Evaluation Rating and Track System. 1. Unit members shall be rated as performing in one of four categories: “Distinguished,” “Proficient,” “Basic,” or “Unsatisfactory.”
Evaluation Rating and Track System Sample Clauses
Related to Evaluation Rating and Track System
Evaluation Rating The final summative evaluation level that is assigned to a teacher based on the holistic review of all Evaluation Factors, observed during the Evaluation Cycle. The rating shall be “accomplished”, “skilled”, “developing”, or “ineffective”. The final rating shall not be weighted in such a way that one (1) domain or component of the evaluation system has a higher importance than another, except that any area marked N/A shall not negatively impact the evaluation rating.
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.
Performance Rating Describes the Educator’s performance on each performance standard and overall. There shall be four performance ratings: Exemplary: the Educator’s performance consistently and significantly exceeds the requirements of a standard or overall. The rating of exemplary on a standard indicates that practice significantly exceeds proficient and could serve as a model of practice on that standard district-wide. Proficient: the Educator’s performance fully and consistently meets the requirements of a standard or overall. Proficient practice is understood to be fully satisfactory.
Rating Impact on Student Learning Growth ESE will provide model contract language and guidance on rating educator impact on student learning growth based on state and district-determined measures of student learning. Upon receiving this model contract language and guidance, the parties agree to bargain with respect to this matter.
Ratings No “nationally recognized statistical rating organization” as such term is defined for purposes of Rule 436(g)(2) (i) has imposed (or has informed the Company that it is considering imposing) any condition (financial or otherwise) on the Company’s retaining any rating assigned to the Company or any securities of the Company or (ii) has indicated to the Company that it is considering any of the actions described in Section 7(c)(ii) hereof.
Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan
Evaluation Plan The systematic blueprint detailing the evaluation aspects of the project.
Student Evaluation A. All unit members shall be subject to student evaluations each semester in each course taught.
Evaluation Use In the event that the Software is licensed only for Evaluation Use, the terms of this paragraph shall apply. Your license to use the Software commences on installation of the Software and, unless You and NetIQ agree to a different period, will terminate after a period of 30 days (the “Evaluation Period”). You may use the Software for an unlimited number of users and servers during the Evaluation Period. At the end of the Evaluation Period, Your license to use the Evaluation version of the Software is automatically terminated. You may not extend the time limits of the Software in any manner. At the end of the Evaluation Period You agree to de-install the Software and if required by NetIQ, return all copies or partial copies of the Software or certify to NetIQ that all copies or partial copies of the Software have been deleted from Your computer libraries and/or storage devices and have been destroyed. If You desire to continue Your use of the Software beyond the Evaluation Period, You must contact NetIQ to acquire a license to the Software for the applicable fee. EVALUATION SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF TITLE OR NON-INFRINGEMENT.
Evaluation, Testing, and Monitoring 1. The System Agency may review, test, evaluate and monitor Grantee’s Products and services, as well as associated documentation and technical support for compliance with the Accessibility Standards. Review, testing, evaluation and monitoring may be conducted before and after the award of a contract. Testing and monitoring may include user acceptance testing. Neither the review, testing (including acceptance testing), evaluation or monitoring of any Product or service, nor the absence of review, testing, evaluation or monitoring, will result in a waiver of the State’s right to contest the Grantee’s assertion of compliance with the Accessibility Standards.
