Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan
A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans.
B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below.
C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows:
i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus.
ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school
iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals.
D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.
Evaluation Period Until 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on August 16, 2002 (the "Evaluation Period"), Purchaser and its authorized agents and representatives (for purposes of this Article V, the "Licensee Parties") shall have the right, subject to the right of any Tenants, to enter upon the Real Property at all reasonable times during normal business hours to perform an inspection of the Real Property, the Improvements and the Personal Property. Purchaser will provide to Seller notice (for purposes of this Section 5.1(a), an "Entry Notice") of the intention of Purchaser or the other Licensee Parties to enter the Real Property at least 24 hours prior to such intended entry and specify the intended purpose therefor and the inspections and examinations contemplated to be made and with whom any Licensee Party will communicate. At Seller's option, Seller may be present for any such entry and inspection. Purchaser shall not communicate with or contact any of the Tenants or any of the Authorities without the prior written consent of Seller, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. If Purchaser shall elect to communicate with any of the Authorities and Seller consents thereto, Purchaser shall give Seller prior notice thereof, and Seller and Seller's representatives shall have the right, but not the obligation, to attend, and participate in, all such meetings. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, no so-called Phase II environmental physical testing or sampling shall be conducted during any such entry by Purchaser or any Licensee Party upon the Real Property without Seller's specific prior written consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or unduly delayed. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE with respect to the provisions of this Section 5.1.
Timetable In order to set a timetable and procedural framework within which the subcommittees will accomplish their tasks, the parties have further agreed to the following: The subcommittees referenced in Section 1 above will be appointed and have their first organizational meeting within six (6) weeks of the date of the MOU ratification. Each subcommittee shall provide to the Head of the affected Department a final report no later than thirty (30) weeks after the date of the MOU ratification. The Department Head who receives a final report will meet with the LMC to provide feedback on the report, indicating areas of acceptance and explaining the reasons for rejecting any of the recommendations in the report.
Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)
Valuation Time At the close of trading of the regular trading session on the Exchange; provided that if the principal trading session is extended, the Calculation Agent shall determine the Valuation Time in its reasonable discretion.
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.
Evaluation Report The state must provide a narrative summary of the evaluation design, status (including evaluation activities and findings to date), and plans for evaluation activities during the extension period. The narrative is to include, but not be limited to, describing the hypotheses being tested and any results available.
Evaluation Process
A. The immediate supervisor will meet with an employee at the start of their 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.
B. The supervisor will discuss the evaluation with the employee. The employee will have the opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation. The discussion may include such topics as:
1. Reviewing the employee’s performance;
2. Identifying ways the employee may improve their performance;
3. Updating the employee’s position description, if necessary;
4. Identifying performance goals and expectations for the next appraisal period; and
5. Identifying employee training and development needs.
C. The performance evaluation process will include, but not be limited to, a written performance evaluation on forms used by the Employer, the employee’s signature acknowledging receipt of the forms, and any comments by the employee. A copy of the performance evaluation will be provided to the employee at the time of the review. A copy of the final performance evaluation, including any employee or reviewer comments, will be provided to the employee. The original performance evaluation forms, including the employee’s comments, will be maintained in the employee’s personnel file.
D. If an employee disagrees with their performance evaluation, the employee has the right to attach a rebuttal.
E. The performance evaluation process is subject to the grievance procedure in Article 30. The specific content of a performance evaluation is not subject to the grievance procedure.
F. Performance evaluations will not be used to initiate personnel actions such as transfer, promotion, or discipline.
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.
2. Grantee agrees to cooperate fully and provide the System Agency and its representatives timely access to Products, records, and other items and information needed to conduct such review, evaluation, testing, and monitoring.
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.
