Series 4000: PERSONNEL -- CERTIFIED & NON-CERTIFIED

4115 Evaluation and Support Program

It is universally accepted that good teaching is the most important element in a sound educational program. Student learning is directly affected by teacher competence; therefore, teacher evaluation shall be accomplished using a teacher evaluation plan which demonstrates a clear link between teacher evaluation, professional development and improved student learning. 

Note: “Teacher” or “Administrator” for purposes of evaluation shall include each professional employee of the Board, below the rank of Superintendent, who holds a certificate or permit issued by the State Board of Education

Appraisal of teaching performance should serve three purposes:

1. To raise the quality of instruction and educational services to the children of our community resulting in improved student learning.

2. To raise the standards of the teaching profession as a whole.

3. To aid the individual teacher to grow professionally, linking district-wide teacher evaluation and professional development plans.

Evaluation of teacher performance must be a cooperative, continuing process designed to improve student learning and the quality of instruction. The Superintendent shall annually evaluate or cause to be evaluated all certified employees in accordance with the teacher evaluation and support program, developed through mutual agreement with the professional development and evaluation committee for the District. The teacher shares with those who work with the teacher the responsibility for developing effective evaluation procedures and instruments and for the development and maintenance of professional standards and attitudes regarding the evaluation process.

The Board of Education shall adopt and implement a teacher evaluation and support program. Such teacher evaluation and support program shall be developed through mutual agreement with the District’s Professional Development and Evaluation Committee. If unable to attain mutual agreement, the Board and the Professional Development and Evaluation Committee shall consider adopting by mutual agreement the State Board of Education (SBE) adopted model teacher evaluation and support program without any modification. Further, if the Board and the Professional Development and Evaluation Committee fail to agree on the SBE model, the Board, will use its statutory authority to adopt and implement a teacher evaluation program of its choice, provided such program is consistent with the SBE adopted guidelines.

The Superintendent and all employees whose administrative and supervisory duties equal at least 50% of their time shall include a minimum of fifteen hours of training in the evaluation of teachers pursuant to Section 10-151b, as part of the required professional development activity during each five-year period for reissuance of their professional educator certificate.

The Superintendent shall annually evaluate or cause to be evaluated each teacher and administrator in accordance with the teacher evaluation and support program and may conduct additional formative evaluations toward producing an annual summative evaluation.

In the event that a teacher or an administrator does not receive a summative evaluation during the school year, such individual shall receive a rating of “not rated” for that year.

The Superintendent shall report to the Board by September 15th annually on the status of the evaluations. In addition, annually, by dates determined by the State Department of Education, the Superintendent shall report to the Commissioner of Education on the implementation of the teacher evaluation and support program, including the frequency of evaluations, aggregate evaluation ratings, the number of teachers and administrators not evaluated, and other requirements as determined by the State Department of Education.

Improvement and Remediation Plans

Teachers rated “below standard” or “developing” shall have a well-articulated improvement and remediation plan that:

1. is developed in consultation with the teacher and his/her union representative is differentiated by the level of identified need and/or stage of development;

2. identifies resources, support, and other methods to address documented deficiencies;

3. contains a timeline for implementing such measures in the same school year as the plan is issued;  and

4. provides success indicators that include a minimum overall rating of “proficient” at the end of the                    improvement and remediation plan.

Evaluation Training

The Board, prior to any evaluation conducted under the teacher evaluation and support program, shall conduct training programs for all evaluators and orientation for all District teachers regarding the District’s teacher evaluation and support program. Such training shall provide instruction to evaluators regarding how to conduct proper performance evaluations prior to conducting an evaluation under the teacher evaluation and support program. The orientation for each teacher shall be completed before a teacher receives an evaluation under the teacher evaluation and support program.

Note: “Teacher” includes all certified employees below the rank of Superintendent.

Implementation Plan

The Board of Education recognizes that the State Board of Education (SBE) has adopted a flexible plan for the implementation of Connecticut’s Educator Evaluation and Support System.

The District will use a District developed plan.

The District’s evaluation plans for State Department of Education’s review and approval, including flexibility requests, shall take place by annual deadlines set by the State Department of Education.

Complementary Observers

The primary evaluator for most teachers will be the school principal or assistant principal who will be responsible for the overall evaluation process, including assigning summative ratings. The District may also decide to use complementary observers to assist the primary evaluator. Complementary observers are certified educators, who may have specific content knowledge, such as department heads or curriculum coordinators. Complementary observers shall be fully trained as evaluators in order to be authorized to serve in this role.

Complementary observers may assist primary evaluators by conducting observations, including pre- and post-conferences, collecting additional evidence, reviewing student learning objectives (SLOs) and providing additional feedback. A complementary observer shall share his/her feedback with the primary evaluator as it is collected and shared with teachers.

Primary evaluators will have sole responsibility for assigning final summative ratings. Both primary evaluators and complementary observers must demonstrate proficiency in conducting standards-based observations.

Dispute-Resolution Process

In accordance with the requirement in the “Connecticut Guidelines for Teacher Evaluation and Professional Development,” in establishing or amending the local teacher evaluation plan, the Board of Education shall include a process for resolving disputes in cases where the evaluator and teacher cannot agree on goals/objectives, the evaluation period, feedback or the professional development plan.

When such agreement cannot be reached, the issue in dispute may be referred for resolution to a subcommittee of the Professional Development and Evaluation Committee (PDEC). The Superintendent and the collective bargaining unit for the District shall each select one representative from the PDEC to constitute this subcommittee, as well as a neutral party as mutually agreed upon between the Superintendent and the collective bargaining unit. In the event the designated committee does not reach a unanimous decision, the issue shall be considered by the Superintendent whose decision shall be binding. This provision is to be utilized in accordance with the specified processes and parameters regarding goals/objectives, evaluation period, feedback, and professional development contained in this document entitled “Connecticut Guidelines for Educator Evaluation.” Should the process not result in resolution of a given issue, the determination regarding that issue shall be made by the Superintendent. An example will be provided within the State model.

Note: The above is an illustrative example pf such a process provided by the State Board of Education.

Data Management

The District’s Professional Development and Evaluation Committee will review and report to the Board the user experiences and efficiency of the District’s data management system/platform to be used by teachers and administrators to manage the evaluation plans.

Beginning with the implementation of the District’s 2014 evaluation plan and each year thereafter, data management systems/platform to be used by teacher and administrators to manage evaluation plans shall be selected by the Board with considerations given to functional requirements/needs and efficiencies identified by the Professional Development and Evaluation Committee.

Such plans shall consider guidance pertaining to the entry of data into the District’s data management system/platform needed to manage the evaluation plan. Such guidance shall address items to be entered, prohibitions pertaining to the sharing and transference of individual teacher data to another district or entity without consent of the teacher or administrator, limits on the access to teacher and administrator data and a process for recording authorized individuals’ access to information.

Audit

The Board, if selected, will participate as required, in an audit of its evaluation program, conducted by the State Department of Education.

Evaluation and Support Program

(cf. 2400 - Evaluation of Administrators and Administration)

(cf. 4111/4211 - Recruitment and Selection)

(cf. 4131 - Staff Development) 

Legal Reference:    

Connecticut General Statutes

10-145b Teaching certificates.

10-151a Access of teacher to supervisory records and reports in personnel file.

10-151b Evaluation by superintendent of certain educational personnel. (amended by PA 04-137, An Act Concerning Teachers’ Evaluations, P.A.

10-111, An Act Concerning Education Reform in Connecticut, and P.A.

12-116 An Act Concerning Educational Reform.)

10-151c Records of teacher performance and evaluation not public records.

10-220a(b) In-service training. Professional development. Institutes for educators. 

Cooperative and beginning teacher programs, regulations. Circular Letter C-6,

Series 2004-2005, Determining “Highly Qualified” Teachers. Circular Letter C-9,

Series 2004-2005, “No Child Left Behind” and Districts’ High Objective Uniform

State Standard of Evaluation (HOUSSE) Plans. PA 11-135

An Act Concerning Implementation Dates for Secondary School Reform.

PA 12-116 An Act Concerning Education Reform (as amended by PA 13- 145

An Act Concerning Revisions to the Reform Act of 2012.)

Connecticut Guidelines for Educator Evaluation, adopted by the

State Board of Education, June 27, 2012. Connecticut’s System for

Educator Evaluation and Development (SEED) state model evaluation system.

“Flexibility to Guidelines for Educator Evaluation” adopted by Connecticut

State Board of Education, February 6, 2014 20 U.S.C. Section 1119

No Child Left Behind Act. 34 C.F.R. 200.55 Federal Regulations.

Policy adopted: April 11, 2016 THOMASTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS Thomaston, Connecticut