This meeting covered two main topics (see agenda here) – the proposed initial implementation phase
(IIP) of the classified evaluation process and potential additional measures
that we might want to incorporate into the process. The initial implementation will focus on self
and supervisor evaluations and growth plan development based on evaluation
outcomes.
The IIP will be a no-stakes opportunity for a sample of classified
employees and their supervisors to provide feedback on the proposed format. The process will include
§
an initial meeting with the employee and
supervisor to establish expectations,
§
an employee self-assessment against the entire
classified performance framework (see the latest version here, and please feel free to submit comments),
§
the development of an Individual Growth Plan
(IGP),
§
an evidence collection component where the employee and
supervisor will have a chance to collect evidence of performance throughout the
year,
§
an end-of-year performance evaluation by the
supervisor, and
§
training on the various components of the
process.
The initial meeting with the employee and the supervisor
should take place at least once for every supervisor/employee pair. This meeting will help establish the
responsibilities of the particular position that the employee is in. This is more specific than the
responsibilities of the classification as outlined in the class
description. Two individuals in the same
classification, Office Technician for example, may perform very different
activities in their positions, even within the same office. Sometimes this meeting will require that the
employee describe his/her position, and other times it will require the
supervisor’s lead on establishing responsibilities.
The employee will evaluate his/her performance against the
entire classified framework by selecting a rating (ineffective, developing,
effective, highly effective) for each of the areas in the framework. The Classified Performance Framework is
modeled after the Teaching & Learning Framework, which you can find here. Based on
this evaluation, the employee will develop a growth plan for the year, focusing
on about two areas of growth. These
areas should be selected from those that the employee has evaluated as
developing or ineffective. If the
employee does not have at least two areas with these ratings, s/he can select
another area to focus on for the year.
The employee develops the IGP following the instructions built into the form and submits it to his/her supervisor for review
and comment. You can compare the
classified IGP with the one for teachers here. Once the employee and supervisor agree on the
necessary growth areas, the employee completes the plan.
Throughout the year, the employee and supervisor will
collect examples of evidence for all of the areas that are evaluated. How this evidence will be cataloged and
managed is yet to be determined.
However, at the end of the year, this evidence will be used to support
ratings in the various areas that are evaluated.
Finally, there will be an end-of-year evaluation by the
supervisor. The same framework will be
used to conduct the evaluation as that used by the employee for
self-evaluation. The steps listed here
are strictly for the IIP. The actual
steps of the evaluation process are outlined in the evaluation guidelines that
will be included with the process.
In addition to the self and supervisor evaluations, there
will most likely be additional measures.
What these additional measures will be has yet to be determined. What is currently used for teachers is a
stakeholder feedback survey, and assessment of the teacher’s contribution to
the school community, and contribution to student learning. We will likely develop similar types of
measures for classified, but what those will look like is still unclear.
Additional and more definitive information regarding the
initial implementation of the classified evaluation process will follow. The materials are still under review, as is
the process that will actually be piloted.
The materials and steps of the process that I presented at the Advisory
Committee Meeting were my draft proposal.
Please feel free to submit comments to this blog or e-mail me directly
at heidi.hrowal@lausd.net.