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 achievement that does not 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 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 ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth components receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, then a student growth inquiry is 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 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 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 does not 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 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 ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth components receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, then a student growth inquiry is 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 student growth inquiry plan to address student growth areas. (Appendix TS)  • 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 achievement assessment that does 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 time 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 rubric scores produce a ‘low’ student growth score or teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on any one of the five student growth components receive an unsatisfactory (1) ratingcomponents, then a it will trigger the student growth inquiry is triggered as outlined belowplan. 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 student growth inquiry professional development 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 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 does not 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 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 ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth components receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, then a student growth inquiry is 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 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 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, 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 does not 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 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 ‘low’ student growth score or any one of the five student growth components receive an unsatisfactory (1) rating, then a student growth inquiry is 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 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 achievement assessment that does 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 time 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 rubric scores produce a ‘low’ student growth score or teacher receives a 1 – Unsatisfactory on any one of the five student growth components receive an unsatisfactory (1) ratingcomponents, then a it will trigger the student growth inquiry is triggered as outlined belowplan. 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 student growth inquiry professional development plan to address student growth areas. (Appendix T)  Work with a mentor teacher.