BILL REQ. #: Z-0907.2
State of Washington | 62nd Legislature | 2012 Regular Session |
Read first time 01/13/12. Referred to Committee on Early Learning & K-12 Education.
AN ACT Relating to evaluating certificated employees; amending RCW 28A.405.100, 28A.405.120, and 28A.405.130; adding a new section to chapter 28A.405 RCW; and adding a new section to chapter 28A.410 RCW.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
Sec. 1 RCW 28A.405.100 and 2010 c 235 s 202 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1)(a) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the
superintendent of public instruction shall establish and may amend from
time to time minimum criteria for the evaluation of the professional
performance capabilities and development of certificated classroom
teachers and certificated support personnel. For classroom teachers
the criteria shall be developed in the following categories:
Instructional skill; classroom management, professional preparation and
scholarship; effort toward improvement when needed; the handling of
student discipline and attendant problems; and interest in teaching
pupils and knowledge of subject matter.
(b) Every board of directors shall, in accordance with procedure
provided in RCW 41.59.010 through 41.59.170, 41.59.910, and 41.59.920,
establish evaluative criteria and procedures for all certificated
classroom teachers and certificated support personnel. The evaluative
criteria must contain as a minimum the criteria established by the
superintendent of public instruction pursuant to this section and must
be prepared within six months following adoption of the superintendent
of public instruction's minimum criteria. The district must certify to
the superintendent of public instruction that evaluative criteria have
been so prepared by the district.
(2)(a) Pursuant to the implementation schedule established in
subsection (((7))) (8)(b) of this section, every board of directors
shall, in accordance with procedures provided in RCW 41.59.010 through
41.59.170, 41.59.910, and 41.59.920, establish revised evaluative
criteria and a four-level rating system for all certificated classroom
teachers.
(b) The minimum criteria shall include: (i) Centering instruction
on high expectations for student achievement; (ii) demonstrating
effective teaching practices; (iii) recognizing individual student
learning needs and developing strategies to address those needs; (iv)
providing clear and intentional focus on subject matter content and
curriculum; (v) fostering and managing a safe, positive learning
environment; (vi) using multiple student data elements to modify
instruction and improve student learning; (vii) communicating and
collaborating with parents and (([the])) the school community; and
(viii) exhibiting collaborative and collegial practices focused on
improving instructional practice and student learning.
(c)(i) The four-level rating system used to evaluate the
certificated classroom teacher must describe performance along a
continuum that indicates the extent to which the criteria have been met
or exceeded. The performance ratings are as follows: Level 1 -
unsatisfactory; level 2 - basic; level 3 - proficient; level 4 -
distinguished.
(ii) By December 1, 2012, the superintendent of public instruction
must adopt rules to provide the summative comprehensive evaluation
descriptors for each of the four performance ratings that result from
the process described in subsection (8) of this section. After
December 1, 2012, any changes to the summative comprehensive evaluation
descriptors made by the superintendent must be after consultation with
a group broadly reflective of education stakeholders as provided in
subsection (8)(a) of this section.
(iii) Each school district must adopt an instructional framework
that supports the evaluation system in subsection (8) of this section.
The instructional framework establishes definitions, known as rubrics,
for each of the four-tier performance ratings of each evaluation
criteria. This framework must be posted on the district's web site.
(iv) The certificated classroom teacher must receive one of the
four performance ratings for each of the minimum criteria in (b) of
this subsection. The certificated classroom teacher must also receive
one of the four performance ratings for the evaluation as a whole.
This rating shall be known as the summative comprehensive evaluation
performance rating.
(v) When student growth data, if available and relevant to the
teacher and subject matter, is referenced in the evaluation process it
must be based on multiple measures that can include classroom-based,
school-based, district-based, and state-based tools. As used in this
subsection, "student growth" means the change in student achievement
between two points in time.
(3)(a) As used in this subsection (3), "employees" means classroom
teachers and certificated support personnel.
(b) Except as provided in subsections (((10))) (11) and (12) of
this section, it shall be the responsibility of a principal or his or
her designee to evaluate all certificated personnel in his or her
school. During each school year all classroom teachers and
certificated support personnel shall be observed for the purposes of
evaluation at least twice in the performance of their assigned duties.
Total observation time for each employee for each school year shall be
not less than sixty minutes. An employee in the third year of
provisional status as defined in RCW 28A.405.220 shall be observed at
least three times in the performance of his or her duties and the total
observation time for the school year shall not be less than ninety
minutes. Following each observation, or series of observations, the
principal or other evaluator shall promptly document the results of the
observation in writing, and shall provide the employee with a copy
thereof within three days after such report is prepared. New employees
shall be observed at least once for a total observation time of thirty
minutes during the first ninety calendar days of their employment
period.
(((b) As used in this subsection and subsection (4) of this
section, "employees" means classroom teachers and certificated support
personnel.))
(4)(a) As used in this subsection (4) "employees" means
certificated classroom support personnel.
(b) At any time after October 15th, an employee whose work is not
judged satisfactory based on district evaluation criteria shall be
notified in writing of the specific areas of deficiencies along with a
reasonable program for improvement. During the period of probation,
the employee may not be transferred from the supervision of the
original evaluator. Improvement of performance or probable cause for
nonrenewal must occur and be documented by the original evaluator
before any consideration of a request for transfer or reassignment as
contemplated by either the individual or the school district. A
probationary period of sixty school days shall be established. Days
may be added if necessary to complete a program for improvement and
evaluate the probationer's performance as long as the probationary
period is concluded before May 15th of the same school year. The
establishment of a probationary period does not adversely affect the
contract status of an employee within the meaning of RCW 28A.405.300.
The purpose of the probationary period is to give the employee
opportunity to demonstrate improvements in his or her areas of
deficiency. The establishment of the probationary period and the
giving of the notice to the employee of deficiency shall be by the
school district superintendent and need not be submitted to the board
of directors for approval. During the probationary period the
evaluator shall meet with the employee at least twice monthly to
supervise and make a written evaluation of the progress, if any, made
by the employee. The evaluator may authorize one additional
certificated employee to evaluate the probationer and to aid the
employee in improving his or her areas of deficiency; such additional
certificated employee shall be immune from any civil liability that
might otherwise be incurred or imposed with regard to the good faith
performance of such evaluation. Should a procedural error occur in the
implementation of a program for improvement, the error does not
invalidate the probationer's plan for improvement or evaluation
activities unless the procedural error materially affects the
effectiveness of the plan or the ability to evaluate the probationer's
performance. The probationer ((may)) must be removed from probation if
he or she has demonstrated improvement to the satisfaction of the
((principal)) evaluator in those areas specifically detailed in his or
her initial notice of deficiency and subsequently detailed in his or
her ((improvement)) program for improvement. Lack of necessary
improvement during the established probationary period, as specifically
documented in writing with notification to the probationer ((and
shall)), constitutes grounds for a finding of probable cause under RCW
28A.405.300 or 28A.405.210.
(((b))) (c) Immediately following the completion of a probationary
period that does not produce performance changes detailed in the
initial notice of deficiencies and ((improvement)) program for
improvement, the employee may be removed from his or her assignment and
placed into an alternative assignment for the remainder of the school
year. This reassignment may not displace another employee nor may it
adversely affect the probationary employee's compensation or benefits
for the remainder of the employee's contract year. If such
reassignment is not possible, the district may, at its option, place
the employee on paid leave for the balance of the contract term.
(5)(a) As used in this subsection (5), "employees" means
certificated classroom teachers.
(b) Pursuant to the timeline in subsection (8)(b) of this section,
the following summative comprehensive performance ratings mean the
employee's work is not judged as satisfactory:
(i) A summative comprehensive evaluation performance rating at
level 1; or
(ii) A summative comprehensive evaluation performance rating at
level 2, acquired by continuing contract employees with more than five
years of teaching experience, when the level 2 performance rating is
received for two consecutive years or for two years within a three
consecutive-year time period.
(c) At any time after October 15th, an employee whose work is not
judged satisfactory based on the evaluation criteria in subsection
(2)(b) of this section shall be notified in writing of the specific
areas of deficiencies along with a reasonable program for improvement.
During the period of probation, the employee may not be transferred
from the supervision of the original evaluator. Improvement of
performance or probable cause for nonrenewal must occur and be
documented by the original evaluator before any consideration of a
request for transfer or reassignment as contemplated by either the
individual or the school district. A probationary period of sixty
school days shall be established. Days may be added if necessary to
complete a program for improvement and evaluate the probationer's
performance, as long as the probationary period is concluded and a new
summative comprehensive performance rating is in place before May 15th
of the same school year. The establishment of a probationary period
does not adversely affect the contract status of an employee within the
meaning of RCW 28A.405.300. The purpose of the probationary period is
to give the employee opportunity to demonstrate improvements in his or
her areas of deficiency. The establishment of the probationary period
and the giving of the notice to the employee of deficiency shall be by
the school district superintendent and need not be submitted to the
board of directors for approval. During the probationary period the
evaluator shall meet with the employee at least twice monthly to
supervise and make a written evaluation of the progress, if any, made
by the employee. The evaluator may authorize one additional
certificated employee to evaluate the probationer and to aid the
employee in improving his or her areas of deficiency; the additional
certificated employee is immune from any civil liability that might
otherwise be incurred or imposed with regard to the good faith
performance of the evaluation. Should a procedural error occur in the
implementation of a program for improvement, the error does not
invalidate the probationer's plan for improvement or evaluation
activities unless the procedural error materially affects the
effectiveness of the plan or the ability to evaluate the probationer's
performance. The probationer must be removed from probation if (i) he
or she has demonstrated improvement to the satisfaction of the
evaluator in those areas specifically detailed in his or her initial
notice of deficiency and subsequently detailed in his or her program
for improvement and (ii) the probationer's new summative comprehensive
performance rating is at one of the following levels: (A) Level 2 or
above for a provisional employee; (B) level 2 or above for a continuing
contract employee with five or fewer years of experience; or (C) level
3 or above for a continuing contract employee with more than five years
of experience. Lack of necessary improvement during the established
probationary period, as specifically documented in writing with
notification to the probationer, constitutes grounds for a finding of
probable cause under RCW 28A.405.300 or 28A.405.210.
(d) Immediately following the completion of a probationary period
that does not produce both: (i) Performance changes detailed in the
initial notice of deficiencies and program of improvement and (ii) the
required summative comprehensive performance rating as provided in (c)
of this subsection, the employee may be removed from his or her
assignment and placed into an alternative assignment for the remainder
of the school year. This reassignment may not displace another
employee nor may it adversely affect the probationary employee's
compensation or benefits for the remainder of the employee's contract
year. If such reassignment is not possible, the district may, at its
option, place the employee on paid leave for the balance of the
contract term.
(6) Every board of directors shall establish evaluative criteria
and procedures for all superintendents, principals, and other
administrators. It shall be the responsibility of the district
superintendent or his or her designee to evaluate all administrators.
Except as provided in subsection (((6))) (7) of this section, such
evaluation shall be based on the administrative position job
description. Such criteria, when applicable, shall include at least
the following categories: Knowledge of, experience in, and training in
recognizing good professional performance, capabilities and
development; school administration and management; school finance;
professional preparation and scholarship; effort toward improvement
when needed; interest in pupils, employees, patrons and subjects taught
in school; leadership; and ability and performance of evaluation of
school personnel.
(((6))) (7)(a) Pursuant to the implementation schedule established
by subsection (((7))) (8)(b) of this section, every board of directors
shall establish revised evaluative criteria and a four-level rating
system for principals.
(b) The minimum criteria shall include: (i) Creating a school
culture that promotes the ongoing improvement of learning and teaching
for students and staff; (ii) demonstrating commitment to closing the
achievement gap; (iii) providing for school safety; (iv) leading the
development, implementation, and evaluation of a data-driven plan for
increasing student achievement, including the use of multiple student
data elements; (v) assisting instructional staff with alignment of
curriculum, instruction, and assessment with state and local district
learning goals; (vi) monitoring, assisting, and evaluating effective
instruction and assessment practices; (vii) managing both staff and
fiscal resources to support student achievement and legal
responsibilities; and (viii) partnering with the school community to
promote student learning.
(c)(i) The four-level rating system used to evaluate the principal
must describe performance along a continuum that indicates the extent
to which the criteria have been met or exceeded. The performance
ratings are as follows: Level 1 - unsatisfactory; level 2 - basic;
level 3 - proficient; level 4 - distinguished.
(ii) By December 1, 2012, the superintendent of public instruction
shall adopt rules to provide the summative comprehensive evaluation
descriptors for each of the four performance ratings that result from
the process described in subsection (8) of this section. After
December 1, 2012, any changes to the summative comprehensive evaluation
descriptors made by the superintendent must be after consultation with
a group broadly reflective of education stakeholders as provided in
subsection (8)(a) of this section.
(iii) Each school district must adopt a leadership framework that
supports the evaluation system in subsection (8) of this section. The
leadership framework establishes definitions, known as rubrics, for
each of the four-tier performance ratings of each evaluation criteria.
This framework must be posted on the district's web site.
(iv) The principal must receive one of the four performance ratings
for each of the minimum criteria in (b) of this subsection. The
principal must also receive one of the four performance ratings for the
evaluation as a whole and this rating shall be known as the summative
comprehensive evaluation performance rating.
(v) When available, student growth data that is referenced in the
evaluation process must be based on multiple measures that can include
classroom-based, school-based, district-based, and state-based tools.
(vi) As used in this subsection (7)(c), "student growth" means the
change in student achievement between two points in time.
(((7))) (d) Pursuant to the timeline of subsection (8)(b) of this
section, the following summative comprehensive evaluation performance
ratings mean the employee's work is not judged as satisfactory:
(i) A summative comprehensive evaluation performance rating at
level 1; or
(ii) A summative comprehensive evaluation performance rating at
level 2, acquired by a principal with five or more years of experience
in the principal role, for two consecutive years or for two years
within a three consecutive-year time period.
(8)(a) The superintendent of public instruction, in collaboration
with state associations representing teachers, principals,
administrators, and parents, shall create models for implementing the
evaluation system criteria, student growth tools, professional
development programs, and evaluator training for certificated classroom
teachers and principals. Human resources specialists, professional
development experts, and assessment experts must also be consulted.
Due to the diversity of teaching assignments and the many developmental
levels of students, classroom teachers and principals must be
prominently represented in this work. The models must be available for
use in the 2011-12 school year.
(b)(i) A new certificated classroom teacher evaluation system that
implements the provisions of subsection (2) of this section and a new
principal evaluation system that implements the provisions of
subsection (((6))) (7) of this section shall be phased-in beginning
with the 2010-11 school year by districts identified in (c) of this
subsection and implemented in all school districts beginning with the
2013-14 school year.
(ii) To assist school districts in the required implementation of
these new evaluation systems, an implementation transition plan must be
developed and recommended to the superintendent of public instruction
by December 1, 2012, by the group broadly reflective of education
stakeholders described in (a) of this subsection. The plan must
provide:
(A) A transition period beginning with the 2015-16 school year and
ending with the 2016-17 school year;
(B) A requirement that school districts increase the number of
classroom teachers and principals evaluated using new evaluation
systems each year during the transition period; and
(C) Other implementation components as recommended to the
superintendent.
(iii) The superintendent of public instruction shall adopt rules
incorporating the plan recommendations in this subsection (8)(b).
(c) A set of school districts shall be selected by the
superintendent of public instruction to participate in a collaborative
process resulting in the development and piloting of new certificated
classroom teacher and principal evaluation systems during the 2010-11
and 2011-12 school years. These school districts must be selected
based on: (i) The agreement of the local associations representing
classroom teachers and principals to collaborate with the district in
this developmental work and (ii) the agreement to participate in the
full range of development and implementation activities, including:
Development of rubrics for the evaluation criteria and ratings in
subsections (2) and (((6))) (7) of this section; identification of or
development of appropriate multiple measures of student growth in
subsections (2) and (((6))) (7) of this section; development of
appropriate evaluation system forms; participation in professional
development for principals and classroom teachers regarding the content
of the new evaluation system; participation in evaluator training; and
participation in activities to evaluate the effectiveness of the new
systems and support programs. The school districts must submit to the
office of the superintendent of public instruction data that is used in
evaluations and all district-collected student achievement, aptitude,
and growth data regardless of whether the data is used in evaluations.
If the data is not available electronically, the district may submit it
in nonelectronic form. The superintendent of public instruction must
analyze the districts' use of student data in evaluations, including
examining the extent that student data is not used or is underutilized.
The superintendent of public instruction must also consult with
participating districts and stakeholders, recommend appropriate
changes, and address statewide implementation issues. The
superintendent of public instruction shall report evaluation system
implementation status, evaluation data, and recommendations to
appropriate committees of the legislature and governor by July 1, 2011,
and at the conclusion of the development phase by July 1, 2012. In the
July 1, 2011, report, the superintendent shall include recommendations
for whether a single statewide evaluation model should be adopted,
whether modified versions developed by school districts should be
subject to state approval, and what the criteria would be for
determining if a school district's evaluation model meets or exceeds a
statewide model. The report shall also identify challenges posed by
requiring a state approval process.
(((8))) (9) Each certificated classroom teacher and certificated
support personnel shall have the opportunity for confidential
conferences with his or her immediate supervisor on no less than two
occasions in each school year. Such confidential conference shall have
as its sole purpose the aiding of the administrator in his or her
assessment of the employee's professional performance.
(((9))) (10) The failure of any evaluator to evaluate or supervise
or cause the evaluation or supervision of certificated classroom
teachers and certificated support personnel or administrators in
accordance with this section, as now or hereafter amended, when it is
his or her specific assigned or delegated responsibility to do so,
shall be sufficient cause for the nonrenewal of any such evaluator's
contract under RCW 28A.405.210, or the discharge of such evaluator
under RCW 28A.405.300.
(((10))) (11)(a) The provisions of (b) of this subsection are in
effect for certificated classroom teachers until the classroom teacher
is included in the evaluation system as provided in subsection (8) of
this section. The provisions of (b) of this subsection continue to
apply to certificated support personnel after the 2012-13 school year.
(b) After a certificated classroom teacher or certificated support
personnel has four years of satisfactory evaluations ((under subsection
(1) of this section or has received one of the two top ratings for four
years under subsection (2) of this section)), a school district may use
a short form of evaluation, a locally bargained evaluation emphasizing
professional growth, an evaluation under subsection (1) or (2) of this
section, or any combination thereof. The short form of evaluation
shall include either a thirty minute observation during the school year
with a written summary or a final annual written evaluation based on
the criteria in subsection (1) or (2) of this section and based on at
least two observation periods during the school year totaling at least
sixty minutes without a written summary of such observations being
prepared. A locally bargained short-form evaluation emphasizing
professional growth must provide that the professional growth activity
conducted by the certificated classroom teacher be specifically linked
to one or more of the certificated classroom teacher evaluation
criteria. However, the evaluation process set forth in subsection (1)
or (2) of this section shall be followed at least once every three
years unless this time is extended by a local school district under the
bargaining process set forth in chapter 41.59 RCW. The employee or
evaluator may require that the evaluation process set forth in
subsection (1) or (2) of this section be conducted in any given school
year. No evaluation other than the evaluation authorized under
subsection (1) or (2) of this section may be used as a basis for
determining that an employee's work is not satisfactory under
subsection (1) or (2) of this section or as probable cause for the
nonrenewal of an employee's contract under RCW 28A.405.210 unless an
evaluation process developed under chapter 41.59 RCW determines
otherwise.
(12) As required by the evaluation systems implementation
transition plan provided in subsection (8)(b) of this section,
beginning with the 2013-14 school year, and continuing after completion
of the transition plan, certificated classroom teachers and principals
shall have annual performance evaluations conducted as provided in this
subsection.
(a) A comprehensive evaluation assesses all eight criteria and all
criteria contribute to the rating. This evaluation is required once
every four years for classroom teachers and principals with the
following exceptions:
(i) Classroom teachers with provisional status as defined by RCW
28A.405.220 shall have an annual comprehensive evaluation;
(ii) Principals in the first three consecutive school years of
employment as a principal shall have an annual comprehensive
evaluation;
(iii) Principals previously employed as a principal by another
school district in the state of Washington for three or more
consecutive school years and in the first full year as a principal in
the school district shall have an annual comprehensive evaluation;
(iv) Classroom teachers on probationary status and subject to the
provisions of subsection (5) of this section shall have a comprehensive
evaluation;
(v) Principals on probationary status shall have a comprehensive
evaluation; and
(vi) Certificated classroom teachers and principals with a
comprehensive evaluation rating at level 2 the previous year shall have
a summative comprehensive evaluation the subsequent year.
(b) When a comprehensive evaluation is not required, a focused
evaluation process may be completed. A focused evaluation process
means assessing one of the eight evaluation criteria selected for a
performance rating following professional growth activities
specifically linked to the evaluation criteria.
(i) Teachers and principals eligible for focused evaluation process
are those with four years of summative comprehensive performance
evaluation ratings at level 3 or above.
(ii) The selected evaluation criteria must be approved by the
teacher's or principal's evaluator. The selected evaluation criteria
may have been identified in a previous comprehensive evaluation as
benefiting from additional attention. A group of teachers may focus on
the same evaluation criteria and share professional growth activities.
A group of principals may focus on the same evaluation criteria and
share professional growth activities.
(iii) The teacher's or principal's evaluator must assign a
performance level rating for the selected evaluation criteria and this
rating, along with the previously assigned performance level ratings
for the other seven criteria, create the summative comprehensive
performance evaluation rating.
(iv) A teacher or principal may be transferred from a focused
evaluation process to a comprehensive evaluation by: (A) The teacher
or principal requesting to receive a comprehensive evaluation; or (B)
the teacher's or principal's evaluator requiring that a comprehensive
evaluation be conducted.
(v) A classroom teacher or principal may choose to apply the
focused evaluation professional growth activities to the requirements
for completion of a professional growth plan for professional
certificate renewal as required by the rules of the professional
educator standards board.
(13) Each school district is encouraged to acknowledge and
recognize classroom teachers and principals who have attained
distinguished level evaluations.
Sec. 2 RCW 28A.405.120 and 1995 c 335 s 401 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) School districts shall require each administrator, each
principal, or other supervisory personnel who has responsibility for
evaluating classroom teachers or principals to have training in
evaluation procedures and periodic opportunities to update and refine
skills used in the evaluation process.
(2) Before school district implementation of the evaluation systems
required by RCW 28A.405.100(8), district principals and administrators
must engage in professional development designed to implement the
revised systems.
Sec. 3 RCW 28A.405.130 and 1985 c 420 s 4 are each amended to
read as follows:
(1) No administrator, principal, or other supervisory personnel may
evaluate a teacher without having received training in evaluation
procedures.
(2) Before evaluating classroom teachers using the evaluation
systems required by RCW 28A.405.100(8), principals and administrators
must engage in professional development designed to implement the
revised systems.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 4 A new section is added to chapter 28A.405
RCW to read as follows:
(1) Subject to funds appropriated for this purpose, the office of
the superintendent of public instruction must develop and make
available a professional development program to support the
implementation of the evaluation systems required by RCW
28A.405.100(8).
(2) The program components may be organized into professional
development strands for principals, administrators, and teachers and
must include the following components:
(a) Examination of Washington evaluation criteria, the four-tiered
performance rating system, and common instructional and leadership
frameworks used to describe the evaluation criteria;
(b) Classroom observation;
(c) The use of student growth data and multiple measures of
performance;
(d) Evaluation conferencing;
(e) Development of classroom teacher and principal support plans
resulting from an evaluation;
(f) Use of an online tool to manage the collection of observation
notes, teacher and principal submitted materials, and other information
related to the conduct of the evaluation; and
(g) Other components as recommended by the model development
process in RCW 28A.405.100(8).
(3) To the extent possible, professional development materials must
be made available online and make use of appropriate, existing
web-based tools and other web-based tools that may be developed.
(4) The professional development materials described in this
section shall be made available to teacher and principal preparation
programs in the state.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 5 A new section is added to chapter 28A.410
RCW to read as follows:
(1) After August 31, 2013, successful completion of a residency
principal preparation program must include:
(a) Demonstrated knowledge of teacher evaluation research and
Washington's evaluation requirements; and
(b) Successfully completed opportunities to practice teacher
evaluation skills.
(2) At a minimum, principal preparation programs must include the
following components related to conducting evaluations:
(a) Examination of Washington teacher and principal evaluation
criteria, the four-tiered performance rating system, and common
instructional and leadership frameworks used to describe the evaluation
criteria;
(b) Classroom observations;
(c) The use of student growth data and multiple measures of
performance;
(d) Evaluation conferencing;
(e) Use of an online tool to manage the collection of observation
notes, teacher and principal submitted materials, and other information
related to the conduct of the evaluation; and
(f) Development of classroom teacher support plans resulting from
evaluations.