Process for Addressing Evaluation Concerns Sample Clauses

Process for Addressing Evaluation Concerns. A. Any non-probationary Teacher who has received his or her first year partially effective or ineffective rating may choose to file a year-one evaluation grievance (Procedure 4170.1) The evaluation grievance must be filed within 11 working days after receiving his or her partially ineffective or ineffective rating on the final summative evaluation report. The teacher filing the appeal will communicate to his/her evaluator that such an appeal is being made per the requirement in Procedure 4170.1. This procedure satisfies the just cause and due process outlined in Policy 4134 as it relates only to evaluation grievances. B. Any teacher who may be and/or is deemed ineffective in any one or more of the performance standards shall receive assistance through the Directed Improvement Plan and, if necessary, a Remediation Plan, as discussed in Part III, below. C. The Office of Human Resources will document the number of mid-year Directed Improvement Plans created for non-probationary teachers each year and, upon request, share this information with the Association no later than February 1 of each school year.
View SourceView Similar (10)
Process for Addressing Evaluation Concerns. ‌ A. Any SSP Employee who has received a partially effective or ineffective rating may choose to file an appeal (see Policy 4873). B. Any SSP Employee who may be and/or is deemed ineffective in any one or more of the performance standards shall receive assistance through the Directed Improvement Plan and, if necessary, a Remediation Plan, as discussed in Part III, below. C. The Office of Human Resources will document the number of mid-year Directed Improvement Plans created for SSP Employees each year and, upon request, share this information with the Association no later than February 1 of each school year. Remediation Process‌ If the evaluator determines that performance concerns exist, the principal or site administrator will contact the Office of Human Resources to ascertain what steps will be taken to address the issue. With the agreement of the Office of Human Resources, the principal or site administrator may develop a Directed Improvement Plan for the SSP Employee. This plan will specifically address those areas of concern, and include correlating support resources and a timeline for implementation. At the end of the timeline specified, if the principal or site administrator does not observe improved performance in targeted elements, the SSP Employee will be moved to Remediation. If the principal or site administrator determines that performance in the targeted areas has improved, the SSP Employee will be removed from the Directed Improvement Plan. Removal from the Directed Improvement Plan does not necessarily render the SSP Employee’s performance effective.
View SourceView Similar (4)

Related to Process for Addressing Evaluation Concerns

  • Student Evaluation a. The President of the College or the President’s designee shall be responsible for administering the student evaluation process. b. Student evaluation packets for each class containing instruments and instructions shall be distributed to each faculty member by the first week of December during the fall semester and by the last week in April during the spring semester. c. It is expressly agreed that the faculty member being evaluated shall not be present in the classroom when the student evaluation is being administered and that all instruction to students with regard to such student evaluation shall be included in writing on the instrument, provided further that the designated unit or non-unit professional shall return the student evaluation directly to the President of the College or the President’s designee. The administering of the student evaluation shall be the responsibility of the President of the College or the President’s designee who shall determine who among unit or non-unit professionals shall administer such student evaluation. Student evaluations shall be valid only if signed by the student; provided, however, that faculty members shall not be entitled to the identity of the student responding unless such student evaluation is used as a basis for dismissal or other disciplinary action and such will be communicated to the students. d. The data from the student evaluation shall be tabulated and copies sent to the President of the College or the President’s designee. The raw data shall be retained by the College for a period of one (1) year during which time the faculty member shall have access thereto upon written request. e. The President of the College or the President’s designee shall review the tabulated data and shall forward a data summary to the faculty member by January 23 for the fall semester and by June 15 for the spring semester. f. The faculty member shall have seven (7) working days in which to respond to such data.

  • Student Evaluations Student evaluations shall be completed by the end of the 12th week of the fall semester.

  • Relationship Management LAUSD expects Contractors and their Representatives to ensure that their business dealings with and/or on behalf of LAUSD are conducted in a manner that is above reproach.

  • Program Monitoring and Evaluation The Recipient shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, and furnish to the Association not later than six months after the Closing Date, a report of such scope and in such detail as the Association shall reasonably request, on the execution of the Program, the performance by the Recipient and the Association of their respective obligations under the Legal Agreements and the accomplishment of the purposes of the Financing.”

  • 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.