Assessment of Performance. The assignment of a teacher to a TLS position will be subject to review by the school district’s administration at least annually. The first review must be completed no later than five (5) work days before the beginning of the transfer process. The review shall include peer feedback on the effectiveness of the teacher’s performance of duty specific to the teacher’s TLS position. A teacher who completes an assignment in a TLS position may apply for assignment to a new TLS position.
Assessment of Performance. 23.9.1 The performance of a Sessional Appointee shall be assessed in the first instance with a student ratings form authorized for general use within the Faculty or department. The results of these ratings, along with any peer evaluations and other materials pertinent to the Sessional Appointee’s performance of teaching or other duties, including materials submitted by the Sessional Appointee, shall be provided to the Sessional Appointee and Department Head or equivalent and retained in the department, following as closely as possible the practice for ongoing academic staff in the unit.
Assessment of Performance. Leeds City College has traditionally been very strong regarding widening participation and aims to continue offering flexible delivery and appropriate support to give students from all backgrounds and circumstances the opportunity to succeed at HE level.
Assessment of Performance. A. An annual assessment of performance shall be the means by which the Assistant to the Superintendent for Operations shall evaluate the performance of the Supervisor of Buildings, Grounds, and Transportation. Such assessment of performance shall be conducted as described below in each year of this agreement and a score will be given. The annual assessment of performance shall comply with the Public School Code and Regulations implementing the School Code, if applicable to this agreement. Review of the performance assessment shall be conducted in a private session. All parties agree that the performance assessment made shall be privileged and that the Board Members, Assistant to the Superintendent for Operations and Superintendent shall respect the confidentiality of the discussions, except to the extent as may be required by law. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the School District from using such evaluation in a hearing properly brought under the Public School Code. The parties agree that the Employees’ employment with the District is subject to the Public School Code, as amended, and in effect from time to time.
Assessment of Performance. 6.1 At any time during the term of this Agreement, the Government may conduct at any intervals reviews :-
Assessment of Performance. A. An annual assessment of performance shall be the means by which the Director of Technology shall evaluate the performance of the Systems Administrator. Such assessment of performance shall be conducted as described below in each year of this agreement and a score will be given. The annual assessment of performance shall comply with the Public School Code and Regulations implementing the School Code, if applicable to this agreement. Review of the performance assessment shall be conducted in a private session. All parties agree that the performance assessment made shall be privileged and that the Board Members, Director of Technology and Superintendent shall respect the confidentiality of the discussions, except to the extent as may be required by law. Nothing contained herein shall prevent the School District from using such evaluation in a hearing properly brought under the Public School Code. The parties agree that the Employees’ employment with the District is subject to the Public School Code, as amended, and in effect from time to time.
Assessment of Performance. Traditionally UCLan has an extremely strong track record of access for under-represented groups. HESA Performance Indicators are used as the main measure and the most recent release (for 2012/13 data) reflects that we met or exceeded our targets, with 19.1% of young full-time first degree students coming from low participation neighbourhoods (target 15% - POLAR 2 methodology) and 43% of young full-time first degree students being drawn from lower socio economic groups (target 39%). We have a strong story to tell and the data represents an improvement on the previous year’s data, but we are mindful that there could be threats to our continued success in this area. We have therefore made a strategic decision to introduce a foundation entry year option for all our undergraduate courses offered on campus. These are heavily discounted to allow for access to higher education by students with non-traditional qualifications within which students from low participation neighbourhoods form a high proportion. We have made a strategic decision to continue with our policy of maintaining the increased entry requirements for full time undergraduate courses. However, we have introduced the significantly expanded alternative entry route to ensure that this policy will not have a negative impact on students with ‘non-standard’ qualifications who have the potential to benefit from higher education. We currently monitor this using the HESA performance indicators noted above, but if this data begins to indicate a downturn in enrolments of students from these under-represented groups, we will look to extend our monitoring to cover applications. Retention is an area of challenge for us, but we are on track with our plans to address this and the latest HESA Performance Indicator release projected that 77.4% of our students would obtain a degree, against a milestone of 69%. Over recent years we have been working to understand the nature and extent of any differential impacts on under-represented groups and have developed a series of internal data reports to examine this at both school and university levels. We are now developing a series of initiatives to ensure that students from all backgrounds are effectively supported to be able to complete their programme of study with us. This will be rigorously monitored through the College structure and investment in enhanced data collection and reporting systems. We are not only concerned to ensure that our students complete their courses...
Assessment of Performance. A. The Board shall evaluate, in writing, the performance of District Superintendent at least once a year during the term of this Agreement, no later than July 1st of each year (beginning July 1, 2021), unless the parties mutually agree in writing on another date for the annual evaluation. An evaluation instrument and method mutually agreed upon in writing by the Board and the District Superintendent shall be utilized for the annual performance assessment. In the event the Board consensus determines that the performance of District Superintendent is unsatisfactory in any respect, it shall describe in writing, in reasonable detail, the specific instances of unsatisfactory performance. A copy of the written evaluation shall be delivered to the District Superintendent. The District Superintendent shall have the right to make a written response to the evaluation. The Board’s evaluations and District Superintendent’s response(s) shall be totally private and in no manner become public knowledge or conversation, except as otherwise expressly required by state or federal law. The District Superintendent’s performance shall be deemed satisfactory and the District Superintendent shall not be subject to discipline, discharge or termination on the basis of neglect of duty or incompetency in any year when a formal performance assessment is not completed in accordance with this Agreement.
Assessment of Performance. A. The Board shall evaluate, in writing, the performance of District Superintendent at least once a year during the term of this contract, no later than June 30th of each year, unless the parties mutually agree in writing on another date for the annual evaluation. An evaluation instrument and method mutually agreed upon in writing by the Board and the District Superintendent shall be utilized for the annual performance assessment. In the absence of such agreed upon evaluation instrument and method, the evaluation instrument and method attached as Appendix C to this Agreement shall be used for the annual performance assessment; provided,however, that any assessment system selected shall require the Board of School Directors to speak in one voice by voting as an entire Board rather than "averaging" the feedback of each member regarding each aspect of the evaluation. In the event the Board consensus determines that the performance of the District Superintendent is unsatisfactory in any respect, it shall describe in writing, in reasonable detail, the specific instances of unsatisfactory performance. A copy of the written evaluation shall be delivered to the District Superintendent. The District Superintendent shall have the right to make a written response to the evaluation. The Board's evaluations and the District Superintendent's response(s) shall be totally private and in no manner become knowledge or conversation, except as otherwise expressly required by state and federal law. The District Superintendent's performance shall be deemed satisfactory, and the District Superintendent shall not be subject to discipline, discharge or termination on the basis of neglect of duty or incompetency in any year when a formal performance assessment is not completed in accordance with this Agreement.
Assessment of Performance. A. The Board shall evaluate, in writing, the performance of Superintendent at least once a year during the term of this Contract, no later than June 30th of each year, unless the parties mutually agree in writing on another date for the annual evaluation. The annual performance assessment shall be conducted in an executive session limited to members of the Board of School Directors and the Superintendent. An evaluation instrument and method mutually agreed upon in writing by the Board and the Superintendent shall be utilized for the annual performance assessment. In the absence of such agreed-upon evaluation method, the evaluation method attached as Appendix B to this Contract shall be used for the annual performance assessment. The annual performance assessment shall be based upon the performance of all duties and responsibilities of Xx. Xxxxx as Superintendent as set forth in the Superintendent’s job description (Appendix A hereto), relevant Board policies as now or hereafter adopted, and the objective performance standards, attached hereto as Appendix C and incorporated herein by reference. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, any evaluation instrument and method selected shall not average the feedback of each Board member regarding each aspect of the evaluation, but rather, each Board member may perform his/her independent evaluation and cast his/her vote. The Board shall then speak in one voice based upon the Board’s consensus. In the event the Board consensus determines that the performance of the Superintendent is unsatisfactory in any respect, it shall describe in writing, in reasonable detail, the specific instances of unsatisfactory performance. A copy of the written evaluation shall be delivered to the Superintendent. The Superintendent shall have the right to make a written response to the evaluation. The Board’s evaluations and the Superintendent’s response(s) shall be totally private and in no manner become public knowledge either through written or verbal communication, except as otherwise expressly required by state or federal law. The Superintendent’s performance shall be deemed satisfactory and the Superintendent shall not be subject to discipline, discharge or termination on the basis of neglect of duty or incompetency in any year when a formal performance assessment is not completed in accordance with this Contract.
