Additional Readjustment of established Targets for Student Growth or Achievement Sample Clauses

Additional Readjustment of established Targets for Student Growth or Achievement. During the course of the school year, teachers are also entitled to request a change to the established Targets for Student Growth or Achievement based on extenuating circumstances (e.g. student mobility, large number of students with IEPs, large number of students who are ELL, large number of AIS, etc). This consideration shall be at the discretion of the Superintendent, but shall not be unreasonably denied. The decision shall be made prior to the computation of this sub-­‐component score. The evaluator may weigh individual student’s scores or add points to the teacher’s total score for the local assessment portion of their APPR. Upon the request of either party, the teacher and evaluator shall meet to discuss extenuating circumstances. Documentation of such circumstances will be maintained by the teacher and evaluator.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Additional Readjustment of established Targets for Student Growth or Achievement. During the course of the school year, teachers are also entitled to request a change to the established Targets for Student Growth based on extenuating circumstances (e.g. student mobility, large number of students with IEPs, large number of students who are ELL, large number of AIS, etc). This consideration shall be at the discretion of the Superintendent, but shall not be unreasonably denied. The decision shall be made prior to the computation of this sub-component score. Upon the request of either party, the teacher and evaluator shall meet to discuss extenuating circumstances. Documentation of such circumstances will be maintained by the teacher and evaluator.

Related to Additional Readjustment of established Targets for Student Growth or Achievement

  • Performance Targets Threshold, target and maximum performance levels for each performance measure of the performance period are contained in Appendix B.

  • Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility For the purposes of this Agreement, the accessibility of online content and functionality will be measured according to the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and the Web Accessibility Initiative Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 for web content, which are incorporated by reference. Adherence to these accessible technology standards is one way to ensure compliance with the College’s underlying legal obligations to ensure that people with disabilities are able to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same benefits and services within the same timeframe as their nondisabled peers, with substantially equivalent ease of use; that they are not excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination in any College programs, services, and activities delivered online, as required by Section 504 and the ADA and their implementing regulations; and that they receive effective communication of the College’s programs, services, and activities delivered online.

  • Selection Criteria for Awarding Task Order The Government will award to the offeror whose proposal is deemed most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment using the evaluation criteria. The Government will evaluate proposals against established selection criteria specified in the task order RFP. Generally, the Government's award decision will be based on selection criteria which addresses past performance, technical acceptability, proposal risk and cost. Among other sources, evaluation of past performance may be based on past performance assessments provided by TO Program Managers on individual task orders performed throughout the life of the contract. The order of importance for the factors will be identified in the RFP for the specified task order.

  • Performance Criteria The Performance Criteria are set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement.

  • Performance Measures and Metrics This section outlines the performance measures and metrics upon which service under this SLA will be assessed. Shared Service Centers and Customers will negotiate the performance metric, frequency, customer and provider service responsibilities associated with each performance measure. Measurements of the Port of Seattle activities are critical to improving services and are the basis for cost recovery for services provided. The Port of Seattle and The Northwest Seaport Alliance have identified activities critical to meeting The NWSA’s business requirements and have agreed upon how these activities will be assessed.

  • Multi-year Planning Targets Schedule A may reflect an allocation for the first Funding Year of this Agreement as well as planning targets for up to two additional years, consistent with the term of this Agreement. In such an event, the HSP acknowledges that if it is provided with planning targets, these targets:

  • Ongoing Performance Measures The Department intends to use performance-reporting tools in order to measure the performance of Contractor(s). These tools will include the Contractor Performance Survey (Exhibit H), to be completed by Customers on a quarterly basis. Such measures will allow the Department to better track Vendor performance through the term of the Contract(s) and ensure that Contractor(s) consistently provide quality services to the State and its Customers. The Department reserves the right to modify the Contractor Performance Survey document and introduce additional performance-reporting tools as they are developed, including online tools (e.g. tools within MFMP or on the Department's website).

  • Performance Goals A. The Trust and State Street have developed mutually acceptable performance goals dated March 1, 2011 , and as may be amended from time to time, regarding the manner in which they expect to deliver and receive the services under this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “Service Level Agreement”). The parties agree that such Service Level Agreement reflects performance goals and any failure to perform in accordance with the provisions thereof shall not be considered a breach of contract that gives rise to contractual or other remedies. It is the intention of the parties that the sole remedy for failure to perform in accordance with the provisions of the Service Level Agreement, or any dispute relating to performance goals set forth in the Service Level Agreement, will be a meeting of the parties to resolve the failure pursuant to the consultation procedure described in Sections V. B. and V.C. below. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties hereby acknowledge that any party’s failure (or lack thereof) to meet the provisions of the Service Level Agreement, while not in and of itself a breach of contract giving rise to contractual or other remedies, may factor into the Trust’s reasonably determined belief regarding the standard of care exercised by State Street hereunder.

  • Performance Measures The System Agency will monitor the Grantee’s performance of the requirements in Attachment A and compliance with the Contract’s terms and conditions.

  • Additional RO Review Criteria (1) In addition to the requirements in Subparagraph 34A, the RO must:

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.