Recap of September 27, 2012 SAE-Classified Advisory Committee Meeting

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.