DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION  
SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION  
TEACHER AND SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR EVALUATION TOOLS  
(By authority conferred on the superintendent of public instruction by sections 1249 and 1249b  
of 1976 PA 451, MCL 380.1249 and MCL 380.1249b, and Executive Reorganization Order No.  
1996-6, MCL 388.993)  
R 380.21 Definitions.  
Rule 1. As used in these rules:  
(a) “Act” means the revised school code, 1976 PA 451, MCL 380.1 to 380.1852.  
(b) “Department” means the department of education.  
(c) “District” means a school district, intermediate school district, or public school academy as  
defined in the act.  
(d) “Educator” means a teacher or school administrator whose performance is evaluated as  
required by the act.  
(e) “Efficacy” means the extent to which an evaluation tool provides information that improves  
professional practice.  
(f) “Evaluation tool” means a written instrument used to assess the performance of educators as  
required by the act.  
(g) “List” means the compilation of evaluation tools by the department as required by the act and  
maintained on the department’s website.  
(h) “Reliability” means the extent to which an evaluation tool is consistent and stable in yielding  
similar results under varying conditions, including, but not limited to, different evaluators and  
observers or different observation windows.  
(i) “Scoring guide” means the scoring instrument developed by the department and reviewed by  
the department’s technical advisory committee before initial implementation and subsequent  
modification that is available on the department’s website and that defines the minimum  
requirements for placement of an evaluation tool on the list using the following criteria: research  
base, qualifications of the author or authors, reliability, validity, and efficacy.  
(j) “Validity” means the extent to which an evaluation tool measures what it is intended to  
measure.  
History: 2017 AACS; 2024 MR 12, Eff. June 27, 2024.  
R 380.22 Placement of evaluation tool on list.  
Rule 2. (1) The department may place an evaluation tool on the list under this rule.  
(2) A district may request placement of an evaluation tool that it has adopted for use on the list  
by submitting an online application available on the department’s website and all of the following:  
(a) Evidence of the evaluation tool’s research base.  
(b) The identity and qualifications of the author or authors of the evaluation tool.  
(c) Evidence of the evaluation tool’s reliability, validity, and efficacy.  
Page 1  
Courtesy of Michigan Administrative Rules  
(d) All frameworks and rubrics used with the evaluation tool, with detailed descriptors for each  
performance level on key summative indicators.  
(e) A description of the processes for conducting observations, collecting evidence, conducting  
evaluation conferences, developing performance ratings, and developing performance  
improvement plans.  
(f) A description of the plan for providing evaluators and observers with training in the use of  
the evaluation tool.  
(3) A public or private organization other than a district may request placement of an evaluation  
tool on the list by submitting an online application available on the department’s website and all  
of the following:  
(a) One of the following:  
(i) Evidence that at least 2 state education agencies have approved or adopted the evaluation  
tool.  
(ii) Evidence that not less than 10 districts in this state will consider adopting the evaluation tool  
if the department adds it to the list.  
(b) Evidence of the evaluation tool’s research base.  
(c) The identity and qualifications of the author or authors of the evaluation tool.  
(d) Evidence of the evaluation tool’s reliability, validity, and efficacy.  
(e) All frameworks and rubrics used with the evaluation tool, with detailed descriptors for each  
performance level on key summative indicators.  
(f) A description of the processes for conducting observations, collecting evidence, conducting  
evaluation conferences, developing performance ratings, and developing performance  
improvement plans.  
(g) A description of the plan for providing evaluators and observers with training in the use of  
the evaluation tool.  
(4) The department shall review an evaluation tool submitted under this rule using the scoring  
guide and examining all information required under subrule (2) or (3) of this rule.  
(5) After receiving a request under this rule, the department shall notify the district or organization  
if the department will place the evaluation tool on the list. If the department determines that it will  
not place the evaluation tool on the list, the notice must include the reasons for denial of the request.  
(6) The department shall place an evaluation tool submitted under this rule on the list if it satisfies  
the minimum requirements set forth in the scoring guide.  
History: 2017 AACS; 2024 MR 12, Eff. June 27, 2024.  
R 380.23 Removal of evaluation tool from list.  
Rule 3. (1) The department shall remove an evaluation tool from the list if any of the following  
occurs:  
(a) The department modifies the scoring guide and an evaluation tool on the list does not satisfy  
the minimum requirements set forth in the scoring guide as modified.  
(b) An evaluation tool on the list is modified and, as modified, it does not satisfy the minimum  
requirements set forth in the scoring guide.  
(c) The department determines that the decision to place the evaluation tool on the list was based  
on incorrect information and that the evaluation tool does not satisfy the minimum requirements  
set forth in the scoring guide.  
Page 2  
Courtesy of Michigan Administrative Rules  
(2) Removal of an evaluation tool from the list under this rule does not preclude placement of the  
evaluation tool on the list at a later time under R 380.22.  
History: 2017 AACS.  
Page 3  
Courtesy of Michigan Administrative Rules  
;