Is it reasonable for a teacher to take a semester off work when he is sick with meningitis and turns

It is a common practice for teachers who ask for leave to pass the annual assessment, and I think it is more reasonable. The subject said that one of his teacher friends was sick with meningitis and took a semester off from work, and the annual assessment was basically qualified, and I don't think there is anything wrong with this operation in the school. <>

Every year, the school will conduct an annual assessment of in-service teachers, and the annual assessment is divided into excellent, qualified (competent), and incompetent (unqualified) three grades, the proportion of excellent is about 10%, the proportion of unqualified is about 10%, and the remaining 80% are competent, so most teachers can only be rated as qualified in the annual assessment. In some places, there will be an extra grade for the assessment of teachers, which is divided into excellent, qualified, basically qualified, and unqualified. In such a grade division, the basic qualification is a relatively poor grade.

How are the grades determined in the annual assessment of teachers? The assessment of teachers is based on the four aspects of morality, ability, diligence and performance. Virtue and energy are more subjective in these two aspects, and they basically get full marks.

"Attendance" refers to attendance, which means taking out the attendance sheet, turning over whether it is on time since the beginning of this school year, whether there is late arrival and early departure, absenteeism without reason, etc., according to the scoring rules, this is more objective, well-documented, the teacher was deducted points because the usual attendance is not in place, naturally there is nothing to say. As for "performance", it naturally refers to the grades, which is also more objective, and is quantitatively scored according to the ranking according to the results of the final exam.

Finally, according to the comprehensive score of "morality, ability, diligence and performance", the teacher will be given a total score, and the teacher assessment grade will be determined according to the total score ranking. The annual assessment grade directly affects the selection of teachers, the promotion of professional titles, etc., so teachers still attach more importance to the annual assessment. <>

The "diligence" and "performance" of the leave teacher cannot be quantitatively scored, so it is reasonable for the annual assessment to be qualified or basically qualified, and the leave teacher has not worked for a semester or an academic year, even if the "morality" and "ability" are full marks, then how to evaluate their "diligence" and "performance"? There is no attendance, no grades, and no accurate quantitative scoring of them. Rated "Excellent"?

Then the on-the-job teacher will definitely not agree and be rated as "unqualified"? The teacher who asked for leave would definitely not do it. Therefore, we can only compromise and take a general grade, that is, qualified or basically qualified.

Conclusion: Now that there are more and more people on maternity leave in various schools, there must be a unified standard for the evaluation of these teachers, and it is obviously not good to be rated as "excellent", which is unfair to in-service teachers, because their "attendance" and "performance" cannot be accurately evaluated. It is also unreasonable to be rated as "unqualified", so it is more reasonable to pass or basically pass the annual assessment of the leave personnel.

It doesn't make sense. The teacher did not come to the class at all, and his assessment should start from the time he started the class.

What's not reasonable? It's not that as long as you take leave and don't go to work, you don't study, although you are sick during this time, you may not forget your work, and it is normal to review and pass the assessment.

I think it's reasonable, because if you take a semester off, there is no way to accurately evaluate their attendance and performance for whatever reason, so they will be given a pass or a basic pass.

Not reasonable, but not surprising either.

Now that teacher evaluation has been formalized, students only use everyone's student number to log in to evaluate the teacher, and everyone dare not and do not want to be truly fair and just.

No, only the results of working hours will be assessed, and if there must be assessment data when not working, it will be averaged.

The bonus is calculated according to the working hours, and there is no bonus when you are not working.

It depends on the specific regulations of your unit, if there are regulations in this area of the assessment, there is no problem, if there is no need to communicate with the leader in private!

There is no basic pass in the annual evaluation of teachers. Teachers are divided into four levels: excellent, qualified, unqualified or indefinite in the annual assessment of professional and technical personnel. The number of outstanding personnel is about 12 percent, most of them are qualified, if they have been punished by administrative punishment in the year, they are rated as unqualified, and the unqualified grades cannot be promoted to the post salary in the next year, and the evaluation will not be eligible to participate in the election, and they can not participate in the evaluation of professional titles within five years, and the impact is relatively large.

If there is indeed a basic pass, this grade has no effect. The indefinite grade refers to the evaluation results of new teachers who have just joined the company for less than one year.

Basically qualified labeling (average ideological and political quality; Weak ability to perform duties; The sense of responsibility at work is average, or there are obvious deficiencies in the work style, or the occurrence of bad behavior is complained about and verified once; Able to basically complete their own work, but the quantity of work completed, the quality and efficiency are not high, or there are big mistakes in the work; can basically be honest and self-disciplined, but there are deficiencies in some aspects) From these aspects, the impact is not great, and you have to work harder in the later rating!

The notice of the "Interim Provisions on the Evaluation of Staff of Public Institutions" issued by the Ministry of Personnel of the People's Republic of China in 1995 clearly reads:

The "Interim Regulations on the Evaluation of Personnel of Public Institutions" are hereby printed and distributed to you, and you are requested to conscientiously implement them in light of the actual conditions of your own localities and departments.

The annual evaluation of service personnel of administrative organs at all levels may be carried out with reference to these provisions.

14 December 1995.

First, after that, each province has formulated specific assessment methods according to its own conditions, and some cities and regions have even formulated their own assessment methods for cities and localities according to their own provincial methods. This does not contradict the spirit of the document.

Second: At present, there are actually three situations in the assessment results of various provinces:

1.The grade is set (excellent, qualified, basically qualified, and unqualified).

2.Indefinite grade (i.e., staff who have participated in the assessment but cannot be given a fixed grade mainly refer to the staff during the internship period and the staff under review).

3.No assessment (mainly due to sick leave exceeding a certain number of days, or those who are studying outside the country do not participate in the assessment).

Third: As far as the implementation situation in various localities is concerned, the specific implementation is organized by each unit according to its own situation and standards. For example:

The evaluation indicators of teachers and doctors are certainly different, so the nature of each unit is different, and there is no unified specific standard, which is determined by each unit according to the situation.

Fourth, the general policy is the same, and they are all evaluated from the four aspects of morality, ability, diligence and performance (including civil servants).

Heilongjiang Province's "Measures for the Personnel Management of Public Institutions" reads: "The content of the assessment includes four aspects: morality, ability, diligence and performance, and the focus is on the actual performance of the work. There should be different assessment standards and requirements for employees with different job levels and different technical levels.

The assessment criteria should be clear and specific, as quantitative as possible, and those that cannot be quantified should be expressed in accurate and qualitative words. ”

So basically, it's how the unit is determined, and what to do.

The impact is still quite big, generally speaking, it is qualified, and the basic qualification proves that you are not very competent in your work, and you can't transfer these in the future, because now the annual assessment in the past two years is required to be qualified or above. Second, you may have to withhold a portion of your performance salary, which will also affect your promotion.

Teachers who are basically qualified in the annual assessment can be adjusted normally according to regulations, and will not be affected. Only if it is not qualified, the capital transfer will be affected.

It's not, but it's very close.

The annual evaluation of personnel of public institutions is divided into excellent, qualified, basically qualified, unqualified, and uncertain.

If the year-end assessment is for the purpose of issuing the year-end bonus, then the employee's work-related injury leave can be freely issued according to the company's own regulations, and the law does not stipulate the issuance of the year-end bonus.

The year-end bonus is an incentive treatment given by the unit to employees.