Rock Island-Milan
School District 41
Educator Evaluation Plan
Including Student Growth
***In this Educator Plan, EGP refers to the plan reflective of your Professional Practice areas
of opportunity, which directly relate to the 4 domains of the FFT.
Developed 2011-2012
Revised July 2013, July 2014, & July 2015
Revised July 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: Introduction & Overview ....................................................................................................... 3
Section 2: Evaluation Plan Beliefs & Commitments and Common Themes.......................................... 5
Section 3: Standards for Teachers and Specialists............................................................................... 7
Section 4: Professional Practice Levels of Performance....................................................................... 8
Section 5: Educator Evaluation Plan Summative Rating System.......................................................... 9
Section 6: Roles of Educators, Mentors, & Facilitators in the Evaluation Plan.................................... 14
Section 7: Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................. 15
Section 8: Additional Information for Specific Groups of Teachers ..................................................... 18
Section 9: Overview of the Educator Evaluation Plan ......................................................................... 21
Section 10: Non-Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan Process Chart ................................................... 23
Section 11: Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan—Proficient or Excellent Process Charts ................... 25
Section 12: Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan—Needs Improvement Process Chart ....................... 31
Section 13: Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan—Unsatisfactory Process Chart................................. 32
APPENDIX
Tenured Educator Growth Plan (EGP) Introduction ............................................................................ 34
Guiding Questions—Relevant to Talk About Teaching (Chapter 3) .................................................... 35
Guide Sheet for Developing Educator Growth Plan (EGP) Sample .................................................... 36
Educator Guide for Filling Out EGP .................................................................................................... 37
Educator Guide for Filling Out the Student Learning Objective (SLO) Portion of EGP ....................... 38
Educator Growth Plan (EGP) Form..................................................................................................... 40
Student Learning Objective Form (Student Growth Goal)................................................................... 41
Educator Growth Plan (EGP) Administrator Approval Guide .............................................................. 42
Assessment Requirements ................................................................................................................. 44
Observation Documentation and Conference Steps ........................................................................... 49
Planning Conversation Form A ........................................................................................................... 50
Observation Documentation Form B ................................................................................................... 51
Reflective Conversation Form C ......................................................................................................... 52
Framework for Teaching ..................................................................................................................... 53
Formative Conversations/Summative Conference Form: Domain 1 for Educators ............................. 54
Formative Conversations/Summative Conference Form: Domain 2 for Educators ............................. 61
Formative Conversations/Summative Conference Form: Domain 3 for Educators ............................. 67
Formative Conversations/Summative Conference Form: Domain 4 for Educators ............................. 73
Final Summative Conference Evaluation Form................................................................................... 80
Tenured Educator Professional Development Plan (PDP) Form ........................................................ 82
Tenured Educator Professional Development Plan (PDP) Guide Sheet............................................. 84
Tenured Educator Professional Development Plan (PDP) Activity Log .............................................. 85
Tenured Educator Professional Development Plan (PDP) Summary Form ........................................ 86
Tenured Educator Professional Development Plan (PDP) Mid-Plan Meeting Conversation Form...... 87
Student Growth Process Summary..................................................................................................... 88
Summative Growth Rating .................................................................................................................. 90
Page 2
SECTION 1
Introduction and Overview
Introduction
A committee was formed, comprised of administrators and teachers, to collaboratively develop an evaluation
process that focuses on continuous improvement and professional growth. It is the belief of the committee that
using Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching will make the new evaluation system more meaningful
and manageable. The most important goal of the evaluation process is to enhance professional practice and
improve student learning.
Overview
Purposes of Evaluation
support District 41’s vision and mission
promote student learning through the highest quality of teaching
promote continuous improvement and professional growth
develop each individual’s professional capacity to be a contributing member in the building and at the
district level
promote reflection and self-assessment to improve teaching practices
support new educator growth through a formative process within clearly defined expectations
support tenured teacher growth through a formative process that promotes collective inquiry and
examination of process
build and foster collaborative relationships among educators and administrators
validate the selection/retention process during the probationary (non-tenured) period
Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching by Charlotte Danielson is the basis for District
41’s Educator Evaluation Plan. The Framework for Teaching is a research-based set of components of
instruction that provides a clear language to describe the complex work of teaching. The Framework is an
invaluable tool to be used as the foundation for professional conversations among practitioners as they seek to
enhance their skill in the classroom.
The Framework serves as the foundation of District 41’s recruitment and hiring, mentoring, coaching,
professional development and teacher evaluation processes, thus linking all these activities together and
helping teachers become more thoughtful practitioners.
The actions educators take to improve student learning are clearly identified and fall under four domains of
teaching responsibility: Planning and Preparation, the Classroom Environment, Instruction, and Professional
Responsibilities. Within these domains there are 22 components and 76 descriptive elements that further refine
our understanding of the profession of teaching, with four levels of performance for each component and
element.
The Framework for Teaching is based on the Praxis III: Classroom Performance Assessment criteria
developed by Educational Testing Service, National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) and
is compatible with Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) standards.
Page 3
By using student growth measures in an accurate and meaningful way, educators can implement strategies to
allow the students to achieve their highest potential and maximize growth. Student growth measures are
detailed as Student Learning Objectives (SLOs). These SLOs allow the educator to monitor student progress
throughout the year and adapt teaching methods accordingly. SLOs provide educators a map, leading the
educator down the appropriate path for individualized student success.
Student growth measures also connect to the Danielson Framework for Teaching, representing another layer
of the work around educator effectiveness. Multiple measures of educator’s practice, which includes frequent
observations using the Danielson Framework, conferences, regular feedback, and student growth measures,
provide a more complete picture of an educator’s performance and create more meaningful dialogue and
evaluations.
There may be situations that require the joint committee to decide upon exceptional circumstances.
Page 4
SECTION 2
Evaluation Plan Beliefs & Commitments and Common Themes
Beliefs
The Rock Island-Milan School District #41 Educator Evaluation Plan…
empowers educators with the responsibility of continuous professional growth in order to support and
enhance instructional practices
fosters student growth through a partnership including the educators, the student, and the family--
supporting this belief is the understanding that ALL students can and will learn
utilizes comprehensive procedures and processes for all educators to ensure consistent and clear
expectations
conducts all aspects of the evaluation process with integrity and fidelity through mutual respect and
trust
Commitments
As part of the Rock Island-Milan School District #41 Educator Evaluation Plan, all educators will promote and
enhance…
School Culture through:
collaborative discussions
the sharing of best practices
the use of data driven decisions
student self-monitoring of progress toward specified goals
on-going dialogue regarding student expectations
partnerships among educators, students, and families
Professional Practice through:
continuous self-reflection which leads to improved professional practice
collaboration with peers
collection, compilation, and analysis of data to guide instruction
professional development that aligns with best practices of teaching and learning
identifying and addressing student needs
providing artifacts and evidence which support improved student learning and progress
Professional Development by:
providing on-going effective and relevant professional development in all areas
mentoring/coaching of peers
differentiating to meet specific needs and job responsibilities
ensuring all educators and administrators are trained regarding specific evaluation tools
Tools and Procedures by:
providing and utilizing accurate, accessible data
differentiating the tools to meet the specific needs and job responsibilities
establishing procedures and guidelines as outlined in the contract (i.e., notification of evaluation
timeframe and assigned evaluator, etc.)
Page 5
Common Themes
Equity:
The belief and practice of our core commitment is that ALL students can and will learn. All students are
valued. Feedback for learning is provided to all students. Equal opportunity and support is provided for
all students to maximize their learning potential.
Cultural Competence:
Educators are role models for all students, have high expectations, and show sensitivity to the unique
needs of various cultures and backgrounds. They have awareness of relevant information about
cultural traditions, religious practices, and patterns of interaction which affect student learning. There is
an obligation to respect all cultures and build rapport so all students feel safe and comfortable to learn.
High Expectations:
All students are capable of achieving high levels of learning based on their unique characteristics within
a rigorous culture of learning. Educators are committed to ensuring all students will reach their full
individual potential. Commitment, hard work, dedication, and persistence are embedded in this concept
for both students and educators.
Developmental Appropriateness:
Students’ cognitive, social, and emotional development effect how they engage in learning and how
they are able to demonstrate that learning. The educator differentiates questions, strategies, expected
outcomes, and assessments to address each individual student’s level of development.
Attention to Individual Students Including Those with Special Needs:
Every classroom is composed of individual learners. Educators will address the particular needs of
those individuals and design activities that are challenging on a number of different levels. Instruction is
differentiated based on an understanding and appreciation of the intellectual, physical, and emotional
needs and abilities of every student.
Appropriate Use of Technology:
The use of technology to enhance instruction is an important responsibility of all educators. Technology
is a tool for instruction but does not replace instruction. The availability of technology among students is
uneven and educators account for this and plan accordingly. Educators stay current in new
developments in technology.
Student Assumption of Responsibility:
A highly effective learning environment fosters a shared responsibility between educators and students
seeking to maximize the natural curiosity and propensity towards learning. Productive learning is
accomplished through the engagement of students with a shared responsibility of instruction and the
manner and methods by which progress is assessed.
Page 6
SECTION 3
Standards for Teachers and Specialists
Framework for Teaching
Domain 1 – Demonstrates effective planning and Domain 2 – Creates an environment conducive
preparation for instruction through: for learning by:
a. knowledge of content and pedagogy a. creating an environment of respect and
b. demonstrating knowledge of students rapport
c. setting instructional outcomes
d. demonstrating knowledge of resources b. establishing a culture for learning*
e. designing coherent instruction* c. managing classroom procedures
f. designing student assessments d. managing student behavior
Domain 4 – Demonstrates professional e. organizing physical space
responsibilities by: Domain 3 – Demonstrates effective instruction
a. reflecting on teaching by:
b. maintaining accurate records a. communicating with students
c. communicating with families b. using questioning and discussion techniques
d. participating in a professional community* c. engaging students in learning*
e. growing and developing professionally d. using assessment in instruction
e. demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness
*Anchor components (see definitions)
Under this evaluation plan, the professional teaching standards to be implemented by each educator are set
forth in Charlotte Danielson’s Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching.
In addition to the teaching framework, alternate frameworks are provided for the following categories
of certified staff (see appendix):
Behaviorist (use Instructional Specialist Framework)
Instructional Coaches (use Instructional Coach Framework)
Library/Media Center Specialist (use Library/Media Center Specialist)
PPS Coordinator/Liaison (use Instructional Specialist Framework)
School Counselor (use School Counselor Framework)
School Psychologist (use School Psychologist Framework)
Social Worker (use Therapeutic Specialist Framework)
Speech/Language Pathologist (use Therapeutic Specialist Framework)
T&L Specialist (use Instructional Specialist Framework)
The above noted staff do not use student growth in evaluations.
Page 7
SECTION 4
Professional Practice Levels of Performance
These levels of performance are included in this plan to support self-reflection, inform and structure
professional conversations between Educators and Evaluators, and suggest areas for further learning. These
levels contribute to an Educator’s summative rating as described in Section 5.
Excellent Professional practice at the Excellent level shows consistent evidence of a master
educator whose practice operates at a qualitatively different level from those of
(Distinguished) other professional peers. Practice has moved from Proficient to the highest level of
expertise and commitment to student learning. Routines are established; however,
Proficient spontaneity is evident. An Excellent educator creates a community of learners
where students assume responsibility for their learning. Educators engage in
Needs Improvement extensive, reflective personal and collaborative professional development.
Professional practice at the Proficient level shows evidence of thorough knowledge
(Basic) of all aspects of the profession. Educators at this level thoroughly know their
content, know their students, and utilize an extensive repertoire of strategies and
Unsatisfactory activities with flexibility to adapt to student needs. They know and follow the
standards and establish a class environment that functions smoothly with little or
no waste of instructional time. Educators set high expectations for student learning,
reflect on their instruction, and use assessment data to drive planning.
Professional practice at the Needs Improvement level shows evidence of
knowledge and skills required to practice, but performance is inconsistent in
applying or understanding the concepts underlying the component of the
Framework for Teaching. This may be due to lack of experience, expertise, and/or
commitment. This level may be considered minimally competent for educators
early in their careers. This level requires specific support in tenured years.
Professional practice at the Unsatisfactory level shows evidence of inadequately
applying or not understanding the concepts underlying the components of the
Framework for Teaching or Frameworks for Specialists. Performance may
represent practice that is harmful and mandates intervention.
Page 8
SECTION 5
Educator Evaluation Plan Summative Rating System
Operating Principles
Professional Practice Domain Ratings in RIMSD 41 Educator Evaluation Plan (Planning and Preparation,
Classroom Environment, Effective Instruction, Professional Responsibilities) – worth 70% of summative
Excellent – At least three components rated Excellent, with the remaining component(s) rated
Proficient.
Proficient – No more than one component rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining components
rated at Proficient or Excellent.
Needs Improvement – Two or more components rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining
components rated as Proficient or Excellent.
Unsatisfactory – Any component rated as Unsatisfactory.
Student Growth (Student Learning Objectives) Ratings: -- worth 30% of summative
Excellent – 80% or more of students meet or exceed growth targets
Proficient – 65-79% of student meet or exceed growth targets
Needs Improvement – 50-64% of students meet or exceed growth targets
Unsatisfactory – less than 50% of students meet or exceed growth targets
If using MAP as the assessment, use the following ratings:
Excellent – greater than 65% meet or exceed growth targets
Proficient – 45-65% meet or exceed growth targets
Needs Improvement – 25-44% meet or exceed growth targets
Unsatisfactory – less than 25% meet or exceed growth targets
(Make sure you select “YES” on the data tool, if using MAP.)
Overall SUMMATIVE Ratings in RIMSD 41 Educator Evaluation Plan (Both Professional Practice and Student
Growth/Student Learning Objectives):
Professional Practice
Unsatisfactory Needs Proficient Excellent
Improvement
Student Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Needs Needs ****
Growth Improvement Improvement Proficient
Needs Unsatisfactory Excellent
Improvement Needs Proficient
Needs Improvement
Proficient Improvement Proficient
Needs
Improvement
Excellent Proficient but Excellent
**** must establish a Proficient
PDP
Page 9
Non-Tenured Educator - Each non-tenured Educator will receive a final summative rating annually. It is
understood that non-tenured Educators in years 1 and 2 may receive a final summative rating of Needs
Improvement as they are emerging towards proficiency. Non-tenured educators in years 3 and 4 are expected
to maintain a final summative rating of Proficient or Excellent.
Tenured Educators are expected to maintain an overall Summative Rating of Proficient or Excellent.
If a Tenured Educator receives an overall Summative Rating of Needs Improvement, a Professional
Development Plan (PDP) will be developed. See Section 13 for additional information. A Tenured
Educator whose performance is not Proficient or Excellent after the completion of a PDP will be rated
Unsatisfactory.
If at any point in the Evaluation cycle a Tenured Educator exhibits evidence of Unsatisfactory practice,
an overall Summative Evaluation may be conducted at any time during the contractual school year. An
overall Summative Rating of Unsatisfactory will result in the development of a Remediation Plan in
accordance with the law. See Section 14 for additional information.
Please see the following page for an example
of how domain and summative ratings are determined.
Page 10
Examples of Domain and Final Summative Ratings
Domain Ratings in RIMSD 41 Educator Evaluation Plan
Excellent – At least three components rated Excellent, with the remaining component(s) rated
Proficient.
Proficient – No more than one component rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining components
rated at Proficient or Excellent.
Needs Improvement – Two or more components rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining
components rated as Proficient or Excellent.
Unsatisfactory – Any component rated as Unsatisfactory.
Domain 2 for Teachers – Classroom Environment
Component Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient Excellent
(Basic) (Distinguished)
2a
2b X X
2c
2d X
2e
Domain Rating X
X
X
Overall Ratings in RIMSD 41 Educator Evaluation Plan
Excellent – No more than one domain rated Proficient, with the remaining domains rated at Excellent.
Proficient – No more than one domain rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining domains rated at
Proficient or Excellent.
Needs Improvement – Two or more domains rated Needs Improvement, with the remaining domains
rated as Proficient or Excellent.
Unsatisfactory – Any domain rated Unsatisfactory.
Domain 2 for Teachers – Classroom Environment
Component Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Proficient Excellent
(Basic) (Distinguished)
Domain 1
Domain 2 X X
Domain 3
Domain 4 X
Overall Rating
X
X
Page 11
Introduction to Student Growth
Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) are the process of setting targets and measuring the extent to which they
have been achieved. Targets must be measurable, and evaluators must be able to interpret and respond to
those measurements. SLOs are a long-term goal for advancing student learning. It is a data-informed process
that involves diagnosing and addressing specific student learning needs.
Summative Performance Evaluation Rating
Student growth will represent 30% of an educator’s summative performance evaluation rating. The other
portion of the evaluation comes from the professional practice piece. For example:
Year of School Year Significance of Student Significance of
Implementation Growth Professional Practice
2014-15 0%
Year 0 (Pilot) 2015-16 30% 100%
Year 1 2016-17 30% 70%
Year 2 2017-Beyond 30% 70%
70%
Year 3 & Beyond
Student growth ratings will be combined with the professional practice ratings to arrive at a summative
performance evaluation rating. At the end of the evaluation cycle, educators will receive a summative
performance evaluation rating of one the following ratings: “Excellent,” “Proficient,” “Needs Improvement,” or
“Unsatisfactory.” See the table below for how to combine measures of student growth and professional practice
into a single performance evaluation rating:
Professional Practice
Unsatisfactory Needs Proficient Excellent
Improvement ****
Student Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Needs Needs Proficient
Growth Unsatisfactory Improvement Improvement Excellent
Needs Excellent
Improvement Needs Proficient
Improvement
Proficient Needs Needs Proficient
Improvement Improvement
Excellent Proficient but
**** must establish a Proficient
PDP
****Must collect more evidence of professional practice and student growth
Using Measures of Student Growth
The SLOs themselves do not measure student growth but rather outline a process in which growth can be
measured through various tools. By setting SLOs, using approved assessments, and regularly progress
monitoring students’ development, an accurate picture of the student’s growth (and an educator’s contribution
to student growth) may be developed.
Page 12
Student growth is defined as a demonstrable change in a student’s or group of students’ knowledge or skills,
as evidenced by two or more assessments, between two or more points in time. Student growth is not the
same thing as attainment. Attainment is a measure only at a single point in time, such as proficiency on the
Illinois Assessment of Readiness for Grades 3-8, SAT, or ability to run a 7:00 mile. Therefore, attainment is not
as beneficial as using growth, which measures average change over one point in time to another. Now, we are
looking to see if a student improved from the beginning-of-year assessment test to the end-of-year
assessment, or whether a student cuts 30 seconds from his time on the mile run. Growth measures average
change in student scores from one point in time to the next, therefore benefits educators with students who
start further behind or at lower levels as they have more room to grow.
Page 13
SECTION 6
Roles of Evaluators, Mentors, & Facilitators in the Evaluation Plan
Evaluation Process
Improved Student Learning
Educator
Evaluator Peer Mentor
or Facilitator
On-going, aligned support through communication
Evaluator Foundation Roles/Responsibilities Peer Mentor or Facilitator
Communicate with Educators Educator Review building routines, as well
regarding the evaluation instrument as building procedures,
and process. Understand and implement all emergency, safety, and student
necessary aspects of the evaluation discipline protocols.
Meet with Educators to discuss instrument and process.
expectations based on the Review system for grade reporting.
evaluation instrument, as well as Meet with Evaluator and Peer Mentor Assist in compilation of substitute
District, School, and Common Core or Facilitator (if applicable) to ensure
goals. adherence to evaluation instrument plans.
and process. Review procedures for
Review SIP and Illinois School
Report Card with all Educators. Take personal responsibility for administering relevant
attaining, at minimum, a summative standardized and diagnostic
Provide training in administering rating of Proficient. testing.
relevant standardized and Ensure that Educators have
diagnostic testing. Develop goals and objectives aligned access to all curriculum materials
with the evaluation instrument. and technology resources.
Review documentation of pertinent After professional development
student data. Meet with Peer Mentor or Facilitator training, provide professional
and/or Evaluator to ensure working learning support.
Communicate with peer mentor to knowledge of expectations such as Support Educators in analysis of
align support for Educators if the following: student data.
applicable. 1. building procedures Support implementation of
2. emergency, safety, and student Professional Growth Plan.
Conduct informal observations and discipline protocols Communicate with Evaluator to
engage in reflective conversations. 3. student progress reporting system align support for Educator.
4. administration of relevant
Conduct formal observations
including pre and post standardized and diagnostic
conversations within specified
timeframe. testing
5. student data analysis
Provide ongoing feedback to
Educators regarding the evaluation It is neither the role nor the responsibility of the peer mentor
instrument and process. or facilitator to bring concerns to the Evaluator’s attention or
report the Educator’s progress or lack thereof.
Conduct summative evaluation
conversation and notify Educators The peer mentor or facilitator meets with Evaluator(s) only to
of employment status within learn of Evaluator’s areas of concerns in order to help
specified timeframe. support growth of the Educator in need.
Page 14
SECTION 7
Definitions of Terms
Administrator – An individual holding a type 75 Certification and serving in a leadership and supervisory
capacity.
Anchor Component – The component in each domain that serves as the focal point for all educators.
Assessment – Any instrument that measures a student's acquisition of specific knowledge and skills.
Attainment – A “point in time” measure of student proficiency, which compares the measured proficiency rate
with a pre-defined goal.
Collective Inquiry – Shared knowledge or learning together.
Component Focus – Areas of emphasis within each domain.
Consulting Teacher – An educational employee, as defined in the Educational Labor Relations Act, who has
at least five years teaching experience along with a reasonable familiarity with the assignment of the
Educator being evaluated, and who received an “excellent” rating on his or her most recent evaluation.
Data Review – Compilation of evidenced-based data to inform decisions on student growth targets (i.e., mid
assessment, data compiled from multiple assessments, observations, student projects, etc.).
Data Tool –The district provided excel spreadsheet, with formatting & calculation codes included.
Design Committee – A committee composed of equal representation selected by the district and its
educators, or when applicable, the exclusive bargaining representatives to begin initial discussions on
student growth, prior to the forming of the Joint Committee.
Educator – Any and all certified staff and specialists covered under the RIEA contract.
EGP – Educator Growth Plan
Scoring EGPs – The window that includes the scoring of the assessment and the final submission of the
EGP.
Setting/Approving EGPs – The window that includes the creation and approval of the EGP and its
component parts, including the Individual Growth Goal(s), Building/Program Growth Goal(s), and the
Student Learning Objective(s).
Individual Growth Goal(s) – A SMART goal, based on educator performance and/or self-
assessment with the Danielson Framework for Teaching.
Building/Program Growth Goal(s) – A SMART goal, based on building identified needs (academic,
behavioral, etc.) for all educators to work on to increase overall student performance
Student Learning Objective(s) – Targets of student growth that educators set at the start of the
school year and strive to achieve by the end of the semester or school year. These targets are
based on a thorough review of available data reflecting students' baseline skills and are set and
approved after collaboration and consultation with colleagues and administrators.
Evaluation – The summative rating achieved at the end of the Educator evaluation cycle.
Evaluator – Anyone certified in Illinois to evaluate Educators.
Exceptional Circumstances – Conditions that require unique decisions to be made (such as, but not limited
to assessment issues, technology glitches, long-term absences, etc.).
FFT – Framework for Teaching
Formal Observation Cycle – The observation shall be 45 minutes in length or the beginning, middle, and end
of a lesson. The cycle consists of:
Formative – Reflections and conversations leading to enhanced professional practice.
Informal Observation – A brief, unannounced observation with written feedback provided within seven school
days. A reflective conversation may be requested by either party as part of the evaluation process.
Joint Committee – A committee composed of equal representation selected by the district and its educators
or, when applicable, the exclusive bargaining representative of its educators, which shall have the duties
regarding the establishment of a performance evaluation plan that incorporates data and indicators of
student growth as a significant factor in rating educator performance.
Learning Objective – A targeted long-term goal for advancing student learning.
Mentor Teacher – A tenured teacher assigned to 1st and/or 2nd year teachers in the formal school district
mentoring program.
Page 15
Mirrored Assessment – An assessment set (pre, mid, post) that has the same form and grading structure,
addresses the same content/skills, and addresses the same level of complexity or rigor for each item,
standard, or skill.
Non-Tenured Educator (also known as probationary) – Educator in the probationary period, as per Illinois
School Code, ILCS 24-12, section 5.
observation of one instructional lesson
Observations – Formal or Informal, these can be either traditional or nontraditional
PEAC – The Illinois State Board’s Performance Evaluation Advisory Committee.
Peer Mentor/Facilitator – A person who shares his or her knowledge, materials, skill, and experience with
those they mentor. This person exposes the receiving Educator to new ideas, perspectives, standards, and
to the values and norms of the profession as well as implement guidelines established by the district and
school.
PERA – The Performance and Evaluation Reform Act of 2010 in the state of Illinois.
Performance Evaluation Rating – The final rating of a educator’s performance, using the rating levels of
“Unsatisfactory,” “Needs Improvement,” “Proficient,” and “Excellent” that includes consideration of both data
and indicators of student growth, when applicable under Section 24A-25 of the School Code.
Planning Conference – A professional conversation involving two or more participants prior to a formal
observation.
post-observation conference
pre-observation conference
Professional Development Plan (PDP) – Required for a Tenured Educator who is rated “Needs
Improvement”. See section 13.
Reflective Conversation – A professional conversation involving two or more participants after an informal or
formal observation.
Revising Student Growth EGPs – The window that includes the review and revision of the Student Growth
EGP, specifically revision of growth targets and the student population.
School Improvement Plan (SIP) – Guiding document that states the building’s mission, purpose, and goals.
Student Growth – Demonstrable change in a student's or group of students' knowledge or skills, as evidenced
by gain and/or attainment on two or more assessments, between two or more points in time.
Student Growth Exemption – The law provides exemptions from the student growth requirement for various
specialized disciplines, including but not limited to; school counselor, school psychologist, nonteaching
school speech and language pathologist, non-teaching school nurse, or school social worker.
Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) – A targeted growth goal for advancing student learning.
Student Population – The complete list of students in the identified course/class.
Summative Evaluation Conference – A conference between the Educator and the Evaluator to discuss the
summation of all informal and formal observations and professional growth requirements.
Summative Rating – The final rating earned by the Educator at the conclusion of the evaluation cycle.
Summative Student Growth Rating – The final student growth rating, after combining the scores of multiple
Student Growth EGPs.
Target – Growth expectations within a tier.
Tenure – An employment status that Educators earn after successfully fulfilling the requirements of a
probationary period.
Tier – Group/range of students.
Type I Assessment – A reliable assessment that measures a certain group or subset of students in the same
manner with the same potential assessment items, is scored by a non-district entity, and is administered
either statewide or beyond Illinois. Examples include assessments available from the Northwest Evaluation
Association (NWEA), Scantron Performance Series, Star Reading Enterprise, College Board's SAT,
Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate examinations, or ACT's EPAS® (i.e., Educational
Planning and Assessment System). Also included as Type I are the Developmental Reading Assessments
(DRA), MAP Readiness, Brigance, etc.
Type II Assessment – Any assessment developed or adopted and approved for use by the school district and
used on a district-wide basis by all educators in a given grade or subject area. Examples include
collaboratively developed common assessments, curriculum tests and assessments designed by textbook
publishers.
Page 16
Type III Assessment – Any assessment that is rigorous, that is aligned to the course's curriculum, and that
the qualified evaluator and educator determine measures student learning in that course. Examples include
educator-created assessments, assessments designed by textbook publishers, student work samples or
portfolios (where appropriate and subject to administrative approval), assessments of student performance,
and assessments designed by staff who are subject or grade-level experts that are administered commonly
across a given grade or subject. A Type I or Type II assessment may qualify as a Type III assessment if it
aligns to the curriculum being taught and measures student learning in that subject area.
Page 17
SECTION 8
Additional Information for Specific Groups of Teachers
Teachers of Special Areas (i.e., general music, band, orchestra, choir, PE, etc.)
The students that are a part of your individual SLOs are TYPICALLY from the class or course(s) that
have the MOST number of students. However, there are exceptions for SpEd and EL (see below).
For example:
o Band and Orchestra teachers at the K-6 level will pick the grade level with the MOST students
(i.e., 5th grade class has more students than any other class; therefore, the 5th grade class is the
group of students to use for the SLOs and to measure student growth.)
o Music teachers at the K-6 level are to use 3rd grade, each year. Common assessments have
been developed and are to be used with this group of students.
o PE teachers at the K-6 level are to work jointly with their administrator/evaluator to identify
EITHER a specific grade level to stay with for several years (i.e. like music teachers are doing);
or use the largest class you have each year (i.e. like band and orchestra are doing).
**In an instance where grade levels have equal numbers, you and your evaluator will
make the decision on what class you use for the SLOs. In the instance where there is
only one period a day where band or orchestra is offered, all students in that period are
included in the SLOs.
Teachers of Special Education
Elementary teachers are to use their entire caseload of students for the SLOs.
o Therefore, whether you teach students in resource or instructional programs, you are to account
for all students who were in attendance during the pre-assessment window.
Junior High teachers are to select the largest grade level of students
o Therefore, if you teach both language arts for both 7th and 8th grades, you are to select the
largest of the two grade levels.
o If there is a situation at the junior high where a teacher has only a few students in each grade
level, the teacher should follow the same process and criteria as the elementary teachers of
special education students by identifying the entire caseload of students.
High School teachers are to select the course with the largest number of students
o Therefore, if you teach World Studies and Math, you are to pick the course with the largest
number of students.
**Caseload refers to all students assigned to you in the special education department (i.e., those with
an IEP)
**If co-teaching, refer to the options in the co-teaching section.
Page 18
Teachers of English Learners
Elementary teachers are to use a minimum of 20 students for the SLOs.
These teachers are to begin by selecting the grade level with the largest number of
students. They continue to select the next largest grade level, until they have met a
minimum of 20 students.
NOTE: An elementary EL teacher may have to use multiple classes to get to the
minimum number of 20 students. Elementary EL teachers use full classes, not
partial classes so it is very possible a teacher will have over 20 when taking the
final full class.
For example: A specific elementary EL teacher has class sizes as follows:
6th grade has 1 student; 5th grade has 3 students; 4th grade has 4 student;
3rd grade has 5 students; 2nd grade has 7 students; 1st grade has 12
students; kindergarten has 4 students.
This elementary EL teacher will use the following grade levels for
his/her SLO: 1st grade = 12; 2nd grade = 7; 3rd grade = 5. The total
caseload for this teacher’s SLO will be 24 students. (This is 4
more than the minimum.)
o Language Acquisition is the basis of push-in or pull-out at the elementary level.
o EL elementary teachers are to account for all students who were in attendance during the pre-
assessment window.
Junior High teachers are to select the largest grade level of students
o Therefore, if you teach both 7th and 8th grades, you are to select the largest of the two grade
levels.
o If there is a situation at the junior high where a teacher has only a few students in each grade
level, the teacher should follow the same as the elementary by identifying the entire caseload of
students.
o At the junior high school level, you are charged with BOTH language acquisition and the course
content.
High School teachers are to select the course with the largest number of students
o Therefore, if you teach EL World Studies and EL Math, you are to pick the course with the
largest number of students.
o At the high school level, you are charged with BOTH language acquisition and the course
content.
**Caseload refers to all students assigned to you in the EL department (i.e., those in Levels 1-5)
**If co-teaching, refer to the options in the co-teaching section.
Teachers in Junior High or High School with Multiple Courses
Junior High and High School teachers who teach the same subject for every course will include ALL
students in every class period (i.e., I teach 7th grade language arts only. All students enrolled in all of
my class periods are included on my SLOs).
Junior High and High School teachers who split courses throughout the day will choose the course that
has the MOST students (i.e., I teach 3 class periods of 10th grade PE, with a total of 105 students, and
2 class periods of Driver’s Ed, with a total of 50 students—my SLOs will include all 105 students in my
10th grade PE classes.
Page 19
Teachers of Title I
**Two options are available, due to school-wide Title I status. Choose ONE of the following two
options:
Option 1: Teachers of Title I follow the semester cycle (refer to tenured or non-tenured teachers pages)
Option 2: Teachers of Title I who push into one or more classrooms select/choose one classroom and
include ALL students in that classroom on their SLOs.
o i.e., I am a Title I teacher. I either push-in full time or do a combination of push-in and pull-out. I
am in Mr. Vine’s 2nd grade classroom multiple times per week. At various times I work with
different students. Therefore, I am using Mr. Vine’s full class of students on my SLOs.
Teachers who Co-Teach
If the majority of your assigned courses are co-taught in the same course/subject/etc., ALL students in
that course/subject/etc. are included on your SLOs.
o i.e., Elementary: Refer to Special Education, El, or Title I sections.
o i.e., Junior High: I co-teach 4 sections of ELA and have 2 sections of Special Education
Resource. I must include all students in the 4 sections of co-taught ELA on my SLOs because
that is my larger course.
o i.e., Junior High: I teach 3 sections of PE and co-teach 2 sections of social studies. I must
include all students in my 3 sections of PE on my SLOs because that is my larger course.
o i.e., High School: I teach 2 American History sections and co-teach 3 World Studies sections. I
must include ALL students in ALL 3 World Studies sections because that is my larger course.
o i.e., High School: I teach 3 Integrated Math I sections and co-teach 2 Integrated Math 22
sections. I must include all students in my 3 Integrated Math I sections because that is my larger
course.
**Other circumstances outside of any of these examples will be decided between the educator and
evaluator.
Page 20
SECTION 9
Overview of the Educator Evaluation Plan
Non-Tenured
Who All educators in years 1, 2, 3, or 4 at RIMSD #41
What Format process focused on:
clearly defined expectations as outlined in the Evaluation Plan and Danielson’s Enhancing Professional
Practice: A Framework for Teaching
a collaboratively developed Educator Growth Plan (EGP) based on Enhancing Professional Practice:
A Framework for Teaching (Individual Goal), school/district goals and priorities (Building Goal), and
student growth measures (Student Learning Objectives [SLOs]).
ongoing conversations based on evidence gathered by both Educator and Evaluator (e.g., logs,
reflections, lesson planning, student work, formal and informal observations)
evidence of professional responsibilities at team, department, building, and/or district level
identification of what’s working and areas for growth based upon formative feedback, Planning and
Reflection Conversations, and Summative Evaluation
Summative Evaluation – Completed Annually (by February 1st)
Tenured – Proficient or Excellent
Who All tenured educators who receive an overall rating of Proficient or Excellent
What Format process focused on:
a collaboratively developed Educator Growth Plan (EGP) based on Enhancing Professional Practice:
A Framework for Teaching (Individual Goal), school/district goals and priorities (Building Goal), and
student growth measures (Student Learning Objectives [SLOs]).
ongoing conversations based on evidence gathered by both Educator and Evaluator (e.g., logs,
reflections, lesson planning, student work, formal and informal observations)
evidence of ongoing professional responsibilities at team, department, building, and/or district level
identification of what’s working and areas for growth based upon formative feedback, Planning and
Reflection Conversations, and Summative Evaluation
Educator Growth Plan may be developed in collaboration with other tenured educators
areas outside of the Educator Growth Plan may be addressed with the educator and, if necessary,
amended by the evaluator for the benefit of the educator’s professional improvement
Summative Evaluation – Completed every two years (by the last contractual school day)
Tenured – Needs Improvement
Who All tenured educators who receive an overall rating of Needs Improvement
What Format process focused on:
improving identified areas of professional practice through a Professional Development Plan (PDP)
based on Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching (Individual Goal), school/district
goals and priorities (Building Goal), and student growth measures (Student Learning Objectives
[SLOs]).
Professional Development Plan is to be created within 30 school days after the completion of an
evaluation resulting in the overall Needs Improvement rating
the Professional Development Plan is developed by the evaluator in consultation with the educator
and takes into account the tenured educator’s ongoing professional responsibilities including his/her
regular assignments
Professional Development Plan includes evidence of progress/achievement of goal(s) as well as
supports provided to address the performance areas needing improvement
Summative Evaluation – Completed within 2 semesters
Page 21
Tenured – Unsatisfactory
Who All tenured educators who receive an overall rating of Unsatisfactory
What Formalized procedure specified by the Illinois School Code Section 24A-5 focused on correcting
performance deficiencies within a specified timeframe:
the Remediation Plan (Remediation Plan created by the administrator) must be developed and
implemented within 30 days after a summative rating of Unsatisfactory or 2 years of Needs
Improvement
a remediation period of 90 school days is provided unless a shorter period is provided by the local
collective bargaining agreement
if, at the conclusion of the remediation period, the tenured educator has not corrected the
performance deficiencies, the educator is subject to dismissal in accordance with Section24-12 of the
School Code
if the tenured educator has corrected the performance deficiencies and receives a rating of Proficient
or Excellent, he/she is returned to the regular evaluation cycle
nothing in this plan shall be construed as preventing immediate dismissal of a tenured educator for
deficiencies deemed irremediable or for actions that injure or endanger the health or person of students
in the classroom or school
Summative Evaluation – As specified by Illinois School Code Section 24A-5 (within 90 days of the
beginning of the remediation plan)
Page 22
SECTION 10
Non-Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan Process Chart
Evaluation Timeline for ALL Non-Tenured Educators
Time of Year Action Forms (Required vs. Optional)
Quarter 1
review of the Professional Practice Required forms/documents:
Quarter 2
Framework and the full evaluation Framework Rubric
process (including all forms and pre-assessments
plans) Educator Growth Plan (must be approved by
identify and conduct all pre- your administrator by the last day of the first
assessments related to individual, quarter)
school, or district goals during the Data Tool
given assessment window
analyze student pre-assessment IF receiving a formal observation (at least 2
results
create, review, and/or revise Educator formal during evaluation cycle):
Growth Goals o Planning Conversation Form A
o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
o Reflective Conversation Form and C
enter pre-assessment results into IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
district provided Data Tool
informal during evaluation cycle)
receive either an Informal o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
Observation or a Formal Observation,
with written feedback within seven Optional forms/documents:
school days (informal observation Self-Assessment Worksheet (review)
reflective conversation may be Assessment Approval Form – Student Growth
requested by either party)
participate in professional Educator Guide
development and professional
learning communities any professional development or PLC related
continue to teach and progress forms
monitor student learning
Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
Form/Rubric
analyze student data and decide if Required forms/documents:
you will request changes to your Educator Growth Plan (if requesting changes to
student learning objective growth Student Learning Objective Growth Goals/Tiers)
goals/tiers (evidence of student data Additional student data for recommended
must be provided) changes
receive either an Informal IF receiving a formal observation (at least 2
Observation or a Formal Observation, formal during evaluation cycle):
with written feedback within seven o Planning Conversation Form A
school days (informal observation o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
reflective conversation may be o Reflective Conversation Form and C
requested by either party)
Educator Growth Plan (mid-term) IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
Reflection
informal during evaluation cycle)
o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
participate in professional Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
development and professional Form
learning communities
district required assessments
continue to teach and progress Data Tool
monitor student learning
conduct district or building required
assessments during identified testing
window(s) Optional forms/documents:
Page 23
Quarter 3 conduct classroom post-assessments Educator Growth Plan (mid-term reflection)
Quarter 4 (related to your Student Learning any professional development or PLC related
Objective Growth Goal) and enter
results into district provided Data Tool forms
Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
continue assessing and progress
monitoring student learning Form/Rubric
Required forms/documents:
conduct district or building required district required assessments
assessments during identified testing building required assessments
window(s) IF receiving a formal observation (at least 2
if not already completed, receive formal during evaluation cycle):
Formal or Informal Observations with o Planning Conversation Form A
written feedback within seven school o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
days (informal observation reflective o Reflective Conversation Form and C
conversation may be requested by IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
either party)—1 of each required but informal during evaluation cycle)
more are optional o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
Summative Evaluation (and Rating) Form
by February 1st Final Summative Evaluation Form
participate in professional Optional forms/documents:
development and professional any professional development or PLC related
learning communities
forms
continue to teach and progress
monitor student learning Required forms/documents:
district required assessments
discuss tenure process/procedures
and expectations (either extension of Optional forms/documents:
probationary period—years 1, 2, or 3; Informal Observation Documentation Form B
or tenure promotion—during year 4)
OPTIONAL: continue informal
observations with written feedback
within seven school days (reflective
conversation may be requested by
either party)
participate in professional
development and professional
learning communities
conduct district or building required
assessments during identified testing
window(s)
Page 24
SECTION 11
Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan—Proficient or Excellent
Process Charts
Evaluation Timeline for Tenured Educators Rated Proficient or Excellent
YEAR 1
Time of Year Action Forms (Required vs. Optional)
review of the Professional Practice Required forms/documents:
Framework and the full evaluation Framework Rubric
process (including all forms and pre-assessments
plans) Educator Growth Plan (must be approved by
identify and conduct all pre- your administrator by the last day of the first
assessments related to individual, quarter)
school, or district goals during the Data Tool
given assessment window
analyze student pre-assessment IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
results
create, review, and/or revise formal during evaluation cycle):
Educator Growth Goals o Planning Conversation Form A
o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
o Reflective Conversation Form and C
Quarter 1 enter pre-assessment results into IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
district provided Data Tool
informal during evaluation cycle)
receive either an Informal o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
Observation or a Formal Formative Conversation/Summative
Observation, with written feedback Conference Form (IF formal or informal
within seven school days (informal observation is conducted)
observation reflective conversation
may be requested by either party)
participate in professional Optional forms/documents:
development and professional Self-Assessment Worksheet (review)
learning communities Assessment Approval Form – Student Growth
continue to teach and progress
monitor student learning Educator Guide
any professional development or PLC related
forms
Formative Conversation/Summative
Conference Form/Rubric
analyze student data and decide if Required forms/documents:
you will request changes to your Educator Growth Plan (if requesting changes to
student learning objective growth Student Learning Objective Growth
goals/tiers (evidence of student data Goals/Tiers)
must be provided) Additional student data for recommended
o semester courses: requested changes
Quarter 2 changes must be approved by the IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
final school day of October formal during evaluation cycle):
o year-long courses: requested o Planning Conversation Form A
changes must be approved by the o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
final school day in January o Reflective Conversation Form and C
(quarter 3)
receive either an Informal IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
Observation or a Formal
Observation, with written feedback informal during evaluation cycle)
within seven school days (informal o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
Formative Conversation/Summative
Conference Form
Page 25
Quarter 3 observation reflective conversation district required assessments
may be requested by either party) building required assessments
Educator Growth Plan (mid-term) Data Tool
Reflection
participate in professional Optional forms/documents:
development and professional Educator Growth Plan (mid-term reflection)
learning communities any professional development or PLC related
continue to teach and progress
monitor student learning forms
conduct district or building required Formative Conversation/Summative
assessments during identified testing
window(s) Conference Form/Rubric
conduct classroom post- assessments tied to Student Learning Growth
assessments (related to your
Student Learning Objective Growth Goal(s)
Goal) and enter results into district o year-long courses: mid assessment(s)
provided Data Tool
Required forms/documents:
continue teaching, assessing and district required assessments
progress monitoring student learning building required assessments
IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
conduct district or building required
assessments during identified testing formal during evaluation cycle):
window(s) o Planning Conversation Form A
o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
if not already completed, receive o Reflective Conversation Form and C
Formal or Informal Observations with IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
written feedback within seven school informal during evaluation cycle)
days (informal observation reflective o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
conversation may be requested by Formative Conversation/Summative
either party)—1 of each required but Conference Form (IF formal or informal
more are optional observation is conducted)
Final Summative Evaluation Form
participate in professional
development and professional
learning communities
Optional forms/documents:
any professional development or PLC related
forms
Page 26
Quarter 4 if not already completed, receive Required forms/documents:
Formal or Informal Observations with district required assessments
written feedback within seven school building required assessments
days (informal observation reflective Data Tool
conversation may be requested by IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
either party)—1 of each required but
more are optional formal during evaluation cycle):
o Planning Conversation Form A
participate in professional o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
development and professional o Reflective Conversation Form and C
learning communities IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
informal during evaluation cycle)
conduct district or building required o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
assessments during identified testing Formative Conversation/Summative
window(s) Conference Form (IF formal or informal
observation is conducted)
conduct classroom post
assessments (related to your Optional forms/documents:
Student Learning Objective Growth Informal Observation Documentation Form B
Goal) and enter results into district
provided Data Tool
prepare to review or refine the
Educator Growth Plan (EGP) for next
school year
Page 27
Evaluation Timeline for Tenured Educators Rated Proficient or Excellent
YEAR 2
Time of Year Action Forms (Required vs. Optional)
review of the Professional Practice Required forms/documents:
Framework and the full evaluation Framework Rubric
process (including all forms and pre-assessments
plans) Educator Growth Plan (must be approved by
identify and conduct all pre- your administrator by the last day of the first
assessments related to individual, quarter)
school, or district goals during the
given assessment window Data Tool
analyze student pre-assessment
results IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
create, review, and/or revise
Educator Growth Goals formal during evaluation cycle):
o Planning Conversation Form A
o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
o Reflective Conversation Form and C
enter pre-assessment results into IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
district provided Data Tool
informal during evaluation cycle)
MUST discuss with administrator o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
Quarter 1 and receive approval IF you want to Formative Conversation/Summative
use a full year’s worth of student Conference Form (IF formal or informal
observation is conducted)
data in our summative evaluation
receive either an Informal
Observation or a Formal
Observation, with written feedback Optional forms/documents:
within seven school days (informal Self-Assessment Worksheet (review)
observation reflective conversation Assessment Approval Form – Student Growth
may be requested by either party)
participate in professional Educator Guide
development and professional
learning communities any professional development or PLC related
continue to teach and progress forms
monitor student learning
Formative Conversation/Summative
Conference Form/Rubric
Quarter 2 analyze student data and decide if ***Must receive administrative approval by the
you will request changes to your end of quarter 1 if you want to use a full year’s
student learning objective growth worth of student data in your summative
goals/tiers (evidence of student data evaluation—administrator makes final decision
must be provided)
o requested changes must be Required forms/documents:
approved by the final school day
of October Educator Growth Plan (if requesting changes to
o exception: for those who received Student Learning Objective Growth
administrator approval to use a full
year’s worth of data in summative Goals/Tiers)
evaluation, requested changes
must be approved by the final Additional student data for recommended
school day in January (quarter 3) changes
receive either an Informal IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
Observation or a Formal formal during evaluation cycle):
o Planning Conversation Form A
o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
o Reflective Conversation Form and C
IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
informal during evaluation cycle)
o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
Formative Conversation/Summative
Conference Form (IF formal or informal
Page 28
Quarter 3 Observation, with written feedback observation is conducted)
within seven school days (informal district required assessments
observation reflective conversation building required assessments
may be requested by either party) Data Tool
Educator Growth Plan (mid-term) Post assessments tied to Student Learning
Reflection
participate in professional Objective Growth Goal(s)
development and professional o for those granted approval for year-long
learning communities
continue to teach and progress data, see highlighted yellow area in optional
monitor student learning forms/documents
conduct district or building required
assessments during identified testing Optional forms/documents:
window(s) Educator Growth Plan (mid-term reflection)
conduct classroom post- any professional development or PLC related
assessments (related to your
Student Learning Objective Growth forms
Goal) and enter results into district Formative Conversation/Summative
provided Data Tool
exception: for those who received Conference Form/Rubric
administrator approval to use a full assessments tied to Student Learning Growth
year’s worth of data in summative
evaluation, requested changes must Goal(s)
be approved by the final school day o for those who received administrator
in January (quarter 3)
approval to use a full year’s worth of student
continue teaching, assessing and data in summative evaluation, the mid
progress monitoring student learning assessment(s) at this point in the year are
optional
conduct district or building required
assessments during identified testing Required forms/documents:
window(s) district required assessments
building required assessments
if not already completed, receive IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
Formal or Informal Observations with
written feedback within seven school formal during evaluation cycle):
days (informal observation reflective o Planning Conversation Form A
conversation may be requested by o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
either party)—1 of each required but o Reflective Conversation Form and C
more are optional IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
informal during evaluation cycle)
participate in professional o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
development and professional Formative Conversation/Summative
learning communities Conference Form (IF formal or informal
observation is conducted)
Optional forms/documents:
any professional development or PLC related
forms
Page 29
Quarter 4 if not already completed, receive Required forms/documents:
Formal or Informal Observations with district required assessments
written feedback within seven school building required assessments
days (informal observation reflective Data Tool
conversation may be requested by IF receiving a formal observation (at least 1
either party)—1 of each required but
more are optional formal during evaluation cycle):
o Planning Conversation Form A
participate in professional o Formal Observation Documentation Form B
development and professional o Reflective Conversation Form and C
learning communities IF receiving an Informal Observation (at least 1
informal during evaluation cycle)
conduct district or building required o Informal Observation Documentation Form B
assessments during identified testing Formative Conversation/Summative
window(s) Conference Form (IF formal or informal
observation is conducted)
conduct classroom post Final Summative Evaluation Form
assessments (related to your
Student Learning Objective Growth Optional forms/documents:
Goal) and enter results into district Informal Observation Documentation Form B
provided Data Tool
Summative Evaluation (and
Rating) by the last contractual
school day
prepare to review or refine the
Educator Growth Plan (EGP) for next
school year
Page 30
SECTION 12
Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan—Needs Improvement
Process Chart
Evaluation Timeline for Tenured Educators Rated Needs Improvement
Time of Year Action Forms (Required vs. Optional)
Within 30 review Framework with educator to Framework for Teaching
school days or confirm areas of strengths and areas Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
before the end of needed improvement Form
of the year of
an educator evaluator, in collaboration with the Professional Development Plan (PDP)
receiving an educator, creates the Professional
overall rating of Development Plan (PDP)
Needs
Improvement examine potential supports
(the law o peer mentor/facilitator
o extra support personnel
specifies this
box)
confirm implementation of Framework for Teaching
By start date of Professional Development Plan with Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
Professional educator, evaluator, and any Form
Development additional educator who will provide
Plan support for the plan Professional Development Plan (PDP)
adjust Professional Development Plan
as needed
Informal Observations with written Planning Conversation (Form A) and Lesson
feedback within seven school days Plan
(reflective conversation may be Observation Documentation (Form B)
By midpoint of requested by either party) Reflective Conversation (Form C)
Professional One or more Formal Observation PDP Mid-Plan Meeting Conversation
Development Cycle(s)
Plan PDP progress meeting between
educator and evaluator
Identify additional support, if needed,
and preview remainder of school year
one or more Informal Observations Planning Conversation (Form A) and Lesson
After midpoint with written feedback within seven Plan
of MDP school days (reflective conversation Observation Documentation (Form B)
may be requested by either party) as Reflective Conversation (Form C)
needed (optional)
Summative Evaluation Conference Final Summative Evaluation
Tenured educator’s next steps: Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
o Overall Rating of Proficient or Form
Excellent—EGP by agreed upon
By PDP due
date date
o second year of Overall Rating of
Needs Improvement or
Unsatisfactory—Remediation
Page 31
SECTION 13
Tenured Educator Evaluation Plan—Unsatisfactory
Process Chart
Evaluation Timeline for Tenured Educators Rated Unsatisfactory
Time of Year Action Forms (Required vs. Optional)
review educator’s Framework for Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
Within 30 Teaching Formative/Summative Form
school days of Conference Form to confirm the area Remediation Plan
an educator of unsatisfactory teaching practice
receiving an develop Remediation Plan with the
overall rating of educator to address deficiencies
Unsatisfactory cited, provided the deficiencies are
(by law) remediable
evaluator assigns a consulting
teacher to support Remediation Plan
At the confirm implementation of Remediation Plan
beginning of Remediation Plan between Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
the 90 school teacher/specialist, evaluator, and Form
day consulting teacher
Remediation
Plan
(by law)
Before the Informal Observation(s) and reflective Planning Conversation (Form A) and Lesson
midpoint of the conversation(s) Plan
Remediation One or more Formal Observation(s) Observation Documentation (Form B)
Plan Reflective Conversation (Form C)
(by law)
At 45 days of Mid-Plan Summative Evaluation is Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
the conducted and reviewed with the Form
Remediation educator (Mid-Plan) Summative Evaluation
Plan
(by law)
After the Informal Observation(s) and reflective Planning Conversation (Form A) and Lesson
midpoint of the conversation(s) Plan
Remediation One or more Formal Observation(s) Observation Documentation (Form B)
Plan Reflective Conversation (Form C)
Summative Evaluation Conference Formative Conversation/Summative Conference
(with Rating) per Remediation Plan Form
Tenured Educator Next Steps: Final Summative Evaluation
At the o Overall Rating of Proficient or
conclusion of Excellent—EGP through
the 90 day reinstatement to the district’s
Remediation evaluation schedule
Plan
o Overall Rating of Needs
Improvement or Unsatisfactory—
Recommendation for Dismissal
(Section 24-12)
Page 32
Rock Island-Milan
School District 41
Educator Evaluation Plan
Including Student Growth
Appendix
Forms & Resource Guides
Page 33
Tenured Educator Growth Plan (EGP) Introduction
What is the Educator’s Growth Plan?
The most important goal of the evaluation process is to enhance professional practice and improve student
learning.
The Rock Island-Milan School District #41 Evaluation Plan process requires educators to develop an Educator
Growth Plan (EGP). An individual growth goal(s) will be identified by the educator based on the Danielson
Framework for Teaching. Each building or program will also identify a growth goal(s), created by the Building
Leadership Team. Finally, each educator will identify a Student Learning Objective (SLO). This goal(s) centers
around student growth. All of these goals will be aligned to district goals and initiatives. The intent of this
process is to develop meaningful self-reflection and professional growth for all educators leading to increased
student performance.
**ALL classroom teachers (general education, special education, and English
Leaner education) create/modify an EGP EVERY year.
Page 34
Educator Growth Plan (EGP)
Guiding Questions—Relevant to Talk About Teaching (Chapter 3)
This has been modified from Talking about Teaching: Leading Professional Conversations by Charlotte
Danielson, 2009. These guiding questions are meant to help you focus your reflection on student learning and
your teaching practices.
WHAT CONSTITUTES IMPORTANT LEARNING?
What are the key purposes in your learning activities? (1c)
Does the purpose reflect important learning and a view of content as conceptual understanding rather
than rote repetition of facts and procedures? (1a,1e,2b,3c)
WHAT CAUSES LEARNING?
What are students actually doing on a regular basis in your classroom activities? (1e, 2c,2a,2b,3c)
What is the level of intellectual rigor? (2b)
What choices do students have? (1e,3c,3d,3e)
What are their opportunities for reflection and closure on their learning? (1e,3c,3d,4a)
HOW ARE STUDENTS MOTIVATED?
To what extent have you succeeded in creating a learning community in class? (Domain 2)
To what degree do students assume responsibility for their learning on a daily basis? (Domain 2 and
Domain 3)
Conversation Components Observable Components
Domain 1 Domain 4 Domain 2 Domain 3
Planning and Preparation Professional Responsibilities Environment Instruction
1a - Demonstrating Knowledge of 4a - Reflection on Teaching 2a - Creating an Environment of 3a - Communicating with
Content and Pedagogy Respect and Rapport Students
4b - Maintaining Accurate Records
1b - Demonstrating Knowledge of 2b - Establishing a Culture for 3b - Using Questioning and
Students 4c - Communicating with Families Learning* Discussion Techniques
1c - Setting Instructional Outcomes 4d - Participating in a Professional 2c - Managing Classroom 3c - Engaging Students in
Community* Procedures Learning*
1d - Demonstrating Knowledge of
Resources 4e - Growing and Developing 2d - Managing Student Behavior 3d - Using Assessment in
Professionally 2e - Organizing Physical Space Instruction
1e - Designing Coherent
Instruction* 4f - Showing Professionalism 3e - Demonstrating Flexibility and
Responsiveness
1f - Designing Student Assessments
Page 35
Guide Sheet for Developing Educator Growth Plan (EGP) Sample
An EGP will be developed related to student learning and teacher skill improvement. Individual Growth Goal(s)
will represent learning for the educator and go beyond basic implementation of district curriculum or initiatives.
Building or Program Growth Goal(s) will represent building- or program-wide learning and achievement
measures to increase educator skills and student achievement. Student Learning Objective(s) will represent
student growth expectations. Each section in the EGP represents a critical component for developing
pedagogy and supporting student learning.
Educator Growth Plan (EGP)
To develop the goals of the EGP, an educator will reflect on data regarding past professional skills and
student needs, i.e., self-assessment based on the Framework for Teachers. School Improvement Plan (SIP)
goals, RIMSD #41 goals, grade-level data, classroom assessments (both formative and summative), feedback
from others, etc.
The EGP should be written in a SMART Goal format. Example below:
Specific Educator Growth Plan Goal Criteria
S Standards- Is the goal clearly focused on what is to be accomplished?
Why is this important?
Based Is it based on the Framework for Teaching (or Framework for Specialist) Practice?
Can this goal be measured?
M Measurable Will I be able to collect evidence of achievement?
Is this goal based upon multiple sources of data?
A Aligned and Is this goal aligned to district and school improvement goals?
Attainable Will resources be available to achieve this goal?
How will this goal enhance teaching/professional practice/craft?
R Relevant How will this goal enhance learning opportunities for students?
Can this goal be attained within the required timeframe?
T Time Bound
When: provide time frame for goal process
Who: list the students or staff that will be involved in the goal
What: list specific area of teaching/student learning that needs to be improved
Data Source: list data tool(s) that will measure progress of goal—data tools include rubrics, check
sheets, assessments, etc.
Example focused upon 2c—Managing Classroom Procedure and 3c—Engaging Students in Learning:
During 2009-10 (When), the 6th Grade Cross-Disciplinary Team (Who) will increase instructional learning time
and student engagement at the beginning of class through 1) improved student transitions between core
classes and 2) “high interest” Core Content bell work (What), as measured by number of 25 or less tardy
yellow slips and 90% student bell work completion (Data Source).
Using the EGP Goal Form, develop and write an EGP for implementation each year.
Page 36
Educator Growth Plan (EGP)
Educator Guide for Filling Out EGP
Individual Growth Goal(s): These are what you identify individually to grow
professionally, using the Danielson Framework to identity your goal or goals.
Write in SMART goal format (see page 36).
Circle all areas of the Danielson Framework that apply to this goal or goals.
Detail the type of activities, with a timeline/date noted, that will help you reach this goal or goals.
Identify any resource you will use and/or need to reach your goal or goals.
Building/Program Growth Goal(s): The Building Leadership Team (BLT) will
develop this goal or goals and share it will all educators. Educators will copy and
paste the BLT goal(s) into this section.
Write in SMART goal format (see page 36).
Circle all areas of the Danielson Framework that apply to this goal or goals.
Detail the type of activities, with a timeline/date noted, that will help you reach this goal or goals.
Identify any resource you will use and/or need to reach your goal or goals.
**NOTE – Building/Program and School-wide are the same thing. The phrases may be used
interchangeably.
Student Learning Objective(s)/Student Growth Goal(s): See next page for details.
Page 37
Student Learning Objective (SLO)
Educator Guide for Filling Out the SLO Portion of EGP
This form is a guide for the educator to use to facilitate completing the EGP form—it is intended to
outline items to be considered for each section of the EGP form.
Student Learning Objective(s) (SLO):
Student Population – FfT Domain 1
Must address all students present for the pre-test and meeting all attendance & enrollment
requirements
Students must be present in that teacher’s class for the pre-test window to be included on the individual
Student Growth EGP
Allows students to be marked as “exception” on the data tool from the STUDENT GROWTH EGP roster
under “exceptional circumstances” with evaluator approval
Exempt students who do not take the approved assessments, per district guidelines
All students must take the post-test, but only data from students who met the attendance and
enrollment requirements will be used for evaluative purposes
Mid cycle, evidenced-based data review
Assumes 85% in-seat attendance (any student who is not in attendance in that teacher’s class 85% of
that period/class/course is removed from the Student Growth EGP roster)
Assessments: All assessments must be approved by the administrator/evaluator.
Type I Assessment (Examples: MAP Readiness, DRA, Brigance…) – FfT Domains 1 & 3
A reliable assessment that measures a certain group or subset of students in the same manner with the
same potential assessment items
Is scored by a non-district entity (either online or with a provided scoring criteria or rubric)
Is administered either statewide or beyond Illinois
Type II Assessment (Examples: RIHS Biology pre assessment, Kindergarten mid-assessment, PE post-
assessment) – FfT Domains 1 & 3
Is developed or adopted and approved by the Teaching & Learning department of RIMSD #41
Used on a district-wide basis by all educators in a given grade or subject area
Type III Assessment – FfT Domains 1 & 3
Items represent at least 3 Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels/tasks
Scoring is objective (includes scoring guides/rubrics)
Item type, length of assessment, and content of assessment is appropriate for the grade-level /subject
Sufficient number of standards (at least 2), based upon course, subject, grade-level, content-area,
instructional time, and/or Essential Learning Objectives
Aligned to appropriate grade-level standards
3-5 items or tasks for each standard/skill to be assessed for core content area subjects (English, Math,
Social Studies/History, and Science)
Question stem and answer choices are clear, free from bias, and do not cue the correct answer
Educators collaboratively develop assessments within the same content-area, grade-level, and/or
subject-area within the school, unless otherwise agreed to by the administrator/evaluator –FfT
Domain 4
Page 38
Student Data Baseline Analysis –FfT Domains 1 & 4
Uses allowable baseline data: designated pre-assessment, formative assessments, previous student
achievement data, RtI documentation, teacher anecdotal (e.g. behavior, referrals, health, observation),
student criteria (e.g. ELL, special education status, socioeconomic status)
Is measureable
Targets specific academic concepts, skills, or behaviors based upon approved assessment objectives
and student needs
Demonstrates expectations that meet or exceed content area standards
Addresses both students’ strengths and weaknesses
Standards – FfT Domains 1 & 4
Aligned with appropriate Illinois Learning Standards (including CCSS) and/or Next Generation
standards for ELA, Math, Social Studies/History, and Science, respectively; WIDA for EL; or
appropriate state standards (such as music, PE, fine arts, etc.)
Minimum of two (2) standards addressed, as appropriate to the class/course, instructional time, and
student need
Collaboration with peers, as appropriate
Use baseline data to set objective
Growth Goals– FfT Domain 1, 2, & 4
80% of the student population expected to meet growth targets
Uses allowable baseline data to set growth targets
Teacher actively collaborates to set growth targets, but distinct growth targets for each teacher are
allowed
At least one but no more than four tiers of growth targets
Students can uphold high achievement (90% or higher on the pre-test)
Rationale for Growth Goals –FfT Domains 1, 3, & 4
Aligns with school and district improvement plans
Aligns with teaching strategies and learning content
Reviews classroom and school data for areas of strengths and needs by student group, subject area,
concepts, skills, and behavior
Strategies—Domains1, 2, 3, & 4
Identifies observable or documentable strategies
Aligns with school and district improvement plans
Follows research-based best practices
Is continually examined and adjusted to better meet student needs based on gathered data and school-
based discussions of student progress
Support and Resources – FfT Domains 1 & 4
Is realistic, practical, and affordable
Relates to content area or student group targeted by EGP
Activities and Timeline—FfT Domains 1, 2, 3, & 4
Is realistic, relevant, and attainable
Is within appropriate timeframe for the instructional window
Lists appropriate number of activities (at least one per quarter)
Page 39
Educator Growth Plan (EGP) Form
Educator: _______________________________________ School Year: ______________________
Department/Grade Level(s): _______________________________________________________________
Support Team Members: _________________________________________________________________
Individual Growth Goal(s): Completed by ALL educators) (SMART) Example: By December 2018 I will implement at
least two new strategies around building effective relationships XX number of times with students, as measured by lesson plans and
principal observational feedback.
The Goal(s) addresses components in (circle all that apply): (Relevant)
Domain 1 Domain 2 Domain 3 Domain 4
abcdef abcde abcde abcdef
Describe the activities and timeline you will follow to achieve successful completion:
What resources will you need to successfully complete your goal?
Building/Program Growth Goals (created by BLT): (Completed by ALL educators.) (SMART) Example: By May
2019 I will implement at least two new strategies around close reading XX number of times with students, as measured by lesson plans
and principal observational feedback.
The Goal(s) addresses components in (circle all that apply): (Identified by BLT)
Planning & Preparation Classroom Environment Instruction Professionalism
abcdef abcde abcde abcdef
Describe the activities and timeline I will follow to help the building achieve this goal. (Educator fills this out.)
What resources will I need to help the building successfully complete this goal? (Educator fills this out.)
Approved by the end of the first quarter
Page 40
Student Learning Objective Form
(Student Growth Goal)
ONLY for classroom teacher: general education, SpEd, and EL teachers
NOT for counselors, school psychologists, social workers, liaisons, etc.
Student population. Who is being assessed?
What assessment will you use to measure growth?
What does the pre-assessment data tell you about your students’ starting points? What are students’ strengths
and weaknesses? What do other data sources tell you about your students?
What standards have been assessed or been identified as areas of need?
Describe the instructional strategies, activities, and timeline you will follow to achieve successful completion.
What resources will you need to successfully complete this goal?
Based on student groups (tiers), how much growth is expected during the instructional window?
Educator’s Signature: ______________________________ Approved by the end of the first quarter
Evaluator’s Signature: ______________________________ Date: ____________________________
Date: ____________________________
Educator and Evaluator Retain Copies
Page 41
Educator Growth Plan (EGP)
Administrator Approval Guide
This form will be reviewed with all administrators each fall.
Student Population
Accounts for all students who were present for the pre-test window
Includes a student roster
Pre-, Mid-, and Post-Assessment:
(**Reminder of PERA law and assessment requirements will be discussed with administrators.) All
assessments must be approved by the administrator/evaluator.
Type I Assessment (Examples: MAP Readiness, DRA, Brigance…)
o A reliable assessment that measures a certain group or subset of students in the same manner with
the same potential assessment items
o Is scored by a non-district entity (either online or with a provided scoring criteria or rubric)
o Is administered either statewide or beyond Illinois
Type II Assessment (Examples: RIHS Biology pre-assessment, Kindergarten mid-assessment, PE
post-assessment)
o Is developed or adopted and approved by the Teaching & Learning department of RIMSD #41
o Used on a district-wide basis by all educators in a given grade or subject area
Type III Assessment
o Items represent at least 3 Depth of Knowledge (DOK) levels/tasks
o Scoring is objective (includes scoring guides/rubrics)
o Item type, length of assessment, and content of assessment is appropriate for the grade-level
/subject
o Sufficient number of standards (at least 2), based upon course, subject, grade-level, content-area,
instructional time, and/or Essential Learning Objectives
o Aligned to appropriate grade-level standards
o 3-5 items or tasks for each standard/skill to be assessed for core content area subjects (English,
Math, Social Studies/History, and Science)
o Question stem and answer choices are clear, free from bias, and do not cue the correct answer
o Educators collaboratively develop assessments within the same content-area, grade-level, and/or
subject-area within the school, unless otherwise agreed to by the administrator/evaluator
(discussion must occur)
Evaluator must approve all assessments used in Student Learning Objectives (SLO) for student growth
measures in educator evaluations.
Page 42
Student Data Baseline Analysis
Describes what the pre-assessment data tells the educator about the starting points of the students
Identifies the students’ strengths from the allowable data used in the analysis
Identifies the students’ weaknesses from the allowable data used in the analysis
Uses other data sources to expand on the current performance levels of the students (allowable
baseline data includes: designated pre-assessment, formative assessments, previous student
achievement data, RtI documentation, teacher anecdotal (e.g., behavior, referrals, health, observation),
student criteria (e.g., EL, SpEd status, socioeconomic status), standards based report card, etc.
Standards
Aligns with appropriate Illinois Learning Standards (including CCSS) and/or Next Generation standards
for ELA, Math, Social Studies/History, and Science, respectively; WIDA for EL; or appropriate state
standards (such as music, PE, fine arts, etc.)
Minimum of two (2) standards addressed, as appropriate to the class/course, instructional time, and
student need
3-5 questions per standard
Collaboration with peers, as appropriate (discussion must occur)
Use baseline data to set objective
Growth Goals
80% of the student population expected to meet growth targets
Uses allowable baseline data to set growth targets
Teacher actively collaborates to set growth targets, but distinct growth targets for each teacher are
allowed (discussion must occur
At least one but no more than four tiers of growth targets
o Tiers allow for students to uphold high achievement (90% or higher on the pre-test)
Rationale for Growth Goals
Aligns with department, school, and/or district improvement plans/goals, where appropriate
Aligns with teaching strategies and learning content
Reviews classroom and school data for areas of strengths and needs by student group, subject area,
concepts, skills, and behavior
Strategies
Identifies observable or documentable strategies
Aligns with school and district improvement plans
Follows research-based best practices
A plan is shared about how the educator will continually examine and adjust to better meet student
needs based on gathered data and school-based discussions of student progress (discussion must
occur)
Support and Resources
Is realistic, practical, and affordable
Relates to content area or student group targeted by EGP
Activities and Timeline
Is realistic, relevant, and attainable
Is within appropriate timeframe for the instructional window
Lists appropriate number of activities (at least one per quarter)
o Lists specific professional development activities
o Describes/lists how they will monitor student progress
Page 43
Assessment Requirements
Educators are required to use at least two assessments, according to Illinois PERA law. Illinois PERA las has
defined assessments according the three distinct types: Type I, Type II, and Type III. See the chart below:
Type I Type II Type III
An assessment developed or An assessment that is rigorous,
As assessment that measures a adopted and approved by the aligned with the course’s
certain group of students in the school district and used on a curriculum, and that the evaluator
same manner with the same district-wide basis that is given by and educator determine measures
potential assessment items, is all educators in a given grade or student learning
scored by a non-district entity, and subject area.
is widely administered beyond Examples: educator-created
Illinois. Examples: MAP Readiness, assessments, assessments of
Examples: MAP Readiness— collaboratively developed common student performance
computer scored, Illinois assessments, curriculum tests, **Reminder: A Type I or II can
Assessment of Readiness for benchmark assessments qualify as your Type III, as long as
Grades 3-8 you have selected it and it is not
required to be used as an
assessment for evaluation
purposes, by the district or school
building
For the Student Growth EGP, educators must select two assessments from the following menu of options for
each Student Growth EGP cycle:
Pre-K
o GOLD
o common assessments
o teacher created
K-2
o ELA MAP (Diagnostic or district created common assessments)
o Math MAP (Diagnostic or district created common assessments)
o ESGI (district-created common assessments) **any other ESGI assessment must be approved**
o DRA
o other district common assessments, as developed
o teacher created (paper, online, MAP, ESGI, etc.)
Grades 3-6
o ELA MAP Readiness or Diagnostic
o Math MAP Readiness or Diagnostic
o DRA
o other district common assessments, as developed
o teacher created (paper, online, MAP, ESGI, etc.)
Grades 7-8
o ELA MAP Readiness or Diagnostic
o Math MAP Readiness or Diagnostic
o other district common assessments, as developed
o teacher created (paper, online, ESGI, etc.)
Page 44
High School
o custom assessments by content area
o teacher created (paper, online, MAP, ESGI, etc.)
Special Education/English Learners
o Brigance
o WIDA
o teacher created (paper, online, MAP, ESGI, etc.)
All educators in grades K-8 will use at least one district-wide Type I or Type II for building/program-
wide goals. All K-8 grade educators will have building/program -wide goal in both ELA and Math during each
evaluation cycle.
Note: Educators must use the Assessment Approval Form for any Type III assessment. This form must be
completed by the educator and submitted to the evaluator prior to the assessment administration.
Building/Program-Wide Measures
To enhance collaboration and ensure all students across the school show growth, all educators will have at
least one school-wide student growth measure each school year. Evaluator evaluations already include these
measures, so educators and evaluators will have aligned goals and commitments. These measures are based
upon growth, not attainment, and will show how many students achieve their growth targets.
These measures will be developed by a school-based team and will NOT be developed by individual
educators. These growth goals will be communicated with educators at the beginning of the school year or
Student Growth EGP cycle, and educators will not have any additional paperwork or development
requirements.
Educators in grades Pre-Kindergarten through 8th grade will have 2 school-wide measures each school year.
Because of the differences of the evaluation cycles, educators will have between 2 and 4 school-wide
measures over the course of the evaluation cycle.
Assessments will be used to determine these school-wide measures. These measures will be worth a total
of 10% of the summative performance evaluation rating. All other Student Growth EGPs will be worth
at least 20% of the performance evaluation rating.
Page 45
Type of Educator Number of School-Wide Measures to be Used
Measures ELA (Fall Year 1 & Fall Year 2)
Proficient or Excellent Tenured, 4 Math (Fall Year 1 & Fall Year 2)
PreK-6
2 ELA (Fall Year 1)
Non-Tenured AND Tenured Rated Math (Fall Year 1)
Needs Improvement/Unsatisfactory, 4 ELA (Fall Year 1 & Fall Year 2)
Math (Fall Year 1 & Fall Year 2)
PreK-6 2 ELA (Fall Year 1)
Proficient or Excellent Tenured, Math (Fall Year 1)
2
Junior High ELA (Year 1 & Year 2)
Non-Tenured AND Tenured Rated 1
Needs Improvement/Unsatisfactory, ELA (Fall Year 1)
Junior High
Proficient or Excellent Tenured,
High School
Non-Tenured AND Tenured Rated
Needs Improvement/Unsatisfactory,
High School
Assessment Administration and Scoring
Assessments must be administered across the district in similar ways, to ensure consistency and fairness for
all educators. Administration requirements vary based upon the type of assessment.
Type I Assessments, such as MAP Readiness—computer based, must be administered using the
following guidelines:
Considerations Decisions
Recommended the classroom educators, but
Who will administer the test? paraprofessionals and PPS staff can administer at the
discretion of the educator.
What testing conditions must be kept stable Administered within the testing window, to be kept as
across administrations, if possible? stable as possible across administrations, district will
provide guidance.
What materials will be allowed/required during the Scratch paper is allowed but NOT required for each
assessment? student; district will decide materials.
What instructions must/can be read before test Develop a standard script at the district-level; all
administration? How can students be prepared for students must be shown the instructional video from
testing? MAP, if available, prior to the test.
How can/must educators respond to questions Instructions/technology tools can be clarified, students
during the assessment? are encouraged to do their best.
What must educators do during the Educators must stay in the room and actively monitor
administration? students.
Based upon individual prescribed modifications as
How can modifications be made to test noted in IEP, 504, or EL. Disruptive students can take
administration? the assessment in environments separate from the
whole class.
Prior to the test administration, buildings must send
communication to families notifying them of the test
How can test results be communicated with and at-home log-in information (a draft/sample will be
parents and students? developed at the district to be sent by the building via
hotline, letters, etc.). Students must be shown their
results, their growth targets, and any other applicable
information.
Type II/III Assessments, such as educator-created assessments must be administered using the
following guidelines:
Considerations Decisions
Page 46
Who will administer the test? The classroom educator is recommended, but
paraprofessional and PPS staff can administer at the
What testing conditions must be kept stable discretion of the educator.
across administrations, if possible? Administered within the testing window, to be kept as
stable as possible across administrations, district will
What materials will be allowed/required during the provide guidance for Type II (common) assessments
assessment? and building will provide guidance for Type III
(educator created) assessments.
How will materials be stored before, during, and Scratch paper is allowed but NOT required for each
after the assessment? student, what is allowed on the pre-test is allowed on
the post-test, district will provide guidance for Type II
What instructions must/can be read before test (common) assessments and building will provide
administration? How can students be prepared for guidance for Type III (educator created) assessments.
testing? All pre- and post-assessments must be stored in a
How can/must educators respond to questions secure and/or locked area; all test questions (as
during the assessment? shown on the pre- and post-assessments) cannot be
What must educators do during the shared with students during the instructional interval.
administration? Instructions must be the same on the pre-assessment
and the post-assessment.
How can modifications be made to test
administration? Instructions/technology tools can be clarified, students
are encouraged to do their best.
How can test results be communicated with Educators must stay in the room and actively monitor
parents and students? students.
Based upon individual prescribed modifications as
noted in IEP, 504, or EL. Disruptive students can take
the assessment in environments separate from the
whole class.
Educators must communicate the pre-test score and
growth targets with the students. Standards-based
strengths and areas of opportunity may be
communicated with students, but individual item
analysis cannot be discussed.
Page 47
Type I Assessments, such as MAP Readiness—computer based, must be scored using the following
guidelines:
Questions Decisions
Who will score the assessments? Computer-scored.
How must assessments be scored? Computer-based.
When will assessments be scored? Immediately.
What data will the teacher receive? In what Roster report (pre-test and post-test scores).
format?
What data will the evaluator need? In what Roster report; data tool is provided by the educator
format? with the pre-test, growth target, and post-test scores.
Will educators need to keep physical copies of the Yes, for the length of the evaluation cycle.
assessment? For what length of time?
Type II/III Assessments, such as educator-created assessments, must be scored using the following
guidelines:
Questions Decisions
Who will score the assessments?
ELA and Math Type II – computer-scored for MAP
Other Type II and Type III – certified classroom
educator.
Same materials (e.g., rubrics and scoring guides)
How must assessments be scored? must be used consistently on both the pre-
assessment and post-assessment.
When will assessments be scored? By the established deadline.
What data will the evaluator need? In what Pre-test score, growth targets, and post-test scores.
format? The evaluator can request to see individual student
assessments.
Will educators need to keep physical copies of the Yes, for the length of the evaluation cycle.
assessment? For what length of time?
Page 48
Observation Documentation and Conference Steps
Informal Observation Steps
Evaluators will use Evaluwise (Observation Documentation Form B) for the purpose of documenting
observed practices in all four domains.
The educator will receive a written copy of the Observation Documentation Form about what was
observed from the evaluator.
Reflective conversations will follow observations for first year educators. For all other educators, a
Reflective Conversation shall occur if requested, by either party.
The data obtained from the informal observation will be used to guide educators towards effective
professional practices.
The data from the informal observations will be gathered by the Evaluator and used in part for the
summative evaluations.
Observed practices that are harmful will be immediately addressed and corrected.
Formal Observation Steps
Planning Conversation Steps:
Based on mutually agreed upon dates for both the Planning Conversation and the formal observation the
educator will complete the following steps:
Complete Planning Conversation Form A.
Submit this completed form to the evaluator no later than a day before the Planning Conversation.
Bring a copy of this completed form to the Planning Conversation and the completed Lesson Plan Form.
(Lesson Plan Form is agreed upon between educator and evaluator.)
Formal Observation Steps:
Evaluator will document the observation of teaching.
The duration of the formal observation will be the length of the lesson.
Evaluator will complete and submit Observation Documentation Form B (Actions and Statements
Section only) to the educator at least one day prior to the mutually agreed upon Reflective
Conversation, but not to exceed seven school days.
Educator will complete and submit to evaluator the Reflective Conversation Form C at least one day
prior to the mutually agreed upon Reflective Conversation, but not to exceed seven school days.
Reflective Conversation Steps:
A Reflective Conversation will be held within seven school days of each formal observation at a
mutually agreeable time.
Observation Documentation Form and Reflective Conversation Form will be reviewed during the
Reflective Conversation.
Educator will bring any additional relevant artifacts pertaining to the observed lesson.
The educator and evaluator will collaboratively determine and document Domain What’s Working,
Areas for Growth/Reflection Opportunities, and Next Steps section on Observation Documentation
Form.
Page 49
Planning Conversation Form A
(To be submitted to evaluator at least 1 day prior to the Planning Conversation Meeting)
Educator: _______________________________________ School: __________________________
Department/Grade Level(s): _________________________ Subject(s): ________________________
Evaluator: _______________________________________ Date: ____________________________
Conversation Components Observable Components
Domain 1 Domain 4 Domain 2 Domain 3
Planning and Preparation Professional Responsibilities Environment Instruction
1a - Demonstrating Knowledge of 4a - Reflection on Teaching 2a - Creating an Environment of 3a - Communicating with
Content and Pedagogy 4b - Maintaining Accurate Records Respect and Rapport Students
1b - Demonstrating Knowledge of 4c - Communicating with Families 2b - Establishing a Culture for 3b - Using Questioning and
Students 4d - Participating in a Professional Learning* Discussion Techniques
1c - Setting Instructional Outcomes Community* 2c - Managing Classroom 3c - Engaging Students in
1d - Demonstrating Knowledge of 4e - Growing and Developing Procedures Learning*
Resources Professionally 2d - Managing Student Behavior 3d - Using Assessment in
1e - Designing Coherent 4f - Showing Professionalism 2e - Organizing Physical Space Instruction
Instruction* 3e - Demonstrating Flexibility and
1f - Designing Student Assessments Responsiveness
Guiding Questions for Discussion Between Educator and Evaluator:
(Additional questions may arise during the planning conference)
Briefly describe the students in your class. What have you learned about your students this year that
has gone into planning for this lesson? (1b)
Discuss how you planned and prepared for this lesson. What are the specific learning targets of the
lesson (explain link to the district curriculum guide), and how will you communicate these to students?
(1a & 1c)
Discuss how you have organized the overall structure, pacing, and materials within this lesson to
engage students in the learning process? (1d, links to 3b)
How have you organized the classroom to promote a respectful learning environment to help students
be successful in your classroom? (Links to 2a, 2c, and 2d)
During the observation, I will be collecting evidence about your teaching directions, procedures,
explanations, discussion process and learning expectations, transitions and closure. What specific
information would you like me to collect about your instructional communication? (Links to 3a, 3c)
How have you differentiated and adjusted your teaching through questions, discussion, and activities?
(Links to 3d)
How do you plan to assess and document evidence of your students’ progress towards mastery of the
identified learning targets? (1e, Links to 3c)
How has this lesson been influenced by collaboration with other teachers? How has involvement in
different professional activities helped you to develop this lesson? (Links to 4d and 4e)
Thinking beyond the classroom, how have you continued to communicate and connect with the
students’ families to help build a link between home and school? How has family information continued
to influence your classroom management and instructional decisions with individual students? (Links to
1b, 4b, and 4c)
Beyond what we have already discussed, what else would you like to share with me about the lesson
that I will be observing? (Links to all Domains)
Page 50
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
Educator Evaluation Plan including Student Growth
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search