Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RSU 15 board sets timeline and forms for superintendent year‑end evaluation
Summary
Board reviewed two evaluation forms tied to the superintendent job description, agreed to collect upward feedback from staff and board input by mid‑April, and set drafting and executive‑session steps to finalize an evaluation for delivery in June.
The RSU 15 board reviewed the tools and schedule it will use for the year-end evaluation of Superintendent Dr. Turner and agreed on a process intended to align feedback with the superintendent job description.
Lauren, who presented the forms, said she created two similar Google-form feedback tools: an "upward feedback" form for central-office staff and direct reports, and a board feedback form tied section-by-section to the job description. The forms use a four-point rating scale—"exemplary, effective, needs improvement or don't know"—with space for comments. "I do encourage for folks to provide specific feedback," Lauren said.
Board members asked to add a specific item for "progress to goals" so reviewers can assess completion or progress on the three individual goals set earlier in the year. Dr. Turner will provide a self-evaluation and commentary; the personnel committee will meet in executive session to discuss criteria and draft the evaluation before members review a draft evaluation in executive session in May. The timeline set in the meeting calls for Dr. Turner to provide her self-reflection by April 6, board and staff forms returned by April 15, draft evaluation discussion in May, and delivery of the final evaluation in June.
Board members discussed confidentiality and noted the upward feedback link will be available only to internal email addresses and will be anonymized to encourage candid responses, while board forms will be tied to board member names. Several members emphasized the utility of having evidence and commentary attached to the job-description sections when rating performance. The board agreed to incorporate goal-progress feedback and to let administration finalize scheduling details.
