Missouri Evaluation

Teacher
Evaluation
Missouri’s Educator Evaluation System

www.dese.mo.gov
© 2013 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national
origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to Department programs and to the location of services,
activities, and facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office
th
of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6 Floor, 205 Jefferson Street,
P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 80-735-2966; email [email protected].

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Step 1: Identify the indicators to be assessed .............................................................................................................................................................. 5
Step 2: Determine a baseline score for each identified indicator ................................................................................................................................ 6
Step 3: Develop an Educator Growth Plan (i.e. professional learning/development plan or improvement plan) .................................................... 10
Step 4: Regularly assess progress and provide feedback............................................................................................................................................ 14
Step 5: Determine a follow-up score for each identified indicator ............................................................................................................................ 16
Step 6: Complete the final summative evaluation....................................................................................................................................................... 19
Step 7: Reflect and Plan ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Timeline for completion of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol ...................................................................................................................................... 25
New Teacher Protocol.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 26
Timeline for New Teacher Evaluation .......................................................................................................................................................................... 27
New Teacher Feedback and Evaluation Forms ............................................................................................................................................................ 30
Timeline for completion of the New Teacher Evaluation Protocol ............................................................................................................................. 33
Educator Improvement Protocol ................................................................................................................................................................................. 34
Timeline for completion of the Educator Improvement Protocol ............................................................................................................................... 35
Educator Improvement Plan forms.............................................................................................................................................................................. 36

Teacher Evaluation Protocol
Introduction
Missouri’s Educator Evaluation System was created, field-tested and piloted, and refined by hundreds of educators across the state. The system
is founded on general beliefs about the purpose of the evaluation process. Central to these beliefs is a theory of action which maintains that
improving student performance is predicated on the improvement of educator practice. These beliefs include that evaluation processes are
formative in nature and lead to continuous improvement; are aligned to standards that reflect excellence; build a culture of informing practice
and promoting learning; and use multiple, balanced measurements that are fair and ethical. Districts are encouraged to collectively establish
basic beliefs that serve as the foundation of their local evaluation process. Based on the theory of action and beliefs that are the foundation to
the state’s model Educator Evaluation System, the primary purpose of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol is to promote growth in effective practice
that ultimately increases student performance. This growth in practice occurs based on the following sequence:

THE
PROCESS

Growth requires focus. The identification of indicators is essential to establishing a particular focus based on performances articulated in the
indicators. The baseline data serves as a starting point by establishing a current level of performance. Strategies for improvement are identified
and practiced. Meaningful feedback is provided regarding the extent to which the new strategies are addressing the area of focus. A follow-up
rating provides indication of the amount of growth in performance that occurred. Reflection on the process and the amount of growth that

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 4

occurred or didn’t occur informs whether this particular indicator remains an area of focus or whether there is a new area of focus. This
sequence is an important component to the growth in educational practice that occurs in the teacher evaluation process described in the
following steps:

Step 1: Identify the indicators to be assessed
Rationale
Appropriate indicators are selected that most support increasing student learning through a focus on potential growth opportunities for the
teacher. The indicators identified create an alignment between district and school improvement plans and the efforts and primary
responsibilities of the teacher in the classroom.

Description
The selection of indicators is very important to the process. These determine the focus and rationale for improving effective practice and are
based on what is needed most to improve student learning.
The identified indicators provide a focus area for ongoing learning and growth. Typically these are identified at the end of the year for returning
teachers. The determination of which and how many indicators to identify is determined with the following criteria in mind:
1. Driven by student learning needs
2. Derived from the Building and District Improvement Plans (BIP-building level / CSIP-district level)
3. A maximum of three indicators per teacher per year are recommended which are:
• Based on student needs
• Represents priorities of the building/district leadership for that teacher
• Based on a potential growth opportunity for the teacher and are determined in collaboration between the teacher(s) and
principal
4. At a minimum two of the indicators must address impact on student learning
5. Other indicators may be identified at any time based on issues and needs that arise. In extreme instances where particular growth or
change in practice must be addressed, an Educator Improvement Plan (see Step 3) may be instituted.

Example
Mrs. Johnson is a third year teacher. Based on student data, the third graders in Mrs. Johnson’s class struggle with reading comprehension. This
is an area of concentration for her class for this year. The principal, who is focusing on the implementation of the Common Core Standards, is
directing all teachers to work on Indicator 1.1 “Content knowledge and academic language”. In addition, Mrs. Johnson, in consultation with her
Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 5

principal, has identified Indicator 7.3 “Student-led assessment strategies” in order to better meet the challenging needs of her third grade class.
The principal also felt that 8.1 “Self-assessment and improvement” would be helpful to Mrs. Johnson in documenting her efforts to meet the
specific needs of her third graders regarding reading comprehension. For this year, Mrs. Johnson’s area of focus will be on performances
articulated in the following three indicators:
1. Content knowledge and academic language 1.1
2. Student-led assessment strategies 7.3
3. Self assessment and improvement 8.1
Indicator 1.1 includes evidence for commitment, practice and impact; indicator 7.3 has evidence for practice and impact; and indicator 8.1 has
commitment and practice evidence.

Step 2: Determine a baseline score for each identified indicator
Rationale
In order to determine growth on an indicator, it is necessary to establish a baseline score and compare it to a follow-up score. This represents a
type of pre- and post-test format where growth in practice occurs between two points in time. A numerical rating provides an assessment of
both pre- and post-status to determine accurately the growth that occurred in between.

Description
The 0 – 7 scale found on each growth guide provides a numerical rating for each indicator. This numerical rating establishes a baseline score.
The baseline score for returning teachers working on the same indicator as the previous year is the follow-up rating they received. This
generates continuity of improvement on a particular indicator.
The baseline rating is determined by considering the evidence at each level of the appropriate growth guide. Evidence falls into one of three
different categories: commitment, practice and impact. Evidence in the commitment frame focuses on the quality of the teacher and includes
data and information like preparation, lesson design and credentialing. Evidence in the practice frames focuses on observable behaviors, or the
quality of the teaching that the teacher is doing. Evidence in the impact frames focuses on outcomes or what students in the teacher’s class are
doing.
It is important to think about a teacher’s rating by taking these separate categories of evidence into consideration. After all, if a teacher designs
what they think is a great lesson and delivers it in what they think is an effective manner and yet students do not grasp the content, then there is

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 6

still something less than ideal in the learning experience. Identifying where that growth opportunity exists that limits the learning experience
from being ideal is the type of focus that leads to growth in practice.
It is first necessary to determine the appropriate descriptive rating for the teacher’s performance. This descriptive rating will be either Emerging,
Developing, Proficient or Distinguished. To determine the descriptive rating, it is necessary to establish the highest level for which there is
evidence of performance.
For example, in Growth Guide 1.1, a determination about the teacher’s performance might be as illustrated below. There is Commitment
evidence that the teacher is well prepared, that their lesson design includes current content and there is use of supplementary sources. There is
also observable Practice evidence reflecting the accuracy and complexity of content knowledge in instruction as indicated. While evidence at the
Impact level reveals that students are generally familiar with academic language, student data does not support that a majority of students are
able to use academic language. Although evidence can be gathered by observing student performance and various student products, an
additional way to gather evidence at the impact level could be through the use of student surveys. Although this is perceptual in nature,
research maintains that it does offer useful data.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 7

Alignment
Of
Evidence

In this illustration, the highlighted areas reflect the evidence of the teacher’s performance. In this illustration, as noted by the highlighted text,
there are examples of evidence in three different columns, Emerging, Developing and Proficient. However, it is only in the Emerging column
where there is an alignment, or evidence in all three professional frames. This alignment of evidence supports that the teacher is fully rated at
the Emerging level. In this particular example, student’s ability to use academic language would be the teacher’s growth opportunity.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 8

It is next necessary to establish a baseline score within the Emerging level. This would be calculated and communicated as follows:
1. Using the appropriate growth guide and rating scale (see below), determine a baseline score. A score of 0 indicates there is no evidence
present in at least one of the three frames. A score of 1 indicates there is evidence in all frames, but that it is inconsistently present or
demonstrated. A score of 2 would indicate it is present and routinely demonstrated. Ideally, this score determination would occur as a
collaborative, professional conversation between the teacher and administrator.
RATING SCALE
Not
Present

0

Present
but
Inconsistent

Present
Consistent
Routine

1
Emerging

2

Present
but
Inconsistent

Present
Consistent
Routine

3
4
Developing

Present
but
Inconsistent

Present
Consistent
Routine

Present
Consistent
Routine

5

6

7
Distinguished

Proficient

2. Once a score has been determined, provide specific feedback that includes an explanation and rationale for the given score. Again, this
would ideally occur within a collaborative, professional conversation.
3. In the example illustrated above, students’ ability to use academic language is the specific area where growth is needed to move
performance from the “Emerging” level to the “Developing” level.

Example
Mrs. Johnson received the following ratings on her baseline assessment:
•

•

A score of “2 Emerging” on Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language
o The evidence, as presented in the example in the Description section, indicates that Mrs. Johnson routinely and consistently is
well prepared and uses current and new content as well as supplementary sources where appropriate and her instruction
reflects accuracy and complexity of content; and her students are familiar with academic language but do not consistently use it.
This consistent use of academic language by students represents a growth opportunity for Mrs. Johnson.
A score of “4 Developing” on Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies
o The evidence indicates that Mrs. Johnson routinely and consistently orientates students on various formats of assessments and
instructs them on how to reflect on their own learning based on data. She also instructs them on setting personal learning goals.
Students routinely and consistently are prepared for the demands of different assessments and successfully set personal

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 9

•

learning goals based on their own reflection of their learning. An appropriate growth opportunity would include Mrs. Johnson
facilitating student learning on how to report on their own progress.
A score of “2 Emerging” on Indicator 8.1: Self assessment and improvement
o This indicates that Mrs. Johnson’s professional development or growth plan includes information from self-assessment and
reflection strategies and that she also uses this information to improve the overall learning of her students. An appropriate
growth opportunity in this area would involve Mrs. Johnson specifically reflecting on the impact of her teaching and using that to
guide adjustments to her practices.

Step 3: Develop an Educator Growth Plan (i.e. professional learning/development plan or
improvement plan)
Rationale
The primary purpose of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol is to promote growth. Therefore, the acquisition and application of new learning and
skills is essential for turning opportunities for growth into outcomes and results.

Description
The description of performance in each indicator and the baseline rating identifies an opportunity for growth. It is important when addressing
this opportunity for growth that a very clear plan be developed. The Educator Growth Plan is the document used to articulate the various
necessary components of this plan. For instances where very specific growth is required, or where particular areas of concern must be
addressed, the Educator Improvement Plan is used to ensure that this growth occurs to the extent necessary and in a timely fashion. For more
on the Educator Improvement Protocol, see page 34 of this Teacher Evaluation Protocol.
The Educator Growth Plan addresses specific sources of new learning, the practice of skills related to new learning and timelines for completion.
The state model offers two different formats for the Educator Growth Plan. One option uses language from the Data Team Process while the
other uses language from the Plan/Do/Study Act process. Regardless of which option is used, the Educator Growth Plan includes the following
key general components:
1. It corresponds to the examples of evidence provided in the appropriate growth guide
2. It is a clear articulation of a plan or goal statement to address growth opportunities
3. It includes specific strategies and timelines for application of new learning and skills
4. It is focused on results and outcomes

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 10

FOCUS – an area that represents an opportunity for
growth and is generated from evidence on the growth
guide
GOAL – a statement that addresses the focus and is
specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and timely
STRATEGY – description of the skill(s) to be demonstrated
that will effectively address the focus and include clear
action steps and timelines
RESULTS – data and evidence that supports that the
outcome of the strategy has effectively addressed the
focus

When considering different strategies to address growth opportunities, the state model offers several different sources of research. Research
sources are inlcuded in the “Research and Proven Practices” section of this document.
The research provided in this section includes the work of Dr. Robert Marzano, Dr. John Hattie, and Mr. Doug Lemov. These bodies of research
were included because of the effect size information provided and their proven record of having impact on student learning. Crosswalks are
provided for each to align each body of research with teacher indicators.
This research offers specific strategies that can be included in the teacher’s Educator Growth Plan as a demonstration of progression on the
specific indicator being addressed.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 11

Also provided is a document called the Possible
Sources of Evidence. There is a single page document
provided for each standard. This document provides a
list of “possible” sources of evidence that a teacher
might include as a component of the Educator Growth
Plan.
It is important to note that this is not a comprehensive
list of all evidence sources nor is it a checklist of things
to do and/or provide. It simply offers some possible
examples that might be included.
The evidence provided is categorized by the three
professional frames found on each of the teacher’s
growth guides. In this way, teachers and
administrators can use this to clarify exactly what kind
of evidence will indicate that growth in performance
has occurred.

Example
Mrs. Johnson, in consultation with her administrator and perhaps also peers and/or a mentor, reviews the Possible Sources of Evidence
documents and the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation System webpage to determine which new skills and
strategies would be most appropriate given the particular growth opportunities of her selected indicators. Mrs. Johnson considers the following
information as she works to complete her Educator Growth Plan:
•

Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language
o Using the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation webpage, Mrs. Johnson observes that there are 23
different Marzano instructional strategies that align to Quality Indicator 1.1. In reviewing these strategies, she and her
administrator agree that strategy MDQ 2.12: “The teacher engages students in activities that help them record their
understanding of new content in linguistic ways and/or represents the content in nonlinguistic ways” would be helpful for
increasing a students’ use of academic language. From the Professional Impact section of the Possible Sources of Evidence for

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 12

o

Standard 1 document, they further determine that student work samples could appropriately provide evidence to this increase
in academic language.
In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson documents the following:
 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for increasing the use of academic language
 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how much she wants student use of academic language to increase by and when
 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use a Marzano strategy (MDQ 2.12) and student work samples to
demonstrate an increase in academic language
 RESULTS – (to be completed later in Step 5)

•

Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies
o Using the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation webpage, Mrs. Johnson observes that there are 9
different strategies taken from the research of John Hattie that align to Quality Indicator 7.3. In reviewing these strategies, she
and her administrator agree that “Self-reported Grades” would assist students in learning to report their own progress in
learning. From the Professional Impact section of the Possible Sources of Evidence for Standard 7 document, they further
determine that individual student growth/performance could appropriately provide evidence specific to this opportunity for
growth.
o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson documents the following:
 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for assisting students in reporting their progress in learning
 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how she wants students to report their progress and a timeframe for this to occur
 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use the research of John Hattie and individual student
growth/performance to demonstrate students’ ability to report their progress in learning
 RESULTS – (to be completed later in Step 5)

•

Quality Indicator 8.1: Self-assessment and improvement
o Using the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation webpage, Mrs. Johnson observes that there are 10
different techniques taken from the work of Doug Lemov in his book “Teach Like a Champion”. In reviewing these 10 techniques,
she and her administrator agree that “Technique 10: Double Plan” would be helpful in Mrs. Johnson being more intentional on
reflecting on the impact of her teaching. From the Professional Commitment section of the Possible Sources of Evidence for
Standard 8 document, they further determine that a reflective journal could appropriately provide evidence specific to this
opportunity for growth.
o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson documents the following:
 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus of using reflection to improve instruction

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 13





GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes her goal of using reflection and timelines for meeting that goal
STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use “Technique 10: Double Plan” to organize her reflections and her
planning for improved instruction
RESULTS – (to be completed later in Step 5)

Mrs. Johnson can further support these opportunities for growth with appropriate articles and research. Her local Professional Development
Committe (PDC), district coaches, the regional professional development center and professional associations can be of assistance as well as
other effective teachers in her building and district.

Step 4: Regularly assess progress and provide feedback
Rationale
In keeping with the research on formative development, the esential role of practice and feedback will ensure that the acquisition and
application of new learning, skills and strategies will lead to the improvement of effective practice resulting in improved learning for students.

Description
Determine progress made on new skill acquistion and application using a variety of formal and informal strategies. In addition to building and
district administrators, the use of peers, mentors, coaches, regional centers, associations and other building and district resources assist with
this part of the process.
Feedback on the growth opportunities from the identified indicator is critical. It ensures that new learning takes place, but more importantly
that new skills and strategies are applied and practiced and growth documented. The following guidelines assist in this process of regular
assessment of progress and feedback:
1.
2.
3.
4.

A minimum of three to five opportunities for formal and informal feedback should occur on each identified indicator
Informal feedback may be provided by mentors, coaches, peers, external consultants, etc.
A formal follow-up assessment should be completed by the administrator
Numerical scoring on the appropriate growth guide for each indicator included as a part of the feedback is optional, but is often helpful
to accurately determine progress

The use of feedback forms inlcuded as a part of the state model allows for documentation of feedback and progress. There are several different
forms available for use in providing and documenting feedback.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 14

The Performance Indicator Feedback Form (shown on left) provides documentation of the progression of feedback offered on a particular
indicator. This single page form can be used to document up to three instances of feedback for a single indicator. Additional forms may be used
as needed. There is opportunity for both teacher and observer comments.
The General Observation Feedback Form (shown on right) provides documentation of general information and data gathered from a classroom
observation. In addition to the option of providing feedback on specific indicators offered in the top section, the form also allows for a very
general overview of other relevant information including particular practice strategies being used by the teacher, student engagement levels,
the depth of knowledge observed, structure of the classroom, alignment between curriculum and instruction, type of assessment being used
and an overall assessment of the learning environment.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 15

Example
On several occasions, Mrs. Johnson receives a Performance Indicator Feedback Form from the district’s instructional coach on her use of
linguistic and nonlinguistic demonstrations of student understanding of content in support of Quality Indicator 1.1. She also receives a
Performance Indicator Feedback Form on how well she is facilitating students’ efforts to self-report their progress in learning. Mrs. Johnson also
receives a couple of General Observation Feedback Forms from her administrator and in their discussions they review her reflective journal and
discuss how well the strategy for making a double plan is working. This discussion includes looking at evidence of the changes she has made in
instruction and how well she feels these have impacted her students’ learning.
These forms provide Mrs. Johnson with documented feedback and evidence on the progress she is making on her selected indicators. She has
opportunity to continue emphasizing those particular strategies that appear to be working as well as make adjustments in any areas where she
feels she could be making more progress.

Step 5: Determine a follow-up score for each identified indicator
Rationale
To determine growth on an indicator, it is necessary to compare the follow-up score to the baseline score. The comparison provides a measure
of growth that has occurred on the performance articulated in each quality indicator.

Description
Using the same process to determine the baseline rating, the follow-up rating is determined by considering the evidence at the appropriate level
of the growth guide. When making a determination about the follow-up rating, it is necessary to consider the particular professional frame of
the teacher’s opportunity for growth.
As a reminder, evidence falls into one of three different categories: commitment, practice and impact. Evidence in the commitment frame
focuses on the qualtiy of the teacher and includes data and information like preparation, lesson design and credentialing. Evidence in the
practice frames focuses on observable behaviors, or the quality of the teaching that the teacher is doing. Evidence in the impact frames focuses
on outcomes or what students in the teacher’s class are doing. The follow-up score is determined as follows:
1. Using the appropriate growth guide and rating scale (see below), determine a follow-up score. A score of 0 indicates there is no
evidence present in at least one of the three frames. Ideally, this follow-up score is collaboratively determined through a
professional conversation between the teacher and administrator.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 16

RATING SCALE
Not
Present

0

Present
but
Inconsistent

Present
Consistent
Routine

1
Emerging

2

Present
but
Inconsistent

Present
Consistent
Routine

3
4
Developing

Present
but
Inconsistent

Present
Consistent
Routine

Present
Consistent
Routine

5

6

7
Distinguished

Proficient

2. Once the follow-up score has been determined, provide specific feedback that includes an explanation and rationale for the given
score.
The purpose of follow-up rating is to determine the extent to which the plan articulated on the Educator Growth Plan was addressed. In
particular, it is used to determine the extent to which the strategies outlined in the plan addressed the goal. If the strategies did address the
goal, then the opportunity for growth will have been addressed and satisfied. This is documented in the RESULTS box of the Educator Growth
Plan. In addition, the follow-up score and growth score are captured on the Educator Growth Plan as well.

Example
Mrs. Johnson’s follow-up ratings included:
•

A follow-up score of “4 Developing” on Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language
o Based on the feedback Mrs. Johnson received on the use of the Marzano strategy she was practicing (MDQ 2.12) and monitoring
student work samples, the evidence now suggests that students are using academic language more consistently than they were
at the time of the baseline assessment.
o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson adds the additional documentation:
 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for increasing the use of academic language
 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how much she wants student use of academic language to increase by and when
 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use a Marzano strategy (MDQ 2.12) and student works samples to
demonstrate an increase in academic language
 RESULTS – Mrs. Johnson describes the specific data from student work samples that demonstrates an increase in her
students’ ability to use academic language
 Baseline Score – 2

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 17




Follow-up Score – 4
Growth Score – 2

•

A follow-up score of “5 Proficient” on Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies
o Observation of Mrs. Johnson’s classroom provides evidence of students using their progress in learning. A review of different
ways that students have communicated this progress to their parents also provides additional evidence.
o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson adds the additional documentation:
 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for assisting students in reporting their progress in learning
 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how she wants students to report their progress and a timeframe for this to occur
 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use the research of John Hattie and individual student
growth/performance to demonstrate students’ ability to report their progress in learning
 RESULTS – Mrs. Johnson describes examples of students communicating their progress in learning and the impact it
appears to have had throughout the year
 Baseline Score – 4
 Follow-up Score – 5
 Growth Score – 1

•

A follow-up score of “3 Developing” on Quality Indicator 8.1 Self-assessment and improvement
o Through discussions and review of Mrs. Johnson’s lesson plans and reflective journal, there is evidence to suggest that she is
more intentional in using reflection to modify instruction. In addition, the T-Chart she developed using “Technique 10: Double
Plan” provides further evidence of the impact this has had on learning in her classroom.
o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson adds the additional documentation:
 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus of using reflection to improve instruction
 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes her goal of using reflection and timelines for meeting that goal
 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use “Technique 10: Double Plan” to organize her reflections and her
planning for improved instruction
 RESULTS – Mrs. Johnson describes the evidence gathered in her reflective journal, from her T-Chart, and from changes
and adaptations made in her lesson plans
 Baseline Score – 2
 Follow-up Score – 3
 Growth Score – 1

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 18

Step 6: Complete the final summative evaluation
Rationale
The evaluation process exists for the improvement as a necessary catalyst for improving student performance. The summative evaluation pulls
together the data that has been collected and provides a final overall statement of the teacher’s effectiveness.

Description
An overall determination on performance uses baseline and follow-up scores, feedback generated throughout the year on selected indicators,
general feedback generated periodically through classroom observations and any other data or information relevanat to the teacher’s
performance observed or gathered throughout the year. This information is captured on feedback forms and the Educator Growth Plan or, if
applicable, the Educator Improvement Plan. This information and data is used to complete Summative Evaluation Form.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 19

The first 1 ½ pages of the summative evaluation form provides both an overview of the effectiveness of the teacher looking across all nine
standards as well as a focused view in regards to the specific indicators the teacher has worked on throughout the year.
• Assessing the teacher’s performance across all teaching standards
o Each standard is listed with summary statements. The statements represent a very broad description drawn from the categories
of commitment, practice and impact. They are listed as a type of checklist supporting each of 9 standards. For each standard,
three options are provided:
 Area of Concern – checking this box for a standard will likely result in an improvement plan for this standard meaning
that growth in this area is both necessary and required for continued employment
 Growth Opportunity – checking this box for a standard might possibly result in an indicator from this standard being
selected in the following year as an opportunity for growth and documented in the next year’s Educator Growth Plan
 Meets Expectation – checking this box for this standard indicates that performance in this area meets the expecation of
the administrator/district at the present time
o Note: the comment box provided below each standard provides opportunity to offer the rationale for the rating as well as to
note exemplary performance in this particular area.
•

Assessing the teacher’s performance on selected indicators
o This section of the summative evaluation form focuses on the growth opportunities presented through the selected indicators.
Summative information is provided in the following areas:
 Indicator and Rationale – document the specific indicator(s) that were selected and the reason this was a growth
opportunity for the teacher
 Baseline Assessment – indicate the initial rating achieved for each selected indicator
 Goal – summarize the goal that was created to address the growth opportunity
 Results – describe the outcomes of implementing the strategy and determine whether the focus was adequately
addressed
 Follow-Up Assessment – indicate the follow-up rating achieved for each selected indicator
o Note: This information is transferred from the Educator Growth Plan

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 20

The final page of the Summative Evaluation Form provides an overall
rating for the teacher. This section is completed as follows:
1. Years in Position – determine the number of years the teacher has
been in the current evaluated position (Note: the purpose for “in
position” is to allow for reassignment of teachers to different grade
levels/positions without adversly affecting performance ratings)
2. Select one of the effectiveness ratings based on the following
criteria:
a. Ineffective Rating
i. Multiple areas of concern across the 9 standards,
OR
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on
the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
b. Minimally Effective Rating
i. 1 area of concern across the 9 standards, OR
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on
the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
c. Effective Rating
i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on
the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
d. Highly Effective Rating
i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on
the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
e. Complete the comments section and the recommendation
for employment

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 21

Example
Mrs. Johnson’s administrator completed her summative evaluation form with the following information:
Assessing Mrs. Johnson’s performance across all 9 teaching standards
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Standard 1: Content Knowledge Aligned with Appropriate Instruction
Standard 2: Student Learning Growth and Development
Standard 3: Curriculum Implementation
Standard 4: Critical Thinking
Standard 5: Positive Classroom Environment
Standard 6: Effective Communication
Standard 7: Student Assessment and Data Analysis
Standard 8: Self-Assessment and Improvement
Standard 9: Professional Collaboration

Meets Expectation
Growth Opportunity
Meets Expectation
Meets Expectation
Meets Expectation
Growth Opportunity
Meets Expectation
Meets Expectation
Meets Expectation

Mrs. Johnson had no areas of concern. She had two areas, Student Learning, Growth and Development and Effective Communication, that
were marked by her administrator as growth opportunities. Her selected indicators next year could possibly come from these two standards.
In the comments section under Standard 9 Professional Collaboration, her administrator particularly noted that he felt Mrs.Johnson was
particularly strong in her collaboration skills and in working with other colleagues.
Assessing Mrs. Johnson’s performance on selected indicators
Mrs. Johnson’s follow-up ratings on her identified indicators show improved effective practice on specific research-based targets intended to
improve the learning of her 3rd grade students. Her ratings on her practice moved from a rating of
•
•
•

Emerging (2) to Developing (4) on Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language.
Developing (4) to Proficient (5) on Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies.
Emerging (2) to Developing (3) on Quality Indicator 8.1 Self-assessment and improvement.

Her average rating based on her follow-up assessments is a 4 (12 total / 3 indicators = 4). This average follow-up assessment score provides a
general summary on the growth Mrs. Johnson achieved in her three growth opportunities.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 22

Mrs. Johnson is in her third year of teaching third grade. Since she has been in her current, evaluated position for three years, the second row of
the Overall Teacher Rating chart is used. Mrs. Johnson had no areas of concern AND her average rating fell in the 4-5 range.

Based on the information collected throughout the year and compiled on the Summative Evaluation Form, Mrs.Johnson would receive the
following overall rating:
Mrs. Johnson
Teacher’s Name

is rated as

Effective

Effectiveness Rating

 Recommend for Re-Employment

for the

2012

-

2013

school year.

Do Not Recommend for Re-Employment

 Develop a new or revised growth plan based on
new indicators or a continuation of the same
indicators.
Develop an improvement plan linked to indicators. This
must included specific target dates and timelines that
must be met in order for re-employment to continue.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 23

Step 7: Reflect and Plan
Rationale
The evaluation process exists primarily for the improvement of effective practice in order to improve student performance. Ongoing reflection
and planning are used to ensure that student learning needs are continually met.

Description
The improvement of effective practice is a means to an end. The ongoing and continual process of improving professional practice is essential
for ensuring that student learning needs remain the focus of the evaluation process. The ultimate result is the improvement of student learning.
Monitoring student learning growth caused by a teacher’s improved practice satisfies the primary purpose of the evaluation process.
Reflection on personal growth is an important part of feedback. It provides personal insight to areas of strength and potential growth
opportunities for future focus. As a part of this reflection, consider the following:
1. Assess whether the particular areas of improvement of effective practice impacted student learning
2. Reflect on personal growth and possible future opportunities for continued growth
3. Plan ahead for future opportunities for growth. In collaboration with the administrator and perhaps teams of teachers and/or
colleagues, select indicators for next year (applies to returning teachers).
4. Continue to acquire new knowledge and practice new strategies and skills

Example
Through the end of the year, Mrs. Johnson continues to monitor the learning of her 3rd grade students. She particularly reflects on how new
learning, skills and strategies from the evaluation process have contributed to her students improved performance. In consultation with her
principal, she begins to plan which particular indicators would be most appropriate for her to focus on next year. In particular, based on her
Summative Evaluation Form, they consider and discuss selecting indicators from Standard 2: Student Learning, Growth and Development and
Standard 6: Effective Communication. Their professional conversation includes consideration of working on some of the same indicators next
year. Mrs. Johnson will use her summer months to continue her learning in ways that will improve her performance on the indicators she will
work on next year.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 24

Timeline for completion of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol

Title and Description
Of Step

Step #

Timeline
Returning
Teacher

Step 1

Step 2

Identify the
indicators to be
assessed

Determine a
baseline score
for each
identified
indicator

Select indicators
to be assessed
based on
student data and
aligned to
building &
district
improvement
plans.

Conduct an
initial
assessment of
identified
indicators and
set a baseline
score for each
identified
indicator.

April –
Summer

Step 3

Develop an
Educator
Growth Plan

Based on the
opportunities for
growth and the
baseline scores,
complete the
Educator
Growth Plan
that includes the
practice and
application of
new knowledge
and skills.

August – October

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Step 4

Reguarly assess progress and provide
feedback

Step 5

Step 6

Step 7

Determine a
follow-up
score for each
identified
indicator

Complete the
final
summative
evaluation

Reflect and Plan

Conduct observations on performances in the Conduct a
identified indicators.
follow-up
assessment of
Provide targeted feedback on areas of
identified
strength and opportunities for growth.
indicators.
Determine
Note: observations may be conducted by
overall progress
coaches, peers, teacher team members as
on the
well as principals and assistant principals.
Educator
Growth Plan.

November – February

Complete the
Summative
Evaluation
Form to
determine the
overall rating
on
performance by
th
the 15 of
March.

By March 15

Continue to monitor student
growth and reflect on the
impact of improved effective
practice.
Reflect on progress of growth
opportunities.
Indicators for next year may
be selected based on local
student data and the results
of the evaluation process.

April – May – Summer

Page 25

New Teacher Protocol

Mentoring

The entry into the teaching profession is too often characterized as times
of isolation, stress and fear of failure on the part of the new teacher.
Effective districts work to ensure this is not the case. The first two years
of teaching should be supported by intentional mechanisms and support
structures to ensure the success of the novice educator.

Induction
Process

SUCCESSFUL
NOVICE
TEACHER

District-wide
Professional
Development

•

The overall structure is the district’s plan for professional
development of all teachers. This plan ensures that teachers
receive what they need to be successful.

•

Within the district’s plan for professional development is the
induction process which ensures that teachers new to the
district, including new teachers, are successfully introduced and
brought into the expectations, priorities and culture of the
system.

•

Within the district’s induction process is the mentoring program where the novice teacher receives two years of one-to-one support.

*For a more comprehensive description, see the Guidelines for the Probationary Period offered by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

A district’s successful induction process, which includes an effective mentoring program, focuses on particular performance targets to ensure the
effective teacher practice of the new teacher. Improving the effectiveness of the teacher and the achievement of their students occurs through a
focus on evidence of the teacher’s knowledge and skills. Typical areas of focus include classroom management procedures and routines,
effective instructional practices, understanding the school community, engaging in ongoing professional learning, and participating in teamwork
among administrators, teachers, support staff and community members. Building on these proven practices, the induction process continues the
ongoing development of the educator in ways that promote successful teaching which demonstrates effectiveness. The initial years are
particularly important as a time to assess initial baseline performance data and identify personal strengths and opportunities for growth.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 26

Timeline for New Teacher Evaluation

The first and second year of teaching can be particularly overwhelming for the new teacher. It is simply not realistic to expect the new teacher to
demonstrate performance across 36 separate indicators. As such, doing an in-depth assessment of the novice educator’s performance on all 36
indicators would not only be overwhelming but likely inaccurate as well. However, events at certain times of the year do allow opportunity to
collect baseline data on performance and provide specific meaningful feedback to new teachers on particularly relevant knowledge and skills .
This specific feedback should be provided to the mentee by the mentor. The administrator should also regularly interact with the new teacher,
providing specific feedback on performance. By maintaining a focus on specific performances at particular times of the year, it’s possible to
accomplish the following:
•

The mentee has a clear sense of expectations connected to certain times/events

•

The induction process and mentor can offer very targeted support aligned to particular school events the mentee is experiencing

•

The administrator has a very clear goal of providing support and feedback multiple times throughout the year to the novice
teacher

•

By the conclusion of the second year, the mentee has received support, guidance, collaboration and feedback across a broad set
of expectations

Baseline data, observed and gathered across the initial two years, provides a general overview of the mentee’s strengths as well as
opportunities for growth. These areas, in particular the opportunities for growth, will inform areas of concentration in the mentee’s continued
development as a part of the overall system’s professional development plan.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 27

Certain performance targets, or specific skills,
are of particular importance at certain times of
the year. While the context of the community
and in particular the teachers’ student
population will have influence over the timing
and the types of knowledge and skills the new
teacher will need to possess and demonstrate;
there are some generalizations that can be
reasonably concluded, regardless of context.
For example, knowledge and skills associated
with curriculum and lesson planning are
especially relevant in the days just prior to
beginning the school year when the teacher is
planning for the first few weeks of school.
Likewise, skills involving classroom
management, procedures and routines are of
particular significance in the first few weeks of
the school year.
A general summary of indicators of teacher
performance and a time of significance is
provided for the first and second year of
teaching. The timeframes on this table begin
with the end of the clinical experience which
occurs in the preparation process. The
timeframes extend through the summer prior
to the first day of school and conclude with the
summer following initial year of teaching.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 28

The second year of teaching is organized in similar
fashion. The timeframes on this table begin with
the summer prior to the second year of teaching
and extend through to the summer following the
second year of teaching. This encompasses all of
the required two years of mentoring that is to be
provided to all new teachers.
Each table contains 8 separate timeframes. Each
timeframe contains anywhere between 2 to 7
Quality Indicators as the particular focus during the
indicated timeframe. In this way, mentees are
focusing on a defined set up performances within
each specified timeframe. The selected indicators
are suggested based on ordinary events that occur
in a typical school year. There is flexibility to
substitute indicators based on the unique
characteristics of a particular district and/or school.
What is most important is ensuring that baseline
data on performance is collected on the mentee;
that the mentee receives specific feedback on their
performance from the mentor on those specific
performances and knowledge; that the
administrator regularly interacts with the new
teacher providing support and specific feedback on
performance; and that this occurs without
overwhelming the new teacher, but instead
provides real time support for the emotions and
reactions the new teacher is experiencing based on
the issues they are experiencing.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 29

New Teacher Feedback and
Evaluation Forms
There is a series of mentee feedback forms.
These forms are aligned to the 8 timeframes
that occur each year and collectively create the
process for gathering baseline data and directing
meaningful feedback between the mentee and
mentor. Each form specifically lists the quality
indicators for the specified timeframe. Each
indicator includes a general description
referencing the particular knowledge and/or skill
to be demonstrated.
There is opportunity provided for reflection on
each of the listed indicators. As mentee and
mentor talk through the specific indicator and its
relevance for what is currently happening in the
school year, this area is used to capture
potential strengths and areas of confidence as
well as potential opportunities for continued
growth.
An overall determination on performance uses
feedback generated throughout the year on
selected indicators, general feedback generated
periodically through classroom observations and
any other data or information relevant to the
new teacher’s performance observed or
gathered throughout the year.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 30

This information and data is used by the administrator to complete the Summative Evaluation Form.

The first 1 ½ pages of the summative evaluation form provides both an overview of the effectiveness of the new teacher looking across all nine
standards.
•

Assessing the teacher’s performance across all teaching standards
o Each standard is listed with summary statements. The statements represent a very broad description drawn from the categories
of commitment, practice and impact used on the growth guides for the quality indicators. They are listed as a type of checklist
supporting each of 9 standards. For each standard, three options are provided:

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 31

Area of Concern – checking this box for a standard resuls in an improvement plan for this standard meaning that growth
in this area is both necessary and required for continued employment
 Growth Opportunity – checking this box for a standard might possibly result in an indicator from this standard being
selected in the teacher’s second year as an opportunity for growth and documented in the next year’s Educator Growth
Plan
 Meets Expectation – checking this box for a standard indicates that performance in this area meets the expecation of
the administrator/district at the present time
Note: the comment box provided below each standard provides opportunity to offer the rationale for the rating as well as to
note exemplary performance in this particular area.


o

The second page of the Summative Evaluation Form provides an overall rating for the new teacher. This section is completed as follows:
1. Years in Position – determine if this is the first or second year the teacher has been in the current evaluated position (Note: the purpose for
“in position” is to allow for reassignment of teachers to different grade levels/positions without adversly affecting performance ratings)
2. Select one of the effectiveness ratings based on the following criteria:
a. Ineffective Rating
i. Multiple areas of concern across the 9 standards, OR
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
b. Minimally Effective Rating
i. 1 area of concern across the 9 standards, OR
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
c. Effective Rating
i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
d. Highly Effective Rating
i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND
ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range
e. Complete the comments section and the recommendation for employment

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 32

Timeline for completion of the New Teacher Evaluation Protocol
1st Year for the New Teacher
Suggested

Suggested

Suggested

Suggested

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

1.1

1.2

2.2

1.5

2.5

1.2

2.5

8.1

2.3

2.1

4.1

2.4

5.2

2.2

7.4

8.2

3.1

5.1

4.3

3.2

7.4

4.3

4.2

5.2

5.2

6.1

7.6

7.2

6.1

6.2

7.3

7.2

8.1

7.5

8.3

7.1

7.5

7.5

9.2

Time

9.1
Prior to

9.1
First Month

2 -3 Month

3 -4 Month

6 Month

7 -8 Month

Frame

School

Year Begins

Quarter 1

Quarter 2

Mid-Year

nd

rd

rd

th

th

th

th

Summative Evaluation Form

Suggested

Complete New Teacher

Suggested

For Each Timeframe

Suggested

Suggested Indicators of Focus

Suggested

7.6
8.1
9.1

th

th

9 -10 Month

End of the

Quarter 3

Quarter 4

Year

By March 15

Suggested

Suggested

Suggested

Suggested

Suggested

Suggested

Suggested

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

Indicators

1.1

1.2

2.2

3.2

2.5

1.2

7.4

8.1

1.3

1.4

4.1

3.3

7.4

6.3

7.6

8.2

3.1

2.6

4.3

5.3

7.6

7.2

4.2

5.1

5.2

7.2

8.1

7.5

9.1

5.2

7.3

7.5

9.3

6.4

7.5

Time

Prior to

7.1
First Month

2 -3 Month

3 -4 Month

6 Month

7 -8 Month

Frame

School

Year Begins

Quarter 1

Quarter 2

Mid-Year

Quarter 3

nd

rd

Missouri's educator evaluation system

rd

th

th

th

th

Summative Evaluation Form

Suggested

Complete New Teacher

For Each Timeframe

Suggested Indicators of Focus

2nd Year for the New Teacher

By March 15

8.1
9.1

th

th

9 -10 Month

End of the

Quarter 4

Year

Page 33

Educator Improvement Protocol
While the primary purpose of the Educator Growth Plan is to identify and
capitalize on growth opportunities, the focus of the Educator
Improvement Protocol is on intervention for areas of concern that require
immediate attention. Thus, the Educator Improvement Protocol targets
very specific standards, indicators, and actions that must be improved
within a specific timeline. Accordingly, the Educator Improvement
Protocol is not only a collaborative process between teacher and
evaluator; it is also one of direction and guidance from the evaluator
requiring the achievement of certain outcomes in a timely fashion.
It is important to remember that the Educator Improvement Protocol is a
single process within a larger process of evaluation and growth.
Therefore, the Educator Improvement Protocol should ony be followed
after an initial evaluation, either formal or informal, revealing one or more areas of concern. Consequently, the first step of the Educator
Improvement Protocol is to detect and indicate any areas of concern. If the evaluator detects any such areas of concern, the next step in the
protocol is to complete the form: Educator Improvement Plan, Initial Conference. This form allows the evaluator to note the indicator causing
concern as well as the rationale for concern, the improvement target, and the corresponding benchmarks and timelines. The Educator
Improvement Plan, Initial Conference form should be completed collaboratively with the teacher and copies should be subsequently shared as
documentation of the overall plan and areas of concern.
After collaborative completion of the Educator Improvement Plan, Initial Conference form, the evaluator should conduct the appropriate
number of necessary formal and informal observations to monitor the status of the teacher. The Educator Improvement Plan, Follow-up
Observation & Conference form should be used to document every formal observation conducted.
Finally, after multiple follow-up observations and conferences, the evaluator should complete the Summative Evaluation Form to determine the
respective teacher’s employment status accordingly.
NOTE: For incidents involving blatant violations of board policy and state or federal law, immediate employment action may be taken as
prescribed or permitted by law.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 34

Timeline for completion of the Educator Improvement Protocol
Step #

Step 1

Action Title Detect and indicate areas
of concern upon
evaluation

Action
Description

Timeline

Formal and/or informal
observations should be
held throughout the year.
If one or more areas of
concern are detected,
teacher should be placed
in the Improvement
Protocol
Detection of areas of
concern can occur at any
time throughout the year
or at any point in a
teacher’s career

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

See page 34:
Improvement Plan,
Initial Conference

Hold Initial Conference
to notify educator of
status and plan

Conduct the appropriate number of
formal and informal observations to
monitor status

Note standards and
indicators causing
concern, give rationale,
set timeline and
improvement target
complete with
benchmarks and
strategies

Explain to teacher
rationale for placement
in Improvement
Protocol, explain
improvement target,
timeline, benchmarks,
and ramifications

Evaluate, observe, and confer with
teacher either formally or informally
multiple times throughout the
Improvement Protocol timeline.
Evaluator should document such
meetings on the Follow-up Observation
& Conference forms to note any
improvements, shortcomings, or other
general observational data

Use and apply in the
same manner
described in Step 6 of
the general Teacher
Evaluation Protocol

The Initial Conferenece
form should be
completed immediately
after detection of areas
of concern

The Initial Conference
should be held
immediately after
completion of the form

Formal and informal observations
and/or conferences should be
conducted throughout the remainder
of the established timeline for
achievement of the improvement
target.

TheSummative
Evaluation Form
should be completed
at the end of the
timeline

Complete Summative
Evaluation Form to
determine
employment status
accordingly

Such observations and/or conferences
should be held in gaps wide enough for
the teacher to show improvement, but
consistent to accurately monitor
progress
*Note: For incidents involving blatant violations of board policy and state or federal law, immediate employment action may be taken as permitted by law.
Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 35

Educator Improvement Plan forms

The Educator Improvement Plan, Initial Conference form (above left) is used to document specific standards and indicators creating areas of
concern. After identifying the indicator to be improved upon, the evaluator then expresses a rationale for why improvement is required. Finally,
the evaluator sets an improvement target complete with the necessary benchmarks and timeline for achievement of the required outcome.
The Educator Improvement Plan, Follow-up Observation & Conference form (above right) is used for any formal or informal observations or
conferences that are conducted throughout the timeline established by the evaluator. At least one formal and one informal evaluation should be
held. When using this form, the evaluator can document any meetings to note improvements, shortcomings, or other general observational
data.
Collectively, the documents provide the essential framework for improvement, as well as the documentation and protocol necessary to make
high-stakes employment decisions. Upon completion of the timeline, evaluators should use the Summative Evaluation Form to note final
outcomes and make ultimate employment decisions.

Missouri's educator evaluation system

Page 36