1. Special Education Educator Evaluation and Professional Growth

2. Senate Bill 290  “The Road to Evaluation Begins With Collaboration”  http://www.oregoned.org/site/pp.asp?c=9dKKKYMDH& b=7906799

3. Framework for Professional Practice The domains, components, and levels of performance adopted by the Oregon City District  Define the expectations for performance for all educators.  Standards of professional practice and levels or performance are the key components of staff evaluation

4. Initial Supervision Cycle  One year cycle for probationary and temporary educators:  Self assessment  Written Professional Growth Plan:  At least two SMART goals based on assessed levels of performance on the components.  Mini-observations with feedback  Self Reflection  Summative Evaluation

5. Supported Supervision Cycle  One year cycle for educators with contract status but are not Proficient in all components and domains  Self assessment  Written PGP with one required SMART goal based on assessment level of performance on components and one SMART goal of choice  Mini-observations with feedback  Annual self reflection  Summative evaluation

6. Independent Supervision Cycle  Three year cycle for educators with contract status and are Proficient or Exemplary on all domains and components.  Self assessment  Written Professional Growth Plan with two  SMART goals of choice  Mini-observations with feedback  Self reflection  Summative Evaluation

7. Staff Evaluation  Complete with added domain for Learning Specialists and Speech Pathologists  Learning Specialists and Speech Pathologists work with school administrators  OSS Staff work with Special Services administrators

8. Domains 1. Planning and Preparation 2. Learning and Work Environment 3. Instruction or Delivery of Service 4. Professional Responsibility 1. Special Education Services

9. Exemplary  …demonstrate mastery and make contributions to the profession both in and outside their school.  They operate at a qualitatively different level, where educator and student become a community of learners,  with students highly motivated, engaged in learning, and assuming considerable responsibility for their own learning and a positive environment.

10. Proficient  Educator clearly understands the concepts underlying the components of the standards and implements them well.  Most experienced, capable educators will regard themselves, and be regarded by others, as performing at this level.

11. Basic  Educator appears to understand the concepts underlying the standards  Attempts to implement the elements.  Implementation is sporadic, intermittent, or otherwise not entirely successful.  The educator’s performance is inconsistent and improvement is likely to come with experience  Little or no actual harm is done to students.

12. Does Not Meet Standards  The educator does not demonstrate an understanding of the concepts underlying the standards.  Working on fundamental practices associated with the elements of the standards will enable the educator to grow and develop in this area.

13. Mini Observations  Unannounced observations of an educator's performance by an administrator  Does not require a pre-conference  Approximately 10-20 minutes  Followed with timely feedback.  May be discussion, written e-mail or a post-observation conference.

14. 5 th Domain  5a Licensure  5b Knowledge and Compliance  5c Written Consent  5d Team Meetings  5e Responding to iTeam Referrals  5f Written Reports  5g IEP Writing  5h Integrating IEP Goals  5i Assistive Technology  5j Consultation  5k Resources for Teachers

15. 5g IEP Writing  Exemplary  Proficient  Basic  Does not meet Standards

16. Exemplary  IEP’s are thorough yet concise, well written and include appropriate and meaningful recommendations that uniquely address student needs.

17. Proficient  IEP’s are thorough and well written.  They include appropriate recommendations.

18. Basic  IEP’s are not always thorough, may be poorly written or unnecessarily long.  Recommendations are somewhat appropriate.

19. Does Not Meet Standards  IEP’s are not thorough or poorly written.  They may not include recommendations or recommendations are inappropriate.