Proposed Amendments to Part 50 (Evaluation of Certified Employees under Article s24A and 34 of the School Code)
P.A. 96-861, or Performance Evaluation Performance Act of 2010 (PERA), became effective January 1, 2010, and amended Articles 24A and 34 of the School Code to transform the way in which the performance of teachers and principals in Illinois public schools is evaluated. Central to this transformation is the inclusion of data and indicators of student growth (in addition to consideration of professional practice) as a “significant” factor in determining a teacher’s or principal’s performance evaluation rating.
Amendments to PERA by P.A. 97-8 (SB 7), effective June 13, 2011, expanded the use of performance evaluations by holding nontenured teachers to similar standards of evaluation as tenured teachers. Similarly, P.A. 97-217, effective July 28, 2011, requires that assistant principals also be included in the performance evaluation system using both student growth and professional practice for rating performance (with the exception of assistant principals in City of Chicago School District 299 (CPS)). Assistant principals working outside of the city of Chicago, like principals, must be evaluated every school year by no later than March 1. Principals in CPS must be evaluated by July 1 annually.
The proposed rules set forth the minimum requirements for both student growth and professional practice that all school districts must meet when establishing their performance evaluation systems for teachers and principals/assistant principals (Subparts B and D, respectively). Additionally, PERA requires that the State Board establish a performance evaluation model for both teachers and principals/assistant principals. Use of the model is optional for school districts, which may choose to incorporate the entire model or portions of the model into their performance evaluation plans, so the model is not a subject of rulemaking. Use of the teacher model pertaining to data and indicators of student growth is required, however, in those instances where the school district and its teachers, using the process of a joint committee set forth in PERA, cannot agree on some or all of the aspects of student growth and those requirements are being placed in Subpart C.
The proposed rules (see Section 50.110) provide an outline for how student growth must be considered when rating student performance for teachers by:
The state model for considering student growth for teachers (Subpart C) includes the minimum criteria addressed in Section 50.110 that all districts must meet (except for CPS, which is not required to use the state model). Since it is anticipated that few if any schools will “default” to the state model within the next couple of years, Performance Evaluation Advisory Council will continue to flesh out requirements of the model specific to special populations, identification of procedures for reaching agreement on the type of assessments to be used when the joint committee cannot agree, and for both assessments for nontested areas, such as career and technical education and the fine arts, and the measures tied to those assessments, such as student learning objectives.
It is proposed that consideration of student growth for principals and assistant principals (see Section 50.310) also be 30 percent of the final performance evaluation rating assigned, with a two-year phasing in of this minimum level. The proposed rules state when a student’s score may be included as part of the student growth measure, ensuring that the results can be attributed to the principal or assistant principal being evaluated. The proposal also recognizes the unique role of assistant principals by allowing for consideration of other student outcomes, such as attendance, when looking at student growth for an assistant principal, provided those outcomes are tied to the individual’s specific duties.
The proposed rules for professional practice for teachers and principals/assistant principals (see Sections 50.120 and 50.320, respectively) define the characteristics of a formal observation, the number of observations that must be conducted, and requirements for the evaluator to meet with the individual being evaluated before the observation takes place and share information about the evidence collected after the observation is concluded. These requirements are intended to help prepare both the evaluator and individual being evaluated for each observation and provide information in a timely manner so that the individual can work towards improvements in practice before the final performance evaluation rating is assigned.
Finally, PERA requires certain training of evaluators and allows school districts the option of either developing their own process or program for prequalification and retraining or using the programs to be developed by, or on behalf of, the State Board. Proposed Subpart E addresses requirements for any locally developed prequalification process or retraining program.
Initial Review by State Board of Education: November 2011