12 by zip82da

VIEWS: 560 PAGES: 18

									Wednesday, March 21,2012
• The system for how teachers are evaluated on a yearly basis
• We have had an APPR plan in place for over 11 years
• Three key components to the review system
   • Goal Setting
   • Observation
   • End of year Evaluation
• Observations are conducted by administrators and department chairs
• End of year evaluations are done by administrators
• Teachers are evaluated on four domains
     I.     Planning and Preparation
     II.    Classroom Environment
     III.   Instruction
     IV.    Professional Responsibilities
• Non tenured teachers – 3 observations and a final evaluation
• Tenured teachers – three year professional growth cycle
DOMAIN II – THE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT – COMPONENT 2B Establishing a Culture for Learning.

                      Ineffective                   Developing                      Effective                 Highly Effective

Importance     Teacher or students          Teacher communicates            Teacher conveys genuine     Students demonstrate
of the         convey a negative attitude   importance of the work but      enthusiasm for the          through their active
Content        toward the content,          with little conviction and      subject, and students       participation, curiosity, and
               suggesting that the          only minimal apparent buy-      demonstrate consistent      attention to detail that they
               content is not important     in by the students.             commitment to its value.    value the content’s
               or is mandated by others.                                                                importance.



Expectations   Instructional goals and      Instructional goals and         Instructional goals and     Both students and teacher
for Learning   activities, interactions,    activities, interactions, and   activities, interactions,   establish and maintain,
and            and the classroom            the classroom environment       and the classroom           through planning of
Achievement    environment convey only      convey inconsistent             environment convey high     learning activities,
               modest expectations for      expectations for student        expectations for student    interactions, and the
               students achievement.        achievement.                    achievement.                classroom environment,
                                                                                                        high expectations for the
                                                                                                        learning of all students.
                   Tenured Observation   Tenured Professional
    Non Tenured
                          Year             Growth Project
• Goal Setting     • Goal Setting        • Goal Setting
• 3 Observations   • 1 Observation       • Growth Project
• End of Year      • End of Year         • End of Year
  Evaluation         Evaluation            Summary
• On May 28, 2010, the Governor signed Chapter 103 of the
  Laws of 2010, which added a new section 3012 c to the
  Education Law, establishing a comprehensive evaluation
  system for classroom teachers and building principals.

• The 2010 law requires each classroom teacher and building
  principal to receive an annual professional performance review
  (APPR) resulting in a single composite effectiveness score and
  a rating of “highly effective,” “effective,” “developing,” or
  “ineffective.”
• Teacher Evaluation will be based on the following:
  • 60% Classroom observation based on New York State
    approved rubric as well as other measures which reflect
    teacher practice including portfolios, evidence binders and
    goal setting.
  • 20% State Assessment Data or District Developed Student
    Learning Objectives (SLO).
  • 20% Locally selected measures – some type of standardized
    data collected through a consistent and organized system.
 All Non Tenured                All Tenured

• Goal Setting             • Goal Setting
• Not Yet Defined # of     • Multiple Observations
  Observations               • 1 unannounced
• End of Year Evaluation     • 1 formal
                             • Other observation data
                           • End of Year Evaluation
• 30 Teachers
  • Initial Goal Setting Approx 45 minutes +
  • Each Formal Observation – minimum of 3 ½ hours
     •   Pre observation meeting
     •   Observation
     •   Post Observation Meeting
     •   Observation Write up
  • Unannounced – Approximately 3 hours
  • Informal Walk Throughs – Approximately1 ½ hours
  • End of Year Evaluation – Approx 2 hours
• Total # of hours per teacher = Approximately 10 hours
• 30 Teachers x 10 hours = 300 hours
• Plan
  • July 1, 2012 – School Districts must adopt (Board adoption prior) and
    submit to the commissioner of education for approval an annual or
    multi year APPR plan.
  • Commissioner will accept or reject plan by September 1, 2012
• Implementation
  • Each teacher review must be fully completed by September 1st of the
    school year that follows the school year covered by the evaluation.
  • Teachers must receive in writing, their score and rating for the local
    measures of student achievement and the other measures of
    effectiveness subcomponents by the last day of the school for which
    their performance is being evaluated.
• Agree on the 60% (the other 60 points)
• Define Student Learning Objectives (SLO’s) for 80% of the teachers
  (teachers who do not have a State Assessment)
• Review, evaluate and select assessment for the local 20% for every
  teacher/subject area.
• Revise current goal setting, observation process and documents for
  alignment with new APPR.
• Plan for professional development for all teachers ( this will require at
  least 15 hours of professional development)
•   Data Management
•   Teacher Demographics
•   Growth Measures
•   Growth Assessment data
•   Local Assessments K 12
•   Evaluation Scores
•   Assurance (legal advice)
• Is it possible for a "good" teacher to end up with a "bad" score?
  • Yes, because of the way the state has developed the scoring bands, the
    district could evaluate a teacher as Effective and the state test scores
    can reduce the teacher to “developing”


• Will the results of the evaluations be made public?
  • According to the State, yes. It is unclear what that will look like


• Will the type of students placed in a particular class impact the
  results of the evaluations?
  • Yes, although certain variables are supposed to part of “the formula”,
    for instance a teacher who may have a student with limited language
    proficiency, the performance of students will play a significant factor in
    the overall evaluation
• When do these new evaluations need to begin?
  • 2011 2012
  • Because the APPR plan must be negotiated with the union, districts
    without a settled contract were not able to implement this school year,
    this would apply to Irvington


• What happens if we do not comply with these evaluations?
  • We will be out of compliance with the state mandate and could lose
    funding
The Relationship Between APPR & CCLS



                                       Data
• Gap Analysis                                • APPR
• Curriculum               • Student          • Professional
  Revision                   Achievement        Growth
                           • New
                             Assessments
         Core                                        Teacher
      Curriculum                                    Evaluation
• Coordinated consultants to provide an introduction to 6 12 English,
  math, social studies and science departments and all K 5 teachers
  on the CCLS
• Coordinated professional development days
• Coordinate and oversee needs for APPR
• Co lead the APPR Committee Work (monthly meeting)
• Presentations to the Board of Education on APPR, budget related to
  curriculum, instruction and assessment
• Responsible for on going professional development workshops,
  scoring leader training for state assessments etc.
• Oversight of IEF grants
• Oversight of Title I and II grants
• Responsible for staffing reduction coordination and assessment of
  needs based on budget and meeting regulations for course
  requirements and certification
• Oversight of substitute teacher reimbursement through BOCES
        Pros                Cons
• Save Money   • Lack of leadership for
                 • APPR
                 • Implementation of Common
                   Core Curriculum
                 • Oversight of alignment for the
                   common core
                 • Troubleshooting APPR, CCLS
               • No representation at regional
                 information meetings
               • Lack of support for the new
                 superintendent
               • Unfair burden and
                 responsibility on teachers to
                 be aware of changing rules
                 and expectations, especially
                 in light of the new evaluation
                 system.
  Current Administrator           Interim/PT Administrator
• Limited number of              • Limited pool
  administrators                 • Lack of knowledge of our
• Implementation of APPR           district and the work that
  will add additional work to      has already been done
  all current administrators     • Lack of knowledge of staff
• Need the necessary skill set
• http://www.newyorkprincipals.org/legislators




                   Q&A

								
To top