Student Growth Impact Rating Sample Clauses

Student Growth Impact Rating. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (11)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Student Growth Impact Rating. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. Evaluators add up the raw score on these components and the teacher is given a score of low, average, or high based on the scores below: Upon completion of the overall summative scoring process, the evaluator will combine only the student growth rubric scores to assess the classroom teacher’s student growth impact rating. The following scoring band will be used to determine the student growth impact rating. 5-12 13-17 18-20 Low Average High
Sample 1See All (4)
Student Growth Impact Rating. Embedded in the State Criteria are five (5) student growth requirements. These requirements are SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. Employees will be placed into summative rating categories based on the OSPI approved student growth impact scoring bands shown below. An employee who receives a 4, Distinguished, preliminary summative score and a Low student growth impact rating score will receive an overall 3, Proficient rating. OSPI Approved Student Growth Impact Rating Scoring Band 5-12 13-17 18-20 Low Average High
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Student Growth Impact Rating. TEACHERS Upon completion of the summative criteria scoring process, the evaluator will combine only the student growth rubric scores that are embedded in the instructional framework. These five (5) components are SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. The raw score is the sum of these components, which determines the student growth impact rating as follows: 5-12 Low 13-17 Average 18-20 High An unsatisfactory rating on any SG component shall result in a student growth inquiry.
Sample 1Sample 2
Student Growth Impact Rating. The sum of all five student growth components from 30 student growth criteria 3, 6, and 8, used in the Comprehensive evaluation. 31
Sample 1
Student Growth Impact Rating. Embedded in the instructional framework are five (5) components designated as student growth components. These components are embedded in criteria as SG 3.1, SG 3.2, SG 6.1, SG 6.2, and SG 8.1. Employees will be placed into summative rating categories based on the OSPI approved student growth impact scoring bands shown below. An employee who receives a 4, Distinguished, preliminary summative score and a Low student growth impact rating score will receive an overall 3, Proficient rating. If an employee receives a Low student growth score, the employee and evaluator will mutually select and engage in one of the student growth inquiries required by law. OSPI Approved Student Growth Impact Rating Scoring Band 5-12 13-17 18-20 Low Average High
Sample 1
Student Growth Impact Rating. A. Upon completing the overall summative scoring process, the evaluator will combine only the student growth rubric scores to assess the student growth impact rating.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Student Growth Impact Rating

  • Moody’s Xxxxx’x Investors Service, Inc. and its successors.

  • Performance Rating Describes the Educator’s performance on each performance standard and overall. There shall be four performance ratings:  Exemplary: the Educator’s performance consistently and significantly exceeds the requirements of a standard or overall. The rating of exemplary on a standard indicates that practice significantly exceeds proficient and could serve as a model of practice on that standard district-wide.  Proficient: the Educator’s performance fully and consistently meets the requirements of a standard or overall. Proficient practice is understood to be fully satisfactory.

  • Rating Impact on Student Learning Growth ESE will provide model contract language and guidance on rating educator impact on student learning growth based on state and district-determined measures of student learning. Upon receiving this model contract language and guidance, the parties agree to bargain with respect to this matter.

  • Industry Ratings The City will only accept coverage from an insurance carrier who offers proof that it:

  • Rating The Notes can be issued without the requirement that they have any rating from a nationally recognized statistical rating organization.

  • Ratings No “nationally recognized statistical rating organization” as such term is defined for purposes of Rule 436(g)(2) (i) has imposed (or has informed the Company that it is considering imposing) any condition (financial or otherwise) on the Company’s retaining any rating assigned to the Company or any securities of the Company or (ii) has indicated to the Company that it is considering any of the actions described in Section 7(c)(ii) hereof.

  • Insurance Carrier Required Rating All insurance companies must carry a rating acceptable to the Office of Risk and Insurance Management. If the Contractor is self-insured for a portion or all of its insurance, review of financial information including a letter of credit may be required.

  • Evaluation Rating The final summative evaluation level that is assigned to a teacher based on the holistic review of all Evaluation Factors, observed during the Evaluation Cycle. The rating shall be “accomplished”, “skilled”, “developing”, or “ineffective”. The final rating shall not be weighted in such a way that one (1) domain or component of the evaluation system has a higher importance than another, except that any area marked N/A shall not negatively impact the evaluation rating.

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