Revised Teacher, Administrator Evaluation Process Sent To State

• Student learning outcomes, accounting for 45 percent of the total evaluation. This would be determined based on both standardized and non-standardized assessments 
  
• Educator practice, accounting for 40 percent of the total evaluation and based on observations and performance 
  
• Parent feedback, accounting for 10 percent of the evaluation, based on school goals linked to parent surveys 
  
• Whole school measure, accounting for 5 percent of the evaluation, based on the principal aggregate score and school-wide goals 
  

The evaluation of administrators would be based on the following categories:

• Student outcomes, accounting for 45 percent of the evaluation. This would be based on factors such as school performance index, school improvement plan goals, and the district’s graduation rate. 
  
• Leader practice, accounting for 40 percent of the evaluation, based on state leadership standards as well as observations by the district 
  
• Stakeholder feedback, accounting for 10 percent of the evaluation, based on parent and teacher feedback 
  
• Teacher effectiveness, accounting for 5 percent of the evaluation, based on teachers’ success in reaching student learning goals 
  

Superintendent Nicholas Fischer said the revisions are a result of a four-year process involving representatives from both the administration and teachers’ union. Ericson said the updates aim to bring the district into compliance with the Connecticut Department of Education moving toward an outcome-based model rather than research-based criteria for effective teaching. However, Ericson said the latter method of evaluation is still incorporated into the new model.

“I do not want the state to change this. I feel like we’ve tried to hold onto as much of our plan as possible,” she said.

Fischer said the proposed evaluation structure updates the process to meet state requirements, including increasing the number of performance levels from two to four. He said the district was required to submit a draft of the evaluation to the State Board of Education by Thursday.

“If you turn it down, the state can very well say, ‘OK, you’ll use what we tell you to use,’” said Fischer.

Fischer said the Board will have an opportunity to review the evaluation process again once the state gives its input. He said the proximity of the Board meeting to the deadline was a result of reduced staffing and that outside assistance was hired in order to complete the plan on schedule.

Board members expressed concerns over receiving the information close to the deadline, but said they would be willing to support sending the evaluation plan to the State Board of Education for input since the process can still be revised. Some members also said there were other aspects of the process.

“Does the state really look at this?” asked Secretary Jason Catala. “Are we just going to send something in that they’re going to stamp ‘Good’?”

Board member Bill Morse said he thought the vote was being taken without sufficient information on the effectiveness of the district’s own evaluations.

“I don’t know how well the current system is working, and yet I know we’re part of the process of approving what’s been proposed,” he said.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.