Focused Evaluations Sample Clauses

Focused Evaluations. Classroom teachers with a continuing contract and whose summative evaluation score the previous year was at least proficient will be on a focused evaluation unless the evaluator provides written rationale for remaining on the comprehensive evaluation, or the teacher received a basic or unsatisfactory summative final evaluation in the prior year. The summative score becomes the focused summative evaluation score for any of the subsequent years following the comprehensive evaluation in which the certificated classroom teacher is placed on a focused evaluation. Should a teacher provide evidence of exemplary practice on the chosen focused criteria, a level 4 (Distinguished) score may be awarded by the evaluator. Classroom teachers scheduled to be on a Focused Evaluation may choose to be on comprehensive evaluation if they notify their evaluator by November 30.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (5)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Focused Evaluations. In the years when a comprehensive summative evaluation is not 8 required, classroom teachers who received a comprehensive summative evaluation performance 9 rating of Proficient (level 3) or above in the previous school year are required to complete a 10 focused evaluation. A focused evaluation includes an assessment of one of the eight criteria 11 selected for a performance rating plus professional growth activities specifically linked to the 12 selected criterion. The selected criterion must be approved by the teacher’s evaluator and may 13 have been identified in a previous comprehensive summative evaluation as benefiting from 14 additional attention. A group of teachers may focus on the same evaluation criterion and share 15 professional growth activities. 16 17 Teachers on focused evaluations shall have the option of selecting which one of the eight criteria 18 will be assessed, plus the professional growth activities linked to that criterion. The role of the 19 evaluator shall be to either approve the proposed activities or suggest modifications to produce a 20 jointly agreed upon activity or activities. Employees will complete the TSD Focused Evaluation 21 Professional Goal Plan (Form I) 22 23 If the employee chooses criterion 1, 2, 4, 5, or 7, he/she must also complete the student 24 growth components in either criterion 3 or 6. 25 26 If the selected criterion for the focused evaluation has been determined to be non- 27 observable, a classroom-based observation will not be required. The selected student 28 growth component will be documented on the student growth goal setting template 29 (Form G). 30 31 A teacher may be transferred from a focused evaluation to a comprehensive summative 32 evaluation at the request of the teacher or at the direction of the teacher’s evaluator. Such 33 change must be initiated prior to December 15 and provided to the employee in writing. 34 36 Each employee shall have the opportunity for confidential conferences with his or her immediate 37 supervisor on no fewer than two occasions in each school year. Such confidential conferences 38 shall be for the purpose of aiding the administrator in his or her assessment of the employee’s 39 professional performance and to provide additional evidence by either the evaluator or teacher to 40 aid in this assessment against the instructional framework rubrics and/or for the teacher to 41 provide unobserved evidence of having met certain criteria and goals. The annual evaluation 4...
Sample 1Sample 2See All (5)
Focused Evaluations. In the years when a comprehensive summative evaluation is not required, classroom teachers who received a comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating of Proficient (level 3) or above in the previous school year are required to complete a focused evaluation as prescribed by law. A focused evaluation includes an assessment of one of the eight criteria selected for a performance rating plus professional growth activities specifically linked to the selected criteria. Teachers on focused evaluations shall have the option of selecting which one (1) of the eight (8) criteria will be assessed, plus the professional growth activities linked to that criterion. The role of the evaluator shall be to either approve the proposed activities or suggest modifications to produce a jointly agreed upon activity or activities. (see WAC 392-191A- 120) The selected criterion, however, must be approved by the teacher’s evaluator and may have been identified in a previous comprehensive summative evaluation as benefiting from additional attention. A group of teachers may focus on the same evaluation criterion and share professional growth activities. If the employee chooses criterion 1, 2, 4, 5, or 0, x/he must also complete the student growth components in either criterion 3 or criterion 6. Teachers shall have the option of being evaluated as a member of a team or as an individual. The evaluator must assign a summative evaluation performance rating for the focused evaluation using the methodology adopted by the Superintendent of Public Instruction for the instructional framework being used. A teacher may be transferred from a focused evaluation to a comprehensive summative evaluation at the request of the teacher or at the direction of the teacher’s evaluator. The request of the teacher must be received in writing by the Superintendent’s office no later than August 1. The direction of the evaluator must be communicated during the prior year’s final evaluation conference based on concerns related to one of the other evaluative criteria. That concern and that direction shall be shared with the teacher in writing at that time.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (5)
Focused Evaluations. The separate components of the demonstration that must be evaluated include, but are not limited to, the following:
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (4)
Focused Evaluations. A. In the years when a comprehensive summative evaluation is not required, classroom teachers who received a comprehensive summative evaluation performance rating of Proficient (level 3) or above in the previous school year are required to complete a focused evaluation. A focused evaluation includes an assessment of one of the eight criteria selected for a performance rating plus professional growth activities specifically linked to the selected criteria.
Sample 1

Related to Focused Evaluations

  • Annual Evaluations The purpose of the annual evaluation is to assess and communicate the nature and extent of an employee's performance of assigned duties consistent with the criteria specified below in this Policy. Except for those employees who have received notice of non-reappointment pursuant to the BOT- UFF Policy on Non- reappointment, every employee shall be evaluated at least once annually. Personnel decisions shall take such annual evaluations into account, provided that such decisions need not be based solely on written faculty performance evaluations.

  • JOC EVALUATION If any materials being utilized for a project cannot be found in the RS Means Price Book, this question is what is the markup percentage on those materials? When answering this question please insert the number that represents your percentage of proposed markup. Example: if you are proposing a 30 percent markup, please insert the number "30". Remember that this is a ceiling markup. You may markup a lesser percentage to the TIPS Member customer when pricing the project, but not a greater percentage. EXAMPLE: You need special materials that are not in the RS Means Unit Price Book for a project. You would buy the materials and xxxx them up to the TIPS Member customer by the percentage you propose in this question. If the materials cost you, the contractor, $100 and you proposed a markup on this question for the material of 30 percent, then you would charge the TIPS Member customer $130 for the materials. No response TIPS/ESC Region 8 is required by Texas Government Code § 791 to be compensated for its work and thus, failure to agree shall render your response void and it will not be considered. Yes - No Vendor agrees to remit to TIPS the required administration fee or, if resellers are named, guarantee the fee remittance by or for the reseller named by the vendor?

  • BID EVALUATION The Commissioner reserves the right to accept or reject any and all Bids, or separable portions of Bids, and waive technicalities, irregularities, and omissions if the Commissioner determines the best interests of the State will be served. The Commissioner, in his/her sole discretion, may accept or reject illegible, incomplete or vague Bids and his/her decision shall be final. A conditional or revocable Bid which clearly communicates the terms or limitations of acceptance may be considered, and Contract award may be made in compliance with the Bidder’s conditional or revocable terms in the Bid.

  • Self-Evaluation Each regular faculty member shall provide a self-evaluation. It shall address, among other items, the faculty member's fulfillment of professional responsibilities as referenced in Section 18.2.3 and an assessment of his or her own performance. The faculty member will share the self-evaluation with the Faculty Evaluation Committee and the first-level manager or designee. The self-evaluation will become part of the evaluation report.

  • EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS 3. Any matter for which there is recourse under State or Federal statutes.

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • JOB EVALUATION The work of the provincial job evaluation steering committee (the JE Committee) will continue during the term of this Framework Agreement. The objectives of the JE Committee are as follows: • Review the results of the phase one and phase two pilots and outcomes of the committee work. Address any anomalies identified with the JE tool, process, or benchmarks. • Rate the provincial benchmarks and create a job hierarchy for the provincial benchmarks. • Gather data from all school districts and match existing job descriptions to the provincial benchmarks. • Identify the job hierarchy for local job descriptions for all school districts. • Compare the local job hierarchy to the benchmark-matched hierarchy. • Develop a methodology to convert points to pay bands - The confirmed method must be supported by current compensation best practices. • Identify training requirements to support implementation of the JE plan and develop training resources as required. Once the objectives outlined above are completed, the JE Committee will mutually determine whether a local, regional or provincial approach to the steps outlined above is appropriate. It is recognized that the work of the committee is technical, complicated, lengthy and onerous. To accomplish the objectives, the parties agree that existing JE funds can be accessed by the JE committee to engage consultant(s) to complete this work. It is further recognized that this process does not impact the established management right of employers to determine local job requirements and job descriptions nor does this process alter any existing collective agreement rights or established practices. When the JE plan is ready to be implemented, and if an amendment to an existing collective agreement is required, the JE Committee will work with the local School District and Local Union to make recommendations for implementation. Any recommendations will also be provided to the Provincial Labour Management Committee (PLMC). As mutually agreed by the provincial parties and the JE Committee, the disbursement of available JE funds shall be retroactive to January 2, 2020. The committee will utilize available funds to provide 50% of the wage differential for the position falling the furthest below the wage rate established by the provincial JE process and will continue this process until all JE fund monies at the time have been disbursed. The committee will follow compensation best practices to avoid problems such as inversion. The committee will report out to the provincial parties regularly during the term of the Framework Agreement. Should any concerns arise during the work of the committee they will be referred to the PLMC. Create a maintenance program to support ongoing implementation of the JE plan at a local, regional or provincial level. The maintenance program will include a process for addressing the wage rates of incumbents in positions which are impacted by implementation of the JE plan. The provincial parties confirm that $4,419,859 of ongoing annual funds will be used to implement the Job Evaluation Plan. Effective July 1, 2022, there will be a one-time pause of the annual $4,419,859 JE funding. This amount has been allocated to the local table bargaining money. The annual funding will recommence July 1, 2023.

  • TEACHER EVALUATION A. All monitoring or observation of the work performance of a teacher shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the teacher.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. The Choate Team will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Performance Evaluations 34.1. The Contractor is subject to an annual performance evaluation to be conducted by NYCDOT pursuant to the PPB Rules.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.