Shelby County Public Schools
Certified Evaluation Plan
Preparing wise students who master standards,
lead by example, and embrace social
responsibility
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
0
Table of Contents
4.0 Model Certified Evaluation Plan
Shelby County Public Schools Timeline………………………………………………………………………………………………….4
Shelby County Public Schools Responsibility Chart…………………………………………………………………………………5
Shelby County Public Schools Evaluation/Observation Procedures…………………………………………………………6
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System – Certified Teacher……………………………………………………………………10
Roles and Definitions................................................................................................................................10
The Kentucky Framework for Teaching………………………………………………………………..………………………….....12
Kentucky Professional Growth & Effectiveness System Model................................................................13
Sources of Evidence/Framework Teaching Alignment.............................................................................14
Professional Practice.................................................................................................................................15
Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection...............................................................15
Observation..........................................................................................................................15
Observation Model...............................................................................................................16
Observation Conferencing....................................................................................................17
Observation Schedule ..........................................................................................................17
Observer Certification...........................................................................................................18
Observer Calibration.............................................................................................................19
Peer Observation...................................................................................................................19
Student Voice........................................................................................................................20
Student Growth....................................................................................................................21
State Contribution – Student Growth Percentiles (SGPs)..............................................22
Local Contribution – Student Growth Goals (SGGs)......................................................22
Rigor of SGGs.........................................................................................................23
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
1
Comparability of SGGs.............................................................................................24
Determining Growth for a Single SGG.....................................................................26
Determining Growth for Multiple SGGs..................................................................26
Products of Practice/Other Sources of Evidence……………………………………………………………..26
Determining the Overall Performance Category.........................................................................................28
Rating Professional Practice...................................................................................................28
Rating Overall Student Growth..............................................................................................29
Determining the Overall Performance Category....................................................................30
Professional Growth Plan and Summative Cycle........................................................................................33
Appeals Process...........................................................................................................................................34
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System – Principal and Assistant Principal.................................................36
Kentucky Professional Growth & Effectiveness System Model..................................................................37
Sources of Evidence/Framework Teaching Alignment...............................................................................38
Roles and Definitions..................................................................................................................................39
Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Components – Overview/Summative Model...41
Principal Performance Standards...............................................................................................................42
Professional Practice…………………...............................................................................................................43
Professional Growth Plan and Self-Reflection...............................................................43
Site-Visits……………………………………………………….............................................................43
Val-Ed 360º....................................................................................................................44
Working Conditions Goal…............................................................................................45
Products of Practice......................................................................................................47
Student Growth....................................................................................................................47
State Contribution ……............................................…….................................................47
Local Contribution......................................................……..............................................48
Determining the Overall Performance Category........................................................................................49
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
2
Rating Overall Professional Practice......................................................................................49
Rating Overall Student Growth…………………………………………………….……………………………………50
Determining Overall Performance Category…………………………………………………………………………..……………….53
Professional Growth Plan and Summative Cycle…………………………………………………..…………………………………54
Sample Principal PGES Cycle………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………….55
Assurances: Certified Evaluation Plan……………………………………………………………………………………………………..56
Certified Staff Advisory Committee – 50/50 Committee………………………………………………………………………….57
Appendix Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….58
Appendix……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………59-108
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
3
SHELBY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
The purpose of the evaluation system shall be to improve instruction, provide a measure of
performance accountability, and provide encouragement and support for employees to improve
performance. The Certified Evaluation Plan’s purpose is to set clear and high expectations and
create conditions for success.
TIMELINE
STEPS
COMPLETION
ON/OR BEFORE
PROCEDURES
PGES Contacts: Director of Administration/Personnel and Level Directors
Step 1
Administrators’ training.
Prior to the first day of
school
Step 2
Director of Administration and Personnel will provide access to documents
needed on district Sharepoint site.
By July 1
Step 3
Evaluator meets with all staff.
Within thirty (30) days of
the first day of school
Step 4


Evaluator notifies those he/she will evaluate in current year
Provide access to evaluation documents to those on current cycle
Explain plan, procedures, monitoring and documents and to staff

Review plan individually for interim hires.
Within thirty (30) days of
the first day of work
Step 5
Teachers working on an annual contract (non-tenured), will participate in
PGES, on the formal cycle (self-reflection, professional growth plan, student
growth goal, student voice, and observations). The minimum for
observations is at least three (3) mini observations and one (1) full
observation. One (1) mini observation will be by a peer teacher.
Cycles:
1. 30th day of school –Nov. 30th
2. Dec. 1st – Feb. 14th
3. Feb. 15th – May 1st
Step 5a
Cycle:
Year 1 Mini
Year 2 Mini
Year 3 Full and Peer Mini
(Summative)
Step 6
Teachers working on a continuing contact (tenured) will participate in PGES
in a full observation and a mini peer observation every third year, during
their summative evaluation year. In the two formative years, tenured
teachers will complete the self-reflection, professional growth plan, student
growth goal, student voice survey, and have a minimum of one (1) mini
observation each year conducted by an administrator.
Observations, conferencing and monitoring.
Step 7
Post observation conference
Step 8
SC106 (Improvement Plan) is used after the post observation conference in
needed or as determined by the administrator.
SC106A shall be used for documentation of progress on the SC106 plan.
Conferencing for monitoring progress shall occur monthly.
Step 9
All Summative documents due to Superintendent/designee.
Within five (5) school days
of the observation
Within five (5) days of the
post observation
conference OR at any time,
as needed, throughout the
year.
Follow-up monthly
May 15th
Continuous
A copy of all summative documents must be sent to Personnel Department
to be placed in employee personnel file. If an improvement plan was
implemented, it shall be attached to the summative document.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
4
RESPONSIBILITY CHART
EVALUATOR/
OBSERVER
Board of Education:
Superintendent:
Deputy Superintendent
Assistant Superintendent
Operations:
Director of Secondary
Schools:
Director of Elementary
Schools:
Director of Student Services:
Special Education Director:
Director of Finance:
Staff Developer:
Principals:
EVALUATEES/OBSERVEES
PROGRAM/FORM
Superintendent
Deputy Superintendent
Assistant Superintendent
Public Relations Coordinator
Director of Administration and Personnel
Director of Finance
Director of Special Education
Director of Elementary Schools
Director of Secondary Schools
Principals (in collaboration with Level Directors)
Curriculum Coordinator
Staff Developer
Chief Information Officer
Migrant Student Advocate (in collaboration with RAMP Coord.)
English as Second Language Consulting Teachers
Reading and Math Proficiency Coordinator
Food Service Coordinator
Director of Student Accounting & Support Services
Secondary Principals (in collaboration with
Superintendent)
Preschool Principal (in collaboration with Superintendent)
Elementary Principals (in collaboration with Superintendent)
Reading Recovery/Title I Coordinator
Health Coordinator
Homebound Service Provider
Psychologists
Psychometrists
Technology Coordinator for Special Education
Educational Diagnosticians
School Facilitators
Other Support Personnel (OT, PT, mental
health/behavioral consultant, EDC)
Finance Coordinator/Purchasing Agent
Instructional Coaches (in collaboration with Level Directors)
Teachers
Assistant Principals
Student Support Specialists
Guidance Counselors
Library Media Specialists
Speech/Language Pathologist
Reading and Math Interventionists
Other School-Based Certified Staff (in non-teaching role)
Back to TOC
SCProcedure 02.14AP2
SC101B
SC101B
SC114
SC101B
SC111
SC101B
SC101B
SC101B
PPGES
SC101A, SC101B
SC101A, SC101B
SC104
SC104
SC104
SC104
SC104
SC104
PPGES
PPGES
PPGES
SC104
SC104
SC100A, SC100
SC104
SC104
SC104
SC104
SC104
SC104
SC111
SC104
PGES
PPGES
SC104
SC102, SC102A
SC103, SC103A
SC112, SC112A
SC104
SC104
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
5
EVALUATION/OBSERVATION PROCEDURES
All staff shall receive orientation on their evaluation plan each year, including intern teachers. Evaluation
is an on-going process. Collecting data is on-going annually and is used to in regard to professional growth
for all certified staff. Each staff member to be evaluated in the current year shall be provided access of
the appropriate evaluation document(s) by the principal or other appropriate administrative staff. Forms
are located on the district Sharepoint site. Evaluators shall be responsible for the explanation and
discussion of the plan and documents to staff no later than thirty (30) days after the first day of school or
if interim, thirty (30) days from the first working day.
The employee’s immediate supervisor/evaluator may request input from other professional staff as the
role of the evaluatee relates to said staff. Staff completing a form on behalf of the immediate supervisor
must complete the form and submit to the immediate supervisor. Signature on the form is optional. All
forms will be available for review by the evaluatee. All administrators, at all levels, Certified District
Supervisors/Consultants and Counselors will be evaluated annually.
The Board of Education shall be responsible for the evaluation of the Superintendent.
For evaluations (not included in PGES), evaluators will be trained by personnel who are approved by the
Kentucky Department of Education. In a two-year cycle, evaluators will receive twelve (12) hours of
training (704 KAR 3:370). For information regarding training and certification for PGES, see Observer
Certification Page 18.
IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SC106 Improvement Plan and SC106A Documentation of Follow-up
SC106 and SC106A shall include clear expectations and specific strategies for improvement. A written
program of improvement shall be established by the evaluator and evaluatee within five (5) working days
after the post-observation conference or may be implemented at any time, as determined by the
supervisor. A follow-up conference using the SC106A form shall be held within twenty (20) working days
from the date the SC106 Improvement Plan was implemented to evaluate and document the progress on
the specific recommendation(s) for improvement. Documentation of these conferences shall be included
as a part of the completed, signed summative evaluation submitted to the Superintendent. Lack of
progress toward improvement may result in a recommendation for change in assignment or disciplinary
action, which may include dismissal.
SC109 Documentation of Standard Not Met
If the final summative documentation is unsatisfactory, form SC109 is to be submitted to the
Superintendent along with the SC106 and SC106A documents.
WRITTEN DISAGREEMENT
Any employee disagreeing with any evaluation or part thereof may have attached to the evaluation a
written statement expressing disagreement.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
6
APPEAL PROCESS
Each person evaluated will be provided an opportunity for appeal of his/her summative evaluation to the
local evaluation appeals panel. (SC Policy 03.18 Evaluation). Both parties in the appeal process are given
the opportunity to review all documentation submitted reasonably in advance of the hearing and the right
to be accompanied by a chosen representative. The employee who is appealing his/her summative
evaluation will use as a reference the Board Policy 03.18 and the Administrative Staff Evaluation Appeal
Procedures. (See Appendix C, Shelby County Policy 03.18 Evaluations, SC Procedure 03.18 AP.11, SC
Procedure 03.18 AP.21) A certified employee who feels that the local district is not properly implementing
the evaluation plan, including PGES, may appeal to the Kentucky Department of Education, Legal and
Legislative Resources at http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE
COPIES AND RECORDS
Forms may be handwritten or completed electronically.
Distribution of copies of the completed Summative document will be to each of the following: the original
copy to be placed in the employee’s personnel file, one copy to the evaluatee, and one copy to the
evaluator. All summative evaluation documents will be kept on all certified personnel until employment
has been terminated. The Superintendent and the evaluator will keep these files secure and will make
them available only to those in the evaluation chain. The evaluation chain will be as follows: the
evaluatee, the evaluator, the Director of Administration and Personnel, the Superintendent, and the
Board of Education, as a body.
Personnel are to be notified by the Superintendent if their completed summative evaluation was
examined by the Board of Education, as a body, and a reason given as to why the evaluation was
examined. A log sheet is to be maintained showing evaluations examined by someone in the evaluation
chain. The log sheet is to be kept with the evaluations. Summative evaluations are housed in personnel
files. The summative evaluations of principals are housed in a secured file cabinet in the Superintendent’s
office, but are part of their official personnel file. Any staff member being evaluated will be given an
opportunity to provide written response. This will become part of his/her official personnel file.
Both non-tenure and tenure teachers going from one school to another school within the district must be
evaluated in their first year in their new assignment.
A minimum of one Summative document will be completed for each tenured teacher once every three (3)
years or more often, if the administration deems necessary. The Summative documents must be
completed and submitted to the office of the Superintendent no later than May 15th.
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH/IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Individual Professional Growth Plan (PGP)
Every certified person, will develop an individual professional growth plan. Professional growth goals shall
be written in such a way that they can be measured. (SMART Goals, see Appendix Page 59). Professional
growth plans will align with school and/or district improvement plans. PGPs will be reviewed by the
administrator and discussed with the teacher a minimum of 3 times per year. The initial development and
approval of the student growth goal and professional growth plan will occur within 30 days of the review
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
7
of the evaluation process. The second formal review of the professional growth plan will occur mid-year.
The final review will occur by May 15th. Goals will be monitored throughout the year.
The Individual Professional Growth/Improvement Plan is a plan whereby the employee establishes goals for
enrichment/development/improvement. The plan shall be aligned with specific goals and objectives of the
School/District Improvement Plan, Professional Development Plan and based upon individual need.
Upon being hired, the new employee shall complete his/her Professional Growth Plan within thirty (30)
days after the explanation of the evaluation procedures. Any change in the timeliness for an individual
must be agreed upon by the evaluator, evaluatee, and the Director of Administration and Personnel. The
original of the plan shall be maintained by the principal/evaluator.
Timeline for Self-Reflection/PGP
August/September
Teacher reflects on his/her current growth needs
based on data and identifies an area of focus
Teacher collaborates with his/her administrator,
develops growth plan and action steps
Implementation/Reflection on progress and
impact of the PGP regarding professional practice
Modifies plan as appropriate
Continued implementation and ongoing reflection
Summative reflection on the degree of goal
attainment and implications for next steps
September
October - December
January
January - April
April/May
SC108 Documentation of Commendation
An optional document which may be used when a Standard Exceeded rating is given on the Summative
Evaluation is SC108. This form provides opportunity for specific information of commendation to be
explained and will accompany the Summative and placed in the employee’s personnel file.
NON-PGES Other Certified Staff (See responsibility
chart Page 2
For other certified staff, (not involved in PGES – Guidance Counselors, Media Specialists, Speech
Therapists, OTs, PTs, Instructional Coaches, Preschool Teachers, Area Tech Teachers, and Central Office
Administrators) every certified staff member will develop an individual professional growth plan.
Professional growth goals shall be written in such a way that they can be measured. (SMART Goals, see
Appendix 59). Professional growth plans will align with school and/or district improvement plans. PGPs
will be reviewed by the administrator and discussed with the teacher a minimum of 3 times per year. The
initial development and approval of the student growth goal and professional growth plan will occur
within 30 days of the review of the evaluation process. The second formal review of the professional
growth plan will occur mid-year. The final review will occur by May 15th. Goals will be monitored
throughout the year.
Shelby County Public Schools will participate in the OPGES Pilot during the 2014 – 15 school year.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
8
SC101A Formative Evaluation for Administrators
The form SC101A will be used by the evaluator for administrators (not involved in PGES) in a scheduled
conference with the evaluatee. Information from SC101A shall be discussed at the conference. The
evaluator shall record a rating for each item on SC101A. At a minimum there shall be two scheduled
formative evaluation conferences per school year. One conference should be scheduled in the first
semester for work and discussion on the Professional Growth Plan. The second conference shall be
scheduled in the second semester in which the SC101A will be used. If a rating of “Standard Not Met” is
given at any time, the evaluatee and evaluator shall schedule another conference to design and
implement an improvement plan, SC106, followed by SC106A.
SC101B Summative Evaluation for Administrators
The final summative evaluation for administrators (not involved in PGES) is form SC101B to be completed
in a conference with the evaluatee prior to May 15th. This summarizes all evaluation data including
formative data, products and performances, professional development activities, work samples, reports
developed, longitudinal assessment data, conferences, and other documentation. Originals of all signed
forms should be submitted to Superintendent/designee prior to May 15th to be placed in evaluatee’s
personnel file.
SC104 Other Certified Staff
The form SC104 is designed to be used to evaluate the performance of other certified staff (not involved
in PGES see responsibility chart Page 5 for correct forms to use).
District Professional Growth and Effectiveness Plan
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AND EFFECTIVENESS SYSTEM OVERVIEW – Certified
Teacher
Effective teaching and school leadership depend on clear standards and expectations, reliable feedback,
and the tools, resources and support for professional growth and continuous improvement. The Kentucky
Department of Education, with the guidance and oversight of various steering committees, has designed,
developed, field tested and piloted a new statewide Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PGES).
Kentucky embarked on a comprehensive system of education reform integrating:
• relevant and rigorous standards
• aligned and meaningful assessments
• highly effective teaching and school leadership
• data to inform instruction and policy decisions
• innovation
• school improvement
All are critical elements of student success, but it is effective teaching supported by effective leadership
that will ensure all Kentucky students are successful and graduate from high school college/career-ready.
The PGES is designed to measure teacher and leader effectiveness and serve as a catalyst for professional
growth and continuous improvement, and is a key requirement of Kentucky’s Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) flexibility waiver and the state’s Race to the Top grant.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
9
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System – Certified Teacher
The vision for the Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PGES) is to have every student taught
by an effective teacher. The goal is to create a fair and equitable system to measure teacher effectiveness
and act as a catalyst for professional growth.
Roles and Definitions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Administrator: means an EPSB certified administrator who devotes the majority of
employed time in the role of principal, for which administrative certification is required
by the Education Professional Standards Board pursuant to 16 KAR 3:050
Danielson Framework for Teaching: the document indicating the domain,
components, and descriptors for which certified personnel will be evaluated.
Educator Development Suite: a component housed within CIITS for the purpose of
compiling information relating to the evaluation cycle of certified employee.
Evaluatee: District/School personnel being evaluated
Evaluator: the immediate supervisor of certified personnel, who has satisfactorily
completed all required evaluation training and, if evaluating teachers, observation
certification training.
Evidence: documents or demonstrations that indicate proof of a particular descriptor.
Local Contribution: a rating based on the degree to which a teacher meets the growth
goal for a set of students over an identified interval of instruction (i.e., trimester,
semester, year-long) as indicated in the teacher’s Student Growth Goal (SGG).
Observation: documentation and feedback on a teacher’s professional practices and
observable behaviors.
Overall Student Growth: the overall growth rating assigned when combining the Student
Growth Goal with the Student Growth Percentile ratings.
Peer Observer: Observation and documentation by a trained colleague, selected as
described in the district’s Professional Growth and Effectiveness System plan, which
observes and documents another teacher’s professional practice and provides
supportive and constructive feedback that can be used to improve professional
practices.
Peer Observer Modules: three modules designed to provide training for peer observers
before completion of peer observations.
Professional Growth: increased effectiveness resulting from experiences that develop
an educator’s skills, knowledge, expertise and other characteristics.
Professional Growth Goal: measurable goal written by certified employee using
established guiding questions and meets the established criteria.
Professional Growth Plan: An individualized plan that is focused on improving
professional practice and leadership skills and is aligned with educator performance
standards and student performance standards, is built using a variety of sources and types
of student data that reflect student needs and strengths, educator data, and school/district
data, is produced in consultation with the evaluator.
Ratings: teachers will be assigned the rating of Ineffective, Developing, Accomplished or
Exemplary based on the Danielson Framework for Teaching and other established
criteria.
Self-Reflection: means the process by which certified personnel assesses the effectiveness
and adequacy of their knowledge and performance for the purpose of identifying areas for
professional learning and growth.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
10
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
SMART Goal Criteria: acronym/criteria for developing student growth goals (Smart,
Measureable, Attainable, Realistic, Time-bound).
State Contribution-a rating based on each student’s rate of change compared to other
students within a similar test score history (“academic peers”) expressed as a percentile.
Student Growth Percentiles are measured for grades 4-8 in Reading and Mathematics.
Student Growth: Quantitative measure of the impact a teacher has on a student (or set
of students) as measured by student growth goal setting and student growth percentiles.
Student Growth Goal: measurable goal(s) written by the certified employee who
measures student growth over time following the SMART criteria format and developed
by using established criteria.
Student Growth Goal Ratings: ratings assigned to student growth based on a rubric
indicating high, expected, or low growth.
Student Voice: the state-approved student perception survey, administered each year,
which provides data on specific aspects of the classroom experience and of teaching
practice.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
11
The Kentucky Framework for Teaching
The Framework for Teaching is designed to support student achievement and professional practice
through the domains of Planning and Preparation, Classroom Environment, Instruction, and
Professional Responsibilities. The Framework also includes themes such as equity, cultural
competence, high expectations, developmental appropriateness, accommodating individual needs,
effective technology integration, and student assumption of responsibility. It provides structure for
feedback for continuous improvement through individual goals that target student and professional
growth, thus supporting overall school improvement. Evidence documenting a teacher’s professional
practice will be situated within one or more of the four domains of the framework. Performance will
be rated for each component according to four performance levels: Ineffective, Developing,
Accomplished, and Exemplary. The summative rating will be a holistic representation of performance,
combining data from multiple sources of evidence across each domain.
The use of professional judgment based on multiple sources of evidence promotes a more holistic and
comprehensive analysis of practice, rather than over-reliance on one individual data point or rote
calculation of practice based on predetermined formulas. Evaluators will also take into account how
educators respond to or apply additional supports and resources designed to promote student
learning, as well as their own professional growth and development. Finally, professional judgment
gives evaluators the flexibility to account for a wide variety of factors related to individual educator
performance, such as: school-specific priorities that may drive practice in one domain, an educator’s
number of goals, experience level and/or leadership opportunities, and contextual variables that may
impact the learning environment, such as unanticipated outside events or traumas.
Evaluators must use the following categories of evidence in determining overall ratings:
Required Sources of Evidence




Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection
Observation
Student Voice
Student Growth Goals and/or Growth Percentiles (4-8 - Math & ELA)
All components and sources of evidence related supporting an educator’s professional practice and
student growth ratings will be completed and recorded in the Educator Development Suite (EDS) housed
within the Continuous Instructional Improvement Technology System (CIITS).
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
12
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
13
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE
To Inform Professional Practice
FRAMEWORK for TEACHING (FfT)
Component
Supervisor
Observation
Student
Voice
SelfReflection
Evidence
(pre and post conferences)
Peer
Observation
Back to TOC
14
Observation
Kentucky Student Voice Survey
Professional
Growth
Professional Growth Planning and Self Reflection
Observation
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
4f-Showing Professionalism
4e-Growing & Developing Professionally
4d-Participating in Profess. Learning Comm.
4c-Communicating With Families
Instruction
4b-Maintaining Accurate Records
4a-Reflecting On Teaching
3e-Demonstrating Flexibility & Responsive
3d-Using Assessment in Learning
3c-Engaging Students in Learning
Classroom
Environment
3b-Questioning & Discussion Techniques
3a-Communicating with Students
2e-Organizing Physical Space
2d-Managing Student Behavior
2c-Maintaing Classroom Procedures
Planning & Preparation
2b-Establish Culture of Learning
2a-Creating Env. of Respect & Rapport
1f- Designing Student Assessment
1e-Designing Coherent Instruction
1d-Demonstrates knowledge of resources
1c- Setting Instructional Outcomes
Domain
1b-Demonstrate knowledge of students
1a -Knowledge of content/pedagogy
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE/FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING ALIGNMENT
Professional
Responsibilities
Evidence
(pre and post conferences)
Professional Practice
Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection
The Professional Growth Plan will address realistic, focused, and measurable professional goals.
The plan will connect data from multiple sources including classroom observation feedback, data
on student growth and achievement, and professional growth needs identified through selfassessment and reflection. In collaboration with the administrators, teachers will identify explicit
goals which will drive the focus of professional growth activities, support, and on-going reflection.
Reflective practices and professional growth planning are iterative processes. The teacher (1)
reflects on his or her current growth needs based on multiple sources of data and identifies an
area or areas for focus; (2) collaborates with his or her administrator to develop a professional
growth plan and action steps; (3) implements the plan; (4) regularly reflects on the progress and
impact of the plan on his or her professional practice; (5) modifies the plan as appropriate; (6)
continues implementation and ongoing reflection; (7) and, finally, conducts a summative
reflection on the degree of goal attainment and the implications for next steps.
Required


All teachers will participate in self-reflection and professional growth planning each year.
All teachers will document self-reflection and professional growth planning in CIITS.
Local District Decision

All teachers will complete a Self-Reflection (Initial Reflection on Practice can be found in CIITS
EDS) and PGP development, which must be approved by the principal/designee, and will occur
within the first 30 school days of employment. Reflection updates will occur during each
observation cycle. This process will be completed on an annual basis.
Observation
The observation process is one source of evidence to determine teacher effectiveness that
includes supervisor and peer observation for each certified teacher. Both peer and supervisor
observations will use the same instruments. The supervisor observation will provide
documentation and feedback to measure the effectiveness of a teacher’s professional practice.
Only the supervisor observation will be used to inform a summative rating. Peer observation will
only be used for formative feedback on teaching practice in a collegial atmosphere of trust and
common purpose. NO ratings will be given by the peer observer. The rationale for each type of
observation is to encourage continued professional learning in teaching and learning through
critical reflection.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
15
Observation Model
Required
The observation model must fulfill the following minimum criteria:
 Four observations in the summative cycle. A minimum of three observations conducted
by the supervisor and one observation conducted by the peer.
 The required peer observation must occur in the final year of the cycle.
 Final observation is conducted by the supervisor and is a full observation.
 All observations must be documented in CIITS.
Local District Decision
Choose an observation model:
OPTION A: The Progressive Model (3 and 1 model)
Observers will conduct three mini observations (two by the supervisor and one by the
peer observer) of approximately 20-30 minutes each. Because these are shorter
sessions, the supervisor will make note of the components observed in order to identify
"look fors" in the next mini observation by the supervisor. The final observation is a
formal observation conducted by the supervisor consisting of a full class or lesson
observation.
For those teachers on a continuing contract, the cycle is a three (3) year cycle, consisting of at least the
following:
CHART 1.0 Tenured Teachers
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3 - Summative
Mini Observation
Mini Observation
Mini Observation
Full Observation
Supervisor
Supervisor
Peer Observer
Supervisor
*Observations must be documented in CIITS
For those teachers on a limited (annual) contract, the cycle is a one (1) year cycle, consisting of at least
the following:
CHART 1.1 Non-Tenured Teachers
Every Year
Observation Window 1
Mini Observation
Observation Window 2
Mini Observation
Mini Observation
Observation Window 3
Full Observation
Supervisor
Supervisor
Peer Observer
Supervisor
*Observations must be documented in CIITS
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
16
Observation Conferencing
Required
Observers will adhere to the following observation conferencing requirements
 Conduct observation post conference within five working days following each observation.
Local District Decision
 Describe the requirements for pre/post observation conferences.
 Describe the differences that may exist in conferencing expectations for mini or full
observations.
 Identify timelines for any required pre conferences.





The summative evaluation conference shall be held at the end of the summative evaluation cycle
prior to May 15.
All classroom observations are conducted openly. Pre-observation conferences, between the
administrator and teacher, if conducted, will be held no earlier than 3 days before the
observation. The pre-observation may be conducted in person, conducted electronically, or not
at all. Whether the administrator’s mini-observation is scheduled or is a drop-in will be
determined at each school. All full observations will be scheduled. Post observation conferences
with the administrator and the teacher will be conducted in person and are required.
The peer observer’s pre-observation conference may be conducted in person or electronically no
earlier than 3 days prior to the observation. The peer observation will always be scheduled
between the peer observer and the teacher. Peer observation data recorded in CIITS cannot be
seen by the administrator and is not used as part of the teacher’s evaluation. Post observation
conferences with the peer observer and the teacher will be conducted in person and are required.
If the teacher chooses, he/she may provide the peer observation evidence to the administrator
to be considered for the overall PGES rating.
All of this information will be included in the initial explanation of the evaluation process each
year so that all participants are aware of the evaluation process for their school. Each teacher will
sign an evaluation statement indicating they have received and understand the evaluation
procedures. Principals will maintain records of this meeting to include a teacher sign-in sheet, a
meeting agenda, and the evaluation statement signed by each teacher.
Resource documents for pre-observation, observation notes, optional questions, and postconferences can be found in the Appendix on Pages 65-70.
Observation Schedule
Required


Observations may begin after the evaluation training takes place within the first month of
employment.
Timeline for when observations must be completed
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
17
Local District Decision
 Timeline for conducting and completing observations.


Observations may begin after the evaluation plan has been reviewed with the teachers, which
takes place within the first 30 days of employment.
Timeline for completion of observations
Observation Window 1
Following the review of the evaluation plan – November 30th
Observation Window 2
December 1st – February 14th
Observation Window 3
February 15th – May 1st
Observer Certification
To ensure consistency of observations, evaluators must complete the Teachscape Proficiency Observation
Training, the current approved state platform. The system allows observers to develop a deep
understanding of how the four domains of the Kentucky Framework for Teaching (FfT) are applied in
observation. There are three sections of the proficiency system:



Framework for Teaching Observer Training
Framework for Teaching Scoring Practice
Framework for Teaching Proficiency Assessment
Required
The cycle for observation certification established is as follows [NOTE: This evaluation certification cycle
mirrors the existing 704 KAR 3:370 related to initial and update training for certified evaluators]:
CHART 2.0 Evaluation Certification Cycle

Year 1
Certification
Year 2
Calibration
Year 3
Calibration
Year 4
Recertification
Only supervisors who have passed the proficiency assessment can conduct mini and full
observations for the purpose of evaluation. In the event that a supervisor has yet to complete
the proficiency assessment, or if the supervisor does not pass the assessment, the district will
provide the following supports:
o Observation data provided by a substitute observer is considered a valid source of
evidence only if the supervisor is present in the observation.
o In cases where the supervisor is not certified though the proficiency system and is
therefore unable to conduct observations during the observation window, the district will
determine how to ensure teachers have access to observations by making the following
decision.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
18
Local District Decision
 Describe the process used to ensure all supervisors obtain observation certification.
 Include support procedures for individuals who are not certified.
 Describe the process used to ensure teachers will have access to certified observers in cases
where the supervisor is not certified.



All certified evaluation supervisors will participate in certification. The completion of this
certification will be monitored by the Chief Academic Officer, the Director of Personnel and the
Level Directors
If a building administrator has not passed the Teachscape certification, the superintendent or
designee will assign a Teachscape certified observer to a school to conduct all administrative preconferences, observations, documentation into EDS, and post-conferences until the building
supervisor completes certification. The uncertified building administrator will accompany the
Teachscape certified observer to all events with the teacher to stay apprised of each teacher’s
effectiveness and progress.
The district will provide technology support and make available study partners for the uncertified
observers to aid in the successful completion of the Teachscape certification process
Observer Calibration
As certified observers may tend to experience “drift” in rating accuracy, the district will complete a
calibration process each year where certification is not required (see chart under Observer Certification).
This calibration process will be completed in years two and three after certification. Calibration ensures
ongoing accuracy in scoring teaching practice; an awareness of the potential risk for rater bias; and
ensures observers refresh their knowledge of the training and scoring practice. All calibration processes
must be conducted through the state approved technology platform.
Required


Observer calibration during years two and three of the Observer Certification process based on
the state approved technology platform.
Re-certification after year three.
Local District Decision
 Explain processes that the district will use for observer calibration being sure to adhere to the
requirements.

The district will ensure that each certified evaluator complete the Teachscape recalibration
training annually.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
19
Peer Observation
A Peer Observer will observe, collect, share evidence, and provide feedback for formative purposes only.
Peer Observers will not score a teacher’s practice, nor will peer observation data be shared with anyone
other than the observee unless permission is granted. A peer observer is trained certified school personnel
Required




All teachers will receive a peer observation in their summative year.
All Peer Observers participating during the summative year observations will complete the state
developed training once every three years.
All required peer observations must be documented in CIITS (time, date, evidence).
All peer observations documentation will be accessed only by the evaluatee.
Local District Decision
 Describe how Peer Observers will be identified and have completed state approved training.
 Describe how Peer Observers will be assigned to teachers.



Each year the Principal will select a pool of teachers to serve as peer observers. The criteria to be
a peer observer is to have completed a minimum of two successful years of teaching. The
principal will make the peer observer assignments.
All teachers assigned to be peer observers will complete the state approved training. This
completion of training will be monitored by the building principal or designee.
All certified staff involved in PGES will participate in the Peer Observer module training annually.
Student Voice
The Student Voice Survey is a confidential, on-line survey collecting student feedback on specific aspects
of the classroom experience and teaching practice.
Required








All teachers will participate in the state-approved Student Voice Survey annually with a
minimum of one identified group of students.
Student selection for participation must be consistent across the district.
Results will be used as a source of evidence for Professional Practice.
Formative years’ data will be used to inform Professional Practice in the summative year.
All teachers and appropriate administrative staff will read and sign the district’s Student Voice
Ethics Statement.
The Student Voice Survey will be administered between the hours of 7:00 AM and 5:00 PM local
time.
The survey will be administered in the school.
Survey data will be considered only when ten or more students are respondents.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
20
Local District Decision




Identify a District Student Voice Survey Point-of-Contact.
Identify the process for determining the student group(s) who will participate in the survey.
Describe the process for ensuring equal access to all students.
Identify the timeline for administration of the state approved Student Voice Survey.
Student Voice Surveys
Point of Contact
Selection of Student Groups
Infinite Campus Data Manager
Building principals in collaboration with the district,
will determine the number of sections/classes
required per teacher to participate (minimum of one
section/class).
Accommodations will be made for all students such
as readers and proctors or the use of technological
devices as stated in their IEP. Accommodations for
special requirements such as blind, non-verbal, or
hearing impaired students will be made in
accordance with student voice and special education
guidelines.
A two week period during the spring semester will be
determined by the district student achievement team
and all student voice surveys will be completed
during this two week window.
Process for Equal Access for All Students
Student Voice Survey Timeline



Teachers will only have access to their own student voice survey data.
Principals will have access to all student voice survey data.
Assistant Principals will have access to the student voice survey data for the teachers they
evaluate.
Student Growth
The student growth measure is comprised of two possible contributions: a state contribution and a local
contribution. The state contribution only pertains to about 20% of teachers in the following content areas
and grade levels participating in state assessments:
 4th – 8th Grade
 Reading
 Math
The state contribution is reported using Student Growth Percentiles (SGP). The local contribution uses
the Student Growth Goal Setting Process and applies to all teachers in the district, including those who
receive SGP. The following graphic provides a roadmap for determining which teachers receive which
contributions:
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
21
CHART 3.0 Local/State Contribution
Do you teach
students in grades 48?
NO
YES
Do you teach in the
Math or ELA
content areas?
NO
YES
Do your students
participate in the
Math or ELA
K-PREP Assessment?
NO
YES
LOCAL & STATE
CONTRIBUTION
LOCAL
CONTRIBUTION
ONLY
State Contribution – Student Growth Percentiles (SGP) – Applies to 20% of teachers
(Math/ELA, Grades 4-8):
The state contribution for student growth is a rating based on each student’s rate of change
compared to other students with a similar test score history (“academic peers”) expressed as a
percentile. The scale for determining acceptable growth will be determined by the Kentucky
Board of Education and provided to the district by the Kentucky Department of Education.
Local Contribution – Student Growth Goals (SGG) – Applies to all teachers
The local contribution for the student growth measure is a rating based on the degree to which a
teacher meets the growth goal for a set of students over an identified interval of instruction (i.e.
trimester, semester, year-long) as indicated in the teacher’s Student Growth Goal (SGG). All
teachers will develop an SGG for inclusion in the student growth measure. All Student Growth
Goals will be determined by the teacher in collaboration with the principal and will be grounded
in the fundamentals of assessment quality (Clear Purpose, Clear Targets, Sound Design, Effective
Communication, and Student Involvement).
Rigor-congruency to the Kentucky Core Academic Standards
Comparability- Data collected for the student growth goal must use comparable criteria across
similar classrooms (classrooms that address the same standards) to determine progress toward
mastery of standards/enduring skills. Examples of similar classrooms might be 6th grade science
classrooms, 3rd grade classrooms, English 1 classrooms, band classes or art classes. For similar
classrooms, teachers would be expected to use common measures or rubrics to determine
competency in performance at the level intended by the standards being assessed. Although
specific assessments may vary, the close alignment to the intent of the standard is comparable.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
22
Student Growth Goal Criteria




The SGG is congruent with Kentucky Core Academic Standards and appropriate for the grade level
and content area for which it was developed.
The SGG represents or encompasses an enduring skill, process, understanding, or concept that
students are expected to master by taking a particular course (or courses) in school.
The SGG will allow high- and low-achieving students to adequately demonstrate their knowledge.
The SGG provides access and opportunity for all students, including students with disabilities,
ELLs, and gifted/talented students.
Rigor and Comparability of Student Growth Goals
To fulfill the criteria of measuring student growth at the local level, a protocol must be established to
ensure rigorous and comparable growth measures used for all teachers.
Required



All teachers will write a student growth goal based on the criteria
Protocol for ensuring rigor
Protocol for ensuring comparability
Local District Decision
Rigor
 Select one of the following choices for demonstrating Rigor:
OPTION A: Rigor Rubric
The district approved rubric for assessing the rigor of all SGG (See Appendix Page
64)
In order to determine that SGG are rigorous, the supervisor will consult the district curriculum, which
has been aligned with the Kentucky Core Academic Standards, developed using the Rigorous Curriculum
Design (RCD) process, and includes the identification of enduring skills. (See Appendix Pages 71-86 for
examples of enduring skills by content area) The supervisor will consult the Student Growth Rubric and
RCD unit(s) involved to ensure that, at a minimum, the SGG:



Is congruent and appropriate for grade level/content standards
Identifies measures that allow students to demonstrate their competency in
performing at the level intended in the standards being assessed (common
formative assessments and other measures)
Includes growth and proficiency targets that are doable, but stretch the outer
bounds of what is attainable
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
23
Comparability
Include both assurances for establishing Comparability:
 Administration Protocol
Describe an administration protocol for comparable administration procedures.
 Scoring Process
Describe the protocol for comparable scoring processes and data collection.
Administration Protocol: The Shelby County Schools will follow the acceptable administration practices
as outlined on Pages 8-10 in the Administration Code for Kentucky’s Educational Assessment Program
September 2009. (See Appendix Pages 99-107)
Scoring Process: The Shelby County Public School teachers will collaboratively score student common
assessments as measured by the defined rubric for the assessment. The data will then be recorded and
analyzed during the data team process.
Determining Growth for a Single Student Growth Goal
The process for determining the result of student growth (high, expected, low) requires districts to explain
how they will use rigorous and comparable (see above) goals and assessments for that rating. Districts
have several options to consider – none of which are mutually exclusive – for determining student growth
Required


Districts will create a process for determining student growth ratings as low, expected, and high.
Measures will be identified as indicators of determining growth.
Local District Decision
 Describe the process for determining student growth as high, expected, or low.
 Identify the measures used for determining student growth rating.
Shelby County Public Schools will utilize the Pre-Test/Post-Test model to determine student growth and
proficiency. Teachers will identify the enduring skill(s) they are using to measure student growth and
proficiency. Once the enduring skill(s) has/have been identified and approved by the principal or
designee, the teacher will use pre- and post-tests to determine student growth and proficiency
identified in their goal. These assessments can be identical or comparable versions.
Each year, the student growth rating shall be determined by utilizing the pre-test/post-test design. While
best practice includes repeated measures as formative assessment, and teachers will be using formative
assessments throughout the cycle, the student growth rating shall be determined by the growth and
percentage of students demonstrating proficiency from pre-test to post-test, using identical or
comparable versions (as assessed on the Overall Student Growth Goal Rating Rubric on Page 26).
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
24
The process for determining student growth as high, expected, or low will consist of an expectation of
movement on the defined rubric. High growth will be defined as increasing 2 to 3 performance categories
on the rubric. Expected growth will be defined as increasing 1 performance category on the rubric. Low
growth will be defined as maintaining the performance category or regressing on the rubric. (See Chart
4.0)
The process for determining student proficiency as high, expected, or low will consist of an expectation
of 81% to 100% proficiency as high, 60% to 80% proficiency as expected, and 59% or below proficiency as
low. (See Chart 4.0)
Overall Student Growth Annual Rating for SCPS Assessments
CHART 4.0 Annual Rating
Student Growth
Movement On Defined
Rubric
Student Proficiency
Proficiency
High Growth
Increasing 2 to 3
Performance Categories
High Proficiency
81% to 100%
of students
Expected Growth
Increasing 1 Performance
Category
Expected Proficiency
60% to 80%
of students
Low Growth
Maintaining the
Performance Category
Or
Regressing On the Defined
Rubric
Low Proficiency
59% or Below
of students
For each assessment, a district-created, standards-congruent rubric or scoring guide, shall be utilized, and
shall have pre-determined performance areas that indicate performance according to the level expected
by the assessment rubric.
For example, as noted in the Student Growth Goal and Rigor Rubric (Appendix Page 64) for Comparability
of Data the Acceptable Measure states, “Reflects use of common measures/rubrics to determine
competency in performance at the level intended by the standards being assessed.” Reference the CHART
4.1 for Overall Student Growth Goal Rating.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
25
CHART 4.1 Overall Student Growth Goal Rating Rubric
Overall Student Growth Goal Rating Rubric
Proficiency
High
E
H
H
Expected
E
E
E
Low
L
L
E
Low
Expected
High
Growth
Determining Growth for Multiple Student Growth Goals Not Applicable
[Please complete this section ONLY if the district has determined teachers may/shall use multiple SGG
as a part of their local growth contribution. NOT TO EXCEED TWO.]
A district-[developed] [adapted] [approved] holistic SGG growth assessment designed to evaluate two SGG
and determine a final rating of high, expected, or low growth.
Local District Decision
 Describe the process and/or instrument to be used and include it as an attachment to this
document. Not Applicable
Products of Practice/Other Sources of Evidence
Teachers may provide additional evidences to support assessment of their own professional
practice. These evidences should yield information related to the teacher’s practice within the
domains.
Required



observations conducted by certified supervisor observer(s)
student voice survey(s)
self-reflection and professional growth plans
Local District Decision
 Identify other sources of evidence that can be used to support educator practice
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
26
Other Sources of Evidence
Program Review evidence
Team-developed curriculum units
Lesson plans
Student data records
Student work
Student formative and/or summative course evaluations/feedback
PLC/Data Team Documentation
Teacher committee or team contributions
Records of student and/or teacher attendance
Video lessons
Engagement in professional organizations
Action research
Teacher website/professional social media
Other as identified by the administrator
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
27
Determining the Overall Performance Category
Supervisors are responsible for determining an Overall Performance Category for each teacher at the
conclusion of the summative evaluation year. The Overall Performance Category is informed by the
educator’s ratings on professional practice and student growth. The evaluator determines the Overall
Performance Category based on professional judgment informed by evidence that demonstrates the
educator's performance against the Domains, district-developed rubrics (see local contribution for
student growth), and decision rules that establish a common understanding of performance
thresholds to which all educators are held.
Rating Professional Practice
The Kentucky Framework for Teaching stands as the critical rubric for providing educators and
evaluators with concrete descriptions of practice associated with specific domains. Each element
describes a discrete behavior or related set of behaviors that educators and evaluators can
prioritize for evidence-gathering, feedback, and eventually, evaluation. Supervisors will organize
and analyze evidence for each individual educator based on these concrete descriptions of
practice.
Supervisors and educators will be engaged in ongoing dialogue throughout the evaluation cycle.
The process concludes with the evaluator’s analysis of evidence and the final assessment of
practice in relation to performance described under each Domain at the culmination of an
educator’s cycle. CHART 5.0 Informing Professional Practice
DOMAIN RATINGS
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO INFORM
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
DOMAIN 1: [I,D,A,E]
REQUIRED
• Observation
• Student Voice
• Professional Growth Plans
and Self Reflection
OPTIONAL
• Other: District-Determined
– Must be identified in the
CEP
• Other Teacher Evidence
DOMAIN 2: [I,D,A,E]
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
DOMAIN 3: [I,D,A,E]
DOMAIN 4: [I,D,A,E]
Required


Provide a summative rating for each domain based on evidence.
All ratings must be recorded in CIITS.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
28
Rating Overall Student Growth
The overall Student Growth Rating is a result of a combination of professional judgment and the
district-developed instrument for summative student growth ratings. The designed instrument
aids the supervisor in applying professional judgment to multiple evidences of student growth
over time. The Student Growth Rating must include data from SGG and SGP (where available),
and will be considered in a three year cycle (when available).
CHART 6.0 Professional Judgment and Rating Overall Student Growth
STUDENT GROWTH
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO
INFORM STUDENT GROWTH
STATE
• SGPs
• State Predefined Cut
Scores
LOCAL
• SGG
• Maintain current process
• Rate on H/E/L
STUDENT GROWTH RATING
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
AND DISTRICTDETERMINED
RUBRICS
STUDENT GROWTH [H,E,L]
Required


SGG and SGP(when available) will be used to determine overall Student Growth Rating
Three years of student growth data (when available) will be used to determine overall Student
Growth Rating for teachers.
Local District Decision
 Describe the process and/or instrument to be used to rate overall student growth as low,
expected or high.
 Describe the procedures for ensuring rigor and comparability.
Student Growth Trend Rating
To ensure quality regarding student growth trend ratings, follow the decision rules outlined in Chart 7.0
on Page 30. These decision rules will be followed if a teacher has only a local contribution or if a teacher
has a combination of state and local contribution.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
29
CHART 7.0 Trend Rating Decision Rules
Teacher has any “Low” ratings
Cannot be rated as “High”
Teacher has more than 50% of their ratings as “Low”
Shall be rated as “Low”
Teacher has 50% or more of their ratings as
“Expected”
Cannot be rated as “Low”
CHART 7.1 Student Growth Trend Data Example
Mrs. Smith’s Student Growth Trend
State Test Data
Local Goal Data
Year 1 2014 – 15
Expected
Expected
Year 2 2015 – 16
Low
Expected
Year 3 2016 – 17
Expected
High
Overall Student Growth Trend Rating would be “Expected”
Determining the Overall Performance Category
An educator’s Overall Performance Category is determined using the following steps:


Determine the individual domain ratings through the use of sources of evidence and professional
judgment.
Apply State Decisions Rules for determining an educator’s Professional Practice rating.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
30
CHART 8.0 Professional Practice Rating
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING A TEACHER’S
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE RATING
Use Local Student Growth Goal instrument to determine overall Student Growth Rating

Apply State Overall Decision Rules for determining educator’s Overall Performance Category.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
31
CHART 9.0 Teacher’s Overall Performance Category
Required

Implement the Overall Performance Category process for determining effectiveness.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
32
Professional Growth Plan and Summative Cycle
Based on the overall Professional Practice rating and Student Growth rating, the type of Professional
Growth Plan and the length of the summative cycle will be determined using the chart below.
CHART 10.0 Professional Growth Plan and Cycle for Tenured Teachers
ACCOMPLISHED
THREE-YEAR CYCLE
SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
 Goal set by teacher with
evaluator input
 One goal must focus on
low student growth
outcome
 Formative review annually
DEVELOPING
ONE-YEAR CYCLE
DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
• Goal(s) Determined by
Evaluator
• Goals focus on professional
practice and student
growth
• Plan activities designed by
evaluator with teacher
input
RATIN
• Summative review
G
annually
UP TO 12-MONTH IMPROVEMENT
PLAN
• Goal(s) determined by
evaluator
• Focus on low performance
area
• Summative at end of plan
INEFFECTIVE
PROFESIONAL PRACTICE RATING
EXEMPLARY
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH PLAN AND CYCLE FOR TENURED TEACHERS
LOW
THREE-YEAR CYCLE
SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
• Goals set by teacher with evaluator input
• Plan activities are teacher directed and implemented with
colleagues.
• Formative review annually
• Summative occurs at the end of year 3.
THREE-YEAR CYCLE
SELF-DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN
• Goal(s) set by teacher with
evaluator input; one must
address professional practice
or student growth.
• Formative review annually.
THREE-YEAR SELF-DIRECTED CYCLE
• Goal(s) set by educator with
evaluator input
• Formative review annually
ONE-YEAR CYCLE - DIRECTED GROWTH PLAN

Goal(s) Determined by Evaluator

Goals focus on a professional practice and student growth

Plan activities designed by evaluator with teacher input

Formative review at mid-point

Summative review
EXPECTED
HIGH
STUDENT GROWTH RATING
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
33
Appeals
According to 156.557 Section 9,
Section 9. (1) A certified employee who feels that the local district is not properly implementing the evaluation plan
according to the way it was approved by the Kentucky Department of Education shall have the opportunity to appeal
to the Kentucky Board of Education.
(2) The appeal procedures shall be as follows:
(a) The Kentucky Board of Education shall appoint a committee of three (3) state board members to serve on the
State Evaluation Appeals Panel. Its jurisdiction shall be limited to procedural matters already addressed by the local
appeals panel required by KRS 156.557(5). The panel shall not have jurisdiction relative to a complaint involving the
professional judgmental conclusion of an evaluation, and the panel's review shall be limited to the record of
proceedings at the local district level.
(b) No later than thirty (30) days after the final action or decision at the local district level, the certified employee
may submit a written request to the chief state school officer for a review before the State Evaluation Appeals Panel.
An appeal not filed in a timely manner shall not be considered. A specific description of the complaint and grounds for
appeal shall be submitted with this request.
(c) A brief, written statement, and other document which a party wants considered by the State Evaluation Appeals
Panel shall be filed with the panel and served on the opposing party at least twenty (20) days prior to the scheduled
review.
(d) A decision of the appeals panel shall be rendered within fifteen (15) working days after the review.
(e) A determination of noncompliance shall render the evaluation void, and the employee shall have the right to be
reevaluated. (11 Ky.R. 1107; Am. 1268; eff. 3-12-85; 12 Ky.R. 1638; 1837; eff. 6-10-86; 15 Ky.R. 1561; 1849; eff. 3-2389; 17 Ky.R. 116; eff. 9-13-90; 19 Ky.R. 515; 947; 1081; eff. 11-9-92; 20 Ky.R. 845; eff. 12-6-93; 23 Ky.R. 2277; 2732; eff.
1-9-97; 27 Ky.R. 1874; 2778; eff. 4-9-2001.)
Required

Districts shall have an appeals process established.
SCPS Appeals Process
Any certified employee who believes that he or she was not fairly evaluated on the summative evaluation
may appeal to the Appeals Panel within five (5) working days of the receipt of the summative evaluation.
The appeal should be submitted on the Evaluation Appeals form. (See Appendix A for Shelby County
Policy 03.18 Evaluation, SC Procedure 03.18 AP.11 Appeals/Hearings, Shelby County Procedure 03.18
AP.21 Evaluation Appeal Form) The certified employee may review any evaluation material related to
him/her. Both the evaluator and the evaluatee shall be given the opportunity to review documents to be
given to the hearing committee reasonably in advance of the hearing. The employee may have
representation of their choosing to appear with them before the Panel to respond to the appeal and
answer questions from the Panel. Only Panel members, the evaluatee and evaluator, legal counsel,
witnesses, and the employee’s chosen representative will be present at the hearing. In the event either
party shall call witnesses at the hearing, the Panel Chair-person must be notified five (5) working days
before the date of the hearing as to the names and positions of each witness.
The certified employee appealing to the Panel has the burden of proof. The evaluator may respond to any
statements made by the employee and may present written records which support the summative
evaluation.
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
34
The Appeals Panel shall hold necessary hearings and shall deliver its decision to the Superintendent, who
shall take whatever action he deems is appropriate or necessary as permitted by law. The Panel’s written
decision shall be issued within fifteen (15) working days from the date an appeal is filed. No extension of
that deadline beyond June 15 shall be granted without written approval of the Superintendent.
A certified employee who feels that the local district is not properly implementing the evaluation plan,
including PGES, may appeal to the Kentucky Department of Education, Legal and Legislative Resources at
http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
35
PRINCIPAL AND ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AND EFFECTIVENESS
SYSTEM
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
36
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
37
Back to TOC
Model Certified Evaluation Plan 4.0
38
Professional Growth and Effectiveness System – Principal and Assistant
Principal
The vision for the Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PGES) is to have every school led by an effective
principal. The goal is to create a fair and equitable system to measure principal effectiveness and act as a catalyst
for professional growth.
Roles and Definitions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Administrator: means an EPSB certified administrator who devotes the majority of employed
time in the role of principal, for which administrative certification is required by the Education
Professional Standards Board pursuant to 16 KAR 3:050
Documentation: Artifacts created in the day-to -day world of running a school that can provide
evidence of meeting the performance standard.
Evaluator: the immediate supervisor of certified personnel, who has satisfactorily completed all
required evaluation training and, if evaluating teachers, observation certification training.
Evaluatee: District/School personnel being evaluated
Observation/School Site Visits: Provides information on a wide range of contributions made by
principals. Observations/school site visits may range from watching how a principal interacts
with others, to observing programs and shadowing the administrator.
Performance Levels-General descriptors that indicate the principal’s performance. Principals can
be rated Ineffective, Developing, Accomplished, or Exemplary on this scale.
Performance Rubrics: a behavioral summary scale that describes acceptable performance levels
for each of the seven performance standards.
Performance Standards-Guiding standards that provide for a defined set of common purposes
and expectations that guide effective leadership. Those standards include: Instructional
Leadership, School Climate, Human Resources Management, Organizational Management,
Communication and Community Relations, Professionalism and Student Growth.
Professional Growth Plan: An individualized plan that is focused on improving professional
practice and leadership skills and is aligned with educator performance standards and student
performance standards, is built using a variety of sources and types of student data that reflect
student needs and strengths, educator data, and school/district data, is produced in consultation
with the evaluator
Self-Reflection: means the process by which certified personnel assess the effectiveness and
adequacy of their knowledge and performance for the purpose of identifying areas for professional
learning and growth
Site Visit: methods by which superintendents or designee may gain insight regarding the level of
competency as principals demonstrate meeting performance standards.
SMART Criteria; Acronym use to develop a goal(s) Specific, Measurable, Appropriate, Realistic,
Time-Bound.
Surveys: Tools used to provide information to principals about perception of job performance.
Val-Ed 360°: An assessment that provides feedback of a principal’s learning-centered behaviors
by using input from the principal, his/her supervisor, and teachers. The survey looks at core
components (the what) that are listed on the slide, as well as key processes (the how).
VAL-ED Point of Contact: person selected at district and school level to assist in the facilitation
of the VAL-ED 360 survey.
39
16.
17.
TELL Kentucky: A working conditions survey of all school staff conducted every two years to
provide feedback on specific aspects of the school’s work environment. Results may be used to
assist in goal setting for improving the learning environment and principal practice.
Working Conditions Goal: Goal that connects the TELL KY data to the Principal Performance
Standards and impacts working conditions within the school building.
40
Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness System Components – Overview and
Summative Model
STUDENT GROWTH
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
The following graphic outlines the summative model for the Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness
System.
STANDARD RATINGS
SOURCES OF
EVIDENCE TO
INFORM
PROFESSIONAL
PRACTICE
STANDARD 1: Instructional
Leadership
STANDARD 2: School Climate
STANDARD 3: Human
Resource Management
Professional Growth
Plans and SelfReflection
Site-Visits
Val-Ed 360°
Working Conditions
Growth Goal
STANDARD 4: Organizational
PROFESSIONAL Management
JUDGMENT
STANDARD 5:
Communication &
Community Relations
STANDARD 6: Professionalism
SOURCES OF
EVIDENCE TO
INFORM STUDENT
GROWTH
State Contribution –
ASSIST/NGL Goal
AND
Local Contribution –
Student Growth Goals
(SGGs) based on
school need
PERFORMANCE
TOWARD
TRAJECTORY
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
AND DISTRICTDETERMINED
RUBRICS
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT &
STATEDETERMINED
DECISION
RULES
establishing a
common
STUDENT GROWTH
understanding of
performance
RATINGS
thresholds to
which all
educators are
STATE CONTRIBUTION: High,
held
Expected, Low Growth
Rating
OVERALL
PERFORMANCE
CATEGORY
LOCAL CONTRIBUTION: High,
Expected, Low Growth
Rating
Evaluators will look for trends and patterns in practice across multiple types of evidence and apply their
professional judgment based on this evidence when evaluating a principal. The role of evidence and professional
judgment in the determination of ratings on standards and an overall rating is paramount in this process.
However, professional judgment must be grounded in the common framework identified: The Principal
Performance Standards.
41
Principal Performance Standards
The Principal Performance Standards are designed to support student achievement and professional best-practice
through the standards of Instructional Leadership; School Climate; Human Resource Management; Organizational
Management; Communication & Community Relations; and Professionalism. Included in the Performance
Standards are Performance Indicators that provide examples of observable, tangible behaviors that provide
evidence of each standard. The Performance Standards provide the structure for feedback for continuous
improvement through individual goals that target professional growth, thus supporting overall student
achievement and school improvement. Evidence supporting a principal’s professional practice will be situated
within one or more of the 6 standards. Performance will be rated for each standard according to the four
performance levels: Ineffective, Developing, Accomplished, and Exemplary. It is projected that most principals will
maintain an Accomplished rating, but will occasionally have exemplary performance on standards at any given
time. The summative rating will be a holistic representation of performance, combining data from multiple sources
of evidence across each standard.
The use of professional judgment based on multiple sources of evidence promotes a more holistic and
comprehensive analysis of practice, rather than over-reliance on one individual data point or rote calculation of
practice based on predetermined formulas. Evaluators will also take into account how principals respond to or
apply additional supports and resources designed to promote student learning, as well as their own professional
growth and development. Finally, professional judgment gives evaluators the flexibility to account for a wide
variety of factors related to individual principal performance. These factors may include school-specific priorities
that may drive practice in one standard, an educator’s number of goals, experience level and/or leadership
opportunities. Contextual variables may also impact the learning environment, such as unanticipated outside
events or traumas.
Evaluators must use the following categories of evidence in determining overall ratings:

Required Sources of Evidence
o Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection
o Site-Visits
o Val-Ed 360°
o Working Conditions Goal
o State and Local Student Growth Goal data
Evaluators may use the following categories of evidence in determining overall ratings:
 Other Measures of Student Learning
 Products of Practice
Plan-On-A-Page (POP)
SBDM Minutes
Faculty Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Department/Grade Level Agendas and Minutes
Data Team Agendas and Minutes
Leadership Team Agendas and Minutes
42
Walk-through documentation
Budgets
EILA/Professional Learning Experience Documentation
Surveys
Professional Organization Memberships
Parent/Community Engagement Surveys
Parent/Community Engagement Events Documentation
School Schedules
Professional Practice
The following sections provide a detailed overview of the various sources of evidence used to inform Professional
Practice Ratings.
Professional Growth Planning and Self-Reflection – completed by principals & assistant
principals
The Professional Growth Plan will address realistic, focused, and measurable professional goals. The plan
will connect data from multiple sources including site-visit conferences, data on student growth and
achievement, and professional growth needs identified through self-assessment and reflection. Selfreflection improves principal practice through ongoing, careful consideration of the impact of leadership
practice on student growth and achievement.
Required:


All principals will participate in self-reflection and professional growth planning each year.
All assistant principals will participate in self-reflection and professional growth planning each year.
Local District Decision:
 Explain timeline for submission of PGP for principals/assistant principals.
 All Principals will develop and submit a PGP in the format of Plan on a Page (POP), as outlined in the
Leading and Learning Center materials, to their immediate supervisor by August 1. (See Appendix
Pages 61-63)
o Additionally, principals will complete the Reflective Practice, Student Growth and Professional
Growth Planning Template (See Appendix Pages 88-92).
Site-Visits – completed by supervisor of principal – formal site visits are not required for
assistant principals
Site visits are a method by which the superintendent may gain insight into the principal’s practice in
relation to the standards. During a site visit, the superintendent will discuss various aspects of the job
with the principal, and will use the principal’s responses to determine issues to further explore with the
faculty and staff. Additionally, the principal may explain the successes and trials the school community
has experienced in relation to school improvement.
Required:
43

Conducted at least twice each year. (Formal site-visits are not required for the assistant principal.)
Local District Decision:
 Identify timeline for site-visits.
 Describe conference expectations following site visits.
 Describe site-visit connections to Principal Performance Standards.




Two Site Visits will be completed in the fall semester and two in the spring semester by the
superintendent or designee or both.
Pre-conference will take place prior to the beginning of each Site Visit. The principal will explain the
focus for the Site Visit, the specific feedback topic and how it relates to their POP. (Project Proficiency
meetings may serve as an official Site Visit.)
At the completion of each Site Visit, the Post Conference will occur and include a review of the
principal’s POP, classroom observation/data team data, progress being made in instructional
strategies and initiatives, student growth data, and a principal’s self-reflection, to include survey data.
We will collect data on the Principal Standards and discuss them during the Post Conference as they
naturally relate to the topics in the Post Conference. All six Principal Standards will be observed,
discussed and documented at the conclusion of all four Site Visits.
Val-Ed 360° - completed for principals – not completed for assistant principals
The VAL-ED 360° is an assessment that provides feedback on a principal’s learning-centered behaviors by
using input from the principal, his/her supervisor, and teachers. All teachers will participate in the Val-Ed
360°. The results of the survey will be included as a source of data to inform each principal’s professional
practice rating.
Required:

Conducted at least once every two years in the school year that TELL Kentucky is not administered.
Local District Decision:








Identify a point of contact for overseeing and administering Val-Ed 360°.
Identify the frequency of Val-Ed 360° administration.
Identify the timeline for administration of Val-Ed 360°.
Describe how Val-Ed 360° results will be used.
Identify who will have access to Val-Ed 360°
SCPS Elementary and Secondary School Level Directors will oversee and administer Val-Ed 360° in the
year opposite the administration of the TELL survey.
The Val-Ed Survey will be administered the year opposite of the TELL Survey and completed by March
30th of the year administered.
Val-Ed 360° results will be analyzed by the administrative team at each school. The analysis will be
aligned with the Principal Performance Standards and areas for growth will be identified. A plan for
achieving growth will be communicated to staff and become a part of the principal reflection.
44

The building principal and all direct supervisors involved in the principal’s evaluation will have access
to Val-Ed 360°.
Working Conditions Goal (Goal inherited by Assistant Principal)
Principals are responsible for setting a two-year Working Conditions Growth Goal based on the most
recent TELL Kentucky Survey. The principal’s effort to accomplish the Working Conditions Growth Goal is
a powerful way to enhance professional performance and, in turn, positively impact school culture and
student success.
Required:


Developed following the completion of the TELL Kentucky Survey.
Minimum of one two-year goal.
Local District Decision:




Identify the number of Working Conditions Goals that will be required.
Describe the process used to establish the Working Conditions Goal rubric.
Describe how a mid-point review will be conducted.
Identify any additional surveys or evidence that will be used to inform the Working Conditions Goal(s).
Working Conditions Goal
Number of Working Conditions Goals
Principals are responsible for setting one 2-year
Working Conditions Goal which is based on
information in the most recent TELL Kentucky
Survey and any additional relevant data which
might include VAL-ED surveys and/or school level
documentation. The goal will be recorded on the
Reflective Practice, Student Growth, TELL KY
Working Conditions Goal and Professional
Growth Planning Template. The principal, in
collaboration with the superintendent/designee,
will review the results from the TELL Kentucky
Survey.
1.
2.
45
Principals will identify a TELL survey question
that indicates a need for growth and will
identify any additional TELL Survey questions
which may have similar results.
The principal will connect these questions to
one or more of the Principal Performance
Standards and will develop a Working
Conditions Growth Goal statement that will
identify a measurable target to be addressed
during the next 2 school years.
3.
4.
5.
Working Conditions Goal Rubric
A rubric will be completed by the principal
and superintendent/designee that will set the
goal target for Accomplished. The rubric will
also establish what will constitute reaching
Exemplary.
The final step is to complete the Action Plan
which will prioritize the steps the principal
will take to accomplish the established goal.
Ongoing reflection and modification of the
strategies as needed.
Exemplary: Above 60% Agreement
Accomplished: 45% - 59% Agreement
Developing: 25% - 44% Agreement
Ineffective: 24% or below Agreement
Rating scale for growth on the rubric will be
determined as follows:
Mid-Point Review
Exemplary Growth: Exceeds Goal
Accomplished Growth: + 10%
Developing Growth: + 5%
Ineffective Growth: 4% or less growth on defined
improvement goal
During mid-point review, principals may choose
one of the following:


Additional Surveys or Evidence
Engage staff in informal discussion that
provide feedback on the progress of
meeting the WCG.
Conduct a sample survey using the
identified questions from TELL as an
interim measure of growth. Principal will
use results to determine if improvement
is occurring according to the WCG.
Principals can choose to use on-line surveys from
Survey Monkey, paper/pencil, etc. to measure
progress regarding the WCG.
46
Products of Products of Practice/Other Sources of Evidence
Principals/Assistant principals may provide additional evidences to support assessment of their own
professional practice. These evidences should yield information related to the principal’s/assistant
principal’s practice within the standards.
Local District Decision:
 Identify other sources of evidence that can be used to support educator practice
Examples of evidence:
SBDM Minutes
Faculty Meeting Agendas and Minutes
Department/Grade Level Agendas and Minutes
Data Team Agendas and Minutes
Leadership Team Agendas and Minutes
Walk-through documentation
Budgets
EILA/Professional Learning experience documentation
Surveys
Professional Organization memberships
Parent/Community engagement surveys
Parent/Community engagement events documentation
School schedules
Student Growth
The following sections provide a detailed overview of the various sources of evidence used to inform Student
Growth Ratings. At least one of the Student Growth Goals set by the principal must address gap populations.
Assistant principals will inherit the SGG (both state and local contributions) of the Principal.
State Contribution – ASSIST/Next Generation Learners (NGL) Goal Based on Trajectory
(Goal inherited by Assistant Principal)
Principals are responsible for setting at least one student growth goal that is tied directly to the Comprehensive
School Improvement Plan located in ASSIST. The superintendent and the principal will meet to discuss the
trajectory for the goal and to establish the year’s goal that will help reach the long-term trajectory target. New
goals are identified each year based on the ASSIST goals. The goal should be customized for the school year with
the intent of helping improve student achievement and reaching the long term goals through on-going
improvement.
Required:


Selection based on ASSIST/NGL trajectory.
Based on Gap population unless local goal is based on Gap population.
47
Local District Decision:
 Describe process for determining interim trajectory goals.
 Describe process for determining high, expected, low growth.


Principals determine interim trajectory goals by consulting the delivery targets outlined in the school
report card. Each principal will choose at least one delivery target goal on which to focus their efforts.
High Growth will be achieved if the delivery target is exceeded for the school year, Expected Growth
will be achieved if the delivery target is reached for the year, and Low Growth will be achieved if the
identified delivery target is not reached for the year.
Local Contribution – Based on School Need (Goal inherited by Assistant Principal)
The local goal for student growth should be based on school need. It may be developed to parallel the State
Contribution or it may be developed with a different focus.
Required:

Based on gap population unless State goal is based on Gap population.
Local District Decision:
 Identify the number of local goals for principal
 Describe process to develop local goals.
 Describe process for determining high, expected, low growth.
 Describe process for determining high, expected, low growth if multiple local student growth
goals are required.



Each principal will develop one local goal through their Plan-On-A-Page (POP) process which focuses
on one high effect strategy to achieve the largest impact on student achievement for the year.
The Plan-On-A-Page (POP) will be developed by the principal and approved by the superintendent to
leverage the largest impact on student achievement for the current school year. The Leadership and
Learning template will be used to design the POP.
The process for determining high, expected, or low growth will be set as follows: High Growth will be
achieved if the determined goal is exceeded by 15% or more, Expected Growth will be achieved if the
determined goal improves by 10% to 14%, and Low Growth will be achieved if the determined goal
improves by less than 10%.
Both the state and local goal will be given a numerical weighting:
LOW = 1
EXPECTED = 2
HIGH = 3
Determination of a single yearly combined goal rating will be an average of the two goals.
48
Determining the Overall Performance Category
Superintendents are responsible for determining an Overall Performance Category for each principal at the
conclusion of their summative evaluation year. The Overall Performance Category is informed by the principal’s
ratings on professional practice and student growth.
Rating Overall Professional Practice
Required:


Use decision rules to determine an overall rating.
Record ratings in CIITS
PRINCIPAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS RATINGS
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO INFORM
PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
STANDARD 1: [I,D,A,E]
REQUIRED
• Professional Growth Plans
and Self-Reflection
• Site-Visit
• Val-Ed 360°/Working
Conditions
OPTIONAL
• Other: District-Determined
– Must be identified in the
CEP
STANDARD 2: [I,D,A,E]
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
STANDARD 3: [I,D,A,E]
STANDARD 4: [I,D,A,E]
STANDARD 5: [I,D,A,E]
STANDARD 6: [I,D,A,E]
A principal’s Overall Performance Category is determined by the evaluator based on the principal’s ratings
on each standard, as well as student growth. Using the sources of evidence for principals/assistant
principals, evaluators will use professional judgment to determine a rating for each standard. Next, the
evaluator will use the following decision rules for determining the Professional Practice Category:
Local District Decision:
Describe timelines for rating professional practice.

Professional practice ratings will be discussed during one site visit post conference in the fall semester.
Professional practice ratings will be discussed at both site visit post conferences in the spring
semester. Principals will share their POP data monthly at administrative team meetings, during Project
Proficiency meetings and with their faculty every other month.
49
Professional Practice Decision Rules
Rating Overall Student Growth
Overall Student Growth Rating results from a combination of professional judgment and the district-developed
instrument. The instrument is designed to aid the evaluator in applying professional judgment to multiple
evidences of student growth over time. Student growth ratings must include data from both the local and state
contributions.
Required:



Determine the rating using both state and local growth.
Determine the rating using up to 3 years of data (when available).
Record ratings in CIITS.
Local District Decision:
 Describe the process used to rate student growth including both state and local contributions.


Determine the rating using both state (Based on ASSIST/NGL Trajectory) and local growth (Based on
the principal’s POP goal, the percentage of students at the 60th percentile on MAP and/or meeting the
defined benchmarks on CERT).
Student data from the fall assessment will be analyzed and a SMART Goal written for improved
academic achievement. POP data will be analyzed and shared at monthly administrative team
50
meetings and interim assessment data will be analyzed after each administration of the interim
assessments.
STUDENT GROWTH
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE TO
INFORM STUDENT GROWTH
STATE

ASSIST/NGL Goal
LOCAL
• Based on school need
STUDENT GROWTH RATING
PROFESSIONAL
JUDGMENT
AND DISTRICTDETERMINED
RUBRICS
STUDENT GROWTH [H,E,L]
Districts will determine the process for determining the rating for High, Expected, and Low growth
rating. Supervisors will use Local Student Growth Goal instrument to determine overall Student Growth
Rating.
The Shelby County Public School determination for rating an administrator with High, Expected, or Low
growth will happen through the analysis of the State Contribution goal regarding the identified NGL
Delivery Target and the Local Contribution goal from the Plan-On-A-Page (POP) data as well as interim
assessment data. Progress toward this determination will be discussed throughout the year during sitevisit post conferences and Project Proficiency meetings. (See Growth Rating Chart below and POP
Implementation Rubric on Page 52)
Growth Rating Chart
Growth Rating
State Contribution
Local Contribution
High
Exceeding the identified NGL
Delivery Target
Exceeding Local Growth Goal
(POP) by 15% or more
Expected
Meeting the identified NGL
Delivery Target
Achieving Local Growth Goal
(POP) of 10% to 14%
improvement
Low
Not Meeting the identified NGL
Delivery Target
Achieving Local Growth Goal
(POP) of less than 10%
51
POP Implementation Rubric
Plan-On-A-Page (POP) Implementation
Exemplary
(4)
All criteria for the proficient
category have been
successfully met. In addition:
Proficient
(3)
The leader . . .
Progressing
(2)
The leader . . .
Not Proficient
(1)
The leader . . .



The leader . . .



Shares the results of their
action research with
faculty, what they are
learning, and how that
learning will influence
leadership practices in
the future
Publicly reports, including
plans and oral
presentations, a frank
acknowledgement of
prior personal and
organizational failures,
and clear suggestions for
system-wide learning
resulting from those
lessons
This leader regularly
shares the results of their
action research along
with some of the things
they are learning about
leadership practices and
the connection to student
achievement with other
schools, departments, or
districts to maximize the
impact of the leader’s
personal learning
experience


Produces clear and
consistent evidence
that they are
monitoring and
measuring both the
leadership strategy or
strategies as well as
the impact on student
achievement monthly
Documents the
changes in leadership
practice that is
occurring monthly as a
result of the
monitoring
Publicly displays the
graphic depiction of
the degree to which
the achieved
leadership strategiesin-action compare to
the impact on student
achievement
52


Produces evidence that
they are monitoring
and measuring student
effect data, but are
inconsistent in
monitoring and
measuring leadership
data. Consequently it
is difficult to determine
the degree to which
the specified
leadership practices
are impacting student
achievement
Participates in the
action research
process, and limited
evidence of changes
based on data
Has not yet created a
graphic display of their
action research
Demonstrates and
indifference to data, no
changes in leadership
practice compared to
the previous year. The
data screams
“Change!” and the
leader’s actions say,
“Everything is fine.”
Determining the Overall Performance Category
A principal’s Overall Performance Category is determined by the evaluator based on the principal’s ratings
on Professional Practice and Student Growth. Next, the evaluator will use the following decision rules for
determining the Overall Performance Category.
CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING A PRINCIPAL’S OVERALL
PERFORMANCE CATEGORY
53
Professional Growth Plan and Summative Cycle
Based on the overall Professional Practice rating and Student Growth rating, supervisors will determine the
type of Professional Growth Plan required of the principal.
54
Sample Principal PGES Cycle
The following chart shows the required components for principals and assistant principals over the two year
process. All principals and assistant principals will be evaluated every year.
Two Year Cycle of the PPGES
Review Accountability and
ASSIST Goal Results & Set
SGG/PGP/Working
Conditions 2-year Goal
End-of-Year Review
with Superintendent
Administer Formative Val-Ed
Administer Summative Val-Ed
2013-14
Site-Visit by Superintendent
Site-Visit by Superintendent
Mid-Year Review with
Superintendent
July 2014
Review Accountability
and ASSIST Goal Results
& Set SGG/PGP & Update
Working Conditions 2year Goal
End-of-Year Review
with Superintendent
Administer TELL Kentucky
2014-15
Site-Visit by Superintendent
Site-Visit by Superintendent
Mid-Year Review with
55
Superintendent
ASSURANCES: CERTIFIED EVALUATION PLAN
The Shelby County Public Schools District hereby assures the Commissioner of Education that:
This evaluation plan was developed by an evaluation committee composed of an equal number of teachers and
administrators.
The evaluation process and criteria for evaluation will be explained to and discussed with all certified personnel annually
within one month of reporting for employment. This shall occur prior to the implementation of the plan.
The evaluation of each certified staff member will be conducted or supervised by the immediate supervisor of the
employee.
All certified employees shall develop an Individual Professional Growth Plan (PGP) that shall be aligned with the
school/district improvement plan and comply with the requirements of 704 KAR3:345. The PGP will be reviewed annually.
All administrators, to include the superintendent, will be evaluated annually.
All non-tenured teachers will be fully evaluated annually and every tenured teacher will write a student growth goal, write a
PGP and be observed annually while receiving a summative evaluation a minimum of once every three years.
Each evaluator will be trained and approved in the use of the appropriate evaluation techniques and the use of local
instruments and procedures.
Each person evaluated will have both formative and summative evaluations with the evaluator regarding his/her
performance.
Each evaluatee shall be given a copy of his/her summative evaluation by the evaluator regarding his/her performance and
the summative evaluation shall be filed with the official personnel records.
The local evaluation plan provides for the right to a hearing as to every appeal, an opportunity to review all documents
presented to the evaluation appeals panel, and a right to presence of evaluatee’s chosen representative.
The evaluation plan will not discriminate on the basis of race, national origin, religion, marital status, sex, or disability.
This evaluation plan will be reviewed as needed and any substantive revisions will be submitted to the Department of
Education for approval.
The local board of education approved the evaluation plan as recorded in the minutes of the meeting held on
__________________________________________.
___________________________________________ _____________________________
Signature of District Superintendent
Date
___________________________________________ _____________________________
Signature of Chairperson, Board of Education
Date
56
CERTIFIED STAFF ADVISORY COMMITTEE (50/50 Committee)
For
2014 – 2015
The following are members of the Evaluation Committee:
Jill Tingle, Administrator
Michelle Shipley, Administrator
Donna Jones, Administrator
Jennifer Wilt, Administrator
Heather Fallen, Teacher
Craig Slaughter, Teacher
Phyllis Poston, Teacher
Shelley LaGrange, Teacher
Barbara Allan, Facilitator
Plan Revisions
The local Board of Education shall approve substantive revisions (forms, timelines, appeals process,
observation cycles) to the plan to ensure compliance with KRS. 156.557 and KAR 3:345. The Certified
Staff Advisory Committee (50/50 Committee) shall consist of an equal number of teacher and
administrator members. The committee shall formulate revisions. All major revisions must be reviewed
and approved by the local Board of Education and submitted to the Kentucky Board of Education for
approval.
Designated Contact Person
Questions or comments regarding the plan for certified staff should be directed to the Director of
Administration and Personnel.
57
APPENDIX – Table of Contents
Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (TPGES)
Goal Setting for Student Growth Process (SMART Goals)
59
Evaluation Explanation Sign-Off Statement
60
Professional Growth Plan on a Page (POP)
61-63
Student Growth Goal and Rigor Rubric
64
TPGES Pre-Observation Document and Observation Notes
65-67
TPGES Peer Observer Optional Questions
68-69
TPGES Post Conference Optional Questions
70
Student Growth and Enduring Skills
Sample Enduring Skills for Reading
Sample Enduring Skills for Math
Sample Enduring Skills for Writing
Sample Enduring Skills for Science
Sample Enduring Skills for Social Studies
Sample Enduring Skills for Music
Sample Enduring Skills for Visual Arts
Sample Enduring Skills for World Languages
71
72-73
74
75-78
79-83
84
85
86
Principal Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (PPGES)
Evaluation Explanation Sign-Off Statement
87
Principal Handbook Reflective Practice, Student Growth and
Professional Growth Planning Template
88-92
Regulation Resources
Shelby County Policy 03.18 Evaluation
93-94
Shelby County Procedure 03.18 AP.11 Evaluation Appeals
95-97
Shelby County Procedure 03.18 AP. 21 Evaluation Appeal Form
98
703 KAR 5: 080 Administration Code for Kentucky’s Educational Assessment Program
99-107
704 KAR 3: 370 PGES Regulation – How to Access
108
58
GOAL SETTING FOR STUDENT GROWTH PROCESS
*Adapted for Kentucky from Stronge, J. H., & Grant, L. W. (2009). Student achievement goal setting: Using data to improve teaching and learning. Larchmont, NY: Eye
on Education, Inc.
59
A faculty meeting was held on [date] at [school name] by [principal name], our principal,
to discuss the following:
o
o
o
o
o
Evaluation Schedule
Evaluation Procedures (CEP)
Professional Code of Ethics
Teacher Standards (Use of Teachscape or “Other”)
Professional Growth Plans
I have received a copy of the above mentioned documents and understand the procedures
and expectations regarding certified evaluations.
In addition, [principal name] discussed details of confidentiality/FERPA, harassment,
discrimination, expectations for reporting an absence/leave, and school safety.
Name: ______________________________________________________
Date:___________________
60
Professional Growth Plan-On-A-Page (POP)
IMPLEMENTATION Component: “Blueprint” for Goal #1
School-wide Problem-of-Practice:
SMART Goal #1 Statement:
Theories-of-Action:
Construct Your Theories-in-Action (IF, THEN) Statements
Leadership Implementation
Student Results Indicators
Strategies
THEN I expect to see an increase in
IF I increase the percent of (insert your 1-2
measurable leadership strategies)
the percent of students “Proficient” or
higher on…
(Insert your student assessment)
1) IF I
THEN
Desired Results
Sources of Data to Monitor
(Insert what you expect both you and
students to achieve)
(Insert what data you plan to monitor)
2)
61
Degree of Implementation vs Impact on Student Achievement Results
100
90
77
80
87
85
82
77
79
73
70
Percent Proficient
62
65
65
60
60
55
50
50
50
45
"IF"
40
"THEN"
30
30
20
10
0
September
October
November
January
February
March
April
May
"IF"
30
50
60
55
65
73
77
79
"THEN"
45
62
50
65
77
82
85
87
Monitoring Fequency
62
Leadership Strategy vs Student Achievment
100%
90%
Percent Proficient
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Leadership Strategy#1
Student Assessment #1
September
5%
30%
October
20%
40%
November
40%
48%
January
45%
54%
February
52%
65%
Monitoring Points
63
March
70%
69%
April
73%
72%
May
85%
82%
Student Growth Goal and Rigor Rubric
Structure of the Goal
The student growth goal:
Acceptable
The student growth goal:
Needs Revision
The student growth goal:
Insufficient
The student growth goal:
Focuses on a standards-based enduring skill which
students are expected to master
Focuses on a standards-based enduring skill
Focuses on a standards-based skill that does not
match enduring skill criteria
Is not standards-based
Identifies an area of need pertaining to current
students’ abilities
Identifies a specific area of need supported by data
for current students
Identifies a specific area of need, but lacks
supporting data for current students
Is not focused on a specific area of need
Includes growth and proficiency targets that
establish and differentiate expected performance
for ALL students
Includes a growth target that establishes growth for
ALL students; a proficiency target that establishes
the mastery expectation for students
Includes both a growth target and a proficiency
target, but fails to differentiate expected
performance for one or both targets
Includes only a growth or a proficiency target
Uses measures for collecting baseline, mid-course,
and end of year/course data that matches the skill
being assessed
Uses measures that fail to clearly demonstrate
performance for the identified skill
Uses no baseline data or uses irrelevant data
Uses appropriate measures for base-line, midcourse, and end of year/course data collection
Explicitly states year-long/course-long interval of
instruction
Specifies a year-long/course-long interval of
instruction
Specifies less than a year-long/course-long
interval of instruction
Fails to specify an interval of instruction
Rigor of the Goal
The student growth goal:
Acceptable
The student growth goal:
Needs Revision
The student growth goal:
Insufficient
The student growth goal:
Is congruent to KCAS grade level standards and
appropriate for the grade level and content area
for which it was developed
Is congruent and appropriate for grade
level/content area standards
Is congruent to content, but not to grade level
standards
Is not congruent or appropriate for grade
level/content area standards
Identifies measures that demonstrate where
students are in meeting or exceeding the intent of
the standard(s) being assessed
Identifies measures that allow students to
demonstrate their competency in performing at the
level intended in the standards being assessed
Identifies measures that only allow students to
demonstrate competency of part, but not all
aspects of the standards being assessed
Identifies measures that do not assess the level of
competency intended in the standards
Includes growth and proficiency targets that are
doable, but stretch the outer bounds of what is
attainable
Includes targets that are achievable, but fail to
stretch attainability expectations
Includes targets that do not articulate expectations
AND/OR targets are not achievable
Includes growth and proficiency targets that are
challenging for students, but attainable with
support
Comparability of Data
Data collected for the student growth goal:
Acceptable
For similar classrooms, data collected for the
student growth goal:
Uses comparable criteria across similar classrooms
(classrooms that address the same standards) to
determine progress toward mastery of
standards/enduring skills
Reflects use of common measures/rubrics to
determine competency in performance at the level
intended by the standard(s) being assessed
64
Needs Revision
Insufficient
For similar classrooms, data collected for the student
growth goal:
n/a
Does not reflect common criteria used to determine
progress
TPGES PRE-OBSERVATION DOCUMENT
Teacher
EPSB ID#
School
Grade Level/Subject(s)
Observer
Date of Conference
Preconference (Planning Conference)
Questions for Discussion:
Notes:
What is your identified student learning target(s)?
To which part of your curriculum does this lesson relate?
How does this learning fit in the sequence of learning for this
class?
Briefly describe the students in this class, including those with
special needs.
How will you engage the students in the learning? What will you
do? What will the students do? Will the students work in
groups, or individually, or as a large group? Provide any
materials that the students will be using.
How will you differentiate instruction for individuals or groups of
students?
How and when will you know whether the students have
achieved the learning target(s)?
Is there anything that you would like me to specifically observe
during the lesson?
65
TPGES OBSERVATION NOTES
Teacher Name:
Physical Classroom Layout:
Date:
Beginning Time:
Ending Time:
Number of
Students:
Other General
Information:
Time
Actions and Statements/Questions by Teacher and Students
66
Domain/
Component
Teacher Name:
Date:
Time
Actions and Statements/Questions by Teacher and Students (cont.)
67
Domain/
Component
TPGES Peer Observer
Optional questions for pre-brief discussion
Questions for
Discussion:
Notes:
PGP and SGG
What is the focus of your PGP?
What is the focus of your SGG?
DOMAIN 2
A.
What characteristics of your
learning environment do you want
me to notice?
B.
What characteristics of your
classroom culture do you want me
notice?
C.
What routines and procedures
might I notice?
D.
What standards of conduct might I
notice?
E.
What might I notice about your
physical environment that
supports student learning and
safety?
F.
What might I notice about
technology use in the lesson?
68
DOMAIN 3
A.
How will you communicate
instructional purpose?
How will you engage the students
in the learning?



What will you do?
What will the students
do?
Will the students work in
groups, or individually, or
as a large group?
*Provide any materials that the
students will be using.
B.
What questioning techniques
might be used?
How might students be involved in
discourse?
How might you ensure all voices
are heard?
What pacing strategies or lesson
structure is used?
How will students demonstrate
active engagement in the lesson?
C.
How is on-going formative
assessment used in this lesson?
What evidence might there be that
students are aware of assessment
criteria?
How and when will you know
whether the students have
achieved the learning target(s)?
D.
What accommodations,
adjustments, etc. do you
anticipate?
How will you differentiate
instruction for individuals or
groups of students?
69
TPGES Post Conference
Optional questions for post-brief discussion
You asked me to observe for ________________________. Here is what I noticed:
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
1. What caused you to make the decisions you made during the lesson?
2. What tells you the students are learning?
3. What was the single most important concept and skill you wanted every single student to know at the
end of the lesson? How successful were you?
4. How did your last formative assessment measure, affect this lesson?
70
Enduring Skills Initial List for Reading
Enduring Skill
February 2014
Reference to Standards
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
Anchor Standard #1
Make logical inferences from
complex text
Anchor Standard #2
Summarize key details & ideas of
complex text
Anchor Standard #3
Analyze individuals, events, and
ideas throughout complex text
Anchor Standard # 4
Interpret words & phrases to
comprehend text independently
Evaluate content presented in
diverse media and formats to
comprehend complex text
Anchor Standard #7
(S/L- Comprehension and
Collaboration)
(W- Research to B&P Knowledge)
Delineate and evaluate the
argument and specific claims in
complex text
Anchor Standard #8
71
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
Enduring Learning Initial List for Math
Enduring Learning
Students understand rate and
ratio in relation to multiplication
and division and use them to
solve problems.
Students understand the use of
variables in mathematical
expressions and understand that
expressions in different forms can
be equivalent.
Students understand statistical
reasoning, including measures of
center and spread.
February 2014
Reference to Standards
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
“Understand” implies Standards for
Mathematical Practice 1-8
6th Grade Critical Area #1
“Understand” implies Standards for
Mathematical Practice 1-8
6th Grade Critical Area #3
“Understand” implies Standards for
Mathematical Practice 1-8
6th Grade Critical Area #4
“Understand” implies Standards for
Mathematical Practice 1-8
Students understand and use
numbers to represent quantities.
HS Number and Quantity
72
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
Students understand solving
equations as a process of
reasoning.
Students understand volume,
unit measure of volume, and use
of multiple strategies to solve
problems related to Volume.
Students understand models of
multiplication and division,
extending understanding of
operations on whole numbers to
fractions and decimals.
“Understand” implies Standards for
Mathematical Practice 1-8
HS Algebra
“Understand” implies Standards for
Mathematical Practice 1-8
5th grade Critical Area #3
“Understand” implies Standards for
Mathematical Practice 1-8
5th Grade Critical Areas #1,3
73
Enduring Skills Initial List for Writing
Enduring Skill
February 2014
Reference to Standards
Build knowledge on a subject
through research.
Anchor Writing Standard 10; Note
on range and content of student
writing; Anchor Writing Standard 79
Write arguments to support
claims
Anchor Writing Standard 1
Write informative/explanatory
texts to convey ideas and
information
Anchor Writing Standard 2
Write narratives to develop real
or imagined experiences
Anchor Writing Standard 3
Use technology to interact and
collaborate with others
Anchor Writing Standard 6
Assess the credibility and
accuracy of sources
Anchor Writing Standard 8
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
74
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
Enduring Skills Initial List for Science
Enduring Skill
Use scientific thinking to
question the natural and
designed world.
February 2014
Reference to Standards
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 1: Asking
Questions & Defining Problems,
pages 54-56.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 4, 1718
Use scientific thinking to
define problems within the
natural and designed world.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 1: Asking
Questions & Defining Problems,
pages 54-56.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 4, 1718
Develop and refine models to
explain, predict, and
investigate the natural and
designed world.
Use models to explain, predict,
and investigate the natural
and designed world, including
identifying the limitations of
the models.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 2:
Developing and Using Models,
pages 56-59.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 19-20
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 2:
Developing and Using Models,
pages 56-59.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 19-20
75
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
Plan and carry out
investigations.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 3: Planning
and Carrying Out Investigations,
pages 59-61.
NGSS Appendix F, page7, 21
Organize and use data to
support claims or conclusions.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 4: Analyzing
and Interpreting Data, pages
61-63
NGSS Appendix F, pages 9, 2324
Analyze data to make sense of
phenomena or determine an
optimal design solution.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 4: Analyzing
and Interpreting Data, pages
61-63
NGSS Appendix F, pages 9, 23-24
Construct explanations based
on scientific evidence.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 6:
Constructing Explanations and
Designing Solutions, pages 6771
NGSS Appendix F,
pages 11-12, 27-28
76
Design and refine solutions to
problems.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 6:
Constructing Explanations and
Designing Solutions, pages 6771
.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 11-12,
27-28
Argue using scientific
evidence.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 7: Engaging
in Argument from Evidence,
pages 71-74
NGSS Appendix F, , pages 13-14,
29-30
Use evidence to evaluate
claims.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 7: Engaging
in Argument from Evidence,
pages 71-74
NGSS Appendix F, pages 13-14,
29-30
Obtain information to
determine patterns in and/or
evidence about the natural or
designed world.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 8:
Obtaining, Evaluation, and
Communicating Information,
pages 74-77.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 31-32.
77
Evaluate information to
determine usefulness and
value.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 8:
Obtaining, Evaluation, and
Communicating Information,
pages 74-77.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 31-32.
Communicate information in a
variety of developmentally
appropriate formats.
Framework for K-12 Science
Education, Practice 8:
Obtaining, Evaluation, and
Communicating Information,
pages 74-77.
NGSS Appendix F, pages 31-32.
78
Enduring Skills Initial List for Social Studies
Enduring Skill
Reference to Standards
February 2014
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
C3 Framework Dimension 1 (p. 23)
Construct compelling and
supporting questions to develop
inquiry skills.
Quality Core
Quality Core A. Exploring the Skills
and Strategies Underlying US
History 1. Process Objectives j.
Develop open-ended historical
questions that can be addressed
through historical research and
interpretation.
KCAS Reading Anchor Standard 1
(importance of evidence in framing
and answering questions)
KCAS Writing Anchor Standard 7
(posing questions as an initial
activity in research and inquiry)
KCAS Speaking and Listening
Standard 1 (prepare and
participate in conversations around
questions)
C3 Framework: Dimension 3 (p. 53)
Use evidence to support a claim.
Quality Core
Quality Core A. Exploring the Skills
and Strategies Underlying US
History 1. Process Objectives b.
Identify and interpret different
types of primary and secondary
sources of fundamental importance
79
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
and relevance to topical inquiry
and understanding
Quality Core A. Exploring the Skills
and Strategies Underlying US
History 1. Process Objectives f.
Utilize research strategies,
methods, and sources to obtain,
organize, and interpret historical
data
Quality Core A. Exploring the Skills
and Strategies Underlying US
History 1. Process Objectives g.
Compose arguments/position
papers, and participate in debates
on different interpretations of the
same historical events; synthesize
primary and secondary sources to
justify position
Historical Thinking Skills: Skill 1
KCAS Writing Standards for
Literacy in History/Social Studies
Write arguments focused on
discipline-specific content.
KCAS Reading Standards for
Literacy in History/Social Studies
Cite specific textual evidence to
support analysis of primary and
secondary sources, connecting
insights gained from specific details
to an understanding of the text as a
whole.
80
C3 Framework: Dimension 3 (p. 53)
Evaluate the credibility of
sources.
Historical Thinking Skills: Skill 1
Quality Core
Quality Core A. Exploring the Skills
and Strategies Underlying US
History 1. Process Objectives d.
Analyze the importance of context
and point of view in historical
interpretation (e.g., interpret past
events and issues in historical
context rather than in terms of
present norms and values);
recognize that historians interpret
the same events differently due to
personal values and societal norms
Quality Core A. Exploring the Skills
and Strategies Underlying US
History 1. Process Objectives e.
Analyze and evaluate historical
sources and interpretations (e.g.,
credibility, perspective, bias, and
authenticity; verifiable or
unverifiable; fact or interpretation)
KCAS Writing Standards for
Literacy in History/Social Studies
8. Gather relevant information
from multiple authoritative print
and digital sources, using advanced
searches effectively; assess the
strengths and limitations of each
source in terms of the task,
purpose, and audience; integrate
81
information into the text selectively
to maintain the flow of ideas,
avoiding plagiarism and
overreliance on any one source and
following a standard format for
citation.
KCAS Reading Standards for
Literacy in History/Social Studies
6. Evaluate authors’ differing
points of view on the same
historical event or issue by
assessing the authors’ claims,
reasoning, and evidence.
C3 Framework: Dimension 4 (p. 60)
Communicate conclusions to a
range of audiences
Critique your own work as well as
the work of others
KCAS Writing Standards for
Literacy in History/Social Studies
4. Produce clear and coherent
writing in which the development,
organization, and style are
appropriate to task, purpose, and
audience.
C3 Framework: Dimension 4 (p.
61)
KCAS Writing Standards for
Literacy in History/Social Studies
5. Develop and strengthen writing
as needed by planning, revising,
editing, rewriting, or trying a new
approach, focusing on addressing
82
what is most significant for a
specific purpose and audience.
Take informed action
CCR AS S&L #3
CCR AS R #8
C3 Framework: Dimension 4 (p. 62)
83
Enduring Skills Initial List for: Arts & Humanities – Music
Enduring Skill
Read & Notate Music
(Creating, Performing,
Responding)
Perform (alone and in groups)
(Performing)
Reference to Standards
February 2014
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
National Standard(s) of Music: 5
KCAS Standard(s): 1.14
National Standard(s) of Music: 1, 2
KCAS Standard(s): 1.14; 2.22; 2.25
Analyze, Evaluate, Describe &
Understand Music and
Performances
(Responding and Connecting)
National Standard(s) of Music: 6, 7,
8, 9
Creating Music
(Creating)
National Standard(s) of Music: 3, 4,
5
KCAS Standard(s): 1.12; 1.14; 2.23;
2.24; 2.25; 2.26
KCAS Standard(s): 1.12; 1.14; 2.22;
2.25;
84
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
Enduring Skills Initial List for Visual Arts
Enduring Skill
Reference to Standards
(Create) Create a work of art that
communicates a meaning.
KCAS, proposed National Core Art
Standards
(Present) Analyze, select and
interpret a work of art to share
with others.
KCAS, proposed National Core Art
Standards
(Respond) Evaluate and or infer
how an artwork conveys the
artistic intent and meaning to
others.
KCAS, proposed National Core Art
Standards
(Connect) Connect the artistic
intent and meaning of a work to
global, community or selfmeaning.
KCAS, proposed National Core Art
Standards
February 2014
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
85
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
Enduring Skills Initial List for World Languages
Enduring Skill
Reference to Standards
Interpret information,
concepts, and ideas from a
variety of culturally authentic
sources on a variety of topics
Exchange information,
concepts, and ideas with a
variety of speakers or readers
on a variety of topics in a
culturally appropriate context
Present information, concepts,
and ideas to an audience of
listeners or readers on a
variety of topics in a culturally
appropriate context
Use language skills to
investigate the world beyond
the immediate environment
Interpretive Listening (IL) and
Reading (IR)
Use language skills to
recognize and understand
others’ ways of thinking as
compared to ones’ self
Understanding of Cultural
Perspectives (CP)
What’s Mastery Look Like at
your Grade Level?
Interpersonal Communication (IC)
Presentational Speaking (PS) and
Writing (PW)
Investigation of Cultural Products
and Practices (CPP)
Use language skills and cultural Participation in Cultural
Interactions (CIA)
understanding to interact in
cultural context other than
ones’ self.
86
Sources of Evidence:
What is available or needs to be
developed?
A faculty meeting was held on [date] at [school name] by [principal name], our principal,
to discuss the following:
o
o
o
o
o
Evaluation Schedule
Evaluation Procedures (CEP)
Professional Code of Ethics
Teacher Standards (Use of Teachscape or “Other”)
Professional Growth Plans
I have received a copy of the above mentioned documents and understand the procedures
and expectations regarding certified evaluations.
In addition, [principal name] discussed details of confidentiality/FERPA, harassment,
discrimination, expectations for reporting an absence/leave, and school safety.
Name: ______________________________________________________
Date:___________________
87
PRINCIPAL HANDBOOK
Reflective Practice, Student Growth and Professional Growth Planning Template
Principal
EPSB ID#
School
Level
Part A: Student Growth
Local Student Growth Goal
(Your identified Objective from your CSIP.)
Principal’s Student Growth Plan
This plan will outline what the principal will do to impact the student growth goal.
(Should be different than the school CSIP plan strategies/actions)
Strategies/Actions
What strategies/actions will I need to do in order to assist
my school in reaching the goal?
How will I accomplish my goal?
Resources/Support
What resources will I need to complete my
plan?
What support will I need?
88
Targeted
Completion
Date
When will I complete
each identified
strategy/ action?
Part B: Professional Growth & Effectiveness
Data Reflection
Survey Results
VAL-ED 360
Number of Surveys
Distributed
TELL Kentucky
Other:
Number of Completed
Surveys Returned
Percentage of Completed
Surveys Returned
Questions to Consider:
What did teachers/staff perceive as major strengths?
What did teachers/staff perceive as major weaknesses?
List factors that might have influenced the results.
How will you use this information for continuous professional growth?
Other Data
Student Achievement Data
NonAcademic Data
Supervisor Feedback
Other
Data Selected
Results
Questions to Consider:
How does the additional data inform your decision about your learning needs?
In Summary:
How will you use all of this information for continuous professional growth?
89
Part B: Reflection on the Standards in the Kentucky Principal Professional
Growth and Effectiveness System
Reflect on the effectiveness and adequacy of your practice in each of the performance standards. Provide
a rating (I = Ineffective; D = Developing; A = Accomplished; E=Exemplary) on each performance standard
and list your strengths and areas for growth. A complete listing of performance standards and indicators
can be found at the end of this form.
Standard
1. Instructional Leadership
The principal fosters the success of all students by
facilitating the development, communication,
implementation, and evaluation of a shared vision
of teaching and learning that leads to student
academic growth and school improvement.
2. School Climate
The principal fosters the success of all students by
developing, advocating, and sustaining an
academically rigorous, positive, and safe school
climate for all stakeholders.
3. Human Resource Management
The principal fosters effective human resources
management by assisting with selection and
induction, and by supporting, evaluating, and
retaining quality instructional and support
personnel.
4. Organizational Management
The principal fosters the success of all students by
supporting, managing, and overseeing the
school’s organization, operation, and use of
resources.
5. Communication and Community Relationship
The principal fosters the success of all students by
communicating and collaborating effectively with
stakeholders.
6. Professionalism
The principal fosters the success of all students by
demonstrating professional standards and ethics,
engaging in continuous professional learning, and
contributing to the profession.
7. Student Progress
The principal’s leadership results in acceptable,
measurable student academic growth based on
established standards.
Self-Assessment
I
D
A
E
I
D
A
E
I
D
A
E
I
D
A
E
I
D
A
E
I
D
A
E
I
D
A
E
Strengths and areas for growth
Examine additional relevant data sources to make an informed decision on growth needs. Select
an area of growth from the above self-reflection to focus your professional growth goals.
90
Part C: Connecting Priority Growth Needs to Professional Growth Planning
1) Initial Reflection: Based on the areas of growth identified in Part B, complete this section at the
beginning of the school year.
Professional Growth Goal:



What do I want to change about my practices that will
effectively impact student learning?
How can I develop a plan of action to address my
professional learning?
How will I know if I accomplished my objective?
Action Plan
Professional
Learning
What do I want to change
about my leadership or
role that will effectively
impact student learning?
What is my personal
learning necessary to
make that change?
Strategies/Actions
What will I need to do in order to learn my identified
skill or content?
How will I apply what I have learned?
How will I accomplish my goal?
Resources/Support
What resources will I need to
complete my plan?
What support will I need?
Administrator’s Signature:
Date:
Superintendent’s Signature:
Date:
Targeted
Completio
n Date
When will I
complete each
identified
strategy/
action?
2) On-going Reflection: Complete this section at mid-year to identify progress toward each
Student Growth/Professional Growth Goal
VI. Mid-Year Student Growth Review*
(Describe goal progress and other relevant
data.)
Mid-year review conducted on________ Initials ______ ______
Principal’s
Superintendent
Date
Status of Professional Growth Goal
Revisions/Modifications
91
Administrator’s Signature:
Date:
Superintendent’s Signature:
Date:
3) Summative Reflection: Complete this section at the end of the year to describe the level of
attainment for each Professional Growth Goal
Date:
VII. End-of-Year Data Results
End of Year Student Growth Reflection:
(Accomplishments at the end of year.)
Data attached
Date:
End of Year Professional Growth Reflection:
Next Steps:
Administrator’s Signature:
Date:
Superintendent’s Signature
Date:
92
PERSONNEL
03.18
- CERTIFIED PERSONNEL -
Evaluation
DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEM
The Superintendent shall recommend for approval of the Board and the Kentucky Department of
Education an evaluation system, developed by an evaluation committee, for all certified employees
below the level of District Superintendent, which is in compliance with applicable statute and
regulation.1
PURPOSES
The purposes of the evaluation system shall be to: improve instruction, provide a measure of
performance accountability to citizens, foster professional growth, and support individual
personnel decisions.
NOTIFICATION
The evaluation criteria and evaluation process to be used shall be explained to and discussed with
certified school personnel no later than the end of the first month of reporting for employment for
each school year.
REVIEW
All employees shall be afforded an opportunity for a review of their evaluations. All written
evaluations shall be discussed with the evaluatee, and he/she shall have the opportunity to attach
a written statement to the evaluation instrument. Both the evaluator and evaluatee shall sign and
date the evaluation instrument.
All evaluations shall be maintained in the employee's personnel file.2
FREQUENCY
Administrators and non-tenured teachers shall be evaluated at least once annually. Tenured
teachers shall be evaluated at least once every three (3) years.
APPEAL PANEL
The District shall establish a panel to hear appeals from summative evaluations as required bylaw.1
ELECTION
Two members of the panel shall be elected by and from the certified employees of the District.
Two alternates shall also be elected by and from the certified employees, to serve in the event an
elected member cannot serve. The Board shall approve one (1) certified employee and one
alternate certified employee to the panel.
CHAIRPERSON
The chairperson of the panel shall be the certified employee approved by the Board.
APPEAL TO PANEL
Any certified employee who believes that he or she was not fairly evaluated on the summative
evaluation may appeal to the panel within five (5) working days of the receipt of the summative
evaluation. The certified employee may review any evaluation material related to him/her. Both
the evaluator and the evaluatee shall be given the opportunity to review documents to be given to
the hearing committee reasonably in advance of the hearing and may have representation of their
choosing.
93
PERSONNEL
03.18
(CONTINUED)
Evaluation
APPEAL FORM
The appeal shall be signed and in writing on a form prescribed by the District evaluation committee.
The form shall state that evaluation records may be presented to and reviewed by the panel.
CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS
No panel member shall serve on any appeal panel considering an appeal for which s/he was the
evaluator.
Whenever a panel member or a panel member's immediate family appeals to the panel, the member
shall not serve for that appeal. Immediate family shall include father, mother, brother, sister, husband,
wife, son, daughter, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, grandparent, and corresponding in-laws.
A panel member shall not hear an appeal filed by his/her immediate supervisor.
BURDEN OF PROOF
The certified employee appealing to the panel has the burden of proof. The evaluator may respond to
any statements made by the employee and may present written records which support the summative
evaluation.
HEARING
The panel shall hold necessary hearings. The evaluation committee shall develop necessary procedures
for conducting the hearings.
PANEL DECISION
The panel shall deliver its decision to the District Superintendent, who shall take whatever action is
appropriate or necessary as permitted by law. The panel’s written decision shall be issued within fifteen
(15) working days from the date an appeal is filed. No extension of that deadline beyond April 25th
shall be granted without written approval of the Superintendent.
SUPERINTENDENT
The Superintendent shall receive the panel's decision and shall take such action as permitted by law as
s/he deems appropriate or necessary.
REVISIONS
The Superintendent shall submit proposed revisions to the evaluation plan to the Board for its review
to ensure compliance with applicable statute and regulation. Upon adoption, all revisions to the plan
shall be submitted to the Kentucky Department of Education for approval.
REFERENCES:
1
KRS 156.557, 704 KAR 003:345
OAG 92-135, Thompson v. Board of Educ., Ky., 838 S.W.2d 390 (1992)
RELATED POLICIES:
2
03.15
03.16
02.14
Adopted/Amended: 08/24/2006
Order #:
94
8
PERSONNEL
03.18 AP.11
-CERTIFIED PERSONNEL-
Appeals/Hearings
PURPOSE
An Appeals Panel shall be established in accordance with KRS Chapter 156 and 704 KAR 3:345. As
an advisory panel to the Superintendent, based on issues identified in an employee’s appeal
documentation, the Panel shall determine whether the employee has demonstrated that a procedural
violation has occurred under the District’s evaluation plan and whether the summative evaluation is
supported by the evidence.
Realizing that the burden of proof lies with the evaluatee, any certified employee who believes s/he
received an unfair summative evaluation and believes s/he can substantiate that belief may file and
appeal.
APPEALS
Pursuant to Board Policy 03.18, any certified employee who believes that s/he was not fairly evaluated
on the summative evaluation may appeal to the Evaluation Appeals Panel within five (5) working days
of the receipt of the summative evaluation. The appeal will be written on the Evaluation Appeals form
and must be received by the Chairperson of the Appeals Panel no later than five (5) working days of
the receipt of the summative evaluation. Appeals not made within five (5) days of the receipt of the
summative evaluation will not be considered.
PANEL
The claimant shall release to the Panel any and all evaluative material and records and shall give the
Appeals Panel permission to review all such material. When determined by the Panel, upon good
reason shown by the claimant in writing, the review may include a non-adversarial hearing. In such an
event, both the claimant and evaluator shall be given the opportunity to appear before the Panel to
respond to the appeal and to answer questions from the Panel.
No panel member shall serve on any panel on which that member was the evaluator. Whenever a panel
member or panel member’s immediate family appeals to the Panel, the member shall not serve for that
panel. Immediate family shall include father, mother, brother, sister, husband, wife, son, daughter,
uncle, aunt, nephew, nieces, grandparent, and corresponding in-laws.
GUIDELINES
The guidelines listed below shall be followed if it is determined a hearing will be conducted:
1. The Panel shall meet at a time and place set by the Chairperson of the Panel. The claimant
and the evaluator shall be notified of the meeting time and place and shall be invited to be
present. The hearing will otherwise be a closed session.
2. Any materials to be used in the hearing must be given to the Chairperson five (5) working
days before the date of the hearing. Five (5) sets of the materials must be given to the
Chairperson so that committee members may review them prior to the hearing. The parties
will exchange copies of documentation by or before the day it is submitted to the Panel.
The Chairperson may disallow materials and/or information to be presented or used in the
hearing when s/he determines that such materials and/or information is not relevant to the
appeal or when the materials were not exchanged between the parties as provided in this
procedure. Copies of the documentation as submitted to the Panel shall not be carried away
from the established meeting by either parties involved or the Panel members.
95
PERSONNEL
03.18 AP.11
(CONTINUED)
Appeals/Hearings
GUIDELINES (CONTINUED)
3. Only Panel members, the evaluatee and evaluator, legal counsel, witnesses, and the
employee’s chosen representative will be present at the hearing.
4. In the event either party is to call witnesses at the hearing, the Panel Chairperson must
be notified five (5) working days before the date of the hearing as to the names and
positions of each witness.
5. The hearing shall be conducted by the Chairperson of the Panel. In the opening statement
by the Chairperson, s/he will review operating procedures for the panel, including order
of the presentations. The Chairperson may set time limits for presentations and the
questioning time period if s/he so desires. The order of presentations is listed below.
Once the hearing has been in session for several hours, the Chairperson will decide
whether the hearing should proceed or be scheduled for continuance on another date.
a. The claimant shall be expected to present evidence in support of the appeal.
b. The evaluator may respond and provide evidence in support of the summative
evaluation.
c. The Panel may question the claimant and the evaluator as necessary.
d. Each party (evaluator and evaluatee) will be asked to make closing remarks.
e. The Chairperson will make closing remarks.
5. The decision of the Panel, after sufficiently reviewing all evidence, may include, but not
be limited to, the following:
a. Upholding all parts of the original evaluation.
b. Voiding the original evaluation or parts of it.
c. Ordering a new evaluation by a second certified employee who shall be a trained
evaluator.
In the event the Panel decides that a new evaluation is needed, both copies of the
evaluations shall be included in the personnel file.
6. A copy of the panel’s written findings shall be filed in the personnel folder.
7. The hearing shall be tape-recorded for use by the Panel in determining a decision to be
forwarded to the Superintendent. One (1) set of the materials, including the original
tapes, shall be given to the Assistant Superintendent/ Administration and Personnel for
storage in a locked file cabinet. The Chairperson shall destroy the remaining sets of
materials.
96
PERSONNEL
03.18 AP.11
(CONTINUED)
Appeals/Hearings
REVIEW
The Panel’s review shall be limited to the following:
1. Whether the summative evaluation had a factual basis; and/or
2. Whether the procedures, as set forth in the evaluation plan, were followed by the
evaluator; and
3. Whether there was an error in the process, and, if so, whether it was a harmless or
substantial error.
PANEL DECISION
The Panel shall forward a written decision to the Superintendent within fifteen (15) working days
from the date the appeal was received by the Panel Chairperson.
Once the hearing is completed, the Chairperson will set a time for the panel to meet to review
hearing materials and develop the written decision to be forwarded to the Superintendent, with a
copy to the claimant and evaluator. The Superintendent may take appropriate action consistent
with the Panel’s decision. The Panel’s decision and the original summative evaluation form shall
be placed in the employee’s evaluation file. When a new evaluation is ordered, both evaluations
shall be included in the employee’s personnel file.
In the case of an appeal of an evaluation that was conducted by the Superintendent, the Panel shall
report its decision to the Board.
The Panel’s decision may be appealed to the Kentucky Board of Education based on grounds and
procedures contained in statute and regulation.
Review/Revised:9/13/07
97
PERSONNEL
03.18 AP.21
- CERTIFIED PERSONNEL -
Evaluation Appeal Form
INSTRUCTIONS
This form is to be used by certified employees who wish to appeal their performance evaluations
to the Appeal Panel. Submit the completed form to the Chair of the Appeals Panel no later than
five (5) working days of the receipt of the summative evaluation.
Employee’s Name _____________________________________________________________
Home Address ________________________________________________________________
Job Title
________________________
Building
________________________
Grade or Department
________________________
What specifically do you object to or why do you feel you were not fairly evaluated? _________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
If additional space is needed, attach extra sheet.
Date you received the summative evaluation _________________________________________
Name of Evaluator ____________________________________ Date _____________________
I hereby give my consent for my evaluation records to be presented to the members of the
Evaluation Appeal Panel for their study and review.
_____________________________________________ _______________________________
Employee's Signature
Date
_____________________________________________
Date Received by Chair of Appeal Panel
_____________________________________________ _______________________________
Signature of Chair of Appeal Panel
Date
RELATED PROCEDURES:
03.18 AP.11
03.18 AP.12
Review/Revised:7/9/09
98
703 KAR 5:080 Administration Code For Kentucky’s Educational Assessment
Program September 2009
703 KAR 5:080 Administration Code for Kentucky’s Educational Assessment Program
Table of Contents
I. Rationale
II. Appropriate Assessment Practices
Test Security
Procedures for Reporting Errors in Assessment Materials
Classroom Materials
Administration Practices
Test Preparation and Student Motivation/Rewards
Inclusion of Special Populations
Alternate Assessment
III.Violations of the 703 KAR 5:080 Administration Code for Kentucky’s Educational Assessment Program
IV. Review of Secure Assessment Components by Parents, and Persons not in the Employment of a
Kentucky Public School District
V. Proper Reporting of Nonacademic Indicators (Attendance, Retention, Dropout, Graduation Rate and
Transition to Adult Life)
VI. Signature Page
I. Rationale
The Kentucky General Assembly continues to require an innovative student assessment program
designed to measure progress toward the goals specified in the Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA).
Kentucky’s assessment and accountability program includes multiple state-required assessments. This
document describes the practices considered appropriate in preparing students for the assessments, in
administering them, and in providing for proper security of the assessment materials. Since the issues
involved for each type of assessment are different, they are considered separately. The following
standards were used in determining appropriate practices:
1. Professional Ethics: No test preparation practice shall violate the ethical standards of the education
profession in 16 KAR 1:020. Rewards or motivational strategies related to state-required assessments
shall be consistent with those applied within the regular curriculum or within the larger school program
in general.
99
2. Educational Defensibility: No test preparation practice shall increase students' test scores on the
statewide assessment components without simultaneously increasing students' ability to apply the
content tested to real life or simulated real-life situations. Activities that are created or implemented for
the sole purpose of increasing test scores and do not contribute to the student's overall education are
considered in violation of this regulation.
3. Student Ownership: All assessment work shall be done entirely by the student.
II. Appropriate Assessment Practices
KRS 158.6455 requires that the school accountability system shall be inclusive of all students. The
Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) shall hold schools and school districts accountable for the
performance of all students. In the absence of assessment information about the performance of a
student, the school shall be assigned a non-performance (low novice) level for that student.
Dedicated time for training on this Administration Code and 703 KAR 5:070, Procedures for the Inclusion
of Special Populations in the State-Required Assessment and Accountability Programs, shall be provided
for every individual (e.g., administrators, supervisors, teachers, instructional assistants, parents, peer
tutors, scribes and readers) involved in any component of the assessment. Everyone involved in any
component of assessment shall read, and comply annually with this Administration Code.
Any individual providing support for students with disabilities or limited English proficiency shall receive
training regarding appropriate accommodations and confidentiality. The reading of this document shall
be done prior to any fall test administration.
Signature verification of the reading of this document is Code and 703 KAR 5:070 shall be reviewed by
everyone involved in assessment prior to spring test administration. The completed signature page of
this document shall be filed within the district in a location agreed upon by the District Assessment
Coordinator (DAC) and Building Assessment Coordinator (BAC), and accessible upon request from KDE.
Local district staff shall read and comply with those documents and administration manuals specific to
the state-required assessment components with which they are involved. Each test administrator or
proctor shall sign a verification form stating that he or she has received and read this Administration
Code and the instruction manual. In the administration of statewide assessments, federal and state law
(e.g., Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of l973)
shall take precedence over administrative manuals provided by the testing contractors.
Test Security
DACs, administrators, and teachers shall ensure the security of the assessment materials before, during,
and after test administration. When not being used for a scheduled testing session, all assessment
materials shall be stored in a secure location with access granted to authorized personnel only.
It is appropriate for teachers to know the concepts measured by the statewide assessment and to teach
those concepts. Proctors with knowledge of the content of any secure test item shall not reveal this
content to anyone.
Concepts appropriate for curriculum instruction can be found in Kentucky’s Core Content for
Assessment. Teachers may use test items from previous years released by the KDE to help prepare their
students for the assessment. Noncertified persons helping with testing (packing materials, providing
accommodations, escorting students to test sites) must sign a nondisclosure form. Students using
100
technology to respond to test items are allowed to save responses to CDs or portable drives, but not to
hard drives or servers.
Alert papers (i.e., evidence within a student response that the student may cause harm to self or to
others or may otherwise be suffering abuses) may be copied only by the DAC, BAC, or school
administrator. In this case these local district staff may photocopy the pertinent section of the student
response and turn those pages over to the appropriate local authorities to assure the safety of the child
and the community. The local district shall direct all local authorities that the student response may
contain information related to secure test items. The local authorities shall sign a nondisclosure form.
Test Administrators shall destroy any notes, rough drafts or scratch paper produced by students during
testing immediately after each testing session or at the end of the testing day, ensuring that no test item
is compromised.
Scanning student response booklets/answer sheets for stray marks and good faith effort is permissible.
Teachers or other staff, who become aware of specific test items through any means, shall not use this
knowledge to prepare students for the assessment. No deliberate reviewing or reading of test items by
an individual or group is permitted. No one shall take notes about or discuss the content, concepts or
structure of any secure test item.
Electronic or other versions of secure assessment materials or student response shall not be maintained
in the district. Secure test materials shall not be reproduced in whole, in part or paraphrased in any way.
Examples include: discussing, e-mailing, photocopying, photographing, handwriting, or typing. Electronic
devices with wireless communication or imaging capabilities (e.g. cell phones or cameras) shall not be
accessible by students during the testing sessions.
Scoring of test items or rough drafts is not permissible. Student responses shall not be read in their
entirety as part of scanning for good faith effort checklist.
Test Administration Manuals shall be distributed to administrators/proctors prior to the testing window.
Tests shall be distributed in the order in which they are received in the shrink-wrapped packages. Test
Administrators and BACs shall ensure that any testing materials reused from previous years are free of
any marks made by students who have used them in the past. Test booklets shall not be made available
to administrators/proctors until the first scheduled day of testing and shall be secured between testing
sessions. No one may have test booklets without authorization from the DAC or BAC. Local district staff
may not show items in the test booklets to anyone not administering the test.
Test booklets cannot be stored in classrooms unless double locked (such as a lockable storage unit inside
a locked room). Access to these locks shall be limited to authorized personnel. Test booklets outside of
locked storage shall not be left unattended.
Procedures for Reporting Errors in Assessment Materials
If an error is found in secure test materials, the following procedure shall be followed:
Do not reproduce the test item in any way (photocopying, photographing, handwriting, typing, or emailing the question in whole, in part or paraphrasing in any way); Identify the location of the error
(grade level, subject area, form number or letter, item number, and page number); Summarize and/or
document the error in general and the documentation shall not unduly compromise the security of the
assessment.
101
Acceptable reporting is as follows: Grade 4, Reading, Form 1A, Multiple Choice Item number 2, page 30,
no correct answer choice provided. Notify the local DAC who shall then notify the KDE, Office of
Assessment and Accountability and forward any requested documentation.
Classroom Materials
Classroom materials shall not provide a testing advantage to any student.
Materials may be placed on classroom walls and bulletin boards for instructional purposes anytime
during the year. Periodic tables or materials without content or strategies for solving problems need not
be removed or covered. Staff shall follow the specific directions in test manuals of assessments
regarding display of classroom materials to ensure reportable scores.
Dictionaries and thesauri, including non-programmable, electronic dictionaries and thesauri may be
used only on the writing on-demand subtest.
Students shall have access to the types of calculators as designated in the administration manuals
accompanying each statewide assessment.
Blank writing or graph paper, blank (clear or colored) overlay sheets, and bookmarks free of content
may be made available at student workstations. Materials containing content information or strategies
for solving problems must be removed or covered from classroom walls, bulletin boards, or other
surfaces (e.g., ceilings, floors, blinds, windows, and clothing) during testing sessions.
Making any resources not provided for in the administration manuals available to address students'
questions during testing is prohibited. Dictionaries and thesauri shall not be used on the reading,
mathematics, science, or social studies content area tests. Students shall not share calculators within
the testing session. Students shall not leave the testing area to gain access to any calculators,
dictionaries or thesauri, blank writing or graph paper, or any resources used for accommodations as
specified in 703 KAR 5:070.
Test administrators or proctors shall not distribute, make available at, or attach to students’
workstations any information or materials that are not sent as part of the assessment materials or
specified in the administration manuals. Examples include: copies of acronym sheets or sheets of paper
containing a system for organizing answers; textbooks; mathematics manipulatives; computer tools; or
other reference resources, unless the assistance is specified in a student’s Individualized Education Plan
(IEP), 504 or PSP.
LEP Program Services Plan (PSP) and is consistent with instructional strategies.
Administration Practices
DACs or BACs shall schedule test administration; arrange for adequate staff to administer the
assessment; prepare an accurate student testing roster; and ensure that all assessment materials are
kept secure before, during, and after the testing sessions.
Words of encouragement and general instructions that direct students to apply themselves to the task
at hand, but do not imply evaluation of student work or allow an advantage are permissible. Examples
include, "Do your best," "Get started," and "Stay on task".
During testing, test administrators or proctors shall not engage in any behavior that would assist the
students in understanding or responding to any item on the test. No one shall coach, edit, or point out
102
errors in student work on the open response on multiple-choice portions of the test. Test administrators
shall not encourage students to edit their responses by providing evaluation of student work through
tone, gesture or phrase such as "You can do better.” or "You can write more."
No district/school staff shall alter student answers at any time (e.g., erasing answers or adding to open
response answers).
The principal, BAC and anyone assisting with test administration to students in special populations shall
ensure that any accommodations provided shall be consistent with the student’s evaluation data, IEP,
504, or PSP and the routine delivery of instructional services.
Students who exhibit disruptive behavior prior to or during testing may be tested in a different location
from their peers. A student can be allowed a restroom break during a testing session as long as the
student is monitored at all times. During testing, test administrators or proctors shall circulate
throughout the testing site to monitor students as they work, verifying that students are working
appropriately and individually. Principals and district administrators shall ensure that proper monitoring
occurs. Interval or restroom breaks may be conducted by the test administrators or proctors at the
discretion of the district/school. The length of time, refreshments served and the monitoring of students
shall not affect the integrity of testing in any way.
Tests should be scheduled to avoid conflicts with lunch; however, if a lunch break is required during
testing, lunch shall be brought to the students in the testing area. If there are too many students for this
to be reasonable, test materials shall be secured and students shall be escorted to the lunchroom, told
not to discuss the test, sufficiently monitored to prevent discussion of test items during the entire lunch
period, and escorted back to the testing area.
The use of any accommodations for the assessment shall not inappropriately interfere with or influence
the administration of the assessment to other students (e.g. reading/scribing for one student within
hearing of any other student).
Students shall not be allowed to move about the room during a testing session. A student shall not be
left alone in a room to take the test. Testing locations or rooms shall not exceed reasonable seating
capacity. Test sessions shall be scheduled to prevent overcrowding in the testing location(s). Space in
testing locations shall not limit the proctor’s ability to circulate and monitor students during testing.
The testing schedule may be changed only if a shortage of personnel exists for providing
accommodations to students. If the schedule is changed, all students in the same grade must complete
the same testing section by the end of the school day.
Test sections shall be administered in the order in which they appear in the test booklets, with students
of the same grade being simultaneously tested in the same content area and test session in a given
school.
Students who are absent or missed test sections for any reason may complete these during makeup
sessions. The order may be changed for make-up test sessions.
When administering the statewide assessment, the test administrator or proctor shall observe any time
limits and follow the specific directions in the manuals provided.
When students need extended time to complete a test session, this additional time shall begin
immediately following the initial administration. If students must move to another test location, they
shall be escorted by a school staff member.
103
Students shall not take more than a single school day to complete a testing session, except where there
is a submitted doctor's or nurse's statement of sudden student illness or an emergency documented and
submitted by the school principal.
The order of testing shall not be altered to facilitate the need for calculators or to provide
accommodations. Students shall not be allowed to work ahead to future test session parts or to return
to past test session parts. A student may not be given more time on a specific test part than specified in
the administration manual, unless the student has extended time as an accommodation on an IEP, 504
Plan, or PSP. A student shall not be allowed to take a test booklet or answer booklet out of the testing
area without proper supervision.
Test Preparation and Student Motivation/Rewards
Schools and districts should ensure that all other regulations regarding curriculum,
instructional time, and school finances are adhered to when providing test preparation
activities and/or student rewards and motivational activities.
District and school employees charged with test administration and oversight shall not
require teachers and other staff to conduct test preparation or practice activities instead of
regular classroom instruction. Teachers and other staff shall not be required to conduct
test preparation or practice activities outside the normal work day.
Normal instruction shall continue during the testing window as planned in the school/district curriculum
map and lesson plans. Cessation of all normal instruction during the testing window, except during test
sessions, is not acceptable. Regular review of content as part of the ongoing year long instructional
practice is acceptable.
Review of core content shall not be developed or modified based on information and content gained
from secure test booklets. Test taking strategies embedded in regular content instruction are
acceptable.
Administering tests that provide information and data analysis to improve instruction and identify areas
of strength and weakness for individual students is acceptable. Test prep courses with no link to content
instruction and the Program of Studies/Core Content are prohibited. Engaging students in activities that
have no link to instruction or do not positively contribute to students’ overall well-being (e.g.,
establishing punitive consequences related to testing which result in students being excluded from
educational opportunities) is not acceptable. Administering tests that provide no feedback to teachers
and students, but are conducted to teach test-taking skills or to simulate a testing environment is not
acceptable.
Student responses may be visually scanned after the testing session to determine disciplinary problems.
When a student’s responses to test items are reviewed and are found to contain inappropriate language
or drawings (e.g. obscenities), the student may be instructed to answer the questions again on separate
sheets of paper for disciplinary purposes. The original responses, along with the rewritten ones clearly
marked NOT TO BE SCORED—ITEMS RETAKEN FOR DISCIPLINARY PURPOSES, shall be submitted for
scoring to the testing contractor. If disciplinary problems are determined to exist, students shall not be
allowed to modify their initial response to test items.
Student responses may be visually scanned during or after the testing session to determine good faith
efforts based on a checklist created and communicated to students and parents prior to testing. The
104
checklist may include whether students answered all parts of the questions, wrote legibly, and focused
on testing during the administration time.
Good faith effort checklist may include a pre-writing requirement. The type of pre-write used shall be
determined by the student. Individual results from checklists or any other evaluative statements shall
not be made available to students until the entire assessment has been administered and submitted to
the BAC or DAC. Teachers may not assign grades to student responses based on specific content area
evaluations that require creating a specific scoring guide or making the student responses available to
support the assigned scores. Specifying a particular organizer or pre-write method for the good faith
effort checklist is not acceptable. Pre-write activities on state assessments shall not require students to
develop a complete first draft. Donations from individuals, businesses, parents, or school staff can be
used for student incentives. Local school board funds, or cash awards from school activity funds
generated by students, shall not be used for student incentives to:
(a) attend school during the testing window
(b) participate in assessment activities, or
(c) perform well on state-required assessments.
Extended School Services (ESS) funds shall not be used for test preparation.
Inclusion of Special Populations
An individual who provides any accommodation to a student with disabilities on any component of the
statewide assessment shall be trained in his/her role and responsibilities and abide by confidentiality
laws (KRS 160.700 et seq), this Administration Code, and the conditions under which each student uses
the accommodations as described in the student's IEP, 504 Plan, or Program Services Plan (PSP). Any
accommodations provided during assessment shall be consistent with the requirements specified in 703
KAR 5:070, Procedures for the Inclusion of Special Populations in the State-Required Assessment and
Accountability Programs.
Alternate Assessment
Only a student who meets all of the eligibility requirements for the Alternate Assessment Program may
participate. Eligible students shall be identified through the Admissions and Release Committee (ARC)
process.
Students have primary ownership of their assessment pieces. Any intervention from teachers, peers or
others should enhance rather than remove or diminish that ownership.
Training is required for administration of the Alternate Assessment components. Alternate Assessment
components are considered secure and shall be kept in locked storage until administration. Altering
results of Alternate Assessment components is prohibited. The use of any accommodation or assistive
device that is not a regular part of instruction (e.g., if the student uses a communication system for the
alternate assessment entry, but does not use the same system as a regular part of his or her instruction)
is not permitted. Adding or subtracting, revising, or working on alternate assessment materials after the
completion deadline is prohibited.
III. Violations of the Administration Code for Kentucky’s Educational Assessment Program
105
All disrict and school individuals (full-time, part-time and volunteers) participating in the administration
of the testing program or providing supervision and oversight of test administration shall comply with
the Administration Code for Kentucky’s Educational Assessment Program. These steps shall be followed
for any alleged state testing violation:
STEP 1 An allegation of inappropriate testing practices received at the KDE shall be referred to the
Testing Allegations Coordinator.
STEP 2 KDE staff shall manage the process for investigating each allegation of inappropriate testing
practice. In order to make an investigation possible, an allegation shall include at least the name of the
school or school district and a specific allegation.
An anonymous allegation of inappropriate testing practices shall be investigated where:
(a) the allegation is submitted in writing;
(b) the specific name of the school is provided;
(c) the names of individuals allegedly committing the inappropriate practices are
provided; and
(d) the allegation can be corroborated through an identifiable source or document other than the
person making the anonymous allegation. Local school district personnel shall be expected to cooperate
in the investigation process as requested.
STEP 3 The Testing Allegations Coordinator shall report all findings for each allegation to the Board of
Review. This Board shall consist of members appointed by the Commissioner of Education representing
various Divisions within the KDE or agencies outside the Department of Education.
STEP 4 The Board of Review shall review the findings and make a recommendation to the Commissioner
of Education.
STEP 5 The Commissioner of Education shall make a final determination and then notify the school
district superintendent of this determination. If one or more of the allegations is determined to be valid
and warrants invalidation or change of scores, the Commissioner of Education shall direct the Deputy
Commissioner to make appropriate adjustments in a school’s or district's scores. If one or more of the
allegations is determined to be valid and it appears that a school district employee is responsible for the
wrongdoing, within 45 days of the date of notification by the Commissioner of Education to the school’s
district superintendent of the final determination or at the point which the local district superintendent
has confirmed the wrongdoing by a certified staff member, whichever is earlier, the local
district superintendent shall:
a.) report in writing to the Commissioner of Education whether or not disciplinary action was taken or
considered necessary; and
b.) comply with his reporting responsibility to the Education Professional Standards Board pursuant to
KRS 161.120.
The Commissioner or his designee shall also communicate findings of allegations investigations to the
Education Professional Standards Board for their information and action. If individual student, school or
district scores are adjusted as a result of the Commissioner's final determination, the changes shall be
reflected in the next scheduled score report release.
STEP 6 After the local district receives the letter from the Commissioner of the action to be taken by the
Department, the school may challenge the action by appealing the next performance judgment it
106
receives. This process is described in 703 KAR 5:050, Statewide Assessment and Accountability Program;
School Building Appeal of Performance Judgments.
IV. Review of Secure Assessment Components by Parents and Persons not in the Employment of a
Kentucky Public School District
Some parents and others outside the employment of a local public school district have expressed to the
administration and release of those components. Local school district central office staff shall be
responsible for reasonable security of the assessment materials; therefore, local districts shall not be
required to allow reviews of secure materials, considering the potential demand that would stretch local
district staff beyond its capacity to provide for that security.
The KDE may permit this review, maintaining a statewide assessment program nondisclosure statement
in the Office of Assessment and Accountability, based on the availability of appropriate staff to supervise
the review activities. To facilitate this process, the KDE may arrange to allow this review at its offices in
Frankfort.
V. Proper Reporting of Nonacademic Indicators (Attendance, Retention, Dropout Rate, Graduation
Rate and Transition to Adult Life)
The Nonacademic Indicators of attendance, retention, dropout rate, graduation rate, and transition to
adult life are reported publicly for schools and districts. Local districts shall be responsible for submitting
this data as accurately as possible and are responsible for informing the KDE of any known errors in the
data reported. Reporting of incorrect data for the purpose of inaccurately affecting public reports shall
be considered a violation of this Administration Code and shall be treated as described in Section III of
this document.
VI. Signature Page
District_______________________________School_____________________________
I have received, read and will comply with the:
Administration Code For Kentucky’s Educational Assessment Program 703 KAR 5:080
________________________________________________________________________
Signature/Date
107
How to Access
704 KAR 3:370 PGES
 go to www.kentuckyteacher.org/
 click on PGES
 on the right side under PGES Resources, click on
PGES Regulation 704 KAR 3:370 PGES
108