Skip to main content

Policy DGA - Certified Teacher Evaluation

Policy DGA-Educator Evaluation (PDF)

Issue Date: July 19, 2017

 

Authority and Purpose: Evaluation of Licensed Instructional Staff

The Board of Education is committed to an evaluation program for licensed personnel, which complies with Utah state law, USBE Board Rule, Juab School District Policy and measures the implementation of the Utah Effective EducatorStandards and Evaluation Framework. 

The Board delegates to district administration and the joint educator evaluation committee responsibility for insuring that the evaluation program is systematic, reasonable, fair and based upon a process which is valid and reliable in measuring educator effectiveness.  

Juab School District has adopted the Utah Model Educator Evaluation System, which is aligned to the Utah Effective Educator Standards in accordance with R277-530, R277-531, and R277-533. 

It is the policy of the Board to require all licensed personnel to participate in the evaluation program for the following purposes:

  1. To insurestudent academic growth as a result of quality instruction.
  2. To promote professional growth in conjunction with an educator’s yearly professional growth plan. 
  3. To develop, support, and maintain highly effective educators through an ongoing and systematic cycle of goal setting, observation, feedback, collaboration, professional learning and reflection.
  4. To promote the use of evidence-based instructional techniques and practices. 
  5. To promote professional and ethical behavior. 
  6. To foster a collaborative professional culture that facilitates student learning. 
  7. To provide a basis for decisions affecting employment and salary.

Definitions for the Purpose of this Policy

  1. Educator means an individual licensed under Utah Code Section 53A-6-104 who, as a condition of licensure, is required to comply with the standards and requirements of Utah Administrative Rule R277-530, R277-531, and R277-533.
  2. Career Educator means a licensed employee entitled to reasonable expectation ofcontinued employment under the policies of the District. 53A-8a-201
  3. Provisional Educator means an educator employed by the District who has not achieved status as a career educator within the District. 53A-8a-404. 
  4. Probationary Educator means an educator employed by the District who has been advised by the District that the educator’s performance is inadequate and is placed on a Plan of Assistance. 
  5. Formative Evaluation is an informal evaluation process designed to provide feedback to   educators on how to improve their performance; it is used to promote reflection and    professional growth.
  6. Summative Evaluation is evaluation that is designed to determine an educator’s 

            effectiveness rating based on standards of instructional quality and classroom performance observation data, student growth data, and stakeholder input data. Summative evaluations may inform decisions on salary and employment.  

  1. Summative Overall Rating is the effectiveness rating assigned to an educator (Not Effective, Emerging Effective/Minimally Effective, Effective, or Highly Effective).
  2. Satisfactory Performance is defined, as a summative overall rating that is Emerging Effective/Minimally Effective, Effective, or Highly Effective.
  3. Unsatisfactory Performance is defined as a summative overall rating that is Not Effective.
  4. Professional Growth Plan(PGP) is completed by each educator yearly with a minimum of two goals and submitted to the principal via the approved digital platform and tool.
  5. Multiple Lines of Evidencemeans additional documentation of an educator’s performance and effectiveness submitted during an evaluation cycle.
  6. Plan of Assistance (POA) is a written document clearly identifying a career educator’s area(s) of unsatisfactory performance and detailing recommendations for improvement that are specific, measurable, and actionable. The POA must also identify a recommended course of action and resources available to support the educator during implementation of the POA.
  7. Evaluation is defined as a comprehensive and ongoing cycle of goal setting, observation, feedback, professional learning, and reflection; all licensed district educators will participate in the evaluation process each year, either formatively or summatively. 
  8. Informal Observation is defined as an unscheduled, informal observation of licensed educator performance for the purpose of providing feedback. 
  9. Formal Observation for the purpose of this policy is defined as a pre-conference between the evaluator and the educator; for classroom teachers this includes a lesson plan, a scheduled observation of classroom instruction aligned to the lesson plan, and a post-conference for feedback and reflection.  
  10. Administrator means an individual who serves in a position that requires an educator license with an administrative area of concentration or a letter of authorization, and supervises school administrators or teachers. 

Evaluation Policy and Procedures

  1. Each licensed employee shall be evaluated by a certified rater who is the Superintendent, Superintendent’s designee, principal, or principal’s designee in accordance with the   District Rater Reliability plan.
  2. All provisional educators shall be assigned a new teacher mentor in accordance with EYE standards and 53A-8a-408.
  3. Evaluation frequency: 
  4.          Career educators shall participate in a summative evaluation every three years. Formative evaluations of career educators will occur annually. A career educator may be subject to additional summative evaluation at any time based on information obtained during the formative evaluation process. A career educator may make a request to the principal to be summatively evaluated during a formative year. 
  5. Evaluation of Provisional educators who are Level 1 license holders shall align to EYE Requirements and provide for at least one evaluation each contract year prior to the end of the second quarter for a minimum of three years and up to five years.  

            Evaluation of Provisional educators who are Level 2 license holders shall occur at least once each contract year, prior to the end of the second quarter for a minimum of three years and up to five years.  

  1. Probationary educators shall be evaluated formally at least once each contract year, prior to the end of the second quarter.
  2.          The Superintendent, principal, or designee may initiate an evaluation of any licensed educator when deemed necessary.
  3.  The educator evaluation system for Juab School District includes the following components to support effective instruction and professional growth: 
  4. A systematic annual evaluation of all licensed provisional, probationary, and career educators;
  5. Use of multiple lines of evidence that must include: 
  6.                       Educator self evaluation and goal setting;
  7. Student and parent input;

                        iii.        For an administrator, employee input;

  1.                     Regular conferences to provide feedback;
  2. Multiple observations of professional performance at appropriate intervals to ensure adequate reliability;
  3. Evidence of professional growth and other indicators of professional improvement 

            as required by the District; 

vii.       Student growth data;

                        viii.      Analysis of, and response to stakeholder input data, student data, and professional performance data.

  1. A summative evaluation that differentiates among four levels of performance; and
  2. For an administrator, the effectiveness of evaluating employee performance in a    school or district for which the administrator has responsibility.

The Juab School District Educator Evaluation system may not require end-of-level assessment scores in educator evaluation. 

  1.  Evaluation Cycle and Timeline:
  2.         Orientation, notification, and access to the district evaluation instrument shall be given at least fifteen (15) calendar days before the evaluation is scheduled to begin, and will occur within the first three weeks of school each year.  
  3.  Self-evaluation and professional growth plans shall be submitted to the Superintendent, Superintendent’s designee, principal, or principal’s designee via the approved digital platform and tool within the first three weeks of school each year. 
  4.          A beginning-of-year conference will be conducted by the Superintendent,

                        Superintendent’s designee, principal or principal’s designee via e-mail or in person within the first six weeks of school each year for all licensed educators, every year.

  1. Every classroom teacher will submit one Student Growth Measurement goal to the principal within the first six weeks of school each year. 
  2. A Student Growth Measurement goal shall include the required three components: 
  3. Learning Goals measuring long-term outcomes linked to appropriate specific knowledge and skills from the Utah Core Standards;
  4. Assessments, and
  5. Targets for incremental monitoring of student growth.
  6.         A minimum of one formal observation shall be conducted yearly for provisional, probationary and career summative educators, prior to the end of the second quarter

Formal observation for the purpose of this policy for classroom teachers is defined as including a lesson plan and pre-conference, the classroom observation, and a post-conference. 

  1.          The district evaluation process shall allow multiple opportunities throughout theprocess, for educators to make written response to any part of the evaluation and/or to contribute additional information and artifacts to inform the effectiveness rating.                  
  2.  A year-end conference between the educator and evaluator will be held within 15days after evaluation is complete, and prior to the last day of school each year. The year-end conference will include a review ofthe educator’s PGP, professional performance, student achievement data documented in the student growth measurement goal, and stakeholder input data with educator response. 

Additionally, other lines of evidence may also be submitted. An effectiveness rating will be determined at the year-end conference. The educator may submit a written response to any part of the evaluation; the educator’s response will be attached to the evaluation.

  1. The evaluation document shall be finalized in the Observer Tab platform, indicating that the educator and evaluator have signed the document electronically.  The educator’s signature indicates participation in the year-end

            conference but does not signify agreement with the contents of the evaluation or the overall summative rating. 

  1.          A copy of the evaluation shall be provided to the educator.              
  2.  A copy of the final overall summative effectiveness rating and supportingdocumentation shall be submitted to the Human Resource Director at the District Office within one week of the close of school each year to be retained in the employee’s personnel file, and for the purpose of submitting an annual effectiveness rating in CACTUS. Evaluation documents are subject to audit by USBE.       
  3.         Evaluation records are classified as “Private Records” and shall be managed according to the guidelines of privacy policy and law.
  4. A rating of Emerging Effective/Minimally Effective, Effective, or Highly Effective shall be considered satisfactory performance for any licensed educator.
  5. A mid-year conference shall be conducted for all licensed provisional, probationary, and career educators in their summative evaluation year, prior to the end of the second quarter each year.
  6. The mid-year conference for provisional, probationary and career educators in their summative evaluation year shall generate a formative mid-year rating based on a minimum of two observations (one must be formal) and other lines of evidence. If the rating from the mid-year conference is Not Effective:
  7.            The educator shall be notified continued district employment is in question, and
  8. Additional resources shall be identified to assist the provisional, probationary, or career summative educator.

                        iii.        A second evaluation cycle will begin after the mid-year conference.

  1. The provisional, probationary or career summative educator will receive a summative overall rating at a conference to be held by no later than the end of the third quarter. 
  2. Anoverall rating of Not Effective for a career educator shall be considered unsatisfactory performance, and the educator will be placed on a Plan of Assistance in accordance with procedures and standards of Utah Code 53A-8a-501.
  3.  A Plan of Assistance (POA) shall:     
  4. Identify specific, measurable, and actionable deficiencies, and
  5. Offer a recommended course of action and available resources intended to improve the educator’s performance. 
  6. The period of time for implementing a Plan of Assistance:
  7. May not exceed 120 school days, except as provided in this policy;
  8. May continue into the next school year, and

                  iii.        Should be sufficient to successfully complete the POA, and 

  1.        Shall begin when the career educator receives written notice and 

                                    end when the determination is made that the career educator has

                                    successfully remediated the deficiency, or notice of intent to not

                                    renew or terminate the career educator’s contract is given in accordance

                                    with Utah Code Section 53A-8a-502(5). 

  1.           An administrator may extend the period of time for implementing a POA beyond 120school days if:
  2. A career employee has been approved and qualifies for leave under the

                                    Family Medical Leave Act during the time period the POA is scheduled to be implemented, or

  1.                   For other compelling reasons as approved by the Board if leave was scheduled before the employee was placed on a POA.
  1.        Career educators who have been placed on probation for unsatisfactory performance, and are again rated unsatisfactory within a three-year period are subject to nonrenewal or employment termination pursuant to Juab School District Policy DHA.                
  1.  An educator is responsible for improving performance, using resources offered by the district, and demonstrating acceptable levels of improvement in any designated area(s) of deficiency.
  1. The Juab School District employee compensation system aligns to the district’s educator evaluation system. 
  2.       An educator’s annual advancement on an adopted salary schedule shall be based 

                        primarily upon an evaluation system that differentiates among four levels of performance as described in Section 53A-8a-405 and R277-533, unless the educator:

  1.          Is a provisional educator; or
  2.         Is in the first year of an assignment, including a new subject, grade level or school.
  3. An educator’s annual advancement on an adopted salary schedule may not be based on end-of-level assessment scores; and
  4. A licensed educator may not advance on an adopted salary schedule if the educator’s rating on the most recent evaluation is at the lowest level of the evaluation instrument, Not Effective (53A-8a-601); and
  5. A salary adjustment may be awarded only to an educator who has received a satisfactory rating or above on the educator’s most recent evaluation. (53A-17a-     153)
  6. Computing the Annual Summative Rating
  7. An educator’s component ratings shall be based on:
  8. Actual observations of the educator’s performance; and 
  9. Educator, evaluator, student growth, or other stakeholder data gathered, calculated, or observed in alignment with the Utah Effective Teaching Standards or the Utah Educational Leadership Standards and rubrics. 

                        iii.        Summative scores shall be reported annually for all educators using the approved terminology for reporting:

  • Not Effective = 0
  • Minimally Effective/Emerging Effective = 1
  • Effective = 2
  • Highly Effective = 3
  1.   Right to Review a Summative Overall Rating

An educator who is not satisfied with a summative evaluation may request a review in writing of the summative evaluation within 15 calendar days after receiving the evaluation document. A review of the educator’s summative evaluation:

  1. Shall be conducted by a certified raters with experience rating educators, and not employed by the school district, in accordance with the Utah Effective Educator Standards. 

                        A certified rater shall review: 

  1.               The district’s educator evaluation policies and procedures;
  2. The evaluation process conducted for the educator;

                        iii.        The evaluation data from the professional performance, student growth, and stakeholder input components, and

  1. An educator’s written response, if submitted; and
  2. Will report the certified rater’s findings, in writing, to the district’s superintendent for action. 

             The school district shall determine if the initial educator rating was in accordance with district educator evaluation policies, and based on the requirements of the performance standards. Utah Code 53A-8a, R277-531, and R277-533. 

  1.   The District shall report to the Board annually on or before June 30, the information necessary for them to make the report required by Section 53A-8A-410.
  2. Nothing in this Policy shall prevent the District from taking appropriate disciplinary action for misconduct defined in District policy DHA, the Utah Code, or Utah Administrative Rule.