Back to Basics: Midyear Progress Reports

As the school year’s midpoint approaches, school officials responsible for teacher evaluations should turn their attention to midyear progress reports. Revised School Code Section 1249 requires that school officials complete midyear progress reports for all first-year probationary teachers as well as all tenured and probationary teachers rated “minimally effective” or “ineffective” in their most recent annual year-end evaluation. It is also prudent to conduct a midyear progress report for all probationary teachers to measure individualized development plan (IDP) progress.

The midyear progress report is a supplemental tool used to gauge a teacher’s improvement from the preceding school year and is designed to assist teacher growth.

As a “supplemental tool,” the midyear progress report does not replace a teacher’s annual year-end evaluation. Nevertheless, school officials should consider the midyear progress report an essential part of the teacher evaluation process. If a midyear progress report is not completed, the evaluator will not have a complete picture of the teacher’s performance at the end of the school year, which could procedurally hamper employment decisions.

The midyear progress report must “gauge the teacher’s improvement” and align with the teacher’s IDP. As a practice point, the evaluator should document the teacher’s progress toward all IDP goals, trainings, and other requirements in the midyear progress report. Where applicable, the report must also review the teacher’s improvement from the “preceding school year” and assist the teacher’s growth going forward.

The midyear progress report must: (1) be based, at least in part, on student achievement; (2) align with the teacher’s IDP; and (3) include specific performance goals for the remainder of the school year.

Analyzing existing student achievement data and aligning the teacher’s IDP with the midyear progress report will help in assessing the teacher’s performance and improvement during the first half of the school year. The midyear progress report should clearly indicate whether any past performance deficiencies remain.

Including specifically tailored performance goals in the midyear progress report will assist gauging a teacher’s progress at the end of the year. These goals must be developed by the school official conducting the teacher’s annual year-end evaluation and should include recommended training to help the teacher achieve those goals. Evaluators should ensure that performance goals are rigorous and address any documented weaknesses. Additional goals should identify performance deficiencies and provide the teacher with ample opportunities to improve. The goals and training should also address any persistent performance deficiencies identified in previous evaluations.

While Section 1249 does not expressly mandate a meeting between the evaluator and the teacher, it requires that “[a]t the midyear progress report, the school administrator or designee . . . develop, in consultation with the teacher, a written improvement plan.” That language may be construed as requiring a meeting. “Consultation,” as interpreted by the State Tenure Commission, means that the teacher receives an opportunity to review and respond to the improvement plan before adoption. Even without a statutory mandate, best practice is to meet with the teacher to align the IDP with the midyear progress report, review the newly drafted goals and training recommendations, and obtain the teacher’s input and signature.

The evaluator should have the teacher sign the progress report to demonstrate that the document was developed in consultation with the teacher. If the teacher refuses to sign the report, the evaluator should indicate on the report that the teacher was consulted but refused to sign. The evaluator should sign and date the report. The teacher should receive a copy of the midyear progress report, and the school should retain a copy in the teacher’s personnel file.

While Section 1249 amendments are anticipated to take effect on July 1, 2024 (see Labor Law Changes: Preparing to Bargain Teacher Evaluations for a detailed analysis of those changes), midyear progress report requirements will remain a required evaluation component for all first-year probationary teachers and tenured and probationary teachers rated “minimally effective” or “ineffective” in their most recent year-end evaluation. Scheduling time to meet with a teacher and assembling the relevant information can inadvertently take a back seat to other pressing issues. Skipping this step in the evaluation process, however, could undermine the annual year-end evaluation process and future employment decisions for the teacher. Evaluators should prioritize midyear progress reports to ensure full statutory compliance.