Evaluation Content Clause Samples

The 'Evaluation Content' clause defines the materials, data, or information provided for the purpose of assessment, testing, or review under an agreement. Typically, this clause specifies what constitutes evaluation content, such as software, prototypes, or documentation, and may outline any restrictions on its use, such as prohibiting reverse engineering or redistribution. Its core function is to clearly delineate what content is being shared for evaluation and to set boundaries on its use, thereby protecting the provider’s intellectual property and ensuring both parties understand their rights and obligations regarding the evaluation materials.
Evaluation Content. If the teacher believes the evaluation or a post-observation summary is incomplete or inaccurate, the teacher may submit any objections in writing, which shall be attached to the personnel file copy of the evaluation, provided such written objections are submitted to the Superintendent’s Office within twenty working days after receipt of the evaluation by the teacher. It is management's right and responsibility to assess performance and therefore, the content of evaluations performed in accordance with the provisions of this Article are not grievable.
View SourceView Similar (15)
Evaluation Content. 1. Evaluations shall be based on the District’s adopted Frameworks for Professional Practice applicable to that unit member. For unit members who work as classroom teachers, the four domains shall be “Planning and Preparation,” “Classroom Environment,” “Instruction,” and “Professional Responsibilities.” The domains and components may change as determined by the District’s Evaluation Committee. 2. Unit members who do not work as classroom teachers (e.g., counselors, nurses, library media specialists, instructional specialists, school psychologists, and therapeutic specialists) shall be evaluated using the domains and components applicable to that unit member’s duties. 3. Track 1 employees shall be evaluated in all domains using eight (8) components selected by the evaluator (3 each from domains 2 and 3 and one each from domains 1 and 4). 4. In a formal evaluation year, Track 2 employees shall be evaluated in at least two domains. Track 2 employees shall select two components, the evaluator shall select two components and the Track 2 employee and the evaluator shall jointly select one other component so that five (5) components are used as the basis for each evaluation. 5. In their self-directed year, Track 2 employees shall select at least one component from any domain (for goal-setting purposes only as no formal evaluation will occur in that year). 6. Track 3 and Track 4 employees shall be evaluated in those domains and components in which the employee was rated below proficient in the previous evaluation.
View SourceView Similar (5)
Evaluation Content. The content of the evaluation shall not be subject to the grievance procedure nor shall the evaluation be considered a step in the formal disciplinary process.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Evaluation Content. The contents of an evaluation shall not be subject to the grievance procedure. However, if an employee's evaluation is later used to justify a disciplinary action by the Employer, any written comments made by the employee concerning the evaluation shall accompany the evaluation form as appropriate subjects for inclusion in the disciplinary proceedings.
View SourceView Similar (2)

Related to Evaluation Content

  • Evaluation Cycle Goal Setting and Development of the Educator Plan A) Every Educator has an Educator Plan that includes, but is not limited to, one goal related to the improvement of practice; one goal for the improvement of student learning. The Plan also outlines actions the Educator must take to attain the goals established in the Plan and benchmarks to assess progress. Goals may be developed by individual Educators, by the Evaluator, or by teams, departments, or groups of Educators who have the similar roles and/or responsibilities. See Sections 15-19 for more on Educator Plans. B) To determine the goals to be included in the Educator Plan, the Evaluator reviews the goals the Educator has proposed in the Self-Assessment, using evidence of Educator performance and impact on student learning, growth and achievement based on the Educator’s self-assessment and other sources that Evaluator shares with the Educator. The process for determining the Educator’s impact on student learning, growth and achievement will be determined after ESE issues guidance on this matter. See #22, below. C) Educator Plan Development Meetings shall be conducted as follows: i) Educators in the same school may meet with the Evaluator in teams and/or individually at the end of the previous evaluation cycle or by October 15th of the next academic year to develop their Educator Plan. Educators shall not be expected to meet during the summer hiatus. ii) For those Educators new to the school, the meeting with the Evaluator to establish the Educator Plan must occur by October 15th or within six weeks of the start of their assignment in that school iii) The Evaluator shall meet individually with Educators with PTS and ratings of needs improvement or unsatisfactory to develop professional practice goal(s) that must address specific standards and indicators identified for improvement. In addition, the goals may address shared grade level or subject matter goals. D) The Evaluator completes the Educator Plan by November 1st. The Educator shall sign the Educator Plan within 5 school days of its receipt and may include a written response. The Educator’s signature indicates that the Educator received the plan in a timely fashion. The signature does not indicate agreement or disagreement with its contents. The Evaluator retains final authority over the content of the Educator’s Plan.

  • 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.

  • Evaluation 1. The purposes of evaluation provisions include providing employees with feedback, and employers and employees with the opportunity and responsibility to address concerns. Where a grievance proceeds to arbitration, the arbitrator must consider these purposes, and may relieve on just and reasonable terms against breaches of time limits or other procedural requirements.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.