The Appraisals section in the Performance menu has 3 pages — School Visits, School Appraisals, Teacher Appraisals — that all sit on one shared system: the Eduversal Teacher Appraisal Framework v2.1. Many people across HQ and partner schools will use this. On a first read it can look like a lot. This page walks you through it in plain English. If a word looks new, Section 7 — Glossary explains it.
What is the Appraisals section?
A small workspace for the people running Eduversal's annual professional review cycle. School Visits is the planning + logging layer. School Appraisals and Teacher Appraisals are the two scoring layers — one for the partner school as a whole, one for each individual teacher.
Who uses it?
The Performance dropdown is open to every central_user — the 3 Appraisals pages are then gated per-page via Page Access. In practice the Appraisals section is read and used by HQ Directors, the central_admin team, and the Subject Specialists / Coordinators who appraise teachers on partner school visits. Partner school leadership sees the same data on the Academic Hub side.
One important separation. Appraisal is a summative system — it grades a teacher or a school once a year against a published rubric. It is not the same as Induction (a year-1 mentee journey, in the Teacher Programs section) or Coaching (a confidential cycle, in the Leadership Programs section). Charter Non-Negotiable #1 (NN1) keeps Induction data out of the appraisal score on purpose — coaching needs psychological safety, appraisal needs evidence.
All three pages in the Appraisals section read from and write to the same scoring framework. Knowing the framework once means knowing all three pages. Here is the one-page version.
Four weighted frameworks (+ one Lead-only block)
F1
20%
Teacher Administration
Planning, records, calendars, gradebooks. 9 items, scored from the teacher's paperwork.
F2
50%
Class Observation
The big one. Watched live in a 35–40 min announced lesson. 4 domains — planning, management, instruction, assessment.
F3
20%
Work Inspection
Professional conduct, contribution beyond the classroom, end-of-year conference review.
F4
10%
Student Survey
Anonymised pupil feedback. Reported separately, but contributes 10% to the final score.
F3L · Leadership Responsibilities — six extra items appraised only for Lead-level teachers (Subject Leaders + Heads of Department). Mentoring quality, pedagogical leadership, strategic contribution. Doesn't apply to Induction / Developing / Proficient teachers.
Scoring scale + Predicate band
Every item is rated 1–4. The weighted total is then mapped to a final letter band A–F. Both labels show up on the teacher's report card.
| Item score | Label | Predicate band | Composite | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Distinguished | A | 86 – 100 | Excellent |
| 3 | Proficient | B | 66 – 85 | Good |
| 2 | Basic | C | 51 – 65 | Satisfactory |
| 1 | Unsatisfactory | D | 36 – 50 | Needs Improvement |
| F | 0 – 35 | Unsatisfactory |
Four appraisal levels (differentiated rubric)
v2.1 is a level-aware system. The items a teacher sees on their appraisal depend on the level set on their profile. A first-year Induction teacher is not measured against the same Lead-level mentoring items as a Head of Department.
Induction
Year 1 hire. Core items only — focused on building habits.
Developing
Years 2–3 typically. Adds depth items in observation + planning.
Proficient
Established classroom practitioner. Full F1 + F2 + F3 + F4 visible.
Lead
Subject Leader / HoD. Adds the F3L leadership block on top.
v2.1 also adds 3 new fields per item —
coaching_focus, feedback_prompts (Grow + Go), follow_up_indicators. These don't change the score. They turn the appraisal into a coaching artifact: the appraiser writes the Glow/Grow/Go feedback at the same time they score, and the follow-up indicators are the things you should look for next time to know the teacher actually moved.
📁 Where this comes from. The full framework spec — every item, every rubric level, every Cambridge cross-reference — lives in
shared-design/frameworks/appraisal-framework-v2.json (synced byte-identical to AH + TH resources/ and exposed read-only via /references → Frameworks → Appraisal v2.1). When this page says "F1.4 Lesson Plan Quality and Format", that is item frameworks[0].items[3] in the JSON. Don't edit the framework here; edit the JSON, re-sync, and every page picks it up.
A single teacher's appraisal moves through four phases in a year. Each phase touches a different page in the Appraisals section. This is the order things happen — not a strict rule, but the way most cycles run.
1
Phase 1
Plan the visit
HQ schedules an on-site visit to a partner school. Logged on School Visits with date, school, purpose (observation / mid-year / validation).
School Visits →
2
Phase 2
Observe & score F1 + F2
During the visit the appraiser scores Teacher Administration (F1, from paperwork) and Class Observation (F2, live during the 35–40 min lesson).
Teacher Appraisals →
3
Phase 3
End-of-year conference
Annual review meeting with the teacher. Appraiser scores Work Inspection (F3) and (for Leads) F3L. Glow / Grow / Go feedback recorded.
Teacher Appraisals →
4
Phase 4
Roll-up to school level
Per-teacher scores feed the School Appraisals page — the partner school sees its own self-rating against the Eduversal validation.
School Appraisals →
Student Survey (F4) sits outside this flow. It is collected directly from students during the academic year, the appraiser enters aggregated results into the system, and the 10% weighting is applied automatically when the composite score is calculated. Students never see the appraisal page.
Three pages — one card each. The cards follow the same order they appear in the Performance dropdown.
School Visits
/school-visits
What it is
The planning + logging layer for every Eduversal on-site visit to a partner school. Three visit types: Observation (the appraisal visit itself), Mid-year check-in (between formal appraisal cycles), Validation visit (cross-checking a school's self-appraisal). Every visit creates a doc in
school_visits.Why we built it
An appraisal score is only as good as the visit it came from. Before this page, visit dates lived in emails and the appraisal arrived without context. Now the visit is logged before it happens, the appraiser walks in with a date + purpose + classes-in-scope, and the resulting Teacher Appraisal score traces back to a specific visit.
Day 1 view
A calendar-style grid of upcoming visits across all 15 partner schools, plus a list of recent / completed visits below. Filters: school · purpose · status · appraiser. Click "Schedule visit" to create a new one.
What to do
Before any HQ Director or Specialist drives to a partner school for an appraisal, log the visit here first. It is also the central read for "how many times have we visited Pondok Indah this year?" type questions.
- The same
school_visitscollection is also written to by HQ Subject Coordinators via the Coordinators-menu School Visits page (their personal walkthrough lens). Those rows are taggedvisitType: 'specialist_walkthrough'and stay confidential under Charter NN2 — they do not appear in the Appraisal layer. - Operations-side School Visits is for formal appraisal context; Coordinators-side is the Specialist's private apprenticeship walkthroughs. Same collection, two lenses.
School Appraisals
/school-appraisals
What it is
The whole-of-school appraisal layer. Partner schools rate themselves across five domains (governance · curriculum · teaching · pastoral · resources) on Academic Hub. Eduversal then validates that rating on this page — confirm / amend / annotate per domain — and produces the network's own school-level appraisal.
Why we built it
Partner schools need a quality signal at the institutional level, not just the per-teacher level. Self-appraisal alone is unreliable; pure HQ-imposed scoring is heavy-handed. This page is the both-sides view — school self-rates first, Eduversal validates second, both views sit next to each other.
Day 1 view
15 partner schools as cards (one per school), each showing the school's submitted self-rating + Eduversal's validation status (pending / in-review / validated). Click a card to open the full 5-domain breakdown side-by-side.
What to do
If you are validating a school's self-rating, open the school's card, work through each of the 5 domains, and either confirm or annotate. The school sees both columns in their AH dashboard.
- School self-appraisal is launched by partner school leadership on Academic Hub → /school-self-appraisal.
- School Appraisals is not the same as the per-teacher Appraisal Framework v2.1 — it is a separate 5-domain instrument for the institution.
Teacher Appraisals
/teacher-appraisals
What it is
All formal teacher appraisal records across every partner school. One row per (teacher × academic year). Each row carries the full Framework v2.1 scoring — F1 (20%) + F2 (50%) + F3 (20%) + F4 (10%) + F3L (Lead only) — plus the appraiser's Glow / Grow / Go narrative.
Why we built it
HQ needs a single source of truth for "who has been appraised, by whom, with what outcome" across the entire network. Schools need the per-teacher record to drive next-year coaching plans. The Glow/Grow/Go field turns a number into a coaching artifact — what to celebrate, what to grow, what specifically to do next.
Day 1 view
A network-wide table of every appraisal record (paginated). Filters: school · subject · level (Induction / Developing / Proficient / Lead) · status (draft / scored / signed / closed) · band (A–F). Click any row to open the full per-item scorecard.
What to do
If you are running the appraisal, open the teacher's row (or create a new one tied to a School Visit), work through F1 → F2 → F3 → F4 in the order the cycle runs, and write Glow/Grow/Go feedback in the v2.1 fields. The teacher level on the profile decides which items are visible.
- Submitted scorecards are immutable at the rule level. Don't expect a "reopen" button — that is intentional (audit). If the score needs correction, central_admin handles it via the rules console.
- The Glow/Grow/Go follow-up indicators are what you'll check at the next appraisal to know coaching actually landed. Be specific in writing them.
- Teacher Appraisal does NOT consume Induction data (Charter NN1) or Coaching data (NN5). The two streams stay separate by design.
Eduversal runs four professional development systems on the same Cambridge anchor. Appraisal is the summative one. The other three are formative — they exist to help people grow and they deliberately do not feed appraisal scoring. New users mix these up. This is the cheat-sheet.
Appraisal — what this page is about
Summative. Annual. Scored 1–4 + composite A–F. Source:
appraisal-framework-v2.json. Feeds: a teacher's formal record. Charter NN1: nothing from Induction is allowed in here.Induction — Year 1 onboarding
Formative. Year-1 hires get a mentor + 4 windows + walkthroughs + a private journal. NEVER feeds appraisal scoring (NN1). HQ never reads named journal entries (NN2). Surface: Teacher Programs → Induction Admin.
Competency — CPD ladder
Formative. 4-level CPD ladder per Cambridge-aligned competency. Teacher-led. Surface: Teacher Programs → Competency Admin. Tracked in
user_competencies/{uid}.KPI — school-level metrics
Quantitative. Per-school configured (1–5 stars + weights). Source:
teacher_kpi_config per school. Surfaces: Performance → School KPI Admin / Teacher KPI Admin. Independent of the appraisal rubric.
Cambridge cross-references run through all four. Click any CTS X.Y chip in any page (including this one) to see the full Cambridge Teacher Standard 2023 text in a popover. The chip wiring is shared across the three rating systems via
cambridge_crossref/index.
Pick the card that matches your role. The page detects your profile and reveals only the relevant card — but you can also read the others to understand what your colleagues see.
Every appraisal-flavoured word, defined in one sentence. If a word here still isn't clear, it's a candidate to bring up in the next Coordinators meeting.
Appraisal— the summative review itself
A once-a-year scored review of a teacher against a published rubric. Produces a number + a band + a coaching narrative. Different from coaching (private + ongoing) or competency (formative + per-skill).
Framework v2.1— the rubric itself
Eduversal Teacher Appraisal Framework, version 2.1. The full JSON spec sits at
shared-design/frameworks/appraisal-framework-v2.json and is published read-only on /references.F1 / F2 / F3 / F4— the four scoring lenses
Teacher Administration (20%, paperwork) · Class Observation (50%, live lesson) · Work Inspection (20%, end-of-year conference) · Student Survey (10%, anonymous). Weighted sum = composite score → A–F band.
F3L— Lead-only block
Six extra Leadership Responsibilities items inside Framework 3, appraised only for Lead-level teachers (Subject Leaders + Heads of Department). Doesn't apply to Induction / Developing / Proficient.
Level— the teacher's career stage
One of Induction · Developing · Proficient · Lead. Each item in the framework declares its
visible_from level — that's how the appraisal sheet is narrowed for the right person.Predicate band— A–F letter grade
The final letter mapping. A = Excellent (86–100), B = Good (66–85), C = Satisfactory (51–65), D = Needs Improvement (36–50), F = Unsatisfactory (0–35). Both the number and the letter appear on the report.
Glow / Grow / Go— the v2.1 feedback protocol
A 3-part coaching prompt added in v2.1 to every scored item. Glow = what to celebrate. Grow = what to develop. Go = the specific next step + indicator you'll check next visit.
Composite score— the final number
(F1 × 0.20) + (F2 × 0.50) + (F3 × 0.20) + (F4 × 0.10), rescaled to 0–100. Lead teachers' F3 component includes F3L. The composite is what maps to the predicate band.
CTS— Cambridge Teacher Standards
The 2023 27-item teacher standards. Every appraisal item carries
cambridge_standard_refs[] so you can see which CTS the item is testing. Click any CTS chip for the verbatim popover.Validation— School Appraisals only
Eduversal's act of confirming, amending, or annotating a partner school's self-rating on the 5 domains. The school sees both columns side-by-side once validation is signed.
Charter NN1— Non-Negotiable 1
"Year-1 induction data NEVER feeds network appraisal scoring." Rule-enforced. Mentioned here because new users sometimes ask "can I see the induction journal to inform the appraisal?" — no.
School visit— the physical event
An on-site trip to a partner school by HQ. Logged on /school-visits. Three types: Observation (appraisal proper) · Mid-year check-in · Validation. Anchors the appraisal record to a specific date + school + appraiser.
Immutable— rule-level
Submitted appraisal scorecards cannot be edited via UI by anyone — central_admin included. This is by design (audit). Corrections require a manual rules-console operation, intentionally rare.