Grosse Ile Township Schools
Bylaws & Policies
 

1240 - EVALUATION OF THE SUPERINTENDENT

The Board of Education believes it is essential that it evaluate the Superintendent's performance periodically in order to assist both the Board and the Superintendent in the proper discharge of their responsibilities and to enable the Board to provide the District with the best possible leadership. To carry out this responsibility, the Board will evaluate the Superintendent utilizing a rigorous, transparent, and fair performance evaluation system that does all of the following:

 

A.

Evaluates the Superintendentís job performance at least annually in a year-end evaluation, while providing timely and constructive feedback.

 
 

A Superintendent rated highly effective on three (3) consecutive year-end evaluations may be evaluated every other year, at the Districtís discretion.

 
 

B.

Establishes clear approaches to measuring student growth and provides the Superintendent with relevant data on student growth.

 
 

C.

Evaluates the Superintendent's job performance as highly effective, effective, minimally effective or ineffective, using multiple rating categories that take into account student growth and assessment data. For the 2015 - 2016, 2016 - 2017 and 2017 - 2018 school years twenty-five percent (25%) of the annual year-end evaluation shall be based on student growth and assessment data. Beginning with the 2018 - 2019 school year, forty percent (40%) of the annual year-end evaluation shall be based on student growth and assessment data.

 
 

For the Superintendent, the pertinent data is that of the entire School District.

 
 

D.

Uses the evaluations, at a minimum, to inform decisions regarding all of the following:

 
 

1.

The effectiveness of the Superintendent, so that s/he is given ample opportunities for improvement.

 
 

2.

Retention and development of the Superintendent, including providing relevant coaching, instruction support, or professional development.

 
 

3.

Removing an ineffective Superintendent after s/he has had ample opportunities to improve, and providing that these decisions are made using rigorous standards and streamlined, transparent, and fair procedures.

 
 

E.

The portion of the annual year-end evaluation that is not based on student growth and assessment data shall be based on at least the following for the entire District:

 
 

1.

The Superintendent's training and proficiency in conducting teacher performance evaluations if s/he does so or his/her designee's proficiency and training if the Superintendent designates such duties.

 
 

2.

The progress made by the school or District in meeting the goals established in the school/District improvement plan.

 
 

3.

Student attendance.

 
 

4.

Student, parent and teacher feedback and other information considered pertinent by the Board.

 
 

F.

For the purposes of conducting annual year-end evaluations under the performance evaluation system, by the beginning of the 2016-2017 school year, the District shall adopt and implement one (1) or more of the evaluation tools for teachers, or administrators, if available, that are included on the list established and maintained by the Michigan Department of Education ("MDE"). However, if the District has one (1) or more local evaluation tools for administrators or modifications of an evaluation tool on the list, and the District complies with G., below, the District may conduct annual year-end evaluations for administrators using one (1) or more local evaluation tools or modifications.

 
 

G.

Beginning with the 2016-2017 school year, the District shall post on its public website all of the following information about the measures it uses for its performance evaluation system for school administrators:

 
 

1.

The research base for the evaluation framework, instrument, and process or, if the District adapts or modifies an evaluation tool from the MDE list, the research base for the listed evaluation tool and an assurance that the adaptations or modifications do not compromise the validity of that research base.

 
 

2.

The identity and qualifications of the author or authors or, if the District adapts or modifies an evaluation tool from the MDE list, the identity and qualifications of a person with expertise in teacher evaluations who has reviewed the adapted or modified evaluation tool.

 
 

3.

Either evidence of reliability, validity, and efficacy or a plan for developing that evidence or, if the District adapts or modifies an evaluation tool from the MDE list, an assurance that the adaptations or modifications do not compromise the reliability, validity, or efficacy of the evaluation tool or the evaluation process.

 
 

4.

The evaluation frameworks and rubrics with detailed descriptors for each performance level on key summative indicators.

 
 

5.

A description of the processes for conducting classroom observations, collecting evidence, conducting evaluation conferences, developing performance ratings, and developing performance improvement plans.

 
 

6.

A description of the plan for providing evaluators and observers with training.

 
 

H.

Beginning with the 2016 - 2017 school year:

 
 

1.

The District shall provide training to the Superintendent on the measures used by the District in its performance evaluation system and on how each of the measures is used. This training may be provided by a district or by a consortium consisting of two (2) or more districts, the intermediate school district or a public school academy.

 
 

2.

The District shall ensure that training is provided to all evaluators and observers. The training shall be provided by an individual who has expertise in the evaluation tool or tools used by the District, which may include either a consultant on that evaluation tool or framework or an individual who has been trained to train others in the use of the evaluation tool or tools. The District may provide the training in the use of the evaluation tool or tools if the trainer has expertise in the evaluation tool or tools.

The Board's evaluation shall also include an assessment of the:

 

A.

progress toward the educational goals of the District;

 
 

B.

working relationship between the Board and the Superintendent;

 
 

C.

Board's own effectiveness in providing direction to the Superintendent.

Such assessments will be based on defined quality expectations developed by the Board for each criteria being assessed.

The evaluation system shall ensure that if the Superintendent is rated as minimally effective or ineffective, the person(s) conducting the evaluation shall develop and require the Superintendent to implement an improvement plan to correct the deficiencies. The improvement plan shall recommend professional development opportunities and other measures designed to improve the rating of the Superintendent on his/her next annual year-end evaluation. A Superintendent rated as "ineffective" on three (3) consecutive year-end evaluations must be dismissed from employment with the District.

The evaluation program shall aim at the early identification of specific areas in which the Superintendent needs help so that appropriate assistance may be provided or arranged for. The Board shall not release the Superintendent from the responsibility to improve. If the Superintendent, after receiving a reasonable degree of assistance, fails to perform his/her assigned responsibilities in a satisfactory manner, dismissal, or non-renewal procedures may be invoked. In such an instance, all relevant evaluation documents may be used in the proceedings.

Evaluations shall be conducted of each administrator as stipulated in the revised School Code, the employment contract, the Superintendent's administrative guidelines and as directed by the Michigan Department of Education. An administrator shall be given a copy of any documents relating to his/her performance which are to be placed in the personnel file.

This policy shall not deprive an administrator of any rights provided by State law or any contractual rights consistent with State law.

As an outcome of the evaluation of the Superintendent's performance, the Board should be prepared to judge the advisability of retention of the Superintendent and be prepared better to:

 

A.

determine the Superintendent's salary;

 
 

B.

identify strengths and weaknesses in the operation of the District and determine means by which weaknesses can be reduced and strengths are maintained.

Adopted 8/28/07
Revised 6/23/15
Revised 11/22/16

© Neola 2016