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.
Outlook 5. Risks and concerns.
Credit Rating With respect to the Competitive Supplier or Competitive Supplier’s Guarantor, its senior unsecured, unsubordinated long-term debt rating, not supported by third party credit enhancement, and if such debt is no longer rated, then the corporate or long-term issuer rating of Competitive Supplier or Competitive Supplier’s Guarantor.
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.
Industry Ratings The City will only accept coverage from an insurance carrier who offers proof that it:
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.
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.
Moody’s Xxxxx’x Investors Service, Inc. and its successors.
Joint Job Evaluation Committee The parties entered into agreement December 17, 1992, to ensure the Joint Gender- Neutral Job Evaluation Plan remains current and operational and to that end endorsed the Joint Gender-Neutral Job Evaluation Maintenance Agreement. The parties agree that a guiding principle for the Committee is that there shall be no discrimination between male and female employees wherein a person of one sex is paid more than a person of the other sex for similar or substantially similar work.
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.
