District Professional Growth and Effectiveness Plan
Carlisle County Schools
Developed by 50/50 Committee Members
Administrators
Kelli Edging
DeeAnne Arant
Jessica Thomas
Dustin Roberts
Teachers
Michelle Trevathan
Chuck Ehrsam
Rhonda King
Jessica Perry
Contents
District Professional Growth and Effectiveness Plan ........................................................................................................................ 1
District Professional Growth and Effectiveness Plan ........................................................................................................................ 1
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System – Certified Teacher ............................................................................................ 2
The Kentucky Framework for Teaching........................................................................................................................................ 5
Professional Practice......................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Observation ................................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Observation Conferencing ........................................................................................................................................................... 8
Observer Certification ................................................................................................................................................................ 11
Observer Calibration .................................................................................................................................................................. 12
Peer Observation ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Student Voice ............................................................................................................................................................................. 14
Comparability ............................................................................................................................................................................. 19
Products of Practice/Other Sources of Evidence .................................................................................................................. 25
Rating Professional Practice .................................................................................................................................................. 26
Determining the Overall Performance Category ................................................................................................................... 26
Appeals…(Applies to TPGES, PPGES and OPGES)…………………......................................…………………………………………………………………32
Roles and Definitions ...................................................................................................................................................................... 35
Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Components – Overview and Summative Model ............................. 36
Principal Performance Standards ............................................................................................................................................... 37
Professional Practice .................................................................................................................................................................. 38
Working Conditions Goal (Goal inherited by Assistant Principal) ......................................................................................... 41
State Contribution – ASSIST/Next Generation Learners (NGL) Goal Based on Trajectory (Goal inherited by Assistant
Principal) ............................................................................................................................................................................... 44
Rating Professional Practice .................................................................................................................................................. 46
Determining the Overall Performance Category........................................................................................................................ 49
Principal PGES Cycle .............................................................................................................................................................. 51
Appendix ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 52
OPGES Other Professionals Growth and Effectiveness System: …………………………………………………………………..52
District Professional Growth and Effectiveness Plan
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AND EFFECTIVENESS SYSTEM OVERVIEW
Effective teaching and school leadership depend on clear standards and expectations, reliable
feedback, and the tools, resources and support for professional growth and continuous
improvement. The Kentucky Department of Education, with the guidance and oversight of various
steering committees, has designed, developed, field tested and piloted a new statewide
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PGES).
With the passage of Senate Bill 1 in 2009, Kentucky embarked on a comprehensive system of
education reform integrating:
• relevant and rigorous standards
• aligned and meaningful assessments
• highly effective teaching and school leadership
• data to inform instruction and policy decisions
• innovation
• school improvement
All are critical elements of student success, but it is effective teaching supported by effective
leadership that will ensure all Kentucky students are successful and graduate from high school
college/career-ready.
The PGES is designed to measure teacher and leader effectiveness and serve as a catalyst for
professional growth and continuous improvement, and is a key requirement of Kentucky’s
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) flexibility waiver and the state’s Race to the Top
grant.
1
ASSURANCES
CERTIFIED SCHOOL PERSONNEL EVALUATION PLAN
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
The Carlisle County School District hereby assures the Commissioner of Education that:
This evaluation plan was developed by an evaluation committee composed of an equal number of teachers and
administrators.
The superintendent shall server as the contact person responsible for monitoring evaluation training and
implementing the Professional Growth and Effectiveness system.
The evaluation process and criteria for evaluation will be explained to and discussed with all certified
personnel annually within one month of reporting for employment. This shall occur prior to the
implementation of the plan. The evaluation of each certified staff member will be conducted or supervised by
the immediate supervisor of the employee.
All certified employees shall develop an Individual Professional Growth Plan (IGP) that shall be aligned with
the school/district improvement plan and comply with the requirements of 704 KAR 3:345. The IGP will be
reviewed annually.
All administrators, to include the superintendent and non-tenured teachers will be evaluated annually.
All tenured teachers will be evaluated a minimum of once every three years.
Each evaluator will be trained and approved in the use of appropriate evaluation techniques and the use of
local instruments and procedures.
Each person evaluated will have both formative and summative evaluations with the evaluator regarding
his/her performance.
Each evaluatee shall be given a copy of his/her summative evaluation and the summative evaluation shall be
filed with the official personnel records.
The local evaluation plan provides for the right to a hearing as to every appeal, an opportunity to review all
documents presented to the evaluation appeals panel, and a right to presence of evaluatee’s chosen
representative.
The evaluation plan process will not discriminate on the basis of race, national origin, religion, marital status,
sex, or disability.
This evaluation plan will be reviewed as needed and any substantive revisions will be submitted to the
Department of Education for approval.
2
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System – Certified Teacher
The vision for the Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PGES) is to have every student
taught by an effective teacher. The goal is to create a fair and equitable system to measure
teacher effectiveness and act as a catalyst for professional growth.
Roles and Definitions
1.
Artifact: A product of a certified school personnel’s work that demonstrates
knowledge and skills.
2.
Assistant Principal: A certified school personnel who devotes the majority of
employed time in the role of assistant principal, for which administrative
certification is required by EPSB.
3.
Certified Administrator: A certified school personnel, other than principal or
assistant principal, who devotes the majority of time in a position for which
administrative certification is required by EPSB.
4.
Certified School Personnel: A certified employee, below the level of
superintendent, who devotes the majority of time in a position in a district for
which certification is required by EPSB.
5.
Conference: A meeting between the evaluator and the evaluatee for the purposes
of providing feedback, analyzing the results of an observation or observations,
reviewing other evidence to determine the evaluatee’s accomplishments and areas
for growth, and leading to the establishment or revision of a professional growth
plan.
6.
Evaluatee: A certified school personnel who is being evaluated.
7.
Evaluator: The primary evaluator as described in KRS 156.557(5)(c)2.
8.
Formative Evaluation: Is defined by KRS 156.557(1)(a).
9.
Full Observation: An observation conducted by a certified observer that is
conducted for the length of a full class period or full lesson.
10.
Improvement Plan: A plan for improvement up to twelve months in duration for:
a. Teachers and other professionals who are rated ineffective in professional
practice and have a low overall student growth rating.
b. Principals who are rated ineffective in professional practice and have high,
expected, or low overall student growth rating.
11.
Job Category: A group or class of certified school personnel positions with closely
related functions.
12.
Local Contribution: A rating based on the degree to which a teacher, other
professional, principal, or assistant principal meets student growth goals and is used
for the student growth measure.
13.
Local Formative Growth Measures: Is defined by KRS 156.557(1)(b).
14.
Mini Observation: An observation conducted by a certified observer for 20-30
minutes in length.
15.
Observation: a data collection process conducted by a certified observer, in person
or through video, for the purpose of evaluation, including notes, professional
judgments, and examination of artifacts made during one (1) or more classroom or
worksite visits of any duration.
16.
Observer Certification: A process of training and ensuring that certified school
personnel who serve as observers of evaluatees have demonstrated proficiency in
rating teachers and other professionals for the purposes of evaluation and
feedback.
3
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Observer calibration: The process of ensuring that certified school personnel have
maintained proficiency and accuracy in observing teachers and other professionals
for the purposes of evaluation and providing feedback.
Other Professionals: Certified school personnel, except for teachers,
administrators, assistant principals, or principals.
Overall Student growth Rating: The rating that is calculated for a teacher or other
professional evaluatee pursuant to the requirements of Section 7(9) and (10) of this
administrative regulation and that is calculated for an assistant principal or principal
evaluatee pursuant to the requirements of Section 10(8) of this administrative
regulation.
Peer observation: Observation and documentation by trained certified school
personnel below the level of principal or assistant principal.
Performance Criteria: The areas, skills, or outcomes on which certified school
personnel are evaluated.
Performance Rating: The summative description of a teacher, other professional,
principal, or assistant principal evaluatee’s performance, including the ratings
listed in Section 7(8) of this administrative regulation.
Principal: A certified school personnel who devotes the majority of employed
time in the role of principal, for which administrative certification is required by
the Education Professional Standards Board pursuant to 16 KAR 3:050.
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System: An evaluation system to support
and improve the performance of certified school personnel that meets the
requirements of KRS 156.557(1)(c), (2), and (3) and that uses clear and timely
feedback to guide professional development.
Professional Growth Plan: An individualized plan for a certified personnel that is
focused on improving professional practice and leadership skills, aligned with
performance standards and the specific goals and objectives of the school
improvement plan or the district improvement plan, built using a variety of
sources and types of data that reflect student needs and strengths, evaluatee
data, and school and district data, produced in consultation with the evaluator as
described in Section 9(1), (2), (3), and (4) and Section 12(1), (2), (3), and (4) of this
administrative regulation, and includes: (a) Goals for enrichment and
development that are established by the evaluatee in consultation with the
evaluator; (b) Objectives or targets aligned to the goals; (c) An action plan for
achieving the objectives or targets and a plan for monitoring progress; (d) A
method for evaluating success; and (e) The identification, prioritization, and
coordination of presently available school and district resources to accomplish the
goals.
Professional Practice: The demonstration, in the school environment, of the
evaluatee’s professional knowledge and skill.
Professional Practice Rating: The rating that is calculated for a teacher or other
professional evaluatee pursuant to Section 7(8) of this administrative regulation
and that is calculated for a principal or assistant principal evaluatee pursuant to
the requirements of Section 10(7) of this administrative regulation.
Self-Reflection: The process by which certified personnel assesses the effectiveness
and adequacy of their knowledge and performance for the purpose of identifying
areas for professional learning and growth.
Sources of Evidence: The multiple measures listed in KRS 156.557(4) and in
Sections 7 and 10 of this administrative regulation.
4
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
State Contribution: The student growth percentiles, as defined in 703 KAR 5:200,
Section 1(11), for teachers and other professionals, and the next generation
learners goal for principals and assistant principals.
Student Growth: Is defined by KRS 156.557(1)(c).
Student Growth Goal: A goal focused on learning, that is specific, appropriate,
realistic, and time-bound, that is developed collaboratively and agreed upon by
the evaluatee and evaluator, and that uses local formative growth measures.
Student Growth Percentile: each student's rate of change compared to other
students with a similar test score history.
Student Voice Survey: The student perception survey provided by the department
that is administered annually to a minimum of one (1) district-designated group of
students per teacher evaluatee or a district designated selection of students and
provides data on specific aspects of the instructional environment and professional
practice of the teacher or other professional evaluatee.
Summative Evaluation: Is defined by KRS 156.557(1)(d).
Teacher: A certified school personnel who has been assigned the lead
responsibility for student learning in a classroom, grade level, subject, or course
and holds a teaching certificate under 16 KAR 2:010 or 16 KAR 2:020.
Working Condition’s Survey Goal: a school improvement goal set by a principal or
assistant principal every two (2) years with the use of data from the departmentapproved working conditions survey.
For Additional Definitions and Roles, please see 704KAR 3:370 Professional Growth and
Effectiveness System
The Kentucky Framework for Teaching
The Framework for Teaching is designed to support student achievement and professional
practice through the domains of Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment,
Instruction, and Professional Responsibilities. The Framework also includes themes such as
equity, cultural competence, high expectations, developmental appropriateness,
accommodating individual needs, effective technology integration, and student assumption of
responsibility. It provides structure for feedback for continuous improvement through
individual goals that target student and professional growth, thus supporting overall school
improvement. Evidence supporting a teacher’s professional practice will be situated within
one or more of the four domains of the framework. Performance will be rated for each
component according to four performance levels: Ineffective, Developing, Accomplished, and
Exemplary. The summative rating will be a holistic representation of performance, combining
data from multiple sources of evidence across each domain.
The use of professional judgment based on multiple sources of evidence promotes a more
holistic and comprehensive analysis of practice, rather than over-reliance on one individual
data point or rote calculation of practice based on predetermined formulas. Evaluators will
also take into account how educators respond to or apply additional supports and resources
designed to promote student learning, as well as their own professional growth and
development. Finally, professional judgment gives evaluators the flexibility to account for a
wide variety of factors related to individual educator performance, such as: school-specific
priorities that may drive practice in one domain, an educator’s number of goals, experience
5
level and/or leadership opportunities, and contextual variables that may impact the learning
environment, such as unanticipated outside events or traumas.
Evaluators must use the following categories of evidence in determining overall ratings:
Required Sources of Evidence
 Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection
 Observation
 Student Voice
 Student Growth Percentiles and/or Student Growth Goals
All components and sources of evidence related supporting an educator’s professional practice and
student growth ratings will be completed and recorded in the Educator Development Suite (EDS)
housed within the Continuous Instructional Improvement Technology System (CIITS).
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
6
Professional Practice
Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection
The Professional Growth Plan will address realistic, focused, and measurable professional
goals. The plan will connect data from multiple sources including classroom observation
feedback, data on student growth and achievement, and professional growth needs
identified through self-assessment and reflection. In collaboration with the administrators,
teachers will identify explicit goals which will drive the focus of professional growth
activities, support, and on-going reflection.
Reflective practices and professional growth planning are iterative processes. The teacher
(1) reflects on his or her current growth needs based on multiple sources of data and
identifies an area or areas for focus; (2) collaborates with his or her administrator to
develop a professional growth plan and action steps; (3) implements the plan; (4) regularly
reflects on the progress and impact of the plan on his or her professional practice; (5)
modifies the plan as appropriate; (6) continues implementation and ongoing reflection; (7)
and, finally, conducts a summative reflection on the degree of goal attainment and the
implications for next steps.
Required








All teachers will participate in self-reflection and professional growth planning each year.
Self-reflection is a continuous process throughout the year.
All teachers will document self-reflection and professional growth planning in CIITS.
A self-reflection must be completed by September 15 of each school year.
An additional self-reflection will be completed after the formal observation on a teacher’s
summative year or any other time if a principal requests it be completed.
The Professional Growth Plan and Student Growth Goal will be completed and approved
by September 30.
Monitoring Process:
1. Submit to building administration by the dates indicated above for review.
2. Conduct a midyear review with administration to check progress and revise if needed.
3. Assess during Summative Conference or by May 15 if not during the summative year or
during the summative conference if during summative year.
Late hires will have 30 work days to complete their Self-Reflection, Student Growth Goal
and Professional Growth Plan.
7
Observation
The observation process is one source of evidence to determine teacher effectiveness that
includes supervisor and peer observation for each certified teacher. Both peer and
supervisor observations will use the same instruments. The supervisor observation will
provide documentation and feedback to measure the effectiveness of a teacher’s
professional practice. Only the supervisor observation will be used to inform calculate a
summative rating. Peer observation will only be used for formative feedback on teaching
practice in a collegial atmosphere of trust and common purpose. NO summative ratings
will be given by the peer observer. The rationale for each type of observation is to
encourage continued professional learning in teaching and learning through critical
reflection.
Observation Model
Required
The observation model must fulfill the following minimum criteria:
 Four (4) observations in the summative cycle. A minimum of 3 observations
conducted by the supervisor and 1 observation conducted by the peer.
 The required peer observation must occur in the final year of the cycle.
 Final observation is conducted by the supervisor and is a full observation.
 All observations must be documented in CIITS.
The Progressive Model (3&1 model)
Observers will conduct three partial observations of approximately 20-30 minutes
each. The partial observations may be scheduled or unscheduled. Because these
are shorter sessions, the observer will make note of the components observed in
order to identify "look fors" in the next partial observation session. The final
observation is a full observation consisting of a full class or lesson observation.
Late Hires
 Hired after the 60th instructional day
 One of each observation type will be conducted (Full, Mini, Peer)
Break in Service
 An employee that experiences a break in service for 60 or more will have a reduction in the
number of observations conducted. This reduction will include 1 peer observation and one
full observation.
Observation Conferencing
Required
Observers will adhere to the following observation conferencing requirements
 Conduct observation conference within five (5) working days.
 The summative evaluation conference shall be held at the end of the summative
evaluation cycle.
 The 2 partial observations may occur prior to summative year at discretion of the principal
and 1 full observation as well as 1 peer observation will occur the year of the summative
evaluation.
 Two partial observations will be conducted by the principal/assistant principal. These
observations can be scheduled or unscheduled. No pre-conference is required for these
8


partial observations but a face to face post conference is required within 5 working days
of the observation
The full observation is required to have a pre and post conference. The pre-conference
will be done electronically and at least 24 hours prior to observation (Pre-conference form
in appendix). The post conference will be a face to face meeting within 5 days of the
observation.
Pre-Observation form(in Appendix) will address learning targets, sequencing, and
assessment
Click here
Observation Schedule
to Return
to Table
Required
of
 Observations may begin after the evaluation training takes place within 30 calendar Contents
days

of reporting for employment each school year.
Timeline for when observations must be completed
Tenured/3yearsummative
Timeline-Summative Year Only
Observation Window
First
Semester/Prior
Summative Year
First
Semester/Prior
Summative Year
Type of Observation
of Partial
to Partial
Second Semester
Partial
By May 1 for tenured
Full
Observer
Principal/Assistant
Principal
Principal/Assistant
Principal
or
Peer
Observer
Principal/Assistant
Principal
or
Peer
Observer
Principal/Assistant
Principal
*If the PGES Process yields an ineffective determination multiple observations will be completed
on tenured/3 year summative teachers.
Non-Tenured/1yearsummative
Timeline-Annually
Observation Window
By October 15
Type of Observation
Partial
By December 15
Partial
By February 28
Partial
By May 1 for non-tenured
Full
9
Observer
Principal/Assistant
Principal
Principal/Assistant
Principal
or
Peer
Observer
Principal/Assistant
Principal
or
Peer
Observer
Principal/Assistant
Principal
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
10
Observer Certification
All administrators serving as a primary evaluator must complete the Initial Certified Evaluation
Training prior to conducting observations for the purpose of evaluation.
To ensure consistency of observations, evaluators must complete the Teachscape Proficiency
Observation Training, the current approved state platform. The system allows observers to
develop a deep understanding of how the four domains of the Kentucky Framework for Teaching
(FfT) are applied in observation. There are 3 sections of the proficiency system:



Framework for Teaching Observer Training
Framework for Teaching Scoring Practice
Framework for Teaching Proficiency Assessment
Required
The cycle for observation certification established is as follows [NOTE: This evaluation certification
cycle mirrors the existing 704 KAR 3:370 related to initial and update training for certified
evaluators]:
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4

Certification
Calibration
Calibration
Recertification
Only supervisors who have passed the proficiency assessment can conduct mini and full
observations for the purpose of evaluation. In the event that a supervisor has yet to
complete the proficiency assessment, or if the supervisor does not pass the assessment,
the district will provide the following supports:
o Observation data provided by a substitute observer is considered a valid source of
evidence only if the supervisor participated (passively) in the observation.
o In cases where the supervisor is not certified though the proficiency system and is
therefore unable to conduct observations during the observation window, the
district will use the following process to ensure teachers have access to
observations and feedback:
In year 1, supervisors will complete the proficiency assessments to gain certification by August 1 or
30 days after hire date whichever is the latter. In year 4, supervisors must complete the proficiency
assessments to gain recertification by July 30.
If a supervisor does not pass the initial assessments, they will meet with a Teachscape certified
administrator to review and discuss Domains 2 and 3 prior to retaking the assessments. Support
and training regarding the Framework for Teaching will be provided until assessments are passed.
Training and support include coaching by a certified trainer and study sessions prior to retaking the
assessments.
A district Teachscape certified supervisor, assigned by the District Supervisor of Instruction will
conduct observations if the school principal is not certified. If a principal is hired after the
evaluation process has begun they will have 30 days to complete Initial Certified Evaluation
11
Training and a substitute evaluator will be assigned by the District Supervisor of Instruction until
this training is completed.
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Observer Calibration
As certified observers may tend to experience “drift” in rating accuracy, the district will establish a
calibration process to be completed each year where certification is not required (see chart under
Observer Certification). This calibration process will be completed in years two (2) and three (3)
after certification. Calibration ensures ongoing accuracy in scoring teaching practice; an awareness
of the potential risk for rater bias; and that observers refresh their knowledge of the training and
scoring practice.
Required


Observer calibration during years 2 & 3 of the Observer Certification process based on
Teachscape, the current state approved technology.
Re-certification after year 3.
The district will provide calibration training during year 2 and 3. The Supervisor of Instruction
will monitor certification and calibration. We will utilize the state approved certification
platform and the current state approved technology. Evaluators who score in the Red or
Yellow rating area will utilize additional resources on the state approved technology platform
as well as mentoring from an approved evaluator in the district if needed to improve scoring
accuracy.
Peer Observation
A Peer Observer will observe, collect, share evidence, and provide feedback for formative purposes
only. Peer Observers will not score a teacher’s practice, nor will peer observation data be shared
with anyone other than the Observee unless permission is granted.
Required






All teachers will receive a peer observation in their summative year.
All Peer observers participating during the summative year observations will complete the
state developed training once every three (3) years.
All required peer observations must be documented in CIITS.
All teachers will participate in the KET Peer Observation Training as part of their
Professional Development as mandated by the Kentucky Department of Education.
Principals will assign Peer Observers. All teachers will receive a peer observation in their
summative year and conduct a Peer Observation.
All peer observation documentation will be accessed only by the evaluatee and the
evidence will be documented in the state approved technology platform.
12
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
13
Student Voice
The Student Voice Survey is a confidential, on-line survey that collects student feedback on specific
aspects of the classroom experience and teaching practice.
Required













All teachers will participate in the state-approved Student Voice Survey annually with a
minimum of one identified group of students.
Student selection for participation must be consistent across the district. The survey will
be given to the class with the largest enrollment for each teacher.
Results will be used to inform Professional Practice.
Formative years’ data will be used to inform Professional Practice in the summative year.
All teachers and appropriate administrative staff read, understand, and sign the district’s
Student Voice Ethics Statement.
The Student Voice Survey will be administered between the hours of 7 AM and 5 PM local
time.
The survey will be administered in the school.
Survey data will only be considered when 10 or more students are respondents. (In
instances where 10 students are not in the survey course, every effort will be made to
combine courses from the teacher’s caseload to reach the 10 student cap.)
In cases that do not meet the state technology format of the survey, a paper/pencil survey
may be administered.
The District Student Voice Survey Point-of-Contact is the instructional supervisor.
One class/section will be assigned by the principal to take the student voice survey
for each teacher.
The principal/designee will be responsible for scheduling the Student Voice Survey
during the state window.
If needed, accommodations will be made for all students such as readers or the use
of technology to assist students in completing the Student Voice Survey. This
process will be ensured through monitoring by the Supervisor of Instruction.
Click here to Return to Table of Contents
14
Student Growth
The student growth measure is comprised of two possible contributions: a state contribution and a
local contribution. The state contribution only pertains to about 20% of teachers in the following
content areas and grade levels participating in state assessments:
 4th – 8th Grade
 Reading
 Math
The state contribution is reported using Student Growth Percentiles (SGP). The local contribution
uses the Student Growth Goal Setting Process and applies to all teachers in the district, including
those who receive SGP. The following graphic provides a roadmap for determining which teachers
receive which contributions:
Do you teach
students in grades 48?
NO
YES
Do you teach in the
Math or ELA
content areas?
NO
YES
Do your students
participate in the
Math or ELA
K-PREP Assessment?
NO
YES
LOCAL & STATE
CONTRIBUTION
LOCAL
CONTRIBUTION
ONLY
Click here to Return to Table of Contents
State Contribution – Median Student Growth Percentiles (MSGP) – Applies to 20% of teachers
(Math/ELA, Grades 4-8)
The state contribution for student growth is a rating based on each student’s rate of
change compared to other students with a similar test score history (“academic peers”)
expressed as a percentile. The scale for determining acceptable growth will be determined
15
by the Kentucky Board of Education and provided to the district by the Kentucky
Department of Education.
Local Contribution – Student Growth Goals (SGG) – Applies to all teachers
The local contribution for the student growth measure is a rating based on the degree to
which a teacher meets the growth goal for a set of students over an identified interval of
instruction (i.e. trimester, semester, year-long) as indicated in the teacher’s Student
Growth Goal (SGG). All teachers will develop an SGG for inclusion in the student growth
measure. All Student Growth Goals will be determined by the teacher in collaboration
with the principal and will be grounded in the fundamentals of assessment quality (Clear
Purpose, Clear Targets, Sound Design, Effective Communication, and Student
Involvement).
Rigor-congruency to the Kentucky Core Academic Standards
Comparability- Data collected for the student growth goal must use comparable criteria
across similar classrooms (classrooms that address the same standards) to determine
progress toward mastery of standards/enduring skills. Examples of similar classrooms
might be 6th grade science classrooms, 3rd grade classrooms, English 1 classrooms, band or
art classes. For similar classrooms, teachers would be expected to use common measures
or rubrics to determine competency in performance at the level intended by the standards
being assessed. Although specific assessments may vary, the close alignment to the intent
of the standard is comparable.
Student Growth Goal Criteria




The SGG is congruent with Kentucky Core Academic Standards and appropriate for the
grade level and content area for which it was developed.
The SGG represents or encompasses an enduring skill, process, understanding, or concept
that students are expected to master by taking a particular course (or courses) in school.
The SGG will allow high- and low-achieving students to adequately demonstrate their
knowledge.
The SGG provides access and opportunity for all students, including students with
disabilities, ELLs, and gifted/talented students.
Rigor and Comparability of Student Growth Goals
To fulfill the criteria of measuring student growth at the local level, a protocol must be established
to ensure rigorous and comparable growth measures used for all teachers.
Required



All teachers will write a student growth goal based on the criteria
Protocol for ensuring rigor
Protocol for ensuring comparability
16
Click here to Return to
Table of Contents
Rigor
 Select one of the following choices for demonstrating Rigor:
 Rigor Rubric -SGG’s will be reviewed using the Rigor Rubric during Professional Learning
Community Meetings. The PLC’s are made up of administration and certified staff.
 The district adopted Student Growth Goal (SGG) Rubric for assessing the rigor of all SGG.
 This rubric was selected by the 50/50 Committee to ensure rigor of Student Growth Goals
by guiding teachers and leadership in a protocol to write measurable goals for student
achievement.
Carlisle County School District Student Growth Goal (SGG) Rubric
S.M.A.R.T. Structure of the Student Growth Goal
‘Specific’
Acceptable
Needs Revision
Insufficient
Does the SGG focus on a
Identifies an area of need
Identifies a specific area Is not focused on a
specific area of need based pertaining to current
of need, but lacks
specific area of
on an enduring skill or
students’ abilities.
supporting data for
need.
understanding/overarching Includes growth and
current students.
goal?
proficiency targets that
Includes both a growth
Includes only a
establish and differentiate
target and a proficiency
growth or a
expected performance for
target, but fails to
proficiency target.
ALL students (e.g. Special
differentiate expected
Edu, GT, ELL, etc.)
performance for one or
both targets.
‘Measurable’
Acceptable
Needs Revision
Insufficient
Is it an appropriate
Uses appropriate measures Uses measures that fail
Uses no baseline
measure selected to assess for base-line, mid-course,
to clearly demonstrate
data or uses
the goal?
and end of year/course
performance for the
irrelevant data.
data collection.
identified skill.
Is anchored in baseline
Only allows students to
Does not assess the
data and identifies multiple demonstrate
level of competency
measures that
competency of part, but intended in the
demonstrate where
not all aspects of the
standards.
students are in meeting or
standards being
exceeding the intent of the assessed.
standard(s) being assessed.
17
‘Appropriate’
Appropriate/attainable:
Is the SGG rigorous,
realistic, and standards
based?
Acceptable
Aligned to grade level
standards appropriate for
the grade level and content
area for which it was
developed.
Addresses critical content
and/or enduring skill(s)
which students are
expected to master and are
necessary for advancement
to future coursework.
‘Reliable’
Is the SGG results-oriented
and relevant?
Acceptable
Includes growth and
proficiency targets that are
rigorous for students, but
attainable with support.
Rigor is determined by past
performance of students,
year’s growth, and/or
percentage of students
who attain the target or
other measures.
Uses comparable criteria
across similar classrooms
to determine progress
towards mastery of
standards/enduring skills.
Acceptable
Is appropriate for the
instructional interval
defined and explicitly
states year-long/courselong interval of instruction.
Is the data collected
comparable across similar
classrooms, across the
district?
‘Time-bound’
Does the SGG specify on
appropriate Instructional
Interval?
18
Needs Revision
Congruent to content,
but not aligned to grade
level standards.
Focuses on a standardsbased skill that does not
match enduring skill
criteria.
 Goal is too narrow;
focusing on a narrow
skill or topic.
 Goal is written in a
general context and
encompasses too
much content.
 Goal lists multiple
enduring
skills/overarching
goals of state
standards.
Needs Revision
Includes targets that are
achievable, but fall to
stretch attainability
expectations.
Insufficient
Is not congruent or
appropriate for
grade level/content
area standards.
Insufficient
Includes targets that
do not articulate
expectations and/or
targets are not
achievable.
For similar
classrooms, data
collected for the
student growth goal
does not reflect
common criteria
used to determine
progress.
Needs Revision
Specifies less than/more
than a year-long/courselong interval of
instruction.
Insufficient
Fails to specify an
interval of
instruction.
Comparability
Include both assurances for establishing Comparability:
Administration Protocol:
The administration and teachers will utilize PLCS to examine student growth goals for effectiveness
based on the Student Growth Goal Rigor Rubric. Principal and teacher will meet to review data and
determine area of focus. The Student Growth Goal will be approved by the principal.
Scoring Process:
To ensure rigor and comparability the following criteria will be used to provide guidance for
revision and ensure rigor of the Student Growth Goal.
 Aligns with standards identified in the student growth goal?
 Meets the expected rigor of the standards?
 Elicits evidence of the degree to which a student can independently demonstrate the
targeted enduring skill or concept?
 Measures accurately the growth of individual students?
 Measures what it says it measures and provides consistent results?
 Allows high- and low-achieving students to adequately demonstrate their knowledge?
 Provides access and opportunity for all students, including students with disabilities, ELLs,
and gifted/talented students?
 Provides sufficient data to inform future instruction?
Determining Growth for a Single Student Growth Goal
The process for determining the result of student growth (high, expected, low) requires districts to
explain how they will use rigorous and comparable (see above) goals and assessments for that
rating. Districts have several options to consider – none of which are mutually exclusive – for
determining student growth.
Required


Districts will create a process for determining student growth ratings as low, expected, and
high.
Measures will be identified as indicators of determining growth.
Describe the process for determining student growth as high, expected, or low.
19
Teacher has any low ratings
Teacher has 50% or more of their ratings as “LOW”
Teacher has more than 50% of their ratings as “EXPECTED
and/or HIGH”
CANNOT be rated as HIGH
SHALL be rated as LOW
CANNOT be rated as LOW
Overall Student Growth Rating for Carlisle County
Each rating will be given a numerical value.
Low = 1
Expected = 2
High = 3
The total rankings will be averaged from the previous three years (if available) and applied to the
following scale in order to determine proficiency.
Proficiency Calculation Chart
% proficiency
Teacher numerical
Teacher rating
score
< 41 percentage points
1
Low
below goal
26-41 percentage
1.3
Low
points below goal
16-25 percentage
1.5
Low
points below goal
5-15 percentage points
1.8
Expected
below goal
Within 5 percentage
2
Expected
points of goal ( + or - )
6-15 percentage points
2.3
Expected
above goal
16-25 percentage
2.5
High
points above goal
26-40 percentage
2.8
High
points above goal
> 40 percentage points
3
High
above goal

All students will demonstrate measurable growth by meeting the 61%-84% goal.
20
Rating
Low
Growth Calculation Chart
Growth Goal Calculation
points
0-25% of students met goal
1
Low
26-40% of students met goal
1.3
Low
41-60% of students met goal
1.5
Expected
61-84% of students met goal
1.8
Expected
85-100% of students met goal and
up to 25% of students exceeding
goal
90-100 % of students met goal and
26-40% exceeded goal
90-100 % of students met goal and
41-60% exceeded goal
90-100 % of students met goal and
61-84% exceeded goal
90-100 % of students met goal and
85-100% exceeded goal
2.0
Expected
High
High
High
21
2.3
2.5
2.8
3
Local Student Growth Goal
GROWTH COMPONENT
Overall Decision Matrix
High
EXPECTED
HIGH
HIGH
Expected
LOW
EXPECTED
HIGH
Low
LOW
EXPECTED
EXPECTED
Low
Expected
High
PROFICIENCY COMPONENT
22
Example of Proficiency Goal Calculation
For this example, a class of 30 students was used.
Goal: states that 50% of students will reach proficiency on the district approved post assessment.
Proficiency is 80% correct as established by the teacher with administrative and peer input.
Student
Blake
Aden
Haven
Sally
Kevin
John
Kelly
Jim
Sara
Bill
Keith
Will
Parker
Izzy
Kara
Jessica
Lauren
Tara
Trace
George
Beverly
Adam
Hillary
Steve
Kim
Jessie
Kara
Jeff
Sabrina
Bob
Pre assessment score
(%)
36
70
50
71
60
43
22
65
52
12
55
80
76
45
71
71
12
80
90
60
36
70
50
71
60
43
22
65
52
12
Total
Midterm assessment score
(%)
60
80
65
80
70
55
29
75
75
20
60
75
88
52
72
85
30
82
94
62
59
88
69
90
70
80
30
70
68
20
15 yes/15 no = 50% proficiency
Post assessment score (%)
70
92
76
98
78
70
36
84
84
25
74
80
98
64
75
91
49
100
97
65
70
92
76
98
80
81
36
84
84
25
Was proficiency
reached?
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
If 15 of 30 students reached proficiency, then the teacher met his goal of 50% proficient and is
given a numerical score of 2.
If 10 of 30 students reached proficiency, then the teacher did not meet his goal. 10/30 is 33.3%.
33.3% is 16.7% points below his goal of 50% proficiency. Therefore, he would be given a numerical
score of 1.5.
If 12 out of 30 students reached proficiency, then the teacher did not meet his goal. 12/30 is 40%.
That is 10 percentage points below his goal. Therefore, he would be given a numerical score of
1.8.
23
If 20 out of 30 students reached proficiency, then the teacher met and exceeded his goal. 20/30 is
66.7%. That is 16.7 percentage points above his goal. Therefore, he would be given a numerical
score of 2.5.
See table.
Weighted Overall Growth Rating
In compiling the rankings of the teachers, Carlisle County will weigh the most recent data more
heavily than prior years. Please see below to outline the processes for each teacher to follow.
Final averages will be applied to the following scaled to determine their overall ranking.
K-PREP teacher with local and state growth goals—three years of data will be weighted as
follows.
Year 1 (most recent data)
33.3%
Year 2
33.3%
Year 3 (least recent data)
33.3%
Each rating will be given a numerical value. (see table at top of this page)
Average the data from each of the years.
If only one piece of data is available for that year, you will not need to average. If two pieces of
data are available, divide by two; three years of data, divide by three.
To find the weighted average for the local goal use the following formula.
.50(yr1) + .30(yr2) + .20(yr3) = GT
Yr1 = year 1 average
Yr2 = year 2 average
Yr3 = year 3 average
GT = Growth Total
Identify the measures used for determining student growth rating. Teachers will use Pre and post
tests to determine the growth identified in their goal. These assessments will be based on
Common Core Standards and End of Course Standards. These assessments will be treated as
secure test materials. These assessments can be identical or comparable versions.
24
Products of Practice/Other Sources of Evidence
Teachers may provide additional evidences to support assessment of their own
professional practice. These evidences should yield information related to the teacher’s
practice within the domains.
Required
 observations conducted by certified supervisor observer(s)
 student voice survey(s)
 self-reflection and professional growth plans
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Identify other sources of evidence that can be used to support educator practice. Any or all of the
other sources of evidence listed below may be used to support educator practice.

















Program Review evidence
team-developed curriculum units
lesson plans
communication logs
timely, targeted feedback from mini or informal observations
student data records
student work
student formative and/or summative course evaluations/feedback
minutes from PLCs
teacher reflections and/or self-reflections
teacher interviews
teacher committee or team contributions
parent engagement surveys
records of student and/or teacher attendance
video lessons
engagement in professional organizations
action research
Determining the Overall Performance Category
Supervisors are responsible for determining an Overall Performance Category for each teacher
at the conclusion of their summative evaluation year. The Overall Performance Category is
informed by the educator’s ratings on professional practice and student growth. The evaluator
determines the Overall Performance Category based on professional judgment informed by
evidence that demonstrates the educator's performance against the Domains, districtdeveloped rubrics (see local contribution for student growth), and decision rules that establish
a common understanding of performance thresholds to which all educators are held.
25
Rating Professional Practice
The Kentucky Framework for Teaching stands as the critical rubric for providing educators
and evaluators with concrete descriptions of practice associated with specific domains.
Each element describes a discrete behavior or related set of behaviors that educators and
evaluators can prioritize for evidence-gathering, feedback, and eventually, evaluation.
Supervisors will organize and analyze evidence for each individual educator based on these
concrete descriptions of practice.
Supervisors and educators will be engaged in ongoing dialogue throughout the evaluation
cycle. The process concludes with the evaluator’s analysis of evidence and the final
assessment of practice in relation to performance described under each Domain at the
culmination of an educator’s cycle.
DOMAIN RATINGS
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO INFORM
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
DOMAIN 1: [I,D,A,E]
REQUIRED
• Observation
• Student Voice
• Professional Growth Plans
and Self Reflection
OPTIONAL
• Other: District-Determined
– Must be identified in the
CEP
DOMAIN 2: [I,D,A,E]
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
DOMAIN 3: [I,D,A,E]
DOMAIN 4: [I,D,A,E]
Required


Provide a summative rating for each domain based on evidence.
All ratings must be recorded in CIITS.
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Determining the Overall Performance Category
An educator’s Overall Performance Category is determined by the following steps:
1. Determine the individual domain ratings through the use of sources of evidence and
professional judgment.
2. Apply State Decisions Rules for determining an educator’s Professional Practice.
26
Use Local Student Growth Goal instrument to determine overall Student Growth Rating.
3. Apply State Overall Decision Rules for determining educator’s Overall Performance
Category.
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
27
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING A TEACHER’S OR OTHER
PROFESSIONAL’S
Overall Student Growth Rating
Decision rules
Overall Student Growth Rating for Carlisle County
Each rating will be given a numerical weighting.
Low = 1
Expected = 2
High = 3
28
The total rankings will be averaged from the previous three years (if available) and applied to the
following scale.
Rating
Low
(< GOAL)
EXPECTED
(@ GOAL)
HIGH
(> GOAL)
Average Numerical Score
0-25% of students met goal
points
1
26-40% of students met goal
1.3
41-60% of students met goal
1.5
61-84% of students met goal
1.8
85-100% of students met goal and up to 25% of students
exceeding goal
90-100 % of students met goal and 26-40% exceeded goal
90-100 % of students met goal and 41-60% exceeded goal
90-100 % of students met goal and 61-84% exceeded goal
90-100 % of students met goal and 85-100% exceeded goal
2.0
2.3
2.5
2.8
3
Weighted Overall Growth Rating
To rate teachers, Carlisle County will weigh the most recent data more heavily than prior years.
Please see below to outline the processes for each teacher to follow. Final averages will be applied
to the following scaled to determine their overall rating.
K-PREP teacher with local and state growth goals—three years of data will be weighted as
follows.
Year 1 (most recent data)
50%
Year 2
30%
Year 3 (least recent data)
20%
Each rating will be given a numerical weighting. (see table on previous page)
Average the data from each of your years.
If only one piece of data is available for that year, you will not need to average. If two pieces of
data are available, divide by two; three years of data, divide by three.
To find the weighted average for the local goal you will use the following formula.
.50(yr1) + .30(yr2) + .20(yr3) = GT
Yr1 = year 1 average
Yr2 = year 2 average
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Yr3 = year 3 average
GT = Growth Total
29
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING A TEACHER’S
OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL’S
OVERALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORY
Required

Implement the Overall Performance Category process for determining effectiveness.
30
Professional Growth Plan and Summative Cycle
Based on the overall Professional Practice rating and Student Growth rating, supervisors will help
tenured teachers determine the type of Professional Growth Plan and the length of the summative
cycle.
31
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Appeals(Appeals process will apply for PPGES, TPGES and OPGES)
Required

According to current regulation, districts shall have an appeals process established.
Local Policy:
According to 156.557 Section 9,
Section 9. (1) A certified employee who feels that the local district is not properly implementing the evaluation
plan according to the way it was approved by the Kentucky Department of Education shall have the opportunity
to appeal to the Kentucky Board of Education.
(2) The appeal procedures shall be as follows:
(a) The Kentucky Board of Education shall appoint a committee of three (3) state board members to serve
on the State Evaluation Appeals Panel. Its jurisdiction shall be limited to procedural matters already addressed
by the local appeals panel required by KRS 156.557(5). The panel shall not have jurisdiction relative to a
complaint involving the professional judgmental conclusion of an evaluation, and the panel's review shall be
limited to the record of proceedings at the local district level.
(b) No later than thirty (30) days after the final action or decision at the local district level, the certified
employee may submit a written request to the chief state school officer for a review before the State
Evaluation Appeals Panel. An appeal not filed in a timely manner shall not be considered. A specific description
of the complaint and grounds for appeal shall be submitted with this request.
(c) A brief, written statement, and other document which a party wants considered by the State Evaluation
Appeals Panel shall be filed with the panel and served on the opposing party at least twenty (20) days prior to
the scheduled review.
(d) A decision of the appeals panel shall be rendered within fifteen (15) working days after the review.
(e) A determination of noncompliance shall render the evaluation void, and the employee shall have the
right to be reevaluated. (11 Ky.R. 1107; Am. 1268; eff. 3-12-85; 12 Ky.R. 1638; 1837; eff. 6-10-86; 15 Ky.R. 1561;
1849; eff. 3-23-89; 17 Ky.R. 116; eff. 9-13-90; 19 Ky.R. 515; 947; 1081; eff. 11-9-92; 20 Ky.R. 845; eff. 12-6-93; 23
Ky.R. 2277; 2732; eff. 1-9-97; 27 Ky.R. 1874; 2778; eff. 4-9-2001.)
Hearing Procedures:
If requested by the teacher, observations by another teacher trained in the teacher’s content area
of by curriculum content specialists shall be provided. The selection of the third-party observer
shall, if possible, be determined through mutual agreement by evaluator and evaluatee. A teacher
who exercises this option shall do so, in writing to the evaluator, by no later than February 15, of
the academic year in which the summative evaluation occurs. If the evaluator and evaluatee have
not agreed upon the selection of the third-party observer within five (5) working days of the
teacher’s written request, the evaluator shall select the third-party observer.
Trained evaluators:
All evaluators, with the exception of the Board of Education, shall be trained, tested and certified.
Continued certification as an evaluator shall be contingent upon the completion of a minimum of
twelve (12) hours of evaluation training every two (2) years.
Review:
All employees shall be afforded a review of their evaluations. All written evaluations shall be
discussed with the evaluatee, and he/she shall have the opportunity to attach a written statement
to the evaluation instrument. Both the evaluator and the evaluatee shall sign and date the
32
evaluation instrument. All summative evaluations shall be maintained in the personnel files
located in the central office.
Appeals Panel:
Two (2) members of the panel and two (2) alternates shall be elected by and from the certified
employees of the district. The board shall appoint one (1) certified employee and one (1)
alternate certified employee to the panel. All terms of panel members shall be for one year and
run from July 1 to June 30. Members may e reappointed or reelected. The chairman of the panel
shall be the certified employee appointed by the board.
Appeal to Panel:
Any certified employee who believes that he/she was not fairly evaluated on the summative
evaluation may submit an Evaluation Appeals Hearing Request From to the panel within five (5)
working days of the receipt of the summative evaluation. The certified employee may review any
evaluation material related to him/her. Both the evaluator and the evaluatee shall be given the
opportunity to review documents to be given to the hearing committee and may have
representation of their choosing.
Burden of Proof:
The purpose of the panel’s review is to determine whether the evaluation is based on facts. This
means that if facts exist on which the evaluator could reasonably base his/her decision, then the
Appeals Panel cannot find the conclusion in error merely because they would prefer a different
result. The evaluatee would have the burden of proof and shall be required to submit proof to the
panel that would compel the panel to find that the evaluation was not factually based.
Hearing Procedures:
Within five (5) working days of receipt of the request, a hearing will convene to allow the evaluatee
and evaluator to present statements, documentation, witnesses, and any other information
pertinent to the appeal. The chairperson will convene the hearing and establish procedures. The
evaluatee shall present his/her opening statement followed by the evaluator’s opening statement.
Each party will then be allowed to present documentation including witnesses pertinent to the
summative evaluation. Witnesses will not be allowed to observe the hearing process other than
during their testimony. Questions of both substance and procedure will be considered by the
panel. The panel will have the right to question the evaluatee and the evaluator. They will then be
asked to leave, and the panel will consider all the information that has been provided. A decision
regarding their finding shall be presented to the superintendent within fifteen (15) working days of
the filing of the appeal. In the case of appeals of evaluation conducted by the superintendent, the
panel shall report to the Board of Education. The panel’s recommendation submitted within three
(3) working days of the decision may include one of the following actions:
1.
uphold the original evaluation
2.
remove the summative or any part of the summative from the personnel file.
Any evaluatee who feels that evaluation procedures have been violated may appeal the decision to
the Kentucky Board of Education.
33
1. All employees given an orientation of the “Certified Employees Evaluation Plan”
2. Identification and notification of employees to be evaluated
3. Primary evaluator completes formal observations and summative evaluation of non-tenured teachers
4. Primary evaluator completes the formal observation and summative evaluation of identified tenured
teachers
5. Summatives sent to Superintendent’s office to be placed in official file
6. All teachers “Individual Professional Growth Plan” will be reviewed with immediate supervisor and a new
one developed for the next year. These plans shall be based on goals and objectives of the school
improvement and professional development plans.
All evaluation data shall be kept in a central personnel file as follows:
(1) All building level staff formative and summative data shall be filed by the principal in the building.
Only a copy of the summative report is kept in a central file in the Superintendent’s office.
(2) All other administrative staff data shall be filed in a central file in the Superintendent’s office. All personnel
file data is confidential, but is open for examination at the request of the employee.
PRIMARY EVALUATOR DESIGNEES
Evaluatee
Evaluator
Teacher
Principal
Media Specialist
Principal
Speech Therapist
Principal
Guidance Counselor
Principal
Athletic Director
Principal
Assistant Principal
Principal
Principal
Superintendent
Central Office Administrator
Superintendent
Superintendent
Board of Education
*Media Specialist, Speech Therapist, Guidance Counselor, Athletic Director, Pre School Teachers, Central Office
Administrator and Superintendent will be evaluated using the 2013-2014 Carlisle County Certified Evaluation
Plan.
**Other administrative personnel may be designated to assist with the evaluation process. For
example, assistant principals, instructional supervisors, and the assistant superintendent may be assigned this
responsibility.
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System – Principal and Assistant Principal
The vision for the Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PGES) is to have every school led by an
effective principal. The goal is to create a fair and equitable system to measure principal effectiveness and act
as a catalyst for professional growth.
Click here to
Return to Table
Roles and Definitions
of Contents
1.
Administrator: means an administrator who devotes the majority of employed time in the role
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
of principal, for which administrative certification is required by the Education Professional
Standards Board pursuant to 16 KAR 3:050
Evaluator: the immediate supervisor of certified personnel, who has satisfactorily completed all
required evaluation training and, if evaluating teachers, observation certification training.
Evaluatee: District/School personnel that is being evaluated
Professional Growth Plan: An individualized plan that is focused on improving professional
practice and leadership skills and is aligned with educator performance standards and student
performance standards, is built using a variety of sources and types of student data that reflect
student needs and strengths, educator data, and school/district data, is produced in consultation
with the evaluator
Self-Reflection: means the process by which certified personnel assess the effectiveness and
adequacy of their knowledge and performance for the purpose of identifying areas for
professional learning and growth
Val-Ed 360°: An assessment that provides feedback of a principal’s learning-centered
behaviors by using input from the principal, his/her supervisor, and teachers. The survey looks
at core components (the what) that are listed on the slide, as well as key processes (the how).
TELL Kentucky: A working conditions survey of all school staff conducted every two years to
provide feedback on specific aspects of the school’s work environment.
35
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Components – Overview
and Summative Model
STUDENT GROWTH
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
The following graphic outlines the summative model for the Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness
System.
STANDARD RATINGS
SOURCES OF
EVIDENCE TO
INFORM
PROFESSIONAL
PRACTICE
STANDARD 1: Instructional
Leadership
STANDARD 2: School Climate
STANDARD 3: Human
Resource Management
Professional Growth
Plans and SelfReflection
Site-Visits
Val-Ed 360°
Working Conditions
Growth Goal
STANDARD 4: Organizational
PROFESSIONAL Management
JUDGMENT
STANDARD 5:
Communication &
Community Relations
STANDARD 6: Professionalism
SOURCES OF
EVIDENCE TO
INFORM STUDENT
GROWTH
State Contribution –
ASSIST/NGL Goal
AND
Local Contribution –
Student Growth Goals
(SGGs) based on
school need
PERFORMANCE
TOWARD
TRAJECTORY
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
AND DISTRICTDETERMINED
RUBRICS
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT &
STATEDETERMINED
DECISION
RULES
establishing a
common
STUDENT GROWTH
understanding of
performance
RATINGS
thresholds to
which all
educators are
STATE CONTRIBUTION: High,
held
Expected, Low Growth
Rating
LOCAL CONTRIBUTION: High,
Expected, Low Growth
36
Rating
OVERALL
PERFORMANCE
CATEGORY
Click
Evaluators will look for trends and patterns in practice across multiple types of evidence
andhere
applyto
their
professional judgment based on this evidence when evaluating a principal. The roleReturn
of evidence
and
to Table
professional judgment in the determination of ratings on standards and an overall rating is paramount in this
of Contents
process. However, professional judgment is grounded in a common framework: the Principal Performance
Standards.
Principal Performance Standards
The Principal Performance Standards are designed to support student achievement and professional bestpractice through the standards of Instructional Leadership; School Climate; Human Resource Management;
Organizational Management; Communication & Community Relations; and Professionalism. Included in the
Performance Standards are Performance Indicators that provide examples of observable, tangible behaviors
that provide evidence of each standard. The Performance Standards provide the structure for feedback for
continuous improvement through individual goals that target professional growth, thus supporting overall
student achievement and school improvement. Evidence supporting a principal’s professional practice will be
situated within one or more of the 6 standards. Performance will be rated for each standard according to the
four performance levels: Ineffective, Developing, Accomplished, and Exemplary. It is important to note that the
expected performance level is “Accomplished,” but a good rule of thumb is that it is expected that a principal
will “live in Accomplished but occasionally visit Exemplary”. The summative rating will be a holistic
representation of performance, combining data from multiple sources of evidence across each standard.
The use of professional judgment based on multiple sources of evidence promotes a more holistic and
comprehensive analysis of practice, rather than over-reliance on one individual data point or rote calculation of
practice based on predetermined formulas. Evaluators will also take into account how principals respond to or
apply additional supports and resources designed to promote student learning, as well as their own
professional growth and development. Finally, professional judgment gives evaluators the flexibility to account
for a wide variety of factors related to individual principal performance. These factors may include schoolspecific priorities that may drive practice in one standard, an educator’s number of goals, experience level
and/or leadership opportunities, and contextual variables that may impact the learning environment, such as
unanticipated outside events or traumas.
Evaluators must use the following categories of evidence in determining overall ratings:

Required Sources of Evidence (See Appendix D)
o Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection
o Site-Visits
o Val-Ed 360°
o Working Conditions Goal (Based on TELL KY)
o State and Local Student Growth Goal data
37
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Evaluators may use the following categories of evidence in determining overall ratings:
 Other Measures of Student Learning
 Products of Practice
 Other Sources (e.g. surveys)
Professional Practice
The following sections provide a detailed overview of the various sources of evidence used to inform
Professional Practice Ratings.
Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection – completed by principals & assistant principals
The Professional Growth Plan will address realistic, focused, and measurable professional goals. The
plan will connect data from multiple sources including site-visit conferences, data on student growth
and achievement, and professional growth needs identified through self-assessment and reflection.
Self-reflection improves principal practice through ongoing, careful consideration of the impact of
leadership practice on student growth and achievement.
Required:


All principals will participate in self-reflection and professional growth planning each year.
All assistant principals will participate in self-reflection and professional growth planning each year.
PRINCIPAL/ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL PGP TIMELINE
August 1
Superintendent reviews expectations of
PPGES (30 calendar days after reporting for
employment)
September 30
Principal/Assistant Principal collaboratively
develop Student Growth Goal, SelfReflection, Working Conditions Coal and
Professional Growth Goal/Plan
October
Superintendent Conducts a Site Visit
Mid-Year
Conference with principal/assistant principal
to review/reflect upon all goals and modify
any strategies as needed.
March
Completion of TELL or VAL-ED Survey
April/May
Superintendent conducts a Site Visit
June 1
Conference with principal/assistant principal
to review their Student Growth Goal,
Working Condition Goal, and Professional
Growth Goal as well as modify any strategies.
 *Additional Conferences may be held as deemed necessary to monitor PGP process.
38
 *All dates are tentative based on the adjustment of the school calendar.
 *For late hires(After 60 calendar days) the self-reflection, a mid-year conference and one site visit
will occur.
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Site-Visits – completed by supervisor of principal – formal site visits are not required for assistant principals
Site visits are a method by which the superintendent may gain insight into the principal’s practice in
relation to the standards. During a site visit, the superintendent will discuss various aspects of the job
with the principal, and will use the principal’s responses to determine issues to further explore with the
faculty and staff. Additionally, the principal may explain the successes and trials the school community
has experienced in relation to school improvement.
Required:
Conducted at least twice each year. (Formal site-visits are not required for the assistant principal.)
Site visits will be conducted twice annually after the completion of the PGP. The first will take place
prior to Jan. 1. The second will take place prior to March 15.
During the follow-up conference with the principal, the superintendent will review all Principal
Performance Standards and give feedback about each standard.
Optional: The Principal may ask the Superintendent to give specific feedback about a particular
standard.
Conferencing:
At least 3 conferences will take place between Evaluator and Evaluatee throughout the year.
1. Beginning of the Year Conference
 Purpose of the Meeting
 Discuss reflections of data
 Discuss and come to agreement on the Student Growth Goal and Action Plan
 Discuss reflections of the Principal Performance Standards
 Discuss and come to agreement on the Professional Growth Goal and Action Plan
 Questions/Concerns/Comments
 Set tentative date for Mid-Year Review
2. Mid-Year (Conference)
 Purpose of Meeting
 Discuss first observation/site visit and provide feedback
 Share progress toward Student Growth Goal
39
 Discuss documentation of each standard-determine if any other documentation is needed
 Questions/Concerns/Comments
 Set tentative date for End of Year Review
3. End of Year Review (Conference)
 Purpose of Meeting
 Discuss second observation/site visit and provide feedback(Site Visit Form in Appendix)
 Share progress toward Student Growth Goal
 Share progress toward Professional Growth Goal
 Discuss progress of each standard-determine if any other documentation is needed
 Discuss overall rating based on Professional Practice and Student Growth
 Late Hires will include the 3 components completed(Self-Reflection, Mid-year and site
visit)
Click here to
 Questions/Concerns/Comments
Val-Ed 360° - completed for principals – not completed for assistant principals
Return to Table
of Contents
The VAL-ED 360° is an assessment that provides feedback on a principal’s learning-centered behaviors
by using input from the principal, his/her supervisor, and teachers. All teachers will participate in the
Val-Ed 360°. The results of the survey will be included as a source of data to inform each principal’s
professional practice rating.
Required:


Conducted at least once every two years in the school year that TELL Kentucky is not administered.
If a principal is hired after the VAL-ED cycle they will be exempt until the next cycle.
VAL-ED 360
Val Ed Point of Contact
Val Ed Point of Contact will be the Supervisor of
Instruction. Each school will also select a VAL ED
Point of Contact to assist with the Val ED process.
District Administrator-oversee and monitor the
implementation of the VAL-ED 360 process.
School VAL-ED Coordinator: Serves as a liaison
between district and school to train and identify
how the school will organize for the teacher survey
and to distribute teacher codes. Each school
process will be submitted and approved at the
district level.
Superintendent: receives access code to be able to
monitor they survey process and reports.
Supervisors-district may elect up to three district
staff to complete survey for an individual
principal. This will include the primary supervisor,
who makes final decision regarding employment
VAL-ED Role Groups
40
and recommendations for growth.
Principals: completes a survey specifically
designed for principals and has access to
information contained within final report.
Certified Teachers: teachers assigned to a
specific school that complete the online survey
designed specifically for teacher input.
Once every other year alternating with TELL
Kentucky Survey
Two week period during the spring semester
The Val-Ed 360 survey results will be used by the
building level principal to develop their individual
student growth/professional growth plan.
Val-ED survey results will be treated as
confidential and only the principal and the
immediate supervisor will receive the survey
results.
Frequency of Val-Ed 360
Timeline
Use of Val-ED 360 Results
Val-ED 360 Access

Working Conditions Goal (Goal inherited by Assistant Principal)
Principals are responsible for setting a 2-year Working Conditions Growth Goal based on the most
recent TELL Kentucky Survey. The principal’s effort to accomplish the Working Conditions Growth Goal
is a powerful way to enhance professional performance and, in turn, positively impact school culture
and student success.
Required:



Developed following the completion of the TELL Kentucky Survey.
Minimum of one 2-year goal.
Goal is documented and evaluated on the principal evaluation forms in the appendix.
WORKING CONDITIONS GOAL(S)
Principals are responsible for setting one (1) 2-year
Working Conditions Goal that is based on
information in the most recent TELL Kentucky
Survey and any additional relevant data which
might include VAL-ED surveys, school level
documentation, etc. The Goal will be recorded on
the district Reflective Practice, Student Growth,
TELL KY Working Conditions Growth and
Professional Growth Planning Template (in the
appendix). The principal, in collaboration with the
superintendent/designee, will review the results
from the TELL Kentucky Survey.
1. Principals will identify a TELL survey
Number of Working Conditions Goals
41
question that indicates a need for growth
and will then identify additional TELL
survey questions that may have similar
results.
2. Once these are identified, the principal will
connect these questions to one or more of
the Principal Performance Standards.
(Crosswalk provided in appendix).
3. Next, the principal will develop a Working
Conditions Growth Goal statement that
will identify a measurable target that the
principal will set and will be addressed
during the next 2 school years.
4. A rubric will be completed, by the
principal and superintendent that will set
the goal target for Accomplished. The
rubric will also establish what will
constitute reaching Exemplary.
5. The final step is to complete the Action
Plan that will prioritize the steps the
principal will take to accomplish the
established goal.
6. Ongoing reflection and modification of the
strategies when needed.
Working Condition Goals Rubric
Example-A principal has identified a WCG area and has
set a goal of increase from 21% to 50% agreement on the
identified question(s).
The rubric with a built in range of + or - 10% would be:
Exemplary: Above 55% Agreement
The rubric will be a collaborative effort using the
categories of Ineffective, Developing,
Accomplished, and Exemplary. Rating scale for the
rubric will reflect growth in + or – 10% scale.
Example:
Exemplary: Above Accomplished Goal
Accomplished: 45-55% Agreement
Accomplished: + 10% of goal
Developing: 22-44% Agreement
Developing: baseline set for the goal
Ineffective: 21% or below Agreement
Ineffective: below the baseline
During mid-year review, principals can choose for
one of the following:
 Engage staff in informal conversations that
provide feedback on the progress of
meeting the WCG.
 Conduct a sample survey using identified
questions from TELL (3-5) as an interim
measure of growth. Principal will use
results to determine if growth has occurred
according to the WCG.
Mid-Point Review
42
 Use results for a variety of sources to
linked to TELL Data questions that support
growth according to the WCG
Principals can choose to complete on-line surveys
from Survey Monkey, paper/pencil surveys, etc. to
measure growth in their WCG.
Additional Surveys or Evidence

Click here to
Return to Table of
Contents
43
Products of Practice/Other Sources of Evidence
Additional evidence provided in support of principal practice may include items from the following list
(not a comprehensive list):
Principals can choose from the following:



PLC Agendas and Minutes
Instructional Round/Walk-through documentation
Parent/Community engagement events documentation
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Student Growth
The following sections provide a detailed overview of the various sources of evidence used to inform Student
Growth Ratings. At least one (1) of the Student Growth Goals set by the Principal must address gap
populations. Assistant Principals will inherit the SGG (both state and local contributions) of the Principal.
State Contribution – ASSIST/Next Generation Learners (NGL) Goal Based on Trajectory (Goal
inherited by Assistant Principal)
Principals are responsible for setting at least one student growth goal that is tied directly to the Comprehensive
School Improvement Plan located in ASSIST. The superintendent and the principal will meet to discuss the
trajectory for the goal and to establish the year’s goal that will help reach the long-term trajectory target. New
goals are identified each year based on the ASSIST goals. The goal should be customized for the school year
with the intent of helping improve student achievement and reaching the long term goals through on-going
improvement.
Required:



Selection based on ASSIST/NGL trajectory.
Based on Gap population unless Local goal is based on Gap population.
If the school does not receive state level data, the principal will construct two local student growth
goals.
State Contribution:
The State Contribution is derived from Growth Goals developed around one of the interim targets housed in
ASSIST. The Kentucky Board of Education has established that each school, based on the grade-levels
served, must address particular student growth goals and objectives; for all four levels—elementary, middle,
and high schools—those goals/objectives are:
 Decreasing achievement gaps between disaggregated groups of students
 Increasing the average combined reading and math K-PREP scores
Middle and High Schools must also address:
 Increasing the percentage of College and Career Ready students
 Increasing the average percentage of freshman graduation
Principals will find these ASSIST goals and objectives in their School Report Card.
44
They will select one (1) of the grade-level appropriate goals to use as the State contribution of their
Student Growth Goal. The goal statements are already set by KBE with a 2017 trajectory.
The principal will then collaborate with the superintendent to determine what percentage of the overall
trajectory will be targeted for student growth during the CURRENT school year. For example, of the
original goal and trajectory is to decrease the achievement gap from a 2012 percentage of 45 to 15
percent by 2017, the principal and superintendent may decide to simply divide the 30 percent difference
evenly and set an objective of decreasing the achievement gap in the current school year by 6 percent.
Or, the decision might be made to be more aggressive initially and set the objective percentage at 10
percent.
The principal and superintendent must then agree to the specific strategies the principal will implement
to reach the objective percentage. It is critical to remember that these are strategies which the
PRINCIPAL HIMSELF/HERSELF will implement—not statements of what teachers or others will do.
Those strategies have already been addressed in the original CSIP document.
The local goal for Student Growth should be based on school need. It may be developed to parallel the State
Contribution or it may be developed with a different focus.
Required:
 Based on Gap population unless State goal is based on Gap population.
Each principal will be required to develop one (1) Local Growth Goal. The Local Growth Goal Process
includes:
 Determining Needs (Based on Data)
 Creating specific growth goals based on baseline data
 Creating and implementing leadership and management strategies
 Monitoring progress through on-going data collection
 Determining goal attainment
For each Student Growth Goal, the district has developed a process for determining high, expected, and
low growth. The Principal in collaboration with the Superintendent develops decision rules and/or
rubrics to measure high, expected and low growth on each specific goal. Both growth goals will define
Expected Growth at + or -10% and establish acceptable range for student growth across the district.




High Growth: More than 10% above Goal
Expected Growth: + or – 10%
Low Growth: More than 10% below goal (Any score below baseline)
In cases that the goal is set at less than 10%, the principal and superintendent will
determine the growth range to meet the expected category.
45
Determining the Overall Performance Category
Superintendents are responsible for determining an Overall Performance Category for each principal at the
conclusion of their summative evaluation year. The Overall Performance Category is informed by the
principal’s ratings on professional practice and student growth.
Rating Professional Practice
Required:


Use decision rules to determine an overall rating.
Record ratings in the department-approved technology platform.
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
The Superintendent will adhere to timeline in the PPGES Timeline. Ratings will be placed in state
approved technology platform following state requirements.
DOMAIN RATINGS
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO INFORM
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
STANDARD 1: [I,D,A,E]
REQUIRED
• Professional Growth Plans
and Self-Reflection
• Site-Visit
• Val-Ed 360°/Working
Conditions
OPTIONAL
• Other: District-Determined
– Must be identified in the
CEP
STANDARD 2: [I,D,A,E]
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
STANDARD 3: [I,D,A,E]
STANDARD 4: [I,D,A,E]
STANDARD 5: [I,D,A,E]
STANDARD 6: [I,D,A,E}
46

Apply the State Decision Rules for determining an Overall Professional Practice Rating.
Overall Student Growth Rating
Overall Student Growth Rating results from a combination of professional judgment and the district-developed
instrument. The instrument is designed to aid the evaluator in applying professional judgment to multiple
evidences of student growth over time. Student growth ratings must include data from both the local and
state contributions.
Required:



Determine the rating using both state and local growth.
Determine the rating up to 3 years of data (when available).
Record ratings in CIITS.
47
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Both the state and local goal will be given a numerical weighting.
– LOW = 1
– EXPECTED = 2
– HIGH = 3
Determination of a single yearly combined goal rating will be a simple average of the two goals.
When a principal has established three years of trend data for SGG the principal will have a ranking based
on an average of the three year score. The total rankings will be averaged from the previous three years (if
available) and applied to the following scale and recorded in CIITS as required by the state.
RANKING
AVERAGE SCORE
Low
1.0 – 1.49
Expected
1.50-2.49
High
2.50-3
STUDENT GROWTH
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO
INFORM STUDENT GROWTH
STATE

ASSIST/NGL Goal
LOCAL
• Based on school need
STUDENT GROWTH RATING
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
AND DISTRICTDETERMINED
RUBRICS
48
STUDENT GROWTH [H,E,L]
Determining the Overall Performance Category
A principal’s Overall Performance Category is determined by the evaluator based on the principal’s
ratings on each standard, as well as student growth. Evaluators will use the following decision rules for
determining the Overall Performance Category:
1. Apply State Overall Decision Rules for determining a principal’s/assistant principal’s Overall
Performance Category.

All summative ratings must be recorded in the department-approved technology platform.
49
Professional Growth Plan and Summative Cycle
Based on the overall Professional Practice rating and Student Growth rating, supervisors will determine the
type of Professional Growth Plan required of the principal.
50
Principal PGES Cycle
The following chart shows the required components for principals and assistant principals over the two year
process. All principals and assistant principals will be evaluated every year.
Two Year Cycle of the PPGES
Review Accountability and
ASSIST Goal Results & Set
SGG/PGP/Working
Conditions 2-year Goal
End-of-Year Review
with Superintendent
Administer Formative Val-Ed
Administer Summative Val-Ed
2013-14
Site-Visit by Superintendent
Site-Visit by Superintendent
Mid-Year Review with
Superintendent
July 2014
Click here to
Return to Table
of Contents
Review Accountability
and ASSIST Goal Results
& Set SGG/PGP & Update
Working Conditions 2year Goal
End-of-Year Review
with Superintendent
Administer TELL Kentucky
2014-15
Site-Visit by Superintendent
Site-Visit by Superintendent
51Mid-Year Review with
Superintendent
Appendix
Please see attached documents
TPGES
PPGES
Carlisle CEP for Other Certified Professionals
OPGES – Other Professionals Growth and Effectiveness System:
The current evaluation standards and procedures for “Other” (Occupational Therapists, Speech Language
Pathologists, Counselors, Psychologist, Administrators other than principals and asst. principals, Media
Specialist, etc...) included in this evaluation plan will remain in effect until the OPGES is fully implemented in
Kentucky. OPGES is scheduled to be piloted in Kentucky during the 2014/15 school year.
 District Certified Personnel not included under the provisions of the PGES model will be
evaluated using the prior approved forms for district evaluation.
52
PRE-OBSERVATION DOCUMENT
Teacher
EPSB ID#
School
Grade Level/Subject(s)
Observer
Date of Conference
Preconference (Planning Conference)
Questions for Discussion:
Notes:
What is your identified student learning target(s)?
To which part of your curriculum does this lesson relate?
How does this learning fit in the sequence of learning for
this class?
Briefly describe the students in this class, including those
with special needs.
How will you engage the students in the learning? What will
you do? What will the students do? Will the students work
in groups, or individually, or as a large group? Provide any
materials that the students will be using.
How will you differentiate instruction for individuals or
groups of students?
53
How and when will you know whether the students have
achieved the learning target(s)?
Is there anything that you would like me to specifically
observe during the lesson?
54
55