Ronan/Pablo Professional Advancement System 2015-2018
1. INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Purpose 3 1.2 Authority, Clarifications, And Revisions 3 1.3 Appraisal Teams 4 1.4 Peer Review 5 2. RPPAS PARTICIPATION 6 2.1 Newly Hired Educators 6 2.2 Educators Hired Before SY 2006-07 6 3. OVERVIEW OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL ADVANCEMENT STRANDS 7 3.1 Overview Of Accountability Strand 7 3.2 Overview Of Professional Advancement Strand 8 4. ACCOUNTABILITY STRAND PROCEDURES 9 4.1 Accountability Strand Placement and Duration 9 4.2 Accountability Strand Components 10 4.3 Identification Of Evaluators 10 4.4 Evaluation Philosophy 10 4.5 Review Of Evaluation Criteria 11 4.6 Evaluation Criteria 11 4.7 Mandatory Plan Of Improvement 11 4.7.1 MPI Guiding Principles 20 4.7.2 Components of a MPI 21 4.7.3 Next Steps 21 4.7.4 Right to Union Representation 21 5. PROFESSIONAL ADVANCEMENT STRAND PROCEDURES 13 5.1 Professional Advancement Strand Placement And Duration 13 5.2 Professional Advancement Strand Components 13 5.3 Timeline 16 5.3.1 Submission of Professional Advancement Plan 16 5.3.2 Midyear 17 5.3.3 Final Professional Advancement Plan Approval 17 5.4.1 Plan Guidelines 19 5.4.1 Submission Guidelines 19 5.4.2 Final Report Guidelines 19 5.5 The Professional Advancement Strand File 20 5.6 Other Professional Advancement Strand Guidelines And Procedures 20 5.6.1 Professional Advancement Strand Principles 20 5.6.2 Guidance For Supervisors 21 5.6.3 Confidentiality 21 5.6.4 Experimentation And Flexibility Encouraged 21 1
5.6.5 Peer Involvement 21 5.6.6 Unsatisfactory Performance 21 5.6.7 In The Event Of Reassignment 21 Appendix A: Glossary 22 Appendix B: RPPAS Intent Form 25 Appendix C: Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria 26 Category I: Productive Teaching Techniques 26 Category II: Student Achievement 28 Category III: Organized, Structured Class Management 29 Category IV: Positive Interpersonal Relations 30 Category V: Employee Responsibilities 30 Appendix D: Pre-Observation Conference Data Sheet 32 Appendix E: Summative Evaluation Report 34 Appendix F: Notice Of Deficiencies Form 42 Appendix G: Mandatory Plan Of Improvement 43 Appendix H: Submission of Professional Advancement Plan Rubric 50 Appendix I: Professional Advancement Plan Midyear Rubric 45 Appendix J: Professional Advancement Plan Final Approval Rubric 45 2
1. INTRODUCTION This document describes the Ronan/Pablo Professional Advancement System (RPPAS), a comprehensive framework for evaluating the performance of Ronan/Pablo School District No. 30 educators. (As used in this document, the term educators includes not only classroom educators but also media specialists, counselors, and all other professional staff described in section 1.2 of the Master Employment Contract.) The provisions and requirements of RPPAS are the result of a negotiated agreement between Ronan/Pablo School District No. 30 (also referred to in this document as the district ) and the Ronan/Pablo Education Association (RPEA). Participation in RPPAS is mandatory for all newly hired educators. Participation in RPPAS is voluntary for educators whose employment in Ronan/Pablo School District No. 30 commenced before school year (SY) 2006-07, but election to participate is permanent. RPPAS is primarily intended to support educators professional growth and improvement as educators. However, RPPAS results may also influence promotion, assignment, and termination decisions, so it is important that all affected staff members read and understand this document. If there is something in this document that you do not understand, please seek clarification from an administrator or an Appraisal Team member. 1.1 Purpose The primary goal of Ronan/Pablo School District No. 30 and its professional staff is to promote the personal and academic achievement of district students. To this end, the district seeks to ensure that its educators are highly competent professionals engaged in a continuous process of assessment, reflection, and planning for improvement. RPPAS plays an important role in this improvement process by providing reliable, valid, and legally discriminating evaluations of educator performance. The intended purposes of RPPAS are to measure competence, identifies strengths, encourage mentoring by colleagues and administrators, stimulate professional growth, and provide data for district employment decisions. In addition to being evaluated on the basis of formal and informal observations, educators participating in RPPAS also set and measure progress toward professional goals, receiving guidance and mentoring from colleagues and administrators. RPPAS is divided into an Accountability Strand and a Professional Advancement Strand (both discussed in detail later in this document). Neither strand shall be used as the basis for establishing a merit-pay system. 1.2 Authority, Clarifications, and Revisions Ronan/Pablo School District No. 30 and RPEA agree on the following provisions concerning the authority and administration of RPPAS. a. RPEA and the district agree that the RPPAS provisions and requirements described in this document constitute an addendum to the Master Employment Contract and will hold the same standing and status as other language contained therein. Any changes to RPPAS must follow the same negotiation procedures required for changes to the Master Employment Contract. 3
b. Nothing in this document shall be construed as eliminating or in any way limiting the district s legal right to dismiss any educator for good cause at any time before expiration of that educator s employment contract, in accordance with article 12.4 of the Master Employment Contract and section 20-4-207 of the Montana Code Annotated. c. Appraisal Teams play an important role not only as evaluators in the RPPAS Professional Advancement Strand (discussed later in this document), but also in RPPAS s overall management. There are two Appraisal Teams, one for K-6 and one for 7-12. d. In the event of confusion or disagreements regarding the interpretation of this document, the Appraisal Team for the appropriate grade level shall issue clarifications and make judgments after reaching consensus among its members. When necessary, the Appraisal Teams shall make recommendations for revisions of this document to the RPEA Executive Committee and the district s board of trustees, both of which must approve any changes before they may be adopted. Any proposed changes must be made in accordance with Article 20 of the Master Employment Contract. 1.3 Appraisal Teams The K-6 Appraisal Team shall consist of the following members: The district superintendent A school-board member An administrator who supervises grades K-6 An RPEA representative An RPEA member from K. William Harvey school An RPEA member from Pablo Elementary school The 7-12 Appraisal Team shall consist of the following members: The district superintendent A school-board member An administrator who supervises grades 7-12 An RPEA representative An RPEA member from Ronan Middle School An RPEA members from Ronan High School The RPEA Members of the Appraisal Team will be appointed by the president of the RPEA and serve for three years. This appointment should allow for the rotation of one new member each year. The Appraisal Team will meet to consider all submitted plans the Monday following the submission due date in September and May. They will also meet the Monday following the final plan due date in March to consider all final plans. All members of the Appraisal Team must be present at the meeting. Each member must enter an approval or non-approval for all presented plans, both for submission and for final approval. A majority of 4
approval from the Appraisal Team must occur for the plan to be approved. 1.4 Peer Review Team The Peer Review Team will consist of the RPEA members from the Appraisal Team. In order to provide consistency in comments, the Peer Review Team will meet as a group and provide feedback to educators who submitted plans for review. 5
2. RPPAS PARTICIPATION As mentioned earlier, RPPAS participation requirements and procedures vary according to when an educator was hired. Once an educator is participating in RPPAS, there is no option of withdrawing. 2.1 Newly Hired Educators Participation in RPPAS is mandatory and automatic for all educators hired by Ronan/Pablo School District No. 30 during or after SY 2006-07. 2.2 Educators Hired Before SY 2006-07 Educators whose employment with the district commenced before the 2006-07 school year are not required to participate in RPPAS but may elect to do so. Though these educators participation is voluntary, their decision to participate is permanent and cannot be rescinded. To enter RPPAS, an educator hired before SY 2006-07 must file a statement of intent by the final day of the school year preceding the school year when participation will commence, using the Intent to Enter the Ronan/Pablo Professional Advancement System form reprinted in appendix B. (The procedure for filing a statement of intent to participate in RPPAS is described in article 3.4 of the Master Employment Contract.) Once an educator has entered RPPAS, he or she is placed on the salary matrix according to the Master Employment Contract then in force and then assigned to the salary rung that most closely matches, but does not reduce, that salary. 6
3. OVERVIEW OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL ADVANCEMENT STRANDS As mentioned earlier, RPPAS consists of an Accountability Strand and a Professional Advancement Strand. As shown in table 1, all non-tenured educators entering RPPAS begin on the Accountability Strand. Non tenured educators are eligible for advancement on the salary ladder upon receiving positive evaluations as defined in this document. Tenured educators moving to RPPAS begin on the Accountability Strand if they would have been scheduled for formal review that year under the old system; if entering RPPAS during nonreview years, tenured educators begin on the Professional Advancement Strand. During their year of scheduled evaluation on the Accountability Strand tenured educators will advance on the salary ladder upon receipt of a positive evaluation as defined in this document. Non-tenured educators are not eligible to move to the Professional Advancement Strand until achieving tenure. With some exceptions (mentioned below), tenured educators move back and forth between the two strands, spending one year on the Accountability Strand for every two years on the Professional Advancement Strand. Because this section is intended only as a brief overview of the Accountability and Professional Advancement strands, some details have been omitted. For each strand s complete procedures, requirements, and other details, please see sections 4 and 5. 3.1 Overview of Accountability Strand On the Accountability Strand, educators are evaluated annually. Non-tenured educators are evaluated on the basis of three formal observations during the year; tenured educators are evaluated on the basis of one formal observation during the year. The 18 Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria used to evaluate Accountability Strand educators are listed in appendix C. (The actual evaluation tool is reprinted in appendix E.) Evaluation frequency for both strands is shown in table 2. As mentioned above, all non-tenured educators start out on the Accountability Strand and remain there until achieving tenure, when they may enter the Professional Advancement Strand. Table 1 RPPAS Strand Placement Accountability Professional Advancement Non-tenured educators for the first three years of RPPAS participation Tenured educators, at least every third year* Tenured educators for two years at a time** Any educator whose performance has been rated unsatisfactory by an immediate supervisor * Tenured educators may elect to remain on the Accountability Strand indefinitely. ** Tenured educators must return to the Accountability Strand every third year for evaluation. With permission, they may submit a Professional Advancement Plan during an Accountability Strand year. 7
3.2 Overview of Professional Advancement Strand While on the Professional Advancement Strand, educators are not evaluated on the basis of formal observations, as they are on the Accountability Strand. Instead, educators submit Professional Advancement Plans, enumerating professional development and service goals to be accomplished each year. Progress toward these goals is evaluated periodically throughout the year by administrative staff and the appropriate Appraisal Team. Successful performance under the terms set out in an approved Professional Advancement Plan is required for promotion eligibility. Failure to obtain approval of a Professional Advancement Plan, or failure to successfully meet a plan s professional development or service goals, will result in assignment to the Accountability Strand for the duration of the school year. Successful completion of one Accountability Strand evaluation cycle is required before an educator may return to the Professional Advancement Strand. Barring performance problems, educators on the Professional Advancement Strand remain there for two school years, after which they return to the Accountability Strand for one school year. Upon successful completion of an Accountability Strand year, these educators may then return to the Professional Advancement Strand. Tenured educators on the Accountability Strand may apply to submit a Professional Advancement Plan during this year as well. Permission for this exception is granted on a case-by-case basis. It is important to note that placement on the Professional Advancement Strand is never automatic but depends on (1) submission and approval of a Professional Advancement Plan and (2) ongoing satisfactory performance, as detailed in section 5. Table 2 Evaluation Frequency Annually Non-tenured educators remain on the Accountability Strand for three years and are therefore evaluated annually Every Third Year Tenured educators performing satisfactorily on the Professional Advancement Strand Tenured educators choosing not to participate in the Professional Advancement Strand remain on the Accountability Strand and are therefore evaluated annually Tenured educators performing unsatisfactorily remain on the Accountability Strand and are therefore evaluated annually 8
4. ACCOUNTABILITY STRAND PROCEDURES This section describes the Accountability Strand in detail and should be considered the authoritative guide to Accountability Strand procedures and requirements. As mentioned in section 3, RPPAS s Accountability Strand is a year-long cycle of formal observation and evaluation. In other words, every educator placed on the Accountability Strand is evaluated annually for as long as he or she remains on this strand. Evaluations are based on the 18 Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria, listed in appendix C. Educators who are rated as unsatisfactory on any criteria may complete a Mandatory Plan of Improvement, described in section 4.7. 4.1 Accountability Strand Placement and Duration All educators participating in RPPAS will spend time on the Accountability Strand. Staff members who are automatically placed on the Accountability Strand include: All non-tenured educators. Tenured educators who have completed a two-year Professional Advancement Strand cycle. Any educator whose performance is deemed unsatisfactory by his or her immediate supervisor. The duration of an Accountability Strand placement depends on tenure status, performance, and in some cases individual educator preference. Non-tenured educators remain on the Accountability Strand until they achieve tenure, i.e., a minimum of three years. Tenured educators who have completed a two-year Professional Advancement Strand cycle are only required to move to the Accountability Strand for one year; at their option, they may remain on the Accountability Strand indefinitely, during the years when they are not required to be evaluated and will not advance on the pay ladder. 9
4.2 Accountability Strand Components Table 3 shows the components of the Accountability Strand for both non-tenured and tenured educators. Table 3 Accountability Strand Components Non-tenured Minimum of three formal observations per year: At least two announced and one unannounced At least 20 minutes in length apiece Must be sufficient time between observations to improve Announced observations shall not begin until after the first full week of school Announced observations shall be completed before the last full week of school Tenured Minimum of one (1) formal observation every third year, following the same guidelines as for non-tenured staff (as applicable) Each announced observation shall be preceded by a pre-observation conference All observations shall be followed by a post-observation conference Within four instructional days of each formal observation, the evaluator will complete an observation report and meet with the educator for the post- observation conference Both Educators may file rebuttals to observation reports within ten instructional days of signing the observation report Should a educator feel an evaluation was incorrect or unfair, the options described in Article 7.3 of the Master Employment Contract are also available. A rating of unsatisfactory (as defined on the Summative Evaluation Report form reprinted in appendix E) on any criteria may result in a Mandatory Plan of Improvement. 4.3 Identification of Evaluators Each educator on the Accountability Strand shall be evaluated by his or her immediate supervisor, as per Article 7.3 of the Master Employment Contract. Educators shall be informed who their evaluators are before the onset of evaluation. (In general, the onset of evaluation is the first day of the contract year). 4.4 Evaluation Philosophy In order to be successful, the Accountability Strand evaluation process must be a continuous, constructive, and cooperative effort between the evaluator and the educator. Throughout the evaluation process, it is expected that both the evaluator and the educator will exhibit integrity, professionalism, and a strong commitment to the personal and academic achievement of district students. 10
4.5 Review of Evaluation Criteria During the month of September at the beginning of each Accountability Strand year, the evaluator and the educator shall review the Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria listed in appendix C, as well as the evaluation tool reprinted in appendix E. In the case of a tenured educator who has moved to the Accountability Strand partway through a school year, this review shall take place within 10 school days of notification. 4.6 Evaluation Criteria The evaluation criteria listed in appendix C represent attributes and skills that are considered by the district and RPEA to be characteristic of an effective educator. In addition to the enumerated criteria, it is assumed that all district employees will perform their duties with professionalism and integrity. The evaluation criteria listed in appendix C shall be the basis for any announced or unannounced observation of an Accountability Strand educator. The evaluation tool reprinted in appendix E shall be used to create a written summary of the evaluator s observations. (Please note that the evaluation tool in appendix E does not list the example behaviors shown for each criteria in appendix C; for this reason, evaluators should be sure to refer to the list of evaluation criteria in appendix C while performing observations, as opposed to relying only on the evaluation tool.) It is important to note that not all criteria may be observable in every lesson or other observation situation; in such cases, the observer may enter a score of not applicable (N/A) on the evaluation tool. In the event of confusion over the meaning of terms used in the evaluation criteria, a glossary is available in appendix A of this document. The evaluation criteria apply to all educators, regardless of specialty or assignment within the school building. The criteria may be modified to make them more appropriate to specialists such as counselors, librarians, and special-services personnel, or to specific classroom situations. For example, in the case of an educator who does not instruct and/or work in a traditional classroom, suitable terms such as counseling skills or library management may be substituted for instructional skills or classroom management. Any such modifications shall be discussed and agreed to by the educator and the evaluator prior to any observation. The evaluation process shall be ongoing throughout the year and shall consist of both formal and informal evaluations. In the event of an overall score of unsatisfactory, as defined on the Summative Evaluation Report form reprinted in appendix E, the evaluator may implement a Mandatory Plan of Improvement, following the procedures described in section 4.7. 4.7 Mandatory Plan of Improvement If an evaluator rates an educator s performance unsatisfactory (as defined on the Summative Evaluation Report form reprinted in appendix E) on any of the 18 criteria, the evaluator may inform the educator in writing of the unsatisfactory performance (using the Notice of Deficiencies form in appendix F) and discuss the problem area(s) with the educator. The evaluator may also complete the explanation section of the Mandatory Plan of Improvement (MPI) form (reprinted in appendix G) before meeting with the educator to plan for correcting these deficiencies. 11
Nothing in this section shall be construed as eliminating or in any way limiting the district s legal right to dismiss any educator for good cause at any time before expiration of that educator s employment contract, in accordance with article 12.4 of the Master Employment Contract and section 20-4-207 of the Montana Code Annotated. In particular, nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring a Mandatory Plan of Improvement before any such dismissal. 4.7.1 MPI Guiding Principles The goal of an MPI is to help an educator improve his or her professional performance. MPIs shall be prepared in collaboration between the evaluator and the educator. It is important to note that productive collaboration requires that both parties treat one another with respect. Though the evaluator has an important role to play in helping the educator plan for improvement, the ultimate responsibility for assisting the educator with that improvement lies with the district. For example, the evaluator and educator working together might identify a need for additional training or support, but it would fall to the district to make that training available, assume any related financial obligations, and so forth. The educator must be involved in any planning for improving the areas of unsatisfactory performance. 4.7.2 Components of an MPI Using specific examples from the observation, the MPI shall describe the weaknesses observed by the evaluator. In consultation with the educator, the evaluator will provide the educator with guidance to help him or her correct the observed weaknesses. The MPI will also specify the evaluation method(s) that will be used to verify improvement and the dates on which such follow-up evaluations will occur. 4.7.3 Next Steps At the end of the MPI (within five school days after any follow-up observations have occurred), the evaluator shall prepare a written assessment of the educator s performance under the terms of the plan, including a recommendation for retention or termination. The evaluator shall then review this written assessment with the educator. After this review, the educator has seven school days to provide written comment regarding the assessment in the space provided on the MPI form. Once the educator has had an opportunity to provide this written comment, a signed copy of the written assessment shall be given to the educator; another copy shall be placed in the educator s official personnel file in the district office. 4.7.4 Right to Union Representation As stipulated in the Master Employment Contract, any union member may have a representative present during any part of the process described herein. 12
5. PROFESSIONAL ADVANCEMENT STRAND PROCEDURES This section describes the Professional Advancement Strand in detail and should be considered the authoritative guide to Professional Advancement Strand procedures and requirements. The purpose of the Professional Advancement Strand is to promote professional growth through goal setting, involve the educator and the administrator who directly supervises the educator in cooperative discussions and planning, and encourage collegial interaction for the accomplishment of goals. As explained in more detail below, participation and successful performance in the Professional Advancement Strand is a requirement for promotion eligibility. The Professional Advancement Strand is based on collaborative interaction, trust, and confidence. Growth is the desired outcome, and so the Professional Advancement Strand is not intended to represent a threat to anyone. At any time throughout a Professional Advancement Strand placement, an educator has the option of requesting the following: Assistance from administrators, supervisors, district personnel, and/or colleagues. Inclusion of documentation of professional growth, in addition to the year-end progress report, in the educator s personnel file. (Otherwise, such documentation is not a requirement of the program.) Placement into the Accountability Strand. While observation-based evaluations are not an explicit component of the Professional Advancement Strand, all educators are subject to unannounced informal observations at any time as defined in article 7.4.1.b of the Master Employment Contract. 5.1 Professional Advancement Strand Placement and Duration The Professional Advancement Strand is available only to tenured professional staff. Participation is voluntary. Tenured educators who choose to participate may remain on the Professional Advancement Strand for up to two successive years (assuming satisfactory performance) before returning to the Accountability Strand for their required evaluation on the third year. A tenured educator who wishes to submit a Professional Advancement Plan while on the Accountability Strand may do so upon approval of the immediate supervisor and the Appraisal Team on a year-by-year basis. An educator on the Professional Advancement Strand who transfers shall take any existing Professional Advancement Plan to the new building, assuming that both the educator and his or her new supervisor agree that the goals in that plan are appropriate to the educator s new position. 5.2 Professional Advancement Strand Components To advance to the next rung on the Ronan/Pablo Professional Advancement System, an educator who is on the Professional Advancement Strand is required to complete the components listed in table 4. Unsatisfactory performance on these components may result in the educator being immediately assigned to the Accountability Strand. 13
Table 4 Professional Advancement Strand Components Tenured Only Professional Advancement Plan Write, submit, and complete a Professional Advancement Plan that meets the criteria as set forth in the Professional Advancement Plan Rubric (see appendix H) and receives approval by the Appraisal Team An online Template will be used to guide organization and content of the plan. In proposing a plan, staff will identify at least one goal they wish to work toward. Educators will maintain a reflective journal/log that includes professional plan notes and documents Professional Service commitments. The Professional Advancement Plan may include an education component that identifies specific learning opportunities for completion, e.g. college courses, workshops, webinars, open courseware, etc. Professional Service Perform Professional Service (see table 5) as proposed in the plan Professional Service commitments must not be allied with any activities for which a stipend is earned, and must occur beyond the contract day. As mentioned in table 4 (above), one component of the Professional Advancement Plan is Professional Service. School District No. 30 educators share their professionalism with students, schools, and the district in many ways. The Professional Service component of the Professional Advancement Strand allows educators to be recognized for their professional contributions. To satisfy the Professional Service component, educators contributions must occur within district boundaries and fall into any of the seven categories shown in table 5. 14
Table 5 Professional Service Committee Involvement Student Projects Peer Support Categories Enrichment/Reinforcement Curriculum Outreach Possible Examples Any committee formed at the request of administration or the Superintendent: Attendance Committee Student Assistance Teams Class advisors (without stipend) Projects that may occur outside the normal school year such as Eagle Scout, 4-H, community service projects, etc. Appraisal Team, mentoring, etc. AM study time, after-school study time, etc. Working with other professionals to develop/enhance curriculum Community Outreach Local, State, and/or National Leadership Roles 4-H, volunteer coaching, Boy/Girl Scouts, Tournament help (locker rooms, crowd control, hospitality room, etc.), display cases, announcing, youth groups RPEA Executive Board, Insurance Committee Chair, Negotiations Committee, A.G.A.T.E. Professional Service commitments must also meet the following criteria: Professional Service frequency requirements: Rungs 4-9: 8 hours per year Rungs 10-15: 12 hours per year Rungs 16-20: 16 hours per year Professional Service cannot be used as Professional Advancement or for PIR credit. All Professional Service must be of direct benefit to the students, school, district, or community. All Professional Service must occur from the 1 st Wednesday in April of the prior school year to the 3 rd Wednesday in March of the current school year. Professional Service hours may come from one commitment or may be an accumulation of multiple commitments. The Professional Service commitment will be agreed upon, on an annual basis, by the educator and the appropriate Appraisal Teams. Upon mutual agreement these commitments may be modified during the year. 15
5.3 Timeline Successful completion of the Professional Advancement Strand requires careful adherence to the deadlines described below. An educator s failure to meet deadlines for any stages of the Professional Advancement Strand may result in the educator being moved to the Accountability Strand. 5.3.1 Submission of Professional Advancement Plan As shown in Table 6, educators on the Professional Advancement Strand shall (1) develop their professional goals, (2) submit their plan to the peer review committee (optional), (3) meet with their supervising administrator to discuss these goals and receive endorsement of their Professional Advancement Plans, and ( 4) submit the resulting Professional Advancement Plan via on-line template to the district office for distribution to the Appraisal Team by the close of the business day on the 4 th Wednesday in September for fall submission or the 3 rd Wednesday in May for spring submission. Lack of administrator endorsement does not mean the plan cannot be forwarded to the Appraisal Team, but any non-endorsed plan will be documented by the administrator endorsement form in Appendix H. Table 6 Professional Advancement Submission Timeline *NLT = Not Later Than Task Develop goals for Professional Advancement Plan. Submit for peer review to district office for distribution to the Peer Review Team via email (recommended but not required). Meet with administrator for endorsement of Professional Advancement Plan. Submit Professional Advancement Plan to district office for distribution to the Appraisal Team via email. (see 5.4.1 Submission Guidelines) Receive notice of approval or nonapproval of Professional Advancement Plan from the Appraisal Team. Deadline Fall Submission NLT the 2 nd Friday in September NLT the 3 rd Friday in September NLT the 4 th Wednesday in September NLT the 1 st Wednesday in October Deadline Spring Submission NLT the 2 nd Wednesday in May NLT the 2 nd Friday in May NLT the 3 rd Wednesday in May NLT the 4 th Wednesday in May Tenured educators choosing not to submit a Professional Advancement plan will be evaluated but will not advance on the pay ladder. (For information on Accountability Strand procedures, see section 4.) Educators choosing to participate in the Professional Advancement Strand will need to develop goals and objectives and create a Professional Advancement Plan using the PAP submission template. The plan should identify areas to be investigated, resources needed, colleagues to be involved, methods for collecting data, and/or methods for evaluating progress toward the goals, as applicable. During this process, administrators shall act as advisors with the goal of assisting educators in clarifying and refining their proposed goals and methods. 16
Educators can submit their Professional Advancement Plan to the Peer Review Team for feedback before presenting the plan for administrator endorsement. Peer review is not required but is recommended. Educators must meet with their administrator for endorsement by the 3 rd Friday in September or by the 2 nd Friday in May. Administrators have five days to review the proposed plans and notify educators either of endorsement or of need for revisions. If revisions are necessary, the administrator shall notify the educator, after which the educator will have till the 4 th Wednesday in September or the 3 rd Wednesday in May to complete revisions and resubmit his/her revised plan to the administrator for endorsement. The administrator will notify the educator if the plan has been endorsed by the submission deadline. The administrator shall fill out the rubric and endorsement form in Appendix H for the educator s Professional Advancement Plan and submit it to the district office for distribution to the Appraisal Team. This form will be used to document the administrator s endorsement or non-endorsement of the educator s plan. A non-endorsed plan may still be submitted to the Appraisal Team. The educator shall submit the resulting Professional Advancement Plan submission via on-line template to the district office for distribution to the Appraisal Team by the close of the business day on the 4 th Wednesday in September for fall submission and the 3 rd Wednesday in May for spring submission. (See 5.4.1 Submission Guidelines for details) Educators whose plans are not approved by the Appraisal Team will not advance on the salary ladder that year and will be placed on the Accountability Strand. Educators will be notified by the Appraisal Team of approval or non-approval of their Professional Advancement Plans no later than the 1 st Wednesday in October for fall submissions or the 4 th Wednesday in May for spring submissions. 5.3.2 Midyear During January, the educator and supervising administrator shall hold a second meeting in order to discuss progress on goal attainment and to refine and update any need for resources or other assistance. At this meeting, a mid-year progress report toward goals shall be completed collaboratively by the educator and the immediate administrator. The administrator shall fill out the rubric in Appendix I and submit it to the district office. This form will be used to document the administrator s and educator s meeting. This form shall be placed in the educator s Professional Advancement Strand file. 5.3.3 Final Professional Advancement Plan Approval In terms of educator activities, the Professional Advancement Strand concludes during March. By the 2 nd Friday in March, the educator and administrator shall hold a final meeting to analyze data and evaluate progress toward goals. The year-end final report shall be compiled by the educator using the PAP final report template. Educators can submit their Professional Advancement Plan final report to the Peer Review Team for feedback before presenting the plan for administrator endorsement. Peer review is not required but is recommended. The administrator shall fill out the rubric and endorsement form in Appendix J for the educator s Professional Advancement Plan final report and submit it to the district office for distribution to the Appraisal Team. This form will be used to document the administrator s endorsement of the educator s final report. 17
The educator shall submit the resulting Professional Advancement Plan final report via on-line template to the district office for distribution to the Appraisal Team by the close of the business day on the 3 rd Wednesday in March. Lack of administrator endorsement does not mean the plan cannot be forwarded to the Appraisal Team. (See 5.4.2 Final Report Guidelines for details) The Appraisal Team will decide whether or not each educator s performance warrants advancement, issuing a Notification of Salary Advancement or Non-advancement no later than the 1 st Wednesday in April. A copy of the Notification of Salary Advancement or Non-advancement is placed in the educator s personnel file. (See Table 7) Table 7 Professional Advancement Plan Timeline *NLT = Not Later Than Task Meet with administrator to discuss progress on the Professional Advancement Plan. Submit Professional Advancement Plan final report for peer review to district office for distribution to the Peer Review Team via email (recommended but not required). Meet with administrator to assess achievement of Professional Advancement Plan and final report. Submit Professional Advancement Plan final report to district office for distribution to the Appraisal Team. Receive notice of advancement or retention on the pay ladder by the Appraisal Team. Deadline During the month of January NLT the 2 nd Friday in March NLT the 3 th Wednesday in March NLT the 1 st Wednesday in April 18
5.4 Plan Guidelines 5.4.1 Submission Guidelines The Professional Advancement Plan submission shall be prepared online using the Professional Advancement Plan Submission template and submitted in accordance with the following guidelines: Plans are to be submitted according to the timeline described in section 5.3. Plans are to be submitted to the peer review team via the email address: professionalplan-peerreview@ronank12.edu Plans are to be submitted to the district office via the email address: professionalplan-submit@ronank12.edu The plan should contain the following: Goals and Objectives Plan Description Plan Timeline Indicators of Progress Collaboration Sharing Education Plan Professional Service Identify at least one overall goal and describe the objectives that would indicate accomplishment of the goal. Describe the reasoning behind the plan, and outline the processes and actions intended to achieve the goals and objectives. Create a detailed timeline for completing the goals and objectives. Specify final products that will result from the plan and will demonstrate accomplishment of the goals and objectives. Describe any collaboration that may occur during the plan. Describe any sharing that may occur during the plan. Describe any classes, college courses, certifications, or other educational components that may occur during plan. Identify the commitments that will be used to meet the requirements for the professional service requirement of the plan. 5.4.2 Final Report Guidelines The Professional Advancement Plan final report shall be prepared online using the Professional Advancement Plan Final Report template and submitted in accordance with the following guidelines: Plans are to be submitted according to the timeline described in section 5.3. Plans are to be submitted to the peer review team via the email address: professionalplan-peerreview@ronank12.edu Plans are to be submitted to the district office via the email address: professionalplan-final@ronank12.edu 19
The final report should contain the following: Plan Summary Plan Timeline Professional Service Reflection Indicators of Progress Write a summary essay describing the plan. (Possible topics for discussion: What was accomplished during the plan? How were the goals and objectives met? Was the plan successful? What collaboration or sharing took place? Give the detailed timeline followed while working toward the goals and objectives. Identify the commitments that were used to meet the requirements for the professional service requirement of the plan. Write a 1- to 2-page personal reflection on the plan s progress and accomplishments. Compile final products that resulted from the plan and that demonstrate accomplishment of the goals and objectives. These need to be shared with the educator s administrator and do not need to be submitted with the final report. Members for the Appraisal Team may request to see these final products. 5.5 The Professional Advancement Strand File The Professional Advancement Strand file is used to collect all materials relevant to an educator s Professional Advancement Plan each year. It will usually contain the following, supplemented by any other items appropriate to a particular educator s plan: Annual goals Data (if app.) Data gathering methods (if app.) Notes from meetings Resources needed Education course list (if app.) Course syllabi (if app.) Transcripts (if app.) Mid-year and year-end progress reports During the year, the file shall be retained by the educator, who must make it available to the administrator upon request. At the end of each year the educator shall retain the Professional Advancement Strand file and data. 5.6 Other Professional Advancement Strand Guidelines and Procedures This section describes additional guidelines and procedures applying to Professional Advancement Strand educators and their supervisors. 5.6.1 Professional Advancement Strand Principles The success of the Professional Advancement Strand is contingent on educators recognition of their responsibility for their own professional growth and on their desire to expand their knowledge and effectiveness. The success of the Professional Advancement Strand is also contingent on administrators recognition of their role as instructional leaders dedicated to the professional growth of their staff. Trust, confidence, and effective communication are essential to the success of this process. 20
5.6.2 Guidance for Supervisors Supervisors are encouraged to assist in coordinating educators efforts toward common goals that may exist in the building. The administrator is further encouraged to provide educators with any information and resources that may bear on their goal attainment. 5.6.3 Confidentiality In order to encourage experimentation and risk-taking, information on an educator s performance during a Professional Advancement Strand year is not considered relevant to that educator s evaluations during an Accountability Strand year. 5.6.4 Experimentation and Flexibility Encouraged Research recognizes that there are varying teaching strategies, learning and teaching styles, and lesson plan formats. To promote maximum professional growth, experimentation and flexibility are encouraged in the development of Professional Advancement Plan goals. However, plans must still comply with all district curriculum guidelines and other applicable rules and regulations. 5.6.5 Peer Involvement Peer involvement is encouraged. Educators may solicit colleagues assistance with observations, data collecting, or other collaborative efforts. Educators may choose to work in teams, department groups, or grade levels for goal setting and to work toward those goals. In this scenario, the supervisor acts as a coach, observer, facilitator, and/or data collector. 5.6.6 Unsatisfactory Performance If, at any time during an educator s placement on the Professional Advancement Strand, an immediate supervisor deems that educator s performance to be unsatisfactory, the educator may be moved to the Accountability Strand. In such cases, a Mandatory Plan of Improvement may be implemented but is not required. In order to return to the Professional Advancement Strand an educator must receive a positive evaluation as defined on the Summative Evaluation Report form reprinted in appendix E. However, it is conceivable that all stated goals may not be reached in a given year for a variety of reasons. The district and RPEA agree that analysis of such circumstances can also be a learning experience; at the Appraisal Team s discretion, failure to achieve stated goals shall not necessarily be grounds for being moved to the Accountability Strand or for being ineligible for promotion. 5.6.7 In the Event of Reassignment At any time that a Professional Advancement Strand educator changes assignments, he or she must resubmit his or her plan to the appropriate Appraisal Team. Assuming that the educator and the supervisor of the new position (which may be the same supervisor as before) agree that the existing goals and other components of the plan still apply to the new assignment, the same plan may be resubmitted with a new endorsement from the supervisor of the new position. 21
Appendix A: Glossary Accountability: To be answerable for; to act in a credible manner. In school organizations a shift is occurring toward being accountable for outputs, not just inputs. Accountability Strand: The evaluation track for all non-tenured educators annually, and for tenured educators one school year out of every three. Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria: The 18 criteria used to evaluate educators on the Accountability Strand. Administrative Observations: Work-site visits to observe administrator performance. These may be sliceof-time observations (such as observing a staff meeting, child study team meeting, a feedback conference with a educator, etc.) or shadowing, observing the administrator during a longer block of time and across multiple activities. Alternative Assessment: Sometimes called nontraditional assessment, it is an act or procedure that is nearer to measuring the real ability and achievement of a student than traditional, especially multiple-choice, tests. Examples might be products, portfolios, performances, and personal communication. Anticipatory Set: An activity to focus students attention, provide a brief practice session, and/or develop a readiness for instruction. Appraisal Team: The Superintendent, one School Board member, one Administrator, one RPEA member, and at least one representative from each building to serve on the teams as follows: K. William Harvey Elementary (K-6 Team), Pablo Elementary (K-6 Team), Ronan Middle School (7-12 Team), and Ronan High School (7-12 Team). Appraisal Teams Log: A diary maintained by the leader of the Appraisal Team detailing activities and resources provided in the appraisal process. Dates, meeting times, and funds expended are included. Approval: The action of the administrator having met with the educator, and accepting the completion of that educator s Professional Advancement Plan and all of its components according to the rubric set forth. Authority: The right to control, command, or determine. In public education, authority is derived from federal and state law, district policy, and organizational culture. Checking for Understanding: Informal assessments in which a educator observes student performance to determine whether or not the student is attaining the objective. Closure: An activity that pulls together all the elements of the lesson into a cohesive unit and reviews or restates the important points. Commendable: Educators are considered commendable if they are rated commendable on the district s Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria. (See Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria. ) This is considered a positive evaluation. (See positive evaluation. ) Consensus: An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole. Data: Observations, work samples, input from peers, students, community, parents, and evaluators. 22
Developing: Educators are considered developing if they are rated developing, proficient, or commendable on the district s Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria. (See Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria. ) This is the minimum rating necessary for a positive evaluation. (See Positive Evaluation. ) Due Process: Constitutional protection guaranteed a public employee for proper procedure and fair treatment. In the case of performance evaluation it includes notice, explanation, assistance, and time. Ethical Behavior: In accordance with professional rules, standards, and best practices. In district 30, ethical behavior includes integrity and a commitment to the well-being of students and colleagues. Evaluation: The process of determining the merit, worth, or value of something, using appropriate measurements and other relevant evidence. Evaluation Cycle: An evaluation process incorporating a pre-observation conference, a formal classroom observation, a post-observation conference and a summative evaluation report. Excellence: Superiority or eminence. The quality of being the best at something. Formal Observation: A scheduled classroom visit wherein records and data are collected to be used to measure and evaluate performance. Guided Practice: Activities closely monitored by the educator to assure that first attempts at using new learning are successful. Independent Practice: Activities, such as homework, class assignments, or tests, which are completed without the availability of the educator. Informal Observation: Unscheduled visits and/or general observations used to collect data in the overall evaluation process. Input: Information students receive in a lesson so that they may attain the lesson objective. Instructional Delivery Model: Generally referred to as Madeline Hunter s Steps of the Teaching Act. Legally Discriminating: Useable for sorting and rating educators as high, medium, or low performing. Mandatory Plan of Improvement: A plan used to help educators improve performance following the receipt of unsatisfactory ratings on any of the Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria. (See Accountability Strand Evaluation Criteria. ) Modeling: Examples of the critical elements of intended instruction or finished products. Objective: An aim or end of action. Positive Evaluation: A rating of commendable, proficient, or developing on the Summative Evaluation Report. (See Commendable, Developing, and/or Proficient. ) Post-observation Conference: Conference held following an announced observation for the purposes of discussing the observation and any other factors relevant to evaluating a staff member's performance. 23