APPR: Ready or Not

1. APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011

2. A brief summary Airplane in the sky

3. 3 “Gates” -Effective Teacher Evaluation • FAIRNESS • VALIDITY • RELIABILITY

4. OBSERVATION VS. EVALUATION

5. A little history…. • 2000: 8 NYCRR Section 100.2 (o) • Established the requirement for the annual professional performance review of teachers based on the following criteria: • Content knowledge • Preparation of instruction • Instructional delivery • Classroom management • Knowledge of student development • Student assessment • Collaboration • Reflective and responsive practice

6. A little history - continued It also called for districts to adopt an annual or multi-year professional performance review plan

7. And then came Race to the Top • Focused on four reform areas • Enhancing standards and assessments • Improving data systems to support instruction • Recruiting, developing, rewarding and retaining effective teachers and principals • Turning around the lowest-achieving schools

8. Race to the Top • January 2010: Round One – New York did not score high enough • In preparation for Round Two the Regents passed emergency measures to 100.2(o) in April 2010 • Added student growth as criteria for teacher evaluation under 100.2 • Required four rating categories: “HEDI” (highly effective, effective, developing and ineffective)

9. Education Law 3012-c (May 2010) • Calls for performance reviews of classroom teachers and building principals • Student performance data must be included in these evaluations • Evaluations must be based on multiple measures, including student achievement

10. Education Law 3012-c - continued • Composite effectiveness score (range: 1 – 100) • Four rating categories – HEDI • Requires evaluator training • New requirements for improvement plans • Requires districts to establish an appeals process • 2 ineffective ratings = a pattern of ineffective teaching or performance – subject to expedited disciplinary proceedings

11. Levels of Performance – “HEDI” –Who is she? • Highly Effective – • Classroom functions as a community of learners with student assumption of responsibility for learning

12. Levels of Performance • Effective – • teaching shows evidence of thorough knowledge of all aspects of the profession • students are engaged in learning • This is successful, accomplished, professional and effective teaching.

13. Levels of Performance • Developing – • Teaching shows evidence of knowledge and skills related to teaching – but inconsistent performance

14. Levels of Performance • Ineffective – • Teaching shows evidence of not understanding the concepts underlying the component • May represent practice that is harmful • Requires intervention

15. Effectiveness Score • Evaluations must result in a single, composite score that incorporates multiple measures of effectiveness related to the criteria included in the regulations of the Commissioner

16. Effectiveness Score • 20% - student growth data on state assessments • 20% - other “locally selected measures of student achievement” determined to be rigorous and comparable across classrooms • 60% - other “locally developed measures” through collective bargaining and consistent with standards • Including multiple classroom observation by trained evaluators – could be peer reviewers or video-taped lessons • Might include evidence binders, a review of student work, self-reflection, individual professional growth plan, or surveys of parents and/or students

17. WHO? • 2 Phases: • Phase 1: on or after July 1, 2011 • Teachers of Common Branch subjects • Teachers of ELA (Grades 4 – 8) • Teachers of Math (Grades 4 – 8) • Principals of the above teachers • Phase 2: for ALL classroom teachers’ and principals’ evaluations done on or after July 1, 2012

18. “Safe Harbor” • Applies if there is a conflicting provision in a collective bargaining agreement that was in effect 7/1/2010 • If so, the agreement controls until a successor agreement is in place • Contracts negotiated after 7/1/2010 must be consistent with 3012-c

19. NYSUT Lawsuit • June 2011: NYSUT filed lawsuit challenging certain provisions • August 2011: Albany County Supreme Court Justice ruled that part of the regulations are invalid • SED has appealed

20. Evaluator Training • Each individual responsible for conducting teacher & principal evaluations must receive appropriate training • Only “lead evaluators” must be certified-must be trained and calibrated • All evaluators must be appropriately trained

21. 9 Elements for Evaluator Training • New York State Teaching Standards & related elements • Evidence-based observation techniques • Use of Student growth percentile model and value added growth model • Application & use of State-approved rubrics • Application & use of any assessment tools • Application & use of any locally selected measures of student achievement • Use of the Statewide Instructional Reporting System (SIRS) • Scoring Methodology for evaluation –including sub-components • Specific considerations for teachers of ELL and SWD

22. Rubrics • Used to assess 60% “other measures” • List of approved rubrics for teacher and principal evaluations • Variance process for use of existing and/or new, innovative rubrics

23. NYS Teaching Standards: • Knowledge of students & student learning • Knowledge of content and instructional planning • Instructional practice • Learning environment • Assessment for student learning • Professional responsibilities and collaboration • Professional growth

24. PRIORITIES – NYS TEACHING STANDARDS • Cognitive Engagement – intellectual involvement with content is required • Constructivist Learning – students making meaning & connections – related to outside world & personal future • 21st Century Skills – collaboration, communication, critical thinking/problem solving,creativity

25. How do you evaluate the Standards???? • The rubrics – which ever one that is selected – are to be used to evaluate the degree to which teachers are meeting the standards

26. Standard 3: Instructional Practice • What would make a teacher “highly effective” in this area? • What would it like? • What would you hear in the classroom? • What would the students be doing or saying?

27. Common Language • The use of a common language across a district ensures that everyone understands expectations • All evaluators will be using the same template for all teachers • Approved rubrics are aligned to NYS standards

28. Resources