Applicability of Evaluation Model Sample Clauses

Applicability of Evaluation Model. This evaluation model is applicable to “classroom teachers” defined in law as a certificated employee who provides academically focused instruction to students and holds one or more of the certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140 (1) through (3) and (6)(a) through (e) and (g). All other nonsupervisory certificated employees (i.e. ESAs, Counselors, Librarians, TOSA’s and Athletic Directors) shall be evaluated using the existing contractual evaluation language. The District and the Association shall meet to negotiate the placement of new positions or positions in which the placement is unclear relative to the new evaluation model. Employees in split assignments or whose duties fall within classroom teacher and non-classroom teacher duties shall be evaluated using the model for whichever assignment or duties comprise the majority of the employee’s assignment.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Applicability of Evaluation Model. This evaluation model is applicable to “classroom teachers” defined in law as a certificated employee who provides academically focused instruction to students and holds one or more of the certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140 (1) through (3) and (6)(a) through (e) and (g). All other nonsupervisory certificated employees (currently limited to the Counselor) shall be evaluated under applicable section in this Article. The District and the Association shall meet to negotiate the placement of new positions or positions in which the placement is unclear relative to the new evaluation model. Employees in split assignments or whose duties fall within classroom teacher and non-classroom teacher duties shall be evaluated using the model for whichever assignment or duties comprise the majority of the employee’s assignment.
Sample 1Sample 2
Applicability of Evaluation Model. This evaluation model is applicable to “classroom teachers” defined in law as a certificated employee who provides academically focused instruction to students and holds one or more of the certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140 (1) through (3) and (6)(a) through (e) and (g). All other nonsupervisory certificated employees shall be evaluated under applicable section in this Article. The District and the Association shall meet to negotiate the placement of new positions or positions in which the placement is unclear relative to the new evaluation model. Employees in split assignments or whose duties fall within classroom teacher and non-classroom teacher duties shall be evaluated using the model for whichever assignment or duties comprise the majority of the employee’s assignment.
Sample 1
Applicability of Evaluation Model. This evaluation model is applicable to “classroom teachers” defined in law as a certificated employee who provides academically focused instruction to students and holds one or more of the certificates pursuant to WAC 181-79A-140
Sample 1

Related to Applicability of Evaluation Model

  • 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?

  • 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.

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. Xxxxxxxxx & Xxxxxx will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Timing of Evaluations Annual performance evaluations shall normally take place near the anniversary date of completion of original probation. However, as to employees who have been rehired as a restoration or after a reduction in force, the date of rehire shall be the anniversary date for the annual evaluation. The Human Resources Department will attempt to secure agency cooperation in conducting the evaluation process in reasonable relationship to the above schedule. Failure to conduct a timely annual rating shall not be grievable. Deadline for Evaluation Meetings: A meeting to discuss an evaluation shall be held within forty- five (45) days after the applicable anniversary date, or after the end of any prescriptive period for remediation (“PPR”) or warning period. This deadline may be extended to accommodate the employee’s illness or injury. Where the deadline is not satisfied, the employee shall be granted an annual overall presumptive rating equal to their last annual overall rating, but not less than a Satisfactory (“S”) rating. However, if the time for annual evaluation falls during a PPR or warning period (See Disciplinary Action 14, Section 1(e), 2 & 3, the annual evaluation shall be waived, and the last evaluation in such process shall be deemed to be the annual evaluation. In the event the time for annual evaluation falls subsequent to the issuance of a notice of performance deficiency (Step 1) but prior to the commencement of a PPR, the employer may issue an evaluation which does not supersede the previously issued notice. A special evaluation may be used at any time except it shall not be used as a late annual evaluation. Written feedback furnished to an employee which would have constituted the annual evaluation had it been timely conducted, shall not be considered as an evaluation, shall not be placed in the employee’s file at the time of issuance, shall not be grievable and does not require the presence of a union representative when issued. An oral or written notice of performance deficiency (Step 1 in the order of progressive corrective action) shall not be grievable when issued, and, when issued, shall not require the presence of a union representative. However, once Step 2 of progressive corrective action has been implemented (a special or annual evaluation coupled with a PPR) such notice or a written record of such notice shall be placed in the employee’s personnel file and shall be fully grievable.

  • Finalization of Evaluation A Written Report 1 Before the evaluation cycle is final, and not later than May 10, a copy of the formal written evaluation report shall be given to the teacher and a conference shall be held between the teacher and the evaluator.

  • PROGRESS EVALUATION Engineer shall, from time to time during the progress of the Engineering Services, confer with County at County’s election. Engineer shall prepare and present such information as may be pertinent and necessary, or as may be reasonably requested by County, in order for County to evaluate features of the Engineering Services. At the request of County or Engineer, conferences shall be provided at Engineer's office, the offices of County, or at other locations designated by County. When requested by County, such conferences shall also include evaluation of the Engineering Services. County may, from time to time, require Engineer to appear and provide information to the Xxxxxxxxxx County Commissioners Court. Should County determine that the progress in Engineering Services does not satisfy an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, then County shall review same with Engineer to determine corrective action required. Engineer shall promptly advise County in writing of events which have or may have a significant impact upon the progress of the Engineering Services, including but not limited to the following:

  • Annual Evaluations The purpose of the annual evaluation is to assess and communicate the nature and extent of an employee's performance of assigned duties consistent with the criteria specified below in this Policy. Except for those employees who have received notice of non-reappointment pursuant to the BOT- UFF Policy on Non- reappointment, every employee shall be evaluated at least once annually. Personnel decisions shall take such annual evaluations into account, provided that such decisions need not be based solely on written faculty performance evaluations.

  • Purpose of Evaluation 10.1.1 It is recognized that a system of evaluation is essential to assist Unit Members in developing competency and realizing their potential. It is further recognized that information gathered through such a system will enable decisions that measure a Unit Member’s performance in a just and equitable manner.

  • Formal Evaluation All formal evaluations of personnel shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the employee concerned by an administrator or supervisor of the District.

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