Professional Report

The evaluation policy procedures must provide for the use of evaluation results for retention and promotion decisions and for removal of poorly performing teachers. In the case of a reduction in force, seniority cannot be used in deciding to retain a teacher, except when considering teachers who “have comparable evaluations.” If the board does not elect to use the alternative framework (see below), among the multiple evaluation factors required in the evaluation framework is a requirement to include student academic growth, which shall account for 50% of each evaluation. This factor could be the value- added progress dimension (if applicable to the grade level or subject area taught by the teacher) or an alternative student academic progress measure in proportion to the part of a teacher’s schedule of courses or subjects for which the value-added progress dimension is applicable. After July 1, 2014, if the teacher’s schedule is comprised only of courses or subjects for which the value-added progress dimension is available, the entire student academic growth factor of the evaluation shall be based on this dimension. However, students with 45 or more absences during the full academic year shall not be included in this student academic growth factor. For grade levels and subjects for which the assessments and the value- added progress dimension, or the alternative student academic progress measure, do not apply, the Ohio Department of Education is required to develop a list of other assessments that measure mastery of course content. This list could include nationally normed standardized assessments, industry certification exams, or end-of-course exams.

The four levels of performance for teachers are: accomplished, skilled, developing, and ineffective.

See PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF TEACHERS – THE ALTERNATIVE FRAMEWORK above.

TEACHERS, RETESTING

3319.58

Effective with the 2015-2016 school year, districts must require any core subject area teacher who has received a performance rating of ineffective for two of the three most recent school years to register and take any content knowledge tests prescribed by the department of education “to determine expertise to teach that core subject area and the grade level to which the teacher is assigned.”

Teachers are not responsible for the cost of the exam.

Teachers who take the exam and provide proof of passing are not required to retake the exam for three years regardless of their performance rating or the performance index score ranking of their assigned building. Also, teachers providing the proof of passage of the exams are required, at their own expense, to complete professional development targeted to address the deficiencies identified in the teacher’s evaluations. Receipt of a rating of ineffective on the next performance evaluation following the completion of the professional development or failure to complete the professional development are grounds for termination under ORC 3319.16. Districts may use the results of the tests to develop or revise professional development plans or to decide whether to continue the employment of the teacher.