Watkins Glen Central School District

Watkins Glen Central School District Annual Professional Performance Review The viability and implementation of the Observation process contained in this document is pending the outcome of litigation pending between the Board of Regents and the New York State United Teachers Procedural Manual September 1, 2011

Introduction: The Watkins Glen Central School District APPR steering committee of Teachers, Administrators and the Superintendent of Schools has worked diligently developing a new system for teacher and Principal evaluation. The purpose of the new evaluation system is to ensure quality teaching and learning practices are in place and comply with Education Law 3012-C. The focus of this plan includes: Quality professional growth of teachers and principals in their instructional practices. Use of evidenced-based standards in each area of classroom instruction that are more objective and rubrics that are clearly defined. Establishes a procedural manual to make the evaluation system clear and available to everyone. Committee Members: Thomas J. Phillips Kristine Somerville Nancy Loughlin Nancy Ruda Richard Comfort Superintendent Middle School Principal/ Administration Association President Guidance Counselor Special Education Teacher Elementary Teacher/ Watkins Glen Faculty Association President

New York State Teaching Standards Knowledge of Students and Learning: Teachers acquire knowledge of each student and demonstrate knowledge of student development and learning to promote achievement for all students. Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning: Teachers know the content they are responsible for teaching, and plan instruction that ensures growth and achievement for all students. Instructional Practice: Teachers implement instruction that engages and challenges all students to meet or exceed the learning standards. Learning Environment: Teachers work with all students to create a dynamic learning environment that supports achievement and growth: Assessment for Student Learning: Teachers use multiple measures to assess and document student growth, evaluate instructional effectiveness, and modify instruction. Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration: Teachers demonstrate professional responsibility and engage relevant stakeholders to maximize student growth, development and learning. Professional Growth: Teachers set informed goals and strive for continuous professional growth.

Requirements for Evaluation I. Non-Tenured Faculty A. Classroom observation cycle for all non-tenured faculty as follows: At least three (3) observations, of which at least one must be a formal classroom observation, per academic year will be conducted in accordance with Education Law 3012- C. In addition, first year faculty members shall receive a preliminary observation within the first three (3) months of employment. The preliminary observation is for informational purposes, will not be used for disciplinary reasons and will not be placed in the faculty member s personnel file. Notwithstanding the above, a faculty member may elect to have the preliminary observation placed in his/her file; this said observation now constituting one of the three (3) required observations. For faculty members possessing an initial or transitional certificate, the evaluation process is required. Additionally, a portfolio review in compliance with Commissioner s Regulation is required. The portfolio shall include the following: 1. Samples of Student work 2. Samples of student assessment instruments 3. Samples of parent communications 4. Video of teaching performance 5. Submission of Post-Conference reflection form following one of the three (3) required yearly observations (See Form G-6) 6. Sample of lesson plans (choice of format by faculty member) B. Those teachers not yet tenured in Watkins Glen Central School District but previously tenured elsewhere may choose one of the self-directed options in lieu of one (1) of the three (3) required observations, with the consent of the building administrator. C. If a faculty member s performance is judged to be Developing or Ineffective in one or more criteria, which directly affects his/her instructional effectiveness, such performance will be clearly and specifically stated in the evaluation. The supervisor in consultation with the faculty member shall develop a Teacher Improvement Plan within ten (10) days after the completion of the observation which the performance is judged to be developing or Ineffective within 10 days after completion of the observation which they are judged to be developing or ineffective (See Form G-5). D. All requirements and deadlines must be in compliance with Article 129.1, Faculty Member Evaluation in the collective bargaining agreement as well as Education Law 3012-C and all applicable Commissioner Regulations.

II. Tenured Faculty A. Observation cycle for all tenured staff shall consist of: 1. A minimum of one classroom observation and additional observations in other educational settings. Teachers may choose but are not required to complete one of the following: Supplemental: 2. The faculty member election of one of the four (4) self-directed options which may be a multi-year plan. This option is for individual Professional Development or Growth. a. A Portfolio b. Independent Research Project c. Action Plan d. Peer Coaching/Peer Review e. Professional Growth Goals using self-reflection (Maximum of 5 points) B. The election of the self-directed option must be made by September 30. C. If a faculty member s performance is judged to be Developing or Ineffective in one or more criteria, which directly affects his/her instructional effectiveness, such performance will be clearly and specifically stated in the evaluation. The supervisor in consultation with the faculty member shall develop a Teacher Improvement Plan within 10 days after completion of the observation which they are judged to be developing or ineffective (See Form G-5). D. All requirements and deadlines must be in compliance with Article 129.1 Faculty Member Evaluation, in the collective bargaining agreement as well as Education Law 3012-C and all applicable Commissioner Regulations. E. Any Tenured Teacher may choose to participate in the Marzano Art and Science of Teaching observation protocol.

Evaluation Process: As per NYS Education Law 3012-c, this evaluation system will include multiple measures of effectiveness that will result in a single composite score after multiple classroom observations. The total composite score will be based on: 40% Student Achievement to be comprised of: 20% growth on the state assessments calculated using a state student growth plan formula (yet to be determined by the State Education Department). The percentage will increase to 25% beginning the academic year 2012-13. 20% student achievement on local measures based on results of the Star Enterprise student assessment calculated using a student achievement formula (yet to be determined by the State Education Department). The percentage will decrease to 15% beginning the academic year 2012-13. 60% Non-growth Measures Will be based on classroom multiple observations consistent with the standards outlined by the NYS Education Commissioner. Classroom observations will be conducted using Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Model and associated rubrics (See Attachment) Beginning the academic year 2011-12, the new state teacher evaluation process will encompass only teachers of common branch subjects of English or Mathematics in grades 4-8. All teachers will be included in the new evaluation process in the academic year 2012-13. Teacher Rating Categories: Each teacher will be rated annually based on the standards described by the Commissioner using the Star Enterprise assessment to measure student achievement and Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Model as the classroom observation tool (Inclusive all applicable forms). The rating categories required by the Commissioner are: Measure of Local Measure Other Measures Composite Total Score Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 20% Marzano 60% (Star Enterprise) Ineffective 0-2 0-2 0-60 0-64 points Developing 3-11 3-11 0-60 65-74 points Effective 12-17 12-17 0-60 75-90 points Highly effective 18-20 18-20 0-60 91-100 points

Teacher Improvement Plan: A teacher with two consecutive ineffective ratings will be required to comply with prescribed Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP) which must be formulated and implemented within ten days of the opening of the new school year and show a determined acceptable progress and growth. Teachers who fail to demonstrate acceptable progress and growth can be terminated regardless of tenure status in accordance with Education Law 3012-C. Required Evaluation Training and Certification: Each district evaluator and lead evaluator will be required to complete evaluation training compliant with the 3012-c Education Law by October 2011 and become certified. Each district evaluator and lead evaluator must attend annual refresher training. A copy of the certification and log of refresher training will be maintained on file in the district office. Process for reporting Teacher/Student Course Linkage: The district plans to use the current student data and personnel management software systems to establish and track the teacher/student course linkage as required by law and will be uploaded when the NYSED system is ready to receive the data. Process for reporting the Teacher Composite Score/Ratings: The district plans to use the current personnel management system to record and upload annual teacher composite scores and ratings as required by law when the NYSED system is ready to receive it. Until then, scores will be stored in a spreadsheet in the district office. Selection of SED Approved Teacher Evaluation Rubric: The Superintendent, Watkins Glen Faculty Association representatives and Watkins Glen Administrator s Association representatives equally represented will formulate an Annual Professional Performance Review Committee which will meet semi-annually to review the Annual Professional Performance Review Plan to evaluate plan effectiveness and compliance with Commissioner s Regulations and Education Law 3012-c.

Appeals Process Purpose of Appeal. The purpose of the internal appeal process is to foster and nurture growth of the professional staff in order to maintain a highly qualified and effective work force. The following appeal process is designed to further this goal. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant to establish by the preponderance of the evidence that the rating given by the lead evaluator was not justified. Who: All tenured and probationary employees who meet the appeal process criteria may use this appeal process. Why: Said appeal process shall be available to employees to appeal either a procedural error in the evaluation process or appeal a substantive portion of the evaluation. What: Only employees who receive a Developing or Ineffective rating in one or more of the evaluative criteria for (a) a formal observation, (b) an informal observation, or (c) an annual professional performance review may process an appeal. The evaluative criteria categories that may be appealed are: How: 1. Knowledge of Students and Student Learning 2. Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning 3. Instructional Practice 4. Learning Environment 5. Assessment for Student Learning 6. Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration 7. Professional Growth 1. Governing Body to Adjudicate the Appeal: The governing body shall be defined as the Appeal Committee (hereinafter Committee ). The Committee make up shall be: A. One tenured administrator shall be appointed to the Committee. The tenured administrator appointed shall not be the administrator who authored the evaluation. The tenured administrator appointed to the committee shall be chosen by the Superintendent or his/her designee. B. Two tenured teachers shall be appointed to the Committee. The tenured teachers appointed to the Committee shall be chosen by the President of the Association or his/her designee. C. The Committee shall reach their finding using the consensus model. If consensus is not reached, the Committee shall write up the opposing viewpoints and submit the opposing viewpoints to the evaluation authoring administrator, the employee, the Association President, and the Superintendent. At this point a committee made up of two (2) Superintendent appointees and one (1) union appointee shall review the evaluation and position papers and by majority vote determine which of the opposing viewpoints shall be the outcome of the appeal.

2. Timeline: A. The employee must forward the evaluation appeal within five (5) workdays of receipt of the evaluation. Said appeal must be submitted in writing to the Superintendent of Schools and the Association President. (See Appeal form attached) B. The Superintendent and Association President shall charge the Committee to hold a Conference within five (5) workdays of receipt of the appeal. C. The Committee shall issue its findings to the Superintendent, Association President, the employee and the authoring administrator within five (5) workdays of the conference. D. If the secondary level is utilized, this committee will be given five (5) to meet and render their decision by majority vote. 3. Conference: A. The conference shall be an informal meeting wherein the authoring administrator and the employee are able to discuss the evaluation procedure and/or substantive content at issue. B. The Committee shall have the right to ask questions of the conference participants and any other relevant participants and have the right to collect any and all information necessary to make an informed decision. 4. Committee Findings: A. The Committee is empowered to overturn a section of the evaluation. Said ability to overturn a section of the evaluation does not negate the fact that the evaluation was timely completed. B. The Committee is empowered to overturn the entire evaluation if the evaluation was procedurally flawed. C. The Committee is empowered to overturn a section or the entire evaluation and require a course of action so as to enhance the professional growth of the employee. D. The Committee is empowered to affirm the evaluation and require a course of action so as to enhance the professional growth of the employee. E. The Committee is empowered to affirm the evaluation.

Evaluation Appeals Form Submit the signed and completed form to the Superintendent of Schools and the Association President within five (5) working days of receiving the evaluation you are appealing. Please review the Evaluation Appeals process found in the collective bargaining agreement on page to review the timelines for appealing an evaluation. 1. Evaluation Appeal Information By submitting this evaluation appeal form, I request the Evaluation Appeal Committee review he evaluation attached to determine if the evaluation in question should be affirmed or overturned. Member Name (please print): Member Title: Member Building: Authoring Administrator Administrator Title Name Date of Date Member received Evaluation Results from Observation: Type of Observation Appealed: Administrator: Date Appeal Submitted: 2. Type of Appeal (check box that applies) If you are appealing more than one observation category use additional forms Procedural Appeal Explanation of why member believes the observation is procedurally flawed. Please include contractual language that member believes was violated. Attach the observation being appealed and any supporting documentation for committee review. Substantive Appeal The category being appealed is: Content knowledge Preparation Instruction Delivery Classroom Management Student Development Student Assessment Student Growth Collaborative Reflective and Responsive Practice Rating being appealed: Developing Ineffective What do you believe the rating should have been? Highly effective Effective Developing Explain why you believe the observation should be reviewed:

Principal APPR Plan Evaluation Process: As per NYS Education Law 3012-c, this evaluation system will include multiple measures of effectiveness that will result in a single composite score after multiple observations. The total composite score will be based on: 40% Student Achievement to be comprised of: 20% growth on the state assessments calculated using a state student growth plan formula (yet to be determined by the State Education Department). The percentage will increase to 25% beginning the academic year 2012-13. 20% student achievement on local measures based on results of the Star Enterprise student assessment. The percentage will decrease to 15% beginning the academic year 2012-13. 60% Non-growth Measures 40% will be based on negotiated multiple observations consistent with the standards outlined by the NYS Education Commissioner using the Beginning the academic year 2011-12 the building principals who oversee schools with at least 30% of the students are being taught English Language Arts or Mathematics in grades 4-8 will be subject to this APPR process. All principals will be included in this process in the year 2012-13. Principal Rating Categories: Each principal will be rated annually based on the standards described by the Commissioner using Reeves Leadership Performance Matrix as identified by The Leadership and Learning Center. The rating categories required by the Commissioner are: Measure of Local Measure Other Measures Composite Total Score Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 20% Reeves 60% Ineffective 0-2 0-2 0-60 0-64 points Developing 3-11 3-11 0-60 65-74 points Effective 12-17 12-17 0-60 75-90 points Highly effective 18-20 18-20 0-60 91-100 points Principal Improvement Plan: A Principal with two consecutive ineffective ratings will be required to comply with prescribed Principal Improvement Plan (PIP) which must be formulated and implemented within ten days of the opening of the new school year and show a determined acceptable progress and growth. Principals who fail to demonstrate acceptable progress and growth can be terminated regardless of tenure status in accordance with Education Law 3012-C.

Appeals Process Principal Evaluation Appeal Process: Purpose of Appeal. The purpose of the internal appeal process is to foster and nurture growth of the professional staff in order to maintain a highly qualified and effective work force. The following appeal process is designed to further this goal. The burden of proof shall be on the appellant to establish by the preponderance of the evidence that the rating given by the lead evaluator was not justified. All tenured and probationary employees who meet the appeal process criteria may use this appeal process. Said appeal process shall be available to employees to appeal either a procedural error in the evaluation process or appeal a substantive portion of the evaluation. Only employees who receive a Developing or Ineffective rating in one or more of the evaluative criteria for (a) a formal observation, (b) an informal observation, or (c) an annual professional performance review may process an appeal. The evaluative criteria categories that may be appealed are: Resilience, Personal Behavior and Professional Ethics, Students Achievement, Decision Making, Communication, Faculty Development, Leadership Development, Time/Task/Project Management, Technology and Personal Professional Learning. The Principal must inform the Superintendent in writing not later than five (5) workdays of receipt of the evaluation. Said appeal must be submitted to the Superintendent and WGAA President. The Superintendent will meet with the Association President or their designee in an effort to informally resolve the appeal within 10 days after receipt of the notice of appeal. If there is no resolution a formal appeal will be submitted to the GST BOCES Superintendent or their designee within 5 days after the informal conference. The GST BOCES Superintendent or their designee will conduct a formal appeal conference within ten (10) days from the conclusion of the informal conference. A written decision of the appeal shall be rendered no later than fifteen (15) calendar days from the close of the appeal conference. The decision shall set forth the reasons and factual basis for each determination on each of the specific issues raised in the principal s appeal. A copy of the decision becomes part of the official observation record. The 3012-c appeal procedure shall constitute the means for initiating, reviewing and resolving any and all challenges to a principal performance review and/or improvement plan. A principal may not resort to any other contractual grievance procedures for the resolution of challenges and appeals related to a professional performance review and/or improvement plan.

Required Evaluation Training and Certification: Each district evaluator and lead evaluator will be required to complete an evaluation training compliant with the 3012-c Education Law and become certified. Each district evaluator and lead evaluator must attend annual refresher training. A copy of the certification and log of refresher training will be maintained on file in the district office. Process for reporting Principal Course and Student Roster Linkage: The district plans to use the current student data management personnel management software systems to establish and track the principal evaluator rating linkage as required by law and will be uploaded when the NYSED system is ready to receive the data. Process for reporting the Principal Composite Score/Ratings: The district plans to use the current personnel management system to record and upload annual principal composite scores and ratings as required by law when the NYSED system is ready to receive it. Until then, scores will be stored in a spreadsheet in the district office. The assessment development, security and scoring processes utilized by District to ensure that assessments are not disseminated to students before administration and that teachers or principals do not have a vested interest in the outcome of the assessment they score. Selection of SED Approved Principal Evaluation Rubric: Reeves Standards will be the agreed upon criteria for Principal evaluation pending approval of the Commissioner of Education. Certifications The Superintendent certifies that the locally selected method of measuring student achievement, referenced above, is rigorous and comparable across classrooms in accordance with Subpart 30-2 of the Commissioner s Regulations. This measure of rigor and comparability will be determined once the local measures are selected. Evaluation of Superintendent of Schools The governing body of each school district shall annually review the performance of the superintendent of schools according to procedures developed by such body in consultation with the superintendent. Such procedures shall be filed in the district office and available for review by any individual no later than September 10th of each year.

Index of Forms Self-Directed Learning Options G-1 Planning Session Conference for Peer Coaching Option G-2 Self-Directed Research Option G-3 Self-Directed Action Plan G-4 Teacher Improvement Plan G-5 Post Conference Reflection G-6 Annual Professional Performance Review, Instructional Faculty G-7 (Exclusive of Teachers of Math/ELA Grades 4-8) Annual Performance Review, Pupil Support Personnel G-8 Annual Professional Performance Review, Instructional Faculty G-9 (Teachers of Math/ELA Grades 4-8) Marzano Art and Science of Teaching Annual Evaluation Report

WATKINS GLEN CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING OPTIONS NOTE: The time frames for each self-directed option will be agreed upon between the faculty member(s) and the administrator at the time of selection. (Check one) Those faculty members not yet tenured in Watkins Glen but previously tenured elsewhere, may choose one of the self-directed options in lieu of one (1) of the three (3)required observations, with the consent of the building administrator. Tenured faculty may choose any of the below listed options. 1. The Portfolio The portfolio is a dynamic collection of items that both records the progress of faculty members and assists them in reaching professional excellence. It is to be comprised of artifacts related to the annual professional goals set by faculty members. The faculty member is required to review the portfolio with the building administrator as well as provide a written rationale for the inclusion of each item. This portfolio will be comprised of at least five items. Possible items may include but are not limited to: *Reflections on a unit plan *Copies of unit assessments with reflections on the assessment *Copies of supervisor observations with students, parents, peers, etc. reflections on the lesson. *Evidence of participation in workshops *Copies of awards or citations *Copies of peer observations *Lesson Plans *Sample communications with *Videotapes of lessons 2. Independent/Building/District-Wide Research Project (Study Group) This is a research-based option. It allows an individual or group to research a particular topic to develop a thesis that will ultimately help in improving student achievement. Faculty members choosing this option must complete form G-3, Self-Directed Plan Research Option. It must be clearly stated how this research will impact the learner and must include the resources used in doing the research. The faculty member(s) will also be required to review the research with their building administrator annually throughout the project. G-1

3. Action Plan Faculty members write a series of action steps that reflect their aspirations for professional growth over the course of a school year. The two categories for the action plan are professional or technological improvement. Faculty members are required to use form G-4, Self-Directed Action Plan. 4. Peer Coaching / Peer Review Over the course of the school year, two (2) faculty members will observe, discuss, and reflect upon the attributes and characteristics the faculty member set as goals at the planning session conference with the administrator (See: Form G-2). Faculty members are required to record their progress and provide the building administrator with a self-reflective narrative. If one of the four (4) self-directed options is not selected by September 30, an annual observation will be conducted according to Article 130.1 of the collective bargaining agreement. Faculty Member s Signature Date Evaluator s Signature Date (9/1/11) G-1

WATKINS GLEN CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING SESSION CONFERENCE PEER COACHING OPTION Faculty Member Date of Conference Administrator School The purpose of this conference is to set one or more goals relating to the faculty member s classroom practice, programs, organization, or evaluation of students. Goals may reference the following: learning standards, district and building goals, comprehensive district education plan (CDEP), or the eight state criteria for faculty member evaluation. Faculty Member s Signature Date Administrator s Signature Date (9/1/11) G-2

WATKINS GLEN CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT SELF-DIRECTED PLAN RESEARCH OPTION Faculty Member School Individual Building District Wide 1. Write a question that you would like to answer about student learning or your teaching. 2. What information do you need to answer the question? 3. In the Research Plan, indicate how you plan to answer the question. RESEARCH PLAN Actions Time Line 4. Summary and Conclusions: If you are able to complete the research, answer the following questions on a separate paper: What have you learned from this project? What additional questions do you have? Do you plan to alter your practice as a result of this project? If so, how? Faculty Member s Signature Date Evaluator s Signature Date (9/1/11) G-3

WATKINS GLEN CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT SELF-DIRECTED ACTION PLAN Faculty Member School Goal STEPS WHAT HOW WHEN OUTCOME Faculty Member s Signature Date Evaluator s Signature Date (9/1/11) G-4

Watkins Glen Central School District Teacher Improvement Plan Faculty Member School GOAL: WHAT: HOW: OUTCOME: TIMELINE: Faculty Signature Date Evaluator s Signature Date (9/1/11) G-5

Watkins Glen Central School District Post-Conference Reflection Faculty Member Date School Subject Status: Tenure Probationary 1. As I reflect on the lesson, to what extent were students productively engaged? 2. Did the students learn what I intended? Were my instructional goals met? How do I know, or how and when will I know? 3. Did I alter my goals or instructional plan as I taught the lesson? Why? 4. If I had the opportunity to teach this lesson again to the same group of students, what would I do differently? Why? (9/1/11) G-6

WATKINS GLEN CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW INSTRUCTIONAL FACULTY Exclusive of Teachers of Math/ELA Grades 4-8 Faculty Member Observer Status: (Probationary /Tenure) Date of Observation Class/Grade/Period School Evaluation Descriptors: UN Unsatisfactory Knowledge/demonstration of criteria below minimum standards S Satisfactory Knowledge/demonstration of criteria at an acceptable level 1. Content knowledge of subject matter and curriculum: Rating 2. Preparation employing necessary pedagogical practices to support instruction: Rating 3. Instructional delivery that results in active student involvement and meaningful lesson plans that result in student learning: Rating 4. Classroom management supportive of diverse student learning needs which creates a supportive learning environment conducive to student learning: Rating 5. Knowledge of student development and appreciation of diversity and regular application of developmentally appropriate instructional strategies: Rating G-7

6. Student assessment techniques based on appropriate learning standards: Rating 7. Collaborative relationships that are effective with students, parents, caregivers, and support personnel: Rating 8. Reflective and responsive practice that demonstrates adjustments are made on a continuing basis to improve the effectiveness of instruction and assessment: Rating Overall Rating: The evaluated member s signature indicates that they have read this evaluation but does not indicate approval or disapproval. Members shall have the right to write comments, which shall be appended to this and placed in the personnel records. Faculty Member s Signature Date Evaluator s Signature Date (9/1/11) G-7

WATKINS GLEN CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW PUPIL SUPPORT PERSONNEL Faculty Member Observer Status: (Probationary /Tenure) Date of Observation Class/Grade/Period School Evaluation Descriptors: UN Unsatisfactory Knowledge/demonstration of criteria below minimum standards S Satisfactory Knowledge/demonstration of criteria at an acceptable level 1. Content knowledge in area of expertise and curriculum: Rating 2. Preparation employing necessary pedagogical practices to support instruction: Rating 3. Sessions that result in active student involvement and meaningful plans that result in student learning: Rating 4. Interactions with students that are supportive of diverse student learning needs which creates a supportive learning environment conducive to student learning: Rating 5. Knowledge of student development and appreciation of diversity and regular application of developmentally appropriate instructional strategies: Rating G-8

6. Student assessment techniques based on appropriate learning standards: Rating 7. Collaborative relationships that are effective with students, parents, caregivers, and support personnel: Rating 8. Reflective and responsive practice that demonstrates adjustments are made on a continuing basis to improve the effectiveness of instruction and assessment: Rating Overall Rating: The evaluated member s signature indicates that they have read this evaluation but does not indicate approval or disapproval. Members shall have the right to write comments, which shall be appended to this and placed in the personnel records. Faculty Member s Signature Date Evaluator s Signature Date (9/1/11) G-8

Annual Evaluation Report for Category I Teachers: 1-3 Years of Service Instructional Practice Score Teacher: District: School: Evaluator: Current Assignment: Grade/Subject: Years of Service: School Year: This form is to serve as a permanent record of an administrator s evaluation of a teacher s performance during a specific period based on specific criteria as it relates to the teacher s instructional practice using the Art and Science of Teaching Framework. Directions: Examine all sources of evidence for each of the four domains in this form as it applies to the teacher s status and deliberate practice performance. Refer to the scale requirements and indicate sources of evidence used to determine the evaluation of results in each section. Assign an overall evaluation of the teacher s performance, sign the form and obtain the signature of the teacher. Use the accompanying Excel worksheet appropriate to the teacher s experience level to calculate the teacher s status and deliberate practice scores, and ultimately the overall performance score.

1. Status Score The teacher s status score reflects his/her overall understanding and application of the Art and Science of Teaching framework across the Four Domains: Domain 1: Classroom Strategies and Behaviors; Domain 2: Planning and Preparing; Domain 3: Reflecting on Teaching; Domain 4: Collegiality and Professionalism. Directions: Use the accompanying spreadsheet to compute the teacher s overall status score. You will need to obtain data for each of the Four Domains in order to compute a weighted overall score. Reference the Overall Status Score number in the cell highlighted in green in the spreadsheet. Domain 1 Sources of Evidence (select all that applies): Formal Observation Informal, Announced Observation Informal Unannounced Observation Walkthrough Artifacts: Other: Evaluator Comments: Domain 2 Sources of Evidence (select all that applies): Planning (Pre) Conference Artifacts: Other: Domain 3 Sources of Evidence (select all that applies): Self-Assessment Reflection (Post) Conference Professional Growth Plan Artifacts: Other: Domain 4 Sources of Evidence (select all that applies): Conferences Discussions Artifacts: Other: HIGHLY EFFECTIVE (4) EFFECTIVE (3) DEVELOPING (2) UNSATISFACTORY (1) Overall Status Score of 3.5 4.0 Overall Status Score of 2.5 3.4 Overall Status Score of 1.5 2.4 Overall Status Score of 1.0 1.4

2. Deliberate Practice Score The teacher s deliberate practice score reflects his/her progress against specific Elements in the Four Domains of the Art and Science of Teaching framework. Directions: Identify the teacher s target Element(s) for improvement. Then use the accompanying spreadsheet to compute the teacher s overall deliberate practice score. You will need to obtain data for each of the Four Domains in order to compute a weighted overall score. Reference the Overall Status Score number in the cell highlighted in purple in the spreadsheet. Domain 1 Target Elements: Routine Segments: Content Segments: On the Spot Segments: Domain 1 Sources of Evidence (select all that applies): Professional Growth Plan Artifacts: Other: Evaluator Comments: HIGHLY EFFECTIVE (4) EFFECTIVE (3) DEVELOPING (2) UNSATISFACTORY (1) Overall Deliberate Practice Score of 3.5 4.0 Overall Deliberate Practice Score of 2.5 3.4 Overall Deliberate Practice Score of 1.5 2.4 Overall Deliberate Practice Score of 1.0 1.4

3. Final Score The final score reflects the teacher s overall performance and includes both the status and deliberate practice score calculations. The district determines the weight of the status and deliberate practice scores toward overall score. Directions: Use the accompanying spreadsheet to compute the teacher s overall score that includes both status and deliberate practice scores. Reference the Final Score number in the cell highlighted in orange in the spreadsheet. Evaluator Comments: HIGHLY EFFECTIVE (4) EFFECTIVE (3) DEVELOPING (2) UNSATISFACTORY (1) Overall Final Score of 3.5 4.0 Overall Final Score of 2.5 3.4 Overall Final Score of 1.5 2.4 Overall Final Score of 1.0 1.4

4. Signatures Evaluator: I certify that the before named teacher has been evaluated around his or her instructional practice. Evaluator s Signature: Date: Evaluator Comments: Teacher: I acknowledge the receipt of this Annual Evaluation Form. Teacher s Signature: Date: Teacher Comments: Superintendent Superintendent s Signature: Date: Superintendent Comments: