Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 2024

Leader and Educator

Evaluation and Sup-

port Plans 2023

Connecticut State Department of

Education

Connecticut

Leader and Educator

Evaluation and

Support Plans 2024

Connecticut State

Department of Education

Connecticut

Leader and Educator Evaluation

and Support Plans 2024

State of Connecticut

Ned Lamont, Governor

Connecticut State Department of Education

Charlene Russell-Tucker, Commissioner

Charles Hewes, Deputy Commissioner

Sinthia Sone-Moyano, Deputy Commissioner

State Board of Education

Karen DuBois-Walton, Chair

Erin D. Benham, Vice Chair

Bonnie E. Burr

Terrence Cheng, Ex Ocio

Erik M. Clemons

Connor Cowan, Student Member

Elwood Exley, Jr.

Yasmeen Galal, Student Member

Donald F. Harris, Jr.

Patricia Keavney-Maruca, Ex Ocio

Martha Paluch Prou

Malia K. Sieve

Allan B. Taylor

Kelli-Marie Vallieres, Ex Ocio

Seth D. Zimmerman

Acknowledgments

Educator Evaluation and Support Council:

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education

of Connecticut (AACTE-CT)

American Federation of Teachers of Connecticut (AFT-CT)

Connecticut Association of Boards of Education (CABE)

Connecticut Association of Public School Superintendents

(CAPSS)

Connecticut Association of Schools (CAS)

Connecticut Education Association (CEA)

Connecticut Association of School Administrators (CASA)

Connecticut Federation of School Administrators (CFSA)

Increasing Educator Diversity (IED) Policy Oversight Council

Regional Educational Service Center (RESC) Alliance

Special recognition to the Connecticut State Department

of Education Talent Oce sta for their work with

the Educator Evaluation and Support Council in the

development of these plans.

The Connecticut State Department of Education is committed to a policy of equal opportunity/armative action for all qualiﬁed

persons. The Connecticut Department of Education does not discriminate in any employment practice, education program, or

educational activity on the basis of race; color; religious creed; age; sex; pregnancy; sexual orientation; workplace hazards to

reproductive systems, gender identity or expression; marital status; national origin; ancestry; retaliation for previously opposed

discrimination or coercion, intellectual disability; genetic information; learning disability; physical disability (including, but not

limited to, blindness); mental disability (past/present history thereof); military or veteran status; status as a victim of domestic

violence; or criminal record in state employment, unless there is a bona ﬁde occupational qualiﬁcation excluding persons in any

of the aforementioned protected classes. Inquiries regarding the Connecticut State Department of Education’s nondiscrimination

policies should be directed to: Attorney Louis Todisco, Connecticut State Department of Education, by mail 450 Columbus Blvd.,

Hartford, CT 06103-1841; by telephone 860-713-6594; or by email at louis.todisco@ct.gov.

Connecticut Leader and Educator Evaluation and Support Plans 2024i

Contents

Leader Evaluation and Support Plan

Vision .................................................................................................................................................................................... 3

The Purpose of this Model Guide ................................................................................................................................ 3

Guiding Principles ............................................................................................................................................................. 3

Connecticut Guidelines for Educator and Leader Evaluation and Support 2023 Components:

Reimagining Educator and Leader Evaluation and Support ............................................................................... 4

Standards and Criteria for Leaders ........................................................................................................................ 4

Professional Learning Standards and Structures ................................................................................................ 5

The Continuous Learning Process: Goal Setting, Professional Practice, and

Evaluator/Observer/ Stakeholder Feedback and Engagement ..................................................................... 5

Growth Criteria ............................................................................................................................................................ 10

Tiered Support and Corrective Support Planning ............................................................................................. 10

Corrective Support Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 10

Dispute Resolution ...................................................................................................................................................... 11

The Role of the Professional Development and Evaluation Committee (PDEC) ........................................ 12

Local and State Reporting ....................................................................................................................................... 13

Technical Assistance and Professional Learning .................................................................................................. 13

Appendices — Leader: Information and Resources to Support Eective Implementation ..................... 14

Appendix A: Sample Reﬂection Questions – Leader ....................................................................................... 15

Appendix B: Deﬁnition of Cohorts – Leader ....................................................................................................... 17

Appendix C: Growth Criteria and Sources of Evidence – Leader ................................................................. 18

Appendix D: General Glossary – Leader ............................................................................................................. 19

Appendix E: Glossary of Professional Learning Opportunities – Leader ................................................... 23

Appendix F: Continuous Learning Process – Leader ...................................................................................... 25

Appendix G: Observation/Site Visit Forms – Leader ....................................................................................... 30

Appendix H: Sample Corrective Support Plan – Leader ................................................................................ 34

Educator Evaluation and Support Plan

Vision .................................................................................................................................................................................. 38

The Purpose of this Model Guide .............................................................................................................................. 38

Guiding Principles ........................................................................................................................................................... 38

Connecticut Guidelines for Educator and Leader Evaluation and Support 2023 Components:

Reimagining Educator and Leader Evaluation and Support ............................................................................. 39

Standards and Criteria for Educators .................................................................................................................. 39

Professional Learning Standards and Structures ............................................................................................. 40

The Continuous Learning Process: Goal Setting, Professional Practice and

Evaluator/Observer/ Stakeholder Feedback and Engagement ................................................................... 40

Connecticut Leader and Educator Evaluation and Support Plans 2024ii

Growth Criteria ........................................................................................................................................................... 45

Tiered Support ........................................................................................................................................................... 45

Corrective Support Plan .......................................................................................................................................... 45

Dispute Resolution .................................................................................................................................................... 46

The Role of the Professional Development and Evaluation Committee (PDEC) ....................................... 47

Local and State Reporting ...................................................................................................................................... 48

Technical Assistance and Professional Learning ................................................................................................. 48

Appendices — Educator: Information and Resources to Support Eective Implementation ................ 49

Appendix I: Sample Reﬂection Questions – Educator .................................................................................... 50

Appendix J: Deﬁnition of Cohorts – Educator ................................................................................................... 52

Appendix K: Growth Criteria and Sources of Evidence – Educator ............................................................ 53

Appendix L: General Glossary – Educator ......................................................................................................... 54

Appendix M: Glossary of Professional Learning Opportunities – Educator .............................................. 58

Appendix N: Continuous Learning Process – Educator ................................................................................. 60

Appendix O: Observation Forms – Educator .................................................................................................... 65

Appendix P: Sample Corrective Support Plan – Educator ............................................................................. 69

Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................................................... 71

Leader Evaluation and Support Plan

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20242

Insert Date District Name, Logo and Members

Date Logo

District Board of Education Members District PDEC Members

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20243

Vision

All Connecticut educators and leaders have the opportunity for continuous learning and feedback, to

develop and grow, both individually and collectively, through the educator and leader evaluation and

support system so that all Connecticut students experience growth and success.

The Purpose of this Model Guide

The Connecticut (CT) Model Evaluation and Support Plan is designed to support a comprehensive

educator and leader evaluation system adopted by the Connecticut State Board of Education in concert

with a wide range of stakeholders and pursuant to educator evaluation regulations. Connecticut General

Statutes 10-151b requires that “the superintendent of each local or regional board of education shall

annually evaluate or cause to be evaluated each teacher.”

The CT Model Evaluation and Support Plan includes tools, guidance, and rubrics to support the evalu-

ation of all educators and leaders. Professional Development and Evaluation Committees (PDECs) can

adopt the model plan, adapt the model plan, or revise their own evaluation system to align with the CT

Guidelines for Educator and Leader Evaluation and Support 2023. It is the intent that this model can

serve as a foundation of evaluation and support practice aligned to the 2023 guidelines beginning in the

initial year of implementation (2024-25) allowing for PDECs to develop an action plan from self-assess-

ment toward best practices and innovation that will evolve over time. This plan will:

• introduce key components of the leader evaluation framework and the requirements set forth in

the regulations;

• outline speciﬁc action steps, forms, and tools from the Model Evaluation and Support Plan spe-

ciﬁc to the evaluation of leaders; and

• highlight considerations, conditions, and systems necessary for eective implementation at the

school/district level.

Guiding Principles

The transformational design of the leader evaluation and support model is grounded in six guiding princi-

ples that use high quality professional learning to advance leader practice, educator practice, and stu-

dent learning, growth, and achievement.

• Allow for dierentiation of roles (for example for leaders: assistant superintendents, director

of pupil services, various leaders in central oce, principal, assistant principal; or for educators:

teachers, counselors, instructional coaches, student support sta).

• Simplify and reduce the burden (eliminate technical challenges, paperwork, steps).

• Focus on things that matter (identify high leverage goal focus areas).

• Connect to best practices aimed at the development of the whole child (including, but not

limited to, academic, social, emotional, and physical development).

• Focus on leader growth and agency (meaningfully engage professionals by focusing on growth

and practice in partnership with others aligned to a strategic focus).

• Meaningful connections to professional learning (provide multiple pathways for participants to

improve their own practice in a way that is meaningful and impactful).

• Speciﬁc, timely, accurate, actionable, and reciprocal feedback.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20244

Connecticut Guidelines for Educator and Leader Evaluation and

Support 2023 Components: Reimagining Educator and Leader

Evaluation and Support

The design of the Connecticut Guidelines for Educator Evaluation and Support 2023 (CT Guidelines

2023) are representative of research-based eective practice and include six elements.

• Standards and criteria

• Goal setting process

• Professional practice and educator growth

• Evaluator/observer/stakeholder feedback and engagement

• Process elements

• Dispute resolution

The combined vision, guiding principles, and overall framework for educators and leaders’ evaluation

and support describe a systematic process of continuous improvement and professional learning leading

to high quality professional practice and improved outcomes for students. While components are similar

for educators and leaders, there are components speciﬁc to educators and to leaders, resulting in two

sections with similar processes within a district’s evaluation and support system.

Standards and Criteria for Leaders

One of the primary goals of the leader evaluation and support system is to ensure the growth and de-

velopment of their sta so they in turn may develop and enhance personal and professional strengths to

meet the needs of all the students they serve. Leader practice discussions are based on a set of national

or state performance standards set by professional organizations and mutually agreed upon by the PDEC.

The following professional practice standards ground this model’s framework. It is recommended that

each PDEC create a process to review the standards and ensure a rubric accompanies the standards.

While a rubric serves as support for self-evaluation, dialogue, and feedback, it is recommended that a

single point rubric is used to provide focus for high leverage goal(s) setting and professional learning.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20245

Leader

1. Professional Standards for School Leaders (PSEL)

2. Learning Forward’s Professional Learning Standards (2022)

Professional Learning Standards and Structures

Professional learning is essential to the CT Guidelines 2023 model. Learning Forward Professional

Learning Standards 2022, serve as a useful tool to illustrate how professional learning can deepen

educator and leader knowledge, promote reﬂection, and maximize leader impact. As a tool, the profes-

sional learning standards help educators and leaders intentionally design learning, address content, and

consider how to accomplish the expected learning transformation desired. Together the professional

standards for leaders, educators and professional learning serve as the three visions that work together

to lay the foundation for meaningful feedback and continuous learning.

The Continuous Learning Process: Goal Setting, Professional Practice, and

Evaluator/Observer/ Stakeholder Feedback and Engagement

The evaluation and support model is designed as a continuous learning process. The goal of the con-

tinuous learning process is to provide leaders with continuous learning opportunities for professional

growth through self-directed analysis and reﬂection, planning, implementation, and collaboration. Reg-

ular dialogue and feedback, coupled with the opportunity to reﬂect on and advance practice, drive the

continuous learning process. The process provides an opportunity for leaders to address organizational

system and structure questions. In this process, the leader serves as the learner who actively engages

in and directs their learning and feedback. The evaluator serves as a learning partner who supports the

leader through the learning and growth process. Within the process, the leader collaborates and serves

as a reﬂective practitioner to determine mutually agreed upon leader goal(s), professional practice and

leader growth, and observation/site visit and feedback focus.

Within the continuous learning process, leaders check in with their evaluator a minimum of three times

a year (fall goal setting, midyear check-in, and end-of-year reﬂection) to provide an opportunity for a

reciprocal discussion of what is happening in the school or district, a sharing of evidence of professional

learning and impact on growth, and identiﬁcation of needs and mutually agreed upon next steps. The

meetings are approached in a spirit of continuous improvement, reﬂection, and collaboration. Dialogue is

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20246

important, however, there must be a balance of written and verbal feedback provided between check-ins

based on observations/site visits, reviews of practice, and artifacts as required by the district plan, which

must be provided periodically. Eective feedback is tied to standards and identiﬁes strengths and areas

of focus for growth.

At the core, educators and students learn best when educational leaders foster safe, caring, supportive

learning communities, and promote rigorous curricula and instructional and assessment systems. This

work requires educational leaders to build and strengthen a network of organizational supports — the

professional capacity of teachers and sta; the professional community in which they learn and work;

family and community engagement; and eective, ecient management and operations of the school/

district. In all their work, educational leaders are driven by the district/school’s mission, vision, and por-

trait of a graduate. They are called to act ethically and with professional integrity, and they promote equi-

ty and cultural responsiveness. Finally, educational leaders believe their district/schools, educators, and

they themselves, can continuously grow. They are tenacious change agents who model transformational

leadership (adapted from PSEL Standards).

The graphic below, adapted from Learning Forward’s Standards for Professional Learning 2022, shows

the relationship between professional learning for leaders, educators, and students.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20247

Below is a graphic with the associated steps, reﬂections, and linked resources

associated with each step of the process to assist leaders and evaluators through the

process. All leaders are assigned a primary evaluator (092 or 093).

Leader Continuous Learning Process

Evaluation Orientation

Completed prior to the start of the Continuous Learning Process

Site Visit/

Observation

of professional

practice,

reﬂection and

feedback

Goal

Setting

Completed by

November 1

Organizational

Health

Mid-Year

Check-in

Completed by

March 1

Site Visit/

Observation

of professional

practice,

reﬂection and

feedback

End-of-Year Reﬂection

Completed by June 30

Goal Setting

Completed by November 

Beginning of the Year Goal(s)

and Planning

• Self reﬂect

• Review evidence

Goal(s), Rationale, Alignment,

and Professional Learning Plan

• Draft goal(s), rationale,

alignment, professional

learning plan

Goal Setting Conference

• Mutually agree on -, -, or

-year goal(s)

• Determine individual or group

goal(s)

• Mutually agree on professional

learning needs and support

Mid-year Check-in

Completed by March 

Mid-Year Check-in: Reﬂection,

Adjustments, and Next Steps

• Review & discuss currently

collected evidence towards

goal(s) and of practice

• Review professional learning,

evidence, and impact on

organization health, educator

and student learning, growth

and achievement

Mid-Year Conference

• Discuss evidence, reﬂection,

and feedback from evaluator

• Adjust and revise as needed

End-of-Year Reﬂection

Completed by June 

End-of-Year Reﬂection and

Feedback Process

• Self-reﬂection: Review

& discuss professional

learning, evidence of impact

on organizational health,

educator and student learning,

growth and achievement

End-of-Year Conference/

Summative Feedback and

Growth Criteria

• Evaluator provides written

summative feedback and

guides next steps

• Annual Summary sign-o

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20248

Orientation on the leader evaluation and support process shall take place prior to the start of the process,

no later than October 15. The orientation shall include:

• High leverage goal setting and professional learning plans

• Use of rubrics and standards

• Observation of practice/site visits

• Tiered supports

• Dispute resolution

Annual training for evaluators as required by C.G.S. 10-151b will include engaging in and providing

reciprocal feedback tied to standards and evidence of professional practice.

Goal(s) Setting (Completed by November 1)

Leaders and their evaluators mutually agree upon a high leverage professional practice one-, two-

, or three-year goal(s) and develop a plan for professional learning and support that is consistent with

their professional status and goals (see appendix B). Goals should always be connected to standards

recommended by the PDEC and approved by the local board of education.

This is a process of feedback, reﬂection, goal setting, opportunities for professional learning, observations by

an evaluator, and collection of multiple measures of leader growth, educator growth, and impact on student

learning, growth, and achievement. Within this process, the leader collaborates in a learning partnership with

their evaluator. The continuous learning process begins with dialogue around leaders’ self-reﬂection (based on

review of evidence and practice) to the identiﬁed rubric while collecting and analyzing evidence to identify and

support an area for leader practice, educator and student outcomes, and organizational growth.

The leader will:

• Self-assess using the identiﬁed rubric.

• Identify a high leverage goal that impacts leadership practice and educator and organizational growth.

• Identify an individual or a collaborative goal.

• Develop a proposed professional learning plan to build knowledge and skill.

The leader shares the above with their evaluator during an initial goal setting conference that consists of dia-

logue around the proposed goal(s) and professional learning plan. During this conference, reciprocal dialogue

between the evaluator and leader takes place to reﬁne the proposed goal and professional learning plan as

needed. In partnership, the leader and evaluator come to mutual agreement on the goal(s), multiple measures

of evidence, professional learning plan, and support to drive progress toward goal attainment.

Midyear Check-in (Completed by March 1):

The midyear check-in provides an opportunity for the leader to self-reﬂect and review multiple and

varied qualitative and quantitative indicators of evidence of impact on professional leadership practice;

organizational growth; educator growth; and impact on student learning, growth, and achievement.

Through reciprocal dialogue, the evaluator provides speciﬁc feedback based on evidence, standards,

and the leader’s goal(s). This is an overview of where the leader is in the process and what steps need

to be taken to assist in continuous learning. During this check-in, revisions to the goal or learning plan,

direction to tiered support, and next steps are documented.

End-of-Year Reﬂection/Summative Review (Completed by June 30)

End-of-year reﬂection provides an opportunity for the leader and evaluator to engage in reciprocal dialogue,

similar to the midyear check-in, to discuss progress toward the leader’s goal(s); professional learning as it re-

lates to the leader’s professional growth and professional practice; and impact on student learning, growth,

and achievement as evidenced by multiple and varied qualitative and quantitative indicators of evidence. A

written end-of-year summary includes the impact on leader practice and growth; possible next steps for the

upcoming year; any concerns with the continuous learning process; new learning; and highlights of impact

on educators, students, and school community; and completion of current goal or rationale for continuing

the goal the following year. Analysis of evidence from the end-of-year summary is important for the leader’s

subsequent self-assessment and goal setting revisions or new goal(s).

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 20249

This summary is based upon the mutually agreed upon goal(s) and identiﬁed standards and will make a

distinction regarding the leader’s successful completion of the professional learning process.

All forms for documentation are hyperlinked within the graphic of the continuous learning process, with

further detail for each step.

Professional Practice and Leader Growth

The implementation of the continuous learning process is shared between the leader and evaluator. For

the duration of the learning process, leaders pursue learning and attainment of their goal(s), collecting

evidence of practice related to their high leverage professional learning goal. Evaluators will provide

leaders with feedback from observations of professional practice/site visits and dialogue, ensure timely

access to support and collect evidence of leader performance and practice toward goal(s) through multi-

ple sources, including site visits, student and sta feedback, or family engagement (see appendix B).

Observation of Professional Practice/Site Visits and Feedback

Observation of professional practice or site visits occur throughout the continuous learning process.

The identiﬁed high leverage goal(s) provides a focus for strategic evidence collection and feedback.

Evaluators provide leaders with feedback based on evidence, standards, and the educator’s goal(s);

ensure timely access to planned support(s); and collect evidence of leader practice and progress toward

goal(s) through multiple sources of evidence including site visits, feedback, written or verbal, that is

provided within ﬁve school days.

“Feedback is deﬁned as a dynamic, dialogic process that uses evidence to engage a learner, internally or

with a learning partner, in constructing knowledge about practice and self. Its primary purpose is learning

that guides change” (Killion, 2019).

Quality feedback:

• Is based on multiple and varied quantitative and qualitative indicators of evidence, standards,

and goal(s)

• Is personalized

• Is learning-focused or growth-oriented

• Provides questions for reﬂection to reﬁne or revise strategies

• Expands understanding of one’s experiences and their implications for future experiences

• Provides reﬂective opportunities to rework, reﬁne, and reorder knowledge, attitudes, skills,

and/or practices

• Is timely, frequent, and reciprocal

Deﬁnition of Cohorts

Cohort 1

Who:

• New to leadership role (e.g., principal from

assistant principal etc.; ﬁrst three years)

• New to LEA (ﬁrst three years)

What:

• Three observations of professional practice

and/or site visits

• Feedback written and verbal within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of professional

practice and/or site visits as mutually agreed

upon or deemed necessary

Cohort 2

Who:

• Leaders who have successfully completed

Cohort 1 in their current LEA

What:

• Two observations of professional practice

and/or site visits

• Feedback written and verbal within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of professional

practice and/or site visits as mutually agreed

upon or deemed necessary

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202410

Growth Criteria

Successful completion of the learning process is determined through multiple forms of evidence and

reﬂection that is demonstrated by:

• Reﬂection supported with evidence of the impact of the leader’s new learning on their practice/goal

• The impact the leader’s new learning and practice had on the leader’s practice, organizational

growth, educator growth, and student outcomes.

• Next steps

See appendix C for further detail.

Tiered Support and Corrective Support Planning

All leaders require access to high-quality, targeted professional learning support to improve practice over

time. Leaders and their evaluators thoughtfully consider and apply three tiers of support, as appropriate,

with an evaluation process. All three tiers of support must be implemented prior to the development of a

Corrective Support Plan.

A pattern of persistent lack of growth and reﬂection or resistance to growth-oriented feedback should lead

to advancing levels of support with a deﬁned process for placing a leader on a Corrective Support Plan

with indicators of success for transitioning out of it. Evaluators must utilize and document all three tiers of

support prior to the development of a Corrective Support Plan. The Corrective Support Plan shall be devel-

oped in consultation with the evaluator, leader and their exclusive bargaining representative if applicable.

Tier 1

It is the expectation that all leaders consistently access opportunities for professional growth within their

district. Tier 1 supports are broadly accessible professional learning opportunities for all, inclusive of, but

not limited to, collegial conversations, school site visits, available district resources (e.g., books, articles,

videos, etc.), formal professional learning opportunities developed and designed by your district PDEC

and other leader supports (e.g., leadership coaching). These resources should be identiﬁed through a

goal setting process by mutual agreement.

Tier 2

In addition to Tier 1, Tier 2 supports are more intensive in duration, frequency, and focus (e.g.,

observation of speciﬁc leadership practices, etc.) that can be either suggested by the leader and/or

recommended by an evaluator.

Tier 3

In addition to Tier 1 and Tier 2, Tier 3 supports are responsive to unresolved, previously discussed

concerns that are collaboratively discussed and may be assigned by an evaluator. Tier 3 supports have

clearly articulated areas of focus, duration of time, and criteria for success, and may include a decision to

move to a Corrective Support Plan. Tier 3 supports shall be developed in consultation with the evaluator,

leader and their exclusive bargaining representative for certiﬁed leaders chosen pursuant to C.G.S. §10-

153b. The start date and duration of time an educator is receiving this level of support should be clearly

documented (see appendix H).

Corrective Support Plan

A pattern of persistent lack of growth and reﬂection or resistance to growth-oriented feedback should

lead to advancing levels of support with a deﬁned process for placing a leader on a Corrective Support

Plan with indicators of success for transitioning out of it. Evaluators must utilize and document all three

tiers of support prior to the development of a Corrective Support Plan. The Corrective Support Plan shall

be developed in consultation with the evaluator, leader and their exclusive bargaining representative for

certiﬁed leaders chosen pursuant to C.G.S. §10-153b.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202411

The Corrective Support Plan must contain:

• clear objectives speciﬁc to the well documented area of concern;

• resources, support, and interventions to address the area of concern;

• timeframes for implementing the resources, support, and interventions; and

• supportive actions from the evaluator.

At the conclusion of the Corrective Support Plan period, a number of outcomes are possible as

determined in consultation with the evaluator, leader and bargaining unit representative.

See appendix H for a Corrective Support Plan form and example.

Dispute Resolution

The purpose of the dispute resolution process is to secure at the lowest possible administrative level eq-

uitable solutions to disagreements, which from time to time may arise related to the evaluation process.

The right of appeal is available to all in the evaluation and support system. As our evaluation and support

system is designed to ensure continuous, constructive and cooperative processes among professional

educators, educators/leaders and their evaluators are encouraged to resolve disagreements informally.

Ultimately, should a leader disagree with the evaluator’s assessment and feedback, the parties are

encouraged to discuss these dierences and seek common understanding of the issues. As a result

of these discussions, the evaluator may choose to adjust the report but is not obligated to do so. The

leader being evaluated has the right to provide a statement identifying areas of concern with the goals/

objectives, evaluation period, feedback, and/or professional development plan, which may include the

individual professional learning plan or a Corrective Support Plan.

Any such matters will be handled as expeditiously as possible, and in no instance will a decision exceed

thirty (30) workdays from the date the leader initiated the dispute resolution process. Conﬁdentiality

throughout the resolution process shall be conducted in accordance with the law.

Process

The leader being evaluated shall be entitled to collective bargaining representation at all levels of the

process.

1. Within three school days of articulating the dispute in writing to his/her/their evaluator, the leader

being evaluated and the evaluator will meet with the objective of resolving the matter informally.

2. If there has been no resolution, the individual may choose to continue the dispute resolution

process in writing to the superintendent or designee within three workdays of the meeting with

his/her/their evaluator (step 1). The leader being evaluated may choose between two options.

a. Option 1:

The issue in dispute may be referred for resolution to a subcommittee of the Professional

Development and Evaluation Committee (PDEC), which will serve as a neutral party.* The

superintendent or designee and the respective collective bargaining unit for the district

may each select one representative from the PDEC to constitute this subcommittee, as

well as a neutral party as mutually agreed upon between the superintendent and the

collective bargaining unit. It is the role of the subcommittee to determine the resolution

of the dispute and to identify any actions to be taken moving forward and to notify the

superintendent of the decision.

*In the instance that a district is too small to have a full PDEC from which to select three

individuals, the superintendent and leader may select three mutually agreed upon

persons to serve as the neutral party for resolving the dispute. Each individual must be a

Connecticut certiﬁed leader and may or may not be from within the district.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202412

b. Option 2:

The leader being evaluated requests that the superintendent or designee solely arbitrate

the issue in dispute. In this case, the superintendent will review all applicable documenta-

tion and meet with both parties (evaluator and leader being evaluated) as soon as possi-

ble, but no longer than ﬁve school days from the date of the written communication to the

superintendent. The superintendent will act as arbitrator and make a ﬁnal decision, which

shall be binding.

Time Limits

1. Since it is important that appeals be processed as rapidly as possible, the number of days indi-

cated within this plan shall be considered maximum. The time limits speciﬁed may be extended

by written agreement of both parties.

2. Days shall mean workdays. Both parties may agree, however, to meet during breaks at mutually

agreed upon times.

3. The leader being evaluated must initiate the appeals procedure within ﬁve workdays of the

scheduled meeting in which the feedback was presented. If no written initiation of a dispute is

received by the evaluator within ﬁve workdays, the leader shall be considered to have waived

the right of appeal.

4. The leader being evaluated must initiate each level of the appeal process within the number of

days indicated. The absence of a written appeal at any subsequent level shall be considered as

waiving the right to appeal further.

The Role of the Professional Development and Evaluation

Committee (PDEC)

The PDEC serves as the collaborative decision maker using the consensus protocol to create, revise, and

monitor the evaluation and support model, as well as the professional learning plan to propose to the

local board of education for mutual agreement.

Pursuant to Connecticut General Statute 10-220a and Public Act 23-159 Section 11(b)(3), each local and

regional board of education must establish a professional development and evaluation committee to

include at least one teacher and one administrator, selected by the exclusive bargaining representative

for certiﬁed employees, at least one paraeducator selected by their exclusive bargaining representative,

and other personnel as the local board deems appropriate.It is vital that individuals selected as delegates

for administrators, teachers, paraeducators, and other school personnel are representative of the various

classiﬁcations within the groups (see examples below).

Other School Personnel Educator Leader

• Attendance counselor

• Paraeducator (required)

• Behavior technician

• Parent and family liaison

• Social emotional support

sta

• Classroom teacher

• CTE teacher

• Library media specialist

• Reading interventionist

• Instructional coach

• Special education teacher

• Social worker

• School psychologist

• Speech pathologist

• Principal

• Assistant principal

• TESOL supervisor

• Special education supervisor

• Assistant superintendent

• Curriculum coordinator

• Talent development super-

visor

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202413

The duties of PDECs shall include, but are not limited to,

• participation in the development or adoption of a teacher evaluation and support program for

the district, pursuant to section 10-151b;

• the development, evaluation, and annual updating of a comprehensive local professional

development plan for certiﬁed employees of the district; and

• the development and annual updating of a comprehensive local professional development plan

for paraeducators of the district.

The educator and leader evaluation and support program shall be developed through mutual agreement

between the local or regional board of education and the PDEC. If the local or regional board of

education and the PDEC are unable to come to mutual agreement, they shall consider the state

model evaluation and support plan adopted by the State Board of Education and may, through mutual

agreement, adopt such model educator and leader evaluation and support programs.

If the local or regional board of education and the PDEC are unable to mutually agree on the adoption of

the State Board of Education’s model program, then the local or regional board of education shall adopt

and implement an educator and leader evaluation and support program developed by such board, pro-

vided that the program is consistent with the guidelines adopted by the State Board of Education.

Local and State Reporting

The superintendent shall report:

1. the status of teacher evaluations to the local or regional board of education on or before June 1

of each year; and

2. the status of the implementation of the teacher evaluation and support program, including the

frequency of evaluations, the number of teachers who have not been evaluated, and other

requirements as determined by the Department of Education, to the Commissioner of Education

on or before September 15 of each year.

For purposes of this section, the term “teacher” shall include each professional employee of a board of

education, below the rank of superintendent, who holds a certiﬁcate or permit issued by the State Board

of Education.

Technical Assistance and Professional Learning

The CSDE works closely with schools and districts to learn what support is most needed for eective

implementation of the CT Guidelines 2023 framework. To that end, the CSDE continues to develop

resources in partnership with the six regional educational service centers, ACES, CES, CREC,

EASTCONN, EdAdvance, and LEARN along with CAS and feedback from districts. You are encouraged to

reach out for technical assistance and professional support during the transition to this new framework.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202414

Appendices — Leader:

Information and Resources to Support Eective Implementation

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202415

Appendix A: Sample Reﬂection Questions – Leader

Self-Reﬂection Sample Questions

• Thinking about the success and challenges you may have encountered last year, or at the start

of this year, what questions do you have about leadership and organizational well-being? What

new learning might you want to explore to inform your understanding of these questions and

professional leadership practice?

• In reviewing the rubric, what areas emerge as opportunities for your professional learning and

practice?

• Based on your current organization’s strengths and needs, and/or knowledge of district/school/

program goals, what new learning might you explore to address the needs?

• Based on knowledge of your students/adult learners, and/or knowledge of school/program

goals, are there any new strategies or methods you’d like to explore and implement this year?

• How do you see yourself contributing to the school or district’s mission, vision, and/or Portrait of

a Graduate and what strategies can you learn more about to support that focus?

• What are you considering for your learning goal?

• What will it look like when you achieve your goal?

Professional Learning and Action Questions

Indicators of success

• What question will you focus on to address your goals?

• What are the criteria for an accomplished practice?

• How do you plan to collect and analyze evidence to assess progress toward your goals?

• What research/professional readings might you explore to support your professional learning

and achieve your goal?

• What speciﬁc professional learning might you need to achieve your goal?

• What support might you need from your colleagues, supervisor, others? How frequently?

• How might you apply your learning to practice? How often?

Determine Evidence

• What evidence might you collect and analyze to understand progress toward your goal?

Quantitative or qualitative or both?

• What ways would you like me as your evaluator to collect data/evidence for feedback?

• From how many dierent situations should we examine data/evidence?

• What are the advantages and disadvantages of the identiﬁed evidence?

• How will the data help us to analyze your practice?

• What is your timeline for collecting this evidence and measuring impact?

• What are the anticipated challenges or obstacles, and how do you plan to address them?

• How might you communicate/share your professional learning to your colleagues or families?

• What opportunities for professional learning do you believe would be beneﬁcial for your growth

as an educator?

• In what ways can we encourage collaboration and communication among colleagues to

promote a culture of sharing best practices?

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202416

Analysis of Evidence

• What do you observe in your evidence?

• What patterns, themes, or outliers do you notice?

• What does the evidence say about how you are doing in relation to your goal and indicators of

success?

• Based on the evidence and your practice overall, what are your strengths?

• In what aspect do you want to continue to grow or reﬁne your knowledge, skill, practice?

Learning Reﬂection and Next Steps

• What is clear to you now?

• What are you learning?

• What do you understand now that you didn’t understand as clearly before?

• How will this learning inﬂuence future actions?

• What is a single sentence conclusion that represents your learning?

• Under what circumstance might this conclusion not be true?

• What are ways you continue to reﬁne your practice?

• What more do you want to learn and practice?

• How might you accomplish that? What is your next plan?

• What resources and support do you want or need?

• Once learning has been implemented: What eect did the learning have on practice, students?

Reﬂect on the Feedback Process

• In what ways did my engagement with you support your learning?

• What did I do as a learning partner that helped you as a learner and how did it help?

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202417

Appendix B: Deﬁnition of Cohorts – Leader

Deﬁnition of Cohorts

Cohort 1

Who:

• New to leadership role (e.g., principal from

assistant principal etc.; ﬁrst three years)

• New to LEA (ﬁrst three years)

What:

• Three observations of professional prac-

tice and/or site visits

• Feedback written and verbal within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of profession-

al practice and/or site visits as mutually

agreed upon or deemed necessary

Cohort 2

Who:

• Leaders who have successfully completed

Cohort 1 in their current LEA

What:

• Two observations of professional practice

and/or site visits

• Feedback written and verbal within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of professional

practice and/or site visits as mutually

agreed upon or deemed necessary

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202418

Appendix C: Growth Criteria and Sources of Evidence – Leader

Growth Criteria

Development of New Learning and Impact

on Practice

• The leader can demonstrate how they

developed new learning within the

continuous learning process through

multiple sources (e.g., observational

feedback, data, walkthroughs, etc.) and

how they used their new learning to

improve practice.

Impact on the Organization

• The leader can demonstrate how they

positively impacted the organizational

health and can articulate connections/

rationale between the improved learning

and their own changes in practice.

Impact on Community

• The leader can demonstrate how they

worked eectively with colleagues/

families/community.

Possible Sources of Evidence

• Information from site visits

• Strategic plans

• Learning walk/instructional rounds

• Self-reﬂection (e.g., journals, learning logs)

• Leader created professional learning

materials

• Operational artifacts (e.g., schedules,

procedural revisions)

• Educator learning outcomes

• Policy updates

• Community communications

• Constituent feedback

• Program development and implementation

• Quantitative measure of whole child

development (including, but not limited to,

academic, social, emotional, and physical

development)

• Systems and structures

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202419

Appendix D: General Glossary – Leader

consensus protocol: Consensus decision-making is a creative and dynamic way of reaching agreement

in a group. Instead of simply voting for an item and having the majority getting their way, a consensus

group is committed to ﬁnding solutions that everyone actively supports — or at least can live with.

By deﬁnition, in consensus no decision is made against the will of an individual or a minority. If signiﬁcant

concerns remain unresolved, a proposal can be blocked and prevented from going ahead. This means

that the whole group has to work hard to ﬁnd win-win solutions that address everyone’s needs.

From Consensus decision making. Seeds for Change. (n.d.).

https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus

Corrective Support Plan: A pattern of persistent lack of growth and reﬂection or resistance to growth-

oriented feedback should lead to advancing levels of support with a deﬁned process for placing an

educator on a Corrective Support Plan with indicators of success for transitioning out of it. The Corrective

Support Plan shall be developed in consultation with the educator and their exclusive bargaining

representative for certiﬁed teachers chosen pursuant to C.G.S. §10-153b. Corrective Support Plans

shall include clear objectives speciﬁc to the well documented area of concern; resources, support, and

interventions to address the area of concern; timeframes for implementing the resources, support, and

interventions; supportive actions from the evaluator; and outcomes or further action as determined in

consultation with the evaluator, leader, and bargaining unit representative.

check-ins: Formal or informal meetings or conferences held in the spirit of collaboration between the

leader and evaluator and to engage in reciprocal dialogue regarding what is happening in one’s practice

at that moment in time including goal(s), professional learning, multiple and varied forms of quantitative

and qualitative evidence, adjustments, and next steps (i.e., classroom/school/building or district). During

each school year, a minimum of three check-ins provide an opportunity for discussions to set and adjust

goals, celebrate growth and positive impact, identify needs, assess and discuss evidence and learning,

and next steps in one’s learning.

community: A school community typically refers to the localized group of students, educators, parents,

and sta within a speciﬁc school, fostering a sense of belonging and shared objectives within that school.

A district community encompasses a broader scope, involving multiple schools within a school district,

and often includes administrators, teachers, students, and families collaborating across various

educational schools and programs within that district. The district community addresses overarching

educational policies, resource allocation, and coordination among multiple schools and programs to

promote consistent and eective education across a larger administrative unit.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202420

continuous learning process: The continuous learning process is a cycle of feedback, reﬂection, goal

setting, opportunities for professional learning, feedback from observations (peers or evaluators), and a

collection of multiple measures of evidence. There are multiple models of continuous learning including,

but not limited to:

• The Supporting Teacher Eectiveness Project (STEP)

• Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 5-Step Cycle and Model

System for Educator Evaluation

• Ohio Department of Education – Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (OTES 2.0) Framework

• Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model

• Connecticut TEAM Process (CAPA)

dispute resolution: A process for resolving disputes in cases where the evaluator and leader being

evaluated cannot agree on goals/objectives, the evaluation period, feedback, or the professional

learning plan or other outcomes of the evaluation process.

evidence: Evidence collected and presented as a part of the evaluation system may include (but is not

limited to) artifacts, observations of practice, site visit feedback, and reﬂections of the leader impact on

organizational health, educator growth, and student learning, growth, and achievement as part of the

leader feedback process.

feedback: “Feedback is deﬁned as a dynamic, dialogic process that uses evidence to engage a learner,

internally or with a learning partner, in constructing knowledge about practice and self. Its primary

purpose is learning that guides change” (Killion, 2019).

Quality feedback:

• Is based on multiple and varied quantitative and qualitative indicators of evidence, standards,

and goal(s)

• Is personalized

• Is learning-focused or growth-oriented

• Provides questions for reﬂection to reﬁne or revise strategies

• Expands understanding of one’s experiences and their implications for future experiences

• Provides reﬂective opportunities to rework, reﬁne, and reorder knowledge, attitudes, skills, and/

or practices

• Is timely, frequent, and reciprocal

From Killion, J. (2019). The feedback process: Transforming Feedback for Professional Learning.

Learning Forward.

formal observations: A formal observation is a structured and planned process of watching, assessing,

and evaluating a leader’s performance. This typically includes a pre-conference and post-conference and

results in a written evaluation within ﬁve school days.

goals and standards: Should be a high leverage goal based on professional practice standards and

consistent with the goals of the district. Clear alignment between district, school, and certiﬁed sta goals

(departments, grade-level teams, or collaborations) improves the collective eectiveness of practice.

growth criteria: Successful completion of the Continuous Improvement Process, supported with evidence

that includes the impact the leader’s new learning had on their practice/goal, along with a reﬂection on

challenges and next steps; and the impact the leader’s new learning and practice had on organizational

health, educator growth, student learning, growth, and/or achievement, supported by evidence.

high leverage goals: High leverage goals are based on professional practice standards and are

transferable across roles, disciplines, and positions and aligned to a strategic focus. They address

strategies for development of human capital (people), instruction (knowledge and skills), and

organizational management that transcends schools (Grissom, et al., 2021).

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202421

informal observations: An informal observation is an unplanned visit intended to evaluate educator

performance. This typically includes either verbal or written feedback provided to the educator within

ﬁve school days.

leader: A leader is deﬁned as someone in a leadership position who has attained the 092 certiﬁcation.

This may include assistant superintendent, principal, dean of students, assistant/vice principal, pupil

services director, department chair. This is not an exhaustive list, rather to illustrate the deﬁnition.

Superintendents will conﬁrm district leaders with evaluation roles.

multiple measures: Can include, but is not limited to, structures and systems to support educator learn-

ing and growth, culture and climate changes, student learning, growth, and achievement as mutually

agreed upon during the goal-setting process. Additional evidence relative to one or more competencies.

mutual agreement: An agreement or condition that is reciprocal or agreed upon by all parties.

organizational health: Organizational health in schools and districts means how well the whole school

system is functioning. It encompasses various interconnected elements that contribute to a positive and

thriving learning environment, including leadership, culture and climate, communication, professional

learning, resource management, collaboration and teamwork, student-centered focus, continuous

improvement, community engagement, and innovation.

PDEC (Professional Development and Evaluation Committee): The Professional Development and

Evaluation Committee serves as the collaborative decision maker to create, revise, and monitor the

evaluation and support program for the district, as well as the professional learning plan for certiﬁed

employees of the district.

professional learning: Professional learning and growth are centered on accelerating personal and

collective learning and closing the knowing-doing gap for leaders and teachers. This includes co-

designing interactive, sustained, and customized learning growth opportunities that are grounded in the

evidence that is most needed and most eective. See also appendix E, Glossary of Professional Learning

Opportunities.

review of practice: Reviews of practice are non-classroom observations and may include, but are not

limited to, observation of delivery of professional learning, facilitation of meetings, coaching/mentoring

other leaders or teachers, review of leader or educator work, or review of other leader artifacts.

rubric: A rubric is a systematic and standardized tool, designed as a continuum, and is used to

communicate the performance of educators based on speciﬁc criteria. It can be used to evaluate a single

criterion to emphasize speciﬁc expectations and provide targeted feedback for improvement. It can

encourage a growth mindset.

single point competency: A description of a standard of behavior or performance that is framed only as

a single set of desired outcomes rather than laid out across a rating or scale of performance like a more

traditional rubric.

site visits: A site visit provides an opportunity for observation and dialogue with the leader that may in-

clude but is not limited to leader engagement with educators, families or other partners in the work with

a focus on the leader’s goal.

student outcomes: Student outcomes include multiple measures of student learning, growth, and

achievement as mutually agreed upon during the goal setting process.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202422

tiered support:

Tier 1

It is the expectation that all leaders consistently access opportunities for professional growth within

their district. Tier 1 supports are broadly accessible professional learning opportunities for all, inclusive

of, but not limited to, collegial conversations, school site visits, available district resources (e.g., books,

articles, videos, etc.), formal professional learning opportunities developed and designed by your dis-

trict PDEC and other leader supports (e.g., leadership coaching). These resources should be identiﬁed

through a goal setting process by mutual agreement.

Tier 2

In addition to Tier 1, Tier 2 supports are more intensive in duration, frequency, and focus (e.g.,

observation of speciﬁc leadership practices, etc.) that can be either suggested by the leader and/or

recommended by an evaluator.

Tier 3

Tier 3 supports are responsive to previously discussed concerns and are assigned by an evaluator. Tier

3 supports have a clearly articulated area of focus, duration of time, and criteria for success, and may

include a decision to move to a Corrective Support Plan.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202423

Appendix E: Glossary of Professional Learning Opportunities – Leader

High quality professional learning enhances both leader practice and outcomes for each and every

educator and student. High quality professional learning integrates research on eective adult learning

and uses interactive, ﬂexible designs to achieve intended outcomes.

advanced coursework: Courses oered at a college, university, or other institution, in person or online,

which further educator skills and/or provide professional training.

case study: A team that engages in a case study using information in a student’s cumulative folder or

other documented information with the intention of determining next steps, i.e., IEP review or attendance

records.

coaching: A process based on trust in which professional colleagues work together to reﬂect on current

practices; expand, reﬁne, and build new skills; share ideas; teach one another; conduct classroom

research; or solve problems.

examination of student work: Individuals or groups of educators review samples of work from various

students. They identify strengths, areas for improvement, and design instructional plans as a result of the

examination.

job-embedded: Any activity that is tied in with authentic classroom practice.

May include, but is not limited to:

• Examining student data

• Mentoring

• Book study (see below)

• Co-planning

• Investigating print and online resources

• Self-reﬂection

• Visitations/observations within a school

lesson study: Groups of teachers planning a lesson, observing one present the lesson, and then

reﬂecting on it afterwards.

mentoring: A relationship between a less experienced educator and a more experienced mentor, in

which the mentor provides guidance and feedback regarding practice.

peer observation: An opportunity for teachers to observe each other during classroom instruction.

Teachers may want to observe peers to see a new teaching strategy in action, learn a new model of

instruction, or analyze classroom processes and procedures.

personal professional reading: Individual, self-driven reading and processing of texts in order to improve

one’s own teaching practice.

professional literature study: Structures and collaborative processes in which individuals or groups of

professionals engage in the examination and discussion of a relevant and informative text. The purpose

of this study is to promote continuous learning, professional development, and the exchange of ideas and

best practices within a speciﬁc ﬁeld or industry. By engaging in a professional book study, individuals can

deepen their understanding of key concepts, stay current in their ﬁeld, and enhance their ability to apply

new knowledge to their professional practice. This collaborative and structured approach to learning helps

foster a culture of continuous improvement and professional growth within a community of practitioners.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202424

protocols: A learning tool that is rule-based. Often implemented to aid in new learning for groups or

individuals. May include article discussions, case studies, book reviews, and other procedures used in its

workshops and other learning designs.

school visits: Observation of practice or teaching at a dierent school or institution to gain new

knowledge, ideas, or activities.

student shadow: Follow a particular student during the academic day for a designated time, for a

particular identiﬁed purpose, i.e., engagement.

walkthroughs: A team of leaders who visit classrooms to ﬁnd evidence for a particular problem of

practice. This evidence is reviewed, and next steps are determined as a result of this practice.

web-based learning: Use of online resources or learning activities to develop new learning or

techniques for the classroom.

workshops: Meetings where participants are involved in group discussions or learning experiences and

are normally organized around one or more theme areas. Workshops allow participants with diering

values and priorities to build a common understanding of the problems and opportunities confronting

them. May take place at school or outside.

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202425

Appendix F: Continuous Learning Process – Leader

Evaluation Orientation

Orientation to Leader Evaluation was Completed on:

Date

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

Download these forms:

Leader Goal-Setting Form

Leader/Site Visit Form

Leader Mid-Year Check-In Form

Leader End-of-Year Self-Reﬂection Form

Leader End-of-Year Conference Form

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202426

Leader Information

Download this form

Name: Location:

Select One:

• Cohort 1

*New to leader role or ﬁrst

three years in LEA

• Cohort 2

*Years 4 (in LEA)

Select One:

• Individual goal

• Collaborative goal

Decided upon mutual

agreement.

Select One:

• 1-year goal

• 2-year goal

• 3-year goal

Decided upon mutual

agreement.

Select One:

• PSEL Rubric

Download this form

Beginning-of-the-Year Goals and Planning

Self-Reﬂection

Completed by Leader

See Sample Reﬂection Questions

Capture your self-reﬂection here; consider using the

Sample Questions linked above to guide your thinking.

See Examples of Evidence Types

Goal, Rationale, Alignment and Professional Learning Plan

Completed by Leader

Based on your analysis above, what is/are your goal(s)?

Include a rationale for the length of your goal (1, 2, 3 year).

What evidence of leader learning, educator learning,

and/or student growth and achievement, and/or

organizational measures will you use to reﬂect, monitor,

and adjust your goal? What is your learning plan to

support achieving your goal?

See professional learning and action questions to guide

your plan.

For multi-year goal(s), what might be the potential focus

of years 2 and 3 (to be revisited and revised annually and

as needed throughout the learning process)?

In what ways might this goal(s) contribute to the school

and/or district’s vision, mission, and strategic goals?

Goal Setting Conference

Completed by Evaluator (By November 1)

Date

Notes: Supports Required/Suggested

• Tier 1

• Tier 2 (Link to Examples of Supports)

• Tier 3 (Link to Examples of Supports)

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202427

Download this form

Planned Site Visit/Observation of Professional Practice

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

Observation of Professional Practice/Site Visit #1 - Required

Additional Observation of Professional Practice/Site Visit

Midyear Check-in: Reﬂection, Adjustment(s), and Next Steps

Completed by Leader

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

See Sample Reﬂection Questions and Professional Learning and Action Questions

What has been your

progress to date on your

professional learning

plan and your goal(s),

and how do you know?

What are your next

steps and why?

Self-Reﬂection:

Links to Evidence:

Midyear Conference

Completed by Evaluator (by March 1)

Date

Feedback to Leader (Feedback regarding progress on professional learning and progress toward goal(s).

Include change in tiered supports, if recommended.):

Observation of Professional Practice/Site Visit #2 - Required

Additional Observation of Professional Practice/Site Visit

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202428

Download this form

End-of-Year Reﬂection and Feedback Process

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

Self-Reﬂection

Completed by Leader

See Sample Reﬂection Questions and Professional Learning and Action Questions

What impact did your

new learning have on

your practice/goal(s),

and how do you know?

What impact did your

new learning have

on your leadership

practice, on educator

and/or student

learning, growth, and/

or achievement, and/or

on organizational health,

and how do you know?

What challenges did

you encounter and what

are your next steps

with your professional

learning?

Self-Reﬂection:

Links to Evidence:

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202429

Download this form

End-of-Year Conference

Completed by Evaluator (by June 30)

Date

Summative Feedback and Growth Criteria

Completed by Evaluator

See appendix for full description

Summative Feedback

Development of new learning and impact on

leadership practice related to goal(s).

Impact of new learning and leadership practice on

key partners and or organizational outcomes.

Impact of new learning on greater community.

Successful Completion of the Evaluative Cycle • Yes • No

Supports Required/Suggested

Are tiered supports required above and beyond

tier 1 (included in feedback above)?

• Not applicable

• Tier 2 (Specify below)

• Tier 3 (Specify below)

If Tier 2 and/or Tier 3, please specify strategies:

For multi-year goals only:

• What adjustments are needed to the goal(s)?

• Why?

• How might adjustments impact the timing of the

goal(s)?

• Leader will continue multi-year goal.

• Leader will adjust multi-year goal.

• Leader completed multi-year goal.

Notes:

Leader Signature Date:

Evaluator Signature Date:

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202430

Appendix G: Observation/Site Visit Forms – Leader

Download this form

Leader Evaluation Observation/Site Visit #1 – Required

Name: Location:

Administrator Role: Leader Goal/Observation Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Site Visit (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation/Visit

Completed by Leader (as needed/required)

Meeting Plan and/or Context Upload and provide hyperlink here, as appropriate

Pre-Conference Notes

Observation/Site Visit Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation/Visit Reﬂection

Completed by the Leader

What does today’s evidence tell you?

Are there patterns, trends, or outliers?

How will our collaborative reﬂection

help you move forward and apply

your learning in your next steps?

Post-Observation/Visit Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas for Growth and/or Next

Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202431

Download this form

Leader Evaluation Observation/Site Visit #2 – Required

Name: Location:

Leadership Role: Leader Goal/Observation Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Site Visit (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation/Visit

Completed by Leader (as needed/required)

Meeting Plan and/or Context Upload and provide hyperlink here, as appropriate

Pre-Conference Notes

Observation/Site Visit Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation/Visit Reﬂection

Completed by the Leader

What does today’s evidence tell you?

Are there patterns, trends, or outliers?

How will our collaborative reﬂection

help you move forward and apply

your learning in your next steps?

Post-Observation/Visit Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas for Growth

and/or Next Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202432

Download this form

Leader Evaluation Observation/Site Visit #3

Name: Location:

Leadership Role: Leader Goal/Observation Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Site Visit (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation/Visit

Completed by Leader (as needed/required)

Meeting Plan and/or Context Upload and provide hyperlink here, as appropriate

Pre-Conference Notes

Observation/Site Visit Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation/Visit Reﬂection

Completed by the Leader

What does today’s evidence tell you?

Are there patterns, trends, or outliers?

How will our collaborative reﬂection

help you move forward and apply your

learning in your next steps?

Post-Observation/Visit Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas for Growth

and/or Next Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202433

Download this form

Leader Evaluation Observation/Site Visit #4

Name: Location:

Leadership Role: Leader Goal/Observation Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Site Visit (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation/Visit

Completed by Leader (as needed/required)

Meeting Plan and/or Context Upload and provide hyperlink here, as appropriate

Pre-Conference Notes

Observation/Site Visit Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation/Visit Reﬂection

Completed by the Leader

What does today’s evidence tell you?

Are their patterns, trends or outliers

How will our collaborative reﬂection

help you move forward and apply

your learning in your next steps?

Post-Observation/Visit Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Areas for Growth and/or

Next Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202434

Appendix H: Sample Corrective Support Plan – Leader

(Sample)

Leader A has consistently struggled with communicating appropriately with a variety of constituents.

Tiered supports have been provided by the evaluator throughout the year. Leader A has demonstrated a

lack of growth/improvement, which has led the evaluator to assign a Corrective Support Plan.

Objective:

To improve engagement with families in communities (PSEL – Standard 8) and to improve operations in

management (PSEL – Standard 9)

Resources:

• All communications previewed by the evaluator for content and timeliness.

• Collaboration with other district leaders for exemplars of communication.

Timeframes:

• Leader A will remain on this Corrective Support Plan for six weeks.

• Improvements in communication within this six-week duration will serve as criteria for successful

completion of this plan.

Supportive Actions:

• Weekly, bi-weekly meetings with progress reporting from Leader A and written feedback from

evaluator (dependent upon need for plan).

• All resources made available.

• Modeling of eective communication practices with role play opportunities.

• Timely feedback in person and in writing (weekly/bi-weekly meetings).

• Management of access to learning opportunities in and out of building, as appropriate.

Corrective Support Plan Template

(Leader being evaluated) has consistently struggled with ___________________________________

___________________________ . Tiered supports have been provided by the evaluator throughout

the year. (Leader being evaluated) has demonstrated a lack of growth/improvement, which has led the

(Evaluator) to assign a Corrective Support Plan.

Objective:

To improve ______________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________ (Indicate speciﬁc standard in your objective language)

(Possible) Resources:

A blend of opportunities and resources should be extended to the Leader being evaluated being

supported on the Corrective Support Plan

• Mentor

• Coach

• Reading as appropriate

Connecticut Leader Evaluation and Support Plan 202435

Timeframes:

• (Length of the Corrective Support Plan – typically six to eight weeks in length)

• Improvements in (standard) within this (Length of Corrective Support Plan) will serve as criteria

for successful completion of this plan

Supportive Actions:

(Suggested supportive actions)

• Weekly, bi-weekly meetings with progress reporting from Leader A and written feedback from

evaluator (dependent upon need for plan)

• All resources made available

• Timely feedback in person and in writing (weekly/bi-weekly meetings)

• Management of access to learning opportunities in and out of building, as appropriate.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202436

Educator Evaluation and Support Plan

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202437

Insert District name, logo and members

Date Logo

District Board of Education Members District PDEC Members

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202438

Vision

All Connecticut educators and leaders have the opportunity for continuous learning and feedback, to

develop and grow, both individually and collectively, through the educator and leader evaluation and

support system so that all Connecticut students experience growth and success.

The Purpose of this Model Guide

The Connecticut (CT) Model Evaluation and Support Plan is designed to support a comprehensive

educator and leader evaluation system adopted by the Connecticut State Board of Education in concert

with a wide range of stakeholders and pursuant to educator evaluation regulations. Connecticut General

Statutes 10-151b requires that “the superintendent of each local or regional board of education shall

annually evaluate or cause to be evaluated each teacher.”

The CT Model Evaluation and Support Plan includes tools, guidance, and rubrics to support the

evaluation of all educators and leaders. Professional Development and Evaluation Committees (PDECs)

can adopt the CT Model Plan, adapt the CT Model Plan, or revise their own evaluation system to align

with the CT Guidelines for Educator and Leader Evaluation and Support 2023. It is the intent that this

model can serve as a foundation of evaluation and support practice aligned to the 2023 guidelines

beginning in the initial year of implementation (2024-25) allowing for PDECs to develop an action plan

from self-assessment toward best practices and innovation that will evolve over time. This plan will:

• introduce key components of the educator evaluation framework and the requirements set forth

in the regulations;

• outline speciﬁc action steps, forms, and tools from the CT Model Evaluation and Support Plan

speciﬁc to the evaluation of educators; and

• highlight considerations, conditions, and systems necessary for eective implementation at the

school/district level.

Guiding Principles

The transformational design of the educator evaluation and support model is grounded in six guiding

principles that use high quality professional learning to advance educator practice and student learning,

growth, and achievement.

• Allow for dierentiation of roles (for example for leaders: assistant superintendents, director of

pupil services, various leaders in central oce, principal, assistant principal; or for educators:

teachers, counselors, instructional coaches, student support sta).

• Simplify and reduce the burden (eliminate technical challenges, paperwork, steps).

• Focus on things that matter (identify high leverage goal focus areas).

• Connect to best practices aimed at the development of the whole child (including, but not

limited to, academic, social, emotional, and physical development).

• Focus on educator growth and agency (meaningfully engage professionals by focusing on

growth and practice in partnership with others aligned to a strategic focus).

• Meaningful connections to professional learning (provide multiple pathways for participants to

improve their own practice in a way that is meaningful and impactful).

• Speciﬁc, timely, accurate, actionable, and reciprocal feedback.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202439

Connecticut Guidelines for Educator and Leader Evaluation and

Support 2023 Components: Reimagining Educator and Leader

Evaluation and Support

The design of the Connecticut Guidelines for Educator Evaluation and Support 2023 (CT Guidelines

2023) are representative of research-based eective practice and include six elements.

• Standards and criteria

• Goal setting process

• Professional practice and educator growth

• Evaluator/observer/stakeholder feedback and engagement

• Process elements

• Dispute resolution

The combined vision, guiding principles, and overall framework for educators and leaders’ evaluation

and support describe a systematic process of continuous improvement and professional learning leading

to high quality professional practice and improved learning, growth, and achievement for students. While

components are similar for educators and leaders, there are components speciﬁc to educators and to

leaders, resulting in two sections with similar processes within a district’s evaluation and support system.

Standards and Criteria for Educators

The primary goal of the educator evaluation and support system is to strengthen individual pedagogy

and collective practices to increase student learning, growth, and achievement. Educator practice

discussions are based on a set of national or state performance standards set by professional

organizations and mutually agreed upon by the PDEC. The following professional practice standards

ground this model’s framework. It is recommended that each PDEC create a process to review the

standards and ensure a rubric accompanies the standards. The rubric serves as support for self-

evaluation, dialogue, and feedback. While a rubric serves as support for self-evaluation, dialogue, and

feedback, it is recommended that a single point rubric is used to provide focus for high leverage goal(s)

setting and professional learning.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202440

Educator

1. CCT Rubric for Eective Teaching 2017

2. CCT Rubric for Eective Service Delivery 2017

3. Learning Forward’s Professional Learning Standards (2022)

4. Teacher Leader Model Standards (2008)

Professional Learning Standards and Structures

Professional learning is essential to the CT Guidelines 2023 model. Learning Forward Professional

Learning Standards 2022, serve as a tool for how professional learning happens to deepen one’s knowl-

edge of their practice to impact student learning, growth, and achievement. As a tool, the professional

learning standards help educators and leaders intentionally design learning, address content and consid-

er how to accomplish the expected learning transformation desired. Together the professional standards

for educators, leaders and professional learning serve as the three visions that work together to lay the

foundation for meaningful feedback in a continuous learning process.

The Continuous Learning Process: Goal Setting, Professional Practice and

Evaluator/Observer/ Stakeholder Feedback and Engagement

The evaluation and support model is designed as a continuous learning process The goal of the contin-

uous learning process is to provide educators with continuous learning opportunities for professional

growth through self-directed analysis and reﬂection, planning, implementation, and collaboration. Reg-

ular dialogue and feedback, coupled with the opportunity to reﬂect on and advance practice, drive the

continuous learning process. In this process, the educator serves as the learner who actively engages

in and directs their learning and feedback. The evaluator serves as a learning partner who supports the

educator through the learning and growth process. Within the process, the educator collaborates and

serves as a reﬂective practitioner to determine mutually agreed upon educator goals, professional prac-

tice and educator growth, and observation and feedback focus.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202441

During each school year, a minimum of three check-ins provide an opportunity for a reciprocal discus-

sion of what is happening in the classroom or school, a sharing of evidence of professional learning and

impact on growth, and identiﬁcation of needs and mutually agreed upon next steps. The meetings are

approached in a spirit of continuous improvement, reﬂection, and collaboration. Dialogue is important,

however, there must be a balance of written and verbal feedback provided between check-ins based on

observations and reviews of practice as required by the district plan.

The graphic below, adapted from Learning Forward’s Standards for Professional Learning 2022, shows

the relationship between professional learning for leaders, educators and students.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202442

Below is a graphic with the associated steps, reﬂections, and linked resources associated with each step

of the process to assist educators and evaluators through the process. All educators are assigned a pri-

mary evaluator (092) who has completed comprehensive orientation on this model and relevant rubrics.

Educator Continuous Learning Process

Evaluation Orientation

Completed prior to the start of the Continuous Learning Process

Observations

of professional

practice,

reﬂection and

feedback

Goal

Setting

Completed by

Mid-October

Educator

& Student

Learning,

Growth, and

Achievement

Mid-Year

Check-in

Completed by

Mid-February

Observations

of professional

practice,

reﬂection and

feedback

End-of-Year Reﬂection

Completed by June 1

Goal Setting

Completed by Mid-October

Beginning of the Year Goal(s)

and Planning

• Self reﬂect

• Review evidence

Goal(s), Rationale, Alignment,

and Professional Learning Plan

• Draft goal(s), rationale,

alignment, professional

learning plan

Goal Setting Conference

• Mutually agree on -, -, or

-year goal(s)

• Determine individual or

group goal(s)

• Mutually agree on professional

learning needs and support

Mid-year Check-in

Completed by Mid-February

Mid-Year Check-in: Reﬂection,

Adjustments, and Next Steps

• Review and discuss currently

collected evidence towards

goal(s) and of practice

• Review professional learning,

evidence, and impact on

educator practice, student

learning, growth, and

achievement

Mid-Year Conference

• Discuss evidence, reﬂection,

and feedback from evaluator

• Adjust and revise as needed

End-of-Year Reﬂection

Completed by June 

End-of-Year Reﬂection and

Feedback Process

• Self-reﬂection: Review and

discuss professional learning,

evidence of impact on

practice, student learning,

growth and achievement

End-of-Year Conference/

Summative Feedback and

Growth Criteria

• Evaluator provides written

summative feedback and

guides next steps

• Annual Summary sign-o

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202443

Orientation on the educator evaluation and support process shall take place prior to the start of the

process, no later than October 15. The orientation shall include:

• High leverage goal setting and professional learning plans

• Use of rubrics and standards

• Observation of practice/Review of practice

• Tiered supports

• Dispute resolution

Annual training for evaluators as required by C.G.S. 10-151b will include engaging in and providing

reciprocal feedback tied to standards and evidence of professional practice.

Goal(s) Setting (Completed by mid-October)

The initial goal setting meeting includes a dialogue between the educator and their evaluator around

the educator’s initial self-reﬂection, which is based on a review of evidence and an analysis of their own

practice to identify and support an area for educator practice and growth, and student learning, growth,

and achievement. The educator and evaluator come to mutual agreement on high leverage professional

practice one-, two- or three-year goal(s), multiple measures of evidence (at least two measures),

professional learning plan, and support that is consistent with their professional status and goals to drive

progress toward goal attainment (see appendix K).

For beginning educators in the Teacher Education and Mentoring (TEAM) Program, consideration for align-

ment between professional learning and their TEAM modules would enhance their learning and practice.

Midyear Check-in (Completed by mid-February):

The midyear check-in consists of reciprocal dialogue between the educator and evaluator and includes

an educator self-reﬂection on their progress toward their goal(s) so far. The reﬂection shall include an

analysis of the impact of their learning on their practice, student learning, growth and achievement and

the school community.

• Educators self-reﬂect and review multiple and varied qualitative and quantitative indicators of

evidence of impact on educator’s growth, professional practice, and impact on student learning,

growth, and achievement with their evaluator.

• The evaluator provides speciﬁc, standards-based feedback related to the educator’s goal.

Observation feedback and evidence aligned to the single point rubric.

• The midyear conversation is a crucial progress check-in. The midyear check-in provides an

opportunity to discuss evidence, learning, and next steps. It is at this point that revisions to the

educator’s goal(s) may be considered based on multiple measures of evidence.

End-of-Year Reﬂection/Summative Review (Completed by June 1)

End-of-year reﬂection provides an opportunity for the educator and evaluator to engage in reciprocal dia-

logue, similar to the midyear check-in, to discuss progress toward the educator’s goal(s); professional learn-

ing as it relates to the educator’s professional growth and professional practice; and impact on student

learning, growth, and achievement as evidenced by multiple and varied qualitative and quantitative indica-

tors of evidence. A written end-of-year summary includes the impact of new learning on educator practice

and growth, impact on student learning, growth and achievement, school community, strengths and con-

cerns, and possible next steps for the upcoming year. Analysis of evidence from the end-of-year summary

is important for the educator’s subsequent self-assessment and goal setting revisions or new goal.

The evaluator provides a concise summary based upon evidence related to the mutually agreed upon

educator goal(s) and identiﬁed standards and will make a distinction regarding the educator’s successful

completion of the professional learning process.

All forms for documentation are hyperlinked within the graphic of the continuous learning process with

further detail for each step.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202444

Professional Practice and Educator Growth

The implementation of the continuous learning process is shared between the educator and evaluator.

For the duration of the learning process, educators pursue learning and attainment of their goal(s),

collecting evidence of practice related to their high leverage professional learning goal. Evaluators will

provide educators with feedback from observation and dialogue, ensure timely access to supports, and

collect evidence of educator performance and practice toward goal(s) through multiple sources, which

include observation and may include student, sta, or family feedback (see appendix J).

Observation of Professional Practice and Feedback

Observations occur throughout the continuous learning process. The identiﬁed high leverage goal(s)

provides a focus for strategic evidence collection and feedback. Evaluators provide educators with

speciﬁc feedback based on evidence, standards, and the educator’s goal; ensure timely access to

planned support(s); and continue to collect evidence of educator practice and progress toward goal(s)

through multiple sources of evidence, including observation. Feedback, written or verbal, is provided

within ﬁve school days.

“Feedback is deﬁned as a dynamic, dialogic process that uses evidence to engage a learner, internally or

with a learning partner, in constructing knowledge about practice and self. Its primary purpose is learning

that guides change” (Killion, 2019).

Quality feedback:

• Is based on multiple and varied quantitative and qualitative indicators of evidence, standards,

and goal(s)

• Is personalized

• Is learning-focused or growth-oriented

• Provides questions for reﬂection to reﬁne or revise strategies

• Expands understanding of one’s experiences and their implications for future experiences

• Provides reﬂective opportunities to rework, reﬁne, and reorder knowledge, attitudes, skills, and/

or practices

• Is timely, frequent and reciprocal

Deﬁnition of Cohorts

Cohort 1

Who:

• New to profession (ﬁrst four years)

• New to LEA (ﬁrst two years)

What:

• Three observations of Professional

Practice (minimum 30 minutes in length)

with pre and post meetings

– One observation of professional

practice may be substituted for a

review of practice

• Verbal and written feedback within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of professional

practice as mutually agreed upon or

deemed necessary

Cohort 2

Who:

• Educators who have successfully

completed Cohort 1 in their current LEA

What:

• Two reviews of practice with one being

Observations of Professional Practice

(minimum 20 minutes in length) with post

meetings.

– One observation of professional

practice may be substituted for a

review of practice

• Verbal and written feedback within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of profession-

al practice as mutually agreed upon or

deemed necessary

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202445

Growth Criteria

An educator is determined to have successfully completed the learning process by demonstrating:

• Reﬂection supported with evidence of the impact of the educators’ new learning on their

practice/goal.

• The impact the educators’ new learning and practice had on student learning, growth, and/or

achievement, supported by evidence.

• Next steps.

(See appendix K)

Tiered Support

All educators require access to high-quality, targeted professional learning support to improve practice

over time. Educators and their evaluators thoughtfully consider and apply three tiers of support, as

appropriate, within an evaluation process. All three tiers of support must be implemented prior to the

development of a corrective plan.

A pattern of persistent lack of growth and reﬂection or resistance to growth-oriented feedback should lead

to advancing levels of support with a deﬁned process for placing an educator on a Corrective Support Plan

with indicators of success for transitioning out of it. Evaluators must utilize and document all three tiers of

support prior to the development of a Corrective Support Plan. The Corrective Support Plan shall be devel-

oped in consultation with the evaluator, educator, and their exclusive bargaining representative if applicable.

Tier 1

It is the expectation that all educators consistently access opportunities for professional growth within

their district. Tier 1 supports are broadly accessible professional learning opportunities for all, inclusive

of, but not limited to, collegial professional conversations, classroom visits, available district resources

(e.g., books, articles, videos etc.), formal professional learning opportunities developed and designed by

district PDEC, and other general support for all educators (e.g., instructional coaching). These resources

should be identiﬁed through a goal setting process by mutual agreement.

Tier 2

In addition to Tier 1, Tier 2 supports are more intensive in duration, frequency, and focus (e.g., engaging

in a professional learning opportunity, observation of speciﬁc classroom practices, etc.) that can be either

suggested by the educator and/or recommended by an evaluator.

Tier 3

In addition to Tier 1 and Tier 2, Tier 3 supports are responsive to unresolved, previously discussed

concerns and are developed in collaboration with the educator and may be assigned by the evaluator.

Tier 3 supports have clearly articulated areas of focus, duration of time, and criteria for success, and

may include a decision to move to a Corrective Support Plan. Tier 3 supports shall be developed in

consultation with the evaluator, educator, and their exclusive bargaining representative for certiﬁed

educators chosen pursuant to C.G.S. §10-153b. The start date and duration of time an educator is

receiving this level of support should be clearly documented.

Corrective Support Plan

A pattern of persistent lack of growth and reﬂection or resistance to growth-oriented feedback should

lead to advancing levels of support with a deﬁned process for placing an educator on a Corrective

Support Plan with indicators of success for transitioning out of it. Evaluators must utilize and document all

three tiers of support prior to the development of a Corrective Support Plan. The Corrective Support Plan

shall be developed in consultation with the educator and their exclusive bargaining representative for

certiﬁed teachers chosen pursuant to C.G.S. §10-153b.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202446

The Corrective Support Plan is separate from the normal educator growth model and must contain:

• clear objectives speciﬁc to the well documented area of concern;

• resources, support, and interventions to address the area of concern;

• well deﬁned timeframes for implementing the resources, support, and interventions; and

• supportive actions from the evaluator.

At the conclusion of the Corrective Support Plan period, a number of outcomes are possible as deter-

mined in consultation with the evaluator, educator, and bargaining unit representative.

See appendix P for a Corrective Support Plan form and example.

Dispute Resolution

The purpose of the dispute resolution process is to secure at the lowest possible administrative level eq-

uitable solutions to disagreements, which from time to time may arise related to the evaluation process.

The right of appeal is available to all in the evaluation and support system. As our evaluation and support

system is designed to ensure continuous, constructive, and cooperative processes among professional

educators, educators/leaders and their evaluators are encouraged to resolve disagreements informally.

Ultimately, should an educator disagree with the evaluator’s assessment and feedback, the parties are

encouraged to discuss these dierences and seek common understanding of the issues. As a result of

these discussions, the evaluator may choose to adjust the report but is not obligated to do so. The ed-

ucator being evaluated has the right to provide a statement identifying areas of concern with the goals/

objectives, evaluation period, feedback, and/or professional development plan, which may include the

individual professional learning plan or a Corrective Support Plan.

Any such matters will be handled as expeditiously as possible, and in no instance will a decision exceed

30 workdays from the date the educator initiated the dispute resolution process. Conﬁdentiality through-

out the resolution process shall be conducted in accordance with the law.

Process

The educator being evaluated shall be entitled to collective bargaining representation at all levels of the

process.

1. Within three school days of articulating the dispute in writing to his/her/their evaluator, the

educator being evaluated and the evaluator will meet with the objective of resolving the matter

informally.

2. If there has been no resolution, the individual may choose to continue the dispute resolution

process in writing to the superintendent or designee within three workdays of the meeting with

his/her/their evaluator (step 1). The educator being evaluated may choose between two options.

a. Option 1:

The issue in dispute may be referred for resolution to a subcommittee of the Professional

Development and Evaluation Committee (PDEC), which will serve as a neutral party*. The

superintendent and the respective collective bargaining unit for the district may each se-

lect one representative from the PDEC to constitute this subcommittee, as well as a neutral

party as mutually agreed upon between the superintendent and the collective bargaining

unit. It is the role of the subcommittee to determine the resolution of the dispute and to

identify any actions to be taken moving forward.

*In the instance that a district is too small to have a full PDEC from which to select three

individuals, the superintendent and educator may select three mutually agreed upon

persons to serve as the neutral party for resolving the dispute. Each individual must be a

Connecticut certiﬁed educator and may or may not be from within the district.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202447

b. Option 2:

The educator being evaluated requests that the superintendent solely arbitrate the issue in

dispute. In this case, the superintendent will review all applicable documentation and meet

with both parties (evaluator and educator being evaluated) as soon as possible, but no lon-

ger than ﬁve school days from the date of the written communication to the superintendent.

The superintendent will act as arbitrator and make a ﬁnal decision, which shall be binding.

Time Limits

1. Since it is important that appeals be processed as rapidly as possible, the number of days indi-

cated within this plan shall be considered maximum. The time limits speciﬁed may be extended

by written agreement of both parties.

2. Days shall mean workdays. Both parties may agree, however, to meet during breaks at mutually

agreed upon times.

3. The educator being evaluated must initiate the appeals procedure within ﬁve workdays of the

scheduled meeting in which the feedback was presented. If no written initiation of a dispute is

received by the evaluator within ﬁve workdays, the educator shall be considered to have waived

the right of appeal.

4. The educator being evaluated must initiate each level of the appeal process within the number

of days indicated. The absence of a written appeal at any subsequent level shall be considered

as waiving the right to appeal further.

The Role of the Professional Development and Evaluation

Committee (PDEC)

The PDEC serves as the collaborative decision maker using the consensus protocol to create, revise, and

monitor the evaluation and support model, as well as the professional learning plan.

Pursuant to Connecticut General Statute 10-220a and Public Act 23-159 Section 11 (b) (3), each local

and regional board of education must establish a professional development and evaluation committee

(PDEC) to include at least one teacher and one administrator, selected by the exclusive bargaining

representative for certiﬁed employees, at least one paraeducator selected by their exclusive bargaining

representative, and other personnel as the local board deems appropriate.It is vital that individuals

selected as delegates for administrators, teachers, and other school personnel are representative of the

various classiﬁcations within the groups (see examples below).

Other School Personnel Educator Leader

• Attendance counselor

• Paraeducator (required)

• Behavior technician

• Parent and family liaison

• Social emotional support

sta

• Classroom teacher

• CTE teacher

• Library media specialist

• Reading interventionist

• Instructional coach

• Special education teacher

• Social worker

• School psychologist

• Speech pathologist

• Principal

• Assistant principal

• TESOL supervisor

• Special education supervisor

• Assistant superintendent

• Curriculum coordinator

• Talent development super-

visor

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202448

The duties of PDECs shall include, but are not limited to:

• participation in the development or adoption of a teacher evaluation and support program for

the district, pursuant to section 10-151b;

• the development, evaluation, and annual updating of a comprehensive local professional devel-

opment plan for certiﬁed employees of the district; and

• the development and annual updating of a comprehensive local professional development plan

for paraeducators of the district.

The educator and leader evaluation and support program shall be developed through mutual agreement

between the local or regional board of education and the PDEC. If the local or regional board of edu-

cation and the PDEC are unable to come to mutual agreement, they shall consider the model educator

and leader evaluation and support program adopted by the State Board of Education and may, through

mutual agreement, adopt such model educator and leader evaluation and support programs.

If the local or regional board of education and the PDEC are unable to mutually agree on the adoption

of the State Board of Education’s model program, then the local or regional board of education shall

adopt and implement an educator and leader evaluation and support program developed by such board,

provided that the program is consistent with the CT Guidelines 2023 adopted by the State Board of

Education.

Local and State Reporting

The superintendent shall report:

1. the status of teacher evaluations to the local or regional board of education on or before June 1

of each year; and

2. the status of the implementation of the teacher evaluation and support program, including the

frequency of evaluations, the number of teachers who have not been evaluated, and other

requirements as determined by the Department of Education, to the Commissioner of Education

on or before September 15 of each year.

For purposes of this section, the term “teacher” shall include each professional employee of a board of

education, below the rank of superintendent, who holds a certiﬁcate or permit issued by the State Board

of Education.

Technical Assistance and Professional Learning

The CSDE works closely with schools and districts to learn what support is most needed for eective

implementation of the CT Guidelines 2023 framework. To that end, the CSDE continues to develop re-

sources in partnership with the six regional educational service centers, ACES, CES, CREC, EASTCONN,

EdAdvance, and LEARN along with CAS and feedback from districts. You are encouraged to reach out for

technical assistance and professional support during the transition to this new framework.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202449

Appendices — Educator:

Information and Resources to Support Eective Implementation

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202450

Appendix I: Sample Reﬂection Questions – Educator

Self-Reﬂection Sample Questions

• Thinking about the success and challenges you may have encountered last year, or at the start

of this year, what questions do you have about teaching and learning? What new learning might

you want to explore to inform your understanding of these questions and professional practice?

• In reviewing the rubric, what areas emerge as opportunities for your professional learning and

practice?

• Based on your current students’/adult learners’ strengths and needs, what new learning might

you explore to address the needs?

• Based on knowledge of your students/adult learners, and/or knowledge of school/program

goals, are there any new strategies or methods you’d like to explore and implement this year?

• How do you see yourself contributing to the school or district’s mission, vision, and/or Portrait of

a Graduate and what strategies can you learn more about to support that focus?

• What are you considering for your learning goal?

• What will it look like when you achieve your goal?

Professional Learning and Action Questions

Indicators of Success

• What question will you focus on to address your goals?

• What are the criteria for an accomplished practice?

• How do you plan to collect and analyze evidence to assess progress toward your goals?

• What research/professional readings might you explore to support your professional learning

and achieve your goal?

• What speciﬁc professional learning might you need to achieve your goal?

• What support might you need from your colleagues, supervisor, others? How frequently?

• How might you apply your learning to practice? How often?

Determine Evidence

• What evidence might you collect and analyze to understand progress toward your goal? Quanti-

tative or qualitative or both?

• What ways would you like me as your evaluator to collect data/evidence for feedback?

• From how many dierent situations should we examine data/evidence?

• What are the advantages and disadvantages of the identiﬁed evidence?

• How will the data help us to analyze your practice?

• What is your timeline for collecting this evidence and measuring impact?

• What are the anticipated challenges or obstacles, and how do you plan to address them?

• How might you communicate/share your professional learning to your colleagues or families?

• What opportunities for professional learning do you believe would be beneﬁcial for your growth

as an educator?

• In what ways can we encourage collaboration and communication among colleagues to pro-

mote a culture of sharing best practices?

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202451

Analysis of Evidence

• What do you observe in your evidence?

• What patterns, themes, or outliers do you notice?

• What does the evidence say about how you are doing in relation to your goal and indicators of

success?

• Based on the evidence and your practice overall, what are your strengths?

• In what aspect do you want to continue to grow or reﬁne your knowledge, skill, practice?

Learning Reﬂection and Next Steps

• What is clear to you now?

• What are you learning?

• What do you understand now that you didn’t understand as clearly before?

• How will this learning inﬂuence future actions?

• What is a single sentence conclusion that represents your learning?

• Under what circumstance might this conclusion not be true?

• What are ways you continue to reﬁne your practice?

• What more do you want to learn and practice?

• How might you accomplish that? What is your next plan?

• What resources and support do you want or need?

• Once learning has been implemented: What eect did the learning have on practice, students?

Reﬂect on the Feedback Process

• In what ways did my engagement with you support your learning?

• What did I do as a learning partner that helped you as a learner and how did it help?

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202452

Appendix J: Deﬁnition of Cohorts – Educator

Deﬁnition of Cohorts

Cohort 1

Who:

• New to profession (ﬁrst four years)

• New to LEA (ﬁrst two years)

What:

• Three observations of Professional Prac-

tice (minimum 30 minutes in length) with

pre and post meetings

– One observation of professional

practice may be substituted for a

review of practice

• Verbal and written feedback within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of profession-

al practice as mutually agreed upon or

deemed necessary

Cohort 2

Who:

• Educators who have successfully complet-

ed Cohort 1 in their current LEA

What:

• Two reviews of practice with one being

Observations of Professional Practice

(minimum 20 minutes in length) with post

meetings.

– One observation of professional

practice may be substituted for a

review of practice

• Verbal and written feedback within ﬁve

school days

• Additional observations of profession-

al practice as mutually agreed upon or

deemed necessary

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202453

Appendix K: Growth Criteria and Sources of Evidence – Educator

Growth Criteria

Development of New Learning and Impact

on Practice

• Educator can demonstrate how they

developed new learning within the

continuous learning process through

multiple sources (e.g., analyzing student

learning, observational feedback, etc.)

and how they used their new learning

to improve practice aligned to their

continuous learning process goal/strategy

focus.

Impact on Students

• Educator can demonstrate how they

positively impacted student learning within

the continuous learning process using

example evidence and can articulate

connections/rationale between the

improved learning and their own changes

in practice.

Possible Sources of Evidence

• Required observational evidence

• Required student learning evidence

aligned to high-leverage indicator focus

• Implementation plans/lesson plan(s)

• Educator learning logs/impact on practice

reﬂection

• Educator created learning materials

• Evidence from Observation of Educator

Practice

• Numeric information about schedule, time,

educator practice, student participation,

resource use, classroom environment, fre-

quency of meetings/communications, etc.

• Educator and/or student self-reﬂection

• Student learning artifacts

• Mastery-based demonstrations of

achievement

• Observational evidence of students’ words,

actions, interactions (including quotations

when appropriate)

• Rubrics, interim or benchmark

assessments, other assessments

• Other artifacts/sources

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202454

Appendix L: General Glossary – Educator

consensus protocol: Consensus decision-making is a creative and dynamic way of reaching agreement

in a group. Instead of simply voting for an item and having the majority getting their way, a consensus

group is committed to ﬁnding solutions that everyone actively supports — or at least can live with.

By deﬁnition, in consensus no decision is made against the will of an individual or a minority. If signiﬁcant

concerns remain unresolved, a proposal can be blocked and prevented from going ahead. This means

that the whole group has to work hard to ﬁnd win-win solutions that address everyone’s needs.

From Consensus decision making. Seeds for Change. (n.d.).

https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus

continuous learning process: The continuous learning process is a cycle of feedback, reﬂection, goal

setting, opportunities for professional learning, feedback from observations (peers or evaluators), and a

collection of multiple measures of evidence. There are multiple models of continuous learning including,

but not limited to:

• The Supporting Teacher Eectiveness Project (STEP)

• Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 5-Step Cycle and Model

System for Educator Evaluation

• Ohio Department of Education - Ohio Teacher Evaluation System (OTES 2.0) Framework

• Tennessee Educator Acceleration Model

• Connecticut TEAM Model (CAPA)

Corrective Support Plan: A pattern of persistent lack of growth and reﬂection or resistance to growth-

oriented feedback should lead to advancing levels of support with a deﬁned process for placing an

educator on a Corrective Support Plan with indicators of success for transitioning out of it. The Corrective

Support Plan shall be developed in consultation with the educator and their exclusive bargaining

representative for certiﬁed teachers chosen pursuant to C.G.S. §10-153b. Corrective Support Plans

shall include clear objectives speciﬁc to the well documented area of concern; resources, support, and

interventions to address the area of concern; timeframes for implementing the resources, support, and

interventions; and supportive actions from the evaluator.

check-ins: Formal or informal meetings or conferences held in the spirit of collaboration between the leader

and evaluator and to engage in reciprocal dialogue regarding what is happening in one’s practice at that mo-

ment in time including goal(s), professional learning, multiple and varied forms of quantitative and qualitative

evidence, adjustments, and next steps (i.e., classroom/school/building or district). During each school year, a

minimum of three check-ins provide an opportunity for discussions to set and adjust goals, celebrate growth

and positive impact, identify needs, assess and discuss evidence of learning, and next steps in one’s learning.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202455

community: A school community typically refers to the localized group of students, educators, parents,

and sta within a speciﬁc school, fostering a sense of belonging and shared objectives within that school.

A district community encompasses a broader scope, involving multiple schools within a school district,

and often includes administrators, teachers, students, and families collaborating across various

educational schools and programs within that district. The district community addresses overarching

educational policies, resource allocation, and coordination among multiple schools and programs to

promote consistent and eective education across a larger administrative unit.

dispute resolution: A process for resolving disputes in cases where the evaluator and educator being

evaluated cannot agree on goals/objectives, the evaluation period, feedback, or the professional

learning plan or other outcomes of the evaluation process.

evidence: Evidence collected and presented as a part of the evaluation system may include (but is

not limited to) artifacts, observations of practice, student feedback, and reﬂections of the educator on

student learning, growth, and achievement as part of the educator feedback process.

feedback: “Feedback is deﬁned as a dynamic, dialogic process that uses evidence to engage a learner,

internally or with a learning partner, in constructing knowledge about practice and self. Its primary

purpose is learning that guides change” (Killion, 2019).

Quality Feedback:

• Is based on multiple and varied quantitative and qualitative indicators of evidence, standards,

and goal(s)

• Is personalized

• Is learning-focused or growth-oriented

• Provides questions for reﬂection to reﬁne or revise strategies

• Expands understanding of one’s experiences and their implications for future experiences

• Provides reﬂective opportunities to rework, reﬁne, and reorder knowledge, attitudes, skills,

and/or practices

• Is timely, frequent, and reciprocal

From Killion, J. (2019). The feedback process: Transforming Feedback for Professional Learning.

Learning Forward.

formal observations: A formal observation is a structured and planned process of watching, assessing,

and evaluating an educator’s performance. This typically includes a pre-conference and post-conference

and results in a written evaluation within ﬁve school days.

goals and standards: Goals and standards should be based on an evidence based, high leverage

strategy or practice aligned with professional practice standards and consistent with the goals of the

district. Clear alignment between district, school, and certiﬁed sta goals (departments, grade-level

teams, or collaborations) improves the collective eectiveness of professional practice.

growth criteria: Successful completion of the Continuous Learning Process, supported with evidence

that includes the impact the educators’ new learning had on their practice/goal, along with a reﬂection

on challenges and next steps, and the impact the educators’ new learning and practice had on student

learning, growth, and or achievement, supported by evidence.

high leverage goal: High leverage goals are based on professional practice standards and are

transferable across roles, disciplines, and positions and aligned to a strategic focus (i.e., a portrait of a

graduate). They address strategies for developing conceptual understanding and have a high standard

deviation eect size (Hattie 2009).

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202456

informal observations: An informal observation is an unplanned visit intended to evaluate educator per-

formance. This typically includes either verbal or written feedback provided to the educator within ﬁve

school days.

leader: A leader is deﬁned as someone in a leadership position who has attained the 092 certiﬁcation.

This may include superintendent, principal, dean of students, assistant/vice principal, pupil services

director, department chair. This is not an exhaustive list, rather to illustrate the deﬁnition. Superintendents

will conﬁrm district leaders with evaluation roles.

multiple measures: Can include, but is not limited to, student learning, educator learning, cultural

changes, growth, and achievement as mutually agreed upon during the goal-setting process and may

include additional evidence relative to one or more competencies.

mutual agreement: An agreement or condition that is reciprocal or agreed upon by all parties.

organizational health: Organizational health in schools and districts means how well the whole school

system is functioning. It encompasses various interconnected elements that contribute to a positive and

thriving learning environment, including leadership, culture and climate, communication, professional

learning, resource management, collaboration and teamwork, student-centered focus, continuous

improvement, community engagement, and innovation.

PDEC (Professional Development and Evaluation Committee): The Professional Development and

Evaluation Committee serves as the collaborative decision maker to create, revise, and monitor the

evaluation and support program for the district, as well as the professional learning plan for certiﬁed

employees of the district.

professional learning: Professional learning and growth are centered around accelerating personal

and collective learning and closing the knowing-doing gap for leaders and educators. This includes

co-designing interactive, sustained, and customized learning growth opportunities that are grounded

in the evidence that is most needed and most eective. See also appendix M, Glossary of Professional

Learning Opportunities.

review of practice: Reviews of practice are non-classroom observations and may include, but are not lim-

ited to, observation of delivery of professional learning, data team meetings, observations of coaching/

mentoring sessions, review of educator work and student work, or review of other educators’ artifacts.

rubric: A rubric is a systematic and standardized tool, designed as a continuum, and is used to

communicate the performance of educators based on speciﬁc criteria. It can be used to evaluate a single

criterion to emphasize speciﬁc expectations and provide targeted feedback for improvement. It can

encourage a growth mindset.

single point competency: A description of a standard of behavior or performance that represents the

enduring understanding of content and skill from a speciﬁc domain that is framed only as a single set of

desired outcomes rather than laid out across a rating or scale of performance.

student outcomes: Student outcomes include multiple measures of student learning, growth, and

achievement as mutually agreed upon during the goal setting process.

tiered support:

Tier 1

It is the expectation that all educators consistently access opportunities for professional growth within

their district. Tier 1 supports are broadly accessible professional learning opportunities for all, inclusive

of, but not limited to, collegial professional conversations, classroom visits, available district resources

(e.g., books, articles, videos etc.), formal professional learning opportunities developed and designed

by your district PDEC, and other general support for all educators (e.g., instructional coaching). These

resources should be identiﬁed through a goal setting process by mutual agreement.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202457

Tier 2

In addition to Tier 1, Tier 2 supports are more intensive in duration, frequency and focus (e.g.,

attending a workshop, observation of speciﬁc classroom practices, etc.) that can be either suggested

by the educator and/or recommended by an evaluator.

Tier 3

Tier 3 supports are responsive to previously discussed concerns and are assigned by an evaluator.

Tier 3 supports have a clearly articulated area of focus, duration of time, and criteria for success, and

may include a decision to move to a Corrective Support Plan.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202458

Appendix M: Glossary of Professional Learning Opportunities –

Educator

High quality professional learning enhances both educator practice and outcomes for each and every

student. High quality professional learning integrates research on eective adult learning and uses

interactive, ﬂexible designs to achieve intended outcomes.

advanced coursework: Courses oered at a college, university, or other institution, in person or online,

which further educator skills and/or provide professional training.

case study: A team that engages in a case study using information in a student’s cumulative folder or other

documented information with the intention of determining next steps, i.e., IEP review or attendance records.

coaching: A process based on trust in which professional colleagues work together to reﬂect on current

practices; expand, reﬁne, and build new skills; share ideas; teach one another; conduct classroom re-

search; or solve problems.

examination of student work: Individuals or groups of educators review samples of work from various

students. They identify strengths, areas for improvement, and design instructional plans as a result of the

examination.

job-embedded: Any activity that is tied in with authentic classroom practice. May include, but is not

limited to:

• Examining student data

• Mentoring

• Book study (see below)

• Co-planning

• Investigating print and online resources

• Self-reﬂection

• Visitations/observations within a school

lesson study: Groups of teachers planning a lesson, observing one present the lesson, and then

reﬂecting on it afterwards.

mentoring: A relationship between a less experienced educator and a more experienced mentor, in

which the mentor provides guidance and feedback regarding practice.

peer observation: An opportunity for teachers to observe each other during classroom instruction.

Teachers may want to observe peers to see a new teaching strategy in action, learn a new model of

instruction, or analyze classroom processes and procedures.

personal professional reading: Individual, self-driven reading and processing of texts, in order to

improve one’s own teaching practice.

professional literature study: Structures and collaborative processes in which individuals or groups of

professionals engage in the examination and discussion of a relevant and informative text. The purpose

of this study is to promote continuous learning, professional development, and the exchange of ideas

and best practices within a speciﬁc ﬁeld or industry. By engaging in a professional book study, individuals

can deepen their understanding of key concepts, stay current in their ﬁeld, and enhance their ability

to apply new knowledge to their professional practice. This collaborative and structured approach to

learning helps foster a culture of continuous improvement and professional growth within a community

of practitioners.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202459

protocols: A learning tool that is rule-based. Often implemented to aid in new learning for groups or

individuals. May include article discussions, case studies, book reviews, and other procedures used in its

workshops and other learning designs.

school visits: Observation of practice or teaching at a dierent school or institution to gain new

knowledge, ideas, or activities.

student shadow: Follow a particular student during the academic day for a designated time, for a

particular identiﬁed purpose, i.e., engagement.

walkthroughs: A team of leaders who visit classrooms to ﬁnd evidence for a particular problem of

practice. This evidence is reviewed, and next steps are determined as a result of this practice.

web-based learning: Use of online resources or learning activities to develop new learning or

techniques for the classroom.

workshops: Meetings where participants are involved in group discussions or learning experiences and

are normally organized around one or more theme areas. Workshops allow participants with diering

values and priorities to build a common understanding of the problems and opportunities confronting

them. May take place at school or outside.

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202460

Appendix N: Continuous Learning Process – Educator

Evaluation Orientation

Orientation to Educator Evaluation was completed on:

Date

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

Download these forms:

Educator Goal-Setting Form

Educator Observation Form

Educator Mid-Year Check-In Form

Educator End-of-Year Self-Reﬂection Form

Educator End-of-Year Conference Form

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202461

Educator Information

Download this form

Name: Location:

Select One:

• Cohort 1

*New to Profession (ﬁrst

four years) or New to

LEA (ﬁrst two years)

• Cohort 2

*Educators who have

successfully completed

Cohort 1

Select One:

• Individual goal

• Collaborative goal

Decided upon mutual

agreement.

Select One:

• 1-year goal

• 2-year goal

• 3-year goal

Decided upon mutual

agreement.

Select One:

• CCT Teacher Rubric

• CCT Service Delivery

Rubric

Download this form

Beginning-of-the-Year Goals and Planning

Self-Reﬂection

Completed by Educator

See Sample Reﬂection Questions

Capture your self-reﬂection here; consider using the

Sample Questions linked above to guide your thinking.

See Examples of Evidence Types

Goal, Rationale, Alignment and Professional Learning Plan

Completed by Educator

Based on your analysis above, what is/are your goal(s)?

Include a rationale for the length of your goal (1, 2, 3 year).

What evidence of leader learning, educator and/or student

growth and achievement, and/or organizational measures

will you use to reﬂect, monitor, and adjust your goal? What

is your learning plan to support achieving your goal?

See professional learning and action questions to guide

your plan.

For multi-year goal(s), what might be the potential focus

of years 2 and 3 (to be revisited and revised annually and

as needed throughout the learning process)?

In what ways might this goal(s) contribute to the school

and/or district’s vision, mission, and strategic goals?

Goal Setting Conference

Completed by Evaluator (By November 1)

Date

Notes: Supports Required/Suggested

• Tier 1

• Tier 2 (Link to Examples of Supports)

• Tier 3 (Link to Examples of Supports)

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202462

Download this form

Planned Observation of Professional Practice

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

Observation of Professional Practice #1 - Required

Additional Observation of Professional Practice

Midyear Check-in: Reﬂection, Adjustment(s), and Next Steps

Completed by Educator

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

See Sample Reﬂection Questions and Professional Learning and Action Questions

What has been your

progress to date on your

professional learning

and how do you know?

Self-Reﬂection:

Links to Evidence:

Midyear Conference

Completed by Evaluator (by March 1)

Date

Feedback to Educator (Feedback regarding progress on professional learning and progress toward goal(s).

Include change in tiered supports, if recommended.):

Observation of Professional Practice #2 - Required

Additional Observation of Professional Practice

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202463

Download this form

End-of-Year Reﬂection and Feedback Process

Non-negotiable Process Element of the CT Guidelines (2023)

Self-Reﬂection

Completed by Educator

See Sample Reﬂection Questions and Professional Learning and Action Questions

What impact did your

new learning have on

your practice/goal(s),

and how do you know?

What impact did your

new learning and

practice have on your

student learning,

growth, and/or

achievement, and how

do you know?

What challenges did

you encounter and what

are your next steps

with your professional

learning?

Self-Reﬂection:

Links to Evidence:

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202464

Download this form

End-of-Year Conference

Completed by Evaluator (by June 1)

Date

Summative Feedback and Growth Criteria

Completed by Evaluator

See appendix for full description

Summative Feedback

Development of new learning and impact on practice

related to goal(s).

Impact on student learning, growth, and achievement

Successful Completion of the Evaluative Cycle • Yes • No

Supports Required/Suggested

Are tiered supports required above and beyond

tier 1 (included in feedback above)?

• Not applicable

• Tier 2 (Specify below)

• Tier 3 (Specify below)

If Tier 2 and/or Tier 3, please specify strategies:

For multi-year goals only:

• What adjustments are needed to the goal(s)?

• Why?

• How might adjustments impact the timing of the

goal(s)?

• Educator will continue multi-year goal.

• Educator will adjust multi-year goal.

• Educator completed multi-year goal.

Notes:

Educator Signature Date:

Evaluator Signature Date:

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202465

Appendix O: Observation Forms – Educator

Download this form

Educator Evaluation Observation #1 – Required

Name: Time/Location:

Grade/Role: Discipline/Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Observation of Professional Practice (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation

Completed by the Educator (as needed/required)

Lesson Plan/Meeting Plan Upload and provide hyperlink here

Pre-Conference Notes including the

identiﬁed competency focus for the

observation

Observation Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation Reﬂection

Completed by the Educator

What worked and how do you know?

What didn’t work and how do you know?

What have you learned (about your

practice and your learners based on

what evidence) and how will you apply

that learning in the future?

Post-Observation Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence for Growth and/or

Next Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202466

Download this form

Educator Evaluation Observation #2 – Required

Name: Location:

Grade/Role: Discipline/Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Observation of Professional Practice (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation

Completed by Educator (as needed/required)

Lesson Plan/Meeting Plan Upload and provide hyperlink here

Pre-Conference Notes including

the identiﬁed competency focus for

the observation

Observation Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation Reﬂection

Completed by the Leader

What worked and how do you know?

What didn’t work and how do you

know?

What have you learned (about your

practice and your learners based

on what evidence) and how will you

apply that learning in the future?

Post-Observation Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence for Growth

and/or Next Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202467

Download this form

Educator Evaluation Observation #3

Name: Location:

Grade/Role: Discipline/Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Observation of Professional Practice (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation/Visit

Completed by Educator (as needed/required)

Lesson Plan/Meeting Plan Upload and provide hyperlink here

Pre-Conference Notes including the

identiﬁed competency focus for the

observation

Observation/Site Visit Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation Reﬂection

Completed by the Educator

What worked and how do you know?

What didn’t work and how do you know?

What have you learned (about your

practice and your learners based on

what evidence) and how will you apply

that learning in the future?

Post-Observation Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence for Growth

and/or Next Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202468

Download this form

Educator Evaluation Observation #4

Name: Location:

Grade/Role: Discipline/Focus:

• Cohort 1 (Pre-/Post-Conference Required)

• Cohort 2 (Post-Conference Required)

• Additional Observation of Professional Practice (Pre-/Post-Conference Optional)

Pre-Observation

Completed by Leader (as needed/required)

Lesson Plan/Meeting Plan Upload and provide hyperlink here, as appropriate

Pre-Conference Notes including the

identiﬁed competency focus for the

observation

Observation Evidence

Completed by the Evaluator

Post-Observation Reﬂection

Completed by the Educator

What worked and how do you know?

What didn’t work and how do you

know?

What have you learned (about your

practice and your learners based

on what evidence) and how will you

apply that learning in the future?

Post-Observation/Visit Conference Feedback

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence of Strengths Single-Point Competencies

Completed by the Evaluator

Evidence for Growth

and/or Next Steps

Insert competencies

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202469

Appendix P: Sample Corrective Support Plan – Educator

(Sample)

Educator A has consistently struggled with classroom management. Tiered supports have been provided

by the evaluator throughout the year. Educator A has demonstrated a lack of growth/improvement, which

has led the evaluator to assign a Corrective Support Plan.

Objective:

To improve classroom management practices in order to improve a positive learning environment (CCT –

1A) to support learning.

(Suggested) Resources:

• Observe a mutually agreed peer for structures, systems, and dispositions that support positive

classroom management skills.

• Read and discuss “The First Six Weeks of School” - Center for Responsive Classroom with evaluator.

• Training in Restorative Practices.

Timeframes:

• Educator A will remain on this Corrective Support Plan for six weeks.

• Improvements in classroom management within this six-week duration will serve as criteria for

successful completion of this plan.

Supportive Actions:

• All resources made available

• Timely feedback in person and in writing (weekly/bi-weekly meetings)

• Management of access to learning opportunities in and out of building, as appropriate.

• Modeling of eective classroom management strategies

• Weekly, bi-weekly meetings with progress reporting from Teacher A and written feedback from

evaluator (dependent upon need for plan)

Corrective Support Plan Template

(Educator being evaluated) has consistently struggled with ___________________________________

___________________________. Tiered supports have been provided by the evaluator throughout

the year. (Educator being evaluated) has demonstrated a lack of growth/improvement, which has led the

(Evaluator) to assign a Corrective Support Plan.

Objective:

To improve _______________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________ (Indicate

speciﬁc standard in your objective language)

(Possible) Resources:

A blend of opportunities and resources should be extended to the Educator being evaluated being

supported on the Corrective Support Plan

• Mentor

• Coach

• Reading as appropriate

Connecticut Educator Evaluation and Support Plan 202470

Timeframes:

• (Length of the Corrective Support Plan - typically six to eight weeks in length)

• Improvements in (standard) within this (Length of Corrective Support Plan) will serve as criteria

for successful completion of this plan

Supportive Actions:

(Suggested supportive actions)

• Weekly, bi-weekly meetings with progress reporting from Educator A and written feedback from

evaluator (dependent upon need for plan)

• All resources made available

• Timely feedback in person and in writing (weekly/bi-weekly meetings)

• Management of access to learning opportunities in and out of building, as appropriate.

Connecticut Leader and Educator Evaluation and Support Plans 202471

Bibliography

Connecticut State Department of Education. 2023. Connecticut Guidelines for Educator Evaluation and

Support. Hartford, CT.

Grissom, Jason A. , Anna J. Egalite, and Constance A, Lindsay. 2021. How Principals Aect Students and

Schools. The Wallace Foundation.

Hattie, John. 2009. Visible Learning. Routledge Publishing.

Killion, Joellen. 2019. The Feedback Process: Transforming Feedback for Professional Learning.

Learning Forward.

Learning Forward. 2022. Learning Forward Professional Learning Standards.

MacDonald, Elisa B. 2023. Intentional Moves, How Skillful Team Leaders Impact Learning. Corwin Press.

Seeds for Change. n.d. Consensus Decision Making. https://www.SeedsforChange.org.UK/Consensus.