Teacher

Evaluation

Missouri’s Educator Evaluation System
www.dese.mo.gov

© 2013 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national 

origin, age, or disability in its programs and activities. Inquiries related to Department programs and to the location of services, 

activities, and facilities that are accessible by persons with disabilities may be directed to the Jefferson State Office Building, Office 

of the General Counsel, Coordinator – Civil Rights Compliance (Title VI/Title IX/504/ADA/Age Act), 6th Floor, 205 Jefferson Street, 

P.O. Box 480, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480; telephone number 573-526-4757 or TTY 80-735-2966; email civilrights@dese.mo.gov.
Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Step 1: Identify the indicators to be assessed .............................................................................................................................................................. 5

Step 2: Determine a baseline score for each identified indicator ................................................................................................................................ 6

Step 3: Develop an Educator Growth Plan (i.e. professional learning/development plan or improvement plan) .................................................... 10

Step 4: Regularly assess progress and provide feedback............................................................................................................................................ 14

Step 5: Determine a follow-up score for each identified indicator............................................................................................................................ 16

Step 6: Complete the final summative evaluation....................................................................................................................................................... 19

Step 7: Reflect and Plan ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 24

Timeline for completion of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol...................................................................................................................................... 25

New Teacher Protocol.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 26

Timeline for New Teacher Evaluation.......................................................................................................................................................................... 27

New Teacher Feedback and Evaluation Forms............................................................................................................................................................ 30

Timeline for completion of the New Teacher Evaluation Protocol ............................................................................................................................. 33

Educator Improvement Protocol ................................................................................................................................................................................. 34

Timeline for completion of the Educator Improvement Protocol............................................................................................................................... 35

Educator Improvement Plan forms.............................................................................................................................................................................. 36
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 4

Teacher Evaluation Protocol

Introduction

Missouri’s Educator Evaluation System was created, field-tested and piloted, and refined by hundreds of educators across the state. The system 

is founded on general beliefs about the purpose of the evaluation process. Central to these beliefs is a theory of action which maintains that 

improving student performance is predicated on the improvement of educator practice. These beliefs include that evaluation processes are 

formative in nature and lead to continuous improvement; are aligned to standards that reflect excellence; build a culture of informing practice 

and promoting learning; and use multiple, balanced measurements that are fair and ethical. Districts are encouraged to collectively establish 

basic beliefs that serve as the foundation of their local evaluation process. Based on the theory of action and beliefs that are the foundation to 

the state’s model Educator Evaluation System, the primary purpose of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol is to promote growth in effective practice 

that ultimately increases student performance. This growth in practice occurs based on the following sequence:

 

Growth requires focus. The identification of indicators is essential to establishing a particular focus based on performances articulated in the 

indicators. The baseline data serves as a starting point by establishing a current level of performance. Strategies for improvement are identified 

and practiced. Meaningful feedback is provided regarding the extent to which the new strategies are addressing the area of focus. A follow-up

rating provides indication of the amount of growth in performance that occurred. Reflection on the process and the amount of growth that 

THE

PROCESS
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 5

occurred or didn’t occur informs whether this particular indicator remains an area of focus or whether there is a new area of focus. This 

sequence is an important component to the growth in educational practice that occurs in the teacher evaluation process described in the 

following steps:

Step 1: Identify the indicators to be assessed

Rationale

Appropriate indicators are selected that most support increasing student learning through a focus on potential growth opportunities for the 

teacher. The indicators identified create an alignment between district and school improvement plans and the efforts and primary 

responsibilities of the teacher in the classroom.

Description

The selection of indicators is very important to the process. These determine the focus and rationale for improving effective practice and are 

based on what is needed most to improve student learning. 

The identified indicators provide a focus area for ongoing learning and growth. Typically these are identified at the end of the year for returning 

teachers. The determination of which and how many indicators to identify is determined with the following criteria in mind:

1. Driven by student learning needs

2. Derived from the Building and District Improvement Plans (BIP-building level / CSIP-district level)

3. A maximum of three indicators per teacher per year are recommended which are:

• Based on student needs

• Represents priorities of the building/district leadership for that teacher

• Based on a potential growth opportunity for the teacher and are determined in collaboration between the teacher(s) and 

principal

4. At a minimum two of the indicators must address impact on student learning

5. Other indicators may be identified at any time based on issues and needs that arise. In extreme instances where particular growth or 

change in practice must be addressed, an Educator Improvement Plan (see Step 3) may be instituted. 

Example

Mrs. Johnson is a third year teacher. Based on student data, the third graders in Mrs. Johnson’s class struggle with reading comprehension. This 

is an area of concentration for her class for this year. The principal, who is focusing on the implementation of the Common Core Standards, is 

directing all teachers to work on Indicator 1.1 “Content knowledge and academic language”. In addition, Mrs. Johnson, in consultation with her 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 6

principal, has identified Indicator 7.3 “Student-led assessment strategies” in order to better meet the challenging needs of her third grade class. 

The principal also felt that 8.1 “Self-assessment and improvement” would be helpful to Mrs. Johnson in documenting her efforts to meet the 

specific needs of her third graders regarding reading comprehension. For this year, Mrs. Johnson’s area of focus will be on performances 

articulated in the following three indicators:

1. Content knowledge and academic language 1.1

2. Student-led assessment strategies 7.3

3. Self assessment and improvement 8.1

Indicator 1.1 includes evidence for commitment, practice and impact; indicator 7.3 has evidence for practice and impact; and indicator 8.1 has 

commitment and practice evidence.

Step 2: Determine a baseline score for each identified indicator

Rationale

In order to determine growth on an indicator, it is necessary to establish a baseline score and compare it to a follow-up score. This represents a

type of pre- and post-test format where growth in practice occurs between two points in time. A numerical rating provides an assessment of 

both pre- and post-status to determine accurately the growth that occurred in between.

Description

The 0 – 7 scale found on each growth guide provides a numerical rating for each indicator. This numerical rating establishes a baseline score.

The baseline score for returning teachers working on the same indicator as the previous year is the follow-up rating they received. This 

generates continuity of improvement on a particular indicator. 

The baseline rating is determined by considering the evidence at each level of the appropriate growth guide. Evidence falls into one of three 

different categories: commitment, practice and impact. Evidence in the commitment frame focuses on the quality of the teacher and includes 

data and information like preparation, lesson design and credentialing. Evidence in the practice frames focuses on observable behaviors, or the 

quality of the teaching that the teacher is doing. Evidence in the impact frames focuses on outcomes or what students in the teacher’s class are 

doing. 

It is important to think about a teacher’s rating by taking these separate categories of evidence into consideration. After all, if a teacher designs 

what they think is a great lesson and delivers it in what they think is an effective manner and yet students do not grasp the content, then there is 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 7

still something less than ideal in the learning experience. Identifying where that growth opportunity exists that limits the learning experience 

from being ideal is the type of focus that leads to growth in practice. 

It is first necessary to determine the appropriate descriptive rating for the teacher’s performance. This descriptive rating will be either Emerging, 

Developing, Proficient or Distinguished. To determine the descriptive rating, it is necessary to establish the highest level for which there is 

evidence of performance.

For example, in Growth Guide 1.1, a determination about the teacher’s performance might be as illustrated below. There is Commitment 

evidence that the teacher is well prepared, that their lesson design includes current content and there is use of supplementary sources. There is 

also observable Practice evidence reflecting the accuracy and complexity of content knowledge in instruction as indicated. While evidence at the 

Impact level reveals that students are generally familiar with academic language, student data does not support that a majority of students are 

able to use academic language. Although evidence can be gathered by observing student performance and various student products, an 

additional way to gather evidence at the impact level could be through the use of student surveys. Although this is perceptual in nature, 

research maintains that it does offer useful data. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 8

 

In this illustration, the highlighted areas reflect the evidence of the teacher’s performance. In this illustration, as noted by the highlighted text, 

there are examples of evidence in three different columns, Emerging, Developing and Proficient. However, it is only in the Emerging column 

where there is an alignment, or evidence in all three professional frames. This alignment of evidence supports that the teacher is fully rated at 

the Emerging level. In this particular example, student’s ability to use academic language would be the teacher’s growth opportunity.

Alignment

Of

Evidence
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 9

It is next necessary to establish a baseline score within the Emerging level. This would be calculated and communicated as follows:

1. Using the appropriate growth guide and rating scale (see below), determine a baseline score. A score of 0 indicates there is no evidence 

present in at least one of the three frames. A score of 1 indicates there is evidence in all frames, but that it is inconsistently present or 

demonstrated. A score of 2 would indicate it is present and routinely demonstrated. Ideally, this score determination would occur as a 

collaborative, professional conversation between the teacher and administrator.

 

RATING SCALE

Not 

Present

Present

but 

Inconsistent

Present 

Consistent 

Routine

Present

but 

Inconsistent

Present 

Consistent

Routine

Present

but 

Inconsistent

Present 

Consistent 

Routine

Present 

Consistent 

Routine

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Emerging Developing Proficient Distinguished

2. Once a score has been determined, provide specific feedback that includes an explanation and rationale for the given score. Again, this 

would ideally occur within a collaborative, professional conversation. 

3. In the example illustrated above, students’ ability to use academic language is the specific area where growth is needed to move 

performance from the “Emerging” level to the “Developing” level. 

Example

Mrs. Johnson received the following ratings on her baseline assessment:

• A score of “2 Emerging” on Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language 

o The evidence, as presented in the example in the Description section, indicates that Mrs. Johnson routinely and consistently is 

well prepared and uses current and new content as well as supplementary sources where appropriate and her instruction 

reflects accuracy and complexity of content; and her students are familiar with academic language but do not consistently use it.

This consistent use of academic language by students represents a growth opportunity for Mrs. Johnson. 

• A score of “4 Developing” on Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies

o The evidence indicates that Mrs. Johnson routinely and consistently orientates students on various formats of assessments and 

instructs them on how to reflect on their own learning based on data. She also instructs them on setting personal learning goals. 

Students routinely and consistently are prepared for the demands of different assessments and successfully set personal 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 10

learning goals based on their own reflection of their learning. An appropriate growth opportunity would include Mrs. Johnson 

facilitating student learning on how to report on their own progress. 

• A score of “2 Emerging” on Indicator 8.1: Self assessment and improvement

o This indicates that Mrs. Johnson’s professional development or growth plan includes information from self-assessment and 

reflection strategies and that she also uses this information to improve the overall learning of her students. An appropriate 

growth opportunity in this area would involve Mrs. Johnson specifically reflecting on the impact of her teaching and using that to 

guide adjustments to her practices. 

Step 3: Develop an Educator Growth Plan (i.e. professional learning/development plan or 

improvement plan)

Rationale

The primary purpose of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol is to promote growth. Therefore, the acquisition and application of new learning and 

skills is essential for turning opportunities for growth into outcomes and results.

Description

The description of performance in each indicator and the baseline rating identifies an opportunity for growth. It is important when addressing 

this opportunity for growth that a very clear plan be developed. The Educator Growth Plan is the document used to articulate the various 

necessary components of this plan. For instances where very specific growth is required, or where particular areas of concern must be 

addressed, the Educator Improvement Plan is used to ensure that this growth occurs to the extent necessary and in a timely fashion. For more 

on the Educator Improvement Protocol, see page 34 of this Teacher Evaluation Protocol.

The Educator Growth Plan addresses specific sources of new learning, the practice of skills related to new learning and timelines for completion.

The state model offers two different formats for the Educator Growth Plan. One option uses language from the Data Team Process while the 

other uses language from the Plan/Do/Study Act process. Regardless of which option is used, the Educator Growth Plan includes the following 

key general components: 

1. It corresponds to the examples of evidence provided in the appropriate growth guide

2. It is a clear articulation of a plan or goal statement to address growth opportunities

3. It includes specific strategies and timelines for application of new learning and skills

4. It is focused on results and outcomes
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 11

 

FOCUS – an area that represents an opportunity for 

growth and is generated from evidence on the growth 

guide 

GOAL – a statement that addresses the focus and is 

specific, measureable, achievable, relevant and timely

STRATEGY – description of the skill(s) to be demonstrated 

that will effectively address the focus and include clear 

action steps and timelines

RESULTS – data and evidence that supports that the 

outcome of the strategy has effectively addressed the 

focus

When considering different strategies to address growth opportunities, the state model offers several different sources of research. Research 

sources are inlcuded in the “Research and Proven Practices” section of this document. 

The research provided in this section includes the work of Dr. Robert Marzano, Dr. John Hattie, and Mr. Doug Lemov. These bodies of research 

were included because of the effect size information provided and their proven record of having impact on student learning. Crosswalks are 

provided for each to align each body of research with teacher indicators.

This research offers specific strategies that can be included in the teacher’s Educator Growth Plan as a demonstration of progression on the 

specific indicator being addressed. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 12

Also provided is a document called the Possible 

Sources of Evidence. There is a single page document 

provided for each standard. This document provides a 

list of “possible” sources of evidence that a teacher 

might include as a component of the Educator Growth 

Plan. 

It is important to note that this is not a comprehensive 

list of all evidence sources nor is it a checklist of things 

to do and/or provide. It simply offers some possible 

examples that might be included.

The evidence provided is categorized by the three 

professional frames found on each of the teacher’s 

growth guides. In this way, teachers and 

administrators can use this to clarify exactly what kind 

of evidence will indicate that growth in performance 

has occurred. 

Example

Mrs. Johnson, in consultation with her administrator and perhaps also peers and/or a mentor, reviews the Possible Sources of Evidence

documents and the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation System webpage to determine which new skills and 

strategies would be most appropriate given the particular growth opportunities of her selected indicators. Mrs. Johnson considers the following 

information as she works to complete her Educator Growth Plan: 

• Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language

o Using the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation webpage, Mrs. Johnson observes that there are 23 

different Marzano instructional strategies that align to Quality Indicator 1.1. In reviewing these strategies, she and her 

administrator agree that strategy MDQ 2.12: “The teacher engages students in activities that help them record their 

understanding of new content in linguistic ways and/or represents the content in nonlinguistic ways” would be helpful for 

increasing a students’ use of academic language. From the Professional Impact section of the Possible Sources of Evidence for 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 13

Standard 1 document, they further determine that student work samples could appropriately provide evidence to this increase 

in academic language. 

o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson documents the following:

 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for increasing the use of academic language

 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how much she wants student use of academic language to increase by and when

 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use a Marzano strategy (MDQ 2.12) and student work samples to 

demonstrate an increase in academic language 

 RESULTS – (to be completed later in Step 5)

• Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies 

o Using the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation webpage, Mrs. Johnson observes that there are 9 

different strategies taken from the research of John Hattie that align to Quality Indicator 7.3. In reviewing these strategies, she 

and her administrator agree that “Self-reported Grades” would assist students in learning to report their own progress in 

learning. From the Professional Impact section of the Possible Sources of Evidence for Standard 7 document, they further 

determine that individual student growth/performance could appropriately provide evidence specific to this opportunity for 

growth.

o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson documents the following:

 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for assisting students in reporting their progress in learning

 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how she wants students to report their progress and a timeframe for this to occur

 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use the research of John Hattie and individual student 

growth/performance to demonstrate students’ ability to report their progress in learning

 RESULTS – (to be completed later in Step 5)

• Quality Indicator 8.1: Self-assessment and improvement

o Using the Research and Proven Practices section of the Educator Evaluation webpage, Mrs. Johnson observes that there are 10 

different techniques taken from the work of Doug Lemov in his book “Teach Like a Champion”. In reviewing these 10 techniques, 

she and her administrator agree that “Technique 10: Double Plan” would be helpful in Mrs. Johnson being more intentional on 

reflecting on the impact of her teaching. From the Professional Commitment section of the Possible Sources of Evidence for 

Standard 8 document, they further determine that a reflective journal could appropriately provide evidence specific to this 

opportunity for growth. 

o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson documents the following:

 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus of using reflection to improve instruction
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 14

 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes her goal of using reflection and timelines for meeting that goal

 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use “Technique 10: Double Plan” to organize her reflections and her 

planning for improved instruction 

 RESULTS – (to be completed later in Step 5)

Mrs. Johnson can further support these opportunities for growth with appropriate articles and research. Her local Professional Development

Committe (PDC), district coaches, the regional professional development center and professional associations can be of assistance as well as 

other effective teachers in her building and district.

Step 4: Regularly assess progress and provide feedback 

Rationale

In keeping with the research on formative development, the esential role of practice and feedback will ensure that the acquisition and 

application of new learning, skills and strategies will lead to the improvement of effective practice resulting in improved learning for students.

Description

Determine progress made on new skill acquistion and application using a variety of formal and informal strategies. In addition to building and 

district administrators, the use of peers, mentors, coaches, regional centers, associations and other building and district resources assist with 

this part of the process.

Feedback on the growth opportunities from the identified indicator is critical. It ensures that new learning takes place, but more importantly 

that new skills and strategies are applied and practiced and growth documented. The following guidelines assist in this process of regular 

assessment of progress and feedback:

1. A minimum of three to five opportunities for formal and informal feedback should occur on each identified indicator

2. Informal feedback may be provided by mentors, coaches, peers, external consultants, etc. 

3. A formal follow-up assessment should be completed by the administrator

4. Numerical scoring on the appropriate growth guide for each indicator included as a part of the feedback is optional, but is often helpful 

to accurately determine progress

The use of feedback forms inlcuded as a part of the state model allows for documentation of feedback and progress. There are several different 

forms available for use in providing and documenting feedback. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 15

The Performance Indicator Feedback Form (shown on left) provides documentation of the progression of feedback offered on a particular 

indicator. This single page form can be used to document up to three instances of feedback for a single indicator. Additional forms may be used 

as needed. There is opportunity for both teacher and observer comments. 

The General Observation Feedback Form (shown on right) provides documentation of general information and data gathered from a classroom 

observation. In addition to the option of providing feedback on specific indicators offered in the top section, the form also allows for a very 

general overview of other relevant information including particular practice strategies being used by the teacher, student engagement levels, 

the depth of knowledge observed, structure of the classroom, alignment between curriculum and instruction, type of assessment being used 

and an overall assessment of the learning environment. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 16

Example

On several occasions, Mrs. Johnson receives a Performance Indicator Feedback Form from the district’s instructional coach on her use of 

linguistic and nonlinguistic demonstrations of student understanding of content in support of Quality Indicator 1.1. She also receives a 

Performance Indicator Feedback Form on how well she is facilitating students’ efforts to self-report their progress in learning. Mrs. Johnson also 

receives a couple of General Observation Feedback Forms from her administrator and in their discussions they review her reflective journal and 

discuss how well the strategy for making a double plan is working. This discussion includes looking at evidence of the changes she has made in 

instruction and how well she feels these have impacted her students’ learning. 

These forms provide Mrs. Johnson with documented feedback and evidence on the progress she is making on her selected indicators. She has 

opportunity to continue emphasizing those particular strategies that appear to be working as well as make adjustments in any areas where she 

feels she could be making more progress. 

Step 5: Determine a follow-up score for each identified indicator 

Rationale

To determine growth on an indicator, it is necessary to compare the follow-up score to the baseline score. The comparison provides a measure 

of growth that has occurred on the performance articulated in each quality indicator. 

Description

Using the same process to determine the baseline rating, the follow-up rating is determined by considering the evidence at the appropriate level 

of the growth guide. When making a determination about the follow-up rating, it is necessary to consider the particular professional frame of 

the teacher’s opportunity for growth. 

As a reminder, evidence falls into one of three different categories: commitment, practice and impact. Evidence in the commitment frame 

focuses on the qualtiy of the teacher and includes data and information like preparation, lesson design and credentialing. Evidence in the 

practice frames focuses on observable behaviors, or the quality of the teaching that the teacher is doing. Evidence in the impact frames focuses 

on outcomes or what students in the teacher’s class are doing. The follow-up score is determined as follows:

1. Using the appropriate growth guide and rating scale (see below), determine a follow-up score. A score of 0 indicates there is no 

evidence present in at least one of the three frames. Ideally, this follow-up score is collaboratively determined through a 

professional conversation between the teacher and administrator.

 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 17

RATING SCALE

Not 

Present

Present

but 

Inconsistent

Present 

Consistent 

Routine

Present

but 

Inconsistent

Present 

Consistent

Routine

Present

but 

Inconsistent

Present 

Consistent 

Routine

Present 

Consistent 

Routine

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Emerging Developing Proficient Distinguished

2. Once the follow-up score has been determined, provide specific feedback that includes an explanation and rationale for the given 

score.

The purpose of follow-up rating is to determine the extent to which the plan articulated on the Educator Growth Plan was addressed. In 

particular, it is used to determine the extent to which the strategies outlined in the plan addressed the goal. If the strategies did address the 

goal, then the opportunity for growth will have been addressed and satisfied. This is documented in the RESULTS box of the Educator Growth 

Plan. In addition, the follow-up score and growth score are captured on the Educator Growth Plan as well. 

Example

Mrs. Johnson’s follow-up ratings included:

• A follow-up score of “4 Developing” on Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language 

o Based on the feedback Mrs. Johnson received on the use of the Marzano strategy she was practicing (MDQ 2.12) and monitoring 

student work samples, the evidence now suggests that students are using academic language more consistently than they were 

at the time of the baseline assessment.

o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson adds the additional documentation:

 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for increasing the use of academic language

 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how much she wants student use of academic language to increase by and when

 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use a Marzano strategy (MDQ 2.12) and student works samples to 

demonstrate an increase in academic language 

 RESULTS – Mrs. Johnson describes the specific data from student work samples that demonstrates an increase in her

students’ ability to use academic language

 Baseline Score – 2
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 18

 Follow-up Score – 4

 Growth Score – 2 

• A follow-up score of “5 Proficient” on Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies

o Observation of Mrs. Johnson’s classroom provides evidence of students using their progress in learning. A review of different 

ways that students have communicated this progress to their parents also provides additional evidence. 

o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson adds the additional documentation:

 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus for assisting students in reporting their progress in learning

 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes how she wants students to report their progress and a timeframe for this to occur

 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use the research of John Hattie and individual student 

growth/performance to demonstrate students’ ability to report their progress in learning 

 RESULTS – Mrs. Johnson describes examples of students communicating their progress in learning and the impact it 

appears to have had throughout the year

 Baseline Score – 4

 Follow-up Score – 5

 Growth Score – 1 

• A follow-up score of “3 Developing” on Quality Indicator 8.1 Self-assessment and improvement

o Through discussions and review of Mrs. Johnson’s lesson plans and reflective journal, there is evidence to suggest that she is 

more intentional in using reflection to modify instruction. In addition, the T-Chart she developed using “Technique 10: Double 

Plan” provides further evidence of the impact this has had on learning in her classroom. 

o In the Educator Growth Plan, Mrs. Johnson adds the additional documentation:

 FOCUS – Mrs. Johnson describes the focus of using reflection to improve instruction

 GOAL – Mrs. Johnson describes her goal of using reflection and timelines for meeting that goal

 STRATEGY – Mrs. Johnson describes how she will use “Technique 10: Double Plan” to organize her reflections and her 

planning for improved instruction 

 RESULTS – Mrs. Johnson describes the evidence gathered in her reflective journal, from her T-Chart, and from changes 

and adaptations made in her lesson plans

 Baseline Score – 2

 Follow-up Score – 3

 Growth Score – 1 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 19

Step 6: Complete the final summative evaluation 

Rationale

The evaluation process exists for the improvement as a necessary catalyst for improving student performance. The summative evaluation pulls 

together the data that has been collected and provides a final overall statement of the teacher’s effectiveness. 

Description

An overall determination on performance uses baseline and follow-up scores, feedback generated throughout the year on selected indicators, 

general feedback generated periodically through classroom observations and any other data or information relevanat to the teacher’s 

performance observed or gathered throughout the year. This information is captured on feedback forms and the Educator Growth Plan or, if 

applicable, the Educator Improvement Plan. This information and data is used to complete Summative Evaluation Form. 

 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 20

The first 1 1⁄2 pages of the summative evaluation form provides both an overview of the effectiveness of the teacher looking across all nine 

standards as well as a focused view in regards to the specific indicators the teacher has worked on throughout the year. 

• Assessing the teacher’s performance across all teaching standards

o Each standard is listed with summary statements. The statements represent a very broad description drawn from the categories 

of commitment, practice and impact. They are listed as a type of checklist supporting each of 9 standards. For each standard,

three options are provided:

 Area of Concern – checking this box for a standard will likely result in an improvement plan for this standard meaning 

that growth in this area is both necessary and required for continued employment

 Growth Opportunity – checking this box for a standard might possibly result in an indicator from this standard being 

selected in the following year as an opportunity for growth and documented in the next year’s Educator Growth Plan

 Meets Expectation – checking this box for this standard indicates that performance in this area meets the expecation of 

the administrator/district at the present time

o Note: the comment box provided below each standard provides opportunity to offer the rationale for the rating as well as to 

note exemplary performance in this particular area.

• Assessing the teacher’s performance on selected indicators

o This section of the summative evaluation form focuses on the growth opportunities presented through the selected indicators. 

Summative information is provided in the following areas:

 Indicator and Rationale – document the specific indicator(s) that were selected and the reason this was a growth 

opportunity for the teacher

 Baseline Assessment – indicate the initial rating achieved for each selected indicator

 Goal – summarize the goal that was created to address the growth opportunity

 Results – describe the outcomes of implementing the strategy and determine whether the focus was adequately 

addressed

 Follow-Up Assessment – indicate the follow-up rating achieved for each selected indicator

o Note: This information is transferred from the Educator Growth Plan
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 21

The final page of the Summative Evaluation Form provides an overall 

rating for the teacher. This section is completed as follows:

1. Years in Position – determine the number of years the teacher has 

been in the current evaluated position (Note: the purpose for “in 

position” is to allow for reassignment of teachers to different grade 

levels/positions without adversly affecting performance ratings)

2. Select one of the effectiveness ratings based on the following 

criteria:

a. Ineffective Rating 

i. Multiple areas of concern across the 9 standards, 

OR

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on 

the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

b. Minimally Effective Rating

i. 1 area of concern across the 9 standards, OR

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on 

the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

c. Effective Rating 

i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on 

the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

d. Highly Effective Rating

i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on 

the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

e. Complete the comments section and the recommendation 

for employment
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 22

Example

Mrs. Johnson’s administrator completed her summative evaluation form with the following information:

Assessing Mrs. Johnson’s performance across all 9 teaching standards

• Standard 1: Content Knowledge Aligned with Appropriate Instruction Meets Expectation

• Standard 2: Student Learning Growth and Development Growth Opportunity 

• Standard 3: Curriculum Implementation Meets Expectation

• Standard 4: Critical Thinking Meets Expectation

• Standard 5: Positive Classroom Environment Meets Expectation

• Standard 6: Effective Communication Growth Opportunity

• Standard 7: Student Assessment and Data Analysis Meets Expectation

• Standard 8: Self-Assessment and Improvement Meets Expectation

• Standard 9: Professional Collaboration Meets Expectation

Mrs. Johnson had no areas of concern. She had two areas, Student Learning, Growth and Development and Effective Communication, that 

were marked by her administrator as growth opportunities. Her selected indicators next year could possibly come from these two standards. 

In the comments section under Standard 9 Professional Collaboration, her administrator particularly noted that he felt Mrs.Johnson was 

particularly strong in her collaboration skills and in working with other colleagues.

Assessing Mrs. Johnson’s performance on selected indicators

Mrs. Johnson’s follow-up ratings on her identified indicators show improved effective practice on specific research-based targets intended to 

improve the learning of her 3rd grade students. Her ratings on her practice moved from a rating of 

• Emerging (2) to Developing (4) on Quality Indicator 1.1: Content knowledge and academic language. 

• Developing (4) to Proficient (5) on Quality Indicator 7.3: Student-led assessment strategies. 

• Emerging (2) to Developing (3) on Quality Indicator 8.1 Self-assessment and improvement. 

Her average rating based on her follow-up assessments is a 4 (12 total / 3 indicators = 4). This average follow-up assessment score provides a 

general summary on the growth Mrs. Johnson achieved in her three growth opportunities. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 23

Mrs. Johnson is in her third year of teaching third grade. Since she has been in her current, evaluated position for three years, the second row of 

the Overall Teacher Rating chart is used. Mrs. Johnson had no areas of concern AND her average rating fell in the 4-5 range. 

 

Based on the information collected throughout the year and compiled on the Summative Evaluation Form, Mrs.Johnson would receive the 

following overall rating: 

Mrs. Johnson is rated as Effective for the 2012 - 2013 school year.

Teacher’s Name Effectiveness Rating

 Recommend for Re-Employment  Do Not Recommend for Re-Employment

 Develop a new or revised growth plan based on 

new indicators or a continuation of the same 

indicators. 

 Develop an improvement plan linked to indicators. This 

must included specific target dates and timelines that 

must be met in order for re-employment to continue. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 24

Step 7: Reflect and Plan 

Rationale

The evaluation process exists primarily for the improvement of effective practice in order to improve student performance. Ongoing reflection 

and planning are used to ensure that student learning needs are continually met. 

Description

The improvement of effective practice is a means to an end. The ongoing and continual process of improving professional practice is essential

for ensuring that student learning needs remain the focus of the evaluation process. The ultimate result is the improvement of student learning. 

Monitoring student learning growth caused by a teacher’s improved practice satisfies the primary purpose of the evaluation process. 

Reflection on personal growth is an important part of feedback. It provides personal insight to areas of strength and potential growth 

opportunities for future focus. As a part of this reflection, consider the following:

1. Assess whether the particular areas of improvement of effective practice impacted student learning

2. Reflect on personal growth and possible future opportunities for continued growth

3. Plan ahead for future opportunities for growth. In collaboration with the administrator and perhaps teams of teachers and/or

colleagues, select indicators for next year (applies to returning teachers).

4. Continue to acquire new knowledge and practice new strategies and skills

Example

Through the end of the year, Mrs. Johnson continues to monitor the learning of her 3rd grade students. She particularly reflects on how new 

learning, skills and strategies from the evaluation process have contributed to her students improved performance. In consultation with her 

principal, she begins to plan which particular indicators would be most appropriate for her to focus on next year. In particular, based on her 

Summative Evaluation Form, they consider and discuss selecting indicators from Standard 2: Student Learning, Growth and Development and 

Standard 6: Effective Communication. Their professional conversation includes consideration of working on some of the same indicators next 

year. Mrs. Johnson will use her summer months to continue her learning in ways that will improve her performance on the indicators she will 

work on next year. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 25

Timeline for completion of the Teacher Evaluation Protocol

Step # Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Title and Description Of Step

Identify the 

indicators to be 

assessed

Determine a 

baseline score

for each 

identified 

indicator

Develop an

Educator 

Growth Plan

Reguarly assess progress and provide 

feedback 

Determine a 

follow-up 

score for each 

identified 

indicator

Complete the 

final 

summative 

evaluation 

Reflect and Plan 

Select indicators 

to be assessed 

based on 

student data and 

aligned to 

building & 

district 

improvement 

plans.

Conduct an 

initial 

assessment of 

identified 

indicators and 

set a baseline 

score for each 

identified 

indicator.

Based on the 

opportunities for 

growth and the

baseline scores,

complete the 

Educator 

Growth Plan

that includes the 

practice and 

application of 

new knowledge 

and skills.

Conduct observations on performances in the 

identified indicators. 

Provide targeted feedback on areas of 

strength and opportunities for growth.

Note: observations may be conducted by 

coaches, peers, teacher team members as 

well as principals and assistant principals.

Conduct a 

follow-up

assessment of 

identified 

indicators. 

Determine 

overall progress 

on the 

Educator 

Growth Plan.

Complete the 

Summative 

Evaluation 

Form to 

determine the 

overall rating 

on 

performance by 

the 15th of 

March. 

Continue to monitor student 

growth and reflect on the 

impact of improved effective 

practice.

Reflect on progress of growth 

opportunities.

Indicators for next year may 

be selected based on local 

student data and the results 

of the evaluation process.

Timeline

Returning

Teacher

April –

Summer August – October November – February By March 15 April – May – Summer
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 26

New Teacher Protocol

The entry into the teaching profession is too often characterized as times 

of isolation, stress and fear of failure on the part of the new teacher. 

Effective districts work to ensure this is not the case. The first two years 

of teaching should be supported by intentional mechanisms and support 

structures to ensure the success of the novice educator. 

• The overall structure is the district’s plan for professional 

development of all teachers. This plan ensures that teachers 

receive what they need to be successful.

• Within the district’s plan for professional development is the 

induction process which ensures that teachers new to the 

district, including new teachers, are successfully introduced and 

brought into the expectations, priorities and culture of the 

system.

• Within the district’s induction process is the mentoring program where the novice teacher receives two years of one-to-one support.

*For a more comprehensive description, see the Guidelines for the Probationary Period offered by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

A district’s successful induction process, which includes an effective mentoring program, focuses on particular performance targets to ensure the 

effective teacher practice of the new teacher. Improving the effectiveness of the teacher and the achievement of their students occurs through a 

focus on evidence of the teacher’s knowledge and skills. Typical areas of focus include classroom management procedures and routines, 

effective instructional practices, understanding the school community, engaging in ongoing professional learning, and participating in teamwork 

among administrators, teachers, support staff and community members. Building on these proven practices, the induction process continues the 

ongoing development of the educator in ways that promote successful teaching which demonstrates effectiveness. The initial years are 

particularly important as a time to assess initial baseline performance data and identify personal strengths and opportunities for growth. 

SUCCESSFUL 

NOVICE 

TEACHER

District-wide 

Professional 

Development

Induction 

Process

Mentoring
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 27

Timeline for New Teacher Evaluation

 

The first and second year of teaching can be particularly overwhelming for the new teacher. It is simply not realistic to expect the new teacher to 

demonstrate performance across 36 separate indicators. As such, doing an in-depth assessment of the novice educator’s performance on all 36 

indicators would not only be overwhelming but likely inaccurate as well. However, events at certain times of the year do allow opportunity to 

collect baseline data on performance and provide specific meaningful feedback to new teachers on particularly relevant knowledge and skills . 

This specific feedback should be provided to the mentee by the mentor. The administrator should also regularly interact with the new teacher, 

providing specific feedback on performance. By maintaining a focus on specific performances at particular times of the year, it’s possible to 

accomplish the following:

• The mentee has a clear sense of expectations connected to certain times/events

• The induction process and mentor can offer very targeted support aligned to particular school events the mentee is experiencing

• The administrator has a very clear goal of providing support and feedback multiple times throughout the year to the novice 

teacher 

• By the conclusion of the second year, the mentee has received support, guidance, collaboration and feedback across a broad set 

of expectations

Baseline data, observed and gathered across the initial two years, provides a general overview of the mentee’s strengths as well as 

opportunities for growth. These areas, in particular the opportunities for growth, will inform areas of concentration in the mentee’s continued 

development as a part of the overall system’s professional development plan. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 28

Certain performance targets, or specific skills, 

are of particular importance at certain times of 

the year. While the context of the community 

and in particular the teachers’ student 

population will have influence over the timing 

and the types of knowledge and skills the new 

teacher will need to possess and demonstrate; 

there are some generalizations that can be 

reasonably concluded, regardless of context. 

For example, knowledge and skills associated 

with curriculum and lesson planning are 

especially relevant in the days just prior to 

beginning the school year when the teacher is 

planning for the first few weeks of school. 

Likewise, skills involving classroom 

management, procedures and routines are of 

particular significance in the first few weeks of 

the school year. 

A general summary of indicators of teacher 

performance and a time of significance is 

provided for the first and second year of 

teaching. The timeframes on this table begin

with the end of the clinical experience which 

occurs in the preparation process. The 

timeframes extend through the summer prior 

to the first day of school and conclude with the 

summer following initial year of teaching. 
Missouri's educator evaluation syste

m Page 29

 

The second year of teaching is organized in similar 

fashion. The timeframes on this table begin with 

the summer prior to the second year of teaching 

and extend through to the summer following the 

second year of teaching. This encompasses all of 

the required two years of mentoring that is to be 

provided to all new teachers. 

Each table contains 8 separate timeframes. Each 

timeframe contains anywhere between 2 to 7 

Quality Indicators as the particular focus during the 

indicated timeframe. In this way, mentees are 

focusing on a defined set up performances within 

each specified timeframe. The selected indicators 

are suggested based on ordinary events that occur 

in a typical school year. There is flexibility to 

substitute indicators based on the unique 

characteristics of a particular district and/or school. 

What is most important is ensuring that baseline 

data on performance is collected on the mentee; 

that the mentee receives specific feedback on their 

performance from the mentor on those specific 

performances and knowledge; that the 

administrator regularly interacts with the new 

teacher providing support and specific feedback on 

performance; and that this occurs without 

overwhelming the new teacher, but instead 

provides real time support for the emotions and 

reactions the new teacher is experiencing based on 

the issues they are experiencing. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 30

New Teacher Feedback and 

Evaluation Forms

There is a series of mentee feedback forms. 

These forms are aligned to the 8 timeframes 

that occur each year and collectively create the 

process for gathering baseline data and directing 

meaningful feedback between the mentee and 

mentor. Each form specifically lists the quality 

indicators for the specified timeframe. Each 

indicator includes a general description

referencing the particular knowledge and/or skill 

to be demonstrated. 

There is opportunity provided for reflection on 

each of the listed indicators. As mentee and 

mentor talk through the specific indicator and its 

relevance for what is currently happening in the 

school year, this area is used to capture 

potential strengths and areas of confidence as 

well as potential opportunities for continued 

growth. 

An overall determination on performance uses 

feedback generated throughout the year on 

selected indicators, general feedback generated 

periodically through classroom observations and 

any other data or information relevant to the 

new teacher’s performance observed or 

gathered throughout the year. 
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 31

This information and data is used by the administrator to complete the Summative Evaluation Form. 

 

The first 1 1⁄2 pages of the summative evaluation form provides both an overview of the effectiveness of the new teacher looking across all nine 

standards. 

• Assessing the teacher’s performance across all teaching standards

o Each standard is listed with summary statements. The statements represent a very broad description drawn from the categories 

of commitment, practice and impact used on the growth guides for the quality indicators. They are listed as a type of checklist 

supporting each of 9 standards. For each standard, three options are provided:
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 32

 Area of Concern – checking this box for a standard resuls in an improvement plan for this standard meaning that growth 

in this area is both necessary and required for continued employment

 Growth Opportunity – checking this box for a standard might possibly result in an indicator from this standard being 

selected in the teacher’s second year as an opportunity for growth and documented in the next year’s Educator Growth 

Plan

 Meets Expectation – checking this box for a standard indicates that performance in this area meets the expecation of 

the administrator/district at the present time

o Note: the comment box provided below each standard provides opportunity to offer the rationale for the rating as well as to 

note exemplary performance in this particular area.

The second page of the Summative Evaluation Form provides an overall rating for the new teacher. This section is completed as follows:

1. Years in Position – determine if this is the first or second year the teacher has been in the current evaluated position (Note: the purpose for 

“in position” is to allow for reassignment of teachers to different grade levels/positions without adversly affecting performance ratings)

2. Select one of the effectiveness ratings based on the following criteria:

a. Ineffective Rating 

i. Multiple areas of concern across the 9 standards, OR

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

b. Minimally Effective Rating

i. 1 area of concern across the 9 standards, OR

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

c. Effective Rating 

i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

d. Highly Effective Rating

i. No areas of concern across the 9 standards, AND

ii. An average of the follow-up assessment scores on the selected indicators falls into the indicated range

e. Complete the comments section and the recommendation for employment
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 33

Timeline for completion of the New Teacher Evaluation Protocol

1st Year for the New Teacher

Suggested Indicators of Focus

For Each Timeframe

Suggested 

Indicators

1.1

2.3

3.1

4.2

6.1

8.3

9.1

Suggested 

Indicators

1.2

2.1

5.1

5.2

6.2

7.1

9.1

Suggested 

Indicators

2.2

4.1

4.3

5.2

7.3

7.5

Suggested 

Indicators

1.5

2.4

3.2

6.1

7.2

7.5

Suggested 

Indicators

2.5

5.2

7.4

7.6

8.1

9.2

Suggested 

Indicators

1.2

2.2

4.3

7.2

7.5

Complete New Teacher

Summative Evaluation Form

Suggested 

Indicators

2.5

7.4

7.6

8.1

9.1

Suggested 

Indicators

8.1

8.2

Time 

Frame

 Prior to 

 School

First Month

Year Begins

2nd-3rd Month

Quarter 1

3rd-4th Month

Quarter 2

6th Month

Mid-Year

7th-8th Month

Quarter 3

 By March 15 9th-10th Month

Quarter 4

End of the 

Year

2nd Year for the New Teacher

Suggested Indicators of Focus

For Each Timeframe

Suggested 

Indicators

1.1

1.3

3.1

4.2

9.1

Suggested 

Indicators

1.2

1.4

2.6

5.1

5.2

6.4

7.1

Suggested 

Indicators

2.2

4.1

4.3

5.2

7.3

7.5

Suggested 

Indicators

3.2

3.3

5.3

7.2

7.5

Suggested 

Indicators

2.5

7.4

7.6

8.1

9.3

Suggested 

Indicators

1.2

6.3

7.2

7.5

Complete New Teacher

Summative Evaluation Form

Suggested 

Indicators

7.4

7.6

8.1

9.1

Suggested 

Indicators

8.1

8.2

Time 

Frame

 Prior to 

 School

First Month

Year Begins

2nd-3rd Month

Quarter 1

3

rd-4th Month

Quarter 2

6th Month

Mid-Year

7

th-8th Month

Quarter 3

 By March 15 9

th-10th Month

Quarter 4

End of the 

Year
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 34

Educator Improvement Protocol

While the primary purpose of the Educator Growth Plan is to identify and 

capitalize on growth opportunities, the focus of the Educator 

Improvement Protocol is on intervention for areas of concern that require 

immediate attention. Thus, the Educator Improvement Protocol targets

very specific standards, indicators, and actions that must be improved 

within a specific timeline. Accordingly, the Educator Improvement 

Protocol is not only a collaborative process between teacher and 

evaluator; it is also one of direction and guidance from the evaluator 

requiring the achievement of certain outcomes in a timely fashion. 

It is important to remember that the Educator Improvement Protocol is a 

single process within a larger process of evaluation and growth. 

Therefore, the Educator Improvement Protocol should ony be followed 

after an initial evaluation, either formal or informal, revealing one or more areas of concern. Consequently, the first step of the Educator

Improvement Protocol is to detect and indicate any areas of concern. If the evaluator detects any such areas of concern, the next step in the 

protocol is to complete the form: Educator Improvement Plan, Initial Conference. This form allows the evaluator to note the indicator causing 

concern as well as the rationale for concern, the improvement target, and the corresponding benchmarks and timelines. The Educator 

Improvement Plan, Initial Conference form should be completed collaboratively with the teacher and copies should be subsequently shared as 

documentation of the overall plan and areas of concern.

After collaborative completion of the Educator Improvement Plan, Initial Conference form, the evaluator should conduct the appropriate 

number of necessary formal and informal observations to monitor the status of the teacher. The Educator Improvement Plan, Follow-up 

Observation & Conference form should be used to document every formal observation conducted. 

Finally, after multiple follow-up observations and conferences, the evaluator should complete the Summative Evaluation Form to determine the 

respective teacher’s employment status accordingly. 

NOTE: For incidents involving blatant violations of board policy and state or federal law, immediate employment action may be taken as 

prescribed or permitted by law.
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 35

Timeline for completion of the Educator Improvement Protocol

Step # Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5

Action Title Detect and indicate areas 

of concern upon 

evaluation

See page 34:

Improvement Plan, 

Initial Conference

Hold Initial Conference 

to notify educator of 

status and plan

Conduct the appropriate number of 

formal and informal observations to 

monitor status

Complete Summative 

Evaluation Form to 

determine 

employment status 

accordingly

Action 

Description

Formal and/or informal 

observations should be 

held throughout the year. 

If one or more areas of 

concern are detected, 

teacher should be placed 

in the Improvement 

Protocol

Note standards and 

indicators causing 

concern, give rationale, 

set timeline and 

improvement target 

complete with 

benchmarks and 

strategies

Explain to teacher 

rationale for placement 

in Improvement 

Protocol, explain 

improvement target, 

timeline, benchmarks, 

and ramifications

Evaluate, observe, and confer with 

teacher either formally or informally 

multiple times throughout the 

Improvement Protocol timeline. 

Evaluator should document such 

meetings on the Follow-up Observation 

& Conference forms to note any 

improvements, shortcomings, or other 

general observational data

Use and apply in the 

same manner 

described in Step 6 of 

the general Teacher 

Evaluation Protocol

Timeline Detection of areas of 

concern can occur at any 

time throughout the year 

or at any point in a 

teacher’s career

The Initial Conferenece 

form should be 

completed immediately 

after detection of areas 

of concern

The Initial Conference 

should be held 

immediately after

completion of the form

Formal and informal observations

and/or conferences should be 

conducted throughout the remainder 

of the established timeline for 

achievement of the improvement 

target. 

Such observations and/or conferences 

should be held in gaps wide enough for 

the teacher to show improvement, but 

consistent to accurately monitor 

progress

TheSummative 

Evaluation Form 

should be completed 

at the end of the 

timeline

*Note: For incidents involving blatant violations of board policy and state or federal law, immediate employment action may be taken as permitted by law.
Missouri's educator evaluation system Page 36

Educator Improvement Plan forms

 

The Educator Improvement Plan, Initial Conference form (above left) is used to document specific standards and indicators creating areas of 

concern. After identifying the indicator to be improved upon, the evaluator then expresses a rationale for why improvement is required. Finally,

the evaluator sets an improvement target complete with the necessary benchmarks and timeline for achievement of the required outcome. 

The Educator Improvement Plan, Follow-up Observation & Conference form (above right) is used for any formal or informal observations or

conferences that are conducted throughout the timeline established by the evaluator. At least one formal and one informal evaluation should be 

held. When using this form, the evaluator can document any meetings to note improvements, shortcomings, or other general observational 

data. 

Collectively, the documents provide the essential framework for improvement, as well as the documentation and protocol necessary to make 

high-stakes employment decisions. Upon completion of the timeline, evaluators should use the Summative Evaluation Form to note final 

outcomes and make ultimate employment decisions.