18A:6-17.3 Evaluation process, determination of charges.
344 words·~2 min read·
/nj/title-18a/chapter-6/18a-6-17-3·A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
25. a. Notwithstanding the provisions of N.J.S.18A:6-11 or any other section of law to the contrary, in the case of a teacher, principal, assistant principal, and vice-principal:
(1)the superintendent shall promptly file with the secretary of the board of education a charge of inefficiency whenever the employee is rated ineffective or partially effective in an annual summative evaluation and the following year is rated ineffective in the annual summative evaluation;
(2)if the employee is rated partially effective in two consecutive annual summative evaluations or is rated ineffective in an annual summative evaluation and the following year is rated partially effective in the annual summative evaluation, the superintendent shall promptly file with the secretary of the board of education a charge of inefficiency, except that the superintendent upon a written finding of exceptional circumstances may defer the filing of tenure charges until after the next annual summative evaluation. If the employee is not rated effective or highly effective on this annual summative evaluation, the superintendent shall promptly file a charge of inefficiency.
b. Within 30 days of the filing, the board of education shall forward a written charge to the commissioner, unless the board determines that the evaluation process has not been followed.
c. Notwithstanding the provisions of N.J.S.18A:6-16 or any other section of law to the contrary, upon receipt of a charge pursuant to subsection a. of this section, the commissioner shall examine the charge. The individual against whom the charges are filed shall have 10 days to submit a written response to the charges to the commissioner. The commissioner shall, within five days immediately following the period provided for a written response to the charges, refer the case to an arbitrator and appoint an arbitrator to hear the case, unless he determines that the evaluation process has not been followed.
d. The only evaluations which may be used for purposes of this section are those evaluations conducted in accordance with a rubric adopted by the board and approved by the commissioner pursuant to P.L.2012, c.26 (C.18A:6-117 et al.).
L.2012, c.26, s.25.