Barren County Schools
Certified Evaluation Plan
Our Mission Students attending the Barren County School System will achieve success in
college or post-secondary education.
This will be demonstrated by providing high quality 21st century teaching that
leads to learning in a healthy, safe and supportive environment. We will
provide experiences and create opportunities which will ensure that our
students will be prepared to embrace change in tomorrow’s world.
Mr. Bo Matthews
Superintendent
July 2015
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
BARREN COUNTY SCHOOLS CEP OVERVIEW
ASSURANCES
EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY, OBJECTIVES, GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AND EFFECTIVENESS SYSTEM – CERTIFIED TEACHER
THE KENTUCKY FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
STATE CONTRIBUTION – STUDENT GROWTH PERCENTILES (MSGP)
LOCAL CONTRIBUTION – STUDENT GROWTH GOALS (LSGG)
RIGOR OF SGGS
COMPARABILITY OF SGGS
MEASURES
STUDENT VOICE
OBSERVATION
OBSERVATION MODEL
OBSERVATION CONFERENCING
OBSERVATION SCHEDULE
OBSERVER CERTIFICATION
OBSERVER CALIBRATION
PEER OBSERVATION
DETERMINING THE OVERALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORY
RATING PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
PRODUCTS OF PRACTICE/OTHER SOURCES OF EVIDENCE
RATING STUDENT GROWTH
DETERMINING GROWTH FOR A SINGLE SGG
DETERMINING GROWTH FOR STATE & LOCAL GROWTH GOALS
DETERMINING THE OVERALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORY
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH PLAN AND SUMMATIVE CYCLE
3
4
8
9
12
12
14-15
14-15
16-17
17
18
18
18
19
21
21
22
23-28
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AND EFFECTIVENESS SYSTEM – PRINCIPAL/ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL
30
ROLES AND DEFINITIONS
PRINCIPAL PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AND EFFECTIVENESS SYSTEM COMPONENTS –
OVERVIEW AND SUMMATIVE MODEL
PRINCIPAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH PLAN AND SELF-REFLECTION
SITE-VISITS
VAL-ED 360º
WORKING CONDITIONS GOAL
PRODUCTS OF PRACTICE
STUDENT GROWTH
STATE CONTRIBUTION – SCHOOL REPORT CARDS (ACCOUNTABILITY)
LOCAL CONTRIBUTION – ASSIST (SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN)
DETERMINING THE OVERALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORY
RATING PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
RATING STUDENT GROWTH
DETERMINING OVERALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORY
33
FORMS & APPENDIX
PGES EVALUATION FORMS
OTHER DISTRICT STAFF EVALUATION AND FORMS
APPENDIX
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
PROFESSION CODE OF ETHICS
APPEAL PROCESS AND FORM
34
35
36
36
36-37
37
39
39
40
40
41
42
43
43
46
CERTIFIED PERSONNEL EVALUATION PLAN
Mark Wallace
Evaluation Contact Person
Assistant Superintendent (270) 651-3787
Position
Telephone
Barren County Board of Education
Name of District
(270) 651-3787
Telephone
(270) 651-8836
Fax
202 West Washington Street
Street Address
Glasgow, Kentucky
City and State
42141
Zip Code
Bo Matthews
Name of Superintendent
Evaluation Plan Development Committee Members and Their Position Titles: FY 2015
Mark Wallace
Scott Harper
Cynthia York
Warren Cunningham
Lori Downs
Jeff Moore
Letitia Hughes
Shari Alexander
Kathy Burris
Christa Middleton
Heather Gardner
Julie Mohon
Kelley Ross
Dinah Wallace
Assistant Superintendent
Director of Instruction & Technology
Director of Special Programs
Principal
Principal
Principal
Assistant Principal
Teacher
Teacher
Teacher
Teacher
Teacher
Teacher
Teacher
ASSURANCES
CERTIFIED SCHOOL CERTIFIED EVALUATION PLAN
The Barren 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 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 p r i o r 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 a Professional Growth Plan (PGP) that shall be aligned with the school/ district
improvement plan and comply with the requirements of 704 KAR 3:345. The PGP 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.
The Barren County Board of Education approved the evaluation plan as recorded in the minutes of the meeting held
on June 9, 2015.
Signature of Barren County Superintendent
Date
Signature of Chairperson, Barren County Board of Education
Date
3|Page
EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY
Based on the premise that all individuals are capable of improvement, evaluation in the Barren County School
District is a constructive, cooperative, continuous process designed for the improvement of the total educational
program and staff for the benefit of all pupils.
EVALUATION OBJECTIVES
FORMATIVE:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
To improve overall instruction.
To encourage certified employees to improve their performance.
To identify the strengths and weaknesses of the individual.
To assist the individual in developing and implementing a program of growth in identified areas of weaknesses.
To promote continuing professional learning.
SUMMATIVE:
1.
2.
3.
To provide a measure of accountability to the public.
To support individual personnel decisions.
To evaluate all certified personnel in the school district in a non-discriminatory manner.
CERTIFIED EVALUATION GUIDELINES
The Formative stage will be a continuous cycle of gathering evaluation information based on predetermined
criteria in the district plan. All observations or monitoring of performance of certified employees shall be
conducted openly and with the full knowledge of the teacher or administrator.
The Summative stage includes a summary of all the information gathered during the formative stage. All
summative evaluations (except for the Superintendent) shall be in writing on the district evaluation form, and
may be completed electronically if available. A copy shall be provided to each person evaluated. The Summative
Evaluation and any written responses to evaluations shall become a part of the official personnel record.
Administrators will mark Ineffective, Developing, Accomplished or Exemplary. Based on the overall Professional
Practice Rating and Student Growth Rating, administrators will help tenured teachers determine the type of
Professional Growth Plan and the length of the summative cycle. The administrator will complete all parts of the
Summative Evaluation Instrument.
It is the intent of the District that all certified employees meet the District’s standards to continue their
employment. In the case of non-tenured employees the evaluator should not recommend the employee for
tenure unless the employee meets the District’s standards in all categories. In the case of tenured certified
employees, it is expected that the employee shall meet the District’s standards in all categories. An assistive
growth plan (Directed Growth Plan) for any standard that is not met shall be written for any employee whose
contract is renewed. An employee with a continuing contract who does not meet the District’s standards in all
categories shall have a corrective action plan. Each Directed Growth Plan shall be developed under the direction
and guidance of the school principal or primary evaluator.
4|Page
EVALUATION PROCEDURES
The district will train the primary evaluators in the evaluation process. The performance-based
teacher/administrator evaluation system includes two stages, formative and summative.
The evaluation criteria and process used to evaluate certified school personnel shall be explained to and discussed
with certified school personnel no later than the end of the first month of reporting for employment for each
school year.
Special teachers and itinerants will be evaluated by the designated evaluator as assigned by the Director of
Instruction, and other principals may become contributors to the process.
The immediate supervisor of the certified school employee shall be designated as the primary evaluator.
Additional trained administrative personnel may be used to observe and provide information to the primary
evaluator (see process for Evaluator Certification)
One mini observation will be conducted by an assigned Peer Observer. The 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.
All evaluations shall be signed by the evaluator and evaluatee indicating that the evaluation has been seen and a
conference held. A copy of all evaluations on approved district forms will be given to the person evaluated. All
summative evaluations (except for the superintendent) will be in writing on approved district forms, submitted
to KDE electronically in the approved format, and will become a part of the individual’s official personnel file.
The Superintendent shall be evaluated annually by the Board and the evaluation shall be discussed with the
Superintendent. The Superintendent shall submit an Individual Professional Growth Plan to the Board annually,
in accordance with KRS 156.011, the Board shall establish the continuing professional development
requirements of the Superintendent.
5|Page
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.
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.
6|Page
7|Page
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 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
District Decisions
• Other Measures of Student Learning
• Products of Practice
• Other Sources (e.g., surveys, walk-through, letters and memos)
All components and sources of evidence related supporting an educator’s professional practice and student
growth ratings will be completed and recorded in the district approved process. In addition to utilizing the
forms for the process, primary evaluators may also use the APPROVED TECHNOLOGY PLATFORM from KDE as
long as the system is available and functioning properly. In the event that the system is unavailable, all
components and evidence shall be documented through hardcopies placed in the principal’s observation folder.
8|Page
Professional
Practice
Orientation, Self-Reflection and Professional Growth Planning
All teachers will participate in an orientation to the evaluation system provided by the principal
of the building. Orientation will occur within the first 30 calendar days of reporting for employment for
each school year.
All teachers will participate in self-reflection and professional growth planning annually in
accordance with the summative cycle chart based on the teacher’s professional practice rating
submitted in the state approved technology platform.
Self- reflection of professional growth goal needs must be completed by September 15. The educator
provides documentation to the primary evaluator that the self-reflection has been completed through the
appropriate district form. If a state approved technology platform system is available and functioning
properly, it may also be used. A planning template is available to assist and will serve as part of the
process that educators maintain. Teachers must include a rationale for each domain in which they mark
themselves as Ineffective (I) or Developing (D).
The Professional Growth Plan will address realistic, focused, and measurable professional goals
aligned with the school or district improvement plan. 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. A professional growth plan shall be developed, submitted to
the primary evaluator, and approved by October 15. A district form will be utilized and may be entered
into any state approved technology platform if available.
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.
See District PGES Forms and the TPGES Resources on the district website for more detailed information on
how to complete the Self-Reflection and how to develop the Professional Growth Plan.
9|Page
Timeline for Orientation, Self-Reflection and Professional Growth Plan
First 30 days of
employment
Teachers participates in orientation to TPGES.
By September 15
Teacher reflects on his/her current growth goal needs based on data
and identifies an area of focus by utilizing the Initial Reflection Tool
and submitting the documentation form to primary evaluator.
Collaborates with his/her administrator, develops growth plan and
action steps. Professional Growth Plan form is submitted to the
primary evaluator and approved.
By October 15
November-January
Implementation/Reflection on progress and impact of PGP plan
on his/her professional practice. The PGP form is updated and
submitted to the primary evaluator for approval.
January
Modifies plan as appropriate and makes any needed changes to the
form.
Continued implementation and reflection.
January-April
April/May
Summative reflection on the degree of PGP goal attainment and
implications for next steps.
*For certified personnel hired after the start of school, the administrator will provide orientation and
teacher will develop PGP within 30 days of employment.
Initial
Self-Reflection
Professional Growth
Goal (PGG) Planning
1. Use the Initial Reflection practice
tool to reflect on your practice
2. Match markings to the KY
Framework for Teaching
3. Fill out the Reflective Practice &
Professional Growth Planning tool
(part A)
4. Complete the Self-Reflection –
Documentation to Evaluator form
5. Submit both items (#3 & 4 above) to
your primary evaluator to indicate
the process has been completed
6. Update throughout the year if
needed, repeating steps 3-5
7. Initial Reflection is due by Sept 15th
each year
1. Complete part B of the Initial
Reflection Planning Tool:
a. Connect Priority Growth Needs
to Professional Growth
Planning
b. Make on-going reflection to
discuss on-going progress
toward PGG
c. At end of year, make reflections
on your progress to attain
goal(s)
2. PGG is due to evaluator for
approval by Oct 15th
3. Review PGG with evaluator at end
of year (Non-tenured -April 15;
tenured May 15)
* retain copies for your records
10 | P a g e
Creating Student Growth Goals and Student Growth Goal Measures
All teachers must complete the student growth component unless identified modifications are established by KDE and
described in the:
• Guidance for PGES for Preschool
• Guidance for Alternative Settings
• Kentucky Framework for Teaching-Specialist Frameworks (OPGES) and related guidance documents
The student growth measure is comprised of two possible contributions: a state contribution and a local
contribution. The state contribution only pertains to approximately 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 Median Student Growth Percentiles (MSGP). The local contribution
uses the Student Growth Goal Setting Process and applies to all teachers in the district, including those who
receive MSGP.
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
11 | P a g e
State Contribution –Median Student Growth Percentiles (MSGP) –
Applies to 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 rating will be
calculated using the MSGPs for the students attributed the teacher of grades 4-8 math and ELA classes. The
scale for determining acceptable growth will be determined by the Kentucky Board of Education and provided
to the district by the Kentucky Department of Education.
Median State Student Growth Percentiles will be provided by the Kentucky Department of Education for all
teachers receiving a state contribution to student growth. The following chart is the Median State Student Growth
Percentile Ratings:
Rating State Median Student Growth Percentiles
High
Above 65th percentile
Expected
Between 30th and 65th percentile
Low
Less than 30th percentile
*Range is established by KDE and may be modified with proper notice
Local Contribution – Student Growth Goals (LSGG) –
Applies to all teachers and appropriate “other” professional
The local contribution for the student growth measure is a rating based on the degree to which a teacher or
other professional 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 and other
professionals will develop an SGG for inclusion in the student growth measure. All Student Growth Goals will
be determined by the teacher and other professionals 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). The Student Growth Goal(s) should be entered into the district designed process, or
into the state approved technology platform, and be principal approved by November 1.
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.
The SGG will be comprised of two parts: Proficiency Component and Growth Component.
There are exceptions for OPGES, Preschool and alternative settings based on their individual classroom
situations. They will select skills, processes, understandings, expectations or concepts specifically generated
from their standards and frameworks for their field or KCAS.
The SGG will be written and approved by Nov 15.
Information for scoring SGG begins on page 26.
12 | P a g e
Process/Protocol to Develop Student Growth Goal
(Resources: See below)
Step 1:
•
•
•
•
Determine Needs
Context of identified class, student population
Interval of instruction
Identify content area
Sources of evidence to establish baseline and
measure of student growth
Step 2: Create a Specific Learning Goal
• Specify expected growth and proficiency
targets
• Apply SMART goal criteria
• Explain rationale for goal/how targets meet
expected rigor
Step 3: Create and Implement Teaching and
Learning Strategies
• Describe personal learning needed to support
students attainment of growth goal
• Instructional strategies to obtain goal
Step 4: Monitor Student Progress through
Ongoing Formative Assessment
• Plan for progress monitoring
Step 5: Determine Whether Students Achieve Goal
• Analyze results (summative/post
assessments)
• Reflection/Next Steps
Instruments
In order to determine if the teacher created student
growth goal ensures rigor, the school will use the
Barren County Schools Rubric to Measure Student
Growth Goal.
Teachers may use a variety of planning tools such as
the Enduring Skills Checklist, Think Plan Guidance
Format for Developing Student Growth Goals and the
CASL (Classroom Assessment for Student
Learning) work on Target/Method to ensure rigor.
13 | P a g e
Rigor and Comparability of Student Growth Goals
All teachers and other professionals will write student growth goal(s) annually
•
•
All teachers and appropriate other professionals will write a student growth goal based on the criteria
All teachers and appropriate other professionals will use the Protocol for ensuring rigor and comparability
In order to ensure both rigor and comparability in the development of Student Growth Goals (SGG) the
district designed rubric (included on the following page) shall be used by evaluator and evaluatee. Schools
may also use a school peer review process using the same rubric with final approval by evaluator.
Administration Protocol
Scoring Process by Principal (and
PLC if school chooses)
Rigor and Comparability
Administrative protocol procedures will ensure rigor and comparability by
ensuring that Student Growth Goals meet the following criteria:
• Aligns with standards identified in the student goal
• Meets expected rigor of the standards
• Elicits evidence of the degree to which a student can
independently demonstrate the targeted enduring skill or concept
• Measures what it says it measures and provides consistent results
• Allows high and low achieving students to demonstrate their
knowledge
• Provides access and opportunity for all students including students
with disabilities, ELL’s and gifted and talented students
• Provides sufficient data to inform future instruction
Step 1: Principal and teachers will meet to review relevant data sources
and determine area of focus.
Step 2: Teachers will use the SGG Template (see appendix) to develop the
Student Growth Goal. The Student Growth Goal shall contain both
growth and proficiency measures. The teacher may meet with a PLC to
determine if the goal meets the rubric prior to meeting with the
principal (not required, but an option that schools may choose to
provide.
Step 3: The teacher will meet with evaluator to review the student growth
goal using the Barren County Schools Rubric to Measure Student Growth
Goal.
Step 4: The principal and teacher will determine if the designed measure
will yield true student growth data and would be comparable to growth
measures.
Step 5: The principal and teacher will approve goal and plan/review
strategies to meet the goal.
The following protocol will be used to ensure rigor and comparability in Barren County Schools.
Teachers will develop a minimum of one Student Growth Goal.
14 | P a g e
Barren County Schools Rubric to Measure Student Growth Goal
Structure of the Goal
Acceptable
Needs Revision
Insufficient
The student growth goal:
The student growth goal:
The student growth goal:
The student growth goal:
Focuses on a standards-based enduring skill which
students are expected to master
Focuses on a standards-based enduring skill
Focuses on a standards-based skill that
does not match enduring skill criteria
Is not standards-based
Identifies an area of need pertaining to current
students’ abilities
Identifies a specific area of need supported by
data for current students
Identifies a specific area of need, but lacks
supporting data for current students
Is not focused on a specific area of need
Includes growth and proficiency targets that
establish and differentiate expected performance
for ALL students
Includes a growth target that establishes
growth for ALL students; a proficiency target
that establishes the mastery expectation for
students
Includes both a growth target and a
proficiency target, but fails to differentiate
expected performance for one or both
targets
Includes only a growth or a proficiency
target
Uses appropriate measures for base-line, midcourse, and end of year/course data collection
Uses measures for collecting baseline, midcourse, and end of year/course data that
matches the skill being assessed
Uses measures that fail to clearly
demonstrate performance for the
identified skill
Uses no baseline data or uses irrelevant data
Explicitly states year-long/course-long interval of
instruction
Specifies a year-long/course-long interval of
instruction
Specifies less than a year-long/course-long
interval of instruction
Fails to specify an interval of instruction
Rigor of the Goal
Acceptable
Needs Revision
Insufficient
Is congruent to KCAS grade level standards and
appropriate for the grade level and content area
for which it was developed
Is congruent and appropriate for grade
level/content area standards
Is congruent to content, but not to grade
level standards
Is not congruent or appropriate for grade
level/content area standards
Identifies measures that demonstrate where
students are in meeting or exceeding the intent of
the standard(s) being assessed
Identifies measures that allow students to
demonstrate their competency in performing
at the level intended in the standards being
assessed
Identifies measures that only allow
students to demonstrate competency of
part, but not all aspects of the standards
being assessed
Identifies measures that do not assess the
level of competency intended in the
standards
Includes growth and proficiency targets that are
challenging for students, but attainable with
support
Includes growth and proficiency targets that
are doable, but stretch the outer bounds of
what is attainable
Includes targets that are achievable, but fail
to stretch attainability expectations
Includes targets that do not articulate
expectations AND/OR targets are not
achievable
Comparability of Data
Data collected for the student growth goal:
Uses comparable criteria across similar classrooms
(classrooms that address the same standards) to
determine progress toward mastery of
standards/enduring skills
15 | P a g e
Acceptable
For similar classrooms, data collected for the
student growth goal:
Reflects use of common measures/rubrics to
determine competency in performance at the
level intended by the standard(s) being
assessed
Needs Revision
Insufficient
n/a
For similar classrooms, data collected for the
student growth goal:
Does not reflect common criteria used to
determine progress
Measures Acceptable as Indicators of Growth:
The graphic below provides one way to view data sources available to teachers. The target denotes the greatest
influence on daily instruction and student success. Teachers’ use of multiple data points to understand what students
know and are able to do provides the most opportunity for the teacher to consistently make decisions based on
authentic assessments. The more closely the student growth goal is aligned with the daily instructional and
assessment practices the more likely the growth goal will be attained.
Multiple Data Points
Classroom-level, Teacher-made
Building/Team-level Common
Assessments
District-level Common Assessments
District-Approved Universal
The target denotes greatest influence on
daily instruction and student success.
Multiple Data
• Use of data from combinations of assessment types
• Districts develop common guidelines for combining multiple, valid assessments into a single
performance rating for student growth goal-setting.
Classroom-Level Assessments and Rubrics
• Teacher-generated assessments/rubrics developed, or selected, at the classroom-level
• Process for developing and jurying is designed at district level
• Juried at building-level
Building/Team-Level Common Assessments and Rubrics
• Assessments/rubrics developed at building-level
• Process for developing and jurying is designed at district level
District Common Assessments and Rubrics
• Common assessments/rubrics designed at district level
District Approved Universal
• Assessments/rubrics used more broadly (state or national levels, i.e., Literacy Design Collaborative
rubrics)
Resources:
• Innovation Configuration Map
• Illinois State Board of Education Guide Book on Student Learning Objectives for Type III Assessments (Feb 2013)
• Performance Counts: Assessment Systems That Support High-Quality Learning (Linda Darling-Hammond)
16 | P a g e
Barren County Schools Recommended Assessments
Grades Preschool, K-2
Grades 3-8
☐ AIMS Web
☐ Preschool standards/social emotional standards
☐ STAR Math Enterprise
☐ STAR Reading Enterprise
☐ STAR Early Literacy
☐ Brigance
☐ MAP Primary Grades or MAP
☐ GRADE or GMADE
☐ DIBELS
☐ District Level Common Assessments
☐ AIMS Web
☐ Easy CBM
☐ MAP
☐ KPREP
☐ STAR Enterprise Reading and Math
☐ Explore
☐ Dibels
☐ Brigance
☐ School Level Common Assessments
Grades 9-12
☐ KPREP
☐ EOC
☐ PLAN
☐ ACT
☐ COMPASS
☐ MAP (grade 9)
☐ School Level Common Assessments
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
KOSSA
AP EXAMS
Quality Core
ACT
WorkKeys
Industry Certifications
Pre Test/Post Test or Rubrics: Teachers may use pre/posttests and/or rubrics to determine the growth identified in
their goal. These assessments can be identical or parallel versions.
Throughout the school year, teachers will use formative assessments to monitor growth toward the goal and
modify instruction.
Student Voice
The Student Voice Survey is a confidential, survey that collects student feedback on specific aspects of the classroom
experience and teaching practice. The Barren County Schools Director of Instruction will serve as the District Student
Voice Point of Contact and work closely with the KSIS District Contact to meet the bullets outlined below:
•
•
All teachers will participate in the state-approved Student Voice Survey annually with a minimum of one
identified group of students.
To be consistent across the district, the following conditions will apply:
•
Elementary teachers will issue the survey in their homerooms (unless special circumstances apply)
•
Middle and High School teachers will issue the survey to students from the first class of the day that
they teach (unless special circumstances applies)
•
In the case of special circumstances as agreed upon by the evaluator, evaluatee, and in consultation
with the district student voice coordinator a different class will be selected.
•
For itinerant, Exceptional Child Educators, other teachers or with class sizes less than 10, who have
more than 10 students on their combined class rosters, the teacher will consult with their primary
evaluator to determine the best make-up to create a group with 10 or more students. If conditions
exist that make this unreasonable to do, the teacher shall get permission from primary evaluator. For
OPGES participants there is a minimum of 5 students to conduct student voice with the appropriate
17 | P a g e
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
survey if they provide group instruction to students on a regular basis through an assigned job duty.
To ensure equal access for all students, accommodations consistent with the student’s IEP, PSP or 504
plan will be utilized for completion of the survey.
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 will 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 during one of the approved KDE windows.
Teacher being evaluated will not be present during the survey.
Survey data will only be considered when 10 or more students have responded.
Observations
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 and 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. All observations must be documented in the approved technology platform.
Observation Model
The observation cycle will consist of a minimum of 4 observations in the summative cycle. Observers will conduct
three mini observations of approximately 20-30 minutes each, one of these observations is conducted by a
trained peer observer. Because these are shorter sessions, the evaluator will make note of the components
observed in order to identify "look fors" in the next mini observation session. The peer observation is only for
formative feedback on teaching practice for the teacher. The final observation is a formal observation consisting
of a full class or lesson observation conducted by the supervisor. All observations must be documented on
approved district forms and may be completed using appropriate technology platform, if available. Additional
observations beyond the minimum requirements stated above may be scheduled or unscheduled (announced or
unannounced), mini-partial, or a walk-thru. All observations may provide additional data for evaluation.
Pre Observation Conferencing
For scheduled observations, the pre observation form is required to be submitted to the supervisor 1-3 days prior
to any scheduled observation. A pre observation conference may be requested by the evaluator or the certified
staff being observed.
Post Observation Conferencing
Observers will adhere to the following observation conferencing requirements:
• Conduct observation post conference within five (5) working days. Documentation filed.
• The summative evaluation conference shall be held at the end of the summative evaluation cycle.
Refer to timelines.
18 | P a g e
Observation Cycles
SYSTEM OF EVALUATION*
ANNUALLY
SUPERINTENDENT
Superintendent PGES (conducted by Board of Ed)
DIRECTORS
Other District Staff Evaluation System
SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST
Other District Staff Evaluation System
CRTS/BAVEL/V-TEAM
TEACHER CONSULTANTS
PRINCIPALS/ASSISTANT/
Alternative School Admin
Other District Staff Evaluation System
NON TENURED
ANNUALLY,
TENURED EVERY 3
YEARS
Principal PGES
COUNSELORS/CCR
DEVELOPMENT COORD
SPEECH LANGUAGE
PATHOLOGIST
LIBRARIANS
OPGES with appropriate KDE Framework
PRESCHOOL TEACHERS
Teacher PGES (with KDE Preschool Guidance)
NON TENURED TEACHERS
Teacher PGES
TENURED TEACHERS
Teacher PGES
TENURED TEACHER ON
IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Teacher PGES
PGES – Professional Growth and Effectiveness System
Observation Schedule
Observations may begin after the evaluation training takes place within 30 calendar days of reporting for
employment according to the timeline below:
Orientation
Non
Tenured
Tenured
***
30 calendar days
of reporting for
employment
SelfReflection,
Professional
Growth Plan
and Student
Growth
Goals
SelfReflection by
Sept. 15**
Professional
Growth Goals
by Oct 15**
Observation Observation Midyear
Mini
Mini
Principal
Principal
By
November 1
By
February 1
Review
Observation
Mini
Peer
Between
Between
November 2 November 2
and
and
February 1
February 1
4th
Observation
Formal
Principal
Between
February 2
and April 15
Summative
Evaluation
submitted
to CO
April 15
May 1
Student
Growth Goals
by Nov. 15**
* All components completed and entered into the approved format by the dates above.
** Evaluator may request submission earlier in order to review before approval.
*** Tenured Teachers not on One-Year Directed Growth Plan
19 | P a g e
Evaluation Timeline Barren County Schools
A summative evaluation conference shall be held at the end of the summative evaluation cycle and shall include all
applicable professional growth and evaluation data.
Non-Tenured Teachers
A summative evaluation shall occur annually for all non-tenured teachers. This observation shall include a minimum
of three mini observations of approximately 20-30 minutes each (one of which is a peer observation and occurs
between Nov 2 & Feb 1). Teachers may request additional peer observations for formative purposes if desired. The
final observation is a formal observation consisting of a full class or lesson observation. Observations may begin 30
calendar days after the first day of teacher employment.
Intern Teachers
The intern shall be evaluated in accordance with the Kentucky Teacher Internship Program (KTIP). Since the
internship program is for the purpose of certification, the district shall additionally require that a district summative
evaluation form be prepared that using the data gathered through the internship program. The summative
evaluation shall be utilized for employment purposes by the district and shall be placed in the intern’s personnel file.
Tenured Teachers not on One-Year Directed Growth Plan
A summative evaluation shall occur a minimum of once every three (3) years for all tenured personnel. All tenured
personnel whose last name begins with A-H will be evaluated during the 2015-16 school year and every third (3rd)
year thereafter. During the 2016-17 school year, all tenured personnel whose last name begins with I-P will be
evaluated and every third year thereafter. During the 2017-18 school year, all tenured personnel whose last name
begins with Q-Z will be evaluated and every third year thereafter.
Tenured Teachers on One-Year Directed Growth Plan
Based on the overall Professional Practice Rating and Student Growth Rating, supervisors will determine the tenured
teacher’s type of Professional Growth Plan and the length of the summative cycle. Those tenured teachers on a oneyear Directed Growth Plan will be evaluated annually. If a teacher is rated as ineffective in professional practice
AND as low in student growth, he or she will be placed on an “up to 12th-month improvement plan” (also known as
Corrective Action Plan) and a summative evaluation completed at the end of the plan.
Late Hires & Those on Extended Leaves
Late hires, and those on extended leaves of absence, will have a minimum of two observations (one mini and one
full) conducted by the assigned supervisor and one observation conducted by the peer. The principal/primary
evaluator will discuss the adjustment of timelines with the evaluatee based on the hire date and/or dates of the
extended leave of absence.
A Late hire is any teacher or Other Professional hired on or after 60 school days following the first day that students
report to school. Exception will be for any late hire that will work for 60 or fewer consecutive days. If the new
employee will work for sixty or fewer consecutive days, then one full observation will be conducted by the
supervisor. In the event of extenuating circumstances, one full, formal observation will be conducted on the
evaluatee prior to the end of the school year.
20 | P a g e
Observer Certification
To ensure consistency of observations, evaluators must complete the approved technology platform
Proficiency Observation Training. 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
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]. The office of the assistant
superintendent will document names of all certified administrators who have successfully passed the proficiency
exam including the year initial certification occurred. Completion of dates will reflect the date of initial
certification:
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Certification
Calibration
Calibration
Recertification
Only primary evaluators who have passed the proficiency assessment can conduct mini and full observations for
the purpose of evaluation. Initial Evaluator Certification and Observer Training (Initial and Calibration) must be
completed prior to full duties of an evaluator are granted. In the event that a primary evaluator has yet to
complete the proficiency assessment, or if the primary evaluator does not pass the assessment, the district will
provide the following supports:
Observer Certification Support
In cases where the primary evaluator 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. A scaffold approach will be implemented, beginning with initial
supports to ensure success during the first administration of the assessment, supports for those who do not pass
after one attempt and, supports for those unable to pass the assessment after the second attempt and are
subsequently locked out of the system for 90 days. These processes could include collaboration during the
initial training (consider a cohort approach to initial certification), additional professional learning opportunities,
and mentors.
To ensure teachers will have access to certified observers in cases where the primary evaluator is not certified
through the proficiency system and therefore unable to conduct the observation, district-level personnel or
principals from another building (certified through the proficiency system) will conduct the observation with the
principal (modeling the process). The office of the assistant superintendent shall determine the “mentor”
observer to work with the primary evaluator. Observation data provided by a substitute observer is considered a
valid source of evidence only if the primary evaluator participated (passively) in the observation. Late hire primary
evaluators will obtain certification within 30 days of hiring.
Observer Calibration
A calibration process is 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. Observer
calibration will occur during years 2 & 3 of the Observer Certification Process based on Teachscape, or the current
21 | P a g e
state approved technology. Re-certification will occur after year 3. In the case where an administrator does not
meet calibration requirements, administrators will receive additional calibration practice/scoring to support the
reliability of the calibration process. Calibration windows will be established by the office of the assistant
superintendent.
The district will provide an observer calibration training each summer for all evaluators. Calibration training is to
be completed preferably by the date of the District’s Evaluator Training, but is required to be completed prior to
the official Opening Day of School. Documentation of calibration training will be forwarded to the central office
contacts to be kept on file in the Office of the Assistant Superintendent upon completion.
Yellow Rating: A yellow rating indicates that the evaluator needs additional practice and support to prepare for
classroom observations. Evaluators receiving a yellow rating will be asked to review the rubrics, benchmarks and
rangefinders for the components they did not have an exact match with expert scores. The evaluator should also
complete additional calibration videos until a green rating is achieved.
Red Rating: A red rating indicates the evaluator is inconsistent in their application of the Framework for Teaching.
A source of their scoring inconsistency may be due to their professional preferences influencing their judgment an
application of the rubric. Evaluators receiving a red rating shall repeat training with an assigned mentor (as
assigned by the Office of the Assistant Superintendent or Superintendent) and score additional videos from their
grade band. Evaluators who score in the red band must be accompanied by another certified evaluator (mentor)
until they reach a green rating.
Peer Observation (Information, certification and selection)
•
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.
•
All teachers will receive a peer observation in their summative year.
•
All peer observations must be documented using the district developed documentation form (see PEER
observation form) that will submitted to the primary evaluator when peer observation process has been
completed (submit PEER3 form only).
• All peer observers will have completed the state developed peer observer training within the last three (3) years.
•
All teachers were trained in the state developed peer observer training system in the Summer of 2014. Additional
district-wide events will be conducted every three years. If additional peer observers are needed at a school, the
district curriculum resource teachers will organize trainings to occur in the interim. Upon successful completion,
the Peer Observer will print certificate and deliver to the building principal.
• From the teachers who have completed the approved peer observation training and have earned the appropriate
certification, the principal will select (based on those who best meet the professional needs for peer observations
for that year) a minimum of one-third for the “approved peer observer pool”. Intern teachers may not be peer
observers.
•
Teachers in the summative cycle will rank choices for their peer observer from the approved peer observer pool.
The principal will select the peer observer from the teachers’ rankings.
22 | P a g e
Determining the Overall Performance Category
Primary evaluators are responsible for determining an Overall Performance Category for each teacher at the
conclusion of the 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, and decision rules that establish a common understanding of performance thresholds to which
all educators are held.
Rating Professional Practice (STEP #1) (Each individual observation – mini/full)
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. Primary evaluators will organize and analyze evidence for each individual educator
based on these concrete descriptions of practice. Primary evaluators 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. Summative rating will be based on evidence. All ratings must be recorded in the district
approved format and a hard copy will be provided to the official personnel record. Evaluators will utilize approved
forms for this process, and if available, may use approved technology formats.
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
DOMAIN RATINGS
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO INFORM
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
DOMAIN 1: [I,D,A,E]
[I D A E]
REQUIRED
• Observation
• Student Voice
• Professional Growth Plans
and Self Reflection
OPTIONAL
• District-Determined –
identified in the CEP
• Other Teacher Evidence
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
DOMAIN 2: [I,D,A,E]
DOMAIN 3: [I,D,A,E]
DOMAIN 4: [I,D,A,E]
23 | P a g e
Products of Practice/Other Sources of Evidence That May Be Considered
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 primary evaluator observer(s)
• Student voice survey(s)
• Self-reflection and professional growth plans
Other sources of evidence that can be used to support educator practice
•
• Program Review Evidence
•
• Team developed curriculum units
•
• Lesson plans
•
• Communication logs
•
• Timely, targeted feedback from mini or
i n f o r ma l observations
•
•
• Student data records
•
• Student work
•
• Student formative and/or summative course
evaluations/feedback
•
• Minutes from PLCs
•
• Teacher reflections and/or self-reflections
Benchmark data
Teacher interviews
Teacher committee or team contributions
Parent engagement surveys
Records of students and/or teacher attendance
Video lessons
Engagement in professional organizations
Action research
Progress monitoring data (IEP, 504, PSP, RTI Plan,
GSSP, etc.)
Individual Learning Plans
Other school and district level assessments
Letters and Memos
In addition to the sources of evidence listed above, letters and memos may be used to document both outstanding
performance and performance which needs improvement. The correspondence should be dated and signed by both parties.
Determining the Overall Performance Category (STEP #2)
An educator’s Overall Performance Category for Professional Practice is determined using 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 Rating.
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING A TEACHER’S PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE RATING
24 | P a g e
Rating Overall Student Growth (STEP #3)
The overall Student Growth Rating is a result of a combination of professional judgment and the district-developed
instrument for summative student growth ratings. The designed instrument aids the primary evaluator in applying
professional judgment to multiple evidences of student growth over time. The Student Growth Rating must include
data from SGG and MSGP (where available), and will be considered in a three year cycle (when available).
STUDENT GROWTH
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO INFORM
STUDENT GROWTH
STATE
• MSGPs
• State Predefined Cut
Scores
LOCAL
• SGG
• Maintain current process
• Rate on H/E/L
STUDENT GROWTH RATING
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
AND DISTRICTDETERMINED
RUBRICS
STUDENT GROWTH [H,E,L]

SGG and MSGP (when available) will be used to determine overall Student Growth Rating.
 When available, up to three years of student growth data will be used to determine overall
Student Growth Rating for teachers/other professionals.
25 | P a g e
Determining Growth for a Single Student Growth Goal (STEP #3A) (LOCAL SGG)
The following decision rules will be used in determining the result of local contribution student growth and apply to
both TPGES (including preschool) and OPGES:
Barren County Schools Decision Rules for the Growth
Low
Expected
Component
High
Achievement data from at least
two points in time shows little to
no evidence of growth for
students.
Achievement data from at least
two points in time shows clear
evidence of growth for all
students.
Achievement data from at least
two points in time shows clear
evidence of growth for all
students.
Less than 60% of the students
showed growth.
60%-84% of students met the
growth target.
85% or more of students reached
desired growth.
Barren County Schools Decision Rules for the Proficiency
Low
Expected
Component (Proficiency Target)
High
Proficiency Component Low Rating
Proficiency Component Expected
Rating
Proficiency Component High Rating
Greater than 10% discrepancy from
stated target will be considered as
Low Growth.
Plus or minus 10% of stated target
will be considered as Expected
Growth
Greater than 10 % of stated target
will be considered as High Growth
The matrix below will be used to assign the overall rating of the growth goal by the building level
primary evaluator for Local Contribution.
Proficiency
Overall Local Student Growth Goal (SGG) Rating
High
Expected Expected
High
Expected
Expected Expected
Expected
Low
Low
Expected
Expected
Low
Expected
High
Growth
26 | P a g e
Combining Local & State Growth (Step #3B) (Grades 4-8 Reading & Math)
Rating Student
Growth
State contribution is weighted 5% of Student Growth (MSGP).
(see page 12 for more details about this state provided score
(grades 4-8 reading & math))
Local contribution is weighted 95% of Student Growth (Local Student Growth Goal Rating).
Calculated for the
current year’s growth
0.95 (LSGGR) + 0.05 (MSGP) = Overall Teacher Performance Rating for Year
LSGGR = Local Student Growth Goal Rating
RANKING
LOW
Expected
High
Low = 1
Expected = 2
High = 3
Example
MSGP = Median State Growth Percentile
Local Student Growth Goal Rating = High
State Growth (MSGP) Rating = Expected
.95 (3) + 0.05 (2) = 2.85 + 0.1 = 2.95 or
Rating Overall
Student Growth
AVERAGE SCORE
1.0 – 1.49
1.50-2.49
2.50-3
High Rating
Data will be collected over 3 years and each year’s data will be of equal
weight in the calculation of growth (33%).
Weighting will be averaged over the 3 years with the following rating:
Low = 1
Multiple years’ growth
Expected = 2
High = 3
To find the weighted average for the Student Growth Goal Rating, use the formula:
FORMULA: .33 (Yr 1) + .33 (Yr 2) + .33 (Yr. 3 ) = Growth
RANKING
LOW
Expected
High
AVERAGE SCORE
1.0 – 1.49
1.50-2.49
2.50-3
•
If a teacher has only one year of data, that year will count for 100% of
their growth total.
•
If a teacher has only two years of data, each of the two years will count for
50% of their growth total.
•
Principals shall include cycle data from other placements within the district (ex.
Teacher taught at the high school for 2 years and this year at the middle school.
Principal would utilize the rating from the middle school for years 1 and 2).
Example
Y1A=Year 1 Average
Low = 1
Y1A=Year 1 Average
Y2A=Year 2 Average
Expected = 2
Y2A=Year 2 Average
Y3A=Year 3 Average
Expected = 2
Y3A=Year 3 Average
GT=Growth Total
5 / 3 = 1.66
Expected
GT=Growth Total
27 | P a g e
Determining Overall Performance Category (Step #4)






This is also known as the Summative Rating.
Apply State Overall Decision Rules for determining educator’s Overall Performance Category.
All summative ratings must be recorded on district forms and submitted to the Kentucky Department of
Education through the approved technology platform.
Implement the Overall Performance Category process for determining effectiveness.
An opportunity for written response shall be included in the official personnel record.
A copy of the evaluation will be provided to the evaluatee.
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING A TEACHER’S OR OTHER
PROFESSIONAL’S OVERALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORY
28 | P a g e
Professional Growth Plan and Summative Cycle (Step #5)
Based on the overall Professional Practice Rating, the type of Professional Growth Plan
and the length of the summative cycle will be determined using the charts below:
ACCOMPLISHED
THREE-YEAR CYCLE
SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH
PLAN
•
•
•
DEVELOPING
•
•
•
•
THREE-YEAR CYCLE
SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
•
•
Goal set by teacher with
evaluator input
One goal must focus on
low student growth
outcome
Formative review
annually
ONE-YEAR CYCLE
DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
INEFFECTIVE
PROFESIONAL PRACTICE
EXEMPLARY
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH PLAN AND CYCLE FOR TENURED TEACHERS AND OTHER PROFESSIONALS
Goal(s) Determined by
Evaluator
Goals focus on professional
practice and student growth
Plan activities designed by
evaluator with teacher input
Summative review annually
UP TO 12-MONTH
IMPROVEMENT PLAN
• Goal(s) determined by
evaluator
• Focus on low performance
area
• Summative at end of plan
LOW
•
•
Goals set by teacher with evaluator input
Plan activities are teacher directed and implemented with
colleagues.
Formative review annually
Summative occurs at the end of year 3.
THREE-YEAR CYCLE
SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
•
•
Goal(s) set by teacher with
evaluator input; one must
address professional practice
or student growth.
Formative review annually.
THREE-YEAR CYCLE
SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
•
•
Goal(s) set by educator with
evaluator input
Formative review annually
ONE YEAR DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
• Goal determined by evaluator
• Goals focused on low performance/outcome area
• Plan activities designed by evaluator with educator input
• Formative review at midpoint
• Summative at end of plan
EXPECTED
HIGH
STUDENT GROWTH RATING
29 | P a g e