You are here

Assurances for Educator Evaluation Systems

The assurances for educator evaluation systems are intended to ensure that school districts and BOCES across Colorado implement written evaluation systems that are aligned with Senate Bill 10-191 and the State Board Rules for the Evaluation of Licensed Personnel. CDE successfully collected assurances from all districts indicating how licensed personnel in their district or BOCES are evaluated. View a summary of the educator effectiveness assurances data by district and BOCES (XLS).

Annual Assurance Process

Each year, by July 1st, Colorado districts and BOCES are required to submit assurances that they are implementing the State Model Evaluation System or another evaluation system that adheres to the requirements in statute (C.R.S. 22-9-106) and Colorado State Board of Education rules (1 CCR 301-87) for teachers, principals, and special services providers (SSPs).

Starting with the collection of assurances for the 2020-21 school year, the assurances process has been revised. It no longer includes the requirement of a website describing details of the LEA’s evaluation process nor a separate signature page, and the assurances process includes more in-depth questions regarding educator evaluation model use. For the 2021-22 school year, assurances remain the same as they were in 2020-21 and include:

  • The educator evaluation model used to evaluate teachers, principals, and all nine categories of SSPs;
  • For those educators evaluated using the state model evaluation system, the weights assigned to the four professional practices quality standards defined in rule;
  • The implementation of the Advisory Personnel Performance Evaluation Council (also referred to as the 1338 Committee); and
  • The date by which all educators will be trained on the system that will be used for their evaluation.

To complete the assurances process, the Superintendent/BOCES Executive Director or appointed designee:

Please contact your Educator Effectiveness Regional Specialist if you have any questions or need any assistance regarding assurances.  For general questions, please email Educator Effectiveness.

Preparing for Future Years

Beginning with educator evaluation assurances for the 2022-23 school year, the assurances collection will include additional questions about Measures of Student Learning/Outcomes (MSLs/MSOs). You can access further details regarding MSL/MSO questions that will be administered in 2022-23 here.

Additional Support and Information

Colorado Historical Use of Educator Effectiveness Evaluation Models for Teachers and Principals

Teachers

Model 2016-17
#
​2016-17
%
​​2017-18
#
​2017-18
%
2018-19
#
2018-19
%
2019-20
#
2019-20
%
2020-21
#
2020-21
%
State 164 86.3% 163 85.8% 170 88.5% 167 87.4% 170 88.5%
Local 13 6.8% 15 7.9% 15 7.8% 17 8.9% 16 8.3%
Combination of State and Local Models 13 6.8% 12 6.3% 7 3.6% 7 3.7% 6 3.1%
Total* 190   190   192   191   192  

Principals

Model ​2016-17
#
​2016-17
%
​2017-18
#
​2017-18
%
​2018-19
#
​2018-19
%
2019-20
#
​2019-20
%
2020-21
#
2020-21
%
State 157 87.2% 156 86.7% 159 88.3% 159 88.8% 156 89.1%
Local 14 7.8% 15 8.3% 15 8.3% 14 7.8% 16 9.1%
Combination of State and Local Models 9 5.0% 9 5.0% 6 3.3% 6 3.4% 3 1.7%
Total* 180   180   180   179   175  

*The total represents the number of districts and BOCES who both completed the required reporting of evaluation models used AND employed the type of educator detailed in a given table. Totals vary by year and by category of educator because not all districts and BOCES employ every category of educator.

Weighting of the Four Professional Practices Standards for Teachers and Principals

Teachers

Weighting ​2020-21
#
​2020-21
%
Equally weights standards 152 86.4%
Does not equally weight standards 24 13.6%
Total** 176  

Principals

Weighting ​2020-21
#
​2020-21
%
Equally weights standards 146 91.8%
Does not equally weight standards 13 8.2%
Total** 159  

Trends among those that do not weight the four quality standards equally:

  • Some districts and BOCES weighted each element equally within the four standards, which results in uneven weighting of the standards because the four standards do not all have the same number of elements.  This practice was most common for SSPs (6 of 11 LEAs compared to 3 of 24 and 5 of 14 for teachers and principals, respectively).
  • For teachers and SSPs, Quality Standard 3 was weighted most heavily among the four standards on average.  Quality Standard 3 relates to instructional practices and delivery of services for teachers and SSPs, respectively.
  • For principals, Quality Standard 2, which pertains to school culture, was weighted most heavily among the four standards on average.
  • For both teachers and principals, Quality Standard 4, pertaining to professionalism, was weighted lower than each of the other standards on average.

**The total represents the number of districts and BOCES who both completed the required reporting of evaluation models used, employed the type of educator detailed in a given table AND use the state model or a combination of state and local models for evaluation.  Totals vary by year and by category of educator because not all districts and BOCES employ every category of educator.

For prior year data and SSP information, download the summary data spreadsheet linked at the top of the page.