INDICATOR Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence A1.6 The district’s student There is little or no evidence District leadership teams have Administrators are evaluated learning and growth goal that administrators are reviewed the revised SLG goal on the effectiveness of their setting process is aligned with evaluated on the effectiveness guidance and state assessment impact on student learning and the state requirements defined of their impact on student criteria and are working to align growth as defined by the SLG in the Student Learning and learning and growth as defined the district’s evaluation system goal guidance and Growth (SLG) goal guidance. by the SLG goal guidance. with state requirements. assessments used to measure Assessments used for SLG SLG goals meet state criteria. goals meet state assessment There is little or no evidence criteria. that assessments used for SLG goals meet sate criteria. Guiding Questions 1.6: What is the district’s process for setting SLG goals? Does the district use the state SLG Goal template and scoring rubric? Does the district ensure that the administrator’s collective SLG goals encompass an appropriate grouping of students? Does the district ensure that administrators use state assessments for one SLG goal? Does the district ensure that Category 2 assessments are implemented consistently school-wide or district-wide? Does the district ensure that the Category 2 assessments are valid and reliable measures? Are SLG goals tied to academic content standards/CCSS? Does the district differentiate SLG goals for other central office administrators? INDICATOR Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence A1.7 Administrators are There is little or no evidence that The district selects evaluators The district selects evaluators selected based upon their depth the district selects evaluators the majority of whom meet who meet clear criteria that of knowledge and demonstrated who meet clear criteria that clear criteria that incorporate incorporate the subject matter expertise and are assigned incorporate the subject matter the subject matter knowledge, knowledge, grade‐level based upon the subject matter knowledge, grade‐level grade‐level experience, and experience, and any other knowledge, grade‐level experience, and any other other requisite skills needed to requisite skills needed to make experience, and other requisite requisite skills needed to make make accurate judgments for accurate judgments for specific experience required to accurate judgments for specific specific evaluation instruments. evaluation instruments. accurately use specific evaluation instruments. evaluation instruments. Guiding Questions 1.7: Who conducts observations and how are they trained? Who conducts the artifact review? How are reviewers selected and trained? Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence
INDICATOR Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence A1.6 The district’s student learning and growth goal setting process is aligned with the state requirements defined in the Student Learning and Growth (SLG) goal guidance. Assessments used for SLG goals meet state assessment criteria. There is little or no evidence that administrators are evaluated on the effectiveness of their impact on student learning and growth as defined by the SLG goal guidance. There is little or no evidence that assessments used for SLG goals meet sate criteria. District leadership teams have reviewed the revised SLG goal guidance and state assessment criteria and are working to align the district’s evaluation system with state requirements. Administrators are evaluated on the effectiveness of their impact on student learning and growth as defined by the SLG goal guidance and assessments used to measure SLG goals meet state criteria. Guiding Questions 1.6: What is the district’s process for setting SLG goals? Does the district use the state SLG Goal template and scoring rubric? Does the district ensure that the administrator’s collective SLG goals encompass an appropriate grouping of students? Does the district ensure that administrators use state assessments for one SLG goal? Does the district ensure that Category 2 assessments are implemented consistently school-wide or district-wide? Does the district ensure that the Category 2 assessments are valid and reliable measures? Are SLG goals tied to academic content standards/CCSS? Does the district differentiate SLG goals for other central office administrators? INDICATOR Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence A1.7 Administrators are selected based upon their depth of knowledge and demonstrated expertise and are assigned based upon the subject matter knowledge, grade‐level experience, and other requisite experience required to accurately use specific evaluation instruments. There is little or no evidence that the district selects evaluators who meet clear criteria that incorporate the subject matter knowledge, grade‐level experience, and any other requisite skills needed to make accurate judgments for specific evaluation instruments. The district selects evaluators the majority of whom meet clear criteria that incorporate the subject matter knowledge, grade‐level experience, and other requisite skills needed to make accurate judgments for specific evaluation instruments. The district selects evaluators who meet clear criteria that incorporate the subject matter knowledge, grade‐level experience, and any other requisite skills needed to make accurate judgments for specific evaluation instruments. Guiding Questions 1.7: Who conducts observations and how are they trained? Who conducts the artifact review? How are reviewers selected and trained? Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence
final-self-appraisal-tool.docx