Cabinet Evaluation Form

Highline Public Schools

Cabinet Evaluation Form

Chief Academic Officer

______

Employee Employee Number

______

Employee SignatureDate

______

Superintendent’s Signature Date

Scoring Criteria

4 – Distinguished: Demonstrates exemplary leadership practice at the highest level through support for students, staff, and schools.

3 – Proficient: Meets all expectations consistently

2 – Basic: Addresses goals but performance is mediocre

1 – Unsatisfactory: Fails to accomplish defined task in a manner that advances gains for student and/or schools

SUMMARY | Highline Cabinet Evaluation Framework

Cabinet Member(s) to be rated on Criterion / Criterion / Criterion Rubrics
ALL / CRITERION 1:
Creating a Culture of Continuous Improvement
Influence, establish and sustain a district culture conducive to continuous improvement for students and staff / 1.1 Develops and sustains focus on a shared mission and clear vision for improvement of learning and teaching / 1.2 Engages in essential conversations for ongoing improvement / 1.3 Facilitates collaborative processes leading toward continuous improvement / 1.4 Creates opportunities for shared leadership
Chief Technology Officer
Chief Operations Officer / CRITERION 2:
Managing Operations
Lead and influence effective district operations – both divisionally (Safety & Security, Transportation, Facility Services, Athletics and Nutrition Services) and district wide / 2.1 Provides management oversight for physical, emotional and intellectual safety of district students, staff, and community members. / 2.2 Provides management oversight of a nutrition service program that promotes an effective, efficient, and appealing student meal program / 2.3 Provides management oversight of current capital projects / 2.4 Incorporates cutting-edge technologies to assist in route planning, bus location, deliveries, repairs and management of fleet / 2.5 Implements technology that improves performance, functionality and supportability of district resources
Chief Accountability Officer
Chief Academic Officer / CRITERION 3:
Leading with Data-Driven Decision Making
Lead the development, implementation and evaluation of the data-driven plan for improvement of student achievement / 3.1 Recognizes and seeks out multiple data sources / 3.2 Analyzes and interprets multiple data sources to inform improvement efforts / 3.3 Implements data driven plan for improved teaching and learning / 3.4 Assists staff to use data to guide, modify and improve classroom teaching and learning / 3.5 Provides evidence of student growth that results from the Annual Action Plan process
Chief Accountability Officer
Chief Academic Officer / CRITERION 4:
Aligning & Improving Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Lead instructional staff in aligning curriculum, instruction and assessment with state and local learning goals. Monitor implementation of the Strategic Plan, effective instruction and assessment practices / 4.1 Alignment of curricula to state and local district learning goals / 4.2 Alignment of best instructional practices to state and district learning goals / 4.3 Provides evidence of student growth by school / 4.4 Monitors systems that assist staff in implementing effective instructional and assessment practices / 4.5 Monitors systems to support staff in developing required student growth plans and identifying valid, reliable sources of evidence of effectiveness
Chief of Staff & Finance
Chief Policy & Strategy Officer
Chief Talent Officer / CRITERION 5:
Managing Human and Fiscal Resources
Manage human and fiscal resources to accomplish student achievement goals / 5.1 Manages human resources (assignment, hiring) / 5.2 Manages human resources (ongoing professional development) / 5.3 Manages fiscal resources / 5.4 Fulfills legal and policy responsibilities
Chief Communications Officer
Chief Academic Officer
Exec Director, Student Support and Family Engagement / CRITERION 6:
Engaging Families & Community
Communicate and partner with school community members to promote student learning / 6.1 Communicates with community to promote learning / 6.2 Partners with families and school community
Chief Accountability Officer
Chief Academic Officer
Exec. Director, Student Support & Family Engagement / CRITERION 7:
Closing the Gap
Demonstrate a commitment to closing the achievement gap / 8.1 Identifies barriers to achievement and resulting gaps / 8.2 Demonstrates a commitment to close the achievement gap / 8.3 Provides evidence of growth in student learning

Criterion 1 /Creating a Culture of Continuous Improvement:Influence, establish and sustain a district culture conducive to continuous improvement for students and staff.

1.1 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
1.1 Develops and sustains focus on a shared mission and clear vision for improvement of learning and teaching / Look For’s /

Actions contradict vision and mission
Vision and mission are not known by staff and are not present in the daily life of the district

Vision/mission are referenced and explicitly connected to district practices, activities, and behaviors
Stakeholders can articulate vision

District practices, messages, and routines are explicitly aligned with the district’s vision and mission
District mission is clearly articulated and understood by staff; staff share commitment towards achieving outcomes related to vision
Mission and vision includes a focus on student academic excellence

Survey data and other indicators continuously motivate the school and community to adopt and enact the vision and mission
Community and students know and demonstrate commitment to the vision and mission
Students and staff begin every review of data, development of action and activity, etc. with how it relates to the district’s vision

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):
1.2 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
1.2 Engages in essential conversations for ongoing improvement / Look For’s /

There are no benchmarks, goals and no way to assess progress throughout the year
Informal and formal conversations are infrequent around ongoing improvement

Conversations occur with limited number of staff on a frequent basis
Feedback begins to include exit tickets, surveys, and other strategies that include all stakeholders
Informal and formal conversations are developing around data ongoing improvement

Structures are in place to facilitate collegial conversations between stakeholders
Communication systems are established so that all stakeholders understand what is happening and are able to contribute

District priorities are public and there is a common understanding of short and long-term milestones and goals
Feedback systems are institutionalized and seen as a healthy part of the culture
Systems of communication and feedback loops are established and consistent with the stakeholders

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):
1.3 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
1.3 Facilitates collaborative processes leading toward continuous improvement / Look For’s /

No expectations for planning or collaboration are shared or supported

Basic planning tenets are shared and there is some expectation for planning and collaboration leading towards improvement in student learning
Begins to foster a climate of trust, collaboration, and consensus

Structures are in place for job-embedded collaborative learning (collaboration process in place, protected time for grade level/content area)
There are protocols to guide collaboration for systematic examination of practice
At the district and school level teams have deep and frequent conversations about student learning and data
Participates in collaborative teams to identify support needed for collective and team goals

Staff share a collective awareness of individual and team skills and growth areas
Staff self-direct professional development based on student achievement outcomes.
Strategies are adjusted systematically where needed
Multiple sources of data including staff surveys indicates a high degree of satisfaction regarding collaboration related to continuous student achievement

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):
1.4 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
1.4 Creates opportunities for shared leadership / Look For’s /

Works solo with little or no support from colleagues and/or students
No emphasis on principals as leaders and works mostly in isolation from colleagues
School and district staff teams are left to fend for themselves in terms of leadership and direction
School and district staff is rarely, or never, incorporated into leadership and decision making roles in the school. Staff and students are unaware of district’s priorities and Strategic Plan
Strategic Plan is referred to infrequently at Leadership Team meetings and/or planning meetings

Only a few staff members have been enlisted to provide input towards decisions
All staff are infrequently involved in decisions pertaining to student learning
School/district teams and/or departments work together to address student achievement
School/district teams are facilitated to utilize time effectively
Staff and students are encouraged to accept leadership responsibilities within the school community
Shared decision making processes are communicated and utilized
Strategic Plan is developed in isolation
Not all staff are aware of the Strategic Plan

Recruits and develops leadership teams with a balance of skills
Regular school/district team meetings are used as a prime locus for decisions related to student achievement
School/district teams are facilitated so meetings are focused and substantive
There are opportunities for staff and various stakeholders to demonstrate leadership skills by allowing them to assume leadership and decision making roles
Shared decision making processes are well established and are communicated and utilized
Strategic Plan is developed collaboratively and is based on student performance data
Consistently identify, utilize and support principals/teachers as leaders within a building

There is a leadership team focused on student achievement with a high level of skill and commitment
Teams/departments take ownership for using data and student work to drive constant refinement of teaching
School/district teams have the training, facilitation, and resources they need to make their meetings highly effective
Staff members have autonomy to make decisions and support the decisions made as a part of the collective decision making process
There are systems to monitor leadership development opportunities for staff based on self-assessments and evaluations

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Criterion 1 /Creating a Culture of Continuous Improvement / Overall Average Rating:
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):

Criterion 3 /Leading with Data-Driven Decision Making:Lead the development, implementation and evaluation of the data-driven plan for improvement of student achievement.

3.1 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
3.1 Recognizes and seeks out multiple data sources / Look For’s /

Limited or single source data is provided
Staff members do not have access to historical data (e.g. test, attendance, behavior

There are systems in place to collect and review data on attendance, behavior, student achievement and departmental milestones;data is disaggregated with more than one data source to support instructional decisions
School/district teams and /or departments are provided with multiple data sources to guide instructional decisions

School/district teams and/or departments regularly collect disaggregated data to make instructional decisions
Models the use and value of data in multiple settings

Data collection systems are in place to support individual staff, team, school-wide, departmental and district-wide analysis to make instructional decisions

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):
3.2 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
3.2 Analyzes and interprets multiple data sources to inform improvement efforts / Look For’s /

Interim data, both student and departmental, are inconsistently shared or analyzed
Analysis of data sets is not done in a timely manner
Data purpose is unclear
Data are inconsistently used in teacher meetings

Interim/benchmark assessments are analyzed at strategic times throughout the year
Data are analyzed in some district/ school or departmental meetings, but is not a standard part of every meeting
There is infrequent review of data to identify low/high performing students, schools, or department activities
Summative data is shared and analyzed by staff to influence classroom and school plans
Can articulate data purpose and use aligned to goals

Continuous data review process is in place to ensure students are learning and departments are progressing
Data are analyzed in district/school and departmental meetings to inform or change actions taken by a school or department
Team structures are in place to review disaggregated data to monitor the progress of all schools/departments and develop action plans related to areas of strength and need
Longitudinal data is reviewed and analyzed annually by staff
Facilitates ongoing collaborative analysis of data on student learning and professional practices

Established strategies to monitor school/department progress through frequent checks for understanding are being developed and monitored e.g. during instruction, exit tickets, during team meetings

School/district and department performance data are examined using multiple lenses, including: overall grade-level/subject-area, grade-level/subject-area on individual standards, classroom level, individual student, and specific item performance
Staff use an established protocol, connected to an instructional framework or departmental goals, to monitor student progress through frequent checks for understanding

Decisions throughout the year, including staffing, budgeting, and targeted interventions are based on interim and formative assessments
Established strategies to monitor school and department progress through frequent checks for understanding are in place e.g. during instruction, exit tickets, during team meetings

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):
3.3 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
3.3 Implements data-driven plan for improved district systems and student success / Look For’s /

Staff is unaware of the district’s priorities for the year
There are few orno benchmarks or milestones and minimal ways to assess progress

School or district plans are referred to infrequently at Leadership Team meeting and/or staff meetings
School or district plans are not based on research or analysis of data

There are systems in place to gather progress data and track progress of school or district plans
School or district plans includes some clear benchmarks and milestones of progress (specific dates and expectations for improved scores)
Leadership teams relies on past and present student achievement data to monitorthe school or district plans
Some staff are aware of school or district plans and priorities – but it is not used consistently to drive the work of the school or departments

School or district priorities are identified implemented, and aligned to the analysis of data (addressing areas with highest needs for the building, department, and district)
All staff are knowledgeable with priorities for improvement and details of the school or district plans
Implementation and impact data are regularly reviewed to assess goals and strategies are adjusted as needed on the School or district plans

Instructional decisions throughout the year are based on formative assessment data

School or district plans plan are the key drivers of all decision making; there is a common understanding of short and long term milestones and goals
Leadership teams meet regularly and createshort and medium term action plans to address areas of concern and recognize areas of success
There are sustainable and collaborative systems to assess programs and adjust strategies as needed
Review of data, school/district and departmental practices are clear and transparent to all staff

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):
3.4 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
3.4 Assists staff to use data to guide, modify and improve student achievement and departmental successes / Look For’s /

Time is not allocated for data analysis
Data expectations and protocols are minimally provided

Multiple types of data are used during annual review with staff, but not a part of the ongoing culture of the school/district
Data is used to inform instruction, school and department activities, and to establish goals for school/department improvement plan
School/department teams work together to analyze multiple data sources to set measureable goals
Protocols and processes are provided to some staff for data analysis with support for implementation
Feedback is provided to staff on action plans as a result of data reflection
Sets collaborative goals and provides infrequent time for teams to reflect on data and plan for ways to implement effective practices

Multiple types of data are used to inform, ongoing monitoring of school/departmental plans, and modifications to school or district plans
There is a continuous data review process in place to ensure students learned material (e.g. aligning assessments, analyzing interim and formative assessment and taking action on results)
Protocols and processes are provided to staff for data analysis with ongoing support for implementation
Feedback is provided to staff on action plans during collaborative review and further development
Sets collaborative goals and provides sacred time for teams to reflect on data and plan for ways to implement effective practices

District culture embodies routine and consistent use of multiple types of data to improve student achievement

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Superintendent Comment: / Superintendent Rating (1-4):
3.5 / UNSATISFACTORY / BASIC / PROFICIENT / DISTINGUISHED
3.5 Provides evidence of district growth that results from the Annual Action Plan process* / Look For’s /

Preponderance of data show little or no growth in core academic areas or core areas of work
Few school-wide or departmental data points demonstrate gains meeting expected growth for one year of instruction

Some data points show growth meeting expectations for one year of instruction in core academic areas
School/district areas of strength produce growth that meets or exceeds expectations, but results are not consistent across grade levels and subjects

Most data points show growth meeting or exceeding expectations for one year of instruction in core academic areas
All or nearly all subjects and grade levels produce growth that meets or exceeds expectations

All or nearly all data points exceed typical growth in core academic areas
Growth across multiple measures surpasses typical school/district performance (i.e. compared to similar schools, prior years, annual growth norms, etc.)

Self-reflection: / Self-rating (1-4):
Criterion 3 / Leading with Data-Driven Decision Making / Overall Average Rating:

*Student growth rubric rows are designed to focus on actual student achievement, rather than superintendent actions. Element 3.5 is intended to analyze the achievement of all or most of the students in the district. Element 4.5 is designed to analyze the achievement of students assigned to a subset of schools that a superintendent identifies. Element 7.3 is designed to analyze subsets of the student population that are identified for the purpose of closing achievement gaps between them and the student population.