Www.engageNY.org New York State’s Teacher and Principal Evaluation System APPR Conference April 30 – May 1, 2012.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Teacher Evaluation & APPR THE RUBRICS! A RTTT Conversation With the BTBOCES RTTT Team and local administrators July 20, 2011.
Advertisements

New York State’s Teacher and Principal Evaluation System VOLUME I: NYSED APPR PLAN SUBMISSION “TIPS”
Student Learning Targets (SLT)
Student Learning Targets (SLT) You Can Do This! Getting Ready for the School Year.
OCM BOCES Day 6 Principal Evaluator Training. 2 Nine Components.
OCM BOCES APPR Regulations As of % Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures APPR NOTE: All that is left for implementation.
OCM BOCES APPR Regulations As of % Student Growth 20% Student Achievement 60% Multiple Measures APPR.
LCSD APPR Introduction: NYS Teaching Standards and the Framework for Teaching Rubric Welcome! Please be seated in the color-coded area (marked off by colored.
New York State District-wide Growth Goal Setting Process: Student Learning Objectives Webinar 2 (REVISED FEBRUARY 2012)
Annual Professional performance review (APPR overview) Wappingers CSD.
Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) as approved by the Board of Regents, May 2011 NOTE: Reflects guidance through September 13, 2011 UPDATED.
Student Learning Objectives NYS District-Wide Growth Goal Setting Process December 1, 2011 EVOLVING.
Teacher Effectiveness
Leader & Teacher SLTs 2014 – ComponentEvaluation for TeachersEvaluation for School Leaders Setting GoalsTeachers set two SLTs in collaboration with.
March, What does the new law require?  20% State student growth data (increases to 25% upon implementation of value0added growth model)  20%
Student Learning Objectives It’s Been a SLO Summer.
Aligning Priorities, Goals and Initiatives for School and Student Success Presenters: Dr. Regina Cohn Dr. Robert Greenberg January 2013.
NYS Middle Level Liaisons Network As representatives of statewide middle level education, our purpose is to advocate for middle level needs, inform SED.
March 28, What does the new law require?  20% State student growth data (increases to 25% upon implementation of value0added growth model)  20%
Student Learning targets
SSL/NYLA Educational Leadership Retreat New York State Teacher Evaluation …and the School Librarian John P. Brock Associate in School Library Services.
Physical Education SLOs: A Clarification of the State Education Department’s 8 Component SLO Template: Grades K-5 Presented By: Laura Shaw – Dows Lane.
New York State District-wide Growth Goal Setting Process: Student Learning Objectives Webinar 1: December 2011.
1 New York State Education Department Using Growth Measures for Educator Evaluation August 2012.
LOUISIANA STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION JOHN WHITE Tracking Readiness: Measuring High School Effectiveness in Louisiana National Conference on Student.
As Adopted by Emergency Action June, 2015 Slides updated
Making Demonstrable Improvement: Request for Feedback (Updated) July 2015 Presented by: Ira Schwartz Assistant Commissioner of Accountability.
Stronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System
1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.
* Provide clarity in the purpose and function of the Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) as a part of the APPR system * Describe procedures for using.
OCM BOCES Day 7 Lead Evaluator Training 1. 2 Day Seven Agenda.
Information for school leaders and teachers regarding the process of creating Student Learning Targets. Student Learning targets.
NY’s APPR Plans and Review Process.
The APPR Process And BOCES. Sections 3012-c and 3020 of Education Law (as amended)  Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) based on:  Student.
Evidence-Based Observations Training for Observers of Teachers Module 5 Dr. Marijo Pearson Dr. Mike Doughty Mr. John Schiess Spring 2012.
OCM BOCES SLOs Workshop. Race To The Top: Standards Data Professional Practice Culture APPR.
The Next Chapter of Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) as described in the April 15th Draft Regulations.
Western Suffolk BOCES Boot Camp Emma Klimek Eastern Suffolk BOCES 2012.
STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND YOUR TEACHER EVALUATION NYSUT Education and Learning Trust NYSUT Field and Legal Services NYSUT Research and Educational.
APPR:§3012-d A Preview of the changes from :§3012-c Overview.
Teacher and Principal Evaluations and Discipline Under Chapter 103.
FEH BOCES Student Learning Objectives 3012-c.
College Preparatory Course Certification Pilot May 5th,
New York State District-wide Growth Goal Setting Process: Student Learning Objectives Webinar 2: January 2012.
Winter, 2012 Teacher Effectivensss Day 5. To download powerpoint:
Student Learning Objectives SLOs April 3, NY State’s Regulations governing teacher evaluation call for a “State-determined District-wide growth.
March 23, NYSCSS Annual Conference Crossroads of Change: The Common Core in Social Studies.
1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation 2011–12 July 2012 PRESENTATION as of 7/9/12.
APPR: Ready or Not Joan Townley & Andy Greene October 20 and 21, 2011.
Race to the Top (RTTT) and the New York State Regents Reform Agenda Dr. Timothy T. Eagen Assistant Superintendent for Instruction & Curriculum South Huntington.
Changes in Professional licensure Teacher evaluation system Training at Coastal Carolina University.
Sample Science SLO’s Grades Student Growth Goal Setting Process (SLO’s) Y Central School District Science Points Grade Level/Subject.
Student Learning Objectives NYS District-Wide Growth Goal Setting Process December 1, 2011 EVOLVING.
© 2012, Community Training and Assistance Center *Please see caveat © 2012, Teaching Learning Solutions Student Learning Objectives OCM.
UPDATE ON EDUCATOR EVALUATIONS IN MICHIGAN Directors and Representatives of Teacher Education Programs April 22, 2016.
1 Teacher Evaluation Institute July 23, 2013 Roanoke Virginia Department of Education Division of Teacher Education and Licensure.
APPR Annual Professional Performance Review Legislation: 3012-d Board of Education Work Session November 9, 2015.
1 New York State Growth Model for Educator Evaluation June 2012 PRESENTATION as of 6/14/12.
1 Overview of Teacher Evaluation 60% Multiple Measures of Teacher Performance At least 31 points based on “at least 2” observations At least one observation.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Writing and Submitting Student Learning Objectives
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Lead Evaluator for Principals Part I, Series 1
APPR Overview 3012c Draft Revision March 2012
Student Learning Objective (SLO) Staff Development
Sachem Central School District Teacher Evaluation Training 2012
Creating Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)
WAO Elementary School and the New Accountability System
Presented by Joseph P. Stern
Roadmap November 2011 Revised March 2012
Presentation transcript:

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

3 Initiatives College & Career Ready Students Data Driven Instruction Common Core State Standards Teacher/ Leader Effectiveness 2

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. 3

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 4

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 5

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 6

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

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

9 Teacher/Principal Evaluation Formula 60 EBOP, etc Growth Local 100

10 Let’s Look at Review Room

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

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

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. 13

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. 14

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

Case study review Applying the Learning 16

17 Teacher/Principal Evaluation Formula 60 EBOP, etc Growth Local 100

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

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 19

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

TeachersPrincipals NY State Teaching Standards: choice of rubric from State-approved list or variance, if approved by NYSED Multiple Measures At least a majority (31) of the 60 points must be based on multiple classroom observations (at least 2) by principal or other trained administrator: -At least one must be unannounced -May be conducted using video or in- person Any remaining standards not addressed in classroom observation must be assessed at least once a year ISLLC 2008 Leadership Standards: choice of rubric from State-approved list or variance, if approved by NYSED Multiple measures At least a majority (31) of the 60 points must be based on broad assessment of principal leadership and management actions by the supervisor based on the practice rubric: -Must incorporate multiple visits by the supervisor, trained administrator, or a trained independent evaluator -At least one visit must be from a supervisor, and at least one visit must be unannounced Any remaining leadership standards not addressed through above requirements must be assessed at least once a year 60 Point Other Measures 21

TeachersPrincipals In addition to classroom observations, remaining points (if any) must be based on: 1. Observation(s) by trained independent evaluators 2. Observation(s) by trained in-school peer teachers 3. Feedback from students and/or parents using a State-approved survey tool 4. Structured review of lesson plans, student portfolios, and/or other teacher artifacts In addition to broad leadership assessment, remaining points (if any) must be based on: Results of one or more ambitious and measurable goal(s) set collaboratively with supervisors: At least one goal must address the principal’s contribution to improving teacher effectiveness based on: 1.Improved retention of high performing teachers; 2.Correlation of student growth scores to teachers granted vs. denied tenure; 3.Improvements in proficiency rating of the principal on specific teacher effectiveness standards in the principal practice rubric. Any other goals shall address quantifiable and verifiable improvements in academic results or the school’s learning environment. Goals must include at least two other sources of evidence: 1.Structured feedback from teachers, students, and/or families using a State-approved tool (each constituency is one source); 2.School visits by trained evaluators; 3.Review of school documents, records, and/or State accountability processes (all documents are one source). Other Measures: Remaining Points 22

23 Working with 60 Point Other Measures in Review Room

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. 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. 24

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. 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. 25

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

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. 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. 27

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. 28

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. 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. 29

Review Room Application 1.Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the choices the district has negotiated for their 60 Point Other Measures subcomponent. 2.When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the Other Measures of Effectiveness – Teachers section. 3.Enter the choices the district has made for their Other Measures. 4.Do not worry about entering the HEDI criteria and scoring bands yet. 5.If you finish early, please move on to the Other Measures of Effectiveness – Principals section and complete the choices the district has made. 30

HEDI Criteria for 60 Point Other Measures 31

Determining HEDI Criteria 60 Point Other Measures Standards for Rating Categories Other Measures of Effectiveness (Teacher and Leader Standards) Highly Effective Overall performance and results exceed standards. Effective Overall performance and results meet standards. Developing Overall performance and results need improvement in order to meet standards. Ineffective Overall performance and results do not meet standards. 32

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. 33

One Example of a HEDI Approach… for 60 Point Other Measures Overall Rubric Score (Must be negotiated) Rating Category 0-60 point distribution by rating category (must be negotiated) Ineffective Developing Effective Highly Effective59-60 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: 34

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. 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. 35

Case Discussion Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the 60% Other Measures section. Then, discuss the following with your table groups: 1.In this case, the district has agreed to prioritize certain key elements of their principal practice rubric in the school year, choosing some based on their relevance to district priorities and needs and weighting these proportionately more than others. Is this allowable? 2.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? 3.The district is considering eliminating some indicators on the rubric for certain non-tested teachers. Is this allowable? 4.In this case, are enough observations conducted for teachers and principals? Are there any requirements missing? 5.The district is considering awarding points to teachers who effectively mentor student teachers or new colleagues. Is this allowable? 36

Review Room Application 1.When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the Other Measures of Effectiveness – Teachers section. 2.Enter the HEDI criteria and points. 3.If you finish early, please move on to the 60% Other Measures– Principals section and complete the HEDI criteria and points. 37

38 Teacher/Principal Evaluation Formula 60 EBOP, etc Growth Local 100

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 Agenda 39

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 40

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

Achievement and Gains ELA Scale Score Proficiency Achievement models tell you who is above and below the proficiency cut Two of five kids here scored above proficiency Achievement models tell you who is above and below the proficiency cut Two of five kids here scored above 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 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.

ELA Scale Score Proficiency 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 This tells us whether the change in scores between two years is average or above or below average. 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 This tells us whether the change in scores between two years is average or above or below average. Above Average Below Average Average NYS Growth Model

Growth Model: Student Growth Percentiles (SGP) Defined Student2010 Score2011 ScoreSGP Student2010 Score2011 ScoreSGP

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

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 , Poverty, SWD, ELL characteristics For value-added model in and beyond, other student, classroom and/or school characteristics may be included 46

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 : Measure is in development Based on student growth in Regents exams passed compared to similar students 47

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 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 48

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. 49

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

SLO Resources from NYSED Please visit: student-learning-objectives/ 51

What Does the District Determine? 52

Assessment Options for SLOs Reference Guide Please see the “Assessment Options for SLOs: Reference Guide” for NYSED’s rules for assessment options for teachers who have SLOs for State Growth 53

Required SLOs Reference Guide 54 Please see the “Required SLOs: Reference Guide” for NYSED’s rules for teachers who have SLOs for State Growth 54

Review Room Application Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the assessment choices Dr. Baery has made for SLOs for State Growth. Before we begin the practice session, let’s orient ourselves to the tool. 55

Review Room Application Keep in Mind: for teachers with State- provided measures of student growth, districts must check boxes that list assurances. For other comparable measures, SLOs, districts must list their decisions. Keep in Mind: for teachers with State- provided measures of student growth, districts must check boxes that list assurances. For other comparable measures, SLOs, districts must list their decisions. 56

Review Room Application Keep in Mind: the dropdown menu has an abbreviated version of the full list above it. After selecting an option from the dropdown menu, please write in the specific assessment option. Keep in Mind: the dropdown menu has an abbreviated version of the full list above it. After selecting an option from the dropdown menu, please write in the specific assessment option. 57

Review Room Application 1.Please go ahead now into Review Room to the State Growth – Teachers section. 2.Enter the assessment choices the district has made for SLOs. 3.Do not worry about entering the HEDI criteria yet. 4.If you finish early, please move on to the State Growth – Principals section and complete the assessment choices the district has made. 58

Case Study Discussion 1.When filling in the district’s assessment choices for SLOs, were there any grades/subjects that you noticed had unallowable options? How did the form help with this? 2.If the district decided to let teachers create their own assessments for evaluation purposes, would this be allowable? 59

HEDI Criteria for SLOs in State Growth 60

HEDI for SLOs in State Growth Standards for Rating Categories Growth or Comparable Measures Highly Effective Results are well-above state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Effective Results meet state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Developing Results are below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Ineffective Results are well-below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). What are “district goals” if there is no state test for the grade/subject? 61

HEDI Scoring Bands: Growth Measures State Value-added & Comparable Growth SLOs Growth Subcomponent Scoring Bands Where value-added measures apply Comparable Growth Measures: SLOs Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective 0-2 Remember that points are different for teachers in grades/subjects with value- added measures and those without: 62

APPR Form Requirements… for HEDI criteria 63

Setting HEDI Criteria – Three Examples After considering previous student performance, normative data, 3rd party data reports, district thresholds, district values/ priorities, districts have choices: Choice One: Set specific growth expectations by grade/subject (for all or some grades/subjects Choice Two: Set generic growth expectations for students across grades/subjects Choice Three: Set generic expectations for students meeting their individualized growth expectations across grades and subject 64

Example of Choice One: Setting Specific Growth Expectations by Grade/Subject District specifies that for grades 6 and 7 Science teachers, a State-approved 3rd party science assessment will be used as evidence of student learning for SLOs. What Student Progress Meets District Expectations Highly Effective points Growth exceeds 3 rd party assessment benchmark Effective 9-17 points Growth is equal to 3 rd party assessment national benchmark for average growth compared to similar students. Specific points assigned based on place in range of “average” Developing 3-8 points Growth below 3 rd party assessment benchmark Ineffective 0-2 points Growth significantly below 3 rd party assessment benchmark 65

APPR Form Requirements… for HEDI criteria 66

Districts may decide there are certain levels of growth that meet/do not meet district expectations based on student’s baseline level of performance. In this example, multiple grades/subjects can utilize performance levels from 1-4 where 3 is on grade level/proficient like NYSED State tests. Districts will need to determine HEDI criteria. What Student Progress Meets District Expectations Performance Level END: 1END: 2END: 3END: 4 START: 1NOYES START: 2NO YES START: 3NO YES START: 4NO YES Target is what % of students make their specific level of acceptable growth or better. Example of Choice 2: Generic Student Growth Expectations Across Grades/Subjects Rating Points Ineffective 0-2 points Developing 3-8 points Effective 9-17 points Highly Effective points Percentage of students whose progress meets expectations0-29%30-54%55-79%80%+

APPR Form Requirements… for HEDI criteria 68

Example of Choice 3: Generic Expectations for Student SLO Target Achievement Highly Effective points Effective 9-17 Developing 3-8 Ineffective 0-2 The work of the teacher results in exceptional student academic growth beyond expectations during the school year. 90%+ of students met or exceeded the Student Learning Objective. The work of the teacher results in acceptable, measurable, and appropriate student academic growth % of students met or exceeded the Student Learning Objective. The work of the teacher results in student academic growth that does not meet the established standard and/or is not achieved with all populations taught by the teacher % of students met or exceeded the Student Learning Objective. The work of the teacher does not result in acceptable student academic growth. Fewer than 50% of students met or exceed the Student Learning Objective. 69

APPR Form Requirements… for HEDI criteria 70

Case Study Discussion Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the HEDI criteria for State Growth that Dr. Baery has determined for SLOs for State Growth. Then, discuss the following with your table groups: 1.In this case, the district has adopted the committee’s recommendations for generic growth expectations for all grades and subjects with the bar set at 80% for the percent of students who must meet their SLO targets in order for the teacher to receive an Effective rating. The district has also said that principals will set the targets with teachers. Is this all allowable? 2.If the district decided to set expectations for some grades and subjects to ensure that all students will demonstrate at least one grade level growth if starting on grade level, and all students starting below grade level will demonstrate at least 2 years grade level growth, would this be allowable? 3.If the district decided that for all SLOs for teachers, Highly Effective is well-above district goals; Effective equals district goals; Developing is below district goals; Ineffective is well-below district goals, would this be allowable? 71

Review Room Application 1.When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the State Growth – Teachers section. 2.Enter the HEDI Criteria for SLOs. 3.If you finish early, please move on to the State Growth – Principals section and complete the HEDI Criteria for SLOs. 72

END OF DAY 1 73

74 Teacher/Principal Evaluation Formula 60 EBOP, etc Growth Local 100

Locally-Selected Measures Overview Regulations Review Room Application Case Study Discussion HEDI Criteria for Locally-Selected Measures Case Study Discussion Review Room Application Agenda 75

Where Can I Find…? Where Can I Find Further Resources, Guidance, and Answers to My Questions Related to Locally-Selected Measures? Section E of NYSED’s APPR Guidance Section F of NYSED’s APPR Guidance Some of Section I of NYSED’s APPR Guidance Page 2 and 3 of the “Purple Memo” Step 4 of the Teacher Road Map Step 4 of the Principal Road Map 76

Locally-Selected Measures Teachers and Principals Keep in Mind: Locally-selected measures can measure growth or achievement Keep in Mind: Locally-selected measures can measure growth or achievement Keep in Mind: Locally-selected measures count for 20 points (15 points with an approved value- added measure) Keep in Mind: Locally-selected measures count for 20 points (15 points with an approved value- added measure) 77

Locally-Selected Measures: Overview Growth and local measures must be different from one another To ensure comparability, select the same measure across all classrooms in the same grade/subject and/or for all principals in same or similar programs/buildings The State-approved list meets prescribed criteria for comparability and rigor; districts/BOCES who develop assessments will need to verify comparability and rigor Collective bargaining considerations 78

Rigorous Rigorous means that the locally-selected measure is: Aligned to the NYS learning standards To the extent practicable, the assessment must be valid and reliable as defined by the standards for Educational and Psychological Testing 79

Comparable 80 Locally-comparable across classrooms means: The same locally-selected measures of student achievement or growth are used across all classrooms in the same grade/subject in the district or BOCES. A district may use more than one type of locally- selected measure for different groups of teachers within a grade/subject if the district/BOCES verifies comparability in accordance with the standards of Educational and Psychological testing. For principals, the same locally-selected measure(s) must be used for all principals in the same or similar program or grade configuration in that school district or BOCES.

Measures for Teachers Using State/Regents Assessments Measures based on several options: 1. State assessments, Regents, examination, and/or Regent-equivalents. These include: a.The change in percentage of a teacher’s students who achieve a specific level of performance as determined locally, on such assessments/examinations in the previous year. b.Teacher-specific growth computed by NYSED based on % of the teacher’s students earning a State-determined level of growth. Methodology to translate such growth into State- established sub-component scoring ranges shall be determined locally. c.Other teacher-specific growth or achievement measure using State, Regents, and/or department approved alternative examinations computed in a manner determined locally. 81

Measures for Teachers Using All Other Options 2.State-approved list of 3rd party assessments 3.District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment 4.School-wide growth or achievement results based on: a.State-provided school-wide growth score for all students taking State ELA or Math assessments in grades 4-8 b.Locally-computed measure based on State, State approved 3rd party, or a district, regional, or BOCES- developed assessment 5.SLOs used with any of the following (option is only for teachers without a State-approved Growth or Value- Added measure for Growth subcomponent): – Any State, approved 3rd party, or district/ regional/ BOCES- developed assessment 82

Measures for Principals of Elementary and/or Middle Schools 1. Achievement levels on State assessments (% proficient or advanced) in ELA and Math Grades Growth or achievement for student subgroups (SWD, ELL) on State assessments in ELA and Math Grades Growth or achievement of students in ELA and Math (Grades 4-8) starting at specific performance levels (e.g., Level 1, Level 2) on State or other assessments. 4. SLOs used with any of the following (option is only for principals without a State-approved Growth or Value-Added measure for Growth subcomponent): – Any State, approved 3rd party, or district/ regional/ BOCES- developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms. 5. Student performance on any district-wide locally-selected assessments approved for use in teacher evaluations. 83

Measures for Principals of High Schools 1. Percent of cohort achieving specified scores on Regents exams, AP, IB, or other Regents-equivalents. 2. Graduation rates (4, 5, 6 years) and/or dropout rates. 3. Graduation % with Regents Diploma with Advanced Designation and/or with Advanced Designation with honors. 4. Credit accumulation (e.g., 9 th and 10 th grade) or other strong predictor of progress toward graduation. 5. SLOs used with any of the following (option is only for principals without a State-approved Growth or Value- Added measure for Growth subcomponent): – Any State, approved 3rd party, or district/ regional/ BOCES- developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms. 6. Student performance on any district-wide locally-selected assessments approved for use in teacher evaluations. 84

Review Room Application Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the assessment choices the district has negotiated for their locally- selected measures. Before we begin the practice session, let’s just re-orient ourselves to Review Room together. 85

Review Room Application Keep in Mind: the full list of options are listed first, then the dropdown boxes. For teachers in courses with a State-provided growth or value-added measure, SLOs are not an option so they are not listed here. Keep in Mind: the full list of options are listed first, then the dropdown boxes. For teachers in courses with a State-provided growth or value-added measure, SLOs are not an option so they are not listed here. 86

Review Room Application Keep in Mind: the dropdown menu has an abbreviated version of the full list above it. After selecting an option from the dropdown menu, please write in the specific assessment option. Keep in Mind: the dropdown menu has an abbreviated version of the full list above it. After selecting an option from the dropdown menu, please write in the specific assessment option. 87

Review Room Application 1.When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the Locally-Selected – Teachers section. 2.Enter the assessment choices the district has made for Locally-Selected. 3.Do not worry about entering the HEDI criteria yet. 4.If you finish early, please move on to the Locally- Selected – Principals section and complete the assessment choices the district has made. 88

Case Study Discussion Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the locally-selected measures that the district plans to use. Then, discuss the following with your table groups: 1.The district is interested in the potential of using a national cosmetology assessment as a locally-selected measure, is this allowable? 2.The district is interested in using SLOs for additional grades/subjects. Which grades/subjects are not allowed to use SLOs for locally-selected measures? 89

HEDI Criteria for Locally-Selected Measures 90

Determining HEDI Criteria: Locally-Selected Measures Standards for Rating Categories Locally-selected Measures of growth or achievement Highly Effective Results are well-above District or BOCES - adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective Results meet District or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing Results are below District or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective Results are well-below District or BOCES- adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. 91

HEDI for Locally-Selected Measures Must be collectively bargained. Must describe a district-adopted level of expectation for every grade/subject although can use generic expectations. Expectations can be based on either growth or achievement of students. 92

Setting HEDI Criteria – Three Examples After considering previous student performance, normative data, 3 rd party data reports, district thresholds, district values/ priorities, districts have choices: Choice One: Set specific growth OR ACHIEVEMENT expectations by grade/subject (for all or some grades/subjects) Choice Two: Set generic growth OR ACHIEVEMENT expectations for students across grades/subjects Choice Three: Set generic expectations for students meeting their individualized growth OR ACHIEVEMENT expectations across grades and subject 93

Examples of Different Approaches to Setting District Expectations GROWTH: change in student results between two points in time ACHIEVEMENT: student results at end of year Level of growth over baseline (e.g., 20 percentage points growth) Achievement level (e.g., score 85 out of 100, Level 3 out of 4) Level of growth required given starting point to be on track Achieve proficiency (or achieve advanced level) Growth vs. a benchmark (State average growth, district average growth, vendor- provided benchmark) Achievement versus a benchmark (State or district average achievement, vendor-provided benchmark) Subgroup growth (lowest or highest achieving students; SWDs; ELLs) Subgroup achievement 94

HEDI Points… for Locally-Selected Measures Locally-Selected Measures of Growth or Achievement: Where state- provided value- added measure applies for Growth Where NO state- provided value- added measure applies for Growth Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective 0-2 Remember that points are different for teachers in grades/subjects with value- added measures and those without: 95

APPR Form Requirements for HEDI criteria Keep in Mind: Districts may decide to leave all HEDI criteria up to the school level and/or to be prescriptive with some grades/subjects, but not with others. 96

Adjustment Factors Keep in Mind: if any adjustments or controls are going to be used, districts must not only describe them in their APPR form submission, but make a number of assurances regarding their usage. Keep in Mind: if any adjustments or controls are going to be used, districts must not only describe them in their APPR form submission, but make a number of assurances regarding their usage. 97

Case Discussion Please take out the NYPSD case study. The district has not negotiated any adjustment factors for their locally-selected measures subcomponent for teachers. Are there any adjustment factors that would be allowable? 98

Examples of Locally-Selected Measures from the Case: Teachers The district has prioritized expository writing and STEM, and has identified a critical need to focus academic interventions in these areas. When negotiating their APPR, the district and their collective bargaining units determined that the following measures would be used: 4 th Grade Common Branch Teachers 7 th Grade Science Teachers School Librarians % of 4 th grade students earning at the proficient level (three) or better performance level on the 4 th grade State Science assessment % of 7 th grade science students who demonstrate growth of at least one level higher than their baseline analytical writing sample, as measured by the district-developed 7 th grade science writing assessment rubric. School-wide growth based on State-provided school-wide growth scores for all students in the school taking the State ELA assessment in grades

Examples of Locally-Selected Measures from the Case: Principals The district has prioritized expository writing and STEM, and has identified a critical need to focus academic interventions in these areas. When negotiating their APPR, the district and their collective bargaining units determined that the following measures would be used: K-5 Principals6-8 Principals9-12 Principals % of students who achieve proficiency from those who scores a Level 1 or 2 on the prior year State assessment % of 4 th grade science students who achieve proficient or higher on State science assessment Growth of ELL students on 6-8 ELA and Math State assessments. No students decrease if 3s or 4s, at least 40% increase one level if 3s or below, at least 75% increase if 1s. % of 8 th grade science students who achieve proficient or higher on State science assessment % of students who score a 75 on ELA Regents and 80 on Math Regents increasing by at least 7%. 100

Case Study Discussion Please take out the NYPSD case study and review the HEDI criteria for locally-selected measures that the district plans to use. Then, discuss the following with your table groups: 1.In this case, the district and their collective bargaining units agreed that teachers/principals will use one generic HEDI criteria with all district- developed assessments across applicable grades/subjects within the district. Targets will be set based on what percentage of students make their specific level of acceptable growth or better. Also, the district will audit a random sampling of SLOs developed by teachers and principals in November to ensure rigor and comparability. Is this allowable? 2.In this case, the district and their collective bargaining units agreed to use a local measure for principals based on the percentage of students in 4 th and 8 th grade Science who earn the proficient (level 3) or higher. Is this allowable? 3.Is there any missing information that you notice from this section of the case? Is it allowable to submit an APPR form that is incomplete? 101

Review Room Application 1.When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the Locally-Selected Measures – Teachers section. 2.Enter the HEDI Criteria for locally- selected measures. 3.If you finish early, please move on to the Locally-Selected Measures – Principals section and complete the HEDI Criteria for locally-selected measures. 102

Putting it All Together: Composite Scores 103

HEDI Scoring Bands: putting it together where Value-Added growth measure applies Growth or Comparable Measures Locally- selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (60 points) Overall Composite Score Highly Effective Ranges determined locally Effective Developing Ineffective where there is no Value-Added measure Growth or Comparable Measures Locally- selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (60 points) Overall Composite Score Highly Effective18-20 Ranges determined locally Effective Developing Ineffective

Review Room Application Keep in Mind: Districts must enter the same scoring ranges for the 60 point other measures here in the “Composite Scoring” section of the form as they did in the “Other Measures” section. 105

Review Room Application 1.When you are ready, go into Review Room and find the Composite Scoring – Teachers section. 2.Enter the scoring bands for 60% Other. 3.If you finish early, please move on to the Composite Scoring – Principals section and enter the scoring bands for 60% Other. 106