Final Summative Evaluation Conference – Comprehensive Evaluation Sample Clauses

Final Summative Evaluation Conference – Comprehensive Evaluation. 34 a. Prior to June 10th the evaluator and teacher shall meet to discuss the teacher’s final 35 summative score. 36 37 b. Any student growth evidence must be submitted to the evaluator prior to the final 38 evaluation. Any other evidence must be submitted to the evaluator by May 1st, 39 unless the evaluator and teacher mutually agree to a later date. 40 41 c. All evidence, measures and observations used in developing the final summative 42 evaluation score must be a product of the school year in which the evaluation is 43 conducted. 44 45 d. The teacher will sign two (2) copies of the Final Summative Evaluation Report. 46 The signature of the teacher does not, however, necessarily imply that the 47 employee agrees with its contents. The teacher may attach any written comments 48 to observations and to the final annual evaluation report as well.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Final Summative Evaluation Conference – Comprehensive Evaluation a. Prior to June 1st the evaluator and teacher shall meet to discuss the teacher’s final summative score. b. Any student growth evidence must be submitted to the evaluator prior to the final evaluation. Any other evidence must be submitted to the evaluator by May 1st, unless the evaluator and teacher mutually agree to a later date. c. All evidence, measures and observations used in developing the final summative evaluation score must be a product of the school year in which the evaluation is conducted. d. The teacher will sign two (2) copies of the Final Summative Evaluation Report. The signature of the teacher does not, however, necessarily imply that the employee agrees with its contents. The teacher may attach any written comments to observations and to the final annual evaluation report as well.
Sample 1
Final Summative Evaluation Conference – Comprehensive Evaluation a. Prior to June 10th the evaluator and teacher shall meet to discuss the teacher’s final summative score. b. Any student growth evidence must be submitted to the evaluator prior to the final evaluation. Any other evidence must be submitted to the evaluator by May 1st, unless the evaluator and teacher mutually agree to a later date. c. All evidence, measures and observations used in developing the final summative evaluation score must be a product of the school year in which the evaluation is conducted. d. Evidence collection is to be gathered from the normal course of the employee’s duties and shall not represent an additional workload created solely for the purpose of evaluation. The method of compiling and reviewing assessment data, evidence and artifacts will be mutually agreed upon by the teacher and the evaluator. It is the responsibility of the teacher to provide evidence to their evaluator for the purposes of scoring observables, non-observables, and student growth based on the Xxxxxxx framework. e. The teacher will sign two (2) copies of the Final Summative Evaluation Report. The signature of the teacher does not, however, necessarily imply that the employee agrees with its contents. The teacher may attach any written comments to observations and to the final annual evaluation report as well.
Sample 1
Final Summative Evaluation Conference – Comprehensive Evaluation. Prior to June 1st the evaluator and teacher shall meet to discuss the teacher’s final summative score. Any student growth evidence must be submitted to the evaluator prior to the final evaluation. Any other evidence must be submitted to the evaluator by May 1st unless the evaluator and teacher mutually agree to a later date. All evidence, measures and observations used in developing the final summative evaluation score must be a product of the school year in which the evaluation is conducted. The teacher will sign two (2) copies of the Final Summative Evaluation Report. The signature of the teacher does not, however, necessarily imply that the employee agrees with its contents. The teacher may attach any written comments to observations and to the final annual evaluation report as well.
Sample 1

Related to Final Summative Evaluation Conference – Comprehensive Evaluation

  • 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. During subsequent years, teachers will be evaluated on a Focused evaluation unless a comprehensive is requested by administration or the teacher.

  • 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?

  • 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. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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. The Choate Team 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • BID EVALUATION The Commissioner reserves the right to accept or reject any and all Bids, or separable portions of Bids, and waive technicalities, irregularities, and omissions if the Commissioner determines the best interests of the State will be served. The Commissioner, in his/her sole discretion, may accept or reject illegible, incomplete or vague Bids and his/her decision shall be final. A conditional or revocable Bid which clearly communicates the terms or limitations of acceptance may be considered, and Contract award may be made in compliance with the Bidder’s conditional or revocable terms in the Bid.

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