Common use of Permanent Teacher Intervention Component Clause in Contracts

Permanent Teacher Intervention Component. 39.1.4.1 This component of the Program is intended for permanent teachers with less than satisfactory teaching skills or practices. Its purpose is to assist them in improving deficiencies. 39.1.4.2 This component of the Program shall provide intervention to permanent teachers who receive an “unsatisfactory” rating on their prior year’s summary evaluation or who have received a “needs improvement” rating for two or more consecutive years, provided the following conditions are met: 39.1.4.2.1 Each referral shall be reviewed by the PAR Panel Co-Chairs to determine whether acceptance into the Intervention Program is appropriate. Part of the review will focus on whether the evaluation documents and process, per Article 16, Evaluation, of the Contract that led to the referral, were valid and correct. The Panel Co-Chairs will, by mutual agreement, enter the referred teacher into the Intervention Component of the PAR program. If they do not agree, no referral will be made. 39.1.4.2.2 The principal shall present copies of his/her evaluation file for the teacher. Said file, developed pursuant to Article 16, Evaluation, shall include reports of classroom observations, recommendations for improvement that were made to the teacher during the evaluation process and any other related information that may assist the panel. 39.1.4.2.3 The teacher shall have the opportunity to make a presentation to the PAR Co-Chairs. Section 16.3 shall apply. 39.1.4.2.4 If the PAR Co-Chairs reject the referral, they shall provide the District with the reasons in writing for the rejection and an acknowledgment that the District is free to exercise its options under the SFUSD/UESF contract and/or the California Education Code in the absence of an intervention program. 39.1.4.3 If a teacher believes that a colleague is in need of the intervention process, s/he may discuss these concerns with the UESF Building Representative. The Building Representative may relay these concerns to the principal. If the Building Representative discusses these concerns with the principal and after one month the principal does not request an investigation for intervention, the building representative may submit the concerns to one of the Panel Co-Chairs. The PAR Co-Chairs may place such a teacher in the Intervention Program following the procedure described above. 39.1.4.4 This Program shall not deal with teachers’ employment issues that arise from accusations of neglect of duty or misconduct (Article 30, Disciplinary Action) which are distinct from teachers’ evaluations in relationship to the California Standards for the Teaching Profession adopted by the Union and District.

Permanent Teacher Intervention Component. 39.1.4.1 41.1.4.1 This component of the Program is intended for permanent teachers with less than satisfactory teaching skills or practices. Its purpose is to assist them in improving deficiencies. 39.1.4.2 This 41.1.4.2 Effective the 2000-2001 school year, this component of the Program shall provide intervention to permanent teachers who receive an “unsatisfactory” rating on their prior year’s summary evaluation or who have received a “needs improvement” rating for two or more consecutive years, provided the following conditions are met: 39.1.4.2.1 41.1.4.2.1 Each referral shall be reviewed by the PAR Panel Co-Chairs to determine whether acceptance into the Intervention Program is appropriate. Part of the review will focus on whether the evaluation documents and process, per Article 16, Evaluation, of the Contract that led to the referral, were valid and correct. The Panel Co-Chairs will, by mutual agreement, enter the referred teacher into the Intervention Component of the PAR program. If they do not agree, no referral will be made. 39.1.4.2.2 41.1.4.2.2 The PAR Panel must approve the entry of any permanent teacher recommended by the Co-Chairs for participation in the intervention component of the PAR program. 41.1.4.2.3 The principal shall present copies of his/her evaluation file for the teacher. Said file, developed pursuant to Article 16, Evaluation, shall include reports of classroom observations, recommendations for improvement that were made to the teacher during the evaluation process and any other related information that may assist the panel. 39.1.4.2.3 41.1.4.2.4 The teacher shall have the opportunity to make a presentation to the PAR Co-Chairs. Section 16.3 shall apply. 39.1.4.2.4 41.1.4.2.5 If the PAR Co-Chairs reject the referral, they shall provide the District with the reasons in writing for the rejection and an acknowledgment that the District is free to exercise its options under the SFUSD/UESF contract and/or the California Education Code in the absence of an intervention program. 39.1.4.3 41.1.4.3 If a teacher believes that a colleague is in need of the intervention process, s/he may discuss these concerns with the UESF Building Representative. The Building Representative may relay these concerns to the principal. If the Building Representative discusses these concerns with the principal and after one month the principal does not request an investigation for intervention, the building representative may submit the concerns to one of the Panel Co-Chairs. The PAR Co-Chairs may place such a teacher in the Intervention Program following the procedure described above. 39.1.4.4 41.1.4.4 This Program shall not deal with teachers’ employment issues that arise from accusations of neglect of duty or misconduct (Article 30, Disciplinary Action) which are distinct from teachers’ evaluations in relationship to the California Standards for the Teaching Profession adopted by the Union and District.