2011-12 Principal Performance Review (PPR) . September 2011. AGENDA. Overview of the Principal Performance Review (PPR) and Education Law 3012-c New Policies around Goals and Objectives for 2011-12 Setting Goals and Objectives Action Planning Evidence Scoring Guidelines.
The PPR was established in 2007 as an evaluative tool to measure principal performance as part of a joint agreement between the CSA and the DOE.
The Principal Performance Review (PPR) offers an opportunity to:
Examine the progress your school and students have made and identify steps you can take to improve student outcomes over the upcoming school year.
Provide a common language and point of discussion for principals, superintendents, and network leaders to talk about the role of the principal and the steps each principal should be taking to achieve their goals for their school.
Provide a structured principal evaluation process to ensure fair and standardized ratings of principal performance across the system.
The PPR results in an annual Final Rating for each principal based on the following components,
which will remain the same for this year:
In May 2010, New York State passed Education Law 3012-c establishing a comprehensive evaluation system for teachers and principals.
The new law requires each teacher and principal receive an annual professional performance review (APPR), resulting in a single composite effectiveness score and a rating of Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, or Ineffective.
3012-c does not go into effect for principals in New York City until a new collective bargaining agreement is reached with the CSA.
The DOE will explore ways to increase coherence across the ways NYC principals are supported and evaluated during the upcoming school year.
NOTE: Scoring criteria will not change for 2011-12.
For the purposes of the PPR:
A goal is an overarching desired outcome, without setting a particular target.
An objective is a measurable target.
Identify a minimum of four and a maximum of five goals in narrative form as outlined below.
Based on your school’s data, what goals will enable your school to achieve stronger student outcomes by June 2012?
How can your school make adjustments to improve specific categories on your school’s Progress Report?
What strategic steps can you take to increase coherence and consistency in instruction and/or systems to improve your Quality Review rating?
How can your school’s structures and strategies be improved to target student outcomes, as identified by your schools NCLB Differentiated Accountability Status and/or PLA identification?
What are your students’ learning needs across different sub-groups and what adjustments need to be made to address those needs?
Given various levels of expertise among your teachers, what differentiated professional learning will result in improved teacher effectiveness to maximize student outcomes?
Has your school adopted a rubric for teacher evaluation? What is the professional development plan around this rubric?
What is your process for teacher feedback?
The action plan in your PPR should describe how you will attain your goals and objectives.
This section should include the steps and actions for meeting goals and objectives (staffing, scheduling, funding plans, etc.)
Example types of measurable evidence that could be used for goals focused on…
The Principal’s Contribution
to Improving Teacher Effectiveness
Quantifiable and Verifiable improvements in Academic Results
Quantifiable and Verifiable improvements the School’s Learning Environment
Goals about the Common Core instructional expectation could fall into any of these categories
Office of Compliance Services will assess each school’s year-end overall compliance with federal, state, and local laws, as well as Chancellor’s Regulations.
For information regarding key dates and actions you may go to:
A superintendent may decrease the Final Rating if:
The principal receives an overall score of “0” on any component of Part B or any category, e.g. “Business and Funding,” listed in the compliance checklist or desk review, OR
The principal engaged in any misconduct conduct during the year.
Whether to decrease the rating depends upon the number of components or categories rated “0”, and/or the frequency and severity of the misconduct or inappropriate conduct as assessed by the superintendent.
Goals and objectives due
Revisions to goals and objectives
See more information on the Principals’ Portal, (click “Principal Evaluations” from the “Leadership & Staff Development” drop-down menu).
Contact your superintendent, network leader or Sarah Kleinhandler at email@example.com with any questions.