(1) As described in Section 53G-11-502, a school district may choose to perform an educator evaluation as described in this section. (2) A school district that chooses the educator evaluation process described in this section is exempt from the requirements described in Sections 53G-11-506, 53G-11-507, 53G-11-508, 53G-11-509, 53G-11-510, and 53G-11-511. (3) In accordance with this section and Title 63G, Chapter 3, Utah Administrative Rulemaking Act, the state board shall make rules that: (a) describe a framework for the evaluation of educators in accordance with Part 3, Licensed Employee Requirements, and this section; (b) require an educator's summative evaluation to be based on: (i) educator professional standards established by the state board; and (ii) the requirements described in Subsections (9) and (10); (c) establish standards for an independent review of an educator's summative evaluation; and (d) ensure the privacy and protection of individual evaluation data. (4) A school district shall develop an educator evaluation program in consultation with the school district's joint committee. (5) A school district shall ensure the joint committee described in Subsection (4) consists of an equal number of classroom teachers, parents, and administrators the school district appoints. (6) A school district may appoint members of the joint committee from: (a) a list of nominees who are classroom teachers, created through a vote of teachers in a nomination election; (b) a list of nominees who are administrators, created through a vote of administrators in a nomination election; and (c) a list of nominees who are parents that school community councils within the school district submit to the school district. (7) Subject to Subsection (8), the joint committee may: (a) adopt or adapt an evaluation program for educators based on a model the state board develops; or (b) create the school district's own evaluation program for educators. (8) A school district shall ensure that an evaluation program the joint committee develops complies with the requirements of this section including the rules the state board adopts under Subsection (3). (9) A school district, in consultation with a joint committee described in Subsection (4), shall adopt a reliable and valid educator evaluation program that evaluates educators based on educator professional standards the state board establishes, including: (a) an annual formative assessment for an educator, a provisional educator, and a career educator; (b) as described in Subsections (11), (12), and (13), a summative assessment for an educator that occurs at least once every four years; (c) use of multiple lines of evidence, including: (i) self-evaluation; (ii) student and parent input; (iii) for an administrator, employee input; (iv) a reasonable number of supervisor observations to ensure adequate reliability; (v) evidence of professional growth and other indicators of instructional improvement; and (vi) student academic growth data; (d) a summative evaluation that differentiates among levels of performance; and (e) for an administrator, the effectiveness of evaluating employee performance in a school or school district for which the administrator has responsibility. (10) A school district, in relation to an educator evaluation program described in Subsection (9): (a) may include a reasonable number of peer observations; and (b) may not use: (i) end-of-level assessment scores; or (ii) the data of a student that is chronically absent. (11) The individual whom the school district and joint committee designate to be responsible for administering an educator's summative evaluation shall: (a) at least 15 days before an educator's first evaluation: (i) notify the educator of the evaluation process; and (ii) give the educator a copy of a relevant evaluation instrument; (b) allow the educator to respond to any part of the evaluation; (c) attach the educator's response to the evaluation if the educator provides a response in writing; (d) within 15 days after the day on which the evaluation process is complete, discuss the written evaluation with the educator; and (e) based upon the educator's performance, assign to the educator one of the levels of performance required in Subsection (9)(d). (12) (a) An educator who is not satisfied with a summative evaluation may request a review of the evaluation within 15 days after receiving the written evaluation. (b) (i) If an educator requests a review in accordance with Subsection (12), the school district superintendent or the superintendent's designee shall appoint an individual whom the school district does not employ who has expertise in teacher or personnel evaluation to review the evaluation procedures and make recommendations to the superintendent regarding the educator's summative evaluation. (ii) The individual conducting a review of an educator's summative evaluation under Subsection (12)(b)(i) shall conduct the review in accordance with the rules that the state board makes under Subsection (3). (13) (a) In accordance with Subsections 53E-2-302(7) and 53E-6-103(2)(a) and (b), the principal or immediate supervisor of a provisional educator shall assign an individual who has received training or will receive training in mentoring educators as a mentor to the provisional educator. (b) Where possible, the principal or immediate supervisor described in Subsection (13)(a) shall assign as a mentor a career educator who: (i) performs substantially the same duties as the provisional educator; and (ii) has at least three years of educational experience. (c) The mentor described in this Subsection (13): (i) shall assist the provisional educator to become effective and competent in the teaching profession and school system; and (ii) may not serve as an evaluator of the provisional educator. (d) An educator who is assigned as a mentor described in this Subsection (13) may receive compensation for mentor services in addition to the educator's regular salary. (14) The state board shall: (a) consult with school districts; and (b) report to the Education Interim Committee's November 2028 committee meeting regarding: (i) implementation of the alternative educator evaluation process; and (ii) making recommendations for needed changes.
‹ Prev All Utah sections Next ›
Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Statute text is provided for general information and may not reflect the most recent amendments; verify against the official state code.