Printable Format72-2410. Evaluation policies; criteria; development; procedure; evaluation required prior to contract nonrenewal. Evaluation policies adopted under K.S.A. 72-2409, and amendments thereto, shall meet the following guidelines or criteria:
(a) Consideration shall be given to the following employee attributes: Efficiency, personal qualities, professional deportment, ability, results and performance, including improvement in the academic performance of pupils or students insofar as the evaluated employee has authority to cause such academic improvement, in the case of teachers, the capacity to maintain control of pupils or students, and such other matters as may be deemed material.
(b) Community attitudes toward, support for and expectations with regard to educational programs shall be reflected.
(c) The original policy and amendments thereto shall be developed by the board in cooperation with the persons responsible for making evaluations and the persons who are to be evaluated, and, to the extent practicable, consideration shall be given to comment and suggestions from other community interests.
(d) Evaluations of the chief administrator employed by a board shall be made by the board. The board shall place primary responsibility upon members of the administrative staff in making evaluations of other employees.
(e) Persons to be evaluated shall participate in their evaluations, and shall be afforded the opportunity for self-evaluation.
(f) The contract of any person subject to evaluation shall not be nonrenewed on the basis of incompetence unless an evaluation of such person has been made prior to notice of nonrenewal of the contract and unless the evaluation is in substantial compliance with the board's policy of personnel evaluation procedure as filed with the state board in accordance with the provisions of K.S.A. 72-2409, and amendments thereto.
History: L. 1973, ch. 281, § 4; L. 1979, ch. 233, § 2; L. 1981, ch. 295, § 3; L. 1982, ch. 304, § 3; L. 1994, ch. 205, § 1; July 1.
Source or Prior Law:
72-9004.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Cited; requirements of board examined; no requirement that employee be given opportunity to improve before notice of nonrenewal. Burk v. Unified School Dist. No. 329, Wabaunsee Cty., 646 F. Supp. 1557, 1563 (1986).
2. Cited; absence of legislative intent authorizing school districts to contract away two-year employment provisions of K.S.A. 72-5445 examined. Miller v. U.S.D. No. 470, 12 Kan. App. 2d 368, 369, 744 P.2d 865 (1987).
3. Cited; nonrenewal of nontenured teacher, inapplicability of master agreement provision on evaluation examined. Miller v. U.S.D. No. 470, 242 Kan. 817, 818, 752 P.2d 113 (1988).
4. School district complied with act in not renewing principal's contract; did not violate due process. Peterson v. Unified School Dist. No. 418, 724 F. Supp. 829, 832 (1989).
5. Negotiability of evaluation criteria and evaluation procedures examined. U.S.D. No. 352 v. NEA-Goodland, 246 Kan. 137, 141, 785 P.2d 993 (1990).
6. Performance evaluation provided for in (f) is not applicable when school administrator's contract is nonrenewed for inefficiency. Brown v. U.S.D. No. 333, 261 Kan. 134, 152, 928 P.2d 57 (1996).
7. Tardy evaluations and plans of assistance for personnel remaining employed with school district not invalid. Marais des Cygnes Valley Teachers' Ass'n v. U.S.D. No. 456, 264 Kan. 247, 251, 954 P.2d 1096 (1998).