Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Continuous Improvement System - Manual “Better teaching is built by steady, relentless, continual improvement – one lesson at a time. One unit at a time.” Ermerling, Hiebert, and Gallimore, 2015

Revised August 2015

1

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

JOINT EVALUATION COMMITTEE Pursuant to Utah Code 53A-8a-403, the following individuals have served on the District’s Joint Evaluation Committee. CHAD CARPENTER Chairman: Human Resources

IAN DAVEY Teacher

MACIE WOLFE Teacher

MATT OGLE Teacher (Ogden/Weber UnivServe)

ROSS LUNCEFORD Administrator

MISTI YOUNG Administrator

BEVERLY JENSON Administrator

SHANE STORY Parent

JEFFERY HEINER Parent

CHRIS ANDRUS Parent

EDUCATOR EVALUATION WORK GROUP The following individuals were essential in the development of the Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System. CHAD CARPENTER Executive Director - HR

SANDY COROLES Superintendent

BRENDA RUFFIER Assistant Superintendent

SONDRA JOLOVICH-MOTES Zone Executive Director

DR. RICH NYE Zone Executive Director

ZACHARY WILLIAMS Communications Director

MISTI YOUNG Curriculum

CJ SMITH Technology

RANDON REED Technology

For additional information regarding the Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System, please contact: Human Resources 1950 Monroe Boulevard, Ogden, UT 84401: Telephone: (801) 737-7320: Fax: (801) 737-8867

Visit us on the Web :: www.ogdensd.org

Revised August 2015

2

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Manual Introduction Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Purposes of the Continuous Improvement System Definitions Teacher and Principal Responsibilities Utah Effective Teaching Standards

4 5 5 7 7

Continuous Improvement System Process Components of Process Self-Assessment Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)/Professional Growth Plan (PGP) Stakeholder Input

8 10 11 14

Rubric for Ogden School District Teachers Explanation of the Rubric and Performance Ratings Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Tool Mid-Year Performance Rating Form Year-End Performance Rating Form

16 17 29 30

Directions for Completing Required Elements Completing the Professional Growth Plan and Self-Assessment Completing Classroom Observations Completing CIS Summatives (Mid-Year and Year-End)

31 31 31

Remediation and Plan of Assistance Procedures for Determining Remediation (Informal and Formal) Process – Informal Remediation (Tier II) Process – Formal Remediation (Tier III) Process – Plan of Assistance Process – Termination Process – Outside Evaluation

32 32 33 34 34 34

Checklist of Required Teacher Continuous Improvement System Activities Resources

Revised August 2015

3

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Introduction - CIS Ogden School District (District) believes that one of the most important factors in improving student achievement is based upon a teacher’s effectiveness. Improved evaluation will not only benefit students by driving the systematic improvement and growth of teachers, but will benefit teachers themselves by treating them as professionals. The District believes that effective teaching must be recognized, and ineffective teaching must be addressed. The main purposes of the Continuous Improvement System (CIS) are: 

Improve student learning and achievement



Improve teacher effectiveness



Provide a path to recognize highly effective educators (and formally recognize them)



Guide personnel decisions/actions



Identify professional development needs/opportunities for educators

Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System (CIS) The CIS tools are based on the Utah Observation Tool, the observation tracker template (with enhanced capabilities developed by Ogden School District) and the Utah Effective Teaching Standards. The tools are designed to improve student achievement, enhance professional practice and effectiveness, provide opportunities for professional growth and development, recognize highly effective educators, and guide necessary personnel decisions. The principal or a designee (hereinafter “principal”) will conduct the evaluation process in which the teacher will actively participate through the use of a professional growth plan (PGP), self- assessment, reflection, presentation of artifacts, student and parent surveys, and classroom demonstration(s) and observations, walk-throughs, student growth data, and other observable venues.

Revised August 2015

4

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Purposes of the Continuous Improvement System (CIS) The CIS evaluation will identify and measure individual teachers’ strengths and challenges accurately and consistently, so that teachers get the feedback they need to improve their professional practice and so the District can determine how best to allocate resources and provide support. The teacher CIS process will:  Serve as a measurement for individual teacher effectiveness;  Serve as a guide for teachers as they reflect upon and improve their effectiveness;  Serve as the basis for instructional improvement;  Provide a format for continuous feedback between educator and principal;  Align goals and objectives of our District to support, monitor, and evaluate its teachers;  Provide for targeted professional development opportunities.

Definitions For purposes of this CIS process, the following terms are defined below: 1. Artifact – A product resulting from a teacher’s work. Artifacts are natural by-products of a teacher’s work and are not created for the purpose of satisfying evaluation requirements. Artifacts are used as evidence to support an evaluation rating. Teachers may use them as exemplars of their work. Examples of artifacts may include: a. Lesson Plans – Teacher’s daily plans that demonstrate integration of Utah Core Standards. b. Professional Development – Staff development, based on research, data, practice and reflection that focuses on deepening knowledge and pedagogical skills in a collegial and collaborative environment. c. Professional Learning Community Documentation – Evidence of effective collaboration and planning in PLC with data-driven results. d. Student Achievement Data – Student achievement/test data available from SAGE, CIAs, CFAs, class grades, etc. e. School Improvement Plan – A plan that includes strategies for improving student performance, how and when improvements will be implemented, use of state funds, requests for waivers, etc. Plans are in effect for no more than three years. Teachers should be able to demonstrate their participation in the development of the plan and/or their active support of the plan. (e.g., 90-day plans). f. School Improvement Team documents – Work of a team made up of the school administration, instructional personnel, instructional support personnel, paraprofessionals, and parents of children enrolled in the school. The team’s purpose is to develop a school improvement plan to strengthen student performance (e.g., 90-day plans). 2. Career Status Teachers – Teachers who have been granted Career Status in the District. 3. Continuous Improvement Tool – Evaluation instrument used to provide a rating on standard(s) within the Continuous Improvement System. Ratings provided in the CIS Tool may be used for remediation purposes. 4. Data – Factual information used as the basis for reasoning, discussion, or planning. 5.

Evaluation Instrument – Observation Tracker and Continuous Improvement System Tool used to provide a rating on standard(s) and may be used to determine if a teacher is in need of remediation.

6.

Evaluator – The person responsible for overseeing and completing the teacher evaluation process. This is usually the school principal, but it may be the principal’s designee; the educator’s immediate supervisor; or another person specified in the evaluation program (see Utah Code 53A-8a-405). Evidence – Documents that demonstrate or confirm the work of the person being evaluated and support the rating on a given element. Formal Remediation (Tier III) – The continued process of working with a teacher to improve classroom performance. Tier III does not occur until Informal Remediation (Tier II) has been attempted. When a teacher is on Tier III, a Plan of Assistance is put into place. Individualized Data Meeting – Opportunity for the school principal and teacher to review and discuss student and teacher achievement/testing data available. Informal Remediation (Tier II) – The process of working with a teacher to improve classroom performance related to the Standards. It may include assistance from other teachers, specialists, and other resources. Media – Mass communication, communication that reach or influence people and typically widely used to deliver a message. Observation Tracker – Evaluation instrument that houses observations, principal notes, artifacts, ratings, dates, and student growth data. Orientation – The principal of each school shall orient all educators assigned to the school concerning the District

7. 8.

9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Revised August 2015

5

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Continuous Improvement System, including the purposes of the evaluations and the method used to evaluate. Evaluations may not occur prior to the orientation by the principal (see Utah Code 53A-8a-404). 14. Performance Rating Scale (Observable) –A teacher’s overall ratings are determined at the end of the year during the CIS Summative Conference. The overall ratings are as follows:  Not Effective: Teacher did not demonstrate competence on standard(s) of performance.  Emerging Effective: Teacher demonstrated basic competence on standard(s) of performance.  Effective: Teacher exceeded basic competence on standard(s) of performance most of the time.  Highly Effective: Teacher consistently and significantly exceeded basic competence on standard(s) of performance. 15. Plan of Assistance – Includes a written definition of the areas of concern, objectives to be met, and timeline for meeting objectives. The plan of assistance may also include the following elements; instructional coaching, consultation with mentors, assistance from other peer educators, etc. 16. Professional Growth Plan (PGP) – A plan created and reviewed annually by an active educator and the principal that details the professional goals of the educator based on the standards relating to the educator’s self-assessment and formal evaluation. (see Utah Code 53A-8a-301). The PGP will consist of two goals; (1) Data-driven goal, and (2) professional development goal 17. Professional Learning Community (PLC) – A group of educators who meet regularly, share expertise, analyze data, create instructional action plans, and work collaboratively to improve teaching skills, and the academic performance of students. 18. Provisional Teacher – Teachers who are in the first three years of teaching and who hold a Level 1 Utah Educator License, or experienced educators who have been in Ogden School District for less than three years. 19. Principal – Principals and assistant principals with a Utah Administrative License. 20. Resource – Information students access to master content; materials supporting instruction including – whiteboards, websites, printed texts, videos, manipulatives, and realia. All other materials that do not fall under technology, but support instruction and student learning. 21. Self-assessment – Personal reflection about one’s professional practice to identify strengths and areas for improvement conducted with guidance from principal. The self-assessment provides the educator the opportunity to reflect upon multiple lines of evidence (e.g., student growth data, observations, professional development, etc.) and to establish goals and objectives that will help the educator improve professional practice. 22. Stakeholder Input – See Component 3 Section in Manual 23. Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) – See Professional Growth Plan (PGP) 24. Teacher – A person who holds a valid Utah Educator License (or appropriate equivalent – e.g., Letter of Authorization) and is employed to instruct, direct or supervise the instructional program. 25. Technology – Tools used to enhance student learning, including computers, graphing, smart boards, clickers, iPads, chrome books, phones, InterWrite boards, responders, and laptops. Typically electronic components, including mechanizations, use of scientific technical knowledge and or telecommunications.

Revised August 2015

6

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Teacher and Principal Responsibilities Teacher Responsibilities:  Know and understand the Utah Effective Teaching Standards.  Understand the Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System.  Prepare for and fully participate in each component of the Continuous Improvement System process.  Gather data, artifacts, evidence to support performance in relation to standards and progress in attaining goals.  Develop and implement strategies to improve personal performance/attain goals in areas individually or collaboratively identified. Principal/Evaluator Responsibilities:  Know and understand the Utah Effective Teaching Standards.  Participate in training to understand and implement the Continuous Improvement System.  Supervise the Continuous Improvement System process and ensure that all steps are conducted according to the approved process.  Identify the teacher’s strengths and areas for improvement and make recommendations for improving performance.  Ensure that the contents of the Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Tool contain accurate information and accurately reflect the teacher’s performance.  Develop and supervise implementation of a plan of assistance (remediation plan) as appropriate (if necessary).

Utah Effective Teaching Standards The Utah State Board of Education developed the Utah Effective Teaching Standards to articulate what effective teaching and learning look like in the Utah public education system. The standards align with the teaching skills needed to successfully teach the Utah Common State Core. Standard I: Learner Development  The teacher understands cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional, and physical areas of student development. Standard II: Learning Differences  The teacher understands individual learner differences and cultural linguistic diversity. Standard III: Learning Environments 

The teacher works with learners to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, positive social interactions, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. Standard IV: Content Knowledge  The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline. Standard V: Assessment  The teacher uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, monitor learner progress, guide planning and instruction, and determine whether the outcomes described in content standards have been met. Standard VI: Instructional Planning  The teacher plans instruction to support students in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, Core Curriculum standards, instructional best practices, and the community context. Standard VII: Instructional Strategies  The teacher uses various instructional strategies to ensure that all learners develop a deep understanding of content areas and their connections, and build skills to apply and extend knowledge in meaningful ways. Standard VIII: Reflection and Continuous Growth  The teacher is a reflective practitioner who uses evidence to continually evaluate and adapt practice to meet the needs of each learner. Standard IX: Leadership and Collaboration  The teacher is a leader who engages collaboratively with learners, families, colleagues, and community members to build a shared vision and supportive professional culture focused on student growth and success. Standard X: Professional and Ethical Behavior  The teacher demonstrates the highest of legal, moral, and ethical conduct as specified in Utah State Board Rule R277-515.

Revised August 2015

7

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Continuous Improvement System (CIS) Process The intended purpose of the Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System (CIS) is to assess the teacher’s performance in relation to the Utah Effective Teaching Standards and to design a plan for professional growth. The principal or a designee (hereinafter “principal”) will conduct the CIS process in which the teacher will actively participate through the use of a professional growth plan (PGP), self- assessment, reflection, presentation of artifacts, surveys, and classroom demonstration(s) and observations, walk-throughs, student growth data, and other observable venues.

Process The Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System shall include the following components: Component 1: Training Before participating in the CIS, principals must complete training on the process. Component 2: Orientation (copies and information may be provided by electronic means or via video recording) Within 15 days of a teacher’s first day of work in any school year, the principal will provide the teacher with a copy of or directions for obtaining access to a copy of: A. The Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Manual B. Rubric for the Standards for Ogden School District Educators; C. Consequences of unsatisfactory performance. First evaluations cannot occur until at least 15 days after Components 1 and 2 are satisfied (see Utah Code 53A-8a-406). Component 3: Self-Assessment, Student Learning Objectives (SLO)/Professional Growth Plan (PGP), and Stakeholder Input Prior to September 20th, the teacher will complete the following items and meet with the principal to review the goals and to discuss expectations for observations (including other observable venues). This review should take place before the first observation is conducted. This is known as the pre-observation conference and is not required for subsequent observations/evaluations. Prior to September 20th, the teacher will: A. Conduct a self-assessment which provides an opportunity for the educator to reflect upon multiple lines of evidence (e.g., student growth data, observations, professional development, etc.) and to establish goals and objectives that will help the educator improve professional practice. B. Reflect on two goals using the Student Learning Objective/(PGP); (1) Data-driven goal and (2) Professional Development goal. As part of the PGP, the teacher will reflect about professional practice to identify strengths and areas for improvement conducted with guidance from principal. In addition, the teacher will explain how the two goals in the PGP will improve student growth outcomes and whether or not the outcomes were met (by April 1 st). C. Complete the School’s Culture Rubric. Once the licensed personnel have completed the Culture Rubric, the results will be shared with teachers. Teachers will reflect (and provide evidence) of how their professional practices have been improved in response to the Culture Rubric from the beginning of the year (by September 20th) to the end of the year (April 1st). Component 4: Observations and Evaluations A. Observations - Observations by a principal may be for short periods of times (e.g., 10-20 minutes) in a walk-through or may last for an entire class period. Observations do not have to be announced. B. Number of Observations a. The principal shall conduct multiple observations during the year. b. Observations may include PLC meetings, individualized data meetings, and classroom observations, etc. c. A teacher may request that one classroom observation be an announced observation (date/time scheduled with administrator). The announced classroom observation may not be the CIS summative. C. Summative Evaluation(s) a. All provisional teachers will be evaluated at least twice per year (first evaluation completed by November 1st and second evaluation by April 1st). b. All career teachers will be evaluated at least one time per year (completed by April 1st). c. A summative evaluation for both provisional and career teachers can be completed at any time during the school year. During observations, the principal shall note the teacher’s performance in relationship to the standards identified in CIS. Revised August 2015

8

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Component 5: Post-Classroom Observation Feedback Session/Conference The principal shall conduct a post-classroom observation feedback session no later than 7 working days after each classroom observation. During the post-observation feedback session, the principal and teacher shall discuss and document the strengths and challenges of the teacher’s performance during the classroom demonstration(s) and observations, walk-throughs, student data discussions, and other observable venues (e.g. PLC, PTC, etc.). Principal will provide written documentation (may be in an electronic format). If the principal does not meet with the teacher within 7 working days after the observation, it may not be used as an evaluation (or part of the summative evaluation) unless the teacher request that it be used. Component 6: Summative CIS Conference and Scoring the Mid-Year/Year-End Performance Rating Form The principal shall conduct a summative CIS conference with the provisional teacher twice during the year (prior to November 1st and April 1st) and once for career teachers (prior to April 1st). During the summative CIS conference, the principal and teacher may discuss the teacher’s most recent Professional Growth Plan, the components of the Ogden School District CIS completed during the year, classroom observations, artifacts submitted or collected during the evaluation process and other evidence of the teacher’s performance. At the conclusion of the CIS Process, the principal shall: A. B. C. D. E.

Give a rating for each Standard; Give an overall performance rating of all Standards; Provide the teacher with the opportunity to add/attach comments to the Mid/Year-End Performance Rating Form; Review the completed Educator Mid/Year-End Performance Rating Form with the teacher; and Secure the teacher’s signature on the Educator Mid/Year-End Performance Rating Form. The teacher’s signature indicates receipt of the Educator Mid/Year-End Performance Rating Form and does not indicate that the teacher agrees with the rating.

Component 7: Teacher Ratings (Highly Effective and Not Effective) Once the principal has conducted numerous observations, he/she will give a rating for each standard. The summative rating (both Mid-Year and End-of-Year) will be determined by which rating tier (e.g., Not Effective, Emerging Effective, Effective, and Highly Effective) has been marked or identified most often during the CIS. For example, if during a summative CIS, a teacher receives 2 marks for Not effective, 6 marks for Emerging Effective, 9 marks for Effective, and 5 marks for Highly Effective, the teacher’s summative rating would be “Effective” because that tier has receive the majority of the markings for that CIS. We believe that highly effective teaching must be recognized. We also believe ineffective teaching must be addressed. The principal may place the teacher on Tier II (Informal Remediation) if after at least two observations of a teacher, the principal determines that there are: 

Three (3) performance indicators rated (marked) as “Not Effective” in Standards 3, 5, or 7; and/or



Five (5) performance indicators rated (marked) as “Not Effective” among all the standards.

If the deficiencies continue after Tier II (Informal Remediation), the principal may proceed to Tier III (Formal Remediation)*. Beginning with the 2015-2016 school year, a teacher (Provisional or Career) may not advance a step/level on the Ogden School District salary schedule if the teacher’s overall summative rating on the April 1st CIS is at the lowest level (rating) of the CIS instrument and they have been placed on Tier II (Informal Remediation). Likewise, a Career Teacher may not receive the Educator Salary Adjustment ($4,200) if the Career teacher’s overall summative rating on the April 1st evaluation is at the lowest level (rating) of the CIS instrument and they have been placed on Tier III (Formal Remediation).

*See Remediation and Plan of Assistance Section for more details.

Revised August 2015

9

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Self-Assessment (Required) – Beginning of Year (prior to September 20th) Name: ____________________________________ School: _____________________________

Provisional Status Grade/Subject: ___________________

Section 1: The Learner and Learning

Career Status Date: ______________

1Low

2

3

4– High

1Low

2

3

4– High

1Low

2

3

4– High

I create developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences based on each learner’s strengths, interests, and needs (Corresponds to Utah Effective Teaching Standard 1a, 2e). I collaborate with families, colleagues, and other professionals to promote student growth and development (1b). I allow learners multiple ways to demonstrate learning sensitive to diverse experiences, while holding high expectations (2a, 2b, 2c, 2d). I develop learning experiences that engage and support students as self-directed learners who internalize classroom routines, expectations, and procedures (3a). I collaborate with students to establish a positive learning climate of openness, respectful interactions, support, and inquiry (3b). I utilize positive classroom management strategies, including the resources of time, space, and attention, effectively (3c, 3d).

Self-Assessment

Section 2: Instructional Practice I base instruction on accurate content knowledge using multiple representations of concepts (4a, 4c, 4d, 7c). I support students in learning and using academic language accurately and meaningfully (4e). I use data sources to assess the effectiveness of instruction and to make adjustments in planning and instruction (5a, 5c, 5d, 8a). I engage students in understanding and identifying the elements of quality work (5b). I document student progress and provide descriptive feedback to student, parent, and other stakeholders in a variety of ways (5e). I demonstrate knowledge of the Utah Cores Standards and references them in short- and long-term planning (4b, 6a). I integrate cross-disciplinary skills into instruction to purposefully engage learners in applying content knowledge (6b, 6e). I practice a range of developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate instructional strategies to meet the needs of individuals and groups of learners (2b, 2e, 6c, 7a, 7b). I ensure multiple opportunities for students to develop higher-order and meta-cognitive skills (3f, 6d, 7e). I support and expand each learner’s communication skills through reading, writing, listening, and speaking (3f, 7d). I use a variety of effective technology and resources to support learning (3e, 7f, 7g). I develop learners’ abilities to find and use information to solve real-world problems (7g, 7f). I use a variety of questioning strategies to promote engagement and learning (7h). Section 3: Professional Responsibility I adapt and improve practice based on reflection and new learning (8b, 8c, 8d, 8e). I participate actively in decision-making processes, while building a shared culture that affects the school and larger educational community (9a, 9b, 9d, 9e). I advocate for the learners, the school, the community, and the profession (9c). I am responsible for compliance with federal and state laws, State Board of Education administrative rules, state assessment policies, local board policies, and supervisory directives (10a, 5f). I am responsible for compliance with all requirements of State Board of Education Rule R277-530 at all levels of teacher development (10b).

Revised August 2015

YES

NO

YES

NO

10

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Student Learning Objectives (SLO) & Professional Growth Plan (PGP) (Required) – Beginning of Year (prior to September 20th) Name: ____________________________________ School: _____________________________

Provisional Status Grade/Subject: ___________________

Career Status Date: ______________

EXAMPLES: Data-Driven Goal – (e.g., specific, measurable, etc.) I will improve my 9th grade government students’ identification of the 33 Amendments of the Constitution from a current class average of 70% to 90% as measured by the “Laws: What’s up with that” assessment” by taking the following the action steps:  

Progress Monitoring – weekly formative assessments with student feedback that will guide lessons/studies Lesson Planning – all lessons will include a quick review of amendments not mastered according to the data collected from weekly formative assessments.

1. Data-Driven Goal: I will (describe your goal)

by taking the following action steps (list at least one action step you will take to achieve your goal):

  List all Utah Core content standards that are associated with this learning goal.  Describe how the Learning Goal requires students to demonstrate deep understanding of the knowledge and skills of the standard(s).  Describe how this Learning Goal will be differentiated for your high, average, and low performing students.  Describe the Assessment(s) (i.e., performance tasks and their corresponding scoring rubrics) that measure the level of students’ proficiency toward the Learning Goal.  Explain how these measureable outcomes demonstrate ambitious, yet realistic growth for measuring students’ understanding of and progress toward proficiency of the Learning Goal.  I will accomplish this goal by April 1st. Comments:

Revised August 2015

11

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Student Learning Objective (SLO) & Professional Growth Plan (PGP) (Required) – Beginning of Year (prior to September 20th) EXAMPLES: Professional Development Goal - Standard 8.1 I will reflect on my current progress monitoring techniques and utilize varying strategies to ensure the practice aligns with student feedback, goal setting, and re-teaching by taking the following steps:   

Utilize my Professional Learning Community (PLC) to share my current progress monitoring strategies and obtain feedback on my practices. Share weekly formative assessments with PLC to obtain feedback on data outcomes and next steps. Adjust lesson planning based feedback from PLC, administrator and instructional coach.

2. Professional Development Goal: I will (describe your goal)

by taking the following action steps (list at least one action step you will take to achieve your goal):

  List all Continuous Improvement System (CIS) standards that are associated with this learning goal.  Describe the measureable outcomes of this Professional Development Goal on your ongoing professional practice.  Explain how the outcomes of this Professional Development Goal demonstrate ambitious, yet realistic growth for measuring progress toward improving your professional practice.  I will accomplish this goal by April 1st. Comments:

Revised August 2015

12

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

(SLO)/(PGP) (Required) – End of Year Review To be completed by April 1st Name: ____________________________________

Date: ____________________

Goals Not Emerging Highly Effective Effective Effective Effective Goal 1 (Data-Driven) was successfully completed.         Goal 2 (Professional Development) was successfully completed.      Scoring Rubric Not Effective = Set Goal Emerging Effective = Set goals and measured outcomes Effective = Set goals, frequently measured goals, action steps, and applicable data Highly Effective = Set goals, frequently measured goals, action steps, applicable data, and responded appropriately to outcomes

Reflection Teacher’s Comments:

Revised August 2015

Administrator’s Comments:

13

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Stakeholder Input Ogden School District Stakeholder Input Component Teacher Information: Name: ____________________________________

Provisional Status

Career Status

School: _____________________________ Grade/Subject: ___________________ Evaluator Information: Name: ___________________________________________________

Date: ______________

Position: ________________________

The online School Culture & Stakeholder Input Survey identifies areas of strength and areas for improvement for your school. Based on the results of the School Culture Survey, please reflect on the following prior to September 20th: Part A: Teacher Analysis of School Culture & Stakeholder Input Survey Data Reflect on what areas of school culture and stakeholder communication you can personally improve through your professional practice. Include analysis of trends, examinations of personal biases, and reflection on outcomes.

Part B: Teacher Response to Analysis Identify personal action steps and set realistic goals to improve school culture and stakeholder communication in response to your analysis in Part A.

Revised August 2015

14

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Prior to April 1st, the principal and teacher will consult and a rating will be assigned using the Stakeholder Input Evaluation Matrix regarding evidence of progress in implementing action steps and attaining goals. Part C: Stakeholder Input Evaluation Matrix Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

Educator presents inadequate or no evidence of response to concerns outlined in school culture survey or other forms of feedback

Educator responds to school culture survey results and other data and sets goals with supervisor. Minimal evidence of execution of plan for improvement.

Educator effectively analyzes responses from feedback, develops and incorporates plan for improvement into goal-setting process. Presents evidence of progress toward goals.

Educator analyzes school stakeholder responses, develops and incorporates plan for improvement, monitors results. Regularly seeks additional feedback from stakeholders to set instructional goals and gauge progress.

Educator provides information and feedback to stakeholders in a timely fashion. Provides multiple mechanisms for stakeholders to provide feedback/respond to educator.

Educator uses multiple sources of data from school stakeholders to continually shape classroom policies and instructional approaches. Consistently maintains twoway communication with stakeholders including students and parents.

Relies on school events to Communication with communicate with stakeholders is minimal and stakeholders including usually one way. parents and students. Doesn’t seek stakeholder input outside of school-wide communication strategies.

Evaluator’s Rating: Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

Reflection Teacher’s Comments:

Revised August 2015

Administrator’s Comments:

15

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Rubric for Ogden School District Teachers Explanation of the Rubric and Performance Ratings The Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Tool (based off of Utah’s Observation Tool) is to be used as part of the Public Educator Evaluation Requirements (PEER) model educator evaluation program. The tool is aligned with the standards and indicators of the Utah Effective Teaching Standards and Continuum of Practice and focusses on the measurement of highleverage instructional activities necessary for effectively teaching the Utah Core Standards. Performance indicators align with the Utah Effective Teaching Standards and indicators (R277-530). All standards and indicators are represented in the observation tool. Standards and indicators are identified by notations at the end of each observation Performance Indicator. The results of the observation should be used in conjunction with self-evaluation, goal-setting, and formative evaluation and support.

Purposes The Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System (CIS) Tool:  Serves as a measurement of performance for individual teachers;  Serves as a source of information for each teacher’s annual rating;  Serves as a guide for teachers as they reflect upon and improve their effectiveness;  Serves as a basis for instructional improvement;  Provides information for professional development planning;  Guides formative assessment and support of teachers; and  Enhances implementation of the Utah Core.

Observations Excellent instructional practice includes many activities performed by a teacher as part of his/her professional work. The Ogden School District CIS Tool includes Performance Indicators that may be observed both formally and informally. Teaching practice may be observed iteratively in the classroom, at professional meetings, at grade or department team meetings, etc. Effective practice may be observed when teachers are interacting with students inside and outside of the classroom and during formal and informal interactions with parents, colleagues, and community members. Each Performance Indicator may be observed and recorded on more than one occasion during the rating period.

Ratings The rating rubric includes four levels. The levels are cumulative across the rows of the rubric. An Effective teacher must exhibit the skills and knowledge described under the Emerging Effective heading as well as those under the Effective heading. Likewise, a Highly Effective teacher exhibits all of the skills and knowledge described in that element across the row. Ratings are intended to support professionalism. Instruction becomes qualitatively better across the scale. An experienced teacher who is rated at the Emerging Effective level must have access to formative support to correct deficiencies and achieve the Effective level within a reasonable period of time. The Not Effective rating should be used when a teacher is performing below expectations and not making adequate growth toward becoming Effective on the Performance Indicator. Teachers rated at the Not Effective level must have access to formative support to correct deficiencies and achieve the Effective level within a reasonable period of time. The summative rating (both Mid-Year and End-of-Year) will be determined by which rating tier (e.g., Not Effective, Emerging Effective, Effective, and Highly Effective) has been marked or identified most often during the CIS. For example, if during a summative CIS, a teacher receives 2 marks for Not effective, 6 marks for Emerging Effective, 9 marks for Effective, and 5 marks for Highly Effective, the teacher’s summative rating would be “Effective” because that tier has receive the majority of the markings for that CIS.

Evidence Evidence provides confirmation that a Performance Indicator has been achieved at a particular level of effectiveness. Evidence may be introduced by the teacher or the evaluator and must be reviewed during the conference (or within a reasonable amount of time following the conference, not to exceed 5 additional working days). Evidence may supply information and verification to Performance Indicators already observed and to Performance Indicators not yet observed. Evidence should be specific to the standard and the Performance Indicator, and must provide clear information supportive of the rating. General or unrelated data or examples will not be accepted as part of the assessment record and will not be added to the body of supportive evidence. Revised August 2015

16

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Tool (based on the Utah Teaching Observation Tool) Teacher Information: Name: ____________________________________ School: _____________________________

Provisional Status

 Career Status

Grade/Subject: ___________________

Date: ______________

Evaluator Information: Name: ___________________________________________________

Position: ________________________

Section 1: The Learner and Learning Teaching begins with the learning. To ensure that each student learns, new knowledge and skills, teachers must understand that learning and development patterns vary among individuals, that learners bring unique individual differences to the learning process, and that learners need supportive and safe learning environments to thrive.

Standard 1: Learner Development The teacher understands cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional and physical areas of student development. Performance Indicator

1.1

Creates developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences based on each learner’s strengths, interests, and needs (1a, 2e).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Identifies appropriate developmental levels of individual learners and consistently and appropriately differentiates instruction.

Supports learners in setting and meeting their own learning goals, aligned to their diverse learning needs.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -No differentiation -Instruction is not developmentally appropriate -Lack of hands-on instruction -Lack of real-world application -Emotionally unsafe environment -Teacher dependent problem solving/scaffolding -Only one answer -Lack of modeling -Unaware of developmental needs

Creates whole-class learning experiences that demonstrate an understanding of learners’ developmental levels.

Incorporates tools of language development into planning and instruction.

…and

…and

Collaborates with family members and a full range of colleagues to help meet the unique needs of all learners.

Anticipates the unique needs of each learner and collaborates within and outside the school to address those needs.

Not effective

1.2

Collaborates with families, colleagues, and other professionals to promote student growth and development (1b).

Revised August 2015

Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Not productive in communication -Not learner focused -Defensive or hostile -Continual excuses for not collaborating -Not taking responsibility for learner growth -Unaware of learner needs -Doesn’t communicate effectively

Interacts with families and colleagues related to learner growth and development.

17

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Specific documentation of communication with parents regarding cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional and physical development of learners Lesson or unit plans showing considerations of individual learner growth and development Participation in professional learning community focused on individual learner growth and development Screening, diagnostic, formative and summative data used to differentiate instruction and monitor progress

Standard 2: Learning Differences The teacher understands individual learner differences and cultural and linguistic diversity. Performance Indicator

2.1

Allows learners multiple ways to demonstrate learning sensitive to diverse experiences, while holding high expectations for all (2a, 2b, 2c, 2d).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Uses learner differences as an asset in designing, adapting, and delivering instruction for all learners.

Contributes to a schoolwide culture that encourages learner perseverance and advancement.

Applies knowledge of language acquisition in instruction.

Connects multiple perspectives to encourage learners to learn from each other.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Unaware of personal biases -Not accepting of differences -Resists change and adaptation -Doesn’t hold high expectations -Evaluated on completion only

Applies understanding of learner diversity to encourage all learners to reach their full potential.

Provides learners multiple ways to demonstrate learning. Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Attendance and implementation of professional development related to diverse student needs and/or language acquisition Collection, analysis and use of individual learner growth and development to positively adapt and deliver instruction Specific documentation of bringing in parents/community members to strengthen diversity appreciation Materials used that reflect a broad range of cultures, interests, and perspectives

Revised August 2015

18

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Standard 3: Learning Environments The teacher works with learners to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, encouraging positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

3.1

Performance Indicator

Develops learning experiences that engage and support students as self-directed learners who internalize classroom routines, expectations, and procedures (3a).

3.2

Collaborates with students to establish a positive learning climate of openness, respectful interactions, support, and inquiry (3b).

3.3

Utilizes positive classroom management strategies, including the resources of time, space, and attention, effectively (3c, 3d).

Revised August 2015

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -No schedule planned -Majority of learners not on task -Learners don’t know what to do -Instructional time is lost -Lengthy transitions -Unorganized -Learners not engaged

Implements a daily schedule.

Establishes classroom routines, expectations, and procedures.

Establishes behavioral expectations focused on planned learning.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Negative demeanor -Frequent reprimands -Lack of learner collaboration -Inappropriate boundaries -Inconsistent response and feedback -Lack of monitoring or engagement with learners -Leaves learners unattended -Teacher-focused strategies only (lecture, worksheet, video, etc.) -Emotionally unsafe environment

Promotes a positive and respectful learning climate.

Provides opportunities for student interactions.

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Provides explicit direction so that learners know what to do and when to do it.

Collaborates with learners in establishing, and reflecting, and promoting learning outcomes, resulting in self-directed learning experiences.

Supports each learner as he/she establishes expectations and develops responsibility for his/her own behavior. …and Collaborates with students to establish a positive learning climate of openness, respectful interactions, support, and inquiry.

Organizes student learning for the purpose of developing cooperation, collaboration, and student leadership.

…and Supports learners as they reflect on and modify their personal interactions.

Supports learners to create and manage learning teams to meet learning goals.

Promotes learner inquiry and exploration.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Limited classroom management strategies -Negative or ineffective strategies -Ineffective use of time, space, and attention -Disorganized learning environment -Frequent digressions -Negative, ineffective, inconsistent use of strategies

Effective

Implements classroom management strategies.

Encourages learners to be engaged with the content. Distributes time, space, and attention to engage learners.

…and

…and

Uses differentiated management strategies focusing on individual learner needs.

Fosters each learner’s ability to manage and reflect upon his/her own learning.

Gains and maintains student attention through active engagement.

Adjusts instructional pacing and transitions to maintain learner engagement and support learning 19

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Collection analysis and use of data to make modifications in classroom instruction Implementation of student learning teams to purposefully ensure support of individual learner needs and engagement Participation in and implementation of professional development related to the learning environment and/or collaborative learning Student work or journals showing self-reflection of his or her personal learning and growth (student data analysis-charts of tracking personal growth)

Section 2: Instructional Practice Effective instructional practice requires that teachers have a deep and flexible understanding of their content areas and be able to draw upon content knowledge as they work with learners to access information, apply knowledge in real-world settings, and address meaningful issues. They must also understand and integrate assessment, planning, and instructional strategies in coordinated and engaging ways to assure learner mastery of content.

Standard 4: Content Knowledge The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline. Performance Indicator

4.1

Bases instruction on accurate content knowledge using multiple representations of concepts (4a, 4c, 4d, 7c).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective …and

…and

Uses multiple representations and explanations of concepts to deepen each learner’s understanding.

Pursues opportunities to learn new developments in the discipline and continually deepens content knowledge.

Designs learning experiences to explicitly teach methods of inquiry and problem solving.

Applies knowledge of subject beyond the content.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Conveys inaccurate content, information, and/or concepts -Only one way to teach a concept -Strategies are not subject specific -Information is not connected to real-world application -Has difficulty conveying concepts

Demonstrates content knowledge in the teaching assignment.

Teaches basic concepts of the discipline.

Models and expects learners to evaluate, create, and think critically about content.

Analyzes learner errors and misconceptions in order to reflect, focus, and deepen learning.

Revised August 2015

Highly Effective

Motivates learners to extend and share their own knowledge beyond core content.

Anticipates possible learner misunderstandings and proactively mitigates concerns.

20

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

4.2

Performance Indicator

Supports students in learning and using academic language accurately and meaningfully (4e).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Inaccurate vocabulary -Minimal use of vocabulary of the discipline

Uses the vocabulary of the discipline accurately.

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Models and teaches the language of the discipline.

Stays current on emerging research and vocabulary (content & academic) specific to the discipline, and incorporates it into instruction.

Designs learning experiences that require learners to correctly use and meaningfully apply the language of the discipline.

Collaborates with colleagues to update academic language.

Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Attendance and implementation of professional development related to grade level or subject content Specific documentation of projected learner misunderstandings and the method used to mitigate misconceptions Materials used to promote critical thinking and problem solving that extend the learners’ knowledge of content Resources, tools, and trainings developed for colleagues that broaden knowledge of academic language

Standard 5: Assessment The teacher uses multiple methods of assessment to engage learners in their own growth, monitor learner progress, guide planning and instruction, and determine whether the outcomes described in content standards have been met. Performance Indicator

5.1

Uses data sources to assess the effectiveness of instruction and to make adjustments in planning and instruction (5a, 5c, 5d, 8a).

Revised August 2015

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Uses data to evaluate the outcomes of teaching.

Designs and targets strategies for instruction based on data.

Monitors learner performance and responds to individual learning needs.

Uses multiple formative and summative assessments to make ongoing adjustments in instruction based on a wide range of individual learner needs.

Provides multiple assessment options for the learner to demonstrate knowledge and skills.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Makes teaching decisions in isolation -No adjustment to instruction based on data -Sticks to pre-determined plan -Provides only one learning opportunity -No pre-assessment or enrichment for advanced learners -Same assessments for all learners

Collaborates with colleagues to use a variety of data to reflect and adapt planning and instruction.

Targets intervention and enrichment strategies based on data 21

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Performance Indicator

5.3

5.2

Engages students in understanding and identifying the elements of quality work (5b).

Documents student progress and provides descriptive feedback to student, parent, and other stakeholders in a variety of ways (5e).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Provides timely, descriptive, and specific feedback to individuals and groups.

Provides opportunities for learners to self-assess work and receive peer feedback.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Non-specific or limited feedback -Ineffective feedback -Untimely feedback -Rarely moves about the classroom to provide ongoing feedback

Provides feedback on learner work.

Identifies elements of quality work.

Provides ways for learners to monitor and reflect upon their own progress. …and

…and

Uses a variety of effective formats to document and provide feedback on learner progress.

Engages learners in using feedback to improve future performance.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Documentation is not accurate, current or thorough -Feedback is inconsistent, incomplete, or inaccessible

Documents and shares assessment feedback with learners and parents/guardians as required.

Initiates ongoing, open communication between home and school about learner progress. Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Documentation of a variety of timely and descriptive feedback provided to learners Specific documentation of implementation of individual learners’ IEPs, 504 Plans, or other necessary accommodations Lesson or unit plans showing considerations of individual learner growth and development Resources and materials demonstrating multiple assessment opportunities for learners to show and self-reflect upon growth

Revised August 2015

22

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Standard 6: Instructional Planning The teacher plans instruction to support students in meeting rigorous learning goals by drawing upon knowledge of content areas, Utah Core Standards, practices, and the community context. Performance Indicator

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective …and

6.2

6.1

Demonstrates knowledge of the Utah Core Standards and references them in short- and long-term planning (4b, 6a).

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Materials are not aligned with standards -Unfamiliar with Utah Core -No evidence of long-term planning

Aligns daily instruction with the Utah Core Standards.

Selects instructional materials that support standards.

Plans for implementation of shortand long-term learning experiences that reference Utah Core Standards learning objectives and content. Organizes and adapts learning experiences and materials to align with the Utah Core Standards.

Integrates crossdisciplinary skills into instruction to purposefully engage learners in applying content knowledge (6b, 6e).

Highly Effective …and Plans authentic learning experiences.

Evaluates the effectiveness of planning in response to student learning data and makes needed adjustments.

Adapts pre-determined plans, materials, and timeframes to meet individual learner needs. …and

…and

Plans lessons that demonstrate how knowledge and skills transfer to other content areas.

Collaborates with colleagues to establish links between disciplines and influence school-wide teaching practices.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Always focuses on one discipline at a time -Learners not engaged in content -Plans solely in isolation

Provides opportunities for students to use knowledge in various ways.

Designs learning experiences that promote the application of knowledge in multiple content areas.

Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Assessment of individual learner needs, analysis of learner progress data results, and application of student learning outcomes in planning Attendance and implementation of professional development related to diverse student needs and/or language acquisition Specific documentation of cross-curricular collaboration with other departments, grade levels, or colleagues Lesson or unit plans or curriculum map showing short- and long-term learning experiences that align with the Utah Core

Revised August 2015

23

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Standard 7: Instructional Strategies The teacher uses various instructional strategies to ensure that all learners develop a deep understanding of content areas and their connections and builds skills to apply and extend knowledge in meaningful ways.

7.1

Performance Indicator

Practices a range of developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate instructional strategies to meet the needs of individuals and groups of learners (2b, 2e, 6c, 7a, 7b).

7.2

Ensures multiple opportunities for students to develop higher-order and meta-cognitive skills (3f, 6d, 7e).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Inappropriate strategies -Minimal variety -Lacks real-world connections -No evidence of differentiation for individuals or groups -Insensitivity to individual differences -No adjustment to plans

Differentiates instruction by using a variety of appropriate strategies.

Uses a limited number of instructional strategies.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Uses mostly memorization, recall, and rote knowledge -Uses one mode of communication

Uses instructional strategies that incorporate higherorder thinking.

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Monitors and adjusts instruction in response to developmental, cultural and linguistic needs of individual and groups of learners.

Uses instructional strategies relevant to each learner’s developmental, cultural, and linguistic background.

Identifies and addresses each learner’s diverse learning strengths and needs.

Uses learner differences as an asset in implementing effective instruction for all students.

…and

…and

Uses explicit instruction to analyze, synthesize, and make decisions.

Facilitates and monitors complex, open-ended learning opportunities where learners develop inventive solutions to problems.

Ensures opportunities for learners to reflect on their own learning. Ensures opportunities for students to generate and evaluate new ideas.

7.3

Supports and expands each learner’s communication skills through reading, writing, listening, and speaking (3f, 7d).

Revised August 2015

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Communication is teacher centered -Only one communication skill typically used -Skills not taught or developed specifically

Provides opportunities for learners to practice communication skills.

…and

…and

Teaches content-specific reading, writing, listening, and speaking skills for effective communication.

Engages each student to transfer communication skills to real-world contexts.

Ensures opportunities for learners to expand communication skills to articulate thoughts and ideas.

Facilitates and monitors the use of multiple forms of communication to further understanding of content and build critical thinking.

24

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Performance Indicator

7.4

Uses a variety of effective technology and resources to support learning (3e, 7f, 7g).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Technology does not support effective learning -Repetitive use of single technology -Avoids using available technology

Uses technology and resources to support instruction.

Effective …and

…and

Evaluates and uses various technologies and resources to support content and skill development.

Facilitates and monitors opportunities for learners to critically analyze information from multiple and diverse sources and perspectives.

Incorporates technology and resources to extend learner content knowledge and skill development. …and

7.5

Develops learners’ abilities to find and use information to solve real-world problems (7g, 7f).

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Uses limited sources of information -Information sources not appropriate for complexity of concepts -Uses unreliable sources of information -Problems addressed are hypothetical and unrealistic

7.6

Not effective Uses a variety of questioning strategies to promote engagement and learning (7h).

Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Opportunity for few learner responses -Questioning focused on recall -Answers own questions -No wait time -One right answer

Exposes learners to various media and other sources.

Highly Effective

Develops each learner’s ability to find, understand, and analyze diverse sources of information.

Investigates and uses new technologies and resources to enhance learner engagement in learning. …and Facilitates and monitors a learning environment where learners offer opinions, support claims, and share perspectives to solve problems.

Ensures opportunities for learners to use multiple sources of information to solve real-world problems.

Asks questions to assess student learning.

…and

…and

Selects questioning strategies aligned with learning goals.

Adapts levels of questions to engage each learner in appropriately differentiated high-level learning.

Incorporates higher-level thinking questions to promote leaner engagement.

Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Specific documentation of implementation of instructional strategies for a range of learners’ developmental, cultural, and linguistic needs Examples of learner work showing opportunities to solve complex, openended problems and development of innovative solutions Learner reflection journals showing self-reflection of individual learning and subsequently setting learning goals Resources demonstrating differentiation of accommodations, materials, teaching strategies, sequencing, etc.

Revised August 2015

25

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Section 3: Professional Responsibility Creating and supporting safe, productive learning environments that result in learners achieving at the highest levels is a teacher’s primary responsibility. To do this well, teachers must engage in meaningful, intensive professional learning by regularly examining practice through ongoing study, self-reflection, and collaboration. They must be aware of legal and ethical requirements and engage in the highest levels of professional and ethical conduct.

Standard 8: Reflection and Continuous Growth The teacher is a reflective practitioner who uses evidence to continually evaluate and adapt practice to meet the needs of each learner. Performance Indicator

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Collaborates with supervisor to develop a professional learning plan based on data and the Utah Effective Teaching Standards.

Seeks professional learning within and outside the school setting to refine professional practices.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Limited participation in professional learning -Does not implement professional development -Unaware of policies -Unaware of Utah Effective Teaching Standards

Applies current professional learning to classroom practice, consistent with its intent.

Acknowledges the impact of bias on teaching.

8.1

Adapts and improves practice based on reflection and new learning (8b, 8c, 8d, 8e).

Not Effective

Measures the effectiveness of new learning strategies by collecting and reflecting upon data and feedback (student exit surveys, student assignments, action research, etc.).

Identifies own background and experiences that have an impact on teaching and learning relationships.

Identifies and accesses resources that support the development of a broader understanding of differences.

Seeks new ideas and participates in dialogue regarding new research, regulations, and requirements and implications for classroom teaching and learning.

Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Attendance and implementation of professional development related student or other personal growth needs Self-reflection journals, mentoring logs, or evidence of collaboration with colleagues to apply and evaluate new knowledge Videos, photos, Podcasts, and other media that reflect learner engagement resulting from new instructional strategies

Revised August 2015

26

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Standard 9: Leadership and Collaboration The teacher is a leader who engages collaboratively with learners, families, colleagues, and community members to build a shared vision and supportive professional culture focused on student growth and success.

9.1

Performance Indicator

Participates actively in decision-making processes, while building a shared culture that affects the school and larger educational community (9a, 9b, 9d, 9e).

9.2

Advocates for the learners, the school, the community, and the profession (9c).

Not Effective

Emerging Effective

Effective

Highly Effective

…and

…and

Participates with colleagues and collaborates in decision making.

Aligns own Professional Growth Plan and student achievement goals with the School Improvement Plan and other school initiatives.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Teaches in solitude -Does not participate in decision-making -Does not fulfill required duties -Displays lack of respect for colleagues -Blames others for lack of learner success

Maintains cordial professional relationships with colleagues to fulfill required duties.

Accepts responsibility for the success of all learners.

Takes initiative to participate in developing and implementing policies and practices that improve instruction.

…and

…and

Advocates for all students to be prepared for high school graduation and future school work success.

Communicates the vision of college and career readiness to students and families.

Not effective Evidence of ineffective performance may include: -Limited communication with learners, families, or community -Lacks respect for learners and families -Communicates negatively about students, families, or the profession

Contributes to student success by responding to learner, family, and community concerns.

Seeks opportunities to make a positive impact on teaching quality, school improvement, and student achievement.

Participates, promotes, and provides support for initiatives in the school and community to have an impact on student success.

Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘Not Effective’ and recommended for all rating levels. Please specify the Performance Indicator for which the comment applies if not the standard as a whole).

Evidence that may be used to provide clarification and support or substantiation of performance not observed:

Confirmation of performance provided by evidence:

Documentation of discussion, results, and implementation of collaboration with colleagues Specific documentation of educational advocacy activities in professional and community groups Contributes to the school improvement plan through activities, such as participation on committees or community council Specific documentation of leadership in local and state professional and educational organizations

Revised August 2015

27

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Standard 10: Professional and Ethical Behavior The teacher demonstrates the highest standard of legal, moral, and ethical conduct, as specified in Utah State Board Rule R277-515.

10.2

10.1

Performance Indicator Is responsible for compliance with federal and state laws, State Board of Education administrative rules, state assessment policies, local board policies, and supervisory directives (10a, 5f).

Is responsible for compliance with all requirements of State Board of Education Rule R277-530 at all levels of teacher development (10b).

Yes

No

Understands, adheres to and upholds federal and state laws, State Board of Education rules, state and local policies, supervisory directives, and professional moral and ethical conduct, and holds others accountable to do the same.

Avoids actions that may adversely affect ability to perform assigned duties and carry out the responsibilities of the profession, including role-model responsibilities. Takes responsibility to understand professional requirements, to maintain a current Utah Educator License, and to complete license upgrades, renewals and additional requirements in a timely way. Maintains accurate instructional and non-instructional records. Maintains integrity and confidentiality in matters concerning student records and collegial consultation. Develops appropriate student-teacher relationships as defined in rule, law, and policy.

Maintains professional demeanor and appearance as defined by the local education agency (LEA). Evaluator Comments: (Required for ratings of ‘No.’ Recommended for ‘Yes’ where appropriate. Please specify the Performance indicator for which the comment applies if not for the standard as a whole.

Revised August 2015

28

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Mid-Year Performance Rating (Required) – To be completed by November 1st Teacher Name: ___________________________________________________

Date: ___________________________

School: ___________________________________________________

Grade/Subject: ___________________

Standard 1: Learner Development 1.1 Creates developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences based on each learner’s strengths, interests, and needs (1a, 2e). 1.2 Collaborates with families, colleagues, and other professionals to promote student growth and development (1b). Standard 2: Learner Differences 2.1 Allows learners multiple ways to demonstrate learning sensitive to diverse experiences, while holding high expectations (2a, 2b, 2c, 2d).

Standard 3: Learning Environments 3.1 Develops learning experiences that engage and support students as self-directed learners who internalize classroom routines, expectations, and procedures (3a). 3.2 Collaborates with students to establish a positive learning climate of openness, respectful interactions, support, and inquiry (3b).

3.3 Utilizes positive classroom management strategies, including the resources of time, space and attention effectively (3c, 3d). Standard 4: Content Knowledge 4.1 Bases instruction on accurate content knowledge using multiple representations of concepts (4a, 4c, 4d, 7c). 4.2 Supports students in learning and using academic language accurately and meaningfully (4e). Standard 5: Assessment 5.1 Uses data sources to assess the effectiveness of instruction and to make adjustments in planning and instruction (5a, 5c, 5d, 8a, 9d).

5.2 Engages students in understanding and identifying the elements of quality work (5b). 5.3 Documents student progress and provides descriptive feedback to student, parent, and other stakeholders in a variety of ways (5e). Standard 6: Instructional Planning 6.1 Demonstrates knowledge of the Utah Core Standards and references them in short- and long-term planning (6a, 6b, 4b). 6.2 Integrates cross-disciplinary skills into instruction to purposefully engage learners in applying content knowledge (6b, 6e). Standard 7: Instructional Strategies 7.1 Practices a range of developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate instructional strategies to meet the needs of individuals and groups of learners (2b, 2e, 6c, 7a, 7b). 7.2 Ensures multiple opportunities for students to develop higher-order and meta-cognitive skills (6d, 7e, 3f). 7.3 Supports and expands learners’ communication skills through reading, writing, listening, and speaking (7d, 3f). 7.4 Uses a variety of effective technology and resources to support learning (7f, 3e). 7.5 Develops learners’ abilities to find and use information to solve real-world problems (7g, 7f). 7.6 Uses a variety of questioning strategies to promote engagement and learning (7h). Standard 8: Reflection and Continuous Growth 8.1 Adapts and improves practice based on reflection and new learning (8b, 8c, 8d, 8e). Standard 9: Leadership and Collaboration 9.1 Participates actively in decision-making processes, while building a shared culture that affects the school and larger educational community (9a, 9b, 9d, 9e). 9.2 Advocates for the learners, the school, the community, and the profession (9c). Standard 10: Professional and Ethical Behavior 10.1 Is responsible for compliance with federal and state laws, State Board of Education administrative rules, state assessment policies, local board policies, and supervisory directives (10a, 5f). 10.2 Is responsible for compliance with all of Board of Education Rule R277-530 at all levels of teacher development (10b).

YES

NO

YES

NO

Mid-Year Performance Rating: Teacher’s Signature: _______________________________________________ Date: _____________________ Administrator’s Signature: __________________________________________ Revised August 2015

Date: _____________________ 29

Highly Effective

Effective

Emerging Effective

Not Effective

Evaluator Name: _________________________________________________

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Year End Performance Rating (Required) – To be completed by April 1st Teacher Name: ___________________________________________________

Date: ___________________________

Standard 1: Learner Development 1.1 Creates developmentally appropriate and challenging learning experiences based on each learner’s strengths, interests, and needs (1a, 2e). 1.2 Collaborates with families, colleagues, and other professionals to promote student growth and development (1b). Standard 2: Learner Differences 2.1 Allows learners multiple ways to demonstrate learning sensitive to diverse experiences, while holding high expectations (2a, 2b, 2c, 2d).

Standard 3: Learning Environments 3.1 Develops learning experiences that engage and support students as self-directed learners who internalize classroom routines, expectations, and procedures (3a). 3.2 Collaborates with students to establish a positive learning climate of openness, respectful interactions, support, and inquiry (3b).

3.3 Utilizes positive classroom management strategies, including the resources of time, space and attention effectively (3c, 3d). Standard 4: Content Knowledge 4.1 Bases instruction on accurate content knowledge using multiple representations of concepts (4a, 4c, 4d, 7c). 4.2 Supports students in learning and using academic language accurately and meaningfully (4e). Standard 5: Assessment 5.1 Uses data sources to assess the effectiveness of instruction and to make adjustments in planning and instruction (5a, 5c, 5d, 8a, 9d).

5.2 Engages students in understanding and identifying the elements of quality work (5b). 5.3 Documents student progress and provides descriptive feedback to student, parent, and other stakeholders in a variety of ways (5e). Standard 6: Instructional Planning 6.1 Demonstrates knowledge of the Utah Core Standards and references them in short- and long-term planning (6a, 6b, 4b). 6.2 Integrates cross-disciplinary skills into instruction to purposefully engage learners in applying content knowledge (6b, 6e). Standard 7: Instructional Strategies 7.1 Practices a range of developmentally, culturally, and linguistically appropriate instructional strategies to meet the needs of individuals and groups of learners (2b, 2e, 6c, 7a, 7b). 7.2 Ensures multiple opportunities for students to develop higher-order and meta-cognitive skills (6d, 7e, 3f). 7.3 Supports and expands learners’ communication skills through reading, writing, listening, and speaking (7d, 3f). 7.4 Uses a variety of effective technology and resources to support learning (7f, 3e). 7.5 Develops learners’ abilities to find and use information to solve real-world problems (7g, 7f). 7.6 Uses a variety of questioning strategies to promote engagement and learning (7h). Standard 8: Reflection and Continuous Growth 8.1 Adapts and improves practice based on reflection and new learning (8b, 8c, 8d, 8e). Standard 9: Leadership and Collaboration 9.1 Participates actively in decision-making processes, while building a shared culture that affects the school and larger educational community (9a, 9b, 9d, 9e). 9.2 Advocates for the learners, the school, the community, and the profession (9c). Standard 10: Professional and Ethical Behavior 10.1 Is responsible for compliance with federal and state laws, State Board of Education administrative rules, state assessment policies, local board policies, and supervisory directives (10a, 5f). 10.2 Is responsible for compliance with all of Board of Education Rule R277-530 at all levels of teacher development (10b).

YES

NO

YES

NO

Year-End Performance Rating (Observations Only): Student Growth Rating: Stakeholder Input Rating:

OVERALL SUMMATIVE Performance Rating: Teacher’s Signature: _______________________________________________

Date: _____________________

Administrator’s Signature: __________________________________________

Date: _____________________

Revised August 2015

30

Highly Effective

Effective

Emerging Effective

Not Effective

Evaluator Name: _________________________________________________

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Directions for Completing Required Elements Completing the Professional Growth Plan (PGP) & Self-Assessment The teacher will complete a professional growth plan (PGP) and self-assessment using the PGP & Self-Assessment forms. The PGP details the professional goals of the educator based on the evaluation standards. The self-assessment is a personal reflection about one’s professional practice to identify strengths and areas for improvement. Purposes of the PGP and self-assessment are to clarify performance expectations, guide discussions about goal-setting, professional development, program needs, and provide input to the final, end-of-year performance ratings. The PGP and self-assessment are a reflective process.

Completing Classroom Observations The principal or evaluator will complete numerous observations throughout the year. An observation by a principal may be for short periods of time (e.g., 10-20 minutes) in a walk-through or may last for an entire class period. In addition, observations may include PLCs, PTCs, and individualized data meetings. Observations do not have to be announced. During the observations, the principal should document the performance of the teacher in relation to the Standards. Each observation should be followed by a post-observation feedback session, the principal and teacher discuss and document the strengths and challenges of the teacher’s performance in relation to the Standards during the observed event.

Completing Continuous Improvement System (CIS) Summatives (Mid-Year and Year-End) After all observations have been completed, the administrator will enter the information on the summative rating sheet. The rating for an element is the lowest rating for which all descriptors are marked during the CIS cycle. After the rating for each element is determined, an overall rating for each standard can be scored. The summative rating (both Mid-Year and End-of-Year) will be determined by which rating tier (e.g., Not Effective, Emerging Effective, Effective, and Highly Effective) has been marked or identified most often during the CIS. For example, if during a CIS summative, a teacher receives 2 marks for Not effective, 6 marks for Emerging Effective, 9 marks for Effective, and 5 marks for Highly Effective, the teacher’s summative rating would be “Effective” because that tier has receive the majority of the markings for that CIS. The principal or evaluator will complete the Ogden School District Continuous Improvement System Tool during teacher CIS summatives. Evidence used in the tool may include PLCs, PTCs, and individualized data meetings. The evaluator checks descriptors that are observed during the event(s) and considers evidence of additional performance responsibilities demonstrated by the teacher. If the evaluator marks any standards as ‘Not Effective’ an evaluator comment is required to specify the applicable performance indicator. The observer may include suggestions for improving performance. Final overall ratings of standards should not be determined until the end of the year during the CIS Summative Conference (prior to April1st). During the CIS Summative Conference, the principal and teacher shall discuss the teacher’s PGP, Self-Assessment, the components of the Ogden School District CIS process completed during the year, classroom observations (and other observable venues). In addition, the principal and teacher may discuss artifacts submitted or collected during the CIS process and other evidence of the teacher’s performance. Evidence submitted by teacher must be submitted within 5 working days of original observation in order for the evidence to be considered in a CIS summative. Finally, the Performance Rating Form(s) is to be jointly reviewed and signed by the teacher and evaluator during the CIS Summative Conference.

Revised August 2015

31

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Remediation and Plan of Assistance Procedures for Determining Remediation (Informal and Formal) Once the principal has conducted numerous observations, he/she will give a rating for each standard. The summative rating (both Mid-Year and End-of-Year) will be determined by which rating tier (e.g., Not Effective, Emerging Effective, Effective, and Highly Effective) has been marked or identified most often during the CIS. For example, if during a CIS summative, a teacher receives 2 marks for Not effective, 6 marks for Emerging Effective, 9 marks for Effective, and 5 marks for Highly Effective, the teacher’s summative rating would be “Effective” because that tier has receive the majority of the markings for that CIS. We believe that highly effective teaching must be recognized. We also believe ineffective teaching must be addressed. The principal may place the teacher on Tier II (Informal Remediation) if after at least two observations of a teacher, the principal determines that there are: 

Three (3) performance indicators rated (marked) as “Not Effective” in Standards 3, 5, or 7; and/or



Five (5) performance indicators rated (marked) as “Not Effective” among all the standards.

If the deficiencies continue after Tier II (Informal Remediation), the principal may proceed to Tier III (Formal Remediation). Beginning with the 2015-2016 school year, a teacher (Provisional or Career) may not advance a step/level on the Ogden School District salary schedule if the teacher’s overall summative rating on the April 1st evaluation is at the lowest level (rating) of the CIS instrument and they have been placed on Tier II (Informal Remediation). Likewise, a Career Teacher may not receive the Educator Salary Adjustment ($4,200) if the Career teacher’s overall summative rating on the April 1st evaluation is at the lowest level (rating) of the CIS instrument and they have been placed on Tier III (Formal Remediation).

IMPORTANT NOTE: Any teacher who receives a ‘No’ marking in Standard 10.1 or 10.2 is subject to the District’s Corrective Discipline Process up to and including termination.

Process – Informal Remediation (Tier II) The Informal Remediation (Tier II) Process shall include the following: 1.

Notice of Deficiencies: Once a principal has determined a teacher is in need of informal remediation, within seven (7) working days of the last observation, the principal shall give the teacher a written document informing the teacher he/she is being placed on Informal Remediation (Tier II) and clearly identifying:  specific, measurable, and actionable deficiencies (e.g., identifying the standards rated as Not Effective);  a recommended course of action that will improve the teacher’s performance (informal plan of assistance);  resources and support; and  dates and a timeline.

2.

Opportunity to Improve: The principal will allow no less than twenty (20) working days for the teacher to make improvements to the deficient standards. During the 20 day period, the principal is not allowed to evaluate or conduct formal observations of the teacher. However, the principal may enter the classroom.

3.

Subsequent Observation(s)/Evaluation: If in subsequent observation(s)/evaluation(s), the principal determines adequate improvements have been made in the areas of previous deficiencies, the principal will provide the teacher with a written document indicating he/she has been taken off of Informal Remediation (Tier II). However, if the teacher has not made adequate progress toward improvement, the principal may;  elect to continue* the Informal Remediation process; or  request that the teacher be placed on Formal Remediation (Tier III) from Human Resources. *If the principal elects to continue the Informal Remediation (Tier II) process, he/she may provide additional days for the teacher to demonstrate improvement, but is not subject to the 20 day improvement period (may be less than 20 days).

Revised August 2015

32

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Remediation (continued) Process – Formal Remediation (Tier III) The Formal Remediation (Tier III) Process shall include the following: 1.

Official Request for Formal Remediation (Tier III) If after continued observations, the teacher is still deficient as described below, the principal shall meet with Human Resources to review the observational documentation and officially request the teacher be placed on Formal Remediation (Tier III). The principal may place the teacher on Tier III (Formal Remediation) if after at least two observations of a teacher, the principal determines that three or more of the performance indicators rated (marked) as “Not Effective” remain “Not Effective”: 

Three (3) performance indicators rated (marked) as “Not Effective” in Standards 3, 5, or 7; and/or



Five (5) performance indicators rated (marked) as “Not Effective” among all the standards.

Beginning with the 2015-2016 school year, a teacher (Provisional or Career) may not advance a step/level on the Ogden School District salary schedule if the teacher’s rating on the most recent CIS is at the lowest level (rating) of the CIS instrument. Likewise, a Career Teacher may not receive the Educator Salary Adjustment ($4,200) if the Career teacher’s rating on the most recent CIS is at the lowest level (rating) of the CIS instrument. 2.

Notice of Deficiencies: Once a principal has been granted approval from Human Resources to place a teacher on Formal Remediation (Tier III), the principal shall give the teacher a written document informing the teacher he/she is being placed on Formal Remediation (Tier III) and clearly identifying:  specific, measurable, and actionable deficiencies (e.g., identifying the standards rated as Not Effective);

3.

Formal Plan of Assistance: Once a principal has determined a teacher is in need of formal remediation, within seven (7) working days, the principal and the teacher shall create a Plan of Assistance (written document) to serve as the guide for the teacher to make necessary improvements. The Plan of Assistance should include:  specific, measurable, and actionable deficiencies (e.g., identifying the standards rated as Not Effective);  a recommended course of action that will improve the teacher’s performance;  resources and support (see Plan of Assistance section for additional details); and  dates and a timeline.

4.

Human Resource Notification: Once Human Resources has approved the Formal Remediation (Tier III) Plan for the teacher, Human Resources shall notify the teacher that the teacher’s contract is subject to nonrenewal or termination if, upon reevaluation of the teacher’s performance, the performance is determined to be not effective.

5.

Opportunity to Improve: The principal will allow no less than twenty (20) working days for the teacher to make improvements to the deficient standards. During the 20 day period, the principal is not allowed to evaluate or conduct formal observations of the teacher. However, the principal may enter the classroom.

6.

Subsequent Observation(s)/Evaluation: If in subsequent observation(s)/evaluation(s), the principal determines adequate improvements have been made in the areas of previous deficiencies, the principal will provide the teacher with a written document indicating he/she has been taken off of Formal Remediation (Tier III). However, if the teacher has not made adequate progress toward improvement, the principal may;  elect to continue* the Formal Remediation process; or  request that the teacher’s contract be non-renewed or terminated for unsatisfactory performance. *If the principal elects to continue the Formal Remediation process, he/she may provide additional days for the teacher to demonstrate improvement, but is not subject to the 20 day improvement period (may be less than 20 days).

Revised August 2015

33

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Plan of Assistance and Termination of Contract Process – Plan of Assistance Once a principal has determined a teacher is in need of formal remediation, within seven (7) working days, the principal and the teacher shall create a written document (Plan of Assistance) informing the teacher he/she is being placed on Formal Remediation. The purpose of the Plan of Assistance is to provide the teacher with necessary information to help them make improvements to their performance. A Plan of Assistance will include the following elements:   



specific, measurable, and actionable deficiencies (e.g., identifying the standards rated as Not Effective and/or Emerging Effective); a recommended course of action that will improve the teacher’s performance; resources and support. o Such as:  Curriculum coach: supportive to teacher, but only reports feedback to employee, not to principal  Intervention Specialist  Mentor support  Lesson Plans turned in – provide feedback as needed  Time to observe master teachers  Professional development opportunities; and dates and a timeline.

Termination of Contract for Unsatisfactory Performance The District will follow the established termination procedures outlined in the Public Education Human Resources Management Act.

Outside Evaluation Request A teacher who is not satisfied with a CIS summative has fifteen (15) calendar days after receiving the written CIS to request a review of the CIS by a person who has expertise in teacher evaluations, but is not an employee of the district. This individual will review and make recommendations to Human Resources regarding the teacher’s CIS summative.

Revised August 2015

34

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Checklist of Required Teacher Continuous Improvement System Activities It is critical that the activities described below are completed in accordance with their applicable timeline to ensure the systematic improvement and growth of teachers. The purpose of this form is to guide principals through the required components of the Continuous Improvement System process for the teacher. Teacher Name: ______________________________________________

Grade/Subject: ___________________

School: ____________________________________________________ Activity Orientation

Self-Assessment

Date(s) Completed

Summary Within 15 days of a teacher’s first day of work, the principal will provide the teacher with a copy of or directions for obtaining access to the Continuous Improvement System Tool. May be provided electronically. Prior to September 20th, the teachers should complete a selfassessment.

Student Learning Objective (SLO/ Professional Growth Plan (PGP) – Beginning of Year

Prior to September 20th, the teachers should complete an SLO/(PGP), including student growth outcomes.

Stakeholder Input (Culture Rubric) – Beginning of Year

Prior to September 20th, the teachers should complete the Culture Rubric.

Pre-Observation Conference

Prior to September 20th, the principal will meet individually with teachers to discuss expectations for observations (including other observational venues). NOT REQUIRED for subsequent observations. Can be in conjunction with PGP Review.

Observations

The principal shall conduct multiple observations during the year by November 1st.

Post-Observation Feedback Sessions

The principal should conduct a post-observation feedback session no later than 7 days after each observation.

Mid-Year CIS Summative Conference (Provisional Teachers)

The principal shall evaluate and meet with each provisional teacher prior to November 1st to review the CIS Mid-Year Summative and performance rating in relation to the Standards.

Observations

The principal shall conduct multiple observations during the year by April 1st.

Post-Observation Feedback Sessions

The principal should conduct a post-observation feedback session no later than 7 days after each observation.

Student Learning Objective (SLO)/ Professional Growth Plan (PGP) – End of Year

The principal shall review the teacher’s SLO/PGP and discuss with teacher on whether or not goals where achieved as well as provide a rating for the SLO/PGP by April 1st.

Stakeholder Input (Culture Rubric) – End of Year

The principal shall review the teacher provided responses (and evidence) of whether or not progress was made toward utilizing the input received from the Culture Rubric to improve performance by April 1st.

Year-End CIS Summative Conference

The principal shall evaluate and meet with each teacher prior to April 1st to review the Year-End CIS Summative and performance rating in relation to the Standards by April 1st.

Revised August 2015

Comments

35

Ogden School District – Continuous Improvement System

Resources Ogden School District, the Utah Legislature, and the Utah State Office of Education recognize that the quality of public education can be improved and enhanced by systematic, fair, and competent annual evaluation of public educators and remediation of those whose performance is inadequate.

Legislative Resources – Public Education Human Resource Management Act (PEHRMA) Utah Code 53A-8a-401

Utah Administrative Code – Public Educator Evaluation Requirements (PEER) Rule R277-531

Utah State Office of Education – Educator Effectiveness Educator Effectiveness

Revised August 2015

36