Plato R-V


R 4610 Certificated Personnel Performance Evaluation


The Evaluation of Educators

The Plato R-V School District shall evaluate all educators in accordance with applicable district policy and state laws and regulatory guidelines.  The Plato R-V School District educator evaluation model shall be aligned with the Missouri Model Educator Standards ( and the State Model of Educator Evaluation.

Observation of Teaching/Classroom Instruction

The observation component is intended to gauge the effectiveness of each educator’s instructional pedagogical strategies; curriculum implementation; teaching critical thinking; maintaining a positive classroom learning environment; demonstrate effective communication; and use of assessment data to improve student learning.  All educators shall be observed by their principals, or when necessary, the principal’s designated assistant principal, and/or other observers.

The purpose of an individual observation is to provide an opportunity for the evaluator to observe the educator as he/she engages in classroom instruction and then to evaluate the instructional practices demonstrated by the educator against the observation scoring guides.  During the observation event, the observer will typically be focused on a few specific indicator scoring guides.  The observer may gather data on other indicators while in the classroom setting.

Unit of Instruction Analysis

The Unit of Instruction Analysis component is intended to determine the level of instructional planning and organization each educator has in their area of responsibility.  The rating inputs for educator Unit of Instruction Analysis include items submitted to the evaluator (or their designee) based on a list of artifacts provided during the evaluator training.

Inputs for the teacher Unit of Instruction Analysis component for the evaluation shall be educator-selected.  However, the educator may only select a Unit of Instruction for analysis that is aligned to his/her primary responsibility; and the educator must justify his/her selection by showing how the input accurately measures his/her instructional planning and organization of curriculum-related materials for use in their classroom.  The educator must select the input (the specific unit of instruction) no later than the end of the first semester of each school year.

Analysis of Planned Learning

The Analysis of Planned Learning component is intended to determine the level of planning and organization of the educator’s Professional Growth Plan, the level of implementation of the plan, and the level of impact the growth plan had on the educator’s students learning.  The list of artifacts for the Analysis of Planned Learning will be provided during evaluator training.

            The rating inputs the Analysis of Planned Learning include:

  1. An educator self-assessment document completed and on file by August 30th of each school year;
  2. Completed beginning of year (BOY) elements of the professional growth plan by August 30th of each school year with Principal BOY conference and signature;
  3. Completed middle of year (MOY) elements of the professional growth plan by December 15th of each school year with principal MOY conference and signature; and,
  4. Completed end of year (EOY) elements of the professional growth plan by April 30th of each school year with principal EOY conference and signature.

Student Growth and Achievement Data

The student growth and achievement data component is intended to measure the impact that the educator has on the academic growth and achievement level of each of his/her students.

The evaluator and educator may collaborate to determine which Student Growth and Achievement data are most appropriate to include in the individual educator’s evaluation.  Each educator, in collaboration with his/her evaluator, will choose from the list of options identified by the State Model of Educator Evaluation, for a measure or measures to represent student achievement in his/her evaluation.  The agreed-upon measures will be aligned as closely as possible to the educator’s primary responsibility.  If the two parties do not agree on a measure, the evaluator will select a measure of student achievement.  If school-wide MAP/EOC results are selected as evaluation measures for educators in grades or subjects without MAP/EOC data, the evaluation report shall indicate that school-wide MAP/EOC data was used and that school-wide MAP/EOC data is not the educator’s individual MAP/EOC score.

The Student Growth Data Input for this component may be based on Missouri Assessment Program Grade-Level and End of Course (MAP and EOC) data that is derived from Missouri’s standardized student test data.

Stakeholder (Student) Perception

The stakeholder perception component is intended to gather information from students and /or other stakeholders on the educator’s demonstration of teaching, instructional, and/or classroom engagement practices that have been shown by research to positively affect student achievement.  The inputs for the student perception component will include information from validated and reliable surveys of students in grades 4-12.  Surveys used for the student component of the evaluation shall be validated to ensure that the items included in the survey directly address research-based best practices of teaching and student and classroom engagement.  Educators of the students to be surveyed will be provided with information and educated on the purpose of the surveys used to measure student perceptions.

Calculating an Effectiveness Score

Based on policy, guidelines, and recommendations provided by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, an overall effectiveness score is to be calculated using the five evaluation component.  Current recommendations/requirements for weighting and scaling are as follows:

                        Observations of Teaching/Classroom Instruction          _%

                        Unit of Instruction Analysis                                                            _%

                        Analysis of Planned Learning                                          _%

                        Student Growth and Achievement Data                          _%

                        Student Perceptions                                                           _%

The weighting of each component may change during subsequent years of evaluation.

The Evaluation Process

            The evaluation process shall address the five areas of the State Model of Educator Evaluation: Model Data Measures; Required Training and Certification; Providing Evaluation Information to Teachers; Improving Practice/Seeking Professional Growth Support; and Use of System Data for Improvement of Educators, Programs, Schools, and Districts.

Model Data Measures

As described above, the evaluation data collected include measures of these five components:

            Observations of Teaching/Classroom Instruction

            Unit of Instruction Analysis           

            Analysis of Planned Learning

            Student Growth and Achievement Data

            Student Perceptions


Training is available for evaluators.  The training is designed to ensure accurate and reliable data is entered.  Training is also available to ensure that evaluators follow standardized protocols in all aspects of the evaluation process from collaboratively setting building level goals to conducting End of the Year (EOY) conferences.  To make the system effective and meaningful in respect to all stakeholders the system training must address several perspectives.

Providing Evaluation Information to Educators

Pertinent education-related and organizational management research indicates timely and consistent supervisor feedback has the maximum impact on changing adult behaviors.  Consequently, observations will be frequent and focused on one or two indicators and follow-up will be timely.  The supervisor should meet with the educator within 24 hours to conduct a structured dialogue session where specific factual and evidence-based feedback can be provided.

The evaluator will meet and conference with each of the educators they are assigned to evaluate at least three times during the school year.

  1. A Beginning of the Year (BOY) conference there the evaluator and educator review specific documents to make sure both are clear on the expectations for the year and content-related measureable instructional goals are in writing.  For returning educators in the district, the evaluator will review the previous year’s evaluation report with the educator and clearly define area of improvement based on the report.  This BOY conference will also include a review and discussion regarding the educator’s Professional Growth plan and establish clear expectations on the impact of the plan on the educator’s classroom;
  2. The Middle of the Year (MOY) conference shall involve a review of student formative assessment data focused on areas related to the measurable instructional goals by the educator and evaluator.  The educator will also review their progress toward completing the Professional Growth plan and show the evaluator evidence of how they plan has made a positive impact on a majority of their students.  If needed, the evaluator may prescribe new and more intense professional growth supports to assist the educator in improving their effectiveness.  A formative data report from the Educator Professional Growth evaluation system will be reviewed by the educator and evaluator and a copy will be provided to the evaluator for their records;
  3. The End of Year (EOY) conference will be conducted just prior to the contract renewal period.  During this session, the educator and evaluator will review student formative assessment data and determine whether the instructional goals were met and what impact the Educator Professional Growth plan had on the majority of the students in the educator’s class/classes.  A summative report based on data in the Educator Professional Growth evaluation system and other data sources available to the educator will be reviewed with the educator during the EOY conference.

View Policy

Board Approved Date: December 12, 2013
Last Updated: December 2013