Chandler Unified School District Teacher Performance Evaluation System Revised 2015-16
Purpose The purpose of this guide is to outline Chandler Unified School District s teacher evaluation process. The guide is designed as a reference tool to help teachers and administrators understand the district s process for observing, documenting, and evaluating instruction in the classroom and other school settings. The main objectives of the teacher performance evaluation system are to improve instruction and maintain instructional strengths. In order to meet the objectives identified, our teacher evaluation system includes: Common language to reflect the complexities of teaching and learning and facilitate common understanding of expectations Trained evaluators and an ongoing focus on inter- rater reliability Observations of instructional practices accompanied by timely, focused feedback Processes to identify and improve instructional practice Opportunities for professional development designed to meet teaching and learning goals based upon teacher evaluation, student achievement data and employee surveys Multiple measures of teacher performance and student academic progress 2
Table of Contents Section Title Page Qualified Evaluator 4 Teacher Performance Classifications- State Reporting 4 Components of the Evaluation System 5 Instructional Practice 5 Student Achievement 8 Deliberate Practice 8 Collegiality and Professionalism 9 iobservation Software 10 Transmittal of Evaluation 10 Training and Support 10 Improvement Plan 10 Appendix 12 Learning Map (pg. 10) Support Personnel Non-classroom (pg. 16) Student Achievement (pg. 19) Deliberate Practice example (pg. 29) Sample Calculation of Overall Composite Score (pg. 36) Policy GCO- Evaluation of Professional Staff Members (pg. 39) 3
Teacher Evaluation Performance System Qualified Evaluator A qualified evaluator is defined by policy as a school Principal or other person who is trained to evaluate teachers and who is designated by the Governing Board to evaluate the District s certificated teachers. Qualified evaluators shall undergo appropriate training on the instructional elements and protocols for the teaching framework (Domains 1-4), evaluation software, and inter-rater reliability. (See Appendix G) Teacher Performance Classifications- State Reporting Teacher Performance classifications encompass the four (4) performance classifications identified for teachers under the law and defined by the State Board of Education. The four performance classifications are defined below. A. Highly Effective A highly effective teacher consistently exceeds expectations. This teacher s students generally made exceptional levels of academic progress. The highly effective teacher demonstrates mastery of the state board of education adopted professional teaching standards, as determined by classroom observations. B. Effective An effective teacher consistently meets expectations. This teacher s students generally made satisfactory levels of academic progress. The effective teacher demonstrates competency in the state board of education adopted professional teaching standards, as determined by classroom observations. C. Developing (State Definition) Caution: this is not the same definition or context as the Marzano framework scale A developing teacher fails to consistently meet expectations and requires a change in performance. This teacher s students generally made unsatisfactory levels of academic progress. The developing teacher demonstrates an insufficient level of competency in the state board of education adopted professional teaching standards, as determined by classroom observations. The developing classification is not intended to be assigned to a veteran teacher for more than two consecutive years. This classification may be assigned to new or newly-reassigned teachers for more than two consecutive years. 4
D. Ineffective An ineffective teacher consistently fails to meet expectations and requires a change in performance. This teacher s students generally made unacceptable levels of academic progress. The ineffective teacher demonstrates a minimal competency in the state board of education adopted professional teaching standards, as determined by classroom observations. (See Appendix G) Components of the Evaluation System There are four components of the evaluation framework which are used to determine the overall performance classification of a teacher: Instructional Practice, Student Achievement, Deliberate Practice, and Collegiality and Professionalism. Each component receives a summative score. This score is then weighted and combined for an overall status score and teacher performance classification. The components are as follows: Evaluation System Instructional Practice (Domain 1,2,3) 55% Student Achievement 33% Deliberate Practice 6% Collegiality and Professionalism (Domain 4) 6% I. Instructional Practice: 5 Instructional Practice comprises fifty-five percent (55%) of the teacher s overall performance classification score. It is based upon formative ratings provided by their evaluator for Domain 1- Classroom Strategies and Behaviors, Domain 2- Planning and Preparing, and Domain 3- Reflecting on Teaching. The elements rated are aligned to the Arizona Teaching Standards adopted by the Arizona Board of Education.
Administrators will evaluate all teachers on their instructional practices based on information gathered from formal and informal classroom observations as well as artifacts supplied by the classroom teacher. Each domain is weighted within the overall score for Instructional Practice with Domain 1 given the most weight due to the larger number of elements within it. A. Instructional Practice Weighting for Domains 1,2,3 Instructional Practice accounts for 55 percent of the overall Performance Classification of a certified staff member. Within the 55%, the following tables reflect the weighting of each domain for both instructional and non-instructional staff. Domain 1 Domain 2 Domain 3 Instructional Certified Staffbased on 54 elements in Domains 1,2,3 76% of Instructional Practice overall score 15% of Instructional Practice overall score 9% of Instructional Practice overall score Non-Classroom certified staff based on 27 elements in Domains 1,2,3 59% of Instructional Practice overall score 26% of Instructional Practice overall score 15% of Instructional Practice overall score B. Classroom Observations The purpose of the classroom observation is 1) to provide regular, timely feedback to teachers and 2) collect evidence as a data source for the final rating on the teacher performance evaluation instrument. Every effort will be made to provide a minimum of thirty (30) data points in Domain 1, six (6) in Domain 2, and four (4) in Domain 3 for each classroom teacher distributed over the school year. Non-classroom teachers (counselor, media, etc.) should have nineteen (19) data points in Domain 1, six (6) in Domain 2, and four (4) in Domain 3 distributed over two conferences. (A minimum of four (4) data points should be given each teacher in Domain 4.) All observations will be performed by trained evaluators. Observations shall not be conducted within two instructional days of any scheduled period in which school is not in session for one (1) week or more. Teachers may request additional visits at any time. 6
Chandler Unified School District has adopted the following guidelines for observations that may occur as part of the evaluation process. 1. Formal Observations A formal observation is an observation of the certificated teacher demonstrating teaching skills in a complete and uninterrupted lesson. A teacher evaluation must include at least two formal observations with at least 60 calendar days between the first and last observations. The second formal classroom observation may be waived by the evaluator in the event a continuing teacher s instructional practice is in one of the two highest categories, unless the teacher requests a second observation. (A continuing teacher is a certificated teacher who has been and is currently employed by the District for the major portion of three (3) consecutive school years.) 2. Informal Observations An informal evaluation averages 10-15 minutes. Evaluators will conduct two informal observations one each semester. 3. Walkthrough Observations A walkthrough observation is normally less than 10 minutes. Evaluators will walk through classrooms and provide feedback on an ongoing basis. C. Performance Ratings on Elements Evaluators will utilize a rating scale of 0-4 to assess competency on the elements listed within the framework. The scale includes the following areas: o Innovative (4) o Applying (3) o Developing (2) o Beginning (1) o Not Using (0) Specific examples of rating scales can be accessed within the iobservation software at www.effectiveeducators.com or in Appendix A. 7 It is understood that not all elements may receive a rating. The elements marked will be those appropriately observed by the evaluator or those with clear evidence
to support a rating. Teachers may view the evaluator s ratings and related feedback within the iobservation software. Teachers may also respond or add comments using the iobservation software system. The ratings are used to determine an overall status score for Instructional Practice at the end of each school year. D. Instructional Practice Proficiency Scale- Domains 1,2,3 Highly Effective (4) Effective (3) Developing-State Definition(2) Ineffective (1) At least 50 % at level 4 or higher At least 65% at level 3 or higher Less than 65% at level 3 or higher and less than 50% at level 1 or 0 Greater than or equal to 50% at level 1 or 0 E. Non-Classroom Instructional Personnel Certified staff members who do not work directly in a classroom will be evaluated using a modified instrument that meets the needs of their positions. (See Appendix B) II. Student Achievement: Student achievement comprises thirty-three percent (33%) of the teacher s overall performance classification score. All scores used will be drawn from sources proven to be valid and reliable forms of assessments. For the 2014-15 school year, Chandler Unified School District will be using the previous year s school-wide data for all certified staff members until such time that valid and reliable classroom level data becomes available. Student Proficiency will be weighted 10% of the overall category score. Student Growth will account for 23% of the overall category score. (See Appendix D) III. Deliberate Practice: Deliberate Practice comprises six percent (6%) of the teacher s overall performance classification score. Deliberate practice is focusing on a specific strategy (element) with attention to improving detailed aspects of the strategy in order to develop fluency, proficiency, and accuracy in applying it in the classroom so that student learning is enhanced. Each staff member will focus on two elements: 1. One site-selected by the administrator 8 2. One self-selected by the staff member
The final score in Deliberate Practice is determined by how much growth occurs on ratings issued for the selected elements. (See Appendix E) IV. Collegiality and Professionalism (Domain 4): Collegiality and Professionalism (Domain 4) comprises six percent (6%) of the teacher s overall performance classification score. It will be based upon formative ratings provided by their evaluator for Domain 4- Collegiality and Professionalism. Each component is given an overall score based upon the performance scale below: Highly Effective Effective Developing- State Definition Ineffective 4.0-3.5 4.0-2.5 2.4-1.5 1.4-1.0 The weighted scores from the four components are added together for a final status score which determines the performance classification. (See Appendix E) 9
iobservation Software Chandler Unified School District utilizes the iobservation software program. This program collects data to provide evaluative feedback and access to observation protocols, selfreflective and peer assessments, discussion and conferencing capabilities, and a resource library for professional development. The evaluation timeline and overall final rating score will be maintained within the software system. Transmittal of Evaluation The results of an annual evaluation shall be in writing or provided in electronic format to the teacher and a copy shall be transmitted or provided in an electronic format to the teacher within 5 days after completion of an evaluation. Teachers may submit a response to any evaluation within 14 calendar days of the date of transmittal. Training and Support Each site has designated Teacher Leaders responsible for training and supporting instructional staff at their individual schools. New teachers will participate in training on the Teacher Evaluation System during their initial orientation. Teachers hired after the annual orientation program will be provided individual training at their site. Notwithstanding the above, all teachers are expected to review Governing Board Policy GCO and related evaluation materials to familiarize themselves with the system. Improvement Plan (IP) When a teacher s instructional performance is determined to be ineffective or developing, a reasonable and specific plan for improvement of teacher performance shall be provided. More specifically: 10 Each evaluation shall include recommendations as to areas of improvement if the teacher s performance warrants improvement. After transmittal of the evaluation, the qualified evaluator or another Board designee shall confer with the teacher to make specific recommendations as to areas of improvement in the teacher s performance. The qualified evaluator or Board designee shall provide professional development opportunities for the teacher to improve performance. Examples of assistance may include, but not be limited to, the following: Mentor assistance Observations of peer teaching
Observations by peer teachers Curriculum resources Professional development related to strategies where deficiencies are noted On-going feedback from evaluator or coaches when available The qualified evaluator or Board designee shall follow up with the teacher after a reasonable period of time for the purpose of ascertaining that the teacher is demonstrating adequate performance. Teachers are accountable for the implementation and completion of the plan. (See Appendix F) 11
12 Appendix
Appendix A Learning Map and Protocol 13
14
L 15
Appendix B Support Personnel (Non-Classroom) Learning Map
18
Appendix C Student Achievement
Teacher Evaluation System Student Achievement Data CUSD Teacher Evaluation is comprised of four components. According to ARS 15-203 (A)(38) the state board of education shall adopt and maintain a model framework for a teacher and principal evaluation instrument that includes quantitative data on student academic progress that accounts for between thirtythree per cent and fifty per cent of the evaluation outcomes. Therefore, a portion of these four components are mandated by state law. Figure 1 shows the main components of teacher evaluations in CUSD according to their weighting. Figure 1. CUSD Teacher Evaluation Weighting System Each of these four main categories of teacher evaluation will have data points that are collected in order to measure teacher effectiveness. These data points will then be used to assign a teacher a rating in each separate category on a four point scale. The scale for the individual categories has been discussed in prior sections and is observed below in Figure 2. 20
Figure 2. Scale for Teacher Effectiveness in Each Category. Highly Effective Effective Developing- State Definition Ineffective 4.0-3.5 4.0-2.5 2.4-1.5 1.4-1.0 For site level data of student achievement the four point scale will be used to incorporate standardized achievement results on the AIMS exam. As mandated by the ESEA waiver at least 20% of the student achievement portion of a teacher evaluation must come from some measurement of student growth. Student growth is defined as a difference in measurement of student knowledge at two distinct points in time. Consequently, it was necessary to divide the student achievement portion of site level data into two components: Growth and Proficiency. Figure 3 represents the proportion of the site level student achievement score that is accounted for by growth and proficiency. Figure 3. Site Level Student Achievement Divided Into Growth and Proficiency. 21
Proficiency One of the pillars in the CUSD Journey 2020 strategic plan is Academic Excellence and achieving excellence starts with showing that students have mastered the concepts in which they were instructed. Currently the mandated method of showing proficiency is through the vehicle of standardized assessment. As an example, if a student receives an entire year of instruction in AP Statistics then it would be the expectation that the student masters the material well enough to pass the AP Statistics examination in May. CUSD will continue to expect that students are taught in such a manner that they can show proficiency on state and national standardized assessments. Proficiency will be measured by determining how students perform compared to the conditional mean. A grade and subject level that performs better than their expected conditional mean will correlate to 90% of the student achievement points available for proficiency. A grade and subject level that performs better than one standard deviation above their expected conditional mean will correlate to at least 100% of the student achievement points available for proficiency. However, a grade and 22
subject level that performs one standard deviation below their expected conditional mean will correlate to no more than 60% of the student achievement points available for proficiency. In other words, the goal of CUSD grade and subject levels should be to perform better than schools with similar poverty rates throughout the state. To achieve maximum points, students must perform better than approximately 84% of schools with similar populations and socio-economic levels throughout the state. Figure 4 is a representation of 6 th grade mathematics proficiency rates conditional means regressed onto free and reduced lunch rates for the 2011-2012 school year. As one can see, and peer-reviewed research would confirm, a strong correlation between proficiency rates and free and reduced lunch rates occurs. The highlighted dots represent three CUSD schools in 6 th grade mathematics for that year. Figure 4. 6 th Grade Mathematics Proficiency Regressed Onto Free and Reduce 2011-2012. The three CUSD schools have relatively different performance in 6 th grade mathematics in comparison to schools with similar poverty levels throughout the 23
state. The CUSD school represented with a triangle performs as one should expect based on the regression model. This school would get ninety percent of their points at this grade and subject level. The CUSD school represented with a circle performs above the conditional mean based on the regression model. In fact, this school is about one-half of a standard deviation above the mean and would receive ninety-five percent of their points at this grade and subject level. Finally, the CUSD school represented by a square performs below the conditional mean based on the regression model. This school is about one standard deviation below the expectation and they would receive sixty percent of their points at this grade and subject level. Philosophy: CUSD students will continue to show increased proficiency on state and national standardized examinations. This aligns with the Journey 2020 pillar of academic excellence. Goal: CUSD expects that grade and subject levels have proficiency ratings that place them in the top half of schools with similar poverty rates throughout the state. Further, CUSD has a high standard of achieving proficiency one standard deviation above expectation relative to schools with similar socioeconomic status in order to achieve one-hundred percent of their proficiency points. Measurement of Site Level Proficiency In each grade and subject level, where mathematics and reading standardized examinations are given across the state, the regression model shown above will be formed. Each grade and subject level at a school will have their performance translated into a percentage of points received from proficiency. The average of the percentage of points received from proficiency across all grade level and subjects will result in a final site-level point total for proficiency. Ultimately, this methodology allows CUSD to set a bar that says three things to site levels: 24
1) We have expectations that are realistic and fair with respect to proficiency. 2) We will reward a higher percentage of points to schools who demonstrate proficiency well above expectation. Similarly, for schools below expectation the percentage of points will be less. 3) In the age of measuring student growth, we will continue to have high expectations for students showing proficiency of concepts on standardized examinations. Growth Growth on standardized assessments continues to be measured in a variety of ways. The state of Arizona has adopted Dr. Damien Bettebenner s modeling of student growth that produces student growth percentiles (SGP). Every student in CUSD has a theoretical chance at showing growth above average in a given academic year. In the model, the student achievement data is not being examined at the classroom level, but rather on data sets larger than one district level. 25
A student growth percentile(sgp) is a metric that conditionally places student performance relative to a theoretical group of statewide academic peers who scored in the same range. In essence, student growth percentiles let parents and teachers know a percentile of performance on a current year test in comparison to other theoretical students like that student who scored similar in previous years. For example, if a student in the 2011-2012 school year had an SGP of 65 in 5 th grade mathematics it communicates to parents that in comparison to a theoretical group of 100 students who had the exact same score as this student in 4 th grade mathematics (AIMS), 3 rd grade mathematics (AIMS) and 2 nd grade mathematics (Stanford 10) this student would have scored better than 65 of those students. A student in the 2011-2012 school year that had an SGP of 20 in 3 rd grade mathematics demonstrates to parents that in comparison to a theoretical group of 100 students who had the exact same score as this student in 2 nd grade mathematics (Stanford 10) this student would have scored better than 20 of those students. In terms of student growth percentiles it is believed that the closest mark to a year s growth in a year s worth of time is the 50 th percentile. Theoretically, having an SGP of 50 suggests that you did better than half of your theoretical academic peer group and worse than half of your academic peer group. If a student learned new standards via new curriculum and that student did better than half of the students like them on the end of the year exam it could certainly be assumed that their mastery of material was as expected. Or, that the student made around a year s growth in a year s time. The SGP of 50 is the critical point for ADE A-F accountability. Schools that want to achieve an A label must do so by showing that their median growth percentile is above 50. Very few schools with a median below 50 achieve an A ranking. Similarly, those schools with a median SGP of 50 and proficiency at 90% are assured of receiving an A ranking. The state recognizes a median SGP of 50 because it is the point where a student goes from underperforming relative to the 26
theoretical peer group to performing above expectations relative to a theoretical peer group. Philosophy: CUSD will continue to have students that show progress in learning through standardized achievement test. This aligns with the Journey 2020 pillar of academic excellence. Goal: CUSD students will perform at least in the top half of their theoretical academic peer group when taking standardized examinations. Measurement of Site Level Growth CUSD has aligned itself to the A-F accountability model. Growth, for student achievement purposes, will be accounted for by measuring the proportion of students who attain an SGP of 50 in reading and mathematics in a given school year. The ADE A-F accountability model strives for a median of at least 50 and to have this as a median a school must have the majority of its SGP marks be above 50. As a result, if a school has at least fifty percent of its students with an SGP above 50 then that school will receive ninety percent of its growth points. Schools that have more than fifty percent of the students with a SGP above 50 will receive more than 90% of growth points. Schools that have less than fifty percent of the students with a SGP above 50 will receive less than 90% of their growth points. Growth points will be awarded at the site level according to the proportion of students that demonstrate growth above the 50 th percentile. This methodology of assigning growth points allows CUSD to make two statements: 1) CUSD expects that students score at least at the 50 th percentile on state standardized assessments in reading and mathematics relative to a group of theoretical academic peers. 2) CUSD believes that every child, no matter where they are at on the learning curve, can demonstrate above average performance relative to a group of theoretical academic peers. 27
Student Achievement Points Student achievement points are ultimately combined in a weighting system and placed on a four point scale. As shown in a graph above 33% of a teacher s final evaluation will come from site level data. But, that 33% will be further divided into 70% from growth and 30% from proficiency. The state requires that at least 20% of a teacher s evaluation is from student growth. Table 1 demonstrates how the proficiency percentage and the growth percentage for three schools are combined to assign points at a site level. Table 1. Student Achievement Points from Growth Percentages and Proficiency Percentages Elementary School A Junior High B High School C Proficiency Percentage (From Table 1) 94.2% 86.9% 94.2% Proficiency Points (Prof. % * 1.2) 1.13 1.04 1.13 Growth Percentage (From Table 2) 91.7% 90.0% 92.2% Growth Points (Growth % * 2.8) 2.57 2.52 2.58 Total Points 3.70 3.56 3.71 The table shows that Elementary School A received 3.7 points on the 4.0 scale. Further, Junior High B and High School C received 3.56 points and 3.71 points, respectively. All three of these schools were rated with a B rating or higher from the ADE. One of these schools was a Title I school with a free and reduce lunch rate greater than 90%. The alignment with ADE letter grades is critical to this process as schools are judged in the CUSD market based on the output metric of letter grade. However, in order to create a more equitable system, CUSD takes account for the socioeconomic status of a school making site-level data less bias than school letter grades. 28
Appendix D Deliberate Practice- Example 29
Deliberate Practice Deliberate practice is focusing on a specific strategy (element) with attention to improving detailed aspects of the strategy in order to develop fluency, proficiency, and accuracy in applying it in the classroom so that student learning is enhanced. 30
31
32
33
34
35
Appendix E Sample Calculation of Overall Composite Scores and Final Teacher Performance Classification 36
Sample Calculation 1.58 +.99+.24+.22= 3.03 or Final Performance Classification of Effective (See range above) 37
Appendix G Policy GCO 38
Policy GCO Evaluation System for Certificated Teachers The Governing Board is responsible for establishing a system for the evaluation of the performance of certificated teachers in the District that meets the requirements of Arizona law and is adopted in a public meeting. To that end, the Governing Board has involved certificated teachers in the development of its teacher performance system and provided the public with opportunities for public discussion on its proposed Policy. In accordance with Arizona law, the objectives of the teacher performance evaluation system are to improve instruction and maintain instructional strengths. However, the District may use the information developed through the teacher performance evaluation system for a variety of other purposes, including: To determine a teacher's effectiveness in the classroom. To provide staff members with motivation to improve and opportunities for professional development. To determine how well school and District educational programs and objectives are being carried out. To provide a basis for planning in-service training and supervisory activities. To provide a basis for personnel decisions, including but not limited to assignments, renewal/retention, dismissal and compensation. The Governing Board will periodically evaluate the teacher performance evaluation system. Definition of Certificated Teacher For purposes of this Policy, a "certificated teacher" means a person who holds a certificate from the State Board of Education to work in the schools of this state and who is employed under a contract in a school district in a position that requires certification, except a psychologist or an administrator devoting less than fifty per cent (50%) of his/her time to classroom teaching. Probationary and Continuing Status Probationary teacher means a certificated teacher who is not a continuing teacher. Continuing teacher means: A certificated teacher who has been and is currently employed by the District for the major portion of three (3) consecutive school years, and; who has not been designated in the lowest performance classification for the previous school year or who has regained continuing status after being designated as a probationary teacher. A continuing teacher becomes a probationary teacher in the school year after the year the teacher was designated in the lowest performance classification. The teacher shall remain a probationary teacher until that teacher's performance classification is designated in either of the two (2) highest performance classifications. 39
Orientation to the Teacher Performance Evaluation System The District's annual orientation program shall include an orientation to the District's teacher performance evaluation system. Teachers who are hired after the annual orientation program has been held will be provided with a separate orientation to the teacher performance evaluation. Notwithstanding the above, tall teachers are expected to review Governing Board Policy GCO and related evaluation materials to familiarize themselves with the system. Professional Growth Plans Teachers shall collaborate with their designated evaluator or supervisor to design individual plans for continual improvement. Qualified Evaluators For purposes of this Policy, a "qualified evaluator" means a school Principal or other person who is trained to evaluate teachers and who is designated by the Governing Board to evaluate the District's certificated teachers. Qualified evaluators shall undergo appropriate training which will include the instructional elements and protocols for the teaching framework (Domain 1-4), evaluation software and inter-rater reliability. Use of Quantitative Data of Student Academic Progress The Board has adopted the following plan for the appropriate use of quantitative data of student academic progress in evaluations of its certificated teachers: Thirty-three percent (33%) of the teacher's overall performance rating will be comprised of valid and reliable quantitative data on student academic progress. Definition of Teacher Performance Classifications Performance classifications mean the four (4) performance classifications for teachers under the law and defined by the State Board of Education. Definition of Inadequacy of Classroom Performance The Governing Board has adopted the following definition of inadequacy of classroom performance that aligns to the performance classifications and that was developed in consultation with its certificated teachers: During any school year, the certificated teacher receives either: A performance rating of ineffective with respect to the Instructional Practice component which includes: (1) Domain 1: Classroom strategies and Behaviors; (2) Domain 2: Planning and Preparing; and (3) Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching; or A composite performance rating of ineffective with respect to three components of the District s evaluation system: A) Instructional Practice (Domain 1, 2, and 3); B) Deliberate Practice; and C) Student Academic Progress; or 40
During any year of two (2) consecutive school years, the certificated teacher receives either: A performance rating of ineffective or developing with respect to the Instructional Practice component which includes: (1) Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors; (2) Domain 2: Planning and Preparing; and (3) Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching; or A performance rating of ineffective or developing with respect to three components of the District s evaluation system: A) Instructional Practice (Domain 1, 2, and 3); B) Deliberate Practice; and C) Student Academic Progress. Distinctions between Classroom Performance and Professional Responsibilities The components of classroom performance are those set forth in the following Domains of the teacher evaluation instrument: (1) Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors; (2) Domain 2: Planning and Preparing; and (3) Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching. However, if there is reliable and substantial evidence that a teacher s failure to meet the standards of these components is deliberate (the result of the teacher s choice), the teacher s failure to meet components of classroom performance may be deemed unprofessional conduct. Domain 4: Collegiality and Professionalism, is not intended to contain components of classroom performance. With respect to professional responsibilities referenced in Domain 4, the District is not required to provide teachers with the opportunity to overcome or remediate such conduct prior to initiating discipline or dismissal action, nor is the District required to provide teachers with remediation opportunities for conduct that otherwise constitutes unprofessional conduct and/or conduct in violation of the law or the District s policies, administrative regulations, or procedures. Evaluation Requirements Annual Evaluation. Each certificated teacher shall be evaluated at least once annually. In its discretion, the District may conduct more than one (1) evaluation annually. Observation Requirements. An evaluation shall include at least two (2) actual classroom observations of the certificated teacher demonstrating teaching skills in a complete and uninterrupted lesson by the qualified evaluator. There shall be at least sixty (60) calendar days between the first and last observations. The second classroom observation may be waived by the evaluator for a continuing teacher whose Instructional Practice based upon the first formal classroom observation places the teacher in one of the two highest performance classifications for the current school year, unless the teacher requests a second formal observation. The last observation may follow the issuance of a preliminary notice of inadequacy of classroom performance and be used to determine whether the teacher has corrected inadequacies and has demonstrated adequate classroom performance. An observation shall not be conducted within two (2) instructional days of any scheduled period in which school is not in session for one (1) week or more. Instructional day means a day in which pupils are scheduled to attend school for instructional time. Written Feedback to Teacher. Within ten (10) business days after each observation, the qualified evaluator shall provide written feedback to the teacher. Transmittal of Evaluation to Teacher. The results of an annual evaluation shall be in writing or provided in electronic format to the teacher and a copy shall be transmitted or provided in an electronic format to the 41
teacher within five (5) days after completion of the evaluation. The teacher may initiate a written reaction or response to the evaluation. Responses should be submitted within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the transmittal. Recommendations for Needed Improvement. A specific and reasonable plan for the improvement of teacher performance shall be provided if the teacher s performance warrants improvement. More specifically: Each evaluation shall include recommendations as to areas of improvement if the teacher s performance warrants improvement. After transmittal of the evaluation, the qualified evaluator or another Board designee shall confer with the teacher to make specific recommendations as to areas of improvement in the in the teacher s performance. The qualified evaluator or other Board designee shall provide professional development opportunities for the teacher to improve performance. The qualified or other Board designee shall follow up with the teacher after a reasonable period of time for the purpose of ascertaining that the teacher is demonstrating adequate performance. Teacher Incentives and ProtectionsIncentives for Teachers in Highest Performance Classification. Teachers in the highest performance classification shall be eligible to receive incentives as approved by the Governing Board. Teachers in the highest performance category may be offered leadership opportunities. (Compensation will be awarded if available.) Incentives for Teachers in the Two Highest Classifications. Teachers who are in the two (2) highest performance classifications and who are willing to work at a school within the District assigned a letter grade of D or F pursuant to A.R.S. 15-241 (if any), shall be eligible to receive incentives as approved by the Governing Board. Teachers in the two highest performance classifications will receive 100% of the Performance Classification portion of the site performance pay. Protections for Teachers Transferred to D and F Graded Schools. Teachers who are transferred to schools that are assigned a letter grade of D or F pursuant to A.R.S. 15-241 shall be entitled to protections as approved by the Governing Board. Teachers transferred to D and F graded schools shall not receive a lower overall performance classification based upon student achievement scores for two school years. Protections for Teachers Assigned to Principals in Lowest Performance Classification. Teachers who are assigned to schools at which the Principal is designated in the lowest performance classifications shall be entitled to protections as approved by the Governing Board. Teachers assigned to principals in the lowest performance classification, as it relates to teacher evaluation, will be assigned a third party evaluator. Retention and Confidentiality of Teacher Evaluation Reports and Performance Classifications 42
Copies of the Evaluation Report and performance classification of a certificated teacher retained by the District are confidential and do not constitute a public record and shall not be released or shown to any person except: To the certificated teacher who may make any use of it. To authorized District officers and employees for all personnel matters regarding employment and contracts and for any hearing that relates to personnel matters. To school districts and charter schools that inquire about the performance of the teacher for prospective employment purposes. A school district or charter school that receives information about a certificated teacher from the evaluation report and performance classification shall use this information solely for employment purposes and shall not release to or allow access to this information by any other person, entity, school district or charter school. For introduction in evidence or discovery in any court action between the Governing Board and the certificated teacher in which either: (a) The competency of the teacher is at issue; or (b) The evaluation and performance classification were an exhibit at a hearing, the result of which is challenged. As otherwise permitted or required by law. Delegation of Authority to Issue Preliminary Notices of Inadequacy of Classroom Performance The Governing Board may issue preliminary notices of inadequacy of classroom performances to certificated teachers of the District. The Governing Board also delegates to the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources (as the Governing Board s authorized designees) the authority to issue preliminary notices of inadequacy of classroom performance to certificated teachers without the need for prior approval of each notice by the Governing Board. In all cases in which the Superintendent or Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources issues a preliminary notice of inadequacy of classroom performance without prior approval by the Governing Board, the Governing Board shall be notified of the issuance within ten (10) school days. Appeal Procedures The Superintendent shall develop appeal procedures for teachers who disagree with the evaluation of their performance, if the evaluation is for use as criteria for establishing compensation. Teachers who are on career ladder and who disagree with an evaluation of their performance may appeal such evaluations as set forth in the career ladder guidelines. Evaluation of Principals, Certificated Administrators and School Psychologists The Governing Board shall establish systems for the evaluation of principals, other school administrators and certificated school psychologists in the District. In the development and adoption of these performance evaluation systems, the Governing Board shall avail itself of the advice of its administrators and certificated school psychologists. School Psychologists 43
Each evaluation of a school psychologist shall include recommendations as to areas of improvement in the performance of the certificated school psychologist if the performance of the psychologist warrants improvement. After transmittal of the assessment, a qualified evaluator will confer with the psychologist to make specific recommendations as to areas of improvement in the psychologist s performance and the qualified evaluator will follow up with the psychologist after a reasonable period of time for the purpose of ascertaining that the psychologist is demonstrating adequate performance. The evaluation process for psychologists shall include an appeal procedure for psychologists who disagree with the evaluation of their performance, if the evaluation is for use as criteria for establishing compensation. Delegation of Authority to Develop Administrative Regulations to Implement this Policy The Governing Board delegates to the Superintendent the authority to develop administrative regulations to implement this Policy, if needed. 44