Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score Sample Clauses

Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. 49.9.1 For TPEP evaluations, employees shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight (8) state evaluation criteria. Each employee’s criterion scores are established using at least 50% of the components from each criterion and 100% of the student growth components. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight (8) criterion scores and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follows. Unsatisfactory = 8-14 Basic = 15-22 Proficient = 22-28 Distinguished = 29-32 49.9.2 For non-TPEP evaluations, criterion-level scores shall be determined based upon a preponderance of evidence of each of the components which comprise the criterion. This evidence will include the growth of the classroom teacher over time and the conditions of the classroom teacher’s work assignment. In the event that the preponderance of evidence leads to an evaluative determination that is evenly split between two criterion scores or the evidence is ambiguous, the higher of the two criterion scores shall be given and used in the summative performance rating. The final summative rating options are unsatisfactory, basic, proficient, or distinguished.
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. 4 A classroom teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the 5 eight (8) state evaluation criteria. Each teacher’s criterion scores are established using 6 at least 50% of the components from each criterion and 100% of the student growth 7 components. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight criterion scores 8 and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follows: 9 10 Unsatisfactory = 8 – 14 11 Basic = 15 – 21 12 Proficient = 22 – 28 13 Distinguished = 29 – 32
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score a. A teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight (8) state evaluation criteria. Each teacher’s criterion scores are established using at least 50% of the components from each criterion and 100% of the student growth components. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight (8) criterion scores and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follows. i. Unsatisfactory = 8-14 ii. Basic = 15-21 iii. Proficient = 22-28 iv. Distinguished = 29-32 b. An annual evaluation conference shall be no later than June 1 of the school year in which the evaluation takes place unless mutually agreed upon between evaluator and employee. At the conference, each criterion to be scored shall be rated using a preponderance of the evidence and based on an assessment of the teacher’s performance. i. The teacher will sign two (2) copies of the Final Summative Evaluation Report. ii. Signatures of the teacher required for the evaluation do not express agreement but merely receipt of that information. iii. Within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of the Summative Evaluation Rating, the teacher may submit signed comments that shall be attached to the report in the teacher’s District personnel file. iv. If there is a dispute between the evaluator and the employee regarding the rating, the parties shall have an opportunity to submit additional evidence within five (5) school days. The final decision is the responsibility of the evaluator. c. Any non-provisional teacher who has not been on comprehensive prior to the 2016-17 school year during our four (4) year roll out, will have his/her criteria rating determined using the “soft landing” first time model listed in our Evaluation Guide. Starting in the 2017-18 school year, all comprehensive scores will be the “ongoing” rating scale in the Evaluation Guide.
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. A classroom teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight (8) state evaluation criteria. Each teacher’s criterion scores are established using at least 50% of the components from each criterion and 100% of the student growth components as per RCW 28A.405.100, WAC 392-191A-080 and WAC 392-191A-090. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight criterion scores and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follow: Xxxxx 0 – Unsatisfactory = 8-14 Level 2 – Basic = 15-21 Level 3 – Proficient = 22-28 Level 4 – Distinguished = 29-32 8. Student Growth Impact Rating Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. Evaluators add up the raw score on these components and the teacher is given a score of low, average, or high based on the scores below. Upon completion of the overall summative scoring process, the evaluator will combine only the student growth rubric scores to assess the classroom teacher’s student growth impact rating. The following scoring band will be used to determine the student growth impact rating. 5-12 13-17 18-20 Low Average High
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. A classroom teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. A classroom teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight (8) state evaluation criteria. Each criterion shall be rated collaboratively based on the components in that criterion using a preponderance of the evidence. This analysis will be based on a holistic assessment of the teacher’s performance. If there is a dispute between the evaluator and the employee regarding the rating, the parties shall have an opportunity to submit additional evidence. The final decision is the responsibility of the evaluator. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight criterion scores and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follows: Unsatisfactory = 8 – 14 Basic = 15 – 21 Proficient = 22 – 28 Distinguished = 29 – 32 3564 3565 3566 3567 3568 3569 3570 3571 3572 3573 3574 3575 3576 3577 3578 3579 3580 3581 3582 3583 3584 3585 3586 3587 3588 3589 3590 3591 3592 3593 3594 3595 3596 3597 3598 3599 3600 3601 3602 3603 3604
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. A classroom teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight (8) state evaluation criteria. Each teacher’s criterion scores are established using at least 50% of the components, with at least one elemental score for that component, from each criterion and 100% of the student growth components. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight criterion scores and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follows: Unsatisfactory = 8 – 14 Basic = 15 – 21 Proficient = 22 – 28 Distinguished = 29 – 32 Component scores within a criterion will be averaged and rounded to reach a final criterion score.
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. A classroom teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight (8) state evaluation criteria. Each criterion shall be rated based on the components in that criterion using the evidence gathered by the evaluator and employee. If there is a dispute between the evaluator and the employee regarding the rating, the parties shall have an opportunity to submit additional evidence. The final decision is the responsibility of the evaluator. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight criterion scores and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follows: Xxxxx Xxx Xxxxxxxxxxxxxx = 0 - 00 Xxxxx Two Basic = 15 - 21 Level Three Proficient = 22 – 28 Level Four Distinguished = 29 – 32
Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score. A classroom teacher shall receive a summative performance rating for each of the eight (8) state evaluation criteria. The Summative Criteria Score is the sum of the eight criterion scores and is rated based on the summative scoring band, as follows: Level 1- Unsatisfactory = 8 – 14 Xxxxx 0 - Xxxxx = 00 – 00 Xxxxx 0 - Xxxxxxxxxx = 22 – 28 Level 4 - Distinguished = 29 – 32

Related to Comprehensive Evaluation Summative Score

  • Comprehensive Evaluation The Comprehensive evaluation is a growth-oriented, teacher/evaluator collaborative process that requires teachers to be evaluated on the eight (8) state criteria. A teacher must complete a Comprehensive evaluation once every six (6) years. Subsequent years they will be evaluated on a Focused evaluation, unless they have received a Basic or Unsatisfactory rating on their final comprehensive summative evaluation. Then they shall continue using the Comprehensive evaluation for the following year. All teachers during their provisional status must be on the Comprehensive evaluation.

  • Self-Evaluation Each regular faculty member shall provide a self-evaluation. It shall address, among other items, the faculty member's fulfillment of professional responsibilities as referenced in Section 18.2.3 and an assessment of his or her own performance. The faculty member will share the self-evaluation with the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the first-level manager or designee. The self-evaluation will become part of the evaluation report.

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion 4. READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not increase your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for the life of the contract, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIPS, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from the “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, with any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they may apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxx-xxx.xxx If the vendor is awarded a contract with TIPS under this solicitation, the vendor agrees to make any Choice of Law clauses in any contract or agreement entered into between the awarded vendor and with a TIPS member entity to read as follows: "Choice of law shall be the laws of the state where the customer resides" or words to that effect.

  • 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 Williamson 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: A. Problems, delays, adverse conditions which may materially affect the ability to meet the objectives of an applicable Work Authorization or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto, or preclude the attainment of Project Engineering Services units by established time periods; and such disclosure shall be accompanied by statement of actions taken or contemplated, and County assistance needed to resolve the situation, if any; and B. Favorable developments or events which enable meeting goals sooner than anticipated in relation to an applicable Work Authorization’s or any Supplemental Work Authorization related thereto.

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion # 4 READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not i ncrease your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for years two and thr ee and potentially year four, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIP S, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentati on, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from th e “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, wit h any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they ma y apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@t xxx-xxx.xxx

  • Long Term Cost Evaluation Criterion # 4. READ CAREFULLY and see in the RFP document under "Proposal Scoring and Evaluation". Points will be assigned to this criterion based on your answer to this Attribute. Points are awarded if you agree not i ncrease your catalog prices (as defined herein) more than X% annually over the previous year for years two and thr ee and potentially year four, unless an exigent circumstance exists in the marketplace and the excess price increase which exceeds X% annually is supported by documentation provided by you and your suppliers and shared with TIP S, if requested. If you agree NOT to increase prices more than 5%, except when justified by supporting documentati on, you are awarded 10 points; if 6% to 14%, except when justified by supporting documentation, you receive 1 to 9 points incrementally. Price increases 14% or greater, except when justified by supporting documentation, receive 0 points. increases will be 5% or less annually per question Required Confidentiality Claim Form This completed form is required by TIPS. By submitting a response to this solicitation you agree to download from th e “Attachments” section, complete according to the instructions on the form, then uploading the completed form, wit h any confidential attachments, if applicable, to the “Response Attachments” section titled “Confidentiality Form” in order to provide to TIPS the completed form titled, “CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM FORM”. By completing this process, you provide us with the information we require to comply with the open record laws of the State of Texas as they ma y apply to your proposal submission. If you do not provide the form with your proposal, an award will not be made if your proposal is qualified for an award, until TIPS has an accurate, completed form from you. Read the form carefully before completing and if you have any questions, email Xxxx Xxxxxx at TIPS at xxxx.xxxxxx@t xxx-xxx.xxx If the vendor is awarded a contract with TIPS under this solicitation, the vendor agrees to make any Choice of Law c lauses in any contract or agreement entered into between the awarded vendor and with a TIPS member entity to re ad as follows: "Choice of law shall be the laws of the state where the customer resides" or words to that effect. Agreed In the event of litigation or use of any dispute resolution model when resolving disputes with a TIPS member entity a s a result of a transaction between the vendor and TIPS or the TIPS member entity, the Venue for any litigation or ot her agreed upon model shall be in the state and county where the customer resides unless otherwise agreed by the parties at the time the dispute resolution model is decided by the parties. Agreed

  • 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. 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. 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?

  • EMPLOYEE EVALUATION A. Formal evaluation of employees shall be in writing and shall be for the purpose of establishing a record of the employee’s work performance. The evaluation may include but is not limited to: establishing performance standards and outcome measures, recognition of an employee’s efforts, as well as planning for improvement. Issues of attendance and punctuality may be addressed if they have previously been discussed with the employee. The employee’s job description shall be a basis for the evaluation. B. The evaluator shall review the written evaluation with the employee and provide the employee with a copy. The employee shall sign the evaluation acknowledging receipt. If the employee has objections to the evaluation, s/he, may within twenty (20) working days following receipt of the evaluation put such objections in writing and have them attached to the evaluation report and placed in his/her personnel file. C. The frequency of evaluations shall be determined by the District and generally occur every other year by April 1st for bargaining unit employees. If the District chooses to do so, it may conduct formal evaluations on an annual basis. An employee may request to receive one (1) annual evaluation. Such request shall be in writing to the employee’s supervisor with a copy to the Human Resources Department. D. The Human Resources Department will consult with the Federation in developing an outline of best practices to be used in conducting employee evaluations. E. When the District determines that an employee’s work performance is unsatisfactory, it shall inform the employee in writing of any deficiency and the improvement expected and provide the employee with the opportunity to correct the unsatisfactory performance within a reasonable time period established by the District. F. The judgment of an employee’s work performance by an evaluating supervisor shall not be the subject of a grievance. A grievance concerning an evaluation shall be limited to an allegation that the evaluation was done in bad faith or clearly untrue. The burden of proof shall rest with the grievant. Such grievance shall be filed at the next administrative level above that of the evaluator and that administrator shall provide a written decision within ten (10) working days of any hearing. If the grievance is not resolved, it may be appealed by submitting a written statement to the Human Resources Department within ten (10) working days following receipt of the administrative written decision. The written statement must clearly set forth why the previous decision is in error regarding the allegation of bad faith or being clearly untrue. The Director of Labor Relations, or designee, may review the record of the grievance and/or conduct a hearing and shall issue a written decision within ten (10) working days following such review or hearing. Such decision shall be final. G. Effective July 1, 2013, Sign Language Interpreters will be evaluated using the Educational Interpreter Performance Assessment (EIPA) pursuant to OAR 581-015-2035 and/or the District’s evaluation form.

  • Annual Performance Evaluation On either a fiscal year or calendar year basis, (consistently applied from year to year), the Bank shall conduct an annual evaluation of Executive’s performance. The annual performance evaluation proceedings shall be included in the minutes of the Board meeting that next follows such annual performance review.

  • Evidence Used In Evaluation The following categories of evidence shall be used in evaluating each Educator: A. Multiple measures of student learning, growth, and achievement, which shall include: i. Measures of student progress on classroom assessments that are aligned with the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks or other relevant frameworks and are comparable within grades or subjects in a school; ii. Common assessments of student learning, growth, and achievement related to the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks or the Massachusetts Vocational Technical Education Frameworks or other relevant frameworks that are comparable across grades and/or subjects district-wide. These measures may include: portfolios, approved commercial assessments and district-developed pre and post unit and course assessments, and capstone projects. iii. Measures of student progress and/or achievement toward student learning goals set between the Educator and Evaluator for the school year or some other period of time as established in the Educator Plan. iv. For Educators whose primary role is not as a classroom teacher, the appropriate measures of the Educator's contribution to student learning, growth, and achievement set by the District. The measures set by the District should be based on the Educator's role and responsibility. See rubrics in Appendix A. B. Judgments based on observations and artifacts of practice including: i. Unannounced observations which are typically at least 10 minutes. ii. Announced observation(s) for non-PTS Educators in their first year of practice in a school, PTS Educators, Educators on Improvement Plans, and as determined by the evaluator. iii. Examination of Educator work products. iv. Examination of student work samples. C. Evidence relevant to one or more Performance Standards, including but not limited to: i. Evidence compiled and presented by the Educator, including: • Evidence of fulfillment of Standard IV: Professional Culture, including, but not limited to, professional responsibilities and growth such as self-assessments, peer collaboration, professional development linked to goals in the Educator plans, contributions to the school community and professional culture; and/or other items as described under Standard IV: Professional Culture. • Evidence of fulfillment of Standard III: Family and Community Engagement, including, but not limited to active outreach to and engagement with families, for example, phone logs, newsletters, conferences, district approved applications and platforms such as websites and email correspondence and /or other items as described in Standard III: Family and Community Engagement. ii. Evidence of progress towards professional practice goal(s); iii. Evidence of progress toward student learning outcomes goal(s). iv. Student Feedback (subject to negotiations) v. Any other relevant evidence from any source that the Evaluator shares with the Educator. Other relevant evidence could include information provided by other evaluators/administrators such as the superintendent. Relevant information from other sources will be assessed by the Evaluator and information will be shared with the Educator. vi. An Educators submission of evidence to support meeting the indicators of performance for Standard I: Curriculum, Planning and Assessment and Standard II: Teaching All Students, is optional as this evidence is typically gathered by the Evaluator during a classroom observation. Submission of evidence supporting either Standards I or II can provide additional data for inclusion in the Formative or Summative Reports. If an Educator chooses to submit evidence for these categories, it is suggested that the evidence be included by the time the Summative Report will be written.