2017 ORS 342.850¹
Teacher evaluation
  • personnel file content
  • rules

(1) The district superintendent of every school district, including superintendents of education service districts, shall cause to have made at least annually but with multiple observations an evaluation of performance for each probationary teacher employed by the district. The purpose of the evaluation is to aid the teacher in making continuing professional growth and to determine the teacher’s performance of the teaching responsibilities. Evaluations shall be based upon at least two observations and other relevant information developed by the district.

(2)(a) The district school board shall develop an evaluation process in consultation with school administrators and with teachers. If the district’s teachers are represented by a local bargaining organization, the board shall consult with teachers belonging to and appointed by the local bargaining organization in the consultation required by this paragraph.

(b) The district school board shall implement the evaluation process that includes:

(A) The establishment of job descriptions and performance standards which include but are not limited to items included in the job description;

(B) A preevaluation interview which includes but is not limited to the establishment of performance goals for the teacher, based on the job description and performance standards;

(C) An evaluation based on written criteria which include the performance goals;

(D) A post-evaluation interview in which:

(i) The results of the evaluation are discussed with the teacher; and

(ii) A written program of assistance for improvement is established, if one is needed to remedy any deficiency specified in ORS 342.865 (Grounds for dismissal or contract nonextension of contract teacher) (1)(a), (d), (g) or (h); and

(E) The utilization of peer assistance whenever practicable and reasonable to aid teachers to better meet the needs of students. Peer assistance shall be voluntary and subject to the terms of any applicable collective bargaining agreement. No witness or document related to the peer assistance or the record of peer assistance shall be admissible in any proceeding before the Fair Dismissal Appeals Board, or in a probationary teacher nonrenewal hearing before a school board under ORS 342.835 (Probationary teacher), without the mutual consent of the district and the teacher provided with peer assistance.

(c) Nothing in this subsection is intended to prohibit a district from consulting with any other individuals.

(3) Except in those districts having an average daily membership, as defined in ORS 327.006 (Definitions for State School Fund distributions), of fewer than 200 students, the person or persons making the evaluations must hold teaching licenses. The evaluation shall be signed by the school official who supervises the teacher and by the teacher. A copy of the evaluation shall be delivered to the teacher.

(4) The evaluation reports shall be maintained in the personnel files of the district.

(5) The evaluation report shall be placed in the teacher’s personnel file only after reasonable notice to the teacher.

(6) A teacher may make a written statement relating to any evaluation, reprimand, charge, action or any matter placed in the teacher’s personnel file and such teacher’s statement shall be placed in the personnel file.

(7) All charges resulting in disciplinary action shall be considered a permanent part of a teacher’s personnel file and shall not be removed for any reason. A teacher shall have the right to attach the teacher’s response, or other relevant documents, to any document included under this subsection.

(8) The personnel file shall be open for inspection by the teacher, the teacher’s designees and the district school board and its designees. District school boards shall adopt rules governing access to personnel files, including rules specifying whom school officials may designate to inspect personnel files.

(9) A program of assistance for improvement or evaluation procedure shall not be technically construed, and no alleged error or unfairness in a program of assistance for improvement shall cause the overturning of a dismissal, nonextension of contract, nonrenewal of contract or other disciplinary action unless the contract teacher suffered a substantial and prejudicial impairment in the teacher’s ability to comply with school district standards. [1971 c.570 §5; 1973 c.298 §3; 1973 c.458 §1; 1977 c.881 §3; 1979 c.598 §1; 1979 c.668 §2a; 1987 c.663 §1; 1989 c.491 §29; 1997 c.864 §9]

Notes of Decisions

A teacher’s per­sonnel file need not necessarily identify all the sources of the subject matter discussed therein in order to be maintained as re­quired in this sec­tion in order for evidence relating to such subject matter to be admissible. School Dist. 48 v. Fair Dismissal Appeals Bd., 14 Or App 634, 514 P2d 1114 (1973)

Although the language of this statute is mandatory, it does not provide a remedy for its viola­tion. Smith v. School Dist. No. 45, 63 Or App 685, 666 P2d 1345 (1983), Sup Ct review denied

Op­tion of invoking or waiving confidentiality of per­sonnel record belongs to school district, not to individual who is subject of record. Oregonian Publishing v. Portland School District No. 1J, 152 Or App 135, 952 P2d 66 (1998), aff’d on other grounds, 329 Or 393, 987 P2d 480 (1999)

Employer disclosure of some per­sonnel file in­for­ma­­tion to public does not change confidential status of docu­ments not disclosed. Springfield School District No. 19 v. Guard Publishing Co., 156 Or App 176, 967 P2d 510 (1998)

Investigatory report that is not specific to employ­ment of individual employee is not part of per­sonnel file and therefore is subject to disclosure. Oregonian Publishing v. Portland School District No. 1J, 329 Or 393, 987 P2d 480 (1999)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Validity of employer’s restric­tions on teacher’s representa­tion at evalua­tion conference, (1976) Vol 38, p 443

Law Review Cita­tions

34 WLR 269 (1998)

Notes of Decisions

Under these sec­tions a nontenured teacher may be entitled to a fair hearing. Vanderzanden v. Lowell Sch. Dist. 71, 369 F Supp 67 (1973)

The procedural require­ments contained in these sec­tions apply to all, or substantially all, nonper­sonal discharges of instructors and administrators and to the transfer of administrators. Schaaf v. Sch. Dist. No. 4J, 19 Or App 838, 529 P2d 943 (1974), Sup Ct review denied

Where senior high school principals were transferred to posi­tions as junior high school principals, allegedly in viola­tion of Fair Dismissal Law, ap­peal must first be made to Fair Dismissal Appeals Board and issuance of writ of mandamus by circuit court was improper. Zollinger v. Warner, 286 Or 19, 593 P2d 1107 (1979)

Law Review Cita­tions

16 WLR 409 (1979)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 342—Teachers and Other School Personnel, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors342.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 342, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano342.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.