39-9. Appeals Process

A teacher appeals process shall be established to contest certain summative ratings given by a qualified evaluator. It shall be comprised of a committee of four active or retired educators, two of whom shall be selected by agreement of the UNION President and Chief Executive Officer, one of whom shall be selected by the UNION and one of whom shall be selected by the BOARD. All members of the committee shall be qualified evaluators. Both the BOARD and the UNION shall select qualified alternate committee members who may substitute for their regularly appointed members. Individual members of the committee must recuse themselves from cases where they have personal familiarity with the teacher appealing a summative rating and will be replaced by the same appointing entity. The Joint Committee shall determine whether the appeals process exists after school year 2018-2019.

The following teachers will have a right to appeal their ratings according to the timelines outlined in Article 39-9.A:

The following teachers will have right to appeal their ratings if they are laid off out of order of seniority.

The time for appeal shall as set forth in Article 39-9A and shall commence when the teacher receives a notice of layoff/displacement. The notice shall advise the teacher of their right to appeal their rating.

  1. A teacher receiving an unsatisfactory rating, and a second consecutive developing rating that results in an unsatisfactory rating, shall be eligible to use the appeals process by filing a notice of intent to appeal with the appeals committee within ten days of receipt of the rating and then the appeal within thirty calendar days after receipt of the rating. The teacher must also submit a copy of the appeal to the teacher’s principal or head administrator. In the appeal, the teacher must state the factual basis for the appeal and identify the evidence that supports the appeal. An appeal may be based on student growth ratings in whole or part only if the teacher identifies a data integrity or data analysis error.
  2. Upon receiving an appeal, the appeals committee shall review the written record of the rating. The “written record of the rating” includes (1) the documents and materials submitted by the teacher to the evaluators during pre-conferences and post-conferences or at other times as evidence of the teacher’s practice and (2) the evaluator’s observations, comments and feedback. The written record of the rating shall not include materials and evidence that the teacher or evaluator was not privy to during the rating process.
  3. If the committee determines the written record of the rating to be insufficient to make a ruling, it shall schedule a meeting with the teacher at which the teacher shall be represented by the UNION and with at least one of the qualified evaluator-observers who contributed observation ratings to the teacher’s rating. The meeting shall take place within ten school days of receipt of the appeal.
  4. The BOARD shall provide the teacher and the UNION with all evidence used by the qualified evaluator to determine the summative rating under appeal five days prior to the meeting.
  5. After reviewing the written record of the rating, the appeals committee shall have the right to meet with the teacher and to determine if a formal observation of the teacher appealing the rating shall take place to assist it in its determination. If an observation does take place, the two jointly appointed appeals committee members must conduct the pre-observation conference in accordance with Article 39-2.3(C)(2), and the observation shall take place within five school days of the pre-observation conference.
  6. After a review of the written record of the rating and any interview with the teacher and evaluator, and any observation, and following deliberation, the appeals committee may overturn the rating if three of its members conclude that the rating under review is erroneous. If the appeals committee determines by majority vote that the teacher’s appeal is to be granted, the BOARD shall revoke the summative rating under appeal and issue the teacher a 250 if an unsatisfactory rating was revoked, a 284 if an emerging rating (210-250) was revoked, or a 285 if a developing rating (251-284) was revoked an appropriate summative evaluation. A different qualified evaluator shall be assigned to the teacher during the next school year who shall follow all applicable provisions of this Article. No developing rating that results from a sustained appeal of an unsatisfactory rating shall count towards the two- developing rule.