DAR File No. 40512

Education, Administration

Rule R277-533

District Educator Evaluation Systems

Notice of Proposed Rule

(Amendment)

DAR File No.: 40512
Filed: 06/15/2016 08:27:01 PM

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

This rule is amended in response to H.B. 201, Student Testing Amendments, from the 2016 General Session, which prohibits a school district from using student scores on the SAGE end-of-level assessment for the evaluation and compensation of the school district's educators and administrators.

Summary of the rule or change:

This rule is amended in response to H.B. 201 (2016), which prohibits a school district from using student scores on the SAGE end-of-level assessment for the evaluation and compensation of the school district's educators and administrators.

State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

• Title 53A, Chapter 8a, Part 4
• Art X, Sec 3
• Section 53A-1-401

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

The amendments to this rule remove language that is prohibited in state law and provide technical and conforming changes, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to the state budget.

local governments:

The amendments to this rule remove language that is prohibited in state law and provide technical and conforming changes, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to local government.

small businesses:

The amendments to this rule remove language that is prohibited in state law and provide technical and conforming changes, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to small businesses.

persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:

The amendments to this rule remove language that is prohibited in state law and provide technical and conforming changes, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.

Compliance costs for affected persons:

The amendments to this rule remove language that is prohibited in state law and provide technical and conforming changes, which likely will not result in any compliance costs for affected persons.

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

To the best of my knowledge, there should be no fiscal impact on businesses resulting from the amendments to this rule.

Sydnee Dickson, Interim State Superintendent

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Office of Administrative Rules, or at:

Education
Administration
250 E 500 S
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111-3272

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

• Angela Stallings at the above address, by phone at 801-538-7656, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet E-mail at [email protected]

Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:

08/01/2016

This rule may become effective on:

08/08/2016

Authorized by:

Angela Stallings, Associate Superintendent, Policy and Communication

R277. Education, Administration.

R277-533. District Educator Evaluation Systems.

R277-533-1. Authority and Purpose.

(1) This rule is authorized by:

(a) Utah Constitution Article X, Section 3, which vests general control and supervision [of]over public education in the Board;

(b) Title 53A, Chapter 8a, Part 4, Educator Evaluations, which requires the Board to make rules to establish a framework for the evaluation of educators and set policies and procedures related to educator evaluations; and

(c) S[ubs]ection 53A-1-401[(3)], which [permits]allows the Board to [adopt rules in accordance with its responsibilities]make rules to execute the Board's duties and responsibilities under the Utah Constitution and state law.

(2) The purpose of this rule is to:

(a) specify the requirements for district Educator Evaluation Systems Policies;

(b) describe the required components of district Educator Evaluation Systems; and

(c) establish requirements for how the Annual Summative Educator Evaluation Rating shall be computed and reported.

 

R277-533-2. Definitions.

(1) "Attribute" means the process of linking the results of student growth and learning to a specific educator or group of educators using the same SLO[ or SGP].

(2) "Evaluator" means a person who is responsible for an educator's overall evaluation, including:

(a) professional performance;

(b) student growth;

(c) stakeholder input; and

(d) other indicators of professional improvement.

(3) "PEER Committee" means the Public Educator Evaluation Requirements Committee established by the Superintendent.

(4) "Rater" means a person who conducts an observation of an educator related to an educator's evaluation.

(5) "School district" includes the Utah Schools for the Deaf and the Blind.

(6) "Student learning objective" or "SLO" means a content and grade or course specific measurable learning objective that can be used to document student learning over a defined period of time.

[(7) "Student growth percentile" or "SGP" means an analytic approach or statistical method for transforming student assessment results into an accountability metric.]

([8]7) "System" means a school district's educator evaluation system.

[(9) "Tested subject" means a subject with an end of course examination in SAGE.]

 

R277-533-3. School District Educator Evaluation Systems.

(1) A local school board shall adopt a district educator evaluation system in consultation with a joint committee established by the local school board as described in Section 53A-8a-403.

(2) A district educator evaluation system shall:

(a) include the components required in Section 53A-8a-405;

(b) include the following four differentiated levels of performance:

(i) highly effective;

(ii) effective;

(iii) emerging/minimally effective; and

(iv) not effective;

(c) use multiple lines of evidence in evaluation, including:

(i) professional performance, as described in Section R277-533-4;

(ii) student growth, as described in Section R277-533-5;

(iii) stakeholder input, as described in Section R277-533-5; and

(iv) other indicators of professional improvement as required by the school district;

(d) require regular conferences between an educator and an evaluator;

(e) provide a process for an educator to contribute additional information to inform the educator's evaluation at several intervals throughout the process;

(f) measure an educator's professional performance when the educator is working in a professional capacity with students, parents, colleagues, or community members;

(g) provide a process for an educator to:

(i) analyze stakeholder input, including input from parents, students, or teachers;

(ii) analyze data related to performance; and

(iii) develop appropriate responses to the information;

(h) provide a procedure to include an educator's response to stakeholder data in the rating calculation;

(i) include a process for an evaluator to give an educator specific, measurable, actionable, and written direction regarding an educator's needed improvement and recommended course of action;

(j) provide a process for an educator to request a review of the implementation of the educator's evaluation, as described in:

(i) Subsection 53A-8a-406(3); and

(ii) Section R277-533-8;

(k) include multiple observations as described in Section R277-533-4; and

(l) provide a description of the methods for gathering, using, and protecting educator data.

(3) To form the school district's system, a local school board may adopt:

(a) the Utah Model Educator Evaluator System established by the Board;

(b) an adapted system; or

(c) a school district-developed system evaluated by the PEER Committee, consistent with Rules R277-530, R277-531, and this rule.

(4) The PEER Committee, as described in Rule R277-531, shall review and evaluate a school district's educator effectiveness system including:

(a) professional performance;

(b) rater-reliability;

(c) student growth; and

(d) stakeholder input.

(5) The PEER Committee shall review and evaluate a school district's system.

(6) An educator is responsible for:

(a) improving the educator's performance, using resources offered by the school district; and

(b) demonstrating acceptable levels of improvement in any designated area of deficiency.

 

R277-533-4. Evaluators and Standards for Education Observations.

(1) A school district's system shall include observations.

(2) The school district shall use observation tools that:

(a) are aligned with the Utah Effective [Teaching]Educator Standards[ and the Educational Leadership Standards] described in Rule R277-530 at the indicator level; and

(b) include multiple observations at appropriate intervals.

(3) A school district's evaluation system shall:

(a) include an orientation for all educators conducted by the principal or designee as required in Section 53A-8a-404;

(b) include multiple observation items;

(c) a final rating for each observation item described in Subsection (3)(b); and

(d) include an opportunity for an educator to contribute additional information to inform their rating at several intervals throughout the process.

(4) To ensure a valid evaluation system, a school district shall provide professional development opportunities to all raters and evaluators of licensed educators to:

(a) improve a rater or evaluator's abilities; and

(b) give the rater or evaluator an opportunity to demonstrate the rater's abilities to rate an educator in accordance with[:

(i)] the Utah Effective [Teaching]Educator Standards described in Rule R277-530[; and

(ii) the Utah Educational Leadership Standards described in Rule R277-530].

(5) A school district shall establish a school district rater reliability plan.

(6) A school district rater reliability plan shall:

(a) require school district to compare a rater's decisions to standardized ratings established by a committee of expert raters;

(b) require a school district to measure a rater's skills and reassess the rater's skills at appropriate intervals to maintain system quality;

(c) designate qualified raters as certified;

(d) assure that an educator is rated by a certified rater;

(e) require a school district to offer a rater opportunities to improve the rater's skills through instruction and practice; and

(f) maintain high standards of rater accuracy.

 

R277-533-5. Student Growth Calculations and Stakeholder Input.

(1) A Utah educator's contribution to a student's growth and learning shall be measured using SLOs.[delineated into one of the following sets of measures:

(a) SGPs;

(b) SLOs; or

(c) a combination of SGPs and SLOs.]

(2) A school district [may]shall attribute an SLO to an educator as part of an educator's evaluation in accordance with the school district's system policies.

(3) [If a school district attributes an SLO to an educator, the]A school district shall:

(a) ensure that [the]an SLO described in Subsection (1) includes:

(i) three required components:

(A) learning goals;

(B) assessments; and

(C) targets; and

(ii) learning goals for an educator linked to the appropriate specific content knowledge and skills from the Utah Core Standards;

(b) provide professional development to an educator for the educator to gain the knowledge and skills necessary to sustain wide-scale implementation of an SLO process;

(c) establish a local review process to assist the school district in developing comparability and consistency of SLOs at each grade level or span; and

(d) design a structure and process for providing professional development to the school district's educators and administrators.

[(4) A school district may attribute an SGP to:

(a) an educator as part of the educator's evaluation if the educator teaches a tested subject;

(b) an educator as part of shared attributions; or

(c) an administrator.]

([5]4)(a) A school district's system shall include a component for stakeholder input for educators, principals, and administrators, which includes annual input from students and parents.

(b) In addition to the stakeholder input described in Subsection ([5]4)(a), stakeholder input for principals and other administrators shall include input from teachers and support professionals.

(c) A school district may attribute stakeholder input to an educator, principal, or other administrator if the data gathered for the stakeholder input is gathered using:

(i) appropriate methods of gathering data as described in the school district's system plan; and

(ii) quality practices.

([6]5) A school district's system shall:

(a) allow an educator to have an opportunity to respond to stakeholder input; and

(b) consider an educator's response described in Subsection ([6]5)(a) as part of the educator's final rating.

 

R277-533-6. Computing the Annual Summative Rating.

(1) A school district shall base an educator's component ratings on:

(a) actual observations of the educator's performance; and

(b) educator, evaluator, or other stakeholder data gathered, calculated, or observed that is aligned with standards and rubrics.

(2) A school district shall combine an educator's component ratings using the following formula:

(a) 70% for professional performance;

(b) 20% for student growth; and

(c) 10% for stakeholder input.

(3) A school district shall report summative scores annually for all educators using the following approved terminology for reporting:

(d) highly effective 3;

(c) effective 2;

(b) minimal/emerging effective 1; and

(a) not effective 0.

 

R277-533-7. Minimal or Emerging Effective Category.

If an evaluator rates an educator's performance within the minimal or emerging effective category, the rater shall:

(1) designate an educator as emerging effective if:

(a) the educator:

(i) holds a Level 1 educator license; or

(ii) is being served by the school district's Entry Years Enhancement (EYE) program described in Rule R277-522; or

(b) the educator:

(i) received a new or different teaching or leadership assignment within the last school year; or

(ii) is developing in that area; or

(2) designate an educator as minimally effective if the educator:

(a) holds a Level 2 educator license; and

(b) is teaching or leading in a familiar assignment.

 

R277-533-8. Evaluation Reviews.

(1) An educator who is not satisfied with a summative evaluation may request a review in writing of the summative evaluation within 15 calendar days after receiving the written summative evaluation.

(2) A school district shall conduct a review of an educator's summative evaluation:

(a) as described in this section; and

(b) the requirements of Section 53A-8a-406.

(3) A review described in Subsection (2) shall be conducted:

(a) by a certified rater:

(i) with experience evaluating educators; and

(ii) not employed by the school district; and

(b) in accordance with the Utah Effective [Teacher and Educational Leadership]Educator Standards described in Rule R277-53[1]0.

(4) A certified rater described in Subsection (3) shall:

(a) review:

(i) the school district's educator evaluation policies and procedures;

(ii) the evaluation process conducted for the educator; and

(iii) the evaluation data from the professional performance, student growth, and stakeholder input components; and

(b) report the certified rater's findings, in writing, to the school district's superintendent for action.

(5) The school district shall determine if the initial educator evaluation was issued in accordance with:

(a) the school district's educator evaluation policies;

(b) the requirements of the performance standards;

(c) Title 53A, Chapter 8a, Public Education Human Resource Management Act;

(d) Rule R277-531; and

(e) this rule.

 

R277-533-9. Educator Evaluation Data.

(1) A school district shall report to the Board annually on or before June 30 the information necessary for the Board to make the report required by Section 53A-8a-410.

(2) A school district shall maintain confidential records of the educator effectiveness component data of individual educators in accordance with:

(a) Rule R277-487; and

(b) state law.

(3) A school district's system may be monitored by the Board.

 

KEY: educators, evaluations

Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: [November 23, 2015]2016

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: Art X, Sec 3; 53A-1-401[(3)]