Appeal of an Evaluation Clause Samples

The "Appeal of an Evaluation" clause establishes a process by which a party can formally challenge or request a review of an assessment or decision made under the agreement. Typically, this clause outlines the steps for submitting an appeal, such as time limits, required documentation, and the authority responsible for reconsidering the evaluation. Its core function is to provide a fair mechanism for addressing disagreements over evaluations, ensuring that parties have recourse if they believe an assessment was incorrect or unjust.
Appeal of an Evaluation. A faculty member who disagrees with the factual contents of the Faculty Evaluation Performance Review form or who claims the Administrator failed to follow evaluation procedures, shall have the right to file a grievance at Step 1 of the grievance procedure as outlined in Article 11 of this Agreement. If the grievance relates to the factual content of the evaluation, the burden of proof will be upon the grievant to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the factual content of the evaluation is wrong.
View SourceView Similar (10)
Appeal of an Evaluation. If the issue remains unresolved after the above steps; or, if the faculty member receives less than a “Satisfactory” evaluation and disagrees with the factual contents of the faculty evaluation; or, if the faculty member believes the Academic ▇▇▇▇/Supervising Administrator failed to follow proper evaluation procedures, the faculty member shall have the right to file a grievance following the procedure in Article 13 of this Agreement. If the grievance relates to the factual content of the evaluation, the administration shall demonstrate that the factual content of the evaluation is correct. A. Such grievance shall be filed at Step 2 and within ten (10) contractual duty days of receipt of Academic ▇▇▇▇/Supervising Administrator ’s response. In the event the faculty member receives no response from the Academic ▇▇▇▇/Supervising Administrator, the grievance shall be filed no later than twenty (20) contracted duty days after the deadline for such response from the Academic ▇▇▇▇/Supervising Administrator. B. As an alternative to the above grievance procedure, any faculty member receiving an evaluation of less than “satisfactory” may appeal the decision in accordance with the College’s discrimination grievance procedure.
View SourceView Similar (4)
Appeal of an Evaluation. A. If the bargaining unit member receives an overall evaluation rating of “Needs Improvement” or “Unsatisfactory” and believes the supervisor failed to follow proper evaluation procedures or included factually inaccurate information, the bargaining unit member shall have the right to pursue the grievance and arbitration procedures in this Agreement. No claim or evaluative conclusion involving the exercise of managerial judgment or discretion shall be subject to the grievance procedure. The sole procedure for resolving disputes over the exercise of managerial judgment or discretion provided in this Agreement shall be paragraph B below.
View SourceView Similar (3)
Appeal of an Evaluation. A part-time instructional faculty member who considers the evaluation to be incomplete, inaccurate or unjust shall have the right to attach a written response within ten (10) working days of the meeting with the department chair or ▇▇▇▇.
View Source
Appeal of an Evaluation. A faculty member who disputes the factual content of his or her faculty evaluation or alleges a violation of any procedure in this article shall have the right to file a grievance pursuant to Article V of this Agreement. The timeline to file such a grievance shall begin at the conclusion of the Performance Review. A. Such grievances shall be filed at Step 1 of the grievance procedure within fifteen (15) contractual duty days of the Performance Review. Should the appeal not be resolved in step 1, the appeal will progress through the steps of the grievance procedure outlined in Article IV of this Agreement. Procedural and Factual Disputes shall be subject to the arbitration process, outlined in Article V. B. For any bargaining unit member who receives an overall rating of unsatisfactory, the supervisor will collaborate with the faculty member to identify any deficiencies and provide suggestions, professional development opportunities, or otherwise assist the bargaining unit member with any necessary correction or remediation and develop a Performance Improvement Plan to address areas where performance requires improvement. C. Bargaining unit members with evaluations rated “Unsatisfactory” must submit their Performance Improvement Plan to their supervisor within ten (10) contracted duty days following the Performance Review. The Performance Improvement Plan period shall not exceed one semester following the initial “Unsatisfactory” rating. Evidence of progress on any Performance Improvement Plan must be included in the subsequent performance evaluation. D. A continuing contract bargaining unit member who receives an “Unsatisfactory” rating in any two out of three years may be subject to be returned to annual contract. A continuing contract bargaining unit member who receives “Unsatisfactory” ratings in three out of five years may be subject to dismissal.
View Source

Related to Appeal of an Evaluation

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • TEACHER EVALUATION A. The administration will be evaluating the teacher’s performance within the time of formal responsibility. The evaluation process and form will be shared with the Association Building Representatives at the beginning of each school year. (a) Probationary teachers shall be evaluated at least two (2) times a year. The first evaluation will be completed prior to December 1st and the second prior to April 15th. Each evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations, on the performance of other duties and responsibilities and the goals developed in the Individualized Development Plan (IDP). The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at anytime prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the probationary teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. (b) Tenured teachers will be evaluated on a rotating schedule, but no less than once every three- (3) years. The administration reserves the right to evaluate a tenured teacher more often. The evaluation will be based upon announced, unannounced, informal observations and on the performance of other duties and responsibilities. The announced and unannounced observations should be a minimum of thirty (30) minutes in length. The observations may occur at any time prior to the development of the written evaluation, but at least one of them must be planned in consultation with the tenured teacher. The results of formal observations will be discussed with the teacher in a timely manner. The information gathered during the observations will be used to write the evaluations. 2. The administrator shall prepare and submit a written evaluation and recommendations to the teacher prior to May 30th of the year they are evaluated. The administrator shall hold a conference with the teacher to discuss the written evaluation and recommendations. 3. Upon receipt of the evaluation the teacher will sign the form indicating his/her receipt of the report. The signature on the form does not constitute his/her approval unless specifically noted. 4. Teachers involved with the instruction of Advanced Placement courses will be evaluated. This evaluation in the first year will be made part of the formal evaluation only at the request of the teacher. B. A teacher who disagrees with the content or procedure of evaluation may submit a written answer which shall be attached to the file copy of the evaluation in question and/or submit any complaints through Level 4 of the grievance procedure. C. If an administrator believes a teacher is doing unacceptable work, the reasons shall be set forth in specific terms. Included will be examples of specific ways in which the teacher is to improve and assistance may be given by the administrator and other staff members. In subsequent conferences it shall be the responsibility of the individual teacher to inquire whether adequate improvement has taken place. D. Monitoring and observation of the work performance of the teacher shall be conducted openly. The public address or audio system or similar types of communications will not be used for the purpose of evaluation. E. The Board and the Association recognize that the ability of pupils to progress and mature academically is a combined result of the school, home, economic and social environment and that teachers alone cannot be held accountable for all aspects of the academic achievement of the pupil in the classroom. Test results of academic progress of students shall not be used as the sole determinant or in isolated instances to evaluate the quality of a teacher's service or fitness for retention. F. All communications, including evaluations by Milan Administrators, commendations, and documented complaints directed toward the teacher which are to be included in the personnel file shall be made available for review of the teacher prior to placement in the file; a copy of any such communication will be provided to the teacher at this time. Pre-placement information such as confidential credentials, letters of reference from universities, individuals, or previous employers are exempt from such review. A written statement for inclusion in the personnel file may then be made by the teacher in regard to materials that were not signed by the teacher. A representative of the Association may accompany the teacher. G. Ordinarily, observations of teachers shall not be for less than a full class period or for the duration of a particular teaching lesson.

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.