Student Growth Criterion Score. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG
Student Growth Criterion Score a. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. Evaluators add up the raw score on these components and the employee is given a score of low, average or high based on the scores below: 5-12—Low 13-17—Average 18-20—High
b. Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources during the school year in which the evaluation is being conducted and must be appropriate and relevant to the teacher’s assignment. It will include teacher initiated formal and/or informal assessments of student progress. Student assessment that is not calibrated to show growth between two points in time in the same school year shall not be used to calculate a teacher’s student growth criterion score. Evaluators shall not consider school-wide or District-wide test scores when evaluating classroom teachers as current state testing does not measure two points in the same year or individual teacher impact.
c. If a teacher receives a 4 – Distinguished summative score and a Low student growth score, they must be automatically moved to the 3 – Proficient level for their summative score. If a teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on any of the five student growth components, it will trigger the student growth inquiry plan. The teacher and evaluator will mutually agree to engage in one of the following: • Compare student growth measure with other evidence (including observation, artifacts and student evidence) and additional levels of student growth based on classroom, school, District and state-based tools; • Examine extenuating circumstances possibly including: goal setting process/expectations, student attendance, and curriculum/assessment alignment; • Schedule monthly conferences with evaluator to discuss/revise goals, progress toward meeting goals, and best practices; • Create and implement a professional development plan to address student growth areas. • Work with a mentor teacher
Student Growth Criterion Score.
A. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.
1. For a comprehensive evaluation, evaluators add up the raw score on these components and the employee is given a score of low, average or high based on the scores below: 1. 5-12 — Low 2. 13-17 — Average 3. 18-20 — High B. Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources, and must be appropriate and relevant to the teacher’s assignment. Student achievement data that does not measure growth between two points in time shall not be used to calculate a teacher’s student growth criterion score.
Student Growth Criterion Score. The evaluator will determine a student growth score for each teacher using the student growth components embedded in the instructional framework in criteria 3, 6, and 8. These components are SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1 Evaluators will total the raw score on these components to determine the employee score of low, average or high based on the scores below:
Student Growth Criterion Score. Embedded in the instructional framework are five components designated as student growth 15 components. These components are SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, SG 8.1. Evaluators add up the 16 raw score on these components and the employee is given a score of low, average, or high based 17 on the following rubric: 18 19 1. 5-12 Low 20 21 2. 13-17 Average 22 23 3. 18-20 High 24 25 B. Student Growth data will be taken from multiple sources, and must be appropriate and relevant 26 to the teacher’s assignment. It should include teacher initiated formal and informal assessments 27 of student progress. These assessments can be formative and/or summative in nature and should 28 be an organic “natural harvest” gathered from the essential work that effective teachers are 29 already doing. 30
Student Growth Criterion Score. A. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. Evaluators add up the raw score on these components and the employee is given a score of low, average or high based on the scores below: 5-12—Low 13-17—Average 18-20—High
B. Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources during the school year in which the evaluation is being conducted, and must be appropriate and relevant to the teacher’s assignment. It will include teacher initiated formal and/or informal assessments of student progress. Student achievement that is not calibrated to show growth between two points in time in the same school year shall not be used to calculate a teacher’s student growth criterion score.
Student Growth Criterion Score. 2 Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth
Student Growth Criterion Score. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. Evaluators add up the raw score on these components and the employee is given a score of low, average, or high based on the scores below: 1. 5-12—Low 2. 13-17—Average 3. 18-20—High Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources, and must be appropriate and relevant to the teacher’s assignment. It will include teacher initiated formal and informal assessments of student progress, and may include district and state assessments of student progress. Student achievement that is not calibrated to show growth between two points in time in the current school year shall not be used to calculate a teacher’s student growth criterion score. If a teacher receives a 4 – Distinguished summative score and a Low student growth score, they must be automatically moved to the 3 – Proficient level for their summative score. If a teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on any of the five student growth components, it will trigger the student growth inquiry plan. The teacher and evaluator will mutually agree to engage in one of the following:
1. Triangulate student growth measure with other evidence (including observation, artifacts and student evidence) and additional levels of student growth based on classroom, school, District, and state-based tools;
2. Examine extenuating circumstances possibly including: goal setting process/expectations, student attendance, and curriculum/assessment alignment;
3. Schedule monthly conferences with evaluator to discuss/revise goals, progress toward meeting goals, and best practices;
4. Create and implement a professional development plan to address student growth areas.
Student Growth Criterion Score. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2 and SG 8.1. Teachers on focused evaluation will be scored using student growth rubrics for Criterion 3, 6, or 8 if those criterion were included in their focus area for professional growth, or Criterion 3 or 6 if any other Criterion was selected as a focus area. For a focused evaluation, there is no student growth impact rating, but a rating of a “1” on any student growth rubric row triggers a Student Growth Inquiry Plan pursuant to WAC 392-191A-100.
Student Growth Criterion Score. 1. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.
1. For a comprehensive evaluation, evaluators add up the raw score on these components and the employee is given a score of low, average or high based on the scores below: a. 5-12 — Low b. 13-17 — Average c. 18-20 — High
2. Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources measuring growth between at least two points in time, and must be appropriate and relevant to the teacher’s assignment.
3. A teacher who receives a Distinguished (level 4) preliminary summative score and a Low student growth score will receive an overall Proficient (level 3) rating.
4. If a teacher receives a Low student growth score, the teacher and evaluator will mutually agree to engage in one of the student growth inquiries required by law.
5. The evaluations of certificated classroom teachers with a preliminary rating of Unsatisfactory (level 1) and High student growth will be reviewed by the evaluator’s supervisor.
