Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) as approved by the Board of Regents, May 2011

UPDATED

NOTE: Reflects guidance through September 13, 2011

Has to be negotiated.

When Value-Added is implemented

ELA/Math 4-8

2011-2012 and Beyond Student Growth (eventually to include subgroups) 1 Teacher of record (for now)

NOTE

Other Teachers

2012-2013 and Beyond Sooner if possible As assessments become available – “core” subjects use state exam w/ goal setting

Must use from approved list if

Can’t use 3 rd party if not on

state test not ready

approved list

Updates to list due in Jan/Feb

If No State Test(s)?

This is “non-core” areas

Can’t use 3 rd party

State approved 3rd party assessments

test that is not on the list, unless you contract for

Rigorous (verified?)District or BOCES-developed

custom

Agreed to in goal setting

NOTE

If NYSAA?

Students not included in state growth or VA scores Locally, NYSAA can be taken into account Other local measures acceptable

Locally Selected

Same across all classrooms State assessments can be used Choose from approved 3rd party assessments

No, 20% can not be 40% NOTE

Locally Selected

Same across all classrooms State assessments can be used Choose from approved 3rd party assessments Student characteristics can be considered

Locally Selected

Same across all classrooms Rigorous (verified?)District or BOCES-developed Can be group measures Agreed to in goal setting

Change to rubric requires variance; forms and weighting do not require approval

Required

Multiple measures ≥ 2/3 based on observation (menu of approved tools) Principal or trained other All standards every year

Limit overturned but is being appealed

Optional

Structure review of teacher artifacts and/or portfolio Feedback from others using survey tools Goals and reflection (≤5pts)

Limit overturned

Ineffective Student Growth 20% Achievement 20% 0-2 0-2 Other 60% Developing Effective Highly Effective 3-11 12-17 18-20 3-11 12-17 18-20 Ranges determined locally

Has to be revised.

Composite 0-64 65-74 75-90 91-100

When Value-Added is implemented

Elem/Middle

Result of student growth Added to as measures become available Other measures being used for teachers in the school

High School

Result of student growth Added to as available Progress to graduation Other measures being used for teachers in the school

Elem/Middle

District-wide achievement measures Achievement on state tests Growth or achievement for subgroups

High School

Regents participation rates College ready rates Graduation rates Credit accumulation Dropout rates PSAT, SAT, AP, IB, etc.

Required

Multiple measures ≥ 2/3 based on broad assessment of actions via supervisor visits Include at least two: Feedback from constituencies School visits from others Review of documents

No approved tools list will be made; local decisions

Required

Locally-selected measure of teacher effectiveness contribution, such as: High performer retention Granted v. denied tenure Teacher satisfaction w/ feedback Evaluation quality

Required

All standards at least once per year

Optional

Teacher and/or student attendance School goals Goals and reflection (≤5pts)

Ineffective Student Growth 20% Achievement 20% 0-2 0-2 Other 60% Developing Effective Highly Effective 3-11 12-17 18-20 3-11 12-17 18-20 Ranges determined locally

SED interpreting that this also has to be revised.

Composite 0-64 65-74 75-90 91-100

Collec tively, not indivi dually

Developing or ineffective (teachers and principals) Developed through negotiations – there is no language that says individual elements must be negotiated Within 10 days after report date for new school year

Challenge the “substance” of the review Challenge adherence to standards and methodologies Challenge adherence to regulations and negotiated procedures

NOTE

In addition to 3012-c requirements, districts must post how all others are evaluated (old APPR) in 100.2(o).

Do NOT have to use HEDI for all others.

Just need to post old plan for all the others

Approved by BoE by September 1 st Posted to website by September 10 bargaining plans th Identify provisions that may change as a result of collective Approve and post amended

Process for data linkage and verification Process for data (subscores and scores)submission Assessment security measures • •

Teachers and principals can not score their own assessments.

Secure locations.

•

Secure answer keys.

Local achievement measures and scoring methodology Teacher 60% rubric Principal 60% rubric

How APPR process will be used for PD for teachers and principals How principals and teachers will receive timely feedback

Improvement Plan process Evaluator training process Evaluator reliability over time (recertification) Appeals process

Improvement Plan process Evaluator training process Evaluator reliability over time (recertification) Appeals process

Ensured by governing body Described in APPR plan All evaluators must be trained

Completed prior to completion of evaluation

All lead evaluators must be trained and certified: Evidence-based observation Growth and value-added models Rubric application Application of assessment tools Locally selected measures Statewide Instructional Reporting System Scoring methodologies SWD and ELL teacher consideration

Non-administrators and evaluations: Must be fully trained and collaborated before conducting any part of an evaluation

Phase-In

Math and ELA 4-8 2011-2012 Everyone else 2012-2013 Everyone else sooner if possible

If more than 50% of students in other than ELA & Math, not included

Unless specifically addressed by a labor agreement signed prior to July 1, 2010