New York State’s Teacher and Principal Evaluation System

1. New York State’sTeacher and Principal Evaluation System APPR Conference April 30 – May 1, 2012

2. 3 Initiatives

3. Conference Objectives • Understand in detail the component pieces of the APPR plan for teachers and principals (requirements and options). • Understand how to structure APPRs to support district/BOCES’ academic priorities and needs. • Understand what makes a rigorous APPR plan that meets requirements of law and regulations. • Understand how to use resources from NYSED to help districts/BOCES and constituencies shape sound APPR plans.

4. Agenda Day 1 and 2 Agenda Day 1: • Introduction to Review Room • District Case Study • State Growth, Locally-Selected Measures, and Other Measures • HEDI and Points • Agenda Day 2: • District Case Study Re-Visited • Panel Discussion • Q & A with the Commissioner

5. Key Tools and Resources When Developing APPR Plans • The Commissioner’s APPR form and instructions • All of the following resources related to APPR plans are located on EngageNY.org: • Summary of regulations (AKA “the purple memo”) • APPR Guidance • TLE Roadmaps • SLO Guidance, Exemplars, and Webinars • Materials from NTI trainings

6. Workshop Model • Mini lesson • Application through case study • Codifying the learning through the APPR form • Assessing the learning through HEDI • Sharing in the epiphanies • Q and A

7. Expectations…. Your Role Making and/or influencing key decisions in support of APPR and its principles.

8. Summary of APPR Components Growth State-provided Growth/VA (20% 25%) Student Learning Objectives Locally Selected Measures Assessments and Measures (20%  15%) Other Measures • Rubrics • Sources of evidence: observations, visits, surveys, etc (60%) Scoring Subcomponents, Composite Scores, Ratings Imple- mentation Improvement Plans, Appeals, Training

9. Teacher/Principal Evaluation Formula

10. Let’s Look at Review Room

11. NYSED APPR Form During the conference, please remember to use the conference log-in ID and password provided by NYSED and not your official district log-in! • 11

12. NYSED APPR Form Keep in Mind: the “Resource Tab” is where you will find helpful items such as the State-approved list of 3rd party assessments These are the file types that can be uploaded to Review Room

13. NYSED APPR Form All pages include directions for completing the page as well as references to the specific sections of Guidance that are most relevant.

14. NYSED APPR Form Some pages have dropdown boxes. Where there are dropdown boxes, you often will see a blank box next to it, like on this page. Here you are asked to actually name the specific assessment. You would type that into the blank box.

15. NYSED APPR Form Don’t get confused! The dropdown boxes include an abbreviated list of what is above.

16. Applying the Learning • 16 Case study review

17. Teacher/Principal Evaluation Formula

18. Agenda • 60 Point Other Measures Overview • Regulations • Review Room Application • HEDI Criteria for 60 Point Other Measures • Case Study Discussion • Review Room Application

19. Where can I find…..? Where Can I Find Further Resources, Guidance, and Answers to My Questions Related to 60 Point Other Measures? • Section H of NYSED’s APPR Guidance • Some of Section I of NYSED’s APPR Guidance • Section J of NYSED’s APPR Guidance • Page 4 of the “Purple Memo” • Step 1 and 2 of the Teacher Road Map • Step 1 and 2 of the Principal Road Map

20. 60 Point Other MeasuresTeachers and Principals Keep in Mind: Multiples measures must be used in this subcomponent. Keep in Mind: Measures, HEDI criteria, and the scoring bands for this subcomponent must be locally-established through negotiations.

21. 60 Point Other Measures

22. Other Measures: Remaining Points

23. Working with 60 Point Other Measures in Review Room

24. Review Room Application: Teachers Keep in Mind: the dropdown menu has the full list of State-approved rubrics. There is also an option for “district variance” that can be selected if you are a district who has already received a NYSED approved variance.

25. Review Room Application: Teachers Keep in Mind: the number of points must add up to 60 for the Other Measures subcomponent. A minimum of 31 points must be allocated to classroom observations/broad assessment of principal leadership and management actions.

26. Review Room Application: Teachers Keep in Mind: survey tools must be selected from NYSED’s State-approved list, which will be available in June.

27. Review Room Application: Teachers Keep in Mind: districts will need to complete the form with specific information on the observation requirements for probationary and tenured teachers. Specifics regarding how many formal/long versus informal/short must be noted.

28. Review Room Application: Principals Keep in Mind: if any points are assigned to goals, the first goal must be related to improving teacher effectiveness. In the form, notice that districts must also check the boxes to identify which two (or more) of the options listed will be utilized as part of assessing the goals.

29. Review Room Application: Principals Keep in Mind: for principals, districts must enter the specific information on the number of school visits that will be conducted for principals in the building. Districts must complete this for probationary and tenured principals.

30. Review Room Application Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the choices the district has negotiated for their 60 Point Other Measures subcomponent. When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the Other Measures of Effectiveness – Teachers section. Enter the choices the district has made for their Other Measures. Do not worry about entering the HEDI criteria and scoring bands yet. If you finish early, please move on to the Other Measures of Effectiveness – Principals section and complete the choices the district has made.

31. HEDI Criteria for 60 Point Other Measures

32. Determining HEDI Criteria60 Point Other Measures

33. Keep in Mind… • HEDI for 60% must be negotiated: scoring bands and the process for assigning points. • HEDI for 60% must assure it is possible to use all points (including 0) in the subcomponent and rating categories. • Districts will need to determine how rubric scores translate into HEDI categories and within categories, into specific point awards. • For example, if an educator earns a rubric score at the bottom of your Developing rubric range, then the educator should get HEDI points at the bottom of your developing point range.

34. One Example of a HEDI Approach…for 60 Point Other Measures • The district negotiates procedures for conducting and scoring classroom observations and assessing other aspects of the rubric. • The district negotiates the level of performance against the rubric for each HEDI category. • Based on all the evidence gathered, a “rubric score” and its corresponding HEDI rating category is determined for each teacher/principal. • The rubric score is then converted into a score on a scale of 0-60 according to the 60 point scoring bands negotiated by the district. • The chart below illustrates one potential result:

35. APPR Form Requirements…for HEDI Criteria Keep in Mind: Districts must provide the locally-negotiated scoring bands and then describe the level of performance for each HEDI rating category. Districts can also describe how scores from the rubric are converted into HEDI and points.

36. Case Discussion Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the 60% Other Measures section. Then, discuss the following with your table groups: In this case, the district has agreed to prioritize certain key elements of their principal practice rubric in the 2012-13 school year, choosing some based on their relevance to district priorities and needs and weighting these proportionately more than others. Is this allowable? If the district decided to prioritize certain key elements of the teacher practice rubric and use meetings that occur every other month to provide the opportunity for teachers and their principals to discuss evidence and feedback on performance on standards not directly assessed by classroom observation, would this be allowable? The district is considering eliminating some indicators on the rubric for certain non-tested teachers. Is this allowable? In this case, are enough observations conducted for teachers and principals? Are there any requirements missing? The district is considering awarding points to teachers who effectively mentor student teachers or new colleagues. Is this allowable?

37. Review Room Application When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the Other Measures of Effectiveness – Teachers section. Enter the HEDI criteria and points. If you finish early, please move on to the 60% Other Measures– Principals section and complete the HEDI criteria and points.

38. Teacher/Principal Evaluation Formula

39. Agenda • State Growth Model Overview • Definitions and characteristics • Student Learning Objectives • State versus district decisions • Rules and options • Review Room Application • Case Study Discussion • HEDI Criteria for SLOs • Case Study Discussion • Review Room Application

40. Where can I find…..? Where Can I Find Further Resources, Guidance, and Answers to My Questions Related to State Growth? • Section D of NYSED’s APPR Guidance • Section F of NYSED’s APPR Guidance • Some of Section I of NYSED’s APPR Guidance • Page 1 and 3 of the “purple memo” • Step 3 of the Teacher Road Map • Step 3 of the Principal Road Map

41. State Growth: Teachers and Principals Keep in Mind: Most teachers will have SLOs for the 2012-13 school year. Keep in Mind: Most principals will be covered by State-provided growth measures for the 2012-13 school year

42. Achievement and Gains • Achievement models tell you who is above and below the proficiency cut • Two of five kids here scored above proficiency ELA Scale Score Proficiency • Gain score models tell us some students received higher scale scores the following year • Three students had higher scores, one didn’t change, and one had a lower score Neither tells us enough to say whether student growth was unusually strong, weak or average. 2011 2012

43. NYS Growth Model In a growth model, we look at how all students with similar scores in one year (or several years) do when compared to each other In this example, we take one student from the previous slide and see how all students with that score in 2011 performed in 2012. This tells us whether the change in scores between two years is average or above or below average. ELA Scale Score Above Average Proficiency Average Below Average 2011 2012

44. Growth Model: Student Growth Percentiles (SGP) Defined

45. Median Student Growth Percentile: Defined The MGP is the median. This is the result that will describe a class or a school’s result. Order by SGP

46. Growth Measures: “Similar” Students For NYS Growth Measures, “similar” students will include: • Up to 3 years of past State assessment history as available for each student (must have current and 1 prior to be included) • In 2011-12, Poverty, SWD, ELL characteristics • For value-added model in 2012-13 and beyond, other student, classroom and/or school characteristics may be included

47. Growth Measures: Principals Elementary and Middle School Principals: • Median Student Growth Percentile of all the tested students in the school • Not the average of all teacher results High School Principals in 2012-13: • Measure is in development • Based on student growth in Regents exams passed compared to similar students

48. Next Steps/Timeline for Growth Model This Spring/Summer: • Approach to determining teacher and principal HEDI levels • Training/communications materials and full technical documentation • Create and provide 11-12 teacher and principal growth scores (July) Fall 2012: • Provide online reporting to teachers, school, districts (Sept) • Value-added measures for teachers and principals presented to Task Force and the Board of Regents

49. Linking Students, Teachers and Schools • SED is collecting data now to connect students and teachers to courses: • Data required by Federal law (not just for NYS statute) • Teachers participate in verifying student rosters • Enrollment, assignment dates also collected to support over time different duration of teacher-student “linkage” if empirically proven • Districts, principals, and teachers play a pivotal role in ensuring high quality inputs for the State-provided growth/value-added measures.

50. Overview of Teacher and Principal Evaluation Regulations Growth State-provided Growth/VA (20% 25%) Student Learning Objectives Locally Selected Measures Assessments and Measures (20%  15%) Other Measures • Rubrics • Sources of evidence: observations, visits, surveys, etc (60%) Scoring Subcomponents, Composite Scores, Ratings Imple- mentation Improvement Plans, Appeals, Training