|
Contacts
Web Content
Web Design
Executive Board & Staff
|
New Evaluation System
NYSUT Teacher Evaluation: NYSUT Teacher Evaluation & Development Page
Evaluation in the News:
Regulation: Education Law §3012-c
Guidance to the Field on Teacher APPR
Summary of Provisions in Draft Regulations
Summary of Revised APPR Provisions 2012-13 (Purple Memo) - updated 5/1/12
Rubric: Danielson's Framework for Teaching (2011 Revised Edition)
Conversion Chart: TO BE NEGOTIATED
Ancillary Services: Will be evaluated under "Old" Model for Practitioner Evaluation.
Evaluation Elements:
2011-12 SIG SCHOOL & 4-8 Math & ELA (TIF) EVALUATION SYSTEM |
| 4-8 Math & ELA (Tested Subjects) Non-Alternative Evaluation |
| Evaluation Points |
Requirements |
Agreed to in SCSD |
Observation
60 Points |
- Multiple measures
- At least 40 of the 60 points based on classroom observation
- Multiple observations by principal or other trained administrator are required
- Any remaining teaching standards not addressed in classroom observation must be assessed at least once a year
|
Domain |
Points |
Planning and Preparation |
5 |
Classroom Environment |
15 |
Instruction |
15 |
Professional Responsibilities |
5 |
| IPGP/Mid Year |
10 |
| Self Reflection |
10 |
Total |
60 |
|
Local
20 Points |
- List of State-approved 3rd party, State or Regent-equivalent assessments.
- District, regional or BOCES-developed assessments provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- School-wide, group, or team results based on state or allowable local assessments, provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- Structured District or BOCES-wide goal setting process for use with any state, approved 3rd Party, or school (teacher-created) assessment agreed to by evaluator and teacher provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor.
|
Measures are based on school-wide targets of 3 percentage point increases in the number of students scoring proficient or better in ELA and Math.
Calculation for Each:
Measure |
Points |
| Math State Test |
10 |
| ELA State Test |
10 |
Total |
20 |
Percent point change of students scoring proficient or better multiplied by a factor of 3.33 to determine points earned for a maximum of 10 points.
Example:
2% Math School Wide Increase = 6.66 Points
1.5% ELA School Wide Increase = 4.99
Total = 11.7
|
State Assessment
20 Points |
- Result of student growth percentile model, which may include consideration of poverty, ELL, SWD status
- Value-added model with additional controls when approved, which can be no earlier than 2012-2013
- Policies on Teacher of Record and linked students
- State has selected by RFP a provider of growth and value-added measures
|
To be determined by NYSED |
2011-12 SIG SCHOOL & 4-8 Math & ELA (TIF) EVALUATION SYSTEM |
| 4-8 Math & ELA (Tested Subjects) Alternative Evaluation |
| Evaluation Points |
Requirements |
Agreed to in SCSD |
Observation
60 Points |
- Multiple measures
- At least 40 of the 60 points based on classroom observation
- Multiple observations by principal or other trained administrator are required
- Any remaining teaching standards not addressed in classroom observation must be assessed at least once a year
|
Domain |
Points |
Planning and Preparation |
5 |
Classroom Environment |
10 |
Instruction |
10 |
Professional Responsibilities |
5 |
| IPGP/Mid Year |
10 |
| Self Reflection |
10 |
| Alternative Eval |
10 |
Total |
60 |
|
Local
20 Points |
- List of State-approved 3rd party, State or Regent-equivalent assessments.
- District, regional or BOCES-developed assessments provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- School-wide, group, or team results based on state or allowable local assessments, provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- Structured District or BOCES-wide goal setting process for use with any state, approved 3rd Party, or school (teacher-created) assessment agreed to by evaluator and teacher provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor.
|
Measures are based on school-wide targets of 3 percentage point increases in the number of students scoring proficient or better in ELA and Math.
Calculation for Each:
Measure |
Points |
| Math State Test |
10 |
| ELA State Test |
10 |
Total |
20 |
Percent point change of students scoring proficient or better multiplied by a factor of 3.33 to determine points earned for a maximum of 10 points.
Example:
2% Math School Wide Increase = 6.66 Points
1.5% ELA School Wide Increase = 4.99
Total = 11.7
|
State Assessment
20 Points |
- Result of student growth percentile model, which may include consideration of poverty, ELL, SWD status
- Value-added model with additional controls when approved, which can be no earlier than 2012-2013
- Policies on Teacher of Record and linked students
- State has selected by RFP a provider of growth and value-added measures
|
To be determined by NYSED |
2011-12 SIG SCHOOL & 4-8 Math & ELA (TIF) EVALUATION SYSTEM |
| Non-Tested Subjects - Non-Alternative Evaluation |
| Evaluation Points |
Requirements |
Agreed to in SCSD |
Observation
80 Points |
- Multiple measures
- At least 40 of the 60 points based on classroom observation
- Multiple observations by principal or other trained administrator are required
- Any remaining teaching standards not addressed in classroom observation must be assessed at least once a year
|
Domain |
Points |
Planning and Preparation |
10 |
Classroom Environment |
20 |
Instruction |
20 |
Professional Responsibilities |
10 |
| IPGP/Mid Year |
10 |
| Self Reflection |
10 |
Total |
80 |
|
Local
20 Points |
- List of State-approved 3rd party, State or Regent-equivalent assessments.
- District, regional or BOCES-developed assessments provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- School-wide, group, or team results based on state or allowable local assessments, provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- Structured District or BOCES-wide goal setting process for use with any state, approved 3rd Party, or school (teacher-created) assessment agreed to by evaluator and teacher provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor.
|
K-8 Teachers
Measures are based on school-wide targets of 3 percentage point increases in the number of students scoring proficient or better in ELA and Math in K-8.
Calculation for Each:
Measure |
Points |
| Math State Test |
10 |
| ELA State Test |
10 |
Total |
20 |
Percent point change of students scoring proficient or better multiplied by a factor of 3.33 to determine points earned for a maximum of 10 points.
Example:
2% Math School Wide Increase = 6.66 Points
1.5% ELA School Wide Increase = 4.99
Total = 11.7
High School Teachers -
Measures are based on school-wide targets of 3 percentage point increases in Regents Exams and Promotion Rates in high schools.
Calculation for Regents: Percent point change in students passing the Integrated Algebra and English Regents from 2011-2012 multiplied by a factor of 1.67 for a maximum of 5 points for each test.
Calculation for Student Promotion: Percent point change in students in Cohort 2011 promoted from 9th to 10th grade and students in Cohort 2010 promoted from 10th to 11th grade multiplied by 1.67 for a maximum 5 points for each cohort.
Measure |
Points |
| Percent Change in Integrated Algebra |
5 |
| Percent Change in English Regents |
5 |
Promotion Increase from 9th to 10th Grade |
5 |
Promotion Increase from 10th to 11th Grade |
5 |
Total |
20 |
Example:
2% Algebra Increase = 3.34
1.5% ELA Increase = 2.50
1% 9-10 Grade Promotion = 1.67
.25% - 10-11 Grade Promo = .42
Total = 7.9 Points |
State Assessment
20 Points |
- Result of student growth percentile model, which may include consideration of poverty, ELL, SWD status
- Value-added model with additional controls when approved, which can be no earlier than 2012-2013
- Policies on Teacher of Record and linked students
- State has selected by RFP a provider of growth and value-added measures
|
To be determined by NYSED |
2011-12 SIG SCHOOL & 4-8 Math & ELA (TIF) EVALUATION SYSTEM |
| Non-Tested Subjects - Alternative Evaluation |
| Evaluation Points |
Requirements |
Agreed to in SCSD |
Observation
80 Points |
- Multiple measures
- At least 40 of the 60 points based on classroom observation
- Multiple observations by principal or other trained administrator are required
- Any remaining teaching standards not addressed in classroom observation must be assessed at least once a year
|
Domain |
Points |
Planning and Preparation |
5 |
Classroom Environment |
15 |
Instruction |
15 |
Professional Responsibilities |
5 |
| IPGP/Mid Year |
10 |
| Self Reflection |
10 |
| Alternative Eval |
20 |
Total |
80 |
|
Local
20 Points |
- List of State-approved 3rd party, State or Regent-equivalent assessments.
- District, regional or BOCES-developed assessments provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- School-wide, group, or team results based on state or allowable local assessments, provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- Structured District or BOCES-wide goal setting process for use with any state, approved 3rd Party, or school (teacher-created) assessment agreed to by evaluator and teacher provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor.
|
K-8 Teachers
Measures are based on school-wide targets of 3 percentage point increases in the number of students scoring proficient or better in ELA and Math in K-8.
Calculation for Each:
Measure |
Points |
| Math State Test |
10 |
| ELA State Test |
10 |
Total |
20 |
Percent point change of students scoring proficient or better multiplied by a factor of 3.33 to determine points earned for a maximum of 10 points.
Example:
2% Math School Wide Increase = 6.66 Points
1.5% ELA School Wide Increase = 4.99
Total = 11.7
High School Teachers -
Measures are based on school-wide targets of 3 percentage point increases in Regents Exams and Promotion Rates in high schools.
Calculation for Regents: Percent point change in students passing the Integrated Algebra and English Regents from 2011-2012 multiplied by a factor of 1.67 for a maximum of 5 points for each test.
Calculation for Student Promotion: Percent point change in students in Cohort 2011 promoted from 9th to 10th grade and students in Cohort 2010 promoted from 10th to 11th grade multiplied by 1.67 for a maximum 5 points for each cohort.
Measure |
Points |
| Percent Change in Integrated Algebra |
5 |
| Percent Change in English Regents |
5 |
Promotion Increase from 9th to 10th Grade |
5 |
Promotion Increase from 10th to 11th Grade |
5 |
Total |
20 |
Example:
2% Algebra Increase = 3.34
1.5% ELA Increase = 2.50
1% 9-10 Grade Promotion = 1.67
.25% - 10-11 Grade Promo = .42
Total = 7.9 Points |
State Assessment
20 Points |
- Result of student growth percentile model, which may include consideration of poverty, ELL, SWD status
- Value-added model with additional controls when approved, which can be no earlier than 2012-2013
- Policies on Teacher of Record and linked students
- State has selected by RFP a provider of growth and value-added measures
|
To be determined by NYSED |
Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP):
If a teacher’s performance is evaluated as “ineffective”, the supervisor will be required to develop a Teacher Improvement Plan in consultation with the teacher. The teacher shall be entitled to STA representation for the development of this Plan. Such Plan will be provided to the staff member and implemented within ten days of the start of the school year within which the Plan will be applied. The Plan shall include, but not be limited to, an identification of the areas in need of improvement, a time line for achieving improvement, suggestions for improvement, support to be provided, and measurable outcomes to be evaluated.
The Plan will describe the professional learning activities that the teacher must complete. These activities will be connected to the areas needing improvement. The artifacts that the teacher must produce that could serve as benchmarks for improvement and as evidence for the successful completion of their improvement plan will be described and could include such items as lessons, student work, or unit plans for a teacher and for a principal. The Plan will include the additional support and assistance that will be provided to the teacher. Upon completion of the improvement plan, the supervisor will meet with the teacher to review the plan, including artifacts and evidence in order to provide a final, summative rating fort the staff member.
The TIP must consist of the following components:
- Specific Areas for Improvement: Identify specific areas in need of improvement. Develop specific, behaviorally written goals for the teacher to accomplish during the period of the Plan.
- Expected Outcomes: Identify specific recommendations for what the teacher/principal is expected to do to improve in the identified areas. Delineate specific, realistic achievable activities for the teacher/principal.
- Resources: Identify specific resources and support systems available to assist the teacher to improve performance. Examples: colleagues; coaches, role playing activities, visitations; courses; workshops; peer visits; materials; etc.
- Responsibilities: Identify responsible administrator(s) and steps to be taken by administrator(s) and the teacher/principal throughout the Plan. Examples: classroom observations of the teacher; supervisory conferences between the teacher/principal and administrator(s); written reports and/or evaluations, etc.
- Evidence of Achievement: Identify how progress will be measured and assessed. Specify next steps to be taken based upon whether the teacher is successful, partially successful or unsuccessful in efforts to improve performance.
- Time line: Provide a specific time line for implementation of the various components for the TIP for its final completion. Identify the dates for preparation of written documentation regarding the completion of the Plan.
Appeal Procedure:
- Only teachers receiving a rating of ineffective and developing shall have the right to appeal their rating.
- The teacher shall be entitled to a hearing on the reasons for his/her rating if s/he notifies the Superintendent or his/her designee to this effect, in writing, no later than five (5) school days following receipt of the final rating notice. Failure to file for a hearing within the five (5) school days shall be considered as a waiver of this appeal process.
- The request for hearing must state the particular provisions of the evaluation that the teacher believes to be inaccurate. The hearing will be scheduled within ten (10) school days of the teacher’s request, and completed within thirty (30) calendar days thereafter, by a Hearing Panel consisting of three (3) members and comprised of the Superintendent’s designee, one teacher named by the Association, and a third person who shall be selected by the Superintendent and the President of the Association. The third person must be trained as an evaluator. A panel member may not have been involved in the evaluation process of the teacher who is appealing. Any extension beyond the thirty (30) day limitations shall be by mutual agreement of the Superintendent and the President of the Association.
- The hearing shall consist of all documents comprising the evaluation and any rebuttal documents. The panel and/or the teacher may request testimony from the teacher and/or evaluator(s). The hearing shall be closed to the public.
The panel shall make its recommendation within five (5) school days of the conclusion of the hearing. The panel’s recommendation shall be advisory to the Superintendent of Schools whose final decision shall be binding on the parties.
- The grievance and/or arbitration procedures in the negotiated agreement shall not be used to appeal or review a teacher’s performance review for APPR results conducted in the 2011-12 school year. To the extent that a conflict exists between a negotiated agreement and this procedure, the terms and conditions of this procedure shall prevail and be applied.
- The parties understand that they will negotiate an appeal process for the 2012-2013 and subsequent years.
- Nothing in this memorandum or in the APPR Plan shall abrogate the rights of the SCSD, its Board of Education and Superintendent of Schools to discontinue the employment of a probationary teacher in accordance with Education Law §§3012 and 3031 or the collective bargaining agreement, as applicable, or restrict or limit the discretion of the Superintendent of Schools or Board of Education in making a determination on the status of a probationary teacher, and/or to deny tenure.
2012-13 APPR Plan - NOTHING NEGOTIATED TO DATE
100 Point Evaluation System |
| Evaluation Points |
Requirements |
Agreed to in SCSD |
| 60 Points |
- Multiple measures
- At least ? of the 60 points based on classroom observation
- Multiple observations by principal or other trained administrator are required
- Any remaining teaching standards not addressed in classroom observation must be assessed at least once a year
|
|
20 Points
Local |
Locally comparable means:
The same locally selected measures of student achievement or growth across all classrooms in same grade/subject in district or BOCES.
Districts may use more than one type of locally selected measure for different groups of teachers within a grade/subject if districts/BOCES prove comparability based on standards of Education and Psychological Testing.
May use growth or achievement measure from these: (Note: the August 2011 Court decision holds that local measures must be different from the growth measures used in the growth sub component above although the local measures may be based on the same state assessment, among other options)
- List of State-approved 3rd party, State or Regent-equivalent assessments.
- District, regional or BOCES-developed assessments provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- School-wide, group, or team results based on state or allowable local assessments, provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- Structured District or BOCES-wide goal setting process for use with any state, approved 3rd Party, or school (teacher-created) assessment agreed to by evaluator and teacher provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
State has published an initial list of 3rd party assessments that meet prescribed criteria for state-approved list. |
|
20 Points
State |
ELA/Math 4-8 (2011-12 and beyond)
- Result of student growth percentile model, which may include consideration of poverty, ELL, SWD status
- Value-added model with additional controls when approved, which can be no earlier than 2012-2013
- Policies on Teacher of Record and linked students
- State has selected by RFP a provider of growth and value-added measures
All Other Classroom Teachers (2012-13 and beyond)
- Approach 65% coverage of teachers with growth/value-added measures by extending growth/VA model, as applicable, to existing and new (if resources available) state assessments:
- 9-11 ELA 2011
- Math Regents
- PARCC as available
- If approved: 6-8 science, social studies and related Regents
- If approved: progress monitoring in K-3 ELA, math
- Feasibility analysis with each expansion area to determine applicability of growth/VA methodology to pre/post tests
Growth Using Comparable Measure when no state assessment with an approved growth/VA model
For all applicable grades/subjects: State-determined district-wide student growth goal-setting process used with:
For core subjects: 6-8 science and social studies, high school English Language Arts, math, science and social studies courses associated in 2010-11 with Regents exams or, in the future, with other state assessments:
- State assessment if one exists (or Regent equivalents)
- If not, District determined assessment from list of state-approved 3rd party assessments and Regents equivalents
For other grades/subjects: District-determined assessments from options below:
- List of State-approved 3rd party assessments
- District- or BOCES-developed assessments provided that the district or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor
- School-wide, group, or team results based on state assessments
- School or teacher-created assessment
|
|
Peer Assistance & Review
Below is a link to the brochure that explains our Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) Program.
2009-10 PAR Intern Handbook - August 2009
Harvard Study on PAR Programs - May 2009
PAR Program Brochure - March 2008
PAR Recruiting PowerPoint - April 2008
PAR_MOU between SCSD, STA & SAAS - July 2008
PAR MOU between STA and SAAS - April 2008
PAR/TTIP Referral Form - April 2008
Model for Practitioner Evaluation
MPE Explanation
Planning MOU - May 4, 2005
MPE Guidance Counselor - Aug. 2008
Booklet Cover
Booklet Contents
MPE Library Media Specialist - Aug. 2008
Booklet Cover
Booklet Contents
MPE Psychologist - Aug. 2008
Booklet Cover
Booklet Contents
MPE Social Worker - Aug. 2008
Booklet Cover
Booklet Contents
MPE Speech Language Pathologist - Aug. 2008
Booklet Cover
Booklet Contents
MPE Teacher - Aug. 2008
Booklet Cover
Booklet Contents
MPE Therapists - Aug. 2008
Booklet Cover
Booklet Contents
|
