Alternative Evaluation Process Sample Clauses

Alternative Evaluation Process. Permanent bargaining unit members who are on step 6 or higher of the salary schedule may participate in alternative evaluation. In the event the evaluator does not agree to the alternative evaluation cycle, the evaluator will provide, in writing, the reason(s) based on observed concerns aligned with the California Standards for the Teaching Profession, and the unit member will participate in the formal evaluation process. To participate in an alternative evaluation the teacher must have received a satisfactory evaluation in the previous cycle. The intent of the alternative evaluation shall be to allow the teacher to direct his or her own professional growth in one or more activities that relate to the California Teaching Standards as listed above. The teacher in collaboration with the evaluator will complete an alternative evaluation contract.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (7)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Alternative Evaluation Process. Permanent bargaining unit members who are on step 6 or higher of the salary schedule may participate in alternative evaluation. In the event the evaluator does not agree to the alternative evaluation cycle, the evaluator will provide, in writing, the reason(s) based on observed concerns aligned with the California Standards for the Teaching Profession, and the unit member will participate in the formal evaluation process. To participate in an alternative evaluation the teacher must have received a satisfactory evaluation in the previous cycle. The intent of the alternative evaluation shall be to allow the teacher to direct his or her own professional growth in one or more activities that relate to the California Teaching Standards as listed above. The teacher in collaboration with the evaluator will complete an alternative evaluation contract. Alternative Evaluations shall be completed by April 30 unless an extension is mutually agreed upon, but no later than June 1. If the teacher does not complete the alternative evaluation, the teacher will be placed on the formal evaluation cycle for the next school year as outlined in Article 10.2.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
Alternative Evaluation Process. Permanent unit members who receive an overall rating of “Meets or Exceeds” on their most recent evaluation may request an alternative evaluation process. The evaluatee may submit an alternative evaluation plan for the evaluator’s approval. The plan shall focus on the unit member’s professional development in one or more of the criteria set forth in Section 3 on this article. Once approved by the evaluator and the District’s chief personnel official or designee, that plan, along with time lines included in the plan, shall become the evaluation procedure for that unit member.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Alternative Evaluation Process. 9.7.1 The alternative evaluation process is designed to increase opportunities for professional growth available to the District’s permanent certificated staff. It serves as an alternative to the traditional performance evaluation process to encourage accomplished teachers and staff to continue their professional development and personal growth. This evaluation process provides flexibility, permitting teachers and staff to grow in self-chosen areas of interest.
Sample 1
Alternative Evaluation Process 
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3

Related to Alternative Evaluation Process

  • Administrative Evaluation It is the intent of the SCD administration to conduct evaluations of non-priority- hire faculty as early as possible in a faculty member's employment in an SCD instructional unit. Administrative evaluation should occur before the beginning of the fifth quarter within the nine (9) out of twelve (12) quarter sequence outlined in Article 10.7.a.

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • Evaluation Process A. The immediate supervisor will meet with an employee at the start of the employee’s probationary, trial services, transition, and annual review period to discuss performance expectations. The employee will receive copies of their performance expectations as well as notification of any modifications made during the review period. Employee work performance will be evaluated during probationary, trial service and transition review periods and at least annually thereafter. Notification will be given to a probationary or trial service employee whose work performance is determined to be unsatisfactory.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. No response TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Yes - No Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order.

  • Review and Selection Process The Project Narratives of SAMHSA applications are peer-reviewed according to the evaluation criteria listed above. Decisions to fund a grant are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the application as identified by peer reviewers. The results of the peer review are advisory in nature. The program office and approving official make the final determination for funding based on the following: • Individual awards over $250,000 are approved by the Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council; • Availability of funds; • Equitable distribution of awards in terms of geography (including urban, rural, and remote settings) and balance among populations of focus and program size; • Submission of any required documentation that must be submitted prior to making an award; and • SAMHSA is required to review and consider any information about your organization that is in the Federal Award Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). In accordance with 45 CFR 75.212, SAMHSA reserves the right not to make an award to an entity if that entity does not meet the minimum qualification standards as described in section 75.205(a)(2). If SAMHSA chooses not to award a fundable application in accordance with 45 CFR 75.205(a)(2), SAMHSA must report that determination to the designated integrity and performance system accessible through the System for Award Management (XXX) [currently, FAPIIS]. You may review and comment on any information about your organization that a federal awarding agency previously entered. XXXXXX will consider your comments, in addition to other information in FAPIIS in making a judgment about your organization’s integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under federal awards when completing the review of risk posed as described in 45 CFR 75.205 HHS Awarding Agency Review of Risk by Applicants.

  • Using Student feedback in Educator Evaluation ESE will provide model contract language, direction and guidance on using student feedback in Educator Evaluation by June 30, 2013. Upon receiving this model contract language, direction and guidance, the parties agree to bargain with respect to this matter.

  • Focused Evaluation The Focused Evaluation is used when a teacher is not evaluated using the Comprehensive Evaluation process, and will include evaluation of one of the eight state criteria (student growth impact required). If a non-provisional teacher has scored at Proficient or higher the previous year, they may be moved to Focused Evaluation. The teacher may remain on the Focused Evaluation for five (5) years before returning to the Comprehensive Evaluation. The teacher or the evaluator can initiate a move from the Focused to the Comprehensive Evaluation. A decision to move a teacher from a Focused to a Comprehensive Evaluation must occur by December 15.

  • Selection Process The Mortgage Loans were selected from among the outstanding one- to four-family mortgage loans in the Seller's portfolio at the related Closing Date as to which the representations and warranties set forth in Subsection 9.02 could be made and such selection was not made in a manner so as to affect adversely the interests of the Purchaser;

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!