OTES 2.0 Framework

The State Board of Education values the importance of promoting educator professional growth that leads to improved instructional performance and student learning. OTES 2.0 is a professional growth model and is intended to be used to continually assist educators in enhancing teacher performance. An effective professional growth model considers a teacher’s instructional strengths while supporting identified areas for improvement according to the profile of each educator. The OTES 2.0 process is to be collaborative, ongoing and supportive of the professional growth of the teacher.

Each teacher will be evaluated according to Ohio Revised Code and the Ohio Teacher Evaluation Framework, which is aligned with the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession adopted under state law. Using multiple factors set forth in the framework, the teacher’s Final Holistic Rating will be based upon a combination of informal and formal observations and supportive evidence using the Teacher Performance Evaluation Rubric.

Essential components of the full evaluation consist of two formal observations of at least thirty minutes each and at least two classroom walkthroughs:

• Professional Growth Plan or Improvement Plan
• One Formal Holistic Observation followed by a conference
• Walkthroughs – with an emphasis on identified focus area(s)when applicable
• One Formal Focused Observation – with an emphasis on identified focus area(s)
• One summative conference

Either a Professional Growth Plan or an Improvement Plan will be developed annually. The plan will be based upon the results of the evaluation and aligned to any existing school district or building improvement plan.

The local board of education may elect to evaluate less frequently each teacher rated Accomplished on the teacher's most recent evaluation once every three years, provided the teacher submits a self-directed Professional Growth Plan** to the evaluator, and the evaluator determines the teacher is making progress on that plan. The Professional Growth Plan shall focus on the most recent evaluation and observations. Less frequent evaluations must include one observation and one conference. Teachers with ratings of Accomplished may choose their credentialed evaluator for the evaluation cycle.

The local board of education may evaluate less frequently each teacher rated Skilled on the teacher's most recent evaluation once every two years, provided the teacher and evaluator jointly develop a Professional Growth Plan** for the teacher, and the evaluator determines the teacher is making progress on that plan. The Professional Growth Plan shall focus on the most recent evaluation and observations. Less frequent evaluations must include one observation and one conference. Teachers with ratings of Skilled may have input on the selection of their credentialed evaluator for the evaluation cycle.

A teacher with a Final Holistic Rating of Developing will develop a Professional Growth Plan** that is guided by the assigned credentialed evaluator.

A teacher with a Final Holistic Rating of Ineffective will be placed on an Improvement Plan developed by the assigned credentialed evaluator.

Choosing and using high-quality student data (HQSD) to guide instructional decisions and meet student learning needs is key in making sound instructional decisions for students. The teacher evaluation will use at least two measures of district-determined High-Quality Student Data to provide evidence of student learning attributable to the teacher being evaluated. When applicable to the grade level or subject area taught by a teacher, HQSD shall include the valueadded progress dimension and the teacher shall use at least one other measure of HQSD to demonstrate student learning. HQSD may be used as evidence in any component of the evaluation where applicable.

It is recognized there are many types of data that can be used to support student learning, and the data include much more than just test scores. These types of data and their uses are important and should continue to be used to guide instruction and address the needs of the whole child but may not meet the definition of high-quality student data for the purpose of teacher evaluation.

The high-quality student data instrument used must be rigorously reviewed by locally determined experts in the field of education to meet all of the following criteria:

• Align to learning standards
• Measure what is intended to be measured
• Be attributable to a specific teacher for course(s) and grade level(s) taught
• Demonstrate evidence of student learning (achievement and/or growth)
• Follow protocols for administration and scoring
• Provide trustworthy results
• Not offend or be driven by bias

AND

The teacher must use the data generated from the high-quality student data instrument by:

• Critically reflecting upon and analyzing available data, using the information as part of an ongoing cycle of support for student learning
• Considering student learning needs and styles, identifying the strengths and weaknesses of an entire class, as well as individual students
• Informing instruction and adapting instruction to meet student need based upon the information gained from the data analysis
• Measuring student learning (achievement and/or growth) and progress towards achieving state and local standards

Teachers must be provided with a written report of the results of their evaluation.

Additionally, at the local level, the board of education will include in its evaluation policy procedures for using the evaluation results for retention and promotion decisions and removal of poorly performing teachers. Seniority will not be the basis for teacher retention decisions, except when deciding between teachers who have comparable evaluations.

The local board of education will provide for the allocation of financial resources to support professional development for all teachers. The local board of education will also ensure that poorly performing teachers are provided with professional development to accelerate and continue teacher growth.

LEGAL REFS. ORC 3319.111; 3319.112

* The Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Framework represents the required basic structure of the teacher evaluation system. For additional guidance, please see the Ohio Teacher Evaluation Model, which provides definitions of terms, detailed suggested implementation, and best practices for evaluating teachers in Ohio.

**Districts have discretion to place any teacher on an Improvement Plan at any time based on deficiencies in any individual component of the evaluation system. However, the notice requirements for being placed on an Improvement Plan, the components of the plan and the implementation process for the plan may be subject to the terms of a collective bargaining.