at least every two years. there is little or no evidence of In two‐year evaluation Educators on a two-year formal and informal measures In two-year evaluation cycles, there are formal and cycle receive on-going cycles, there are informal that assure educators in informal measures that feedback in the measures that assure evaluation years assure educators continue to summative year. continue to demonstrate educators continue to demonstrate effective effective performance and are demonstrate effective performance and are Evaluation systems progressing on meeting performance and are progressing on meeting differentiate procedures progressing on meeting professional expectations. professional expectations. based on the level of an professional expectations, educator’s experience. but no formal measures. The evaluation system provides The district evaluation system little or no differentiation for differentiates support that The district evaluation system educators who are new to the recognizes the needs of new profession, new to the district or differentiates support that educators and those who are new to a role category. recognizes the needs of new educators whose roles have educators. changed. Guiding Questions 2.3: How does the evaluation and support system differentiate based upon experience, assignment, and prior evaluations (e.g., number of observations, formal or informal, announced or unannounced, specifics of support – team or individual mentor, self-directed or supervisor directed)? INDICATOR Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence T2.4 The district has a There is little or no evidence The district is developing their The combination of evaluation process in place to determine that the combination of summative model which from these three areas is used an educator’s evaluation from these three combines evaluations from to determine the administrator evaluation rating based on areas is used to determine the these three areas to determine teacher’s summative rating the Oregon Matrix Model for administrator’s summative the administrator’s summative aligned to the Oregon Matrix Educator Summative rating aligned to the Oregon rating aligned to the Oregon requirements. Evaluations which includes: Matrix. Matrix requirements. professional practice and professional responsibilities; and student learning and growth as a significant factor. Guiding Questions 2.4: What is the district’s plan to incorporate the Oregon Matrix summative model into their evaluation system?
at least every two years. Educators on a two-year cycle receive on-going feedback in the year. Evaluation systems differentiate procedures based on the level of an educator’s experience. there is little or no evidence of formal and informal measures that assure educators in evaluation years continue to demonstrate effective performance and are progressing on meeting professional expectations. The evaluation system provides little or no differentiation for educators who are new to the profession, new to the district or who are new to a role category. In two-year evaluation cycles, there are informal measures that assure educators continue to demonstrate effective performance and are progressing on meeting professional expectations, but no formal measures. The district evaluation system differentiates support that recognizes the needs of new educators. In two‐year evaluation cycles, there are formal and informal measures that assure educators continue to demonstrate effective performance and are progressing on meeting professional expectations. The district evaluation system differentiates support that recognizes the needs of new educators and those educators whose roles have changed. Guiding Questions 2.3: How does the evaluation and support system differentiate based upon experience, assignment, and prior evaluations (e.g., number of observations, formal or informal, announced or unannounced, specifics of support – team or individual mentor, self-directed or supervisor directed)? INDICATOR Insufficient Progressing Sufficient Evidence T2.4 The district has a process in place to determine an educator’s summative evaluation rating based on the Oregon Matrix Model for Educator Summative Evaluations which includes: professional practice and professional responsibilities; and student learning and growth as a significant factor. There is little or no evidence that the combination of evaluation from these three areas is used to determine the administrator’s summative rating aligned to the Oregon Matrix. The district is developing their summative model which combines evaluations from these three areas to determine the administrator’s summative rating aligned to the Oregon Matrix requirements. The combination of evaluation from these three areas is used to determine the administrator teacher’s summative rating aligned to the Oregon Matrix requirements. Guiding Questions 2.4: What is the district’s plan to incorporate the Oregon Matrix summative model into their evaluation system?
final-self-appraisal-tool.docx