Standards Based Teacher Evaluation Sample Clauses

Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. A. Teacher evaluations will utilize multiple factors, with the intent of providing meaningful feedback to each teacher and assigning an effectiveness rating based in equal part upon teacher performance and student growth. B. Each teacher evaluation will result in an effectiveness rating of: 1. accomplished 2. skilled 3. developing
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (12)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. 1. Teacher evaluations will utilize multiple factors, with the intent of providing meaningful feedback to each teacher and assigning an effectiveness rating based in equal part upon teacher performance and student growth. 2. Each teacher evaluation will result in an effectiveness rating of accomplished, skilled, developing or ineffective. The specific standards and criteria for distinguishing between these ratings/levels of performance shall be the same as those developed by the State Board of Education, which are incorporated herein by reference. 3. The Superintendent shall annually cause to be filed a report to the Department of Education the number of teachers for whom an evaluation was conducted as well as the number of teachers assigned each rating as set forth above, aggregated by teacher preparation programs from which and the years in which the teachers graduated. Individual data shall not be reported by the ODE except as required by law. 4. Fifty percent (50%) of each evaluation shall be based upon teacher performance and fifty percent (50%) on multiple measures of student growth as set forth herein except as otherwise recommended and ratified by the parties pursuant to HB 362.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (5)
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. ‌ The Board is responsible for adopting and implementing in consultation with teachers a standards-based teacher evaluation policy that conforms to the framework for evaluation of teachers as approved by the State Board of Education, as amended, which aligns with the "Standards for the Teaching Profession" as set forth in State law.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (4)
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. Teacher evaluations will utilize multiple factors, with the intent of providing meaningful feedback to each teacher and assigning an effectiveness rating based in equal part upon teacher performance and student growth. Each teacher evaluation will result in an effectiveness rating of: a) Accomplished b) Skilled c) Developing or d) Ineffective The specific standards and criteria for distinguishing between these ratings/levels of performance shall be the same as those developed by the State Board of Education, which are incorporated herein by reference. Fifty percent (50%) of each evaluation will be based upon teacher performance and fifty percent (50%) on multiple measures of student growth as set forth herein.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. A determination of the efficiency and effectiveness of the teaching and School Counselor staff is a critical factor in the overall operations of the District. The Board evaluates teachers in accordance with State law and the standards- based statewide teacher evaluation framework adopted by the State Board of Education. The Board directs the Superintendent/designee to implement this policy in accordance with State law.
Sample 1Sample 2
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. FOR NON-INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF Teacher evaluations will utilize multiple factors, with the intent of providing meaningful feedback to each teacher and assigning an effectiveness rating based in equal part upon teacher performance and student growth. Each teacher evaluation will result in an effectiveness rating of:
Sample 1Sample 2
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. Teacher evaluations will utilize multiple factors, with the intent of providing meaningful feedback to each teacher and assigning a final holistic rating based upon evidence provided by the teacher and on the formal observations and walkthroughs by the teacher’s assigned evaluator. A teacher may provide evidence to the credentialed evaluator to support and inform an accurate reflection of the Evaluation Factors being evaluated. Examples include, but are not limited to, student information affecting educational progress, student interest or learning style surveys, newsletters, classroom rules, lesson plans, portfolios, summative assessments, professional education organization work, education awards, and student work samples. All evidence presented will be considered in the evaluator’s assessment of the teacher. Each teacher evaluation will result in a final holistic evaluation rating of:
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. The Board of Education is responsible for a standards-based teacher evaluation policy which conforms to the framework for evaluation of teachers as approved by the State Board of Education and aligns with the “Standards for the Teaching Profession” as set forth in State law. The Board adopts the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (“OTES”) model and the Ohio School Counselor Evaluation System (“OSCES”) model as approved by the State Board of Education. The evaluation policy is intended to provide an evaluation model that is research-based, transparent, fair, and adaptable to the needs of the District. The Board believes in the importance of ongoing assessment and meaningful feedback as a powerful vehicle to support improved teaching performance and student growth, as well as promotion and retention decisions for teachers. The Board acknowledges that the overarching purposes of the teacher evaluation system are to serve as a tool to advance the professional development of teachers, to inform instruction, and to assist teachers and administrators in identifying and developing best educational practices in order to provide the greatest opportunity for student learning and achievement. This policy shall be implemented as set forth herein and shall be included in the collective bargaining agreement with the Xxxxxxxx Education Association, and in all extensions and renewals thereof. This policy has been developed in consultation with teachers employed by the Board and represented by the Xxxxxxxx Education Association (BEA). Given the dynamic nature of the mandated teacher evaluation process, the Board recognizes the Evaluation Review Committee (ERC) as well as Student Learning Objective Committee (SLO), with continuing participation by District teachers represented by the Xxxxxxxx Education Association, and for the express purpose of recommending necessary changes to the Board for the appropriate revision of this policy.
Sample 1
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation. Lakeview Evaluation Committee
Sample 1

Related to Standards Based Teacher Evaluation

  • TEACHER EVALUATION A. The administration will be evaluating the teacher’s performance within the time of formal responsibility. The evaluation process and form will be shared with the Association Building Representatives at the beginning of each school year. (a) Probationary teachers shall be evaluated at least two (2) times a year. The first evaluation will be completed prior to December 1st and the second prior to April 15th. Each evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations, on the performance of other duties and responsibilities and the goals developed in the Individualized Development Plan (IDP). The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at anytime prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the probationary teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. (b) Tenured teachers will be evaluated on a rotating schedule, but no less than once every three- (3) years. The administration reserves the right to evaluate a tenured teacher more often. The evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations and on the performance of other duties and responsibilities. The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at any time prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the tenured teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. 2. The administrator shall prepare and submit a written evaluation and recommendations to the teacher prior to May 30th of the year they are evaluated. The administrator shall hold a conference with the teacher to discuss the written evaluation and recommendations. 3. Upon receipt of the evaluation the teacher will sign the form indicating his/her receipt of the report. The signature on the form does not constitute his/her approval unless specifically noted. 4. Teachers involved with the instruction of Advanced Placement courses will be evaluated. This evaluation in the first year will be made part of the formal evaluation only at the request of the teacher. B. A teacher who disagrees with the content or procedure of evaluation may submit a written answer which shall be attached to the file copy of the evaluation in question and/or submit any complaints through Level 4 of the grievance procedure. C. If an administrator believes a teacher is doing unacceptable work, the reasons shall be set forth in specific terms. Included will be examples of specific ways in which the teacher is to improve and assistance may be given by the administrator and other staff members. In subsequent conferences it shall be the responsibility of the individual teacher to inquire whether adequate improvement has taken place. D. Monitoring and observation of the work performance of the teacher shall be conducted openly. The public address or audio system or similar types of communications will not be used for the purpose of evaluation. E. The Board and the Association recognize that the ability of pupils to progress and mature academically is a combined result of the school, home, economic and social environment and that teachers alone cannot be held accountable for all aspects of the academic achievement of the pupil in the classroom. Test results of academic progress of students shall not be used as the sole determinant or in isolated instances to evaluate the quality of a teacher's service or fitness for retention. F. All communications, including evaluations by Milan Administrators, commendations, and documented complaints directed toward the teacher which are to be included in the personnel file shall be made available for review of the teacher prior to placement in the file; a copy of any such communication will be provided to the teacher at this time. Pre-placement information such as confidential credentials, letters of reference from universities, individuals, or previous employers are exempt from such review. A written statement for inclusion in the personnel file may then be made by the teacher in regard to materials that were not signed by the teacher. A representative of the Association may accompany the teacher. G. Ordinarily, observations of teachers shall not be for less than a full class period or for the duration of a particular teaching lesson.

  • 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.

  • Performance Standards The Contractor agrees to perform all tasks and provide deliverables as set forth in the Contract. The Department and the Customer will be entitled at all times, upon request, to be advised as to the status of work being done by the Contractor and of the details thereof.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

  • 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?

  • Performance Evaluations The Contractor is subject to an annual performance evaluation to be conducted by NYCDOT pursuant to the PPB Rules.

  • Formal Evaluation All formal evaluations of personnel shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the employee concerned by an administrator or supervisor of the District.

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