Teacher & Principal Effectiveness Chapter 103 of the Laws of 2010

1. Teacher & Principal EffectivenessChapter 103 of the Laws of 2010 St. John Fisher College March 28, 2011 Dr. Michael Glover, District Superintendent Genesee Valley BOCES Dr. Jon Hunter, Superintendent Fairport Central School District Ms. Laura Kelley, Special Assistant to the Supt. Rochester City School District

2. Teacher & Principal Effectiveness Education Law §3012-C • Essential Component of NYS • Race to the Top (RttT) Application • “Reform” Agenda • Commitment to rigorous Common Core Standards • Expand data systems to inform instruction • Adopt teacher/principal/school accountability model that includes student growth measures • Turn around struggling schools

3. Teacher & Principal Effectiveness Education Law §3012-C • Purpose • To improve teaching and learning by implementing a statewide comprehensive evaluation system for school districts and BOCES which is designed to measure teacher and principal effectiveness based on performance including measures of student achievement.

4. Key Elements of Education Law §3012-C • Comprehensive system with multiple measures of effectiveness which would result in a single composite score. • 40% student achievement • 20% growth on State assessments • 20% student achievement on local measures • 60% non-growth measures locally developed and negotiated consistent with standards proscribed by the Commissioner • Differentiated rating categories: • Highly Effective • Effective • Developing • Ineffective • Timely and constructive feedback on all criteria.

5. Key Elements of Education Law §3012-C • Improvement plans for teachers/principals rated as ineffective or developing. • Locally negotiated • Consistent with Commissioner’s Regulations • Evaluator training in accordance with regulation for each individual conducting teacher and principal evaluations. • A process for appeals for teachers and principals to challenge. • Substance • Adherence to standards and methodologies • Adherence to Commissioner’s Regulations • Compliance with locally negotiated procedures • A significant factor to be negotiated for professional development, compensation, and promotion.

6. Phase-In of New Evaluation System • 2011-12: Only for teachers in common branch subjects of ELA and math in grades 4-8 and for principals in buildings in which these teachers are employed. • Score to be based on: • 20% on student growth on State assessments or comparable measures of student growth+ • 20% on other locally selected measures of student achievement that “are rigorous and comparable across classrooms” (in accordance with Commissioner’s Regulations and as are developed locally in a manner consistent with procedures negotiated)+ • 60% on other locally selected measures developed through negotiations between the district/BOCES and the unions representing the teachers and principals

7. Phase-In of New Evaluation System • 2012-13: Applicable to all classroom teachers and building principals. If Board of Regents has not adopted a value-added growth model for the 2012-13 school year, all teachers and principals become subject to requirements applicable to teachers and principals in 2011-12. • Score to be based on: • 20% on student growth on State assessments or comparable measures of student growth+ • 20% on other locally selected measures of student achievement that “are rigorous and comparable across classrooms” (in accordance with Commissioner’s Regulations and as are developed locally in a manner consistent with procedures negotiated)+ • 60% on other locally selected measures developed through negotiations between the district/BOCES and the unions representing the teachers and principals

8. All Classroom Teachers and Principals • Commencing the first school year for which Regents adopts a value-added growth model (may be 2012-13), the percentage of evaluation to be based on State assessment measures of student growth increases from 20% to 25%. • 25% on student growth on State assessments or comparable measures of student growth+ • 15% on other locally selected measures of student achievement that “are rigorous and comparable across classrooms” (in accordance with Commissioner’s Regulations and as are developed locally in a manner consistent with procedures negotiated)+ • 60% on other locally selected measures developed through negotiations between the district/BOCES and the unions representing the teachers and principals

9. Four Rating Categories in APPR Process • APPRs must differentiate teacher and principal effectiveness using the following quality rating categories: • Highly Effective • Effective • Developing • Ineffective • Commissioner’s Regulations to prescribe the minimum and maximum scoring ranges for each category. • APPRs to result in single composite teacher or principal effectiveness score which incorporates multiple measures of effectiveness.

10. Regents Advisory Task Force • Law was negotiated prior to passing the bill in Legislature. • Education Law §3012-C created an Advisory Committee to be comprised of representatives of teachers, principals, superintendents, school boards, school district and BOCES officials, and other interested parties. • Chaired by Vice Chancellor Cofield and Regent Young. • Facilitated by SED Staff and Fellows. • Participants include unaffiliated teachers and principals, NYSUT, UFT, SAANYS, University representatives, NYSSBA, NYSCOSS, and others. • Observers.

11. Work of the Regents Advisory Task Forceon Teacher and Principal Effectiveness September 2010 Regents Task Force on Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Committee on 60% Non-Growth Measures for Principals Committee on Locally Selected Assessments Committee on 60% Non-Growth Measures for Teachers Committee on Non-Tested Subjects Regents Task Force Formulates Recommendations Recommendations to the Commissioner Commissioner Reports to the December Board of Regents

12. Work of the Regents Advisory Task Forceon Teacher and Principal Effectiveness January 2011 Regents Task Force on Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Input from the Center for Assessment No recent updates *NEW* Committee on Student Growth/ Composite Scores Teachers/Principals FEBRUARY Committees on Non-Tested Subjects, 60% Teacher and Principal, & 20% locally selected CONTINUE Committee on Professional Development HAS NOT BEGUN Regents Task Force Formulates Recommendations Commissioner Presents Regulations to the Regents to Implement Chapter 103 May/June 2011

13. Meeting Format Monthly Meetings • General Sessions—Presentations and Q&A • Sub-committees—First stage • Four sub-committees started with long lists of questions, readings, and discussion • Still defining terms, discussing standards, and debating procedures for proposed regulations

14. Timetable and Process

15. Critical Key Points • Who is “a teacher”? What about multiple teachers in a classroom? • The evaluation “rating system” or “scoring bands” and how they will be applied to a teacher, within a category of evaluation, and across the state. • The Appeals Process: Who may appeal? To Whom? How far? How often? • What is negotiated? What is in regulations? • Teacher/Principal In Need of Improvement and Improvement Plans. • The implementation timeline and degree of “high stakes” annually. • Practical application, capacity for implementation, and manageability of the entire process in a school, district, and state to do this work right and well.

16. The Work of the Regents Task Force 20% Tested Subjects 4-8 Math/ELA for Teachers and Principals • Key Issues • Who is “the teacher of record?” • Understanding how student growth will be computed, reported, and scored • Understanding how value-added will be computed, reported, and scored • Concerns • No Committee

17. The Work of the Regents Task Force 20% Tested Subjects 4-8 Math/ELA for Teachers and Principals Potential Options Center for Assessment has completed student growth percentile calculations Initial student level results show model works. Need to adjust for student demographics and false negatives SED has issued RFP for vendors to develop full principal and teacher value-added models

18. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on 20% Non-Tested Subjects “Twenty percent of the evaluation shall be based upon student growth on State assessments as prescribed by the Commissioner or a comparable measure of student growth if such growth data is not available.” • Key Issues • 80% of all teachers in NYS are in this category • Teachers with one State assessment • Teachers with no State assessments • Who is “the teacher of record?” • What about teachers who provide pupil support services?

19. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on 20% Non-Tested Subjects • Concerns • Criteria for developing regulations • There must be comparability at state, district, and school levels • There must be rigor and validity • There must be feasibility in administration, cost, and time • There must be data produced that positively impacts instruction • Potential Options • Use existing State assessments • Use existing standardized assessments (e.g. MAP/ACT/Terra Nova) • Develop new State assessments • Allow for local assessments that meet criteria as stipulated by Commissioner • Allow for locally developed growth goals defined by groups of teachers that meet criteria as stipulated by the Commissioner

20. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on Locally Selected Assessments “Twenty percent shall be based on other locally selected measures of student achievement that are determined to be rigorous and comparable across classrooms in accordance with the Regulations of the Commissioner and are developed locally in a manner consistent with procedures negotiated, pursuant to the requirements of article fourteen of the Civil Service Law.” • Key Issues • Interpreting the law and legal implications • Challenging conversations with respect to genuine high expectations for quality, rigor, and comparability across classrooms • What is bargained vs. what is in regulations? • Regulations could end up with a menu of options from state, other sources, and/or locally developed • Must add value to classroom instruction

21. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on Locally Selected Assessments • Concerns • When good local authentic assessments become high stakes (for teachers) assessments • Should be based on assessments that are not standardized State tests • Potential Options • Off-the-shelf assessment(NWEA MAP, Scranton Performance Series, CTB Acuity, ACT Explore/College Board ReadiStep) • Locally developed “authentic” assessment • Must be aligned with NYS and Common Core Standards • All would need to pass muster of rigor as defined by rubric, validity, reliability, and comparability across classrooms • School wide or group or team metric(not from a state assessment)

22. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on 60% Non-Growth Measures for Teachers The remaining percent of the evaluations, ratings, and effectiveness scores shall be locally developed, consistent with the standards prescribed in the Regulationsof the Commissioner through negotiations • Key Issues • Clarity of Standards (BoR has adopted the NY Teacher Standards) • Flexibility with rubrics • Flexibility on weighting elements • Define scoring bands

23. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on 60% Non-Growth Measures for Teachers • Concerns • Clearly defined expectations with performance descriptors for each performance level • Rubrics must include details for training and implementation • Potential Options • Multiple measures of teacher practice: portfolio, 360 feedback, professional goals • No single rubric but develop criteria for rubric selections • Observations by multiple persons: principals, peers, outside evaluations

24. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on 60% Non-Growth Measures for Principals The remaining percent of the evaluations, ratings, and effectiveness scores shall be locally developed, consistent with the standards prescribed in the Regulationsof the Commissioner through negotiations • Key Issues • Reference to Wallace Committee work • Use of ISLLC or similar standards • Based on multiple measures and contain multiple sources of feedback • Flexibility on the choice of rubrics

25. The Work of the Regents Task Force Committee on 60% Non-Growth Measures for Principals • Concerns • Focus on measurable outcomes • Flexibility in scoring bands • Flexibility for experience in years as a leader • Possible Options • Focus on leadership and management • Focus on managing school operations • Focus on supervising and developing teachers • Focus on progress against school wide goals • Focus on progress against individual professional development goals

26. The Work of the Regents Task Force Reminders • Still more questions than answers • Varying legal opinions on a number of points • Caution: No decisions yet • Final recommendations: The Commissioner

27. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Scoring Bands The Law: …annual professional performance reviews shall result in a single composite teacher or principal effectiveness score which incorporates multiple measures of effectiveness related to the criteria included in the Regulations of the Commissioner. • Key Issues • Rigor, reliability, and training • Fair and equitable • Specific, contextualization within three sub-component scores • Local bargain or Commissioner’s Regulation to determine how 20% achievement/60% other factors are to be computed • Rating scales for teacher and principal the same • No existing “good” models in other states

28. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Scoring Bands • Possible Options • State Growth Score: NYS assigns score of 1-20 (25 after VA) based on state test results in a normal distribution of educators across the state (taking into consideration confidence intervals) • State defines composite scoring bands for over all Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, and Ineffective rating only

29. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Teacher of Record • An individual(or individuals, such as co-teaching assignments) who have been assigned responsibility for a student’s learning in a subject/course with aligned performance measures • Teacher-Student Linkage - State must collect data linking teachers, courses, and students

30. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Teacher of Record • Data Collected

31. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Teacher of Record • Data Concerns

32. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness An Eye to the Future • “Crosswalk” your teacher APPR with the NYS Teaching Standards. • “Crosswalk” your principal APPR with the ISLLC Standards. • Advance plan with your School Attorney • Negotiations • Appeal • Affirm your principles and practices of your Professional Learning Communities. • Ask questions and share information.

33. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Lessons Learned and Tips to Remember • Decide now: where are you and your good friend “input” going to part ways? • Sure, Rome wasn’t built in a day. But it also didn’t take forever. Move fast! • High stakes are like a good pair of glasses: they help everyone focus. • Be prepared to be Ms. or Mr. Unpopular. • When you start to lose your courage, ask yourself: Would I be willing to randomly assign my own child to any teacher in our school system? If not, push harder.

34. Opportunities for Transforming Human Capital “…three years of good teachers…in a row would overcome the average achievement deficit between low-income kids…and others.” ~ Eric Hanushek in Teacher Quality, 2002 Providing highly effective instructors for every child, in every class, every day is the cornerstone for quality educational systems; nothing schools do matters more for students.

35. Systems of Support and Development • Multiple data points, frequent observations, constant attention to development

36. Human Capital Innovation

37. Human Capital Development • What could a system like this mean for your district(s)? • What does a system like this mean for you and your school? • How can the district support this kind of evaluation system over the next few years? • In what ways would this kind of evaluation and compensation system impact your students? Your teachers? Your school community?

39. Teacher and Principal Effectiveness • Questions • Comments • Suggestions Thank you!