33.96 Feels Like 31.24
Snow
Sunrise 7:16 am
Sunset 7:48 pm

EDUCATOR EVALUATION 2190

1. PURPOSE:
The purpose of the formal educator evaluation system of the Sevier School District (referred to as District in this policy) is to insure that the best possible instruction and learning are accomplished and to provide feedback to the educator in order to promote professional growth in conjunction with the educator's plan for professional development. The evaluation process is also intended to establish behaviors that contribute to student progress.

2. POLICY:
The Sevier School District Board of Education understands the importance of guaranteeing that every child has an effective educator. Research shows that educator quality affects student achievement greater than any other school based variable. It is the policy of the Sevier School District to focus on preparing, recruiting, and retaining quality educators as primary strategies to boost academic achievement. By linking educator evaluation with academic standards for students and professional standards for educators, the District intends to transform educator evaluation into a more effective tool for improving instructional practice and raising student achievement.

3. PROCEDURE FOR EDUCATOR EVALUATION:
3.1 References/Definitions:
3.1.1 “Administrator/Principal” means an individual in a position that requires an educator license with an administrator area of concentration or a letter of authorization and who supervises school administrators or teachers. Administrators will be evaluated according to this policy.
3.1.2 "Career Educators" has the meaning given that term in UCA 53G-11-503. http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE53A/htm/53A08a020100.htm

3.1.3 "Designee" as it pertains to a principal's designee in this specific policy, is a district or school administrator holding an active administrative endorsement or pursuing such endorsement. Designee also applies to a Lead Teacher in very small schools situations. This designation is not applicable to the Superintendent's designee.

3.1.4 "Educator" means an individual licensed under Utah Code Section 53E-6-201 who, as a condition of licensure, is required to comply with the standards and requirements of Utah Administrative Rule R277-530 and R277-531. For the purpose of this policy an educator does not include individuals who work less than three hours per day or who are hired for less than half of a school year or Superintendent and Business Administrator.

3.1.5 “Effectiveness Standards” means the Utah Effective Teaching and Educational Leadership Standards found in Utah Administrative Code R277-530 located on-line at: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r277/r277-530.htm

3.1.6 “Formative Evaluation” means formal evaluations that take place yearly and provide Educators with feedback on how to improve their performance. The Administrator conducting a Formative Evaluation may review applicable and available Educator Evaluation Multiple Lines of Evidence to include, but not limited to observations, evidence, Educator effectiveness, stakeholder input, student growth and information obtained from at least two Walk-through Evaluations. This information may be used to “re-validate” the most recent Summative Evaluation or as a basis to conduct a formal Summative Evaluation. Formative Educator Evaluation is based on the Effectiveness Standards.
3.1.7 "EYE" has the meaning given that term in Utah Administrative Rules: R277-522. Entry Years Enhancements (EYE) for Quality Teaching - Level 1 Utah Educators. http://www.usoe.k12.ut.us/cert/other/EYE.htm
3.1.8 “Joint Educator Evaluation Committee” has the meaning given that term by UCA 53G-11-506, and shall consist of four classroom teachers, four parents, and four administrators appointed by the Sevier School District Board of Education. Membership in the committee is temporary. The term of membership is four years unless otherwise extended or discontinued by the Board.

3.1.9 "Misconduct" means conduct that is designated as a cause for termination or disciplinary action under Section 53G-11-512, a violation of District Policy or a reason for license discipline by the State Board of Education or as a basis for action recommended by the Utah Professional Practices Advisory Commission. Misconduct also includes, but is not limited to, a violation of work rules; a violation of Board policies, State Board of Education rules, directives issued by an administrator or supervisor, or law; a violation of standards of ethical, moral, or professional conduct; or insubordination.

3.1.10 “Probationary Educator” means an Educator employed by the District who has been advised by the District that the Educator’s performance is inadequate and is placed on a Plan of Assistance. The term may also include an Educator who is placed on “Formal Probation” for Misconduct. Educators placed on Formal Probation for Misconduct are not granted additional entitlements, rights, opportunities, or benefits as a condition of this policy.
3.1.11 "Provisional Educator" has the meaning given that term in UCA § 53G-11-503. Specifically, a provisional employee must work for the Sevier School District on at least a half-time basis for three consecutive years to obtain career employee status. The District may extend the provisional status of an employee up to an additional two consecutive years as specified in this policy.
3.1.12 “Summative Evaluation” means an evaluation conducted at a minimum of once every three years and is used to make annual decisions or ratings of Educator performance and may inform decisions on salary, continued employment, personnel assignments, transfers, or dismissals. The Summative Evaluation will be used to help maintain effectiveness in teaching.
3.1.13 "Temporary Educators” has the meaning given that term in District Policy 2225. While temporary educators will be evaluated annually, temporary Educators serve at the will of the District and may be terminated at any time at the sole discretion of the District regardless of evaluation outcome. Compliance or failure to comply with this policy will not provide an expectation of continued employment or provide additional rights for at-will or temporary Educators.
3.1.14 “Unsatisfactory performance” means a deficiency in performing work tasks which may be due to insufficient or undeveloped skills, lack of knowledge or aptitude, poor attitude, or insufficient effort; and remediated
through training, study, mentoring, practice, or greater effort. Unsatisfactory performance does not include Misconduct.
3.2 Utah Code governing Educator Evaluations is contained in Utah Code 53G-11-501.5 et seq.

4. Educator Evaluation Training and Notification
4.1 The District will explain the evaluation process and provide training and implementation guidance to principals, require state evaluator certification and provide follow-up training as needed. District leadership will monitor and enforce compliance and intervene as necessary.
4.2 Principals will notify Educators of the evaluation process, provide a copy of the instrument, and explain the purpose of, procedure, and the methods used to evaluate Educators at least 15 days before an Educator's first evaluation. Evaluations may not occur prior to the orientation. No notification is required after the first evaluation.
4.3 All Educators, to include Career Educators, shall complete a self-assessment and develop professional growth goals using the Effectiveness Standards no later than 15 days following the initial explanation of the evaluation process.

5. Provisional Educator Evaluation and Mentor Assistance
5.1 The principal of a provisional Educator shall assign a mentor teacher to work with the provisional Educator. The mentor shall assist the provisional Educator to become effective and competent in the teaching profession and school system. The mentor teacher shall not serve as an evaluator of the provisional Educator. While the mentor teacher shall provide reasonable guidance and direction, based on observation and knowledge, it shall be the ultimate responsibility of the provisional Educator to seek advice and assistance as necessary from the mentor teacher.

5.2 Provisional Educators will receive a Summative Evaluation using the District Educator Evaluation Instrument at least twice each year. The first of two evaluations shall occur prior to November 30th and the second shall occur prior to March 1st. Administrators shall share and discuss summative ratings with provisional educators within 15 days of the observation.

5.3 The second lowest level of four levels of performance for Provisional Educators shall be designated as “emerging effective.” If a Provisional Educator receives a rating of emerging effective, it shall not result in a withholding of the most recent legislative allocated salary adjustment.
6. Career Educator Evaluation:
6.1 Career Educators shall participate in and receive a Summative Evaluation at least once every three years. A Career Educator may be subject to additional Summative Evaluations at any time based on information obtained during the Formative Evaluation process, if any of the Lines of Evidence suggests a need for a Summative Evaluation, or if the Educator’s Administrator has reason to believe it would be helpful.
6.2 All Career Educators shall participate in at least one annual Formative Evaluation.
7. Educator Evaluation Process
7.1 The District’s Evaluation Instrument shall be based on the Utah Effectiveness Standards:
7.2 Educator Evaluation Multiple Lines of Evidence:

7.2.1 Self Evaluation: Each Educator shall engage in a self-assessment and develop a professional growth plan using the Effectiveness Standards no later than 15 days following the principal’s group meeting to explain the purpose of and the methods used to evaluate Educators. Educators shall use the District on-line tool to conduct their self-assessment and document their professional growth plan.
7.2.2 Instruction: The District will measure effective, consistent, and meaningful educator practices using the principles and guidelines outlined in the Effectiveness Standards. This is primarily accomplished and documented using the District Evaluation Instrument through a reasonable number of observations and other indicators of instructional knowledge, skill, and ability.
7.2.3 Student Achievement: The District will measure student growth using assessment data as required by Administrative Rule and State Code.
7.2.4 Parent and Student Input: Parents and students will be given the opportunity to provide input using available tools and web-based surveys. Data will be recorded and measured for both elementary and secondary schools to provide feedback on school climate and educator effectiveness. For administrative evaluations, employee input also.
7.2.5 Random Evaluation: (Walk-through Evaluation) At any time the principal or designee may randomly and informally evaluate an Educator and record observations using the applicable Effectiveness Standards and evaluation instruments.

7.2.6 Reliability and consistency: a reasonable number of supervisor observations to ensure adequate reliability and consistent with Utah Admin. Rules R277-533-4;

7.3 Additional Evaluation Evidence:
7.3.1 Documented Evidence
7.3.2 Completed Professional Growth: evidence of professional growth and other indicators of instructional improvement based on educator professional standards established by the State Board of Education;
7.3.2 Student or parent written praise or concerns
7.3.3 Peer feedback or written praise or concerns

7.3.4 PLC participation

7.4 Summative Evaluation
7.4.1 Differentiated Levels of Performance:
7.4.1.1 Highly Effective
7.4.1.2 Effective
7.4.1.3 Third level based on license level
7.4.1.4 Emerging Effective –provisional or in the first year of a new subject, grade level or school assignment.
7.4.1.5 Minimally Effective – Career Educators
7.4.1.6 Not Effective
7.5 Components: Educators shall receive a Summative Evaluation score based on evidence of the following three components;
7.5.1 Educational Effectiveness,
7.5.2 Stakeholder Input, and
7.5.3 Student Academic Growth
7.6 Each component will be measured by one or more of the Multiple Lines of Evidence. The Summative Evaluation system shall align with the above four differentiated levels of performance:
7.7 The administrator responsible for an Educator's Summative Evaluation shall allow the Educator to make a written response and gather evidence to part of the Summative Evaluation and attach the Educator's response and evidence to the evaluation.
7.8 Within 15 calendar days after the Summative Evaluation process is completed, the administrator shall discuss the written evaluation and evidence provided with the Educator and any revision of the written evaluation made after the discussion.

7.9 Administrators shall share and discuss summative ratings with career educators by April 30th of each year. The evaluating administrator may conduct further Formative or Summative Evaluations throughout the school year and may hold a teacher conference, develop a performance improvement plan, a Plan of Assistance, or adjust the Summative Evaluation rating as needed.

7.10 Summative Rating Review:

7.10.1 A career educator who is not satisfied with a Summative Evaluation rating may request a review of the evaluation within 15 days after receiving the written evaluation.
7.10.2 If a review is requested, the Superintendent or the Superintendent's Designee shall appoint a person not employed by the District who has expertise in teacher or personnel evaluation to review the evaluation procedures and make recommendations to the superintendent regarding the Educator's Summative Evaluation in accordance with USOE guidelines.

8. Wage Increase and Legislative Supplemental Salary Adjustments
8.1. Teachers shall be transitioned to the Educator Effectiveness Salary Schedule consistent with state implementation timelines of the statewide evaluation process.
A career educator that receives an average rating of 1.9 or less on their summative evaluation will be considered less than satisfactory. A provisional educator that receives an average rating of 0.9 or less on their summative evaluation will be considered less that satisfactory. Such educators will be subject to being placed on probation and to withholding the most recent legislative allocated salary adjustment pursuant to UCA § 53F-2-405(4) c, and Administrative Rule R277-110.
8.1.2 The following events will subject the Educator to an interim withholding of the most recent legislative allocated salary adjustment until completion of the identified requirements regardless of evaluation results.
8.1.3 Failure to complete EYE, Alternative Route to Licensure, or other licensing requirements within USOE or District authorized time limits until such requirements are completed. Teacher salary adjustments will resume the month following satisfactory completion of omitted requirements.
8.1.4 Placement on Probation will result in a withholding of the most recent legislative allocated salary adjustment for a
period of one year (12 months) commencing at the beginning of the next contract year following the issue date of the formal notice, regardless of evaluation results.
8.1.5 Principals will recommend career teacher status to District Administration for all new teachers after three years except for those that have documented concerns associated with the evaluation process resulting in an overall score below 2 before rounding or a 1 or below before rounding in any of the areas. It must be noted that State statue allows an additional 2 year extension as a provisional teacher.

9. Educator Deficiencies:
9.1. Notice of Improvement:
9.1.1. The administrator may give an Educator whose performance is inadequate or in need of improvement (minimally or not effective as defined in paragraph 7.4.1.5) a written document clearly identifying:
9.1.2. Specific and actionable deficiencies;
9.1.3. the available resources that will be provided for improvement; and
9.1.4. a recommended course of action that will improve the Educator's performance.

9.2. The Educator is responsible for improving performance, including using any resources identified by the District, and demonstrating acceptable levels of improvement in the designated areas of deficiencies.
9.3. An administrator is not required to remediate an Educator, if the Educator's unsatisfactory performance was documented for the same deficiency within the previous three years and a plan of assistance was implemented.
Utah Code § 53G-11-517(2018)
Utah Admin. Rules R277-533-3(2)(i), (4) (January 10, 2017)

10. Improvement Measures:

10.1. If the District intends to not renew a career employee's contract for unsatisfactory performance or terminate a career employee's contract during the contract term for unsatisfactory performance, the District:
10.1.1. shall provide and discuss with the career employee written documentation clearly identifying the deficiencies in performance;
10.1.2. shall provide written notice that the career employee's contract is subject to non-renewal or termination if, upon a reevaluation of the career employee's performance, the career employee's performance is determined to be unsatisfactory;
10.1.3. may recommend improvement measures in an attempt to allow the career employee an opportunity to improve performance;
10.1.4. may re-evaluate the career employee's performance; and
10.1.5. if the career employee's performance remains unsatisfactory, give notice of intent to not renew or terminate the career employee's contract.

11. The period of time for implementing Improvement measures:
11.1. may not exceed 120 school days, except as provided in this policy;
11.2. may continue into the next school year;
11.3. should be sufficient to successfully complete the improvement procedures; and
11.4. shall begin when the career employee receives the improvement measures and end when the determination is made that the career employee has successfully remediated the deficiency.
11.5. An administrator may extend the period of time for implementing the improvement measures beyond 120 school days if:
11.5.1. a career employee has been approved and qualifies for leave under the Family Medical Leave Act during the time period of the improvement measures are scheduled to be implemented; or
11.5.2. For other compelling reasons as approved by the Board if the leave was scheduled before the employee was given the improvement measures.

12. If upon a reevaluation of the career employee’s performance, the District determines the career employee’s performance is satisfactory, and within a three-year period after the initial documentation of unsatisfactory performance for the same deficiency, the career employee’s performance is determined to be unsatisfactory, the District may elect to not renew or terminate the career employee’s contract without implementing new Improvement Measures.

13. If the District intends to not renew or terminate a career employee’s contract for performance under this section, the District will provide written documentation of the career employee’s deficiencies in performance through the evaluation tool; and give notice of intent to not renew or terminate the career employee’s contract.

14. Nothing in this Policy shall prevent the District from taking appropriate disciplinary action for Misconduct defined in this Policy, the Utah Code, Utah Administrative Rule, or District Policy #2225.
Approved: 04/20/16
Revised: 06/21/17
Revised: 03/14/18
Revised 03/13/19