§50.110. Student Growth Components

Each school district, when applicable (see Section 50.20), shall provide for the use in the performance evaluation plan of data and indicators on student growth as a significant factor in rating teacher performance.  (Section 24A-4(b) of the School Code) For the purpose of this Subpart B, "significant factor" shall represent at least 30 percent of the performance evaluation rating assigned, except as otherwise provided in subsection (a).  In situations in which a joint committee cannot reach agreement on one or more aspects of student growth within the timeline established under Section 24A-4(b) of the School Code, the school district shall adopt the State model plan contained in Subpart C with respect to those aspects of student growth upon which no agreement was reached. 

 

a)         Student growth shall represent at least 25 percent of a teacher's performance evaluation rating in the first and second years of a school district's implementation of a performance evaluation system under Section 50.20 (for example, 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years for a school district with a 2012-13 implementation date).  Thereafter, student growth shall represent at least 30 percent of the rating assigned.

 

b)         The performance evaluation plan shall identify at least two types of assessments for evaluating each category of teacher (e.g., career and technical education, grade 2) and one or more measurement models to be used to determine student growth that are specific to each assessment chosen.  The assessments and measurement models identified shall align to the school's and district's school improvement goals.

 

1)         The joint committee shall identify a measurement model for each type of assessment that employs multiple data points.  The evaluation plan shall include the use of at least one Type I or Type II assessment and at least one Type III assessment.  Assessments used for each data point in a measurement model may be different provided that they address the same instructional content.

 

2)        The joint committee shall identify the specific Type I or Type II assessment to be used for each category of teacher.

 

3)        The evaluation plan shall require that at least one Type III assessment be used for each category of teacher.  If the joint committee determines that neither a Type I nor a Type II assessment can be identified, then the evaluation plan shall require that at least two Type III assessments be used.

 

A)        The plan shall state the general nature of any Type III assessment chosen (e.g., teacher-created assessments, assessments designed by textbook publishers, student work samples or portfolios, assessments of student performance, and assessments designed by staff who are subject or grade-level experts that are administered commonly across a given grade or subject area in a school) and describe the process and criteria the qualified evaluator and teacher will use to identify or develop the specific Type III assessment to be used.

 

B)        A school district required to use two Type III assessments for any category of teachers may delay the use of the second Type III assessment until the second year of implementation.

 

4)         The plan shall identify student growth expectations consistent with the assessments and measurement model to be used, as appropriate.

 

5)         Each plan shall identify the uniform process (to occur at the midpoint of the evaluation cycle) by which the teacher will collect data specific to student learning.  The data to be considered under this subsection (b)(5) shall not be the same data identified for use in the performance evaluation plan to rate the teacher's performance.

 

A)        The data the teacher collects shall not be used to determine the performance evaluation rating.

 

B)        The teacher should use the data to assess the teacher's progress and adjust instruction, if necessary.

 

c)         The joint committee shall consider how certain student characteristics (e.g., special education placement, English learners, low-income populations) shall be used for each measurement model chosen to ensure that they best measure the impact that a teacher, school and school district have on students' academic achievement.  [105 ILCS 5/24A-7]

 

d)         If the rating scale to be used for student growth does not correspond to the performance evaluation ratings required under Section 24A-5(e) or 34-85c of the School Code, then the plan shall include a description of the four rating levels to be used and how these are aligned to the required performance evaluation ratings.

 

e)         CPS may adopt, when applicable, one or more State assessments administered pursuant to Section 2-3.64a-5 of the School Code [105 ILCS 5/2-3.64a-5] as its sole measure of student growth for purposes of teacher evaluations.  (Section 24A-7 of the School Code)  In circumstances in which the school district determines that the State assessment is not appropriate for measuring student growth for one or more grade levels or categories of teachers, it shall identify other assessments to be used in the manner prescribed in this Section.

 

(Source:  Amended at 46 Ill. Reg. 8142, effective May 2, 2022)