Common use of Student Growth Criterion Score Clause in Contracts

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. 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. B. Scoring for student growth will be as follows: 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 Classroom teachers will collect student growth data will be taken from multiple sources during the school year in which the evaluation is being conducted and must conducted. This data will be appropriate and relevant to shared in discussions with the teacher’s assignment. It will include teacher initiated formal and/or informal assessments evaluator for the purpose of student progress. Student assessment that is not calibrated to show growth between two points in time in documenting performance for 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 impactgoals. c. If 2. For a comprehensive performance evaluation, evaluators add up the raw score on all five (5) components and the employee is rated low, average, or high based on the scores below: 5-12 Low 13-17 Average 18-20 High 3. When a classroom teacher receives a 4 – Distinguished summative score and a Low student growth scorerating of “Low” they will engage with their evaluator, they must be automatically moved to the 3 – Proficient level for their summative scorein a student growth inquiry. If a teacher receives a an Unsatisfactory - 1 – Unsatisfactory on any of the five student growth components, it will trigger the student growth inquiry plan. 4. The A teacher who receives a Distinguished - 4 comprehensive performance rating and a Low student growth rating, must automatically be moved to Proficient - 3 for their comprehensive performance rating. 5. Evaluations of classroom teachers with a comprehensive performance rating of Unsatisfactory - 1 and a student growth rating of “High” will be reviewed by the evaluator’s supervisor. 6. Within two months of receiving the low student growth rating or at the beginning of the following school year, the teacher and evaluator will mutually agree to engage in one of the following: a. Examine extenuating circumstances which may include, but are not limited to: • Compare goal setting process/expectations, student attendance, and curriculum/ assessment alignment; b. Schedule monthly conferences with evaluator to discuss/revise goals, progress toward meeting goals, and best practices; c. Examine student growth measure with other evidence (including observation, artifacts and student evidence) and additional levels of student growth based on classroom, school, District and and/or 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; • ; d. Create and implement a professional development plan to address student growth areas. • Work with a mentor teachere.

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 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 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 achievement that is does 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 time 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 rubric scores produce a teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth componentscomponents receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, it will trigger the then a student growth inquiry planis triggered as outlined below. 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 student growth inquiry plan to address student growth areas. (Appendix S) • 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. 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 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 achievement that is does 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 time 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 rubric scores produce a teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth componentscomponents receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, it will trigger the then a student growth inquiry planis triggered as outlined below. 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 student growth inquiry plan to address student growth areas. • (Appendix T)  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 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 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 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. 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 impactteachers. 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 : i. 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; • ; ii. Examine extenuating circumstances possibly including: goal setting process/expectations, student attendance, and curriculum/assessment alignment; • ; iii. Schedule monthly conferences with evaluator to discuss/revise goals, progress toward meeting goals, and best practices; • ; iv. Create and implement a professional development plan to address student growth areas. • Work with a mentor teacher.

Student Growth Criterion Score. a. 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. 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: below 1. 5-12—Low 2. 13-17—Average 3. 18-20—High b. 2. Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources during the school year in which the evaluation is being conducted 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 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. 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 unless mutually agreed upon by the same year or individual teacher impactevaluator and the teacher. c. 3. 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 : a. 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; • ; b. Examine extenuating circumstances possibly including: goal setting process/expectations, student attendance, and curriculum/assessment alignment; • ; c. Schedule monthly conferences with evaluator to discuss/revise goals, progress toward meeting goals, and best practices; • ; d. 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. 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 during the school year in which the evaluation is being conducted conducted, and must be appropriate and relevant to the teacher’s assignment. It will include teacher initiated formal and/or and informal assessments of student progress. Student assessment 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. 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 unless submitted by the same year or individual teacher impactand mutually agreed to by the evaluator. 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 : 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. • 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. 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. 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: B. 5-12—Low C. 13-17—Average D. 18-20—High b. Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources during the school year in which the evaluation is being conducted 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 achievement that is does 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 time 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 rubric scores produce a teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth componentscomponents receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, it will trigger the then a student growth inquiry planis triggered as outlined below. The teacher and evaluator will mutually agree to engage in one of the following: • : A. 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; • ; B. Examine extenuating circumstances possibly including: goal setting process/expectations, student attendance, and curriculum/assessment alignment; • Schedule ; X. Xxxxxxxx monthly conferences with evaluator to discuss/revise goals, progress toward meeting goals, and best practices; • ; D. Create and implement a professional development student growth inquiry plan to address student growth areas. • (Appendix T) E. 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. 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 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 achievement that is does 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 time 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 rubric scores produce a teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth componentscomponents receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, it will trigger the then a student growth inquiry planis triggered as outlined below. 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 student growth inquiry plan to address student growth areas. (Appendix T) • Work with a mentor teacher.

Student Growth Criterion Score. a. 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 8.18.1 (UW CEL 5 D+ Framework). 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. 2. Student growth data will be taken from multiple sources during the school year in which the evaluation is being conducted 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 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. 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 impactteachers. c. 3. 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: • , as mutually agreed to by the teacher and the evaluator: 1. Compare student growth measure with other evidence (including observation, artifacts and student evidence) and and/or 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. 5. • Work with a mentor teacher; 6. Additional options, as mutually determined by the teacher and evaluator.