Administrative Evaluation – Purpose and Procedures

(Last Updated On: November 21, 2016)

Administrative Evaluation Purpose and Procedures

Section 1249 of the Revised School Code requires that administrators be evaluated at least annually

through a performance evaluation system that complies with statutory requirement. MCL 380.1249.

The Purposes of Evaluation

Performance evaluation is a formal communication tool for interaction between supervisors and employees that should lead to improved job performance, personal continuous growth, foster a change, and lead to improved student achievement. It should reward effective job performance and provide intervention where necessary. It should:

  • Evaluate the administrator’s job performance at least annually while providing timely and constructive feedback
  • Establish clear approaches to measuring student growth and provide administrators with relevant data on student growth
  • Evaluate Administrator’s performance, using multiple rating categories that take into account data on student growth as a significant factor. For these purposes, student growth shall be measure by national, state, or local assessment and other objective criteria
  • Use the evaluations, at a minimum, to inform decisions regarding all of the following:
    • The effectiveness of school administrators, ensuring that they are given ample opportunities for improvement.
    • Promote development of administrators, including providing relevant coaching, instruction support, or professional development
    • Removing ineffective administrators after they have had ample opportunities to improve, and ensuring that these decisions are made using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.
  • Promote and stimulate self-­‐reflection and growth.
  • Increase overall school improvement and student growth through improved teaching.
  • Ensure that evaluation and goals are connected with school improvement, professional development, and personal goals.
  • Establish and maintain a record of professional performance.
  • Improve deficiencies in performance when identified.
  • Be rigorous transparent, and fair.
  • Provide timely and constructive feedback.

Types of Student Data

Section 1249 requires the performance evaluation system to measure student growth by national, state, or local assessments and other objective criteria. . Student growth must be measured, at least in part, using the state assessments, and for grades and subjects in which state assessments are not required and administered for purposes of 20 USC 6311, student growth must be measured, at least in part, using alternative assessments that are rigorous and comparable across schools within the school district. Acceptable growth models may include: pre/post assessments, NWEA, Aimsweb, Delta Math, PSI, PASI, FryeWords, DRA, MLPP, DIBELS NEXT, Common Assessments, PSAT, SAT, etc.. Special Education growth models may include IEP goals, Behavior Data, MI-­‐Access, Brigance Inventory, Woodcock Johnson, and Achievement Tests.

Administrators will be evaluated on the rubric and on data goals. Percentages for student growth data will be based on current law and will count toward the administrator’s final Overall Score (See Evaluation Summary page). The administrator’s goals and measures of what would constitute success will be developed by the Superintendent in consultation with the administrator.

Evaluation Structure

  • All administrators will be evaluated at least annually.
  • Goals will be developed by the Superintendent in consultation with the individual administrator. Two goals will be required: one from the Administrator Evaluation Rubric and one that includes the use of data on individual student growth, building School Improvement Plans, and other needs assessments and/or team goals.
  • Goals must be clearly defined and measurable.
  • The evaluation of the administrator must include at least an assessment of the administrator’s progress in meeting the goals of the Individual Development Plan or Professional Growth Plan
  • The evaluation from the previous year will be used as a resource to note strengths and areas of growth.

Evaluation for Administrators Not Meeting Goals

If an administrator has not met stated goals and demonstrated student growth or has specific performance problems, as identified in writing by the supervisor via the evaluation process, the administrator will move to an Individual Development Plan (IDP). The IDP shall be developed by the Superintendent in consultation with the administrator.

If an administrator has any one domain that is overall minimally effective or ineffective, the administrator may mark the overall evaluation as minimally effective or ineffective.

Updated: November 21, 2016 — 4:54 PM