Tuesday, May 17, 2011

APPR In Plain English

APPR Overview in Plain English
Communication from John B. King – May 12, 2011
NYS Reform Agenda

Amendment to 100.2(o) PLUS Subpart 30.2 = Implementation of 3012-c

Note: A copy of the regulations is available at the following web address please review for details: http://www.regents.nysed.gov/meetings/2011Meetings/May2011/511bra4.pdf

Why Changes to APPR?
• Improve teaching and learning in NYS
• Increase opportunities for all students to graduate college and career ready
• Foster a culture of continuous improvement
o Student growth measures compared to similar students
o Local student achievement measures to reflect local priorities, needs and targets
o Teacher observations, school visits, etc. will provide structured feedback on professional practice
• Taken together, this information must be used to tailor the 175 hours of professional development required under the 100.2(dd) (PDP regulation)
• Grounded in NYS Teaching Standards and ISLLC Standards
• Ultimate goal - to ensure an effective teacher in every classroom and effective leader(s) in every building

Big Ideas

• As part of the NYS Reform Agenda, the new law establishes a comprehensive evaluation system for all classroom teachers and building principals.
o All evaluators must be appropriately trained.
• The regulations, will take effect during the 2011-2012 school year requires each teacher and principal to receive an annual professional performance review resulting in a single composite score that will label them “highly effective”, “effective”, “developing”, or “ineffective”.
o As a phase-in, 2011-2012 the law only applies to classroom teachers of the common branch subjects, English Language Arts or mathematics in grades 4-8 and the building principals of schools in which such teachers are employed. (The existing APPR remain in effect for classroom teachers and principals who are not subject to the new law in 2011-2012.)
• Building principal or principal = a principal, co-principal of a registered public school or an administrator in charge of an instructional program of a school district or BOCES.
• Classroom teacher or teacher = any teacher in the teaching service (as defined in section 80-1.1), who is a teacher of record except evening school teachers of adults enrolled in non-academic, vocational subjects, and supplemental school personnel as defined in 80-5.6.
• The phase-in does not prevent a school from applying to all teachers and principals in 2011-2012. SED does recommend to the extent possible the roll-out to all classroom teachers and principals in the 2011-2012 school year.
• The regulations do not override any conflicting provisions of any collective bargaining agreement in effect July 1, 2010 until the agreement expires and a successor agreement is entered into; at that point, however, the new regulations apply.
• The make-up of the composite score will change as other regulations are implemented but to begin,
o 20% -- student growth on state assessments or a comparable measure of student achievement growth
o 20% -- locally-selected measures of student achievement that are determined to be rigorous and comparable across classrooms (which could be the same measure of student growth on state assessments used in the other 20%)
o 60% -- other measures of teacher/principal effectiveness.
• These evaluations will play a significant role in a wide array of employment decisions, including promotion, retention, tenure determinations, termination, and supplemental compensation, and will be a significant factor in teacher and principal professional development.
o Nothing in this subpart shall be construed to affect the satutory right of a school district or BOCES to terminate a probationary teacher or principal or to restrict a school district’s or BOCES’ discretion in making a tenure determination pursuant to the law.
o If a teacher or principal is rated "developing" or "ineffective," the school district or BOCES is required to develop and implement a teacher or principal improvement plan.
o Teachers or principals with two “ineffective” ratings may be charged with incompetence and considered for termination.
Implementation Timeline
• July 1 2011-New performance evaluation system takes effect
• September 1, 2011 and each year following - Board adoption of required APPR plan (annual or multi-year) in each district after consultation with an advisory committee (to the extent that any of the items required to be included in an APPR plan not finalized by September 1, 2011 due to negotiations, the plan shall identify those specific parts in the plan and the school district or BOCES shall file an amended plan upon completion of such negotiations).
• September 10, 2011 and each year following – (or within 10 days after adoption of the plan, whichever occurs later) APPR plans to be made available public on district or BOCES web-site.
• 2012-2013 School Year – New performance evaluation system goes into effect for all teachers and building principals.
• 2012-2013 School Year and thereafter – Implementation of teacher and principal improvement plans, as appropriate; implementation of a Regents-approved value-added growth model to be used for the teacher and principal performance evaluation system.







Student Achievement Measures Summary of Provisions in Regulations:
Teachers
New York State Teacher and Principal Evaluation: Summary of Provisions in Draft Regulations Student Achievement Measures:
Teachers ELA/Math 4-8
(2011-12 and beyond)
Growth on State Assessments

20 points
(25 points with approved VA model) • 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 2012-13.
• Policies on Teacher of Record and linked students.
• State to issue RFP for provider of growth and value-added measures.
Growth Using Comparable Measure
20 points
[when no State assessment with an approved growth/VA model] N/A
Locally Selected Measures of Student Achievement

20 points
(15 points after approval of VA model) Locally comparable means:
The same locally selected measures of student achievement 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 Educational and Psychological Testing.

May choose growth or achievement measure from these 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-wide goal setting process for use with any State, local, or school (teacher-created) assessment agreed to by evaluator and teacher.

State will issue RFQ for 3rd party assessments that meet prescribed criteria for state-approved list.




New York State Teacher and Principal Evaluation: Summary of Provisions in Regulations
Student Achievement Measures:
Every Teacher
(2012-13 and beyond)
Growth on State Assessments


20 points
(25 points with approved VA model) • Approach 65% coverage of teachers with growth/value-added measures by extending growth/value-added model, as applicable, to existing and new (if resources available) state assessments:
o 9-11 ELA 2011
o Math Regents
o PARCC as available
o If approved: 6-8 science, social studies and related Regents
o If approved, progress monitoring in K-3 ELA, math
• Feasibility analysis with each expansion area to determine applicability of growth/value-added methodology to pre/post tests.
Growth Using Comparable Measure

20 points
[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 assessment from options below:

For core subjects: 6-8 science and social studies, HS ELA, math, science and social studies courses associated with Regents exams or, in the future, with other state assessments:
• State assessments if one exists (or Regents 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, State and Regent-equivalent 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 agreed to in goal-setting process.
Locally Selected Measures of Student Achievement

20 points
(15 points after approval of VA model) Locally comparable means:
The same locally selected measures of student achievement 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 Educational and Psychological Testing.

May choose growth or achievement measure from these 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-wide goal setting process for use with any State, local, or school (teacher-created) assessment agreed to by evaluator and teacher.
State will issue RFQ for 3rd party assessments that meet prescribed criteria for state-approved list.


Student Achievement Measures:
Principals


Growth on State Assessments

20 points
(25 with approved VA model) Elem/Middle
(2011-12 and beyond) High Schools
(2012-13 and beyond)

• Result of student growth/value-added model.
• Add grades and/or subjects as growth/value-added model applies.

• Result of growth/value-added model as applied to English and Math State assessments.
• Add subjects and a “progress to graduation metric as growth/value-added model applies.

Other Comparable Measures
If principal has no grades with State assessment and an approved VA model State-determined district-wide student growth goal setting process with school level results from:
* Approved assessments for core subjects as defined for teachers, if applicable
*If no core subjects applicable to this school, Distrtic-determined school-level results from comparable measures used to assess student growth for teachers in schools with this grade configuration.
Locally Selected Measures of Student Achievement
20 points
(15 after approval of VA model) Comparable means the same locally selected measures used for all principals in same or similar programs or grade configurations across District or BOCES.
May choose growth or achievement measure from these options:

• Student performance on any or all district-wide locally selected measures approved for use in teacher evaluations.
• Achievement on State tests (% proficient).
• Growth or achievement for student subgroups (SWD, ELL, students starting at specific performance levels (e.g. level 1, 2)) on State or other assessments.
May choose growth or achievement measure from these options:

• Applicable options from elementary/middle school column.
• Percent of cohort achieving specified score on Regents exams, AP, IB or other Regents-equivalents Graduation rates (4,5,6 years) and or drop-out rates
• Graduation % with Advanced Regents designation and/or honors.
• Credit accumulation (e.g. 9th and 10th grade) or other strong predictor of progress to graduation










60 Points Teachers Principals
Standards NYS Teaching Standards ISLLC 2008
Choice of rubrics Menu of state-approved choices for rubrics to assess performance based on standards. Also district variance process available for district or BOCES that seeks to use a rubric not on State-approved list. State to issue RFQ for rubrics that meet prescribed criteria.
Requirements and options: Requirements:
• Multiple measures.
• To support continuous professional growth, at least 40 of the 60 points based on classroom observation.
• Multiple observations by principal or other trained administrator is required.
• Any remaining standards not addressed in classroom observation must be assessed at least once a year.

Optional:
• Observation by trained evaluators independent of school and/or trained in-school peer teachers may be included in portion of 60 points assigned to classroom observation.
• Observations may be in person or by video.
• Structured review of student work and/or teacher artifacts using “portfolio” or “evidence binder” processes.
• Feedback from students, parents, and/or other teachers using structured survey tools.
• Individual professional growth goals with teacher self-reflection (maximum 5 points).
Requirements
• Multiple measures.
• At least 40 of 60 points based on supervisor’s broad assessment of principal leadership and management actions.
o Must incorporate supervisory visit(s) to school and at least two sources of evidence from the following options: structured feedback from constituencies including: teachers, students, and/or families; school visits by other trained independent evaluators; review of school documents, records, state accountability processes, and/or other locally-determined sources.
Any remaining points will be based on results of one or more ambitious and measurable goals set collaboratively with their lead evaluator.
• At least one goal must address the principal’s contribution to improving teacher effectiveness, including but not limited to: improved retention of high performing teachers, student growth scores of teachers granted VS denied tenure; the quality of feedback provided to teachers, facilitation of teacher participation in professional development opportunities and/or the quality and effectiveness of teacher evaluations.
• Any other goals shall address quantifiable and verifiable improvements in academic results of the school’s learning environment resulting from principal’s leadership and commitment to their own professional growth.
• Any remaining standards not addressed through above requirements must be assessed at least once a year.
Teachers and Principals: Subcomponent and Composite Scoring and Ratings

The legislation requires the Regents to prescribe the scoring ranges for each of the following rating categories: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, and Ineffective (HEDI).

SED will require districts to do the following around scoring of the subcomponents of evaluation for local achievement measures and the “other 60%”.
• The process by which points are assigned in subcomponents must be transparent and provided in advance to those being rated.
• District plans must be made publicly available on district or BOCES website and must specify how points will be assigned based on locally selected student achievement and other measures.
• The method for assigning subcomponent points must identify how points will be awarded within four performance levels (HEDI) for the “local measures of student achievement” and the “other measures of effectiveness” subcomponents using the following standards:
Level Growth Local assessment
growth or achievement Other
(Teacher and Leader standards)
Ineffective Results are well-below state average for similar students (or district goals if no state test). Results are well-below District or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement of student learning standards for grade/subject. Overall performance and results are well below standards.
Developing Results are below state average for similar students (or district goals if no state test). Results are below District or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement of student learning standards for grade/subject. Overall performance and results need improvement in order to meet standards.
Effective Results meet state average for similar students (or district goals if no state test). Results meet District or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement of student learning standards for grade/subject. Overall performance and results meet standards
Highly
Effective Results are well-above state average for similar students (or district goals if no state test). Results are well above District or BOCES -adopted expectations for growth or achievement of student learning standards for grade/subject. Overall performance and results exceed standards

Commissioner will review specific scoring ranges annually before the start of each school year and recommend any changes to the Board of Regents. For 2011-12, these will be:

Level Measures of student growth Local measures of student achievement Other 60 points Overall
Composite Score
Ineffective 0-2 0-2
Ranges determined locally 0-64
Developing 3-11 3-11 65-74
Effective 12-17 12-17 75-90
Highly Effective 18-20 18-20 91-100
District Annual Professional Performance Review Plan Requirements



Annually, each district will submit to the State a professional performance review plan, including:

• the process for ensuring that SED receives timely and accurate teacher, course, and student “linkage” data, and the process for teachers and principals to verify the courses and/or student rosters assigned to them;

• process for reporting to SED the individual subcomponent scores and the total composite effectiveness score for each applicable educator;

• description of the assessment development, security, and scoring processes utilized by district or BOCES including ensuring that assessments are not disseminated to students before administration and that teachers or principals do not have a vested interest in the outcome of the assessments they score;

• decisions about local measures of student achievement; teacher and principal practice rubrics; any other instruments (such as surveys, self-assessments, portfolios); and the scoring methodology for the assignment of points to locally selected measures of student achievement and other measures of teacher or principal effectiveness;

• how educators will receive timely and constructive feedback as part of the evaluation process;

• how appeals of annual performance evaluations will be handled

Other Requirements in Regulations

• District or BOCES must address how the performance of teachers or principals whose performance is evaluated as needing an individual improvement plan;

• District or BOCES must ensure that all evaluators are properly trained and that lead evaluators, who complete an individual’s performance review, will be “certified” to conduct evaluations, consistent with regulations. Evaluator training will address specific considerations in evaluating teachers and principals of English Language Learners and students with disabilities;

• How the District or BOCES will ensure lead evaluators maintain inter-rater reliability over time and the process for periodically recertifying lead evaluators;

• SED will conduct ongoing monitoring and may require corrective action around evaluation implementation.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Post a Comment