Educator Evaluation


  • Educator Evaluation
    • Are ratings required at mid-year?

      No. The purpose of the Mid-Year Conference is to provide an opportunity for the evaluator and educator to qualitatively review progress and appropriate adjustment(s) to practice and performance goals and student learning goals/objectives. This is also an opportunity to discuss professional learning to support the educator in attaining her/his goals/objectives. However, an indication of quantitative progress may be helpful to include as part of the discussion, especially in instances when final data is available for one or more student learning goals/objectives (e.g. a high school teacher who has completed a trimester course and has data to inform one or more of his/her student learning goals/objectives/IAGDs).

    • Are teachers who teach a test grade or subject required to use state test data for their IAGDs?

      Yes, however, for the years 2014-15 and 2015-16, pending approval of our ESEA waiver, state test data does not need to be tied to educator evaluation.

    • At the goal-setting conference, should an evaluator “approve” a teacher’s goals/objectives and IAGDs?

      The CT Guidelines for Educator Evaluation require that each teacher and his or her evaluator mutually agree on the goals and indicators of academic growth and development (IAGDs).

      If the district educator evaluation and support plan indicates that during the Goal-setting Conference the evaluator will approve the goals and/or indicators of academic growth and development, approval means that the teacher and his or her evaluator have come to mutual agreement on the goal(s)/objective(s) and IAGDs.

      In the case when an evaluator does not agree on a goal/objective or the IAGDs, the evaluator and teacher should discuss the evaluator’s reasons for disagreement. The teacher should can share any relevant data to support the reason for setting the goal/objective. They should work together to reach mutual agreement a goal/objective and/or IAGDs that are most appropriate for the students assigned to the teacher.

    • During an observation, must the evaluator collect evidence for every indicator in the rubric?

      Evaluators should collect evidence for what is observed. In all likelihood, an evaluator will not be able to collect evidence for every indicator in a single observation. Generally, evidence for planning will come from pre and post conference discussions. Reviews of practice can also provide evidence on planning over time. Data or grade level team meeting, faculty meeting, PPTs or other meetings with parents can provide evidence for professional responsibility. An evaluator should try to collect evidence to inform decisions for each domain in the rubric that is used for observation.

    • How many IAGDs must a teacher have?

      At least two IAGDs are required. One half (or 22.5%) of the IAGDs used as evidence of whether goal/objective is met shall be based on standardized indicators where available. The other half (22.5%) of the indicators of academic growth and development will be based on a minimum of one non-standardized indicator and/or a maximum of one additional standardized indicator, if there is mutual agreement, subject to the local dispute resolution.

      The State Board of Education, in agreement with PEAC, further recommended that one half (22.5%) of the indicators of academic growth and development used as evidence of whether goals/objectives are met shall not be determined by a single, isolated standardized test score, but shall be determined through the comparison of data across assessments administered over time, including the state test for those teaching tested grades and subjects or another standardized indicator for other grades and subjects where available. A state test can be used only if there are interim assessments that lead to that test, and such interim assessments shall be included in the overall score for those teaching tested grades and subjects. Those without an available standardized indicator will select, through mutual agreement, subject to the local dispute-resolution procedure, an additional non-standardized indicator.

    • How many student learning goals/objectives are teachers required to set?

      The Guidelines state the teachers will select at least 1 but no more than 4 goals/objectives for student growth, the exact number based on a consideration of a reasonable number of goals/objectives taking into account teaching responsibilities and teacher experience.

      For each goal/objective, each teacher, through mutual agreement with his/her evaluator, will select Indicators of Academic Growth and Development (IAGD) and evidence of the IAGD based on the range of criteria used by the district.

      In February, 2014, the State Board of Education adopted recommendations made by PEAC, which allow for local and regional school districts to adopt one or more evaluation plan flexibility components, which includes the number of required goals/objectives. Teachers may select 1 goal/objective for student growth. For each goal/objective, each teacher, through mutual agreement with his/her evaluator, will select multiple Indicators of Academic Growth and Development (IAGD) and evidence of those IAGDs based on the range of criteria used by the district. This means that there must be a minimum of two IAGDs if only one objective/goals is required.

      The decision to implement the flexibility must be decided by the district’s PDEC pursuant to 10-151b(b) and 10-220a(b).

    • If using whole-school learning indicators, must the teacher write a goal linked to the administrator’s goals?

      The teacher does not need to write a goal. For districts that use Whole-School Student Learning Indicators in teacher evaluations, a teacher’s indicator rating will be equal to the aggregate rating for multiple student learning indicators established for the principal’s evaluation rating at that school. The rating that the administrator receives for his or her 45% will be the rating that teachers will be given for their 5%. However, teachers may determine the strategies they will use that would ultimately contribute to the whole school learning indicators set by the administrator.

    • What if an educator and evaluator do not agree on the summative ratings?

      If an educator does not agree with the summative evaluation ratings, he/she should still sign the End-of-Year Summative Evaluation Scoring Report to acknowledge that the End-of-Year Conference discussion has taken place.

      In cases where the evaluator and educator cannot agree on goals/objectives, the evaluation period, feedback or the professional development plan the district is required to have a process for resolving disputes. Please refer to your Dispute Resolution Process.

    • What is a review of practice?

      Reviews of practice are non-classroom observations and include but are not limited to: observations of data team meetings, observations of coaching/mentoring other teachers, reviews of lesson plans, student work or other teaching artifacts.

    • What training does an evaluator need before conducting observations?

      Both the Connecticut Guidelines for Educator Evaluation and SEED require that districts provide all evaluators with training in observation and evaluation and how to provide high-quality feedback. Included in the district educator evaluation plan, the district must describe how evaluators will demonstrate proficiency on an ongoing basis in observation, goal-setting and providing feedback as part of the teacher evaluation system. If a district adopts a rubric other than the CCT Rubric for Effective Teaching 2014, they will likely want to research a tool that would be most appropriate for training purposes.

  • Evaluation Development and Approval Process
  • Questions Regarding Employment Status