| Old | New | Differences | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | ||
| 2 | 2 | ||
| 3 | 3 | LCO No. 289 1 of 1 | |
| 4 | 4 | ||
| 5 | 5 | General Assembly Proposed Bill No. 5891 | |
| 6 | 6 | January Session, 2025 | |
| 7 | 7 | LCO No. 289 | |
| 8 | 8 | ||
| 9 | 9 | ||
| 10 | 10 | Referred to Committee on EDUCATION | |
| 11 | 11 | ||
| 12 | 12 | ||
| 13 | 13 | Introduced by: | |
| 14 | 14 | REP. HOWARD, 43 | |
| 15 | 15 | rd Dist. | |
| 16 | 16 | ||
| 17 | 17 | ||
| 18 | 18 | ||
| 19 | 19 | ||
| 20 | 20 | ||
| 21 | 21 | AN ACT CONCERNING REVISIONS TO THE CONNECTICUT | |
| 22 | 22 | GUIDELINES FOR EDUCATOR EVALUATION. | |
| 23 | 23 | Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General | |
| 24 | 24 | Assembly convened: | |
| 25 | 25 | ||
| 26 | 26 | That section 10-151b of the general statutes be amended to require the 1 | |
| 27 | 27 | Department of Education to revise Section 2 of the Connecticut 2 | |
| 28 | 28 | Guidelines for Educator Evaluation to establish a tiered program of 3 | |
| 29 | 29 | evaluation so that teachers who are rated as proficient or exemplary 4 | |
| 30 | 30 | need not be formally evaluated on an annual basis, and teachers who 5 | |
| 31 | 31 | are rated as developing or below standard will continue to be evaluated 6 | |
| 32 | 32 | annually. 7 | |
| 33 | 33 | Statement of Purpose: | |
| 34 | 34 | To allow educators who are rated as exemplary or proficient to continue | |
| 35 | 35 | to use their teaching hours focused on classroom instruction and | |
| 36 | 36 | student development by not requiring annual evaluations for such high- | |
| 37 | 37 | achieving educators, and providing educators with continuing support | |
| 38 | 38 | who have not yet reached exemplary and proficient evaluation ratings. |