Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Teacher Evaluation Qcomp topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stillwater updates QCOMP coaching, introduces two evaluation rubrics for 2025-26
Summary
District officials reported on QCOMP implementation, described a centralized coaching model used this year, and presented two new educator evaluation rubrics to meet a 2023 Minnesota statutory requirement to revise evaluation tools.
Board Chair Sherman heard an annual report on QCOMP and the district's new educator evaluation rubrics during the Stillwater Area Public Schools Board of Education meeting.
The presentation described QCOMP (the state's alternative teacher professional pay system), the district's centralized instructional coaching model piloted this year and plans to implement two simplified evaluation rubrics next school year.
Deb Van Clai and Steven Gordy told the board that QCOMP in Stillwater has four components: teacher leadership/career ladders, job-embedded professional development, the teacher development/evaluation plan and performance pay. Van Clai said the district used coaches in a centralized model this year and that 428 educators took part in either formal coaching cycles or "learning labs." She said coaches work one-on-one with teachers to develop professional goals and to connect teacher growth to student growth.
Gordy described the rubric work. He said Minnesota statute required districts to revise instructional evaluation rubrics in 2023, and that Stillwater last adopted the 5D+ rubric 11 years ago. The district's committee met from November through May with roughly 25 members representing classroom teachers, special educators, related-service staff and administrators. Gordy said the group produced two rubrics: a classroom educator rubric (17 indicators across five competencies) and a service-and-program provider rubric (14 indicators). By contrast, the previous 5D+ instrument had about 30 indicators, Gordy said.
Board members asked whether committee members who created the rubrics are the same people who will perform evaluations; Gordy and Van Clai clarified that licensed building administrators (principals and assistant principals) will perform formal evaluations, while coaches will work primarily with continuing-contract teachers and probationary teachers will be evaluated by building administrators. Van Clai added that the district will continue centralized coaching next year and expand supports such as an instructional playbook and a three-year professional growth model.
Directors asked about measures of coaching effectiveness. Van Clai said the district is still gathering survey and student-growth data and is tracking how many staff met individual student achievement goals. She said the district draws on evidence-based coaching factors from Jim Knight's work and plans to refine its data collection to show impacts more clearly.
Several directors asked whether QCOMP funding could be at risk after a governor's budget proposal; Van Clai said she received an update that morning and that QCOMP was not mentioned, and that the program presently appears likely to continue.
Board members praised the district for a collaborative rubric development process and asked that the communications team share the rubric and the instructional playbook with the board and the community before full implementation.
The district said implementation will begin next school year; principals and instructional leaders will use the rubrics, coaches and the playbook to support teacher growth.
