principal and assistant principal level. the harrison e&r plan for principals and assistant...

Harrison School District Two 1060 Harrison Road Colorado Springs, CO 80905

Principal and Assistant

Principal Evaluation System

Revised October 2015 Page 1

HARRISON SCHOOL DISTRICT TWO

PRINCIPAL AND ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL

EVALUATION SYSTEM

DOCUMENTS RECEIPT

I acknowledge that I have reviewed a copy of the Principal and Assistant Principal Evaluation

System Manual.

The Principal and Assistant Principal Evaluation System Manual can also be accessed on the

Harrison School District Two Human Capital website at www.hsd2.org.

My signature does not constitute agreement; it only signifies that I reviewed a copy of the

aforementioned document.

Principal/AP Name Printed Signature Date

School Leadership Officer Name Printed Signature Date

http://www.hsd2.org/

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=harrison+school+district+two+logo&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=M6VfYqdGH7TVNM&tbnid=RlaV-KotOTNBsM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=https://twitter.com/HarrisonSDTwo&ei=gwAmUpHxKeeTyQGMooEY&bvm=bv.51495398,d.aWc&psig=AFQjCNEZupWi6MqW4WC1pjCKNMuqKnf-IA&ust=1378308593220334


Table of Contents

Section

1. Evaluation Process Procedures

2. Leadership Standards

Communication

Compliance

Culture

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Awareness

Data Driven Decision Making

Management

Monitor and Evaluate Instructional Delivery

Professionalism

Recognition

Relationship

3. Performance Standards Rubric

4. Written Summative Form

5. Evaluation Metric Form

6. Compensation Form

Originally Adopted August 2011 Revised October 2015

Section 1: Evaluation Process Procedures


INTRODUCTION: As required by Colorado’s Senate Bill 10-191, all principals and assistant principals must be evaluated

annually. The primary purpose of evaluation in Harrison School District Two is to assist principals and

assistant principals in developing and strengthening their professional abilities, improve the instructional

program, enhance the implementation of curricular programs, and measure professional growth,

development and level of performance of the administrator while maintaining compliance with Senate Bill

10-191.

Fifty percent of the evaluation is based on performance and fifty percent of the evaluation is based on the

academic growth of the students enrolled in the principal’s and assistant principal’s campus. Additionally,

SB 10-191 requires districts to consider the number and percentage of licensed personnel in the principal’s

and assistant principal’s campus who are rated as effective or highly effective, and the number and

percentage of licensed personnel in the principal’s and assistant principal’s campus who are rated as

ineffective but are improving in effectiveness.1

Harrison’s pay for performance plan for principals and assistant principals effectively measures a principal’s

and assistant principal’s success and compensates based on that success. In accordance with SB 10-191,

Harrison’s evaluation of principals and assistant principals will rely on a combination of performance

measurements and student achievement results.

1 For more information, see http://www.cde.state.co.us/EducatorEffectiveness/OverviewOfSB191.asp


DEFINITIONS: The following definitions apply to the principal and assistant principal E&R Plan:

Accountability Year: the Accountability Year for principals and assistant principals is

the 4th Quarter a year in arrears and the first 3 Quarters of the current school year. For

example, the 2015-16 Accountability Year is the 4th Quarter of the 2014-15 school year

and Quarter 1, Quarter 2, and Quarter 3 of the 2015-16 school year.

Annual evaluation rating: the overall assessment of a principal’s/assistant principal’s

effectiveness based on the principal’s/assistant principal’s performance and achievement

metrics during one year. A principal/assistant principal receives an evaluation rating

annually. It is possible for an evaluation rating to be higher or lower than the overall

effectiveness level.

The Harrison E&R Plan for principals and assistant principals uses different terminology

than Colorado’s teacher and principal effectiveness legislation (SB 191). For purposes of

implementing SB 191, we adopt the following definitions:

An “effective” principal/assistant principal in the Harrison School District is one

who attains an annual evaluation rating (based on the principal’s/assistant

principal’s performance and student achievement data of students enrolled in the

principal’s/assistant principal’s campus) of Proficient I, Proficient II, or Proficient

III. A “highly effective” principal/assistant principal is one who attains an annual

evaluation rating of Exemplary.

A “partially-effective” principal or assistant principal is one who attains an annual

evaluation rating of Progressing II, or Progressing III.

Principals or assistant principals whose annual performance evaluation rating is

Progressing I shall be considered “ineffective.”

E&R – Effectiveness and Results: the District’s name for the pay-for-performance plan.

Teachers also have an E&R Plan.

Metrics: performance measurements or measurable outcomes used to assess principal

and assistant principal effectiveness. There are three types of metrics used in the

principal E&R Plan:

o Performance metrics – those measureable indicators that describe how well a

principal/assistant principal does their job. They focus on leadership through

communication, recognition, and effective instructional delivery.

o Student achievement metrics – student achievement results related to

proficiency levels, academic growth, and student performance on District,

national, and state common assessments.


o Progress-monitoring metrics – performance measurements that are assessed

during the year through the fall, winter and spring staff file reviews. These

reviews provide feedback to principals/assistant principals and help them gauge

their progress.

Overall effectiveness level: the effectiveness level on the E&R scale to which a

principal/assistant principal will be assigned based on the performance evaluation and

achievement measures. The overall effectiveness level also determines the salary. There

are seven effectiveness levels:

Prog I Prog II Prog III Prof I Prof II Prof III Exemp

There are three levels that fall below “effective.” The Progressing I, II, and III categories

note the varying degrees of progress being made. Four levels denote varying degrees of

effectiveness. For Harrison’s E&R Plan for principals and assistant principals,

proficiency denotes effectiveness.

Principal/assistant principal performance rubric: the evaluation instrument that outlines

principal/assistant principal performance standards. The rubric accounts for one hundred

(100) percent of a principal’s/assistant principal’s performance.

Effective Partially-Effective Highly-

Effective


PRINCIPAL AND ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL EFFECTIVENESS METRICS: A principal’s or assistant principal’s annual evaluation rating consists of two parts: 1)

performance, and 2) student achievement. Each part is worth fifty (50) percent or half of the

total one hundred (100) percent. The performance and achievement metrics are summarized in

the chart below and are described in more detail on the following pages.

Measuring Principal Effectiveness – the Metrics

Area

Per

form

an

ce

(50%

)

Performance rubric

Ach

iev

emen

t

(50%

)

School Performance Framework

State Assessment/ACT

National Assessments

District Assessments

ACCESS Growth

District Performance Framework


PERFORMANCE: Principal and assistant principal performance will be assessed using the principal and assistant

principal evaluation rubric (dated March 2014). The rubric includes specific performance

criteria for leadership, the instructional program, staff development, effective management,

professional responsibilities, retention of effective teachers, and improving teacher effectiveness.

The rubric also includes specific sources of evidence to be used in assessing the various areas. It

contains ten (10) performance standards that equal a maximum of five (5) points each resulting

in a total possible score of fifty (50) performance points.

TEACHER RETENTION:

The goal of the District is to retain as many proficient or distinguished teachers as possible. To

achieve this goal, the District will determine the number of effective teachers (Proficient I or

higher) the campus has at the end of the year (based on that year’s evaluations) and then identify

the number of effective teachers who start the next school year with the District. This measure is

included in the principal’s and assistant principal’s performance score within the principal and

assistant principal evaluation rubric under Standard 3: Culture.

Unsatisfactory Progressing - 1 Proficient – 3 Exemplary – 5

Percentage of

effective teachers

(Proficient I or

higher) returning is

less than 49%.

Percentage of

effective teachers

(Proficient I or


between 50-69%.

Percentage of

effective teachers

(Proficient I or


between 70-89%.

Percentage of

effective teachers

(Proficient I or


90% or greater.

Teach for America (TFA) teachers will not be counted in this retention metric. However, if a

TFA teacher returns to the District for a third year and has received a “Proficient” or higher

evaluation rating, the District will add one to the numerator of this metric. Any TFA teacher

starting a fourth year in the District will be considered a regular teacher for this metric.


IMPROVING TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS:

Improving teacher effectiveness assesses the improvement in the overall effectiveness of the

teachers at a campus. Each teacher summative evaluation is quantified per the chart below. For

example, a Proficient I annual evaluation is given three (3) points and a Proficient III annual

evaluation receives five (5) points.

Teacher Effectiveness = Sum of evals/no. of teachers =

The teacher effectiveness is measured by adding the points for the teacher’s annual evaluation

ratings and dividing the number by the number of teachers. The teacher effectiveness score at

the beginning of the year is compared with the score at the end of the year after the summative

evaluations are completed. The principal’s or assistant principal’s teacher effectiveness measure

is determined by the degree of improvement. This measure is included in the principal’s and

assistant principal’s performance score within the principal and assistant principal evaluation

rubric under Standard 7: Monitor and Evaluate Instructional Delivery.

Unsatisfactory Progressing - 1 Proficient – 3 Exemplary – 5

Teacher

effectiveness score

at the beginning of

the year as

compared at the end

of the year

illustrates a

difference of less

than 10%.

Teacher

effectiveness score

at the beginning of

the year as

compared at the

end of the year

illustrates a

difference between

10% and 24%.

Teacher

effectiveness score

at the beginning of

the year as

compared at the end

of the year

illustrates a

difference between

25% and 74%.

Teacher

effectiveness score

at the beginning of

the year as

compared at the end

of the year

illustrates a

difference of 75%

or greater.

Teachers placed on a remediation plan, removed from the campus during the school year, or who

are non-renewed at the end of the school year are not counted in this metric. Novice teachers

(who are automatically advanced if they are invited back to the District) also do not count in this

metric, except for those novice teachers who receive an annual evaluation rating greater than

Progressing I.

Unsat Prog. I Prog. II Prof. I Prof. II Prof. III Exemp.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6


INPUT FROM OTHERS:

Included in the Performance metric is input from the teachers employed in the principal’s and

assistant principal’s campus as well as input from the students enrolled in the campus and their

parents. CRS § 22-9-106(3.2) (b) states “Each principal’s evaluation shall include input from

the teachers employed in the principal’s school and may include input from the students enrolled

in the school and their parents. Each school district shall specify the manner in which input from

teachers and from students and parents, if any, is collected but shall ensure that the information

collected remains anonymous and confidential.”


ACHIEVEMENT RESULTS: Fifty (50) percent of a principal’s and assistant principal’s evaluation is tied to multiple measures

of student achievement based on the accountability year. These include State Assessment/ACT

results, District Assessment results, School Performance Framework, National Assessments,

ACCESS Growth, and District Performance Framework.


School accreditation ratings are determined by the Colorado Department of Education and come

directly from the School Performance Frameworks. There are four categories: Performance,

Improvement, Priority Improvement, and Turnaround based on the overall performance rating

score. This metric is based on the school’s overall percentage of framework points earned out of

one hundred (100) points.

State Assessments /ACT

The State Assessment metric is related to academic growth. The eligibility date for students is

October 1 for all scores attributed to the administrator.

As per HB 15-1323, results from spring 2015 administration of CMAS assessments (which

include science, social studies, PARCC English Language Arts, and PARCC math) will not be

used in effectiveness ratings for the 2015-16 accountability year. Therefore, for 2015-16 the

state assessment accountability wedge for MS and ES administrators will be distributed among

other assessment measures within the pie. In future years, CMAS results will be a metric in

Principal and Assistant Principal evaluations of student achievement, beginning with the 2016-17

accountability year.

The ACT metric is related to college and career readiness. The ACT score is based on the

average composite score of eligible 11th grade students at the campus.

National Assessments (ACT Aspire)

The District is working with vendors and technical assistants to research growth metrics for ACT

Aspire.

District common assessments

The December CBMs administered in RWC (reading, writing, and communicating), math,

science, and social studies courses will be the accountable assessments. The District assessment

metric is a measure of the percent of eligible students that score at or above the District median

of their academic peers.


The District removes all students who are ineligible based on campus entry dates. (Reference the

E&R Data System Calendar for eligibility dates). Students who are tagged as habitually absent,

who are eligible for Co-Alt, or who are NEP are also removed.

ACCESS Growth

The District administers ACCESS for ELLs to students in Kindergarten – 12th grade. The metric

is based on eligible students’ median growth percentile across all contents. Growth is available

for students in 1st-12th grade.


District accreditation ratings are determined by the Colorado Department of Education and come

directly from the District Performance Framework. There are five categories: Accredited with

Distinction, Accredited, Accredited with Improvement Plan, Accredited with Priority

Improvement Plan, or Accredited with Turnaround Plan based on the overall performance rating

score. This metric is based on the district’s overall percentage of framework points earned out of

one hundred (100) points.


PRINCIPAL AND ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS

LEVEL:

Principals and assistant principals will receive an evaluation rating every year. A principal’s or

assistant principal’s effectiveness level is an average of the last two annual evaluation ratings.

For example, if a principal or assistant principal earned 64.37 points (a Proficient I evaluation

rating) in 2013-14, and 70.34 points (a Proficient II evaluation rating) in 2014-15, the average

score would be 67.355. Truncating to the tenths place would result in a score of 67.3 and would

equate to an effectiveness level of Proficient II. One year of evaluation ratings will be used to

assess a principal’s or assistant principal’s effectiveness level when they are a new principal or

assistant principal of Harrison School District Two.

Principals or assistant principals remain at their overall effectiveness level until the average

evaluation rating scores over the last two years is within the range for the next higher

effectiveness level. Should a principal’s or assistant principal’s average evaluation rating score

fall within a higher overall effectiveness level, they will be moved to the next higher level.

Should a principal’s or assistant principal’s average evaluation rating score fall below their

overall effectiveness level for two consecutive years, they will be moved to the next lower level.3

Principals or assistant principals who have an evaluation rating of Proficient and are moved to a

campus in order to help the campus improve, may keep the evaluation rating they earned at the

previous campus for two additional years.

PRINCIPAL AND ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL COMPENSATION: The overall effectiveness level determines the base salary of the principal or assistant principal.

Principals and assistant principals receive additional compensation for the size of the campus, the

level (elementary, middle, or high), and years of experience. The size of the campus is

determined by the data received from the prior year’s October count. The Superintendent has the

authority to make the final determination of a principal’s or assistant principal’s compensation

on the total compensation scale.

Principals and assistant principals with no prior year’s data will be placed on the E&R pay scale

as per the Superintendent’s and the Human Capital Officer’s determination. Input will be

accepted from the School Leadership Officers (SLOs) when necessary for placement.

3 Nothing in this document prohibits the District from removing a principal at any time or grants property rights beyond what is provided for in State law.


Section 2: Leadership Standards


Harrison School District Two

Instructional Leadership Standards

I. Communication-establishes strong lines of communication with stakeholders.

a. Faculty, Student and Parent Handbook

b. School & Staff Newsletters

c. Staff and leadership meetings

d. Website/Social Media

e. Parent Conferences

f. Timely staff communication

II. Compliance-adheres to local, state, and federal policies, procedures and regulations

a. Budget; resources aligned to support district and school initiatives

b. Teacher and Administrative Evaluation Timelines

c. Attendance

d. Discipline

e. Special Education/504

f. Gifted & Talented (GT)

g. Unified Improvement Plan (UIP)

h. Title I

i. Cultural Linguistic Diverse Education (CLDE)

j. Literacy Plan (students below grade level)

k. CDE Policies/Procedures

l. District Initiatives

m. Testing Regulations

III. Culture-fosters shared belief and a sense of community and cooperation

a. School vision, mission, and positioning statement

b. Staff members can articulate the school’s vision

c. High expectations for all students and teachers

d. Positive School-wide Discipline System

e. Reduction of incidents of violence and suspensions

f. Collaborative Decision-Making

g. Teacher Retention

h. Student and Parent Satisfaction Survey

i. Safe Learning Environment


IV. Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Awareness-is knowledgeable about current

curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices

a. Professional Learning Communities (PLCs)

b. Scheduling-Teacher assignments that are purposeful

c. Focus on Standards Based Instruction

d. Professional Development related to school improvement goals

e. District Curriculum

V. Data Driven Decision Making-utilizes student data and a variety of data sources to make

recommendations for improving instructional practices and positively impacting student

achievement

a. Review of Disaggregated data by subgroups

b. Root Cause Analysis

c. Common/Formative/Summative Assessments

d. State and Local Assessments

e. Data Walls

f. Data Talk Teams

g. Response to Intervention (RTI)

VI. Management- coordinates the efforts of personnel to accomplish desired goals and

objectives using available resources efficiently and effectively

a. Established and effective leadership teams

b. Administrative Duties

c. Manage all appropriate resources

d. Facilities/Grounds

e. Transportation

f. Scheduling

g. Effective Time Management

VII. Monitor and Evaluate Instructional Delivery-improves instructional practices through the

purposeful observation and evaluation of staff

a. Spot Observations

b. Formal and Summative Evaluation Feedback

c. Examination of student work

d. Implementation and monitoring of district initiatives

e. Instructional Rounds

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective_(goal)


VIII. Professionalism-maintains appropriate and respectful behavior with all stakeholders

a. Attendance

b. Professional Appearance and Demeanor

c. Shows respect and concern for others

d. Deals effectively with challenging situations

e. Models positive behavior for employees

f. Collaborative with colleagues

g. Positive interactions with student/parent/staff/supervisors

IX. Recognition-fosters an environment that positively recognizes individuals

a. Teacher incentives

b. Student/Staff/Community recognition

c. Very Important Parent (VIP) Program-Participation

d. Recognition of contributions

X. Relationship-develops an awareness of the personal aspects of stakeholders.

a. Organized parent groups (PTO, PTA, VIP)

b. Established partnerships (Business, Faith-based community associations)

c. Building rapport with parents, students, staff, colleagues, and supervisors

Overall Rating Points Overall Rating Band Range

0-7 Progressing I 8

8-15 Progressing II 8

16-22 Progressing III 7

23-30 Proficient I 8

31-37 Proficient II 7

38-45 Proficient III 8

46-50 Exemplary 5


Section 3: Performance Standards Rubric


RUBRIC ASSESSMENT

Name:_______________________________

Date:________________________________

Principal/Assistant Principal

Self-Assessment Evaluator Assessment

Standard 1: Communication

The school leader will establish strong lines of communication with stakeholders.

Unsatisfactory Progressing - 1 Proficient - 3 Exemplary - 5

Fails to satisfy the component

as defined.

Fails to develop a coherent plan to

effectively communicate with all

staff and stakeholders.

COMMENTS:

Defines a communications plan for

staff and stakeholders; however,

actual communications lack purpose,

clarity, consistency, or regularity.

COMMENTS:

Designs and utilizes a system of

open communications that provides

for the timely, responsible sharing of

information to, from, and with staff

and stakeholders.

Provides information in various

formats in multiple ways through

different media in order to ensure

communication with staff and

stakeholders.

COMMENTS:

…and

Ensures that staff and stakeholders

are aware of school goals for

instruction and achievement,

activities used to meet these goals,

and progress toward meeting these

goals.

COMMENTS:


Standard 2: Compliance

The school leader will ensure that the school has processes and systems in place for budgeting, staffing, problem solving,

communicating expectations and scheduling that result in organizing the work routines in the building. The school leader

must efficiently, effectively, and safely manage the building to foster staff accountability and student achievement.


Fails to satisfy the

component as defined.

Fails to comply with policies,

mandates, and contractual

agreements in a timely and/or

complete manner.

COMMENTS:

Inconsistently complies with

local, state, and federal

mandates and all contractual

agreements in a timely

and/or complete manner.

COMMENTS:

Designs protocols and processes

in order to comply with local,

state, and federal mandates.

Consistently complies with local,

state, and federal mandates and

all contractual agreements in a

timely and complete manner.

COMMENTS:

…and

Presents local, state, and federal

mandates so that such mandates

are viewed as an opportunity for

improvement within the school.

Identifies opportunities for

improvement to develop

programs derived from the

mandates.

COMMENTS:


Standard 3: Culture

The school leader fosters shared belief and a sense of community and cooperation.


Fails to satisfy the component as

defined.

Fails to develop a school wide

vision, mission, or strategic goals.

Fails to demonstrate the

involvement of staff and

stakeholders in a strategic

process that leads to the

development of the school’s

vision, mission, and goals

Percentage of effective teachers

(Proficient I or higher) returning

is less than 49%.

COMMENTS:

Develops school wide vision,

mission, and strategic goals

based on his/her own individual

beliefs regarding future needs of

student performance, with

limited evidence of stakeholder

involvement.



is between 50-69%.

COMMENTS:

Implements a process that

includes stakeholders for

developing a shared vision and

strategic goals for student

achievement that results in rigor

and relevance for students and

staff.

Maintains a focus on the vision

and strategic goals throughout the

school year.

Ensures that staff incorporates the

school’s vision, mission, and

strategic goals in their

instructional plans to assure that

students achieve expected

outcomes.



is between 70-89%.

COMMENTS:

…and

Designs, initiates, and

implements collaborative

processes to collect and analyze

data about the school’s progress

for the periodic review and

revision of the school’s vision,

mission and strategic goals.

Systematically ensures that the

school’s vision, mission, values,

beliefs and goals drive decisions

that positively influence the

culture of the school.



is 90% or greater.

COMMENTS:


Standard 4: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Awareness

The school leader is knowledgeable about current curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices.


Fails to satisfy the component as

defined.

Fails to monitor that the LEA’s

curricula are being implemented.

Fails to engage staff in curricula

planning and instruction.

COMMENTS:

In consistently monitors that the

LEA’s curricula are implemented

with fidelity throughout the

school.

Inconsistently engages staff in

curricula planning and

instruction.

COMMENTS:

Consistently ensures that the

LEA’s curricula are implemented

with fidelity throughout the

school.

Aligns curricula with assessments

and instructional material.

Engages staff in curricula

planning and instruction based

upon state and local assessments.

Creates opportunities to

collaboratively use

data/assessments to drive

instructional decisions and

practices.

COMMENTS:

…and

Engages staff to assess curricula

for strengths and weaknesses.

Reports data and

recommendations to curriculum

committee for refinement of the

LEA’s curricula.

Principals promote school-wide

efforts to establish, implement

and refines appropriate

expectations for curriculum,

instructional practices,

assessment and use of data on

student learning based on

scientific research and evidence-

based practices that result in

student academic achievement.

COMMENTS:


Standard 5: Data Driven Decision Making

The school leader utilizes student data and a variety of data sources to make recommendations for improved instructional practices

and positively impacting student achievement.




Fails to demonstrate the

ability to analyze or use data

to drive effective decision-

making.

COMMENTS:

Infrequently uses data and

assessments to monitor

progress.

Exhibits the inability to

develop the capacity of staff

and other stakeholders to use

data for decision-making.

COMMENTS:

Collects, analyzes, monitors and

uses data systematically

regarding the school’s progress in

driving informed decision making

for the attainment of strategic

goals and objectives.

Develops the capacity of staff and

other stakeholders to use data for

decision making.

Ensures that a plan is in place that

supports to improve academic

achievement and developmental

outcomes for all students, and

provides for data-based progress

monitoring.

COMMENTS:

…and

Activates and sustains a school

wide system for monitoring and

evaluating progress toward

achieving school goals and

student outcomes.

COMMENTS:


Standard 6: Management The school leaders coordinate the effort of personnel to accomplish desired goals and objectives using available resources

efficiently and effectively.




Fails to systematically allocate

human and financial resources

that support the vision,

mission, and strategic goals of

the school.

COMMENTS:

Utilizes systems for

allocating human and

financial resources that are

not transparent.

COMMENTS:

Designs transparent systems to

equitably manage human,

financial, and other resources.

Ensures the strategic allocations

and equitable use of all resources

to meet instructional goals and

support teacher needs.

COMMENTS:

…and

Integrates school, LEA, and

community resources efficiently

and effectively into school

operations.

Uses data and feedback to assess

the success of funding and

program decisions.

COMMENTS:


Standard 7: Monitor and Evaluate Instructional Delivery The school leader improves instructional practices through the purposeful observation and evaluation staff.




Fails to monitor the

effectiveness of

professional staff in the

domains of:

• Leadership • Classroom Environment • Instruction • Professional

Responsibilities

Teacher effectiveness score at

the beginning of the year as

compared at the end of the year

illustrates a difference of less

than 10%.

COMMENTS:

Inconsistently monitors the

effectiveness of and timely

feedback to professional staff

in the domains of:

• Leadership • Classroom Environment • Instruction • Professional

Responsibilities Lacks participation in

ongoing professional

development activities to

better monitor and coach the

use of effective instructional

and assessment practices.



compared at the end of the

year illustrates a difference

between 10% to 24%.

COMMENTS:

Consistently monitors the

effectiveness of and timely

feedback to professional staff in

the domains of:

Leadership • Classroom Environment. • Instruction • Professional Responsibilities

Participates in professional

development activities,

including calibrating to better

monitor and coach the use of

effective instructional and

assessment practices.




illustrates a difference between

25% to 74%.

COMMENTS:

…and

Collaboratively works with staff

members to:

Identify professional

development needs based

on observation data

Plans short and long-term

professional activities to

identify needs based on

data

Monitor performance

following professional

development to ensure

application of lessons

learned.




illustrates a difference of 75% or

greater.

COMMENTS:


Standard 8: Professionalism The school leader maintains appropriate and respectful behavior with all stakeholders.




Fails to display honesty in

interactions with students,

staff, and stakeholders. Fails to recognize student

needs and contributes to school

practices that result in some

students being ill served.

COMMENTS:

Interacts honestly with

students, staff, and

stakeholders, but attempts to

serve students are

inconsistent.

COMMENTS:

Articulates and demonstrates a

professional code of ethics.

Displays high standards of

honesty, integrity, and

confidentiality in interactions

with students, staff, and

stakeholders.

Actively serves students to ensure

that all students receive a fair

opportunity to succeed.

COMMENTS:

…and

Holds the highest standards of

honesty, integrity, and

confidentiality.

Proactively serves students,

seeking out resources when

needed.

Makes a concerted effort to

challenge negative attitudes or

practices to ensure that all

students, particularly those

traditionally underserved, are

honored in the school.

COMMENTS:


Standard 9: Recognition The school leader fosters an environment that positively recognizes individuals.




Fails to utilize lessons

from accomplishments

and failures to positively

impact the culture and

performance of the

school.

COMMENTS:

Inconsistently utilizes

lessons from

accomplishments and

failures to positively

impact the culture and

performance of the school.

COMMENTS:

Recognizes individuals and

collective contributions in a

systematic manner toward

attainment of strategic goals.

Utilizes failure as an opportunity

to improve school culture and

student performance.

COMMENTS:

…and

Utilizes recognition, reward, and

advancement as a way to promote

the accomplishments of the

school.

COMMENTS:


Standard 10: Relationship The school leader develops an awareness of the personal aspects of all stakeholders.




Fails to design structures and

processes, which result in a

lack of parent and community

engagement, support, and

ownership for the school.

COMMENTS:

Efforts for community outreach

do not result in meaningful

support for teaching and

learning.

Unilaterally designs

structures and processes

that result in limited

involvement of parents

and other stakeholders.

COMMENTS:

Creates systems and engages

parents/guardians and all

community stakeholders in a

shared responsibility for student

and school success reflecting the

community’s vision of the school.

Collaboratively works to

establish a culture that

encourages and welcomes

families and community

members.

Creates a collaborative work

environment predicated upon

cooperation among and between

students, staff, and community.

COMMENTS:

…and

Proactively develops

relationships with

parents/guardians and the

community so as to develop good

will and garner fiscal, intellectual

and human resources that support

specific aspects of the school’s

goals.

COMMENTS:


The following documents were used as reference in the development of the Administrator Evaluation System:

Colorado Department of Education. (July, 2013). Rubric for Evaluating Colorado’s Principals and Assistant Principals.

Denver, Colorado

Pittsburgh Public Schools. (2009). Administrator Performance Standard Rubric Revised 09-10. Pittsburgh, PA.

Tennessee Department of Education. (September 2011). Tennessee’s Principal Evaluation System. Nashville, TN


Section 4: Written Summative Form


Principal and Assistant Principal Performance Evaluation

Name: ________________________ Evaluator: _________________ Date: _________

Position: _______________________ Location: ________________________

See evaluation rubric for more detailed descriptions of performance areas.

I. Communication Points 0 1 3 5

Establishes strong lines of communication with

stakeholders. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:

II. Compliance Points 0 1 3 5

Adheres to local, state, and federal policies,

procedures and regulations.

Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:


III. Culture Points 0 1 3 5

Fosters shared belief and a sense of community and

cooperation. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:

IV. Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment Awareness Points 0 1 3 5

Is knowledgeable about current curriculum,

instruction, and assessment practices. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:

V. Data Driven Decision Making Points 0 1 3 5

Utilizes student data and a variety of data sources to

make recommendations for improving instructional

practices and positively impacting student

achievement.

Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:


VI. Management Points 0 1 3 5

Coordinates the efforts of personnel to accomplish

desired goals and objectives using available resources

efficiently and effectively. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:

VII. Monitor and Evaluate Instructional Delivery Points 0 1 3 5

Improves instructional practices through the

purposeful observation and evaluation of staff. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:

VIII. Professionalism Points 0 1 3 5

Maintains appropriate and respectful behavior with

all stakeholders. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:


IX. Recognition Points 0 1 3 5

Fosters an environment that positively recognizes

individuals. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:

X. Relationship Points 0 1 3 5

Develops an awareness of the personal aspects of

stakeholders. Rating U Prog Prof E

TOTAL

Comments:

With the exception of the conditions outlined below, total the points for each rating of Standards I-X.

An administrator with an unsatisfactory rating in two or more standards will receive an annual

evaluation rating of “Progressing I.”

An administrator with an unsatisfactory rating in one standard will receive an annual evaluation rating of

“Progressing I” if that administrator’s student achievement data totals less than 23 points.

An administrator with an unsatisfactory rating in one standard will receive an annual evaluation rating of

“Proficient I” if that administrator’s student achievement data totals 23 points or above.


Prog I Prog II Prog III Prof I Prof II Prof III Exemplary

< 8 8-15 16-22 23-30 31-37 38-45 46-50

Summative comments:

Administrator: ________________________________ Date: __________

Evaluator: ________________________________ Date: __________

Supervisor of Evaluator: ____________________________ Date: __________

Criteria Total

Communication /5

Compliance /5

Culture /5

Curriculum, Instruction, and Awareness /5

Data Driven Decision Making /5

Management /5

Monitor and Evaluate Instructional Delivery /5

Professionalism /5

Recognition /5

Relationship /5

GRAND TOTAL


Section 5: Evaluation Metric Form


PRINCIPAL EVALUATION NAME:

Accountability Year: SCHOOL:

Poss.

Pts. Metric Rating/ Result Points

50 Performance Rubric

50 Performance Subtotal

Poss.



State Assessments / ACT



ACCESS Growth


50 Achievement Subtotal

100 TOTAL POINTS

Prog I Prog II Prog III Prof I Prof II Prof III Exemp.

< 8 8 - 15 16 - 22 23 - 30 31 - 37 38 - 45 46 - 50


< 8 8 - 15 16 - 22 23 - 34 35 - 43 44 - 50

Prof III this year and

Prof III in 2 of 4

previous years

Prog I Prog II Prog III Prof I Prof II Prof III Prof III/Exemp.* Exemp.

< 16 16 – 31 32 – 45 46 – 65 66 – 81 82 – 89 90 – 93

*March Stu Ach Rating

94 - 100

Performance

Achievement

Annual Evaluation Rating

Performance

Rating

Achievement Rating


ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL EVALUATION NAME:

Accountability Year: SCHOOL:

Poss.


50 Performance Rubric

50 Performance Subtotal

Poss.



State Assessments / ACT



ACCESS Growth


50 Achievement Subtotal

100 TOTAL POINTS


< 8 8 - 15 16 - 22 23 - 30 31 - 37 38 - 45 46 - 50


< 8 8 - 15 16 - 22 23 - 34 35 - 43 44 - 50

Prof III this year and

Prof III in 2 of 4

previous years

Prog I Prog II Prog III Prof I Prof II Prof III Prof III/Exemp.* Exemp.

< 16 16 – 31 32 – 45 46 – 65 66 – 81 82 – 89 90 – 93

*March Stu Ach Rating

94 - 100

Performance

Achievement

Annual Evaluation Rating

Performance

Rating

Achievement Rating


Section 6: Compensation Form


PRINCIPAL COMPENSATION NAME: Accountability Years:

SCHOOL:

Compensation Year:

* If an administrator’s average evaluation rating score falls below their effectiveness level for two consecutive years, the

administrator will be moved to the next lower level (reference Principal and AP Evaluation Handbook). If an

administrator’s average evaluation rating score has increased more than one level above their effectiveness level, the

administrator will be moved only one level higher.

-OR-

Principal Signature: _____________________________________________ Date_____________

Supervisor Signature: ____________________________________________Date_____________


< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100


< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100

70,000 75,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 110,000 120,000

Additional Compensation

Size Level (EMH) Admin/Principal Exp. (4+)

0R Principal Exp. (4+)

Principal Exp. w/Dist.

(4+)

Total

Additional

Admin/Principal Exp. (4+)

Principal Exp. (4+)

$3,000 $5,000

Size Addition

1 – 400 $1,000

401 – 650 $3,000

651 – 900 $6,000

901 + $9,000

Level (EMH) Addition

Elem. $2,000

Middle $5,000

High $10,000 Principal Exp. w/ Dist. (4+)

$5,000

Overall Effectiveness Level (salary)*:

Additional Compensation: $

2015-16 Compensation Year Salary: *

Effectiveness Level:


NEW PRINCIPAL COMPENSATION NAME: Accountability Years:

SCHOOL:

Compensation Year:

* If an administrator’s average evaluation rating score falls below their effectiveness level for two consecutive years, the

administrator will be moved to the next lower level (reference Principal and AP Evaluation Handbook). If an



-OR-

Principal Signature _____________________________________________ Date_____________

Supervisor Signature ____________________________________________Date_____________


< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100


< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100

70,000 75,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 110,000 120,000


Size Level (EMH) Admin/Principal Exp. (4+)

0R Principal Exp. (4+)

Principal Exp. w/Dist.

(4+)

Total

Additional

Size Addition

1 – 400 $1,000

401 – 650 $3,000

651 – 900 $6,000

901 + $9,000


Elem. $2,000

Middle $5,000

High $10,000

Admin/Principal Exp. (4+)

Principal Exp. (4+)

$3,000 $5,000

Principal Exp. w/ Dist. (4+)

$5,000



2015-16 Compensation Year Salary: *

Annual Evaluation Rating:


ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL COMPENSATION NAME: Accountability Years:

SCHOOL:

Compensation Year:

* If an administrator’s average evaluation rating score falls below their effectiveness level for two consecutive years,

the administrator will be moved to the next lower level (reference Principal and AP Evaluation Handbook). If an



Assistant Principal Signature: _____________________________________ Date_____________



< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100


< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100

58,000 62,000 66,000 70,000 75,000 80,000 85,000


Size Level (EMH) AP or Admin Experience

(3+)

AP or Admin Exp.

w/Dist. (3+)

Total

Additional


Elem. $2,000

Middle $4,000

High $8,000

Size Addition

1 – 400 $1,000

401 – 650 $2,000

651 – 900 $4,000

901 + $6,000

AP/Admin Exp. (3+)

AP/Admin Exp. w/Dist.

(3+)

1 Year $1,000 2 Years $2,000 3 Years $3,000

$3,000



2015-16 Compensation Year Salary:

Effectiveness Level:


NEW ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL COMPENSATION NAME:

Accountability Years:

SCHOOL:

Compensation Year:

* If an administrator’s average evaluation rating score falls below their effectiveness level for two consecutive years,

the administrator will be moved to the next lower level (reference Principal and AP Evaluation Handbook). If an



Assistant Principal Signature: _____________________________________ Date_____________



< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100


< 16 16 - 31 32 - 45 46 - 65 66 - 81 82 - 93 94 – 100

58,000 62,000 66,000 70,000 75,000 80,000 85,000


Size Level (EMH) AP or Admin Experience

(3+)

AP or Admin Exp.

w/Dist. (3+)

Total

Additional

Size Addition

1 – 400 $1,000

401 – 650 $2,000

651 – 900 $4,000

901 + $6,000


Elem. $2,000

Middle $4,000

High $8,000

AP/Admin Exp. (3+)

AP/Admin Exp. w/Dist.

(3+)

1 Year $1,000 2 Years $2,000 3 Years $3,000

$3,000



2015-16 Compensation Year Salary:

Annual Evaluation Rating:

principal and assistant principal level. the harrison e&r plan for principals and assistant...

Documents