LAKEWOOD LOCAL SCHOOLS
525 E. Main St. Hebron, OH 43025
TEACHER EVALUATION RESOURCE
This teacher evaluation document has been created to help guide the professional growth of the Lakewood Local School District teachers. A
special thanks to all Lakewood teachers and administrators who participated in the district level Ohio Teacher Evaluation System committee.
Standards Based Teacher Evaluation Document Reference: Alignment to the Ohio Teacher Evaluation Framework as per Ohio Revised Code
3319.61; House Bill 1; House Bill 153 and House Bill 316.
Committee Members: Dawn Villares, Debbie Warthen, Michelle Vayansky, Sheldon Hill, Andy Bowman, Elizabeth Rauch, Sharon McCord,
Misty Dutiel, Jessica Fry, Patti Pickering, Mike Rodich, Larry Bevard, Arnie Ettenhofer, Jay Gault
1
Table of Contents
Background / Rationale for OTES
Lakewood Local Evaluation Framework
Checklist of Evaluation Procedures and Timelines
PART I – TEACHER PERFORMANCE ON STANDARDS
Lakewood Local Annual Teacher Evaluation Process
Step 1: Self Assessment / Goal Setting
Step 2: Formative Assessment of Teacher Performance
Pre-Conference
Formal Observation : Gathering Evidence of Teacher Performance
Classroom Walkthroughs / Informal Observations
Post-Conference: Reflection, Reinforcement, and Refinement
Combining Measures to Obtain a Holistic Rating
Using Evidence to Inform Holistic Performance Ratings
Defining the Performance Ratings
Part I – Forms
Lakewood Teacher Evaluation Summary Assessment (Teacher Optional)
Professional Goal Setting (Teacher Required)
Pre-Observation Planning Guide (Teacher Resource)
Lesson Plan Template (Teacher Resource)
Performance Evaluation Rubric (Evaluator Required)
Post-Observation Teacher Reflection Form (Teacher Resource)
Observation Narrative and Evaluator’s Observation Notes Form (Evaluator Resource)
Communication and Professionalism Evaluation Form (Teacher Resource)
Informal Observation: Walkthrough Form (Teacher / Evaluator Resource)
Post Observation Conference Guidelines (Teacher Resoure)
Post Observation Rating Form (Evaluator Required)
PART II – STUDENT GROWTH MEASURES
Step 3: Student Growth Measures
A Guide to Using SLO’s
What is an SLO?
What are the steps for Creating an SLO?
Preparing for Scoring
Step 4: Summative Rating
Requirements for Professional Growth Plan or Improvement Plan
Professional Conversations and Progress Checks
Professional Growth Plan
Improvement Plan
Part II – Forms
SLO Checklist (Rubric) (Teacher / SLO Committee Resource)
SLO Template (Required for Teachers with no Value-Added Data)
Student Growth Matrix (Teacher Required)
Summary Report Form (Evaluator Required)
Professional Growth Plan (See pages 39-40 for eligibility)
Improvement Plan (See pages 39-40 for eligibility)
Improvement Plan: Evaluation of Plan (Evaluator Required)
Record of Teacher Evaluation Activities (Teacher /Evaluator Required)
Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (OTES) Original Framework
2
3
5
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
11
12
14
15
16
24
25
26
28
29
30
31
32
33
33
33
35
36
38
38
39
39
40
41
43
44
45
46
48
49
Background / Rationale for Ohio Teacher Evaluation System
Over the past decade, Ohio has made important education policy advances, with a focus on student learning and
achievement, standards, and accountability, which together have moved Ohio’s kindergarten through 12 th grade
system forward in several important ways. Ohio is serious about its commitment to quality schools. The report of the
Governor’s Commission on Teaching Success was followed by the passage of Senate Bill 2 in 2004, which
mandated the creation of the Educator Standards Board. The Board was charged with the creation of the Ohio
Standards for the Teaching Profession, the Ohio Standards for Principals and the Ohio Standards for Professional
Development.
House Bill 1 in 2009 directed the Educator Standards Board to recommend model evaluation systems for teachers
and principals to the State Board of Education for their review and adoption. The Ohio Teacher Evaluation System
(OTES) was created in response to this mandate and designed to be used to assess the performance of Ohio teachers.
The OTES was collaboratively developed by Ohio teachers, school administrators, higher education faculty, and
representatives from Ohio’s professional associations, in collaboration with national experts in the area of teacher
evaluation. The OTES is designed to be research-based, transparent, fair and adaptable to the specific contexts of
Ohio’s districts (rural, urban, suburban, large, and small). The evaluation system builds on what we know about the
importance of ongoing assessment and feedback as a powerful vehicle to support improved practice.
The teacher evaluation as required by Ohio Revised Code:
o Provides for multiple evaluation factors, including student academic growth which shall account for fifty
percent of each evaluation;
o Is aligned with the standards for teachers adopted under section 3319.61 of the Revised Code;
o Requires observation of the teacher being evaluated, including at least two formal observations by the
evaluator of at least thirty minutes each and classroom walkthroughs;
o Assigns a rating on each evaluation conducted under sections 3319.02 and 3319.111 of the Revised Code in
accordance with the following levels of performance: accomplished, proficient, developing, or ineffective.
o Requires each teacher to be provided with a written report of the results of the teacher’s evaluation;
o Implements a classroom-level, value-added program developed by a nonprofit organization as described in
division (B) of section 3302.021 of ORC;
o Identifies measures of student academic growth for grade levels and subjects for which the value-added
progress dimension prescribed by section 3302.021 of the Revised Code does not apply;
o Provides for professional development to accelerate and continue teacher growth and provide support to
poorly performing teachers; and
o Provides for the allocation of financial resources to support professional development.
Definition of Teacher Effectiveness
The scope of work of the Ohio Teacher Evaluation Writing Team during 2009-2010 included extensive study of
model evaluation systems throughout the country. Many state systems were examined in depth (e.g., District of
Columbia Public Schools, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado) for a standards-based definition of teacher
effectiveness. Research was supplemented by the work of Charlotte Danielson, Laura Goe, New Teacher Center,
and Learning Point Associates.
After conducting extensive research, the following definition of teacher effectiveness was developed by educational
practitioners in Ohio and is reinforced by Ohio’s Standards for the Teaching Profession. Clearly the research
supports the direct connection between effective teaching and high student achievement.
Inherent in this definition is the expectation that all students will demonstrate a minimum of one year of growth
based on standard and reliable measures.
3
Effective teachers:
 Understand student learning and development, respect the diversity of the students they teach, and hold
high expectations for all students to achieve and progress at high levels;
 Know and understand the content areas for which they have instructional responsibility;
 Understand and use varied assessments to inform instruction, and evaluate and ensure student learning;
 Plan and deliver effective instruction that advances the learning of each individual student;
 Create a learning environment that promotes high levels of student learning and achievement for all
students;
 Collaborate and communicate with students, parents, other teachers, administrators and the community to
support student learning; and
 Assume responsibility for professional growth and performance as an individual and as a member of a
learning community
Teacher Performance
Teacher performance is determined by using a rating rubric (Teacher Performance Evaluation Rubric) consisting
of indicators based on the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession. The evaluation process requires the
evaluator to use evidence gathered in a variety of avenues (professional growth or improvement plan, observations,
walkthroughs, and conferences) to determine a teacher performance rating.
4
Lakewood Local Evaluation Framework
The Lakewood Local Board of Education and State Board of Education recognize the importance of evaluating
teachers for the purposes of improving the quality of instruction students receive, improving student learning,
strengthening professional proficiency, including identifying and remediating deficiencies, and for informing
employment decisions.
Student Academic Growth will be measured through multiple measures which must include value added scores on
evaluations for teachers where value added scores are available. Lakewood Local Schools may administer
assessments chosen from the Ohio Department of Education’s assessment list for subjects where value added scores
are not available and/or local measures of student growth using state –designed criteria and guidance.
Each evaluation will consist of two formal observations of the teacher at least thirty minutes each in duration, as
well as periodic walkthroughs. Each teacher will be provided a written report of the results of the evaluation carried
out under the Evaluation Framework. The evaluation must be completed annually, by May 1, and the teacher will
receive the written evaluation report by May 10.



Beginning with the 2014-15 school year, teachers receiving a rating of accomplished will be evaluated every three
years as long as the teacher’s student academic growth measure for the most recent school year for which data is
available is average or higher.
A teacher receiving a rating of skilled will be evaluated every two years as long as the teacher’s student academic
growth measure for the most recent school year for which data is available is average or higher.
In any year in which a teacher who has not been formally evaluated as a result of having previously received a rating of
accomplished or skilled, a credentialed evaluator shall conduct at least one observation of the teacher and hold at least
one conference with the teacher. This also applies to teachers who received an accomplished rating in 2013-14.
The teacher’s performance rating will be combined with the results of student growth measures to produce a
summative evaluation rating as depicted in the matrix above. Teachers with above expected growth will develop a
professional growth plan. Teachers with expected levels of student growth will develop a professional growth plan.
Teachers with below expected levels of student growth (a score of 1 or 2 on the Student Growth Measures) will
develop an improvement plan with their credentialed evaluator. The administration will assign the credentialed
evaluator for the evaluation cycle and approve the improvement plan.
The Lakewood Local Board of Education will establish procedures for using the evaluation results for retention and
promotion decisions and for removal of poorly-performing teachers. Seniority will not be the basis for teacher
retention decisions, except when deciding between teachers who have comparable evaluations. The Lakewood
Local Board of Education will provide for the allocation of financial resources to support professional development.
Legal Refs. ORC 33198.111; 3319.112
5
 Checklist of Evaluation Procedures

Self-Assessment: The self –assessment should be completed by August 29.

Professional Development Plan / Goal Setting: To be completed by the teacher and reviewed with
the credentialed evaluator on or before September 30.

Student Learning Objectives: To be submitted for approval by October 24.

Walkthroughs: Any classroom visits which last less than thirty (30) minutes. Preferably 15-20 minutes or more.

Pre Conference: Teacher submits Pre Observation Planning Sheet and Lesson Plan to the credentialed evaluator on or before
each Pre Conference upon the mutually agreed upon date.

Observations / Formative Assessment: Two formal observations must take place during the school year, 1
prior to the end of the 2nd grading period and the second prior to May 1.

Mid-Year Conference: May be completed during the Pre-Conference (Planning) and Post Conference Sessions
(Reflection) to review Goal Setting and Observation progress.

Communication / Collaboration: Artifacts should be collected throughout the year and reviewed during the 1
nd
pre and post conference as well as the 2 pre and post conference.

Professionalism: Artifacts should be collected throughout the year and reviewed during the 1
st
pre and post observation
nd
conference as well as the 2 pre and post observation conference.

Student Growth: All teachers will have a student growth component that will make up 50% of the Evaluation.


Year End Conference:

Final Summative Rating: To be completed holistically by the credentialed evaluator on or before May 10.
To be completed on or before May 1.
6
st
PART I
TEACHER PERFORMANCE ON
STANDARDS
LEFT SIDE OF THE OTES MODEL
=
50% of SUMMATIVE EVALUATION
LAKEWOOD LOCAL ANNUAL TEACHER EVALUATION PROCESS
7
Step 1: Self-Assessment / Goal Setting
(See Professional Goal Setting forms for Goal 1 & 2, pages 11-13)
Beginning in the 2013-2014 school year, teachers should complete a self-assessment to reflect on areas of strength
and growth specifically related to each performance standard. The self-assessment results may be used as a source
of information for developing an individualized plan for professional growth using the documents in the handbook.
Teachers will identify two priority areas of growth for their Professional Development Plan.
The self-assessment summary should be completed by the teacher during the first month that school is in session. It
is the teacher’s choice whether or not to review this information with the credentialed evaluator. See the SelfAssessment Summary Form for directions on completing the form page 11.
Step 2: Formative Assessment of Teacher Performance (50%)
Assessment of Teacher Performance
All teachers, at all stages of their careers, will be assessed on their expertise and performance—in the classroom and
school setting by one of the credentialed administrators in the building they spend the majority of their teaching day.
A credentialed evaluator is one who:
 possesses the proper certification/ licensure to be an evaluator or the LEA has deemed that peers may be
evaluators
 has been approved as an evaluator by the local board of education
 has completed a state-sponsored OTES training
 has passed an online assessment using the OTES rubric.
The Formal Observation Process
Observations of teaching provide important evidence when assessing a teacher’s performance and effectiveness. As
an evaluator observes a teacher engaging students in learning, valuable evidence may be collected on multiple
levels. As part of the formal observation process, on-going communication and collaboration between evaluator and
teacher help foster a productive professional relationship that is supportive and leads to a teacher’s professional
growth and development.
8
Pre-Conference (See Pre-Conference Planning Guide and Lesson Plan Template pages 14-15)
At the pre-conference, the evaluator and teacher discuss what the evaluator will observe during the classroom
visitation. Important information is shared about the learning targets of the lesson and the assessment of student
learning. The conference will also give the teacher an opportunity to identify areas in which he/she would like
focused feedback from the evaluator during the classroom observation. The communication takes place during a
formal meeting and a record of the date(s) will be kept. The purpose of the pre-observation conference is to provide
the evaluator with an opportunity to discuss some of the following sample topics:







Lesson Learning Targets;
Prior learning experiences of the students;
Characteristics of the learners/learning environment;
Instructional strategies that will be used to meet the Learning Targets;
Student activities and materials;
Differentiation based on the needs of students; and
Assessment (data) collected to demonstrate student learning.
The optional lesson plan template and list of sample questions stems (pages 14-15) should serve as guide to the
lesson plan.
The teacher and evaluator should set a time for the formal observation to take place and re-negotiate this scheduled
date and time as necessary if the observation is not conducted as planned.
Formal Observation: Gathering Evidence of Teacher Performance (See Lakewood Local Teacher
Performance Evaluation Rubric pages 16-23).
Teachers will participate in a minimum of two formal observations. These observations should be conducted for an
entire class period, lesson or a minimum of 30 minutes. During the classroom observation, the evaluator will
document specific information related to teaching and learning. Each formal observation will be analyzed by the
evaluator using the Teacher Performance Evaluation Rubric. A narrative will then be completed by the evaluator to
document each formal observation. The results of each formal observation will be reviewed with the teacher during
the post-observation conference. Formal observations will not include videotaping or sound recordings except with
the written permission of the teacher.
Classroom Walkthroughs / Informal Observation (See Informal Observation: Walkthrough Guide page 28).
An informal observation/classroom walkthrough is a:



Tool to inform evaluation that provides the opportunity to gather evidence of instruction over a series of
short classroom visits;
Process for giving targeted evidence-based feedback to teachers; and
Means for principals to visit classrooms more frequently and purposefully.
An informal observation/classroom walkthrough is not a(n);




Formal observation;
“Gotcha” opportunity for supervisors or evaluators’
Isolated event; or
Shortcut to the observation protocol required as part of the teacher evaluation process.
Classroom walkthroughs/informal observations, as part of the teacher evaluation system, may be general in nature or
focused on observing a specific aspect of teacher performance. Informal observations should last from 15-20
minutes. The evaluator will provide feedback to the teacher within a reasonable amount of time. Summary data
collected through a series of walkthroughs along with evidence documented through formal observations will come
together to inform the teacher’s summative performance rating: ineffective, developing, proficient or accomplished.
9
Post-Conference: Reflection, Reinforcement, and Refinement (See Teacher Reflection Form page 25, Data
Collection Tools page 28 and Communication and Professionalism Summative Evaluation Form pages 26-27 )
The purpose of the post-observation conference is to provide reflection and feedback on the observed lesson and to
identify strategies and resources for the teacher to incorporate in lessons to increase effectiveness. Following the
lesson, the teacher reflects on the lesson and how well the student learning outcomes were met. Professional
conversations between the evaluator and the teacher during the Post-Conference will provide the teacher with
feedback on the observed lesson, and may identify additional strategies and resources. The evaluator will make
recommendations and commendations which may become part of the teacher’s professional development plan.
In general, the discussion between the evaluator and teacher needs to focus on how successful the lesson was
(reinforcement), and areas needing further support (refinement). Teachers may bring additional evidence that
supports the lesson observed to share with the evaluator at the conference. The evaluator may consider these as
evidence of student learning or evidence to support the teacher’s performance.
Combining Measures to Obtain a Holistic Rating (See Post Observation Conference: Rating Summary Form
page 32)
A strong teacher evaluation system calls for ongoing collaboration and honest conversation between teachers and
their evaluators. The foundation of such a system is the transparent, two-way gathering and sharing of evidence that
informs the teacher performance ratings at the end of the year. Some teacher behaviors are observable in the
classroom while other evidence may include formal conferences, informal conversations, evidence of practice, and
colleague, parent and student input. The model Ohio Teacher Evaluation System describes opportunities for teachers
and evaluators to discuss evidence, build a common understanding of the teacher’s current practice, and identify
areas for future growth. Regular check-ins also help evaluators manage the administrative burden of gathering and
organizing evidence by sharing the responsibility with the teacher and encouraging evaluators to document teacher
practices as they occur.
Using Evidence to Inform Holistic Performance Ratings
Defining the Performance Ratings
In accordance with Ohio Revised Code 3319.112 the rubric describes four levels of teacher performance for each
standard area. Each performance rating can also be described in more general terms, as a holistic rating of teacher
performance:
Accomplished:
Skilled:
Developing:
Ineffective:
A rating of Ineffective indicates
that the teacher consistently fails
to demonstrate minimum
competency in one or more
teaching standards. There is little
or no improvement over
time. The teacher requires
immediate assistance and needs
to be placed on an improvement
plan.
A rating of Developing indicates
that the teacher demonstrates
minimum competency in many
of the teaching standards, but
may struggle with others. The
teacher is making progress but
requires ongoing professional
support for necessary growth to
occur.
A rating of Skilled indicates that
the teacher consistently meets
expectations for performance and
fully demonstrates most or all
competencies. This rating is the
rigorous, expected performance
level for most experienced
teachers.
10
A rating of Accomplished
indicates that the teacher is a
leader and model in the
classroom, school, and district,
exceeding expectations for
performance. The teacher
consistently strives to improve his
or her instructional and
professional practice and
contributes to the school or
district through the development
and mentoring of colleagues.
LAKEWOOD TEACHER EVALUATION SUMMARY ASSESSMENT (TEACHER-optional) Directions: Teachers should record evidence to indicate area(s) of
strengths and areas for growth for each standard by placing a check mark in the appropriate box under the categories. Please look across all of the standards holistically and identify two priorities for the
upcoming year. Mark two priority areas of growth by placing a check mark in the Priority column. NAME___________________________________________________________________________
Collaboration &
Communication
Standard 7
Profession
Responsibi
lity and
Growth
Standard 6
Standard 5
Learning
Environment
Standard 4
Instruction
Standard 3
Assessment
Standard 2
Content
Standard 1
Students
Standard
Area of Strength
-Knowledge of how students learn and of student development
-Understanding of what students know and are able to do
-High expectations for all students
-Respect for all students
-Identification, instruction and intervention for special populations
-Knowledge of Content
-Use of content-specific instructional strategies to teach concepts and skills
-Knowledge of school and district curriculum priorities and Ohio Academic Content Standards
-Relationship of knowledge within the discipline to other content areas
-Connection of content to life experiences and career opportunities
-Knowledge of assessment types
-Use of varied diagnostic, formative and summative assessments
-Analysis of data to monitor student progress and to plan, differentiate, and modify instruction
-Communication of results
-Inclusion of student self-assessment and goal writing
-Alignment to school and district priorities and Ohio Academic Content Standards
-Use of student information to plan and deliver instruction
-Communication of clear learning goals
-Application of knowledge of how students learn to instructional design and delivery
-Differentiation of instruction to support learning needs of all students
-Use of activities to promote independence and problem solving
-Use of varied resources to support learner needs
-Fair and equitable treatment of all students
-Creation of a safe learning environment
-Use of strategies to motivate students to work productively and assume responsibility for learning
-Creation of learning situations for independent and collaborative work
-Maintenance of an environment that is conducive to learning for all students
-Clear and effective communication
-Shared responsibility with parents/caregivers to support students learning.
-Collaboration with other teachers, administrators, school and district staff
-Collaboration with local community agencies
-Understanding of and adherence to professional ethics, policies and legal codes
-Engagement in continuous, purposeful professional development
-Desire to serve as an agent of change, seeking positive impact on teaching quality and student achievement
11
Area for Growth
Priority
Name: ________________________________ Date: ____________________________
LAKEWOOD TEACHER EVALUATION (TEACHER-required)
GOAL ONE
Professional Goal Setting: Goal One (Evaluation Requirement: To be completed be the teacher and reviewed with the evaluator on or before September 30)
Goal Setting and Planning (To be completed by the teacher and reviewed with evaluator on or before September 30)
Area of Concentration:
List Type of Certificate/License and Date of Expiration of each:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Goal One (Please check all Ohio Educator Standards that apply)
Analysis of Student Data:
Data sources that indicate the need for action:
1. Students
2. Content
3. Assessment
4. Instruction




5. Learning Environment

6. Collaboration and Communication

7. Professional responsibility and Growth 
1.
2.
3.
Goal One:
Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant &
Time-bound
Action Step for
Goal One
Activity/Strategy
Evidence
Indicators
Evidence/Artifacts to Collect
Timeline
12
Reflection Summary
Contact Hours
Granted
Final Verification
of Completion
Name: ________________________________ Date: ____________________________
LAKEWOOD TEACHER EVALUATION (TEACHER-required)
GOAL TWO
Professional Goal Setting: Goal Two (Evaluation Requirement: To be completed be the teacher and reviewed with the evaluator on or before September 30)
Goal Setting and Planning (To be completed by the teacher and reviewed with evaluator on or before September 30)
Area of Concentration:
List Type of Certificate/License and Date of Expiration of each:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Goal Two (Please check all Ohio Educator Standards that apply)
Analysis of Student Data:
Data sources that indicate the need for action:
1. Students
2. Content
3. Assessment
4. Instruction



5. Learning Environment

6. Collaboration and Communication

7. Professional responsibility and Growth 
1.
2.

3.
Goal Two:
Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant &
Time-bound
Action Step for
Goal One
Activity/Strategy
Evidence
Indicators
Evidence/Artifacts to Collect
Timeline
13
Reflection Summary
Contact Hours
Granted
Final Verification
of Completion
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
Pre Conference Planning Guide (TEACHER-resource)
Directions: The question stems below are provided to guide the PLAN, TEACH, ASSESS sections of the lesson plan to be discussed at the Pre- Conference. It is understood that the lesson plan may
not address all of the question stems. A lesson plan is to be completed by the teacher and submitted to the evaluator by a mutually decided date prior to the observation.
PLAN
Focus (Standard 4)

What is the focus for the lesson (standards, skills, content)?

Why is this lesson important?
Assessment Data (Standard 3)

What assessment data was examined to inform this lesson planning?
Prior Content Knowledge / Sequence, Connections (Standard 1: Students / Standard 2: Content / Standard 4: Instruction)

What prior knowledge do students need?

What are the connections to previous and future learning?

How does this lesson connect to other areas (students’ real life and/or possible career, other disciplines)?
Knowledge of Students (Standard 1: Students)

What should the Evaluator know about the student population and how the lesson meets student need(s)?
TEACH
Lesson Delivery (Standard 2: Content / Standard 4: Instruction)

How will the goals for learning be communicated to students?

What instructional strategies and methods will be used to engage students and promote independent learning? Problem solving, and student success?
Differentiation (Standard 1: Students / Standard 4: Instruction)

How will the lesson engage and challenge students at all levels?
Resources (Standard 2: Content / Standard 4: Instruction)

What resources / materials / technology will be used in instruction?
Classroom Environment (Standard 1: Students / Standard 5: Learning Environment)

How will the environment support all students and student need(s)?

How will safety in the classroom be ensured?

How will respect for all be modeled and taught?
ASSESS
Assessment of Student Learning (Standard 3: Assessment)

How will you check for understanding during the lesson?

How will you use assessment data to inform your next step(s)?
14
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION LESSON PLANNING TEMPLATE (TEACHER-optional)
Name: __________________________________________
Subject__________________________________ Grade Level: ___________________________ Building: ___________________
Lesson Planning Template: To be used by the teacher as a guide to create the lesson plan submitted to the evaluator by the mutually agreed upon date. Teacher may also submit their own lesson plan.
PLAN
Focus – Clear Learning Target(s)
Assessment Data
Prior Knowledge, Sequence, Connections
Knowledge of Students
TEACH
ASSESS
ASSESSMENT of LEARNING
Lesson Delivery
Differentiation
Resources
Classroom Environment
15
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RUBRIC (EVALUATOR)
The Teacher Performance Evaluation Rubric is intended to be scored holistically. This means that evaluators will assess which level provides the best overall description of the teacher. The
scoring process is expected to occur upon completion of each thirty (30) minute observation and post-conference. The evaluator is to consider evidence gathered during the pre-observation
conference, the observation, the post-observation conference, and classroom walkthroughs. When completing the performance rubric, please note that evaluators are not expected to gather
evidence on all indicators for each observation cycle. Likewise, teachers should not be required to submit additional pieces of evidence to address all indicators. The professionalism section
of the rubric may use evidence collected during the pre-observation and post-observation conferences as well as information from the Professional Growth and/or Improvement Plan.
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
Ineffective
FOCUS FOR LEARNING
(Standard 4: Instruction)
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
The
Developing
Skilled
Accomplished
The teacher communicates a
The teacher demonstrates a focus for
The teacher establishes challenging
focus for student learning, develops
learning objectives that are
appropriate for students and
reference the Ohio standards but do
not include measurable goals.
student learning, with appropriate
learning objectives that include
measurable goal(s) for student learning
aligned with the Ohio standards. The
teacher demonstrates the importance of
the goal and its appropriateness for
students.
and measurable goal(s) for student
learning that aligns with the Ohio
standards and reflect a range of student
learner needs. The teacher
demonstrates how the goal(s) fit into a
broader unit, course, and school goals
for content learning and skills
The teacher does not plan for the
The teacher explains the
The teacher demonstrates an
The teacher purposefully plans
assessment of student learning or does
not analyze student learning data to
inform lesson plans.
characteristics, uses, and
limitations of various diagnostic,
formative, and summative
assessments but does not
consistently incorporate this
knowledge into lesson planning.
understanding that assessment is a means
of evaluating and supporting student
learning through effectively
incorporating diagnostic, formative,
and/or summative assessments into
lesson planning.
assessments and differentiates
assessment choices to match the full
range of student needs, abilities, and
learning styles, incorporating a range of
appropriate diagnostic, formative, and
summative assessments into lesson
plans.
The teacher uses more than one
The teacher employs a variety of
measure of student performance but
does not appropriately vary
assessment approaches, or the
teacher may have difficulty
analyzing data to effectively inform
instructional planning and delivery.
formal and informal assessment
techniques to collect evidence of
students’ knowledge and skills and
analyzes data to effectively inform
instructional planning and delivery
teacher does not demonstrate a
clear focus for student learning.
Learning objectives are too general to
guide lesson planning and are
inappropriate for the students, and/or do
not reference the Ohio Standards.
Evidence
ASSESSMENT DATA
(Standard 3: Assessment)
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
The teacher does not use or only uses one
measure of student performance.
Evidence
16
Student learning needs are accurately
identified through an analysis of student
data; the teacher uses assessment data
to identify student strengths and areas
for student growth
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
Ineffective
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
PRIOR CONTENT
KNOWLEDGE /
SEQUENCE/
CONNECTIONS
(Standard 1: Students;
Standard 2: Content;
Standard 4: Instruction)
Developing
Skilled
The teacher’s lesson does not build
The teacher makes an attempt to
The teacher makes clear and coherent
The teacher uses the input and
on or connect to students’ prior
knowledge, or the teacher may give an
explanation that is illogical or
inaccurate as to how the content
connects to previous and future
learning.
connect the lesson to students’
prior knowledge, to previous
lessons or future learning but is not
completely successful.
connections with students’ prior
knowledge and future learning—both
explicitly to students and within the
lesson.
contributions of families, colleagues,
and other professionals in
understanding each learner’s prior
knowledge and supporting their
development. The teacher makes
meaningful and relevant connections
between lesson content and other
disciplines and real-world experiences
and careers as well as prepares
opportunities for students to apply
learning from different content areas to
solve problems.
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
The teacher plans and sequences
instruction to include the important
content, concepts, and processes in
school and district curriculum priorities
and in state standards.
Evidence
Teacher Comments
17
Accomplished
The teacher plans and sequences
instruction that reflects an
understanding of the prerequisite
relationships among the important
content, concepts, and processes in
school and district curriculum priorities
and in state standards as well as
multiple pathways for learning
depending on student needs. The
teacher accurately explains how the
lesson fits within the structure of the
discipline.
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
Ineffective
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
KNOWLEDGE OF
STUDENTS
(Standard 1: Students)
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
Analysis of Student Data
Developing
Skilled
Accomplished
The teacher demonstrates a lack of
The teacher demonstrates some
The teacher demonstrates familiarity
The teacher demonstrates an
familiarity with students’ backgrounds
and has made no attempts to find this
information.
familiarity with students’
background knowledge and
experiences and describes one
procedure used to obtain this
information.
with students’ background knowledge
and experiences and describes multiple
procedures used to obtain this
information.
understanding of the purpose and value
of learning about students’ background
experiences, demonstrates familiarity
with each student’s background
knowledge and experiences, and
describes multiple procedures used to
obtain this information.
The teacher’s plan for instruction
The teacher’s instructional plan
The teacher’s instructional plan draws
does not demonstrate an understanding
of students’ development, preferred
learning styles, and/or student
backgrounds/prior experiences.
draws upon a partial analysis of
students’ development, readiness
for learning, preferred learning
styles, or backgrounds and prior
experiences and/or the plan is
inappropriately tailored to the
specific population of students in
the classroom.
upon an accurate analysis of the
students’ development, readiness for
learning, preferred learning styles, and
backgrounds and prior experiences.
The teacher’s analysis of student data
(student development, student learning
and preferred learning styles, and
student backgrounds/prior experiences)
accurately connects the data to specific
instructional strategies and plans.
The teacher plans for and can
articulate specific strategies, content,
and delivery that will meet the needs of
individual students and groups of
students.
Evidence
Teacher Comments
18
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
Ineffective
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
LESSON DELIVERY
(Standard 2: Content;
Standard 4: Instruction;
Standard 6: Collaboration
and Communication)
Sources of Evidence:
Formal Observation
Classroom Walkthroughs/
Informal Observations
Developing
Skilled
Accomplished
 Teacher’s explanations are unclear,
Teacher explanations are
Teacher explanations are clear and
Teacher explanations are clear,
incoherent, or inaccurate, and are
generally ineffective in building student
understanding. The teacher uses
language that fails to engage students,
is inappropriate to the content, and/or
discourages independent or creative
thinking.
accurate and generally clear but the
teacher may not fully clarify
information based on students’
questions about content or
instructions for learning activities
or the teacher may use some
language that is developmentally
inappropriate, leading to confusion
or limiting discussion.
accurate. The teacher uses
developmentally appropriate strategies
and language designed to actively
encourage independent, creative, and
critical thinking.
coherent, and precise. The teacher uses
well-timed, individualized,
developmentally appropriate strategies
and language designed to actively
encourage independent, creative, and
critical thinking, including the
appropriate use of questions and
discussion techniques.
The teacher re-explains topics
The teacher effectively addresses
The teacher accurately anticipates
when students show confusion, but
it not always able to provide an
effective alternative explanation.
The teacher attempts to employ
purposeful questioning techniques,
but may confuse students with the
phrasing or timing of questions.
The lesson is primarily teacherdirected.
confusion be re-explaining topics when
asked and ensuring understanding. The
teacher employs effective, purposeful
questioning techniques during
instruction. The lesson is a balance of
teacher-directed instruction and studentled learning.
confusion by presenting information in
multiple formats and clarifying content
before students ask questions. The
teacher develops high-level
understanding through effective uses of
varied levels of questions. The lesson
is student-led, with the teacher in the
role of facilitator.
The teacher does not attempt to make
The teacher relies on a single
The teacher supports the learning
The teacher matches strategies,
the lesson accessible and challenging
for most students, or attempts are
developmentally inappropriate.
strategy or alternate set of materials
to make the lesson accessible to
most students though some students
may not be able to access certain
parts of the lesson and/or some may
not be challenged.
needs of students through a variety of
strategies, materials, and/or pacing that
make learning accessible and challenging
for the group.
materials, and/or pacing to students’
individual needs, to make learning
accessible and challenging for all
students in the classroom. The teacher
effectively uses independent,
collaborative and whole-class
instruction to support individual
learning goals and provides varied
options for how students will
demonstrate mastery.
The teacher fails to address student
confusion or frustration and does not
use effective questioning techniques
during the lesson. The lesson is almost
entirely teacher-directed.
Evidence
DIFFERENTIATION
(Standard 1: Students;
Standard 4: Instruction)
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
Formal Observation
Classroom Walkthroughs /
Informal Observations
Evidence
19
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
Ineffective
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING
RESOURCES
(Standard 2: Content;
Standard 4: Instruction)
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
Formal Observation
Classroom Walkthroughs /
Informal Observations
Developing
Skilled
Accomplished
Instructional materials and resources
The teacher uses appropriate
Instructional materials and resources
Instructional materials and resources
used for instruction are not relevant to
the lesson or are inappropriate for
students.
instructional materials to support
learning goals, but may not meet
individual students’ learning
styles/needs or actively engage
them in learning.
are aligned to the instructional purposes
and are appropriate for students learning
styles and needs, actively engaging
students.
are aligned to instructional purposes,
are varied and appropriate to ability
levels of students, and actively engage
them in ownership of their learning.
Evidence
Teacher Comments
20
INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT
INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT
CLASSROOM
ENVIRONMENT
(Standard 1: Students;
Standard 5: Learning
Environment; Standard 6:
Collaboration and
Communication
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
Formal Observation
Classroom Walkthroughs/
Informal Observation
Ineffective
Developing
Skilled
There is little evidence of a positive
rapport between the teacher and
students. For example, the teacher may
respond disrespectfully to students or
ignore their questions or comments.
The teacher is fair in the treatment
of students and establishes a basic
rapport with them. For example,
the teacher addresses students’
questions or comments but does not
inquire about their overall wellbeing.
The teacher has positive rapport
with students and demonstrates
respect for and interest in all
students. For example, the teacher
makes eye contact and connects
with individual students.
There are no evident routines or
procedures; students seem unclear
about what they should be doing or are
idle.
Routines and procedures are in
place, but the teacher may
inappropriately prompt or direct
students when they are unclear or
idle.
Routines and procedures run
smoothly throughout the lesson,
and students assume ageappropriate levels of responsibility
for the efficient operation of the
classroom.
Accomplished
The teacher has positive rapport with
students and demonstrates respect for and
interest in individual students’ experiences,
thoughts and opinions. For example, the
teacher responds quietly, individually.
Routines are well-established and orderly
and students initiate responsibility for the
efficient operation of the classroom.
Transitions are inefficient with
considerable instructional time lost.
Lessons progress too slowly or quickly
so students are frequently disengaged.
The teacher transitions between
learning activities, but occasionally
loses some instructional time in the
process.
Transitions are efficient and occur
smoothly. There is evidence of
varied learning situations (whole
class, cooperative learning, small
group and independent work).
Transitions are seamless as the teacher
The teacher creates a learning
environment that allows for little or no
communication or engagement with
families.
The teacher welcomes
communication from families and
replies in a timely manner.
The teacher engages in two-way
communications and offers a
variety of volunteer opportunities
and activities for families to
support student learning.
The teacher engages in two-way, ongoing
Expectations for behavior are not
established or are inappropriate and /or
no monitoring of behavior occurs. The
teacher responds to misbehavior
inappropriately.
Appropriate expectations for
behavior are established, but some
expectations are unclear or do not
address the needs of individual
students. The teacher
inconsistently monitors behavior.
A classroom management system
has been implemented that is
appropriate and responsive to
classroom and individual needs of
students. Clear expectations for
student behavior are evident.
Monitoring of student behavior is
consistent, appropriate, and
effective.
A classroom management system has been
Evidence
Teacher Comments
21
effectively maximizes instructional time and
combines independent, collaborative, and
whole-class learning situations.
communication with families that results in
active volunteer, community, and family
partnerships which contribute to student
learning and development.
designed, implemented, and adjusted with
student input and is appropriate for the
classroom and individual student needs.
Students are actively encouraged to take
responsibility for their behavior. The teacher
uses research-based strategies to lessen
disruptive behaviors and reinforce positive
behaviors.
INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT
Ineffective
ASSESSMENT OF
STUDENT LEARNING
(Standard 3: Assessment
Developing
Skilled
The teacher does not routinely use
The teacher uses assessments to
The teacher uses assessment data
The teacher uses assessment data to
assessments to measure student
mastery.
measure student mastery, but may
not differentiate instruction based
on this information.
to identify students’ strengths and
needs, and modifies and
differentiates instruction
accordingly, although the teacher
may not be able to anticipate
learning outcomes.
identify students’ strengths and needs, and
modifies and differentiates instruction
accordingly, as well as examines classroom
assessment results to reveal trends and
patterns in individual and group progress and
to anticipate learning obstacles.
The teacher checks for student
The teacher checks for
The teacher continually checks for
understanding and makes attempts
to adjust instruction accordingly,
but these adjustments may cause
some additional confusion.
understanding at key moments and
makes adjustments to instruction
(whole-class or individual
students). The teacher responds to
student misunderstandings by
providing additional clarification.
understanding and makes adjustments
accordingly (whole-class or individual
students). When an explanation is not
effectively leading students to understand the
content, the teacher adjusts quickly and
seamlessly within the lesson and uses an
alternative way to explain the concept.
The teacher rarely or never checks
INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT
the students’ understanding of content.
The teacher fails to make adjustments
in response to student confusion.
Sources of Evidence:
Pre-Conference
Formal Observation
Classroom
Walkthroughs/Informal
Observations
Post-Conference
The teacher persists in using a
particular strategy for responding to
misunderstandings, even when data
suggest the approach is not succeeding.
The teacher gathers and uses
student data from a few sources to
choose appropriate instructional
strategies for groups of students.
The teacher does not provide students Students receive occasional or
with feedback about their learning.
limited feedback about their
performance from the teacher.
Evidence
Teacher Comments
22
The teacher gathers and uses
student data from a variety of
sources to choose and implement
appropriate instructional strategies
for groups of students.
Accomplished
By using student data from a variety of
sources, the teacher appropriately adapts
instructional methods and materials and
paces learning activities to meet the needs of
individual students as well as the whole class.
The teacher provides substantive, specific,
The teacher provides substantive, 
and timely feedback to students, families, and
specific, and timely feedback of
student progress to students,
families, and other school
personnel while maintaining
confidentiality.
other school personnel while maintaining
confidentiality. The teacher provides the
opportunity for students to engage in selfassessment and show awareness of their
strengths and weaknesses. The teacher uses
student assessment results to reflect on his or
her own teaching and to monitor teaching
strategies and behaviors in relation to student
success.
PROFESSIONALISM
Ineffective
PROFESSIONALISM
PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITIES
(Standard 6:
Collaboration and
Communication; Standard
7: Professional
Responsibility and
Growth)
Sources of Evidence:
Professional Development
Plan or Improvement Plan;
Pre-conference; Postconference; daily
interactions with others
Developing
Skilled
Accomplished
The teacher fails to communicate
The teacher uses a variety of
The teacher uses effective
The teacher communicates effectively with
clearly with students and families or
collaborate effectively with
professional colleagues.
strategies to communicate with
students and families and
collaborate with colleagues, but
these approaches may not always
be appropriate for a particular
situation or achieve the intended
outcome.
communication strategies with
students and families and works
effectively with colleagues to
examine problems of practice,
analyze student work, and identify
targeted strategies.
students, families, and colleagues. The
teacher collaborates with colleagues to
improve personal and team practices by
facilitating professional dialogue, peer
observation and feedback, peer coaching and
other collegial learning activities.
The teacher understands and
The teacher meets ethical and
The teacher meets ethical and professional
follows district policies and state
and federal regulations at a
minimal level.
professional responsibilities with
integrity and honesty. The teacher
models and upholds district policies
and state and federal regulations.
responsibilities and helps colleagues access
and interpret laws and policies and
understand their implications in the
classroom.
The teacher identifies strengths
The teacher sets data-based short
The teacher sets and regularly modifies
and areas for growth to develop and
implement targeted goals for
professional growth.
and long-term professional goals
and takes action to meet these
goals.
short and long-term professional goals based
on self-assessment and analysis of student
learning evidence.
The teacher fails to understand and
follow regulations, policies, and
agreements.
The teacher fails to demonstrate
evidence of an ability to accurately selfassess performance and to appropriately
identify areas for professional
development.
Evidence
Teacher Comments
23
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
OBSERVATION NARRATIVE and EVALUATOR’S OBSERVATION NOTES FORM (Evaluator-optional)
 Observation #1
 Observation #2
Name: ____________________________________ Subject / Area: ______________________ Grade: ___________ Building: _____________________
Observation Narrative Form
Evaluator may use the Observation Narrative Form to record observable evidence around each element on the form. Observation notes should document what is observable in the classroom
(e.g. what is seen, heard or observed.) The notes should not include an evaluation or analysis of what this evidence suggests about the teacher’s practice.
Criteria for Observation
Evaluator Observation Notes for Scripting During the Observation
LESSON DELIVERY (Standard 2: Content / Standard 4: Instruction)
TEACH
-Use of activities to promote independence and problem solving
-Use of content specific instructional strategies to teach concepts and
skills
-Application of knowledge of how students learn regarding
instructional design and delivery
-Demonstration of accurate understanding of content specific
knowledge and skills
DIFFERENTIATION (Standard 1: Students / Standard 4: Instruction)
-Identification, instruction and intervention for special populations
-Differentiation of instruction to support learning needs of all students
RESOURCES (Standard 2: Content / Standard 4: Instruction
-Use of varied resources to support learner needs
-Use of technology as appropriate to support learning and engagement
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT (Standard 1: Students / Standard
ASSESS
5: Learning Environment
-Use of strategies to motivate students to work
-Creation of learning situations for independent and collaborative work
-Maintenance of an environment that is safe, respectful, and conducive to
learning for all students
ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING (Standard 3:
Assessment
-Use of varied diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments
-Analysis of data to monitor progress and plan, differentiate, and modify
instruction
-Student involvement in self-assessment
-Communication of results
Note: All criteria may not be seen in one formal observation. In alignment with the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System, the evaluator may observe the teacher’s performance in each area over time and
artifacts/data may be collected over the course of the year and discussed in the Mid-Year Conference and End of Year Conferences to provide evidence of the teacher’s performance in each area.
24
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
 Observation #1
TEACHER REFLECTION FORM (TEACHER- optional)
 Observation #2
Name: ____________________________________ Subject / Area: ______________________ Grade: ___________ Building: _____________________
Teacher Reflection Form
Following the lesson, the teacher is to compose a reflection that is to be submitted to the evaluator by the mutually agreed upon date or taken to the Post-Observation Conference for
discussion.
Criteria for Observation
Teacher Reflection
LESSON DELIVERY (Standard 2: Content / Standard 4: Instruction)
TEACH
-Use of activities to promote independence and problem solving
-Use of content specific instructional strategies to teach concepts and
skills
-Application of knowledge of how students learn regarding
instructional design and delivery
-Demonstration of accurate understanding of content specific
knowledge and skills
DIFFERENTIATION (Standard 1: Students / Standard 4: Instruction)
-Identification, instruction and intervention for special populations
-Differentiation of instruction to support learning needs of all students
RESOURCES (Standard 2: Content / Standard 4: Instruction
-Use of varied resources to support learner needs
-Use of technology as appropriate to support learning and engagement
ASSESS
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT (Standard 1: Students / Standard
5: Learning Environment
-Use of strategies to motivate students to work
-Creation of learning situations for independent and collaborative work
-Maintenance of an environment that is safe, respectful, and conducive to
learning for all students
ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING (Standard 3:
Assessment
-Use of varied diagnostic, formative, and summative assessments
-Analysis of data to monitor progress and plan, differentiate, and modify
instruction
-Student involvement in self-assessment
-Communication of results
25
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
Data Collection Tool (ongoing): Collaboration and Communication (Standard 6) (TEACHER- resource)
Directions: Keep an ongoing log of evidence of collaboration and communication.
communication/collaboration, which may include but not be limited to the following:
Select and attach artifacts that represent a variety of types of
-Notes of collaboration occurring with colleagues
- Samples of parent newsletters
-Log of phone contacts to parents
- Screen shots of classroom website at various times of the year
-Descriptions/samples of work produced from collaboration with colleagues
-Log of email contact with parents
-Documentation of meetings, committees and school event planning
-Log of parent conferences
Date
Person(s)
Artifact/Type of Communication
26
Purpose
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
Data Collection Tool (ongoing): Professional Development (Standard 6) To be completed and reviewed with evaluator at Mid-Year and End of year conference.
Please use this log to describe professional activities that contribute to professional development and/or positively impact the classroom, school and/or students
and the capacity of the organization (building or district) to meet its goals. Attach additional pages of the tool and artifacts/evidence as relevant. Relevant
evidence may include items such as:
-
Materials from workshops and seminars
Samples of materials from professional organizations, conferences and networks that demonstrate professional collaborations
Evidence of service on professional committees
o Examples of sharing with other educators and administrators knowledge and information in areas of expertise
Professional Development: Communication and Collaboration
Type of Activity
Focus of Activity
Description of Activity and Outcomes
Individual
Teaching Quality
Collaborative (with other staff)
School Improvement
Collaborative (with community/other) Student Achievement
Time for Completion
1st Observation 2nd Observation
Type of Activity
Individual
Collaborative (with other staff)
Collaborative (with community/other)
Type of Activity
Individual
Collaborative (with other staff)
Collaborative (with community/other)
Description of Activity and Outcomes
1st Observation
2nd Observation
Description of Activity and Outcomes
1st Observation
2nd Observation
Focus of Activity
Teaching Quality
School Improvement
Student Achievement
Focus of Activity
Teaching Quality
School Improvement
Student Achievement
27
Lakewood Local School District
Informal Observation: Walkthrough Guideline
Teacher Name: __________________________________
Grade(s)/Subject Area(s):________________________
Evaluator Name: _________________________________
Date: ________________________________________
Time Walkthrough Begins: _________________________
Time Walkthrough Ends: ________________________
Directions: This form serves as a record of an informal walkthrough by a teacher’s evaluator. The evaluator will likely not observe all elements
listed below in any one informal observation. This record, along with records of additional informal observations, will be used to inform the
summative evaluation of the teacher. (This is a sample form.)
EVALUATOR OBSERVATIONS
 Instruction is developmentally appropriate
 Clear Learning Targets are communicated
 Lesson content is linked to previous and future learning
 Classroom learning environment is safe and conducive to learning
CE
 Varied Instructional tools and strategies reflect student needs. DIF
 Teacher provides students with timely and responsive feedback LD
 Content presented is accurate and grade appropriate
LD
 Instructional time is used effectively, Transitions are smooth CE
 Teacher connects lesson to real-life applications
LD
 Routines support learning goals and activities CE
 Instruction and lesson activities are accessible and challenging for
 Multiple methods of assessment of student learning are utilized to
all students. LD DIF
guide instruction. ASL
 Teacher has rapport, respect, and connects with students
CE
 Teacher has high expectations and monitors behavior consistently
CE
 Other:
 Other:
High Impact Practices:  Students communicate where they are in their learning  Students use self-assessment and peer feedback ASL
LD
LD
Evaluator Summary Content:
Recommendations for Focus of Informal Observation:
Resources/Tools Utilized: Textbook Worksheet  Computer  Smart Board  Calculator  Teacher Created Materials  Manipulative(s) 
Reading Logs  Chalkboard/Whiteboard  Graphic Organizer  Chart Paper  Clear Learning Targets Posted  Formative Instructional Practice
Evaluator Signature: ________________________________________
Photocopy to Teacher
28
Date________________________
Post-Observation Conference: Suggestions for Discussion
The Post-Observation Conference is intended for discussion of the strengths of the lesson observed, and discussion of next steps.
The Observation Rating Rubric can be used to provide the teacher with an understanding of how his or her performance is rated on
a scale; the conference is intended to provide formative information that will guide professional planning and learning.
In the Post-Observation Conference, the teacher and evaluator should review and discuss:
 The Observation Narrative Form,
 The Observation Rating Rubric, and
 Additional relevant artifacts or evidence to support the teacher’s performance in Standards 1 through 5.
The teacher and evaluator may also want to discuss the teacher’s responses to the suggested questions below:
Evaluation of Lesson
 Did this lesson accomplish what you intended? Why or why not?
 What were the strengths of this lesson? If you had concerns, what were they?
Evaluation of Student Learning
 How successful were your students?
 How will you adapt future instruction based on your assessment of student learning?
Reflection on Observation Process
 What does the observation data tell you about your teaching and students’ learning?
 What feedback do you have about this process and our work together?
Next Steps
 What did you learn from this lesson that you will use the next time you work with this group of students?
 What other conclusions can you draw?
 What support will you need in your next steps?
29
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
POST OBSERVATION CONFERENCE: Rating Summary Form (EVALUATOR) (To be completed by the evaluator as a summative reflection of the observation)
The observation Rating Rubric is intended to be scored holistically. The evaluator will define the rating level that best describes the overall description of teacher performance. The evaluator will assess
the teacher’s overall performance and select a holistic overall rating on Rating Summary Form. Teacher is to be provided a copy of the Post Observation Conference rating form.
 Observation #1
Teacher: ___________________________________
Building:
 Hebron Elementary
Observation
Observation #1
Observation #2
 Lakewood Intermediate (Jackson)
 Observation #2
 Lakewood Middle School
Holistic Rating for OVERALL RATING of Observations Only
Accomplished
Skilled
Developing
 Lakewood High School
Ineffective
Area(s) of Reinforcement:
Area(s) of Refinement:
Next steps:
The teacher and evaluator will sign the Rating Rubric Summary Form to indicate that the Holistic Overall Recommended Rating has been shared and discussed. The “Next steps” section may be
completed by the evaluator collaboratively at the conference. If the Overall Rating is “Ineffective” comments must be included in the Next Steps section of this form to provide direction and focus to the
teacher for areas of improvement.
Teacher Signature: ________________________________________
1st Observation Conference Date: _____________________________
Evaluator Signature: ______________________________________
2nd Observation Conference Date: _____________________________
30
Part II
Student Growth Measures
Right Side of the OTES Model
=
50% of the Summative Evaluation
31
Step 3: Student Growth Measures (50%)
Student Growth Measures (See SLO checklist page 42 and SLO Template pages 43-44 and See Student
Growth Matrix page 45)
Student growth measures shall account for fifty percent (50%) of the teacher evaluation. For the purpose of use in
the OTES model, student growth is defined as the change in student achievement for an individual student between
two or more points in time. Beginning in the 2014-15 school year, Category B teacher percentages will be:
 K-5: 50% Vendor Data
 6-12: 50% SLO
In the calculation for student academic growth, a student who has sixty or more excused and/or unexcused absences
for the school year will not be included. Data from these multiple measures will be scored on five levels in
accordance with ODE guidance and converted to a score in one of three levels of student growth: 1) “Above”;
2) “Expected”; and 3) “Below.”
32
A GUIDE TO USING STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES (SLO’S) AS A LOCALLY DETERMINED
MEASURE OF STUDENT GROWTH
What is an SLO?
A SLO is a measure of a teacher’s impact on student learning within a given interval of instruction. An SLO is a
measurable, long-term academic goal informed by available data that a teacher or teacher team sets at the beginning
of the year for all students or for subgroups of students. The teacher(s) and students work toward the SLO growth
targets throughout the year and use interim, benchmark, summative, and formative assessments to assess progress
toward the goal. At the end of the year, the teacher(s) meet with a principal or building team to discuss attainment of
the SLO and determine the teacher’s impact on student learning.
What are the Steps for Creating SLOs?
Step 1: Gather and Review Available Data. SLOs are based on a clear understanding of the student population
under a teacher’s charge. To begin the process, teachers should gather baseline data to better understand how
prepared their students are for the standards addressed by the course. These data could include end-of-year data from
the previous year, baseline data from district assessments, pretests, or student work samples. Once teachers have
identified curricular priorities and gathered baseline data, they are ready to conduct a detailed analysis of student
data.
Conduct an analysis of student data. This step helps the educator(s) determine where students will need to
demonstrate the most growth. This process is similar to a gap analysis where the educator determines a plan for
reducing the gap in a student’s knowledge or skill. For this step, the teacher analyzes the baseline data for the most
important content standards of the course. Based upon the data analysis, the educator can decide the skills or
knowledge the SLO(s) will target.
Identify the student population of focus for the SLO. In this step, teachers should outline the student population
to which the SLO will apply. This step can take on many different forms. An important note: Teachers should try to
cover as many students as possible in their SLO. The student population will be based largely on what courses the
teacher teaches and the results of the data analysis.
1.
Course-level SLOs—A teacher with three English I classes can write one SLO for all three classes. Another
teacher may have three prep periods (e.g., algebra 1, geometry, algebra 2), in which case, the teacher would
develop a separate SLO for each course taught. Teachers should have a minimum of two (2) SLO’s during
the 2013-2014 school year.
2.
Tiered targets within a course-level SLO—a teacher should consider developing tiered targets if the data
analysis shows a wide range of skill and ability in student performance. If most of the class is deficient in a
necessary skill, but a handful of students have already mastered the skill, a teacher might develop tiered
targets for the students who are deficient in the skill and a separate tiered target for the students who have
already mastered the skill.
3.
Targeted SLOs—It is possible to write targeted SLOs, which are separate SLOs for subgroups of students
or specific skills that students must achieve. In some cases, teachers will find it preferable to write separate
SLOs that focus on specific content or specific groups of students who need additional attention. For
example, 10 students in an environmental biology class might need specific support in using sound
evidence to develop scientific explanations. The targeted SLO would target those 10 students as well as the
specific skills they need to apply as a foundation for learning.
33
When completing this step, keep the following in mind:
 SLOs can apply to all students (course-level SLOs) or subgroups of students (targeted SLOs).

Teachers should aim to include as many students as possible in the SLO and acknowledge in writing why
any students are not included in the SLO. Students covered under a teacher’s SLO(s) must be proportional
and representative of the teacher’s schedule. For example, if a science teacher teaches four sections of
biology and two sections of earth science, two SLOs might cover the biology classes and one might apply
to the earth science classes.

In the rare case where a principal approves a student or subgroup omission, the teacher should note the
rationale for the omission in the SLO student population field.
Step 2: Determine the Interval of Instruction and Identify Content
Also included in an SLO is the time period during which the educator expects growth to occur. The interval of
instruction should be the length of the course (i.e., year long, semester long). For example, an elementary school
mathematics class might meet every day, so the interval of instruction would be the duration of the academic year.
The interval of instruction for a high school history class on a block schedule might be a trimester or semester. The
interval of instruction should be an adequate time for the expected growth to occur. The educator should also note
when pre-assessments, post-assessments, and midyear evaluations will be administered.
Determine the specific content and standards addressed by the SLO. Based upon the data analysis, this section
of the SLO should articulate the specific concepts or skills that students will gain during the course. The content or
skill area should represent the essential learning of the course such as key skills or overarching content, and should
be selected based upon the identified areas from the data analysis. The educator should also indicate the specific
standard(s) that align with the SLO.
Step 3 Choose Assessments and set the Growth Target(s). The next step is to identify an appropriate assessment.
This can be challenging, but it is one of the more important steps of the SLO process. ODE strongly recommends
that districts not use assessments created by individual teachers. If a teacher must create an assessment that is unique
to his or her classroom, ODE strongly recommends that the teacher develop the assessment with a school or district
administrator with expertise in assessment, a special educator, an English language learner (ELL) specialist, and/or a
content team member. At a minimum, the assessment should be reviewed at the district level by content experts such
as grade-level or subject-level content experts. When choosing an appropriate assessment, the items on the test
should cover all key subject and grade-level content standards.
Educators may compare their end-of-year data to baseline and trend data. Having a set of baseline and trend data
will help develop a rich context for student growth that may produce higher quality targets than a simple pre-test
could. Assessments do not need to be pencil-and-paper tests, but can be performance based assessments as well.
Educators are encouraged to select the assessment(s) that are most appropriate for measuring student growth in the
subject area of the SLO.
Assessment options include:




Performance-based assessments, such as presentations, projects, and tasks scored with a rubric
Portfolios of student work scored by an approved rubric
Results of state exams when value-added models are not available (e.g., Ohio Alternative Assessment,
Ohio Graduation Assessment), results of nationally normed tests
Results of subject- or grade-level specific district-created tests
34
When identifying assessments, educators should keep in mind that
assessments must:
 Be aligned to national or state standards and to the SLO growth target (meaning that it measures the skills
or content addressed by the SLO).
 Be reliable, meaning that the assessment produces accurate and consistent results.
 Be a valid measure, meaning that the assessment measures what it is designed to measure.
 Be realistic in terms of the time required for administration.
When multiple educators adopt the same SLO, it is advisable that all educators adopt the same assessment measures
to ensure that student progress is measured the same way and under the same testing conditions.
Develop the SLO growth target(s). Within the SLO Template, the educator should write a brief yet specific growth
target for students that align with state or national standards, district priorities, and course objectives. These growth
targets should include specific indicators of growth; such as percentages or questions answered correctly that
demonstrate an increase in learning between two points in time. The target can be tiered for specific students in the
classroom to allow all students to demonstrate growth or the target can be equally applicable to all students in a
class, grade, or subject. This target should be rigorous, yet attainable, as determined by the baseline or pretest data.
Below are examples of acceptable and unacceptable growth targets. The acceptable growth targets allow the teacher
to demonstrate growth for all students while the unacceptable SLOs focus solely on student mastery. The
Lakewood Local School District standard growth formula will be as follows:
 100-pretest score = potential growth/2
 Individual teachers/departments may justify alternate growth percentages based on trend data.
 Growth percentages for specific content areas will be analyzed and approved by building SLO committees.
Explain the rationale for the growth target. High-quality SLOs include strong justifications for why the growth
target is appropriate and achievable for this group of students. The rationale should be a precise and concise
statement that describes the student needs and refers to the evidence that informed the creation of targets. When
applicable, rationales should also reference school and district goals or priorities.
Step 4: Submit your SLO and prepare for approval and review.
Prepare to submit your SLO. Prior to submitting an SLO, the educator should do a final comparison with the SLO
Template Checklist. Once the educator has created his or her SLO, he or she should submit it for review by the
school-building SLO team or the designated SLO approval person(s). Educators should expect to receive feedback
on the rigor and completeness of the SLO from the review team by the beginning of November of the current school
year. Timing will depend on the school calendar (e.g., start of the school year, end of quarter, use of trimester
schedule). If the SLO is not approved, the educator will have 10 days to complete requested revisions and then
resubmit the SLO.
Schedule the SLO conference. Once the SLO has been submitted for approval, the educator and evaluator(s)
should plan to meet. In cases where a district team evaluates the SLO, the educator may meet with the wholebuilding SLO team or a representative of the team. Keep in mind that all SLOs must be finalized by November of
that school year, and educators may need time to revise their SLOs before that deadline. Though the location of the
conference can be determined based on the preferences of the evaluator(s) and educator, it may be advisable to meet
in the teacher’s classroom. This venue might make teachers feel more comfortable and also will allow them easy
access to additional data or resources that might be needed during the conference.
Review guidance materials and the SLO. Teachers should submit SLO materials prior to the SLO conference.
Materials may include the student needs assessment, baseline and trend data, and assessments used in the SLO.
Ideally, evaluators will have access to and review the SLO to assure that all required elements are complete prior to
the SLO conference. Evaluators should generate notes about the SLOs prior to the conference and include clarifying
questions that will support a quality approval process.
Initiate building committee review discussions and approval. The building committee should be prepared to
engage in a meaningful discussion with teachers on their SLOs if they have questions about the content or growth
target. As the committees prepare for these discussions, it is important to note that all criteria identified in the SLO
35
Template Checklist must be included in order to approve the SLO. Therefore, if there is a component on the
checklist that is not addressed in the SLO, the committee or evaluator will have to address the component with the
teacher(s).
Step 5: Final scoring of the SLO. After the SLO is approved, the teacher is responsible for compiling the evidence
for the final scoring process. The final scoring process must be completed by May 1 to ensure that the teacher
evaluation is completed in accordance with the timeframes established by law.
SLO Scoring Process
Preparing for Scoring
Prior to the end-of-year review, teachers are responsible for collecting relevant information and compiling it in a
useful way. For example, evaluators will have limited time, so having all student work or other documentation
clearly organized and final student scores summarized (as noted below) will be valuable for saving time and
reducing paperwork. Information that could be collected includes student performance data and the completed SLO
Scoring Calculator document.
The SLO Scoring Calculator is an Excel spreadsheet that can be used to assess whether or not SLO targets have
been met as well as the overall teacher rating for the SLO. There are several steps teachers must follow in order to
arrive at a final calculation. The calculation and scoring must be completed prior to May 1 of each year. Ample time
for committee review must be given to ensure that the entire teacher evaluation process is complete by the May 10
deadline as defined in law.
 First, the teacher adds the name or identification number for each student into the spreadsheet.
 Then, the teacher incorporates each student’s baseline score from the assessment administered at the
beginning of the school year.
 Next, using their completed SLO template as a guide, the teacher adds each student’s established growth
target.
 The teacher adds in the final performance data from the end of year assessment for each student.
 The teacher must enter if each individual student met the growth target.
 Once all the relevant information has been added in the Excel spreadsheet, attainment of the students’
growth targets and overall teacher rating of student growth measures (50%) will be automatically computed
and displayed.

The teacher can now use the SLO Scoring Template to determine the percentage of students
meeting or exceeding the established growth targets.
This matrix should be used in conjunction with the SLO Scoring Template. ODE developed the five-level
rating for SLOs to align with the 5-levels of value-added scores. The teacher can now use the SLO Scoring
Calculator to determine the percentage of students not meeting, meeting, or exceeding the established
growth targets. If the teacher used tiered targets as recommended by ODE, they can sort the students
by the identified tiered targets and then sort again based on the difference of the target score and the
baseline score from highest to lowest.
36
SLO Scoring Matrix for Student Growth (effective 9/17/2014)
% of students that exceeded/ met
growth target
90 - 100
80 - 89
70 - 79
60 - 69
59 or less
Descriptive Rating
Numerical Rating
Most Effective
Above Average
Average
Approaching Avg.
Least Effective
5
4
3
2
1
The teacher is responsible for collecting the evidence, using the SLO Scoring Matrix to
determine an SLO rating, and providing the scores to the reviewing body (principal or
committee as determined at the local level).
Step 4: Summative Rating (See Teacher Evaluation Summary Report Form page 46 and
Record of Teacher Evaluation Activities Form on page 51)
Teacher performance and student growth measures are combined in a summative teacher evaluation rating:
Here are the steps for determining a final summative rating
1) As they submit data into the electronic Teacher and Principal Evaluation System (eTPES), districts enter ratings for each
measure: teacher performance (from 1-to-4), each student growth measure (from 1-to-5) and, if selected, an alternative component
(from 1-to-4).
2) eTPES assigns the point value that corresponds to the ratings from each component:
Student growth. This component may entail multiple measures (Value-Added scores, approved vendor assessments or student
learning objectives) each with its own 1-to-5 rating. A most effective (5) rating results in 600 points; above average (4), 400 points;
average (3), 300 points; approaching average (2), 200 points; and below average (1), 0 points.
Teacher performance. A rating of accomplished (4) results in 600 points; skilled (3), 400 points; developing (2), 200 points; and
ineffective (1), 0 points.
3) eTPES multiplies the points for each measure by the appropriate weight or percentage. The totals of
student growth measures will be added to the Performance score to obtain the points required to attain a
Summative rating.
Ratings and Points
Student growth
Performance Final
Summative rating
37
Requirements for Professional Growth Plan or Improvement Plan
Processes: A Professional Growth Plan or an Improvement Plan is based on Student Growth Measures as
designated on the Summative Evaluation Matrix and/ or performance on the standards as noted in the teacher
performance rubric (see Appendix A).
Above
Expected Growth




Expected Growth
Below
Expected Growth
Description of Requirements
for
Professional Growth or Improvement Plan
Growth Plan – Self Directed by Teacher




Growth Plan -Collaborative –Teacher and Evaluator




Improvement Plan – Directed by the Evaluator
Professional Conversations
Mid-Year Progress Check
End-of-Year Evaluation
Professional Conversations and Progress Checks
As the teacher and evaluator work together during the formative assessment process, scheduled conferences should
take place several times during the year to provide opportunities for professional conversation or direction about
performance, goals, progress, as well as supports needed. During the year, the evaluator and teacher should discuss
opportunities for professional development that evolve as a result of the evaluation process. The professional growth
plan will be evaluated through indicators as described in the teacher performance rubric.
38
Professional Growth Plan (See Professional Growth Plan Form page 47)
Professional Growth Plans help teachers focus on areas of professional development that will enable them to
improve their practice. Teachers are accountable for the implementation and completion of the plan and may use the
plan as a starting point for the school year. (The Professional Growth Plan is intended to be one academic year in
duration and may support the goals of the Individual Professional Development Plan- IPDP. The Professional
Growth Plan is not intended to replace the IPDP.) The professional growth plan and process includes feedback from
the evaluator as well as the teacher’s self-assessment, and the support needed to further the teacher’s continuous
growth and development. Professional development should be individualized to the needs of the teacher and
students (based on available data), and specifically relate to the teacher’s areas for growth as identified in the
teacher’s evaluation. The evaluator should recommend professional development opportunities, and support the
teacher by providing resources (e.g., time, financial). The growth plan should be reflective of the data available and
include:
 Identification of area(s) for future professional growth;
 Specific resources and opportunities to assist the teacher in enhancing skills, knowledge and practice;
Improvement Plan (See Improvement Plan Form pages 48-49 and Improvement Plan Evaluation Form pages
50)
Improvement Plans are developed for a teacher by the evaluator in response to ineffective ratings in performance
and/or student growth. The Improvement Plan is intended to identify specific areas for improvement of performance
and for identifying guidance and support needed to help the teacher improve. [A plan of improvement may be
initiated at any time during the evaluation cycle by the evaluator based on deficiencies in performance as
documented by evidence collected by the evaluator.] District collective bargaining unit agreements should be
consulted to determine additional conditions under which improvement plans are instituted. When an improvement
plan is initiated by an administrator, it is the responsibility of the administrator to:
 Identify, in writing, the specific area(s) for improvement to be addressed in relationship to the Ohio
Standards for the Teaching Profession;
 Specify, in writing, the desired level of performance that is expected to improve and a reasonable period of
time to correct the deficiencies;
 Develop and implement a written plan for improvement that will be initiated immediately and includes
resources and assistance available;
 Determine additional education or professional development needed to improve in the identified area(s);
 Gather evidence of progress or lack of progress.
A reassessment of the educator’s performance shall be completed in accordance with the written plan (multiple
opportunities for observation of performance). Upon reassessment of the educator’s performance, if improvement
has been documented at an acceptable level of performance**, the regular evaluation cycle will resume. If the
teacher’s performance continues to remain at an ineffective level, the supervising administrator may reinstate the
improvement plan with additional recommendations for improvement or take the necessary steps to recommend
dismissal.
*Local negotiated agreement requirements should be consulted when developing Professional Growth Plans and
Improvement Plans.
Testing for Teachers in Core Subject Areas
Beginning with the 2015-2016 school year, teachers who teach in a “core subject area” are required to register for
and take all written examinations of content knowledge selected by ODE if the teacher has received and
effectiveness rating of “Ineffective” on evaluations for two of the three most recent school years. “Core subject
area” means reading and English language arts, mathematics, science, foreign language, government, economics,
fine arts, history, and geography.
39
LAKEWOOD LOCAL STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE CHECKLIST (Rubric) (TEACHER GUIDE, SLO COMMITTEE)
This checklist is intended to be used as a guide for writing and approving the SLO and will be made available to both teachers and evaluators for these purposes. Formal approval of each SLO will
require that ALL criteria below are met, and every box checked as verification by the SLO committee. Note: To be reviewed with the teacher on or before October 31.
Baseline and Trend
Data
What is being used to inform
the creation of the SLO and
establish the amount of
growth that should take place
within the time period?
Identifies sources of
information about students
(e.g. test scores from prior
years, results from preassessments)
Draws upon trend data, if
available
Summarizes the teacher’s
analysis of the baseline data
by identifying student
strengths and weaknesses.
Student Population
Interval of Instruction
Standards and Content
Which students will be
included in this SLO?
Include course, grade level,
and number of students.
What is the duration of the
course that the SLO will
cover? Include beginning and
end dates.
What content will the SLO
target? To what related
standard is the SLO aligned?
What assessment(s) will be
used to measure student
growth for this SLO?
Considering all available data
and content requirements, what
growth target(s) can students
be expected to reach?
What is your rationale for
setting the target(s) for
student growth within the
interval of instruction?
Includes all students in the
Matches the length of the
Specifies how the SLO will
Identifies assessments that
Ensures all students in the
Demonstrates teacher
class covered by the SLO.
course (e.g., quarter,
semester, year)
address applicable standards
from the highest ranking of
the following: (1) Common
Core State Standards, (2)
Ohio Academic Content
Standards, or (3) national
standards put forth by
education organizations
have been reviewed by
content experts to effectively
measure course content and
reliably measure student
learning as intended
course have a growth target
knowledge of students and
content
Selects measures with
Sets developmentally
sufficient “stretch” so that all
students may demonstrate
learning, or identifies
supplemental assessments to
cover all ability levels in the
course
appropriate targets
Addresses observed student
Creates tiered targets when
needs
appropriate so that all students
may demonstrate growth
Uses data to identify
Provides a plan for
targets
Describes the student
population and considers any
contextual factors that may
impact student growth
Does not exclude
subgroups of students that
may have difficulty meeting
growth targets
Represents the big ideas or
domains of the content taught
during the interval of
instruction
Identifies core knowledge
and skills students are
expected to attain as required
by the applicable standards
Assessment(s)
Growth Target
Uses a baseline or pretest
data to determine appropriate
growth
Sets ambitious yet attainable
combining assessments if
multiple summative
assessments are used
SLO Committee Comment(s)
SLO Committee Comment(s)
40
SLO Committee Comment(s)
appropriate for the
population
student needs and determine
appropriate growth targets
 Explains how targets align
Sets rigorous expectations
for students and teacher(s)
appropriate assessments
SLO Committee Comment(s)
Explains why target is
with broader school and
district goals
Follows the guidelines for
SLO Committee Comment(s)
Rationale for Growth
Target(s)
SLO Committee Comment(s)
SLO Committee Comment(s)
LAKEWOOD LOCAL STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE TEMPLATE (TEACHER-required if no value-added data)
This template should be completed while referring to the SLO Template Checklist.
Teacher Name: ____________________________________ Content Area and Course(s): ___________________________________Grade Level(s): ____________ Academic Year: ______________
Please use the guidance provided in addition to this template to develop components of the Student Learning Objective and populate each component in the space below. Teaching areas with no Value
Added data must create a SLO to measure student growth.
Baseline and Trend Data
What information is being used to inform the creation of the SLO and establish the amount of growth that should take place?
Student Population
Which students will be included in this SLO? Include course, grade level, and number of students.
Interval of Instruction
What is the duration of the course that the SLO will cover? Include beginning and end dates.
Standards and Content
What content will the SLO target? To what related standards is the SLO aligned?
41
Assessment(s)
What assessment(s) will be used to measure student growth for this SLO?
Growth Target(s)
Considering all available data and content requirements, what growth target(s) can students be expected to reach?
Rationale for Growth Target(s)
What is your rationale for setting the above target(s) for student growth within the interval of instruction?
Verification Use Only
To be signed as verification of SLO to be used for evaluation as per collective bargaining agreement.
Educator Signature: _____________________________________
Date: _____________________
SLO Committee Signature: _______________________________
Date: _____________________
 Approved
 Not Approved (see attached SLO Checklist and Feedback)
C
42
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
2013-2014 Student Growth Matrix
Teacher Name: _____________________________________________________Date: _________________
Please circle the grade(s) and subject(s) for your content area that will be used for teacher evaluation.
Grade(s):
PS
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Subject(s): Art Band Foreign Language Choir Music PE Math Science Social Studies Language Arts
English Health Computers Intervention Specialist
Directions: Please insert the grade level, subject level and percentage for each type of student growth measure that
will be used for accountability for 50% student growth component of the teacher evaluation.
Grade Level
Subject(s)
Student Growth Matrix for Teacher Evaluation
Grades 4-8 Only
Type of Student Growth Measure
50% Percentage
% of time % or time
Value Added
Vendor
Locally
teaching
not
Measure
Measure(s)
Determined
reading
teaching
Percentage*
Percentage
Measure(s)
and math
reading
Percentage
and math
*In 2013-14, teachers in Category A1 must have at least 26% of the student growth measure component
fall under the value added measure. Beginning in 2014-15, the Value Added report must represent 50% of
the student growth measure component.
VERIFICATION USE ONLY
To be signed as verification of Student Growth Measures to be used for evaluation as per
negotiated agreement.
Educator Signature: ___________________________________________
Date:
___________________________________________
Evaluator Signature: ___________________________________________
Date:
___________________________________________
43
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACER EVALUATION SUMMARY REPORT FORM
Evaluation Summary
Teacher Performance Compliance
Compliance Dates
Student Growth Rating
Identify measure(s) used to calculate the student growth rating.
Goal Setting Meeting Date
Observation #1
Observation #2
Pre-Conference Completion Date
Post-Conference Completion Date
End of Year Conference Completion Date
Please check to identify:
 Value Added
 MAP
Accomplished
Teacher Performance Observation Rating(s)
Observation #1
Standard Area
Accomplished
Skilled
Developing
Ineffective
 SLO(s)
Skilled
Developing
Ineffective
Observation #2
Accomplished
Skilled
Developing
Ineffective
Communication and
Collaboration (Standard 6)
Professional Growth/District
Policies and Collective
Bargaining/Ethical Behavior
(Standard 7)
Focus for Learning
Standard 4: Instruction
Assessment Data
Standard 3: Assessment
Prior Content Knowledge
Standards 1,2 and 4
Knowledge of Students
Standard 1: Students
Lesson Delivery
Standards 2 and 4
Differentiation
Standards 1 and 4
Resources
Standards 1 and 4
Classroom Environment
Standards 1 and 5
Assessment of Student
Learning
Standard 3: Assessment
Observation #1 Holistic Rating
Observation #2 Holistic Rating
Evaluation Summary Overall Rating
Professional Growth Plan
Recommended Completion
Description of Plan (Please see complete plan description on next page)
Date
Improvement Plan
Required Completion Date
Contract Recommendation Type
 Not Applicable
 Non-renew the limited contract
 Re-new the limited contract with specific recommendations for professional development
 Continuing Contract with specific recommendations for professional development
 Continuing Contract without specific recommendations
Teacher Comment(s):
 All contained in this section
 See attachment(s)
Teacher Signature: ____________________________ Date: __________________________
Evaluator Signature: ___________________________ Date: __________________________
Please attach additional Rating Summary Page as necessitates if more than two observations are conducted for a holistic summary rating.
Note: Principals are required to submit all building Teacher Evaluation Ratings annually to the Ohio Department of Education.
44
LAKEWOOD LOCAL PROFESSIONAL GROWTH PLAN
As a result of the evaluation process, teachers and evaluators should focus on accelerating and continuing teacher growth through professional development.
Professional development should be individualized to the needs of the teacher, and specifically relate to his/her areas of refinement as identified in the teacher’s
evaluation. The evaluator should recommend professional development opportunities, and support the teacher by providing resources (e.g., time, financial).
Self-Directed
Collaborative
Teacher_______________________________
Annual Focus
These are addressed by the evaluator as appropriate for this teacher.
Evaluator________________________________
Areas for Professional Growth
Supports needed, resources, professional development
Comments during conference with teacher and evaluator are
made appropriate to the needs of the teacher.
Goal 1: Student Achievement / Outcomes for Students
Goal Statement:
Evidence Indicators:
Goal 2: Teacher Performance on the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession
Goal Statement:
Evidence Indicators:
Evaluator Signature: ______________________________________
Teacher Signature: __________________________________________
Date: ______________________________
Date: ____________________________
The signatures above verify that the teacher and evaluator have discussed and agreed upon this Professional Growth Plan.
45
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Improvement Plan
Teacher Name: _______________________________________________________Grade Level / Subject: ______________________________
School year: _________________________ Building: ________________________Date of Improvement Plan Conference: __________________
Written improvement plans are to be developed in the circumstances when an educator makes below expected academic growth with his/her students
AND/OR receives an overall ineffective or an ineffective rating on any of the compounds of the OTES system. The purpose of the improvement plan is
to identify specific deficiencies in performance and foster growth through professional development and targeted support. If corrective actions are not
made within the time as specified in the improvement plan, a recommendation may be made for dismissal or to continue on the plan.
Section 1: Improvement Statement- List specific areas for improvement as related to the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession. Attach
documentation.
Performance Standard(s) Addressed in this plan Date(s) Improvement Area or Concern Observed
Specific Statement of the Concern: Areas of
Improvement
Section 2: Desired Level of Performance – List specific measurable goals to improve performance. Indicate what will be measured for each goal.
Beginning Date
Ending Date
Level of Performance
Specifically Describe Successful Improvement
Target(s)
46
Improvement Plan (continued)
Section 3: Specific Plan of Action
Describe in detail specific plans of action that must be taken by the teacher to improve his/her performance. Indicate the sources of evidence that will be
used to document the completion of the improvement plan.
Actions to be Taken
Sources of Evidence that Will Be Examined
Section 4: Assistance and Professional Development
Describe in detail specific supports that will be provided as well as opportunities for professional development.
Dates for this Improvement Plan to be evaluated:
Teacher’s Signature ___________________________________
Date: _______________________
Evaluator’s Signature: _________________________________
Date: _______________________
The evaluator’s signature on this form verifies that the proper procedures as detailed in the local contract have been followed.
47
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Improvement Plan: Evaluation of Plan
Teacher Name: _______________________________________________________Grade Level / Subject: ______________________________
School year: _________________________ Building: ________________________Date of Improvement Plan Conference: __________________
The improvement plan will be evaluated at the end of the time period specified in the plan. Outcomes from the improvement plan demonstrate the following
action to be taken;
Improvement is demonstrated and performance standards are met to a satisfactory level of performance*
The Improvement Plan should continue for time specified: ___________________________________
Dismissal is recommended.
Comments: Provide justification for recommendation indicated above and attach evidence to support recommended course of action.
I have reviewed this evaluation and discussed it with my evaluator. My signature indicates that I have been advised of my performance status; it does
not necessarily imply that I agree with this decision.
Teacher’s Signature: _____________________________
Date: ______________________
Evaluator’s Signature: ____________________________
Date: ______________________
The evaluator’s signature on this form verifies that the proper procedures as defined in the local contract have been followed.
*The acceptable level of performance varies depending on the teacher’s years of experience. (Teachers in residency – specifically in Years 1 through 4
– are expected to perform at the Developing level or above. Experienced teachers – with 5 or more years of experience- are expected to meet the
Proficient level or above.)
48
LAKEWOOD LOCAL TEACHER EVALUATION
Record of Teacher Evaluation Activities (Required)
Teacher Name: ____________________________________Contract Status: _______________________________
School (s): ____________________________________________________School Year: _____________________
Position /Assignment: __________________________________________________________________________
Evaluator: ________________________________________________ Title: ______________________________
Teacher Background (Briefly describe the teacher’s educational background, years of experience, teaching
assignment, extracurricular duties).
The Lakewood Local Teacher Evaluation is based, in part, on informal and formal observations and conferences
conducted on the following dates
Activity
Professional Goal Setting
SLO(s) Submitted for Approval
SLO(s) Approved
Pre-Conference #1
Formal Observation #1
Date
Teacher Signature
Post-Conference #1
Walkthrough #1
Walkthrough #2
Walkthrough #3
Walkthrough #4
Pre-Conference #2
Formal Observation #2
Post-Conference #2
Walkthrough #1
Walkthrough #2
Walkthrough #3
Walkthrough #4
SLO Results Scored and Submitted
Final Summative Rating
49
Evaluator Signature
50