The Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness design and work teams recognized that any one model for evaluating professional practice and its rubrics for observation might not suit every district. Therefore, the design team recommended the state develop an application process for districts wishing to use alternative models to measure teacher or principal practice within the statewide system of educator effectiveness.
Accordingly, the Wisconsin Legislature included language in Act 166, the legislation setting forth requirements regarding educator evaluations, for the Department of Public Instruction to develop an application and approval process (Equivalency Review) for districts intending to use alternative practice models. The legislation states the following requirements of the Equivalency Process:
- An alternative model must align to the InTASC standards for teachers and align to the ISLLC standards for principals.
View alignment standards for the following:
InTASC (for teachers)
ISLLC (for school administrator)
- An alternative model for measuring teacher practice must also align to the following four domains:
- Planning and preparation.
- Classroom management.
- Professional responsibilities
Alignment with Danielson
A district intending to use an alternative model must apply for Equivalency from the Department of Public Instruction.
For that purpose, the DPI, in collaboration with a group of education stakeholders familiar with the Educator Effectiveness system, established parameters for the review of models to measure professional practice - otherwise referred to as the Equivalency Review Process. Within the Wisconsin Educator Effectiveness system, only models of educator practice are subject to equivalency; the equivalency review process does not apply to the measures of student outcomes. Applicants must align observation rubrics to the InTASC (teacher) and ISLLC (principal) standards, as well as to the intentions of the statewide system that continuously improves teacher and principal practice through a fair, valid and reliable process using multiple measures to improve student and school outcomes.
The Equivalency Review Process also requires evidence relative to a model's
- research base,
- rubrics that have four or more performance levels which are comparable to the state's levels, differentiate across levels with distinctive, observable practices; and provide specific, observable, practices to inform improvement and growth,
- CESA 6 Effectiveness Project© Guidebooks
- Equivalent processes, and
- Equivalent Observation Options (May 2013)
NOTE: The CESA 6 Effectiveness Project© submitted the Application for Equivalency on April 17, 2013. Approval was received on May 16, 2013.