2.  Individual Growth and Development Plan with 35% Student Growth Data  Peer Review  Student Engagement Walkthrough Data  Summative Evaluation

3.  Completed annually by all staff members  Baseline data needed  Aligned to building strategic plan  Goal tied to a measurable student data point  Principal approval of goal  Mid-year check  Individual assesses his/her student data using rubric Individual Growth and Development Plan

4.  Embedded in your IGDP  Teacher-created goals including valid and reliable assessment  Incorporated into summative evaluation  A zero in the rubric will result in a PIP  Calculated over the course of three years as opposed to just one year

5.  Completed annually by tenured staff only  Teacher selects partner  Completed by March 31 st  Confidential Peer Observation

6.  Done by administrators during walk-throughs  Evaluated as part of Danielson

7.  Danielson Framework will be utilized  65% of evaluation based on Danielson  Once every three years for tenured staff

8.  Remember Education Minnesota and Minnesota School Board Association agree that local districts and associations should create a plan.  Vote on December 4 th !

9.  Teacher Representatives (Building Locations) ◦ Brandon Button ( I.J. Holton) ◦ Jens Levisen (High School) ◦ Jill Rollie (Ellis) ◦ Erin Schoen (Southgate) ◦ John Sullivan (Specialist and AEA executive committee) ◦ Greg Wehner (Special Ed Rep)  Administrative Representatives (Locations) ◦ John Alberts (District Office Educational Services) ◦ Brad Bergstrom (High School) ◦ Mary Burroughs (District Office Human Resources) ◦ Jessica Cabeen (Woodson) ◦ Edwina Harder (Southgate)