissal, or compensation. NC doesn't offer tenure to teachers that have been employed for less than three years—they can only get one-year contracts. After three years, a teacher can be recommended for a longer contract if they have "shown effectiveness as demonstrated by proficiency on the evaluation instrument."

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state made significant changes in 2016 to its teacher evaluation system.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts in North Dakota design their own systems, based on state guidelines. Plans must be approved by the state and include multiple measures that include:

  • student growth and achievement measures, and
  • observations.
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    North Dakota's requirements state that evaluation systems must "incorporate multiple valid measures, which are clearly related to increasing the standards-based teaching competencies, including a meaningful level of student growth, student academic achievement, and school performance." This must include standardized assessments, where conducted. However, teachers are not required to meet student growth goals in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    There are guidelines (last updated in 2014), and links to two external resources available. Overall, the selection of resources is very limited.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    North Dakota does not have any policies around performance pay. It also does not use effectiveness to make decisions about licensure advancement or renewal, tenure, or dismissal.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    North Dakota passed a new teacher evaluation law in 2016.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The Ohio Teacher Evaluation System requires teacher evaluation measures to constitute 50% student growth and 50% teacher performance on standards. In the alternative system, measures are 50% teacher performance, 35% student growth, and 15% "alternative components" (which can include student surveys, teacher self-evaluations, peer evaluations etc.). Districts can use either system.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Ohio requires student growth to count for between 35-50% of a teacher's evaluation score, depending on the availability of value-added measures. Value-added measures come from standards-based state tests. For teachers without value-added measures, approved vendor assessment and/or student learning objectives are used. The state does not require teachers to receive a effective student growth rating in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides several resources for evaluations, including a resource guide that has things like suggested PD activities around evaluation, coaching frameworks, and links to external resources.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Ohio requires that municipal school districts adopt a performance-based pay salary schedule. They do not use effectiveness ratings to make decisions about licensure advancement, renewal, or tenure. Evaluations are taken into consideration for dismissal decisions.

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Ohio passed legislation in August 2018 to revise the teacher evaluation system.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Oklahoma requires that all teachers are evaluated using the Oklahoma Teacher and Leader Effectiveness System. The evaluation system uses various measures of teacher professional practice (PD plans, observations), but does not require measures of student growth.

     

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Oklahoma does not require that student growth or achievement play a role in teacher evaluation systems.

     

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide a variety of resources for districts to implement the state's evaluation system, including webinars, PPTs, and instructions for completing the state forms.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Oklahoma allows districts to adopt performance-based pay systems. The state does not take effectiveness into considerationg for licensure advancement or renewal decisions. However, effectiveness ratings do come into play when making tenure decisions: a teacher must receive either a superior rating for 2 out of 3 years, or an effective rating for 4 years. If teachers receive multiple ineffective ratings, they are eligible for dismissal.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has maintained its same teacher evaluation system.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Oregon requires district evaluation systems to be based on Oregon adopted standards (ITASC and ISLIC). Teachers are evaluated based on the following criteria:

  • professional practice (quality of planning, delivery of instruction etc.);
  • professional responsibilities; and
  • student learning and growth.
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Oregon requires that all teachers have two student learning and growth goals, which must be incorporated into the evaluation system. One goal must be based on the standards for which the teacher is responsible for teaching, the other based on the same OR a related student area such as behavior. However, it is not required that state standardized assessments are used as measures of goal attainment. Other allowable measures include commercially or locally-developed pre- and post-assessments and portfolios of student work. Oregon does not require that teachers be rated effective in the area of student growth in order to receive an overall effective rating.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a toolkit with many different resources for districts, including sample goals for educators and differentiated rubrics.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state allows school districts to participate in a grant program, which provides funding to implement performance-based approaches to compensation. Oregon does not use effectiveness ratings in making decisions around licensure advancement or renewal, or tenure. A teacher may be dismissed for inadequate performance, but the link between dismissal and the evaluation rating is vague.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    There have been no changes to the teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    All teachers in the state are evaluated using the Pennsylvania's Teacher Effectiveness Tool. Student performance counts for 50% of a teacher's rating. The other 50% comes from classroom observation and practice. However, although this appears to be a requirement, the state website discusses how local districts can come up with alternatives to the teacher observation/practice component in the state system, if proper guidelines are followed and approval is received.

     

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Pennsylvania requires that student growth count for 50% of a teacher's evaluation rating, and that the 50% must be comprised of multiple measures including:

    1)    building-level data (15%), which includes both standards-based measures like assessments and non-standards-based measures like graduation rates;

    2)    teacher-specific data (15%), including assessment performance and progress towards meeting student goals; and

    3)    locally developed measures of student achievement (20%).

    However, a teacher could earn zero student growth points and still be rated proficient.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Pennsylvania provides extensive resources for implementing its state evaluation system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    PA requires that a teacher must have three years of satisfactory ratings before advancing to a professional license. There are no effectiveness requirements about renewal, once a teacher has received a professional license. However, the state automatically awards tenure (doesn't take effectiveness into consideration). A teacher is eligible for dismissal if he/she receives two consecutive unsatisfactory evaluations. The state does not have performance-based pay policies in effect.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Pennsylvania has maintained its Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation system since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Rhode Island has a state model evaluation system, but districts can adopt their own system. The three criteria in the eval. system are:

  • professional practice (classroom environment and instruction),
  • professional responsibilities, and
  • student learning (must be 30%).
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Rhode Island requires that student growth make up 30% of a teacher's evaluation score, measured through academic goals and SLOs, which should be standards-based. The state does not require that teachers meet their student growth goals/be rated effective in student growth in order to be rated effective overall.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a guidebook, templates/forms, and various resources for evaluators and educators to orient them to the system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Rhode Island does not have performance-based compensation policies in place. The state does require that teachers have at least 1 rating of developing or higher within 3 years to advance to a professional certificate (pretty low bar...). Effectiveness ratings also tie into licensure renewal decisions. Effectiveness ratings do not factor in to tenure or dismissal decisions though.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    0. The state developed a new teacher evaluation system called Frontline in 2017.

     

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    South Carolina requires districts to use the state system (Expanded ADEPT) or an equivalent. The system uses multiple measures to assess professional performance (including observations) and student growth measures.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    South Carolina's state system requires the use of one Student Learning Objective (SLO) for a teacher, which is aligned to the standards-based state assessments. In addition, the South Carolina Teaching Standards 4.0 rubric is aligned with the skills and characteristics of the Profile of the South Carolina Graduate.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as training, templates, webinars, and an online data management platform for implementing the Expanded ADEPT system.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations

    The state allows incentive pay, based on factors like student achievement and classroom observations (parts of the evaluation system). South Carolina uses effectiveness ratings to make decisions about licensure advancements, but not for renewal, or dismissal. Per 56-26-40, an educator may only advance to a professional certificate and continuing contract status after they have “successfully completed the formal evaluation process.”

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    2018-19 will be the first year of implementation of the state’s redesigned teacher effectiveness system. The system focuses on growth and development, emphasizing student growth measures (Student Learning Objectives) and teacher observation using the South Carolina Teaching Standards 4.0 Rubric.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    South Dakota requires districts to implement an evaluation system aligned to the SD Framework for Teaching (Danielson standards) and includes student learning objectives. The evaluation system must assign a professional practice rating and student growth rating. 

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    South Dakota does require the use of student growth scores in teacher evaluations and says they should play a "significant" role. The state uses SLOs, which are intended to be aligned to standards Student learning objectives must include district, school, or teacher-developed assessments.

     

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a fair amount of resources (rubrics, training webinars, templates etc.) that are aligned to the state's model system.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not have performance-based compensation policies in place. They also do not use effectiveness ratings to make decisions about licensure advancements or renewals, or tenure. The state does allow for dismissal due to "poor performance," but it's not explicitly linked to the teacher evaluation process.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state significantly revised its teacher evaluation system in 2017.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Tennesse has a state model (TEAM), but districts may also develop their own state models as long as they align with the state framework. The state requires that student achievement comprise 30-50% of the evaluation system (30% for teachers of non-tested subjects, 50% for teachers of tested subjects). The other 50% comes from observations.

     

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that student achievement comprise of 30-50% of a teacher's total evaluation score (30% for teachers of non-tested subjects, 50% for teachers of tested subjects). For teachers of tested subjects, 35% should be from the state's value-added model and 15% must come from another measure (which may or may not be standards-aligned) such as state assessments, ACT/SAT, or graduation rates. Tennessee does not require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated at least effective for student growth portion to be rated overall effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources for districts implementing the state’s teacher evaluation model, but not for districts to develop their own systems.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Districts in Tennessee can choose to include a performance-based component in their salary, but they must tie it directly to evaluation ratings. Licensure advancement and renewal decisions can be made one of two ways: either through effective evaluations or through earning PDPs (PD points) which can be accrued either through evaluation or through training & coursework. Evaluation ratings are used to make decisions around tenure and dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state passed new legislation in 2018 revamping its teacher evaluation system.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Texas' T-TESS includes three components:

  • a goal-setting and PD plan;
  • evaluation cycle (pre-conference, observation, post-conference); and
  • student growth.
  • For districts that use T-TESS, student growth must be 20%. Districts can also design comparable systems, instead of using T-TESS.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that student growth be included in a teacher's overall evaluation score. For districts using T-TESS (the state system), student growth must count for 20% and come from one of the following measures: student learning objectives (SLOs), portfolios, district-level pre- and post-tests, or value-added measures. Texas does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated effective in student growth to earn an overall rating of effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a plethora of resources associated with T-TESS.

     

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Texas does not have specific performance pay policies, although it does have a grant program for districts with at least 50% ED students that can be used for implementing an alternative compensation system. The state also does not have any sanctions associated with the teacher evaluation system (i.e., licensure, renewal, tenure).

     

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Utah requires that district evaluation systems have the following multiple measures of evidence: professional performance, student academic growth, and stakeholder input.

    2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Utah does require student growth to be included in a teacher's rating and specifies that measures include "learning goals measuring long-term outcomes linked to the appropriate specific content knowledge and skills from the Utah Core Standards." Utah does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated effective in student growth to earn an overall rating of effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    Utah provides the professional standards and an observation tool.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Utah's compensation policy does reward teachers based on effectiveness. Utah does include evaluation ratings when making decisions about licensure advancement and renewal, though it's not the sole component. They also allow teachers to be dismissed for unsatisfactory performance, but it's not explicitly tied to the evaluation system. The state automatically awards tenure—it is not tied to the evaluation system or any other effectiveness measure.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Utah removed proficiency and growth from its mandatory teacher evaluation system measures in 2017.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Districts determine their own evaluation systems, and states provide little guidance or required criteria. The state does suggest multiple indicators are used, that assess four different standards: "the learner and learning", content, instructional practice, and professional responsibility.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Vermont specifies that student growth and proficiency on state assessments plays a role in teacher evaluation.

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides limited resources to districts for developing their own systems. This is mainly a few sample rubrics, and a link to the state's Education Quality Standards.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Vermont has no policies related to rewards and sanctions for teacher evaluation scores.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Virginia allows districts to develop their own evaluation systems, in conjunction with state requirements. The recommended system is to count student growth for 40% (required it plays a significant role) and to count the six other teaching professional standards for 10% each.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Virginia requires that student growth play a "significant" role in teacher evaluations and recommends 40%. The state suggests that tools such as standardized achievement tests, criterion-referenced tests, and "authentic measures (i.e. learner portfolio, recitation, performance)" are "appropriate" measures for assessing student achievement. Virginia does not require that teachers meet student growth goals or be rated effective in student growth to earn an overall rating of effective.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does provide resources/materials for creating district evaluation systems that align with the state's Guidelines for Uniform Performance Standards and Evaluation Criteria for Teachers.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Virginia has a state grant that allows districts to submit proposals for funding to award incentive pay to teachers, which includes incentives for student growth. The state does not use evaluation ratings to make decisions around licensure advancement or renewal. It does require that probationary teachers who receive an unsatisfactory rating may not be reemployed, and it also allows teachers who demonstrate "incompetence" through evaluation ratings to be dismissed.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system

    Washington requires teacher evaluations to include at least eight criteria:

    1)    centering instruction on high expectations for student achievement;

    2)    demonstrating effective teaching practices;

    3)    recognizing individual student learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs;

    4)    providing clear and intentional focus on subject-matter content and curriculum;

    5)    fostering and managing a safe, positive learning environment;

    6)    using multiple student data elements to modify instruction and improve student learning;

    7)    communicating and collaborating with families and the school community; and

    8)    exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on improving instructional practice and student learning.

    Student growth data must be a substantial factor in measuring standards 3, 6 and 8.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Washington requires student growth based on multiple measures to be a factor in the evaluation process. Measures can include classroom-, school-, district-, or state-based tools.

     

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides districts with many resources for creating their own systems, including links to state-approved instructional and leadership frameworks, training modules, and guidelines for using and measuring student growth, and grant funding for professional learning.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    The state does not support performance pay. Washington does take evaluation ratings into account when teachers want to advance to a professional license. However, teachers don't have to advance to a professional license—they can continue to renew their residency licenses. Teacher evaluations do not play a role in licensure renewal decisions. There can be consequences for tenure or dismissal based on teacher effectiveness ratings.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state has made no major changes to its teacher evaluation systems since 2015.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    West Virginia has a statewide evaluation system that counts student growth for 20%, and the other five teacher professional standards for a combined 80%, which cover curriculum and planning, learner/learning environment, teaching, and professional responsibilities.

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    West Virginia Department of Education provides technical assistance to districts requiring support in the area of teacher evaluation. All evaluation tools are provided through the statewide teacher evaluation system.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state does not appear to provide any resources.

    0

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    West Virginia does not support performance-based pay, and it also does not include evaluation ratings in decisions around licensure advancement, renewal, and tenure. It does allow for the evaluators to recommend the dismissal of teachers based on consistent unsatisfactory performance and a failure to remediate.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    As of 2018, West Virginia has a statewide evaluation system that counts student growth as measured by student learning goals for 20%. Previously, student growth was measured by student learning goals for 15%, and summative assessment data for 5%.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Wisconsin has a state evaluation system. The state requires 50% of a teacher's evaluation is based on student outcomes. The other 50% is based on performance, using a standards-based rubric.

     

    3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Wisconsin requires that 50% of a teacher's evaluation come from student growth, measured by one SLO which should be aligned to "specific content standards."

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources and trainings on understanding and implementing the state system. These include forms, online trainings, and user guides. The state also provides technical assistance sessions to help districts understand their implementation data and create strategic plans to improve implementation. Additionally, the state provides a learning series every year that focuses on implementing the work in a meaningful and authentic way.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Wisconsin does not have any sanctions in place related to unsatisfactory evaluation ratings. The state does not have any policies in place for performance pay, but it does say that performance pay initiatives are not subjective to collective bargaining.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Wisconsin implemented a new teacher evaluation system beginning in 2016.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Wyoming requires districts to develop evaluation systems based on the state framework. However, implementation is delayed until the 2019-20 school year. The state framework uses five equally weighted domains:

    1)    evidence of student learning,

    2)    learner and learning,

    3)    content knowledge,

    4)    instructional practice, and

    5)    professional responsibility.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Wyoming requires that student learning be one of five equally weighted domains in a district's evaluation system. Measures should come from SLOs or SGPs (student growth percentiles—used where there are tests in the same subject for two consecutive years). Teachers are not required to be rated effective in student growth to receive an overall effective rating.

    3

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state has a handbook that aligns to its model system.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Wyoming does not factor evaluation ratings into licensure advancement and renewal, or compensation decisions, but it does have use ratings for tenure and dismissal decisions.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Wyoming is implementing a new teacher evaluation system beginning in the 2019-2020 school year.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Alabama strongly encourages districts to use a state evaluation system (EDUCATE), but they do allow districts to develop local systems if they are state-approved. The metrics of the evaluation system are:

  • 1/3 = “professional commitment" (self assessment, professional learning plan, etc.);
  • 1/3 = "professional practice” (observations = 20%, instructional design and impact [lesson development] = 10%, professional showcase [demonstration of teacher leadership, ongoing learning] = 5%); and
  • 1/3 = "impact on engagement & learning" (surveys from parents/students = 10%; student growth data = 25%).
  • 2

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state requires that student growth data accounts for 25% of a teacher's evaluation score. However, it only says that student growth data should come from "various assessments." It is up to districts to determine what data is considered meaningful and should be included. In addition, it is not required that a teacher meet their student growth goals to receive an overall effective evaluation rating.

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as online training modules and guides on the evaluation system on their website. Additionally, the state provides differentiated technical assistance to districts to meet requirements.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Alabama does not support performance pay. They also do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations. They also do not explicitly make evaluation ratings of ineffective grounds for dismissal.

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Alabama passed a new teacher evaluation law in 2016, scaling back Race to the Top reforms. They continue to support districts in the development, implementation, and assessment of their effectiveness processes.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Alaska provides criteria that districts must follow when designing their evaluation systems. The state provides requirements for evaluation systems, but does not actually specify what the metrics for the evaluation system must be. It does say that eval. systems must include observations, and must provide opportunities for parents/students/peers to provide feedback. Student growth data only counted if it's considered "relevant" to teacher's performance.

    1

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Alaska does not require measures of student growth. In June 2016, the board voted to repeal a proposed teacher eval. system which would have required student growth to account for 50% of a teacher's overall ranking. A district can use student growth data if it's considered "relevant" to a teacher's performance. However, it does not specify that student-level data come from a standards-based assessment, "Examples of student learning data include scores from curriculum-based measures, universal screeners, standardized assessments, portfolios of student work, student projects, performances, and career and technical certifications."

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides resources such as tools and templates that districts can use when designing their evaluation systems.

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Alaska does not have policies that tie teacher compensation to positive evaluation scores. They also do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations. The state does say that if tenured teachers don't meet district standards after a performance improvement plan, they are eligible for nonrenewal. However, student growth is not a factor.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    Alaska passed a law changing the teacher evaluation to include student learning data, which was piloted during the 2016-2017 school year. This data, however, does not have to come from standardized tests and could be tied to the teacher’s curriculum.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    The state requirements are:

  • teaching performance (for which multiple measures must be used),
  • professional practice = 50-67%, and
  • student academic progress (for which multiple measures must be used) = 33-50%.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    Arizona requires that student data account for 33-50% of all teacher evaluations. For "Group A teachers" (those with readily available and reliable student growth data), data from statewide assessments must be included as one indicator and must be a "significant factor" in student growth calculations. For "Group B teachers" (those with limited reliable student growth data), data must be augmented with school-level data as needed. The state does not explicitly require that teachers meet student growth goals to be rated overall effective (if they meet all other goals).

    2

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a state evaluation model, the teaching/school administrator standards that educators are held accountable to, and various rating tables for different types of educators.

     

    1

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Arizona has a "Classroom Site Fund" and some of the money is required to be allocated to teacher compensation based on performance. Arizona does not tie licensure advancement or renewal to teacher evaluations. Teachers who are up for tenure that are rated ineffective must retain their probationary status, and tenured teachers who receive an ineffective rating will be reverted to probationary status until earning an effective rating. Teachers who are consistently rated ineffective are also eligible for dismissal.

    2

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state board of education adopted revisions in 2017 that emphasize more flexibility, local control in decision making, and multiple measures of assessment of student achievement and instructional practice.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    In Arkansas, districts/charters must use the Teacher Excellence and Support System (TESS) as a blueprint when approving their own evaluation systems. TESS has four domains:

  • planning and preparation,
  • environment,
  • instruction, and
  • professional responsibilities.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    The state model, TESS, does not specifically require standards-based measures of student growth data be included in a teacher's evaluation as a stand-alone component; however, student growth data is embedded in the design of every educator’s professional growth plan. Student growth data is embedded in evidence of planning and reflecting on instructional implementation required by TESS.

    0

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides a system for the organized collection and management of teacher and leader observations and ratings, EdReflect powered by BloomBoard. As well as additional information posted on the Arkansas Department of Education website for teacher and leader evaluation.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    Arkansas does utilize performance-based pay. The state's Alternative Pay Program requires using "a variety of objective criteria that are credible, clear, specific, measurable indicators of student achievement, and generally accepted best practices to determine pay." This must represent at least 10% but not more than 50% of a teacher's salary. However, they do not tie licensure advancement, tenure, or renewal to teacher evaluations.

    1

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    The state enacted major changes to their teacher evaluation system in 201. Act 295 of 2017 led our practice away from state-mandated, prescriptive procedures to state-communicated, general practice recommendations with policies created and approved locally by districts/charters to best serve the needs of the educator community. This move also laid the foundation for a definite link to self-selected, self-driven educator professional development.

    0

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    California law requires districts to use the following criteria when developing local evaluation systems:

  • progress of pupils towards standards,
  • instructional techniques and strategies used,
  • employee's adherence to curricular objectives, and
  • learning environment.
  • 0

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievement or growth data on CCR-aligned assessments.

    California's policy states that, in their evaluation systems, districts should include "(1) The progress of pupils toward the standards established pursuant to subdivision (a) and, if applicable, the state adopted academic content standards as measured by state adopted criterion referenced assessments."

    1

    Authority

    Whether states provide resources/tools to districts to help them implement or come up with teacher evaluation systems. 

    The state provides various resources that districts can use when developing their evaluation systems. These include the California Standards for the Teaching Profession and California Professional Standards for Educational Leaders and links to external websites.

    2

    Power

    The extent to which states offer rewards (performance pay, licensure advancement, renewal, tenure) and sanctions (dismissal, layoffs) for teachers based on their evaluations.

    California does not have any policies that specifically offer teachers compensation based on performance, but they do encourage districts "to recognize teacher contributions to improving pupil achievement." The state does not tie evaluation ratings into renewal, licensure advancement, tenure, or dismissal decisions.

     

    0

    Stability

    Whether a state has passed a new teacher evaluation law or major regulatory change passed since 2015. The passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act in December 2015 allowed many states to move away from Race to the Top-era teacher evaluation policies.

    California has not passed a major law affecting teacher evaluations, which are designed by local districts.

    1

    Attribute

    Criteria

    State Details

    Strength of Attribute

    Teacher Evaluation

    Specificity

    The extent to which states specify what needs to be included in a district's evaluation system.

    Colorado districts can either use the model evaluation system provided by the state or create their own as long as it meets the criteria set forth by the State Board of Education, including standards and elements. The State Board of Education’s rules require the following metrics for an evaluation system:

  • objective evidence of student growth;
  • using a variety of measures; and
  • teacher professional practice, which can include student surveys, peer feedback, feedback from parents, a review of lesson plans, and student work.
  • 3

    Consistency

    Whether a teacher evaluation system is aligned to the standards, as measured by student achievemen