appr: ready or not joan townley & andy greene october 20 and 21, 2011
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
APPR: Ready or Not
Joan Townley & Andy GreeneOctober 20 and 21, 2011
![Page 2: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
A brief summary
Airplane in the sky
![Page 3: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3 “Gates” -Effective Teacher Evaluation
FAIRNESS
VALIDITY
RELIABILITY
![Page 4: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
OBSERVATIONVS.
EVALUATION
![Page 5: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
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
![Page 6: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
A little history - continued
It also called for districts to adopt an annual or multi-year professional performance review plan
![Page 7: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
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
![Page 8: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
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)
![Page 9: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
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
![Page 10: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
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
![Page 11: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Levels of Performance – “HEDI” –Who is she?
Highly Effective –
Classroom functions as a community of learners with student assumption of responsibility for learning
![Page 12: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
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.
![Page 13: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Levels of Performance
Developing –
Teaching shows evidence of knowledge and skills related to teaching – but inconsistent performance
![Page 14: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Levels of Performance
Ineffective –
Teaching shows evidence of not understanding the concepts underlying the component
May represent practice that is harmful Requires intervention
![Page 15: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
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
![Page 16: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
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
![Page 17: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
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
![Page 18: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
“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
![Page 19: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
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
![Page 20: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
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
![Page 21: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
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
![Page 22: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
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
![Page 23: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
NYS Teaching Standards:
1. Knowledge of students & student learning2. Knowledge of content and instructional
planning3. Instructional practice4. Learning environment5. Assessment for student learning6. Professional responsibilities and
collaboration7. Professional growth
![Page 24: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
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
![Page 25: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
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
![Page 26: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
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?
![Page 27: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
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
![Page 28: APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051622/5697bfa81a28abf838c999de/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Resources