Pennsylvania Code & Bulletin
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

• No statutes or acts will be found at this website.

The Pennsylvania Code website reflects the Pennsylvania Code changes effective through 52 Pa.B. 6342 (October 1, 2022).

22 Pa. Code § 19.2a. Classroom Teacher Evaluation.

§ 19.2a. Classroom Teacher Evaluation.

 Educator Effectiveness rating tools, comprised of instructions and forms, function as summary records in the evaluation of the effectiveness of professional employees. Educator Effectiveness rating tools shall be used in accordance with the General Provisions contained in §  19.1a (relating to general provisions).

 Table 19.2a-1 represents the rating form for the evaluation of classroom teachers and depicts the significance (that is, weighting) of each rating area to the overall performance rating.

Table 19.2a-1: PDE 13-1 Rating Form



PDE 13-1
Department of Education
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
LEA: School:
Employee Name (Last, First, Middle):
Rating Period (M/D/Y - M/D/Y):  Professional Employee  or   Temporary Professional Employee
Date Completed:  Annual Evaluation  or   Semi-Annual Evaluation (Temporary only)


CLASSROOM TEACHER RATING FORM
(A) OBSERVATION & PRACTICE
Domain Rating
(a)
Factor
(b)
Adjusted Rating
(a x b)
I. Planning & Preparation [0—3] 20% [0—0.60]
II. Classroom Environment [0—3] 30% [0—0.90]
III. Instruction [0—3] 30% [0—0.90]
IV. Professional Responsibilities [0—3] 20% [0—0.60]
(A) Observation & Practice Rating [0—3]
(B) STUDENT PERFORMANCE
(B.1) Building Level Score* Converted to a 0—3 Point Scale
[0—3]
*Scores for teachers assigned to multiple buildings shall be calculated pro rata.
(B.2) Teacher-Specific Data: Assessment, Growth, IEP Goals Progress
Indicator Rating
(c)
Factor**
(d)
Adjusted Rating
(c x d)
Assessment [0—3] [2.5%] [0—0.75]
Growth (PVAAS) [0—3] [5%] [0—1.50]
IEP Goals Progress [0—3] [2.5%] [0—0.75]
(B.2) TSD: Assessment, Growth, IEP Goals Progress Rating [0—3]
**Absent one, remaining indicators assigned 5% each. Absent two, remaining indicator assigned 10%. Absent
three indicators, 10% is allocated to (B.3) LEA Selected Measures.
(B.3) LEA Selected Measures Rating*** [0—3]
***Ratings for teachers evaluated using multiple measures shall be calculated pro rata.
(C) CLASSROOM TEACHER SUMMATIVE RATING (ALL MEASURES)
Teacher
Category
Measure
Rating
(f)
Factor
(g)
Adjusted Rating
(f x g)
Data-Available
Teacher
Observation & Practice [0—3] 70% [0—2.10]
Building Level
Data
[0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
TSD:
Assessment, Growth, IEP
Goals Progress
[0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
LEA Selected Measures [0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
DATA-AVAILABLE TEACHER RATING
[0—3]****
Non-Data-
Available
Teacher
Observation & Practice [0—3] 70% [0—2.10]
Building Level
Data
[0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
TSD: IEP Goals Progress [0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
LEA Selected Measures [0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
NON-DATA-AVAILABLE TEACHER RATING
[0—3]****
Teacher w/out
Building-Level
Data
Observation & Practice [0—3] 80% [0—2.40]
TSD: IEP Goals Progress [0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
LEA Selected Measures [0—3] 10% [0—0.30]
TEACHER w/out BUILDING LEVEL DATA RATING
[0—3]****
Temporary
Teacher
Observation & Practice [0—3] 100% [0—3]****
TEMPORARY TEACHER RATING
****Final Rating Values 0
Failing
1
Needs
Improvement
2      3
Proficient  Distinguished


I certify the afore-named employee has received a performance rating of:
  DISTINGUISHED      PROFICIENT      NEEDS IMPROVEMENT        FAILING
Distinguished, Proficient, or Needs Improvement* shall be considered Satisfactory. Failing shall be considered
Unsatisfactory.
*A second Needs Improvement rating issued by the same employer within 4 years of the first where the
employee is in the same certification shall be considered Unsatisfactory.
The performance rating shall be deemed:
   SATISFACTORY                       UNSATISFACTORY
Date: Rater Name/Position:
Date: Chief School Administrator Signature:
I acknowledge that I have read the information contained herein and that I have been provided an
opportunity to discuss it with the rater.
Date: Employee Signature:
Employee signature does not signify agreeance with the performance rating.

 (a)  Observation and Practice

   (1)  The evaluation of the effectiveness of a professional employee or temporary professional employee serving as a classroom teacher shall be based on classroom observation and practice models related to student achievement (see Table 19.1a-1: Rating Areas and Significance by Professional Employee Evaluated).

   (2)  A rating must be given in each of the four domains of teacher practice, with each domain rating constituting a percentage of the single, summative Observation and Practice rating as denoted in Table 19.2a-2.

Table 19.2a-2: Classroom Teacher Observation & Practice Weighting by Domain



DOMAIN PERCENTAGE OF OBSERVATION &
PRACTICE RATING
I. Planning & Preparation 20%
II. Classroom Environment 30%
III. Instruction 30%
IV. Professional Responsibilities 20%

   (3)  The rating for each domain of teacher practice shall be based on the four levels of performance as defined in Table 19.2a-3.

Table 19.2a-3: The Four Levels of Performance by Domain (Classroom Teacher)



I. PLANNING & PREPARATION (20%)
Effective teachers plan and prepare for lessons using their extensive knowledge of the content area, the relationships among different strands within the content and between the subject and other disciplines, and their students’ understanding of the subject as identified through effective use of assessments. Instructional outcomes are clear, represent important learning in the subject, and are aligned to academic standards. The instructional design includes relevant learning activities and modalities that are well sequenced and support all students in meeting high expectations in an environment that provides positive, equitable, and inclusive opportunities for learning.*
Failing
Needs Improvement
Proficient
Distinguished
Teacher’s plans reflect little understanding of the content, students, and /or available resources.

Instructional outcomes are either lacking or inappropriate; assessment methodologies are inadequate.**
Teacher’s plans reflect moderate understanding of the content, the students, and/or available resources.

Some instructional outcomes are suitable to the students as a group, and the approaches to assessment are partially aligned with the goals.**
Teacher’s plans reflect a thorough understanding of
the content, the students, and available resources.

Instructional outcomes represent important learning suitable to most students. Most elements of the instructional design, including the assessments, are aligned to the goals and reflect an awareness of the diversity of students’ interests, background, and needs.**
Teacher’s plans, based on extensive content knowledge and understanding of students, are designed to engage all students in significant, autonomous learning.

All aspects of the teacher’s plans—instructional outcomes, learning activities, paths to successful completion, materials, resources, and assessments—are in complete alignment and are adapted as needed
for individual students or teaching environments.

Teacher planning promotes the learning and growth of
all students in a positive, culturally sensitive, and collaborative manner.**
II. CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT (30%)
Effective teachers organize their classrooms so that all students can learn. Teachers know and value their students’ identities, as well as their academic, social, and emotional strengths and needs. They maximize instructional time and foster respectful interactions with and among students, ensuring that students find the classroom a safe place to take intellectual risks. Students themselves make a substantive contribution to the effective functioning of the class by assisting with classroom procedures, ensuring effective use of instructional space, and supporting and engaging in the learning of classmates. Students and teachers work in ways that demonstrate their belief that rigorous effort will result in higher
levels of learning. Student behavior is consistently appropriate, and the teacher’s handling of infractions is subtle, preventive, and respectful of students’ dignity.*
Failing Needs Improvement Proficient Distinguished
Classroom environment is characterized by chaos and conflict, with low expectations for learning, no clear standards of student conduct, poor use of instructional space and time, and negative interactions between individuals.**
Classroom environment is controlled, with moderate expectations for student learning and conduct, and classroom routines and use of space that partially support student learning.

Students and the teacher rarely treat one another with disrespect.**
Classroom environment functions smoothly, with efficient use of instructional space and time. Expectations for student learning are high

Standards for student conduct are clear, and interactions among individuals are respectful.**
Students themselves make a substantive contribution to the smooth functioning of the classroom, with highly positive personal interactions, high expectations and student pride in work, seamless routines, clear standards of conduct, and a physical environment conducive to high-level learning.**
III. INSTRUCTION (30%)
Effective teachers ensure all students are highly engaged in learning and contribute to the success of the class. Teacher explanations are clear and invite student intellectual engagement. Instructional practices are personalized to accommodate diverse learning styles, needs, interests, and levels of readiness. Teacher feedback is specific to learning goals and rubrics and offers concrete suggestions for improvement. As a result, students understand their progress in learning the content and can explain the learning goals and what they need to do in order to improve, and have autonomy in their learning. Effective teachers recognize their responsibility for student learning and make adjustments, as needed, to ensure student success.*
Failing Needs Improvement Proficient Distinguished
Instruction is characterized
by poor communication, low-level questions, little student engagement or participation in discussion, little or no use of assessment in learning,
and rigid adherence to an instructional plan despite evidence that it should be revised or modified.**
Inconsistently clear communication uneven use
of questioning and discussion strategies, and/or lack of suitable instructional
activities and materials result in only some students engaged in learning.
The teacher displays some use of assessment in instruction and is moderately flexible in adjusting the instructional plan in response to students’ interests and
their success in learning.**
All students are engaged in learning as a result of clear communication and successful use of questioning and discussion techniques.

Activities and assignments are of high quality, and teacher and students make productive use of assessments.

The teacher demonstrates flexibility in contributing to the success of the lesson and of each student.**
All students are highly engaged in learning and
make material contributions to the success of the class through their participation in discussions, active involve-
ment in learning activities, and use of assessment information in their learning.
The teacher creates opport-
unities for peer-to-peer engagement that support social, emotional, and academic development and continuously incorporates approaches to meet the needs of every student.**
IV. PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES (20%)
Effective teachers have high ethical standards, a deep sense of professionalism, and are focused on improving their own teaching and supporting the ongoing learning of colleagues. Teachers provide frequent, proactive, and personalized com-
munication with families about student learning and performance, while demonstrating understanding of and appreciation for different families’ home language, culture, and values. They assume leadership roles in both school and LEA projects, and they engage in a wide range of professional development activities to strengthen their practice. Reflection on their own teaching results in ideas for improvement that are shared across professional learning communities and contribute to improving the practice of all. Documentation is accurate and comprehensive and supports student learning.*
Failing
Needs Improvement
Proficient
Distinguished
The teacher demonstrates low ethical standards and levels
of professionalism, with poor recordkeeping systems and skill in reflection, little or no communication with families or colleagues, and avoidance of school and LEA responsibilities and participation in activities for professional growth.**
The teacher demonstrates moderate ethical standards and levels of professionalism, with rudimentary recordkeeping systems and skills in reflection, modest communication with families or colleagues, and
compliance with expectations regarding participation in school and LEA projects and activities for professional growth.**
The teacher demonstrates high ethical standards and a genuine sense of professionalism by engaging in accurate reflection on instruction, maintaining accurate records, communicating frequently with families, actively participating in school and LEA events, and engaging in activities for professional development.** The teacher’s ethical standards and sense of professionalism are highly developed, showing perceptive use of reflection, effective systems for recordkeeping and culturally responsive communication with families, leadership
roles in both school and LEA projects, and extensive professional development activities.

Where appropriate, students contribute to the systems for recordkeeping and family communication.**

 *Copyright [copy ] Charlotte Danielson, 2013

 **From Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teachers, 2nd Edition (pp. 41-42), by Charlotte Danielson, Alexandria, VA: ASCD. [copy ] 2007 by ASCD. Adapted and reproduced with permission.

   (4)  The Department shall publish on the Department’s web site approved practice models for assessing the four domains. The four domains and practice models establish a framework for the Observation and Practice evaluation of classroom teachers. An LEA may use any portion or combination of the approved practice models related to a domain in determining a domain rating for the professional employee.

   (5)  Observation and Practice ratings shall be informed using evidentiary source materials noted in the professional employee’s record, including dates and times as applicable. Records may include, but are not limited to, any combination of the following items as appropriate for the employee and the employee’s placement in a classroom and educational program:

     (i)   Notations of classroom observations, teacher/rater conferences or interviews, or informal observations or visits.

     (ii)   Lesson plans, unit plans, instructional materials and resources.

     (iii)   Student work, student records, progress reports and grading.

     (iv)   Interactions with students and their families (for example, frequency, methods of communication).

     (v)   Student surveys, family and community feedback.

     (vi)   Professional growth (for example, coursework, staff development, networking, reflection of practice).

     (vii)   Examination of sources of evidence provided by the teacher.

   (6)  Evaluators may include the use of multiple classroom walk-throughs in an academic year to gather evidence and artifacts, provided specific observations are based only on factors that are present or witnessed by the evaluator during the walk-through.

   (7)  Classroom walk-throughs shall be used to gather evidence in addition to, not in place of, data gathered during one or more comprehensive classroom observations except when defined by a plan of differentiated supervision.

   (8)  The evidence and evaluator observations and findings shall provide the basis for rating the professional employee’s level of performance in each of the four domains and for assigning each domain a rating with a zero, one, two or three point value.

   (9)  The rating value for each domain is adjusted by the percentage factor attributed to that domain (see Table 19.2a-1: PDE 13-1 Rating Form, Part (A)); the sum of the adjusted values is the Classroom Teacher Observation and Practice rating.

 (b)  Student Performance Data

 

   Based on the type of professional employee evaluated (see Table 19.1a-1: Rating Areas and Significance by Professional Employee Evaluated), up to 30% of the overall performance rating for a classroom teacher shall be based on student performance data as applicable and attributable to the individual teacher and comprised of the rating areas delineated in Table 19.2a-4.

Table 19.2a-4: Student Performance Data Weighting by Rating Area



RATING AREA
PERCENTAGE OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE DATA RATING
Data-Available
Classroom Teacher
Non-Data-Available
Classroom Teacher
Building Level Data 10% 10%
Teacher-Specific Data: Assessment 2.5% -
Teacher-Specific Data: Growth 5% -
Teacher-Specific Data: IEP Goals Progress 2.5% 10%
LEA Selected Measures 10% 10%

   (1)  Building Level Data.

     (i)   A Building Level Score is comprised minimally of two of the four measures (Assessment, Growth, Attendance Rate, Graduation Rate). If fewer than two of the four measures are available, the Building Level Data weighting of 10% shall be reallocated to Observation and Practice.

     (ii)   For a classroom teacher assigned to multiple buildings, a single Building Level Score shall be calculated proportional to the employee’s building assignments.

     (iii)   A classroom teacher who transfers from one building to another within an LEA shall have the option of using Observation and Practice or other Student Performance Data measures instead of Building Level Data for the first 2 school years of the new location assignment. Before evaluation in the new location assignment, the classroom teacher and the LEA shall agree upon one or more replacement measures and the reallocation of the Building Level Data weighting of 10% to the selected measures to calculate the final performance rating.

   (2)  Teacher-Specific Data: Assessment, Growth, and IEP Goals Progress.

     (i)   Data-Available Classroom Teacher.

       (A)   If directly attributable to the classroom teacher, statewide Assessment data and Growth data, as measured by PVAAS, shall constitute 2.5% and 5% respectively of the overall performance evaluation.

       (B)   Progress toward goals as identified in students’ Individualized Education Plans (that is, IEP Goals Progress) and assessed by the LEA shall constitute 2.5% of the overall performance rating.

       (C)   Regardless of certification area, all classroom teachers shall be accountable for student progress toward IEP Goals Progress if students have identified IEP Goals to which the teacher contributes data used by the IEP team to monitor progress. An LEA may establish a minimum number (an n count) for students with associated IEP Goals, below which the classroom teacher shall not be evaluated on IEP Goals Progress.

         (I)   The n count shall not exceed the n count used by the Department for determining Growth under PVAAS.

         (II)   The n count shall be comprised of the total number of students with associated IEP Goals taught by the classroom teacher, rather than the number within a single class or course.

       (D)   The sum of the three ratings, each adjusted for weighting, shall provide a single zero—three-point scale rating for Teacher-Specific Data: Assessment, Growth and IEP Goals Progress that constitutes 10% of the overall performance rating.

         (I)   In the absence of one of the three indicators for Teacher-Specific Data: Assessment, Growth and IEP Goals Progress, the remaining two indicators shall be weighted each 5% toward the overall evaluation rating of a data-available classroom teacher.

         (II)   In the absence of two of the three indicators, the remaining indicator shall be weighted 10%.

         (III)   Absent three indicators, the weighting shall be re-allocated, increasing the factor for the LEA Selected Measures rating area by 10%.

     (ii)   Non-Data-Available Classroom Teacher and Classroom Teacher without Building Level Data.

       (A)   Progress in meeting the goals for student individualized education plans (that is, IEP Goals Progress) required under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act shall constitute 10% of the overall evaluation rating of a non-data-available classroom teacher and a classroom teacher without available Building Level Data as neither has attributable Assessment and Growth data.

       (B)   Regardless of certification area, all classroom teachers shall be accountable for student progress toward IEP Goals Progress if students have identified IEP Goals to which the teacher contributes data used by the IEP team to monitor progress. An LEA may establish a minimum number (an n count) for students with associated IEP Goals, below which the classroom teacher shall not be evaluated on IEP Goals Progress.

         (I)   The n count shall not exceed the n count used by the Department for determining Growth under PVAAS.

         (II)   The n count shall be comprised of the total number of students with associated IEP Goals taught by the classroom teacher, rather than the number within a single class or course.

       (C)   If the classroom teacher has no students, or fewer students than the LEA established n count, with IEP Goals to which the teacher contributes data used by the IEP team to monitor progress during the evaluation cycle, the 10% weighting shall be re-allocated to the LEA Selected Measures rating area for the evaluation of that classroom teacher.

 (c)  LEA Selected Measures

   (1)  LEAs shall use one of the following measures to assess student performance attributable to the classroom teacher and to assign a zero, one, two- or three-point rating:

     (i)   Locally developed rubrics.

     (ii)   District-designed measures and examinations.

     (iii)   Nationally recognized standardized tests.

     (iv)   Industry certification examinations.

     (v)   Student projects under local requirements.

     (vi)   Student portfolios under local requirements.

   (2)  If more than one measure is used for the evaluation of a professional employee, the LEA shall weight and sum the assigned ratings using factors established by the LEA to produce a single LEA Selected Measures rating of zero, one, two or three.

   (3)  A classroom teacher shall provide documented input to an evaluator on the development of LEA Selected Measures and annual results of data.

     (i)   In the analysis of that data, classroom teachers shall have the opportunity to reflect on their success, unanticipated barriers, and any supports that could have been useful to classroom teachers.

     (ii)   The documented input shall be included with documentation of the classroom teacher’s overall annual rating.

   (4)  LEA Selected Measures may be revised mid-academic year, if agreed upon by both the administrator and the teacher, and may be reused on an annual basis if a classroom teacher’s goals are updated and continue to offer reflections on their goals for improvement on an annual basis.

Authority

   The provisions of this §  19.2a issued under sections 1138.3(d)(1), 1138.4(e)(1), 1138.5(d)(1) and 1138.11 of the Public School Code of 1949 (24 P.S. § §  1138.3(d)(1), 1138.4(e)(1), 1138.5(d)(1) and 1138.11); and sections 201 and 506 of The Administrative Code of 1929 (71 P.S. § §  61 and 186).

Source

   The provisions of this §  19.2a adopted March 26, 2021, effective March 31, 2021, 51 Pa.B. 1653.

Cross References

   This section cited in 22 Pa. Code §  19.1a (relating to general provisions).



No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.


This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.