State law (Ohio House Bill 362) brought changes to the Ohio Teacher Evaluation System for the 2014-2015 school year and beyond. The first change allows less frequent evaluation for teachers receiving skilled and accomplished ratings, while still providing them with feedback on their work.

The second change allows districts a choice between a new alternative teacher evaluation structure (Ohio Revised Code 3319.114) and the current (original) structure (Ohio Revised Code 3319.112). The alternative structure includes a third measure as 15 percent of the evaluation, with the remaining portion divided equally between performance on standards and student growth measures.

Find Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Ohio House Bill 362 located here.

For a quick reference, check out 10 Things You Need to Know about Educator Evaluation can be found here.

Please note that the House Bill 362 changes do not apply to principal evaluations. Principals are to follow guidelines posted here.

Back to Top

ORC 3319.111 – No later than July 1, 2013, the board of education of each school district, in consultation with teachers employed by the board, shall adopt a standards‐based teacher evaluation policy that conforms with the framework for evaluation of teachers developed under section 3319.112 of the Revised Code.

Back to Top

Since there are several different legislative effective dates as well as differences in collective bargaining agreements, it is best to consult your LEA’s legal counsel to determine how ORC applies to individual LEAs.

Back to Top

In the first year of implementation, every teacher and principal starts on a professional growth plan (unless the teacher or principal is already on an improvement plan). Starting with a professional growth plan allows for comparability within buildings, districts and the entire state. Professional growth plans help teachers focus on areas of professional development that will enable them to improve their practice. If student growth data are available, they are part of the plan. However, completing the self-assessment enables teachers to identify professional goals in the initial and subsequent years. After the first year of implementation in 2013-2014, all teachers and principals will have a professional growth plan or improvement plan based on their student growth measures.

Back to Top

Back to Top

The scope of work of the Ohio Teacher Evaluation Writing Team during 2009‐2010 included extensive study of model evaluation systems throughout the country. Many state systems were examined in depth (e.g., District of Columbia Public Schools, Delaware, New Mexico, Colorado) for a standards‐based definition of teacher effectiveness. Research was supplemented by the work of Charlotte Danielson, Laura Goe, New Teacher Center, and Learning Point Associates. The writing team used the Ohio Standards for the Teaching profession as the foundation for determining areas to be included in the rubric. From this work, the rubric was developed. A review was then conducted by national experts. Input received during field testing and piloting further refined the rubric.

Back to Top

All evaluators in Ohio, regardless of the evaluation system they use, will have to complete state sponsored training and pass an online assessment. Their performance rubric will need to be aligned with the OTES rubric. The LEA must complete the alignment tool found in the eTPES as well as report their ratings in the electronic system.

Back to Top

All indicators on the rubric do not have to have evidence associated with them. However, it is important that the evaluator have enough evidence to make a determination of the rating for that teacher.

Back to Top

At the beginning of the school year, the educator will complete a professional growth plan or have an improvement plan completed. In these plans, there should be areas determined for professional development. A self‐assessment using the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession may be completed by the teacher prior to developing the professional growth plan to provide a complete picture of their teaching practice.

Each educator should engage in a post‐conference. During that conference, the evaluator should offer area(s) of reinforcement and area(s) of refinement. These areas of refinement will guide improvement and professional development.

Back to Top

No, they are considered best practice. Growth comes from the conversations about practice between observer and teacher.

Back to Top

This is a district decision.

Back to Top

The scripting provides concrete evidence for the evaluator to cite in the evaluation documentation and supports the rating provided. However, scripting is not required.

Back to Top

No. Districts are not required to purchase vendor assessments. If a teacher has ODE approved, vendor assessment data, then that data will need to be used in the student growth measures calculation. If a teacher has valueadded data, then the value‐added data must be used in the student growth measures calculation. For teachers without value‐added or approved vendor assessment data, local student growth measures will be used.

Back to Top

There is a link on the ODE website that includes an overview of student growth measures, the ODE approved list of assessments, student learning objectives information and tools, and steps for designing local student growth plans for evaluation. Additional information is added to this part of our website regularly.

Back to Top

The LEA will determine the list of evaluators the teacher may choose and the procedures for selecting the evaluator

Back to Top

Evaluators re-calibrate two years from the date of successful passage of the OTES assessment.  Evaluators can find the expiration date on the current certificate of achievement issued through the Ohio portal at the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching at https://www.nietbestpractices.org/ohio  The certificate with expiration date can be viewed or reprinted at any time.

Back to Top

ORC 3319.111 states that an evaluator may be a person who is employed by an entity contracted by the board to conduct evaluations and who holds a license designated for being a superintendent, assistant superintendent, principal, vocational director, administrative specialist or supervisor in any educational area issued under section 3319.22 of the Revised Code or is qualified to conduct evaluations. The words “3rd party evaluator” no longer appears in legislative language.

Back to Top

ORC 3319.111 states that each evaluation conducted pursuant to this section shall be conducted by one or more of the following persons who hold a credential established by the department of education being an evaluator. The language says one or more so, yes, there can be more than one evaluator for a teacher.

Back to Top

This training does not replace graduate coursework. The purpose of the training is to provide consistency across the state and to make sure that expectations for ratings are clear. This training is required so that common understanding across evaluation systems occurs.

Back to Top

The training uses intermediate grade level teachers so that all evaluators can apply the information in the training. If high school only teachers were shown in the training, this may not meet the needs of the primary grade evaluator. Likewise, if a primary grade teacher video was used, it would not meet the needs of a secondary evaluator. The videos chosen allow the evaluators to focus on using the tools of the evaluation instrument in order to build understanding of the system. Once the evaluator has completed the training, there are practice videos and online assessment videos for various grade levels available on the online portal. The evaluator may choose to view any grade level band they wish at that time.

Back to Top

The training is emphasizing the importance of capturing objective evidence during observations. Scripting is a tool used by the evaluator to capture evidence. This evidence is needed and important to use when assigning a rating to the observation. As the evaluator becomes more familiar with the evaluation system, the evaluator will likely develop his/her own methods for collecting evidence during the observation.

Back to Top