Escambia
County Public Schools
Final Employee Evaluation Rating & Score
Final Employee Evaluation Rating & Score
Each employee's final evaluation is the result of the combining or averaging of the two main components of the employee's: professional practices and student growth (with each component being weighted for the final evaluation): (Updated 9-24-16)
1. Employee professional practice rating
This rating is assessed with the Danielson framework as is applied via our Employee Appraisal Rubric through the observation/interaction process. The final appraisal scores are based on the last observation where a given component area was assessed.
| E3 - Instructional Professional Practice: Teacher, Instructional Specialist, Media Specialist, School Counselor, Therapeutic Specialist | ||||
| E3 Rubric (observations/artifacts) | PDP: Professional Development Plan | Surveys (NA) | Student Growth | Total |
| 65% | 2% | NA | 33% | 100% |
| ESPE - Educational Support Personnel Professional Practice: Educational Support Contact Personnel | ||||
| EPE Rubric (observations/artifacts) | PDP: Professional Development Plan | Surveys (NA) | Student Growth | Total |
| 100% | NA | NA | NA | 100% |
| EPE - Escambia Professional Evaluation Professional Practice: Professional Contact Personnel | ||||
| EPE Rubric (observations/artifacts) Including PDP: Plan for Deliberate Practice | PDP: Professional Development Plan | Surveys (Employee Engagement & Support Report Card) | Student Growth | Total |
| 80% | Included in the Professional Practice Rubric Scoring | 10% | 10% | 100% |
| ELA - Escambia Leaders Assessment Professional Practice: Curriculum & Instruction School-Based Administrator Contact Personnel | ||||
| ELA Rubric (observations/artifacts) Including PDP: Plan for Deliberate Practice | PDP: Professional Development Plan | Surveys (Parent Engagement & Employee Engagement) | Student Growth | Total |
| 57% | Included in the Professional Practice Rubric Scoring | 10% | 33% | 100% |
| ELA-D - Escambia Leaders Assessment - District Professional Practice: Curriculum & Instruction District-Based Administrator Contact Personnel | ||||
| EPE Rubric (observations/artifacts) Including PDP: Plan for Deliberate Practice | PDP: Professional Development Plan | Surveys (Employee Engagement & Support Report Card) | Student Growth | Total |
| 60% | Included in the Professional Practice Rubric Scoring | 10% | 30% | 100% |
| EAE - Escambia Administrator Evaluation Professional Practice: Human Resource, Operations & Finance Administrator Contact Personnel | ||||
| EPE Rubric (observations/artifacts) Including PDP: Plan for Deliberate Practice | PDP: Professional Development Plan | Surveys (Employee Engagement & Support Report Card) | Student Growth | Total |
| 60% | Included in the Professional Practice Rubric Scoring | 20% | 20% | 100% |
| ELA-D - Escambia Leaders Assessment - District Professional Practice: Curriculum & Instruction District-Based Administrator Contact Personnel | ||||
| EPE Rubric (observations/artifacts) Including PDP: Plan for Deliberate Practice | PDP: Professional Development Plan | Surveys (Employee Engagement & Support Report Card) | Student Growth | Total |
| 60% | Included in the Professional Practice Rubric Scoring | 10% | 30% | 100% |
The scales and rules for maintaining a given effectiveness rating are as follows: (Updated 11-2-17)
| Professional Practice Rating: | Raw Score: |
| Highly Effective (4 points) No Unsatisfactory rating* |
94.5 and above |
| Effective (3 points) No Unsatisfactory rating* |
77.5 - 94.4 |
| Needs Improvement / Developing (2 points) No Unsatisfactory rating* |
70.5 - 77.4 |
| Unsatisfactory (1 point) 1 or more Unsatisfactory rating* |
0 - 70.4 |
*If a teacher's final rating is rated Unsatisfactory in any component at the end of the school year, the overall evaluation preliminary rating will be Unsatisfactory.
**If a teacher's evaluator is a STAR CT, and the teacher has five (5) or more components' final rating at Needs Improvement / Developing, the STAR CT will make a recommendation to the START Review Board to determine if the teacher is to be offered an annual contract for the next school year.(Updated 4-25-16)
| Professional Practice Rating: | Raw Score: |
| Highly Effective (4 points) No Unsatisfactory rating* |
94.5 and above |
| Effective (3 points) No Unsatisfactory rating* |
77.5 - 94.4 |
| Needs Improvement / Developing (2 points) No Unsatisfactory rating* |
70.5 - 77.4 |
| Unsatisfactory (1 point) 1 or more Unsatisfactory rating* |
0 - 70.4 |
2. Student learning growth rating (Updated 10-05-21)
Technical Assistance Paper: 2024-2025 Teacher Evaluation Process - Student Performance
3. Overall effectiveness rating: (Updated 11-02-17)
An educator's overall effectiveness rating is the average of the teo parts of the evaluation: the professional practices and student learning growth portions. For each portion of the evaluation, the rating achieved corresponds to a number (4, 3, 2, 1) that is used to calculate the sum total of the two halves of the evaluation, to yield a final, summative rating, as shown below:
| Evaluation Measures | ||||
| Highly Effective | Effective | NI / Dev | Unsat. | |
| Employee Appraisal Framework | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| PDP | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Student Growth | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Final Rating | 3.5 - 4.0 | 2.5 - 3.49 | 1.5 - 2.49 | 1 - 1.49 |
For example, an employee with a: (Updated 4-25-16)
Highly Effective Employee Appraisal Framework Score (4 point) and a Highly Effective PDP Score, and an Effective Student Growth Score (3 points) would be calculated as follows:
(4*0.65) + (4*0.02) + (3*0.33) = 3.67 points for a summative rating of Highly Effective
| Professional Practice - 65% | PDP - 2% | Student Growth - 33% | Final Summative Rating - 100% |
| 4 x 0.65 = 2.60 | 4 x 0.02 = 0.08 | 3 x 0.33 = 0.99 | 3.67 = Highly Effective |