Berne-Knox-Westerlo Central School District

Transcription

Berne-Knox-Westerlo
Central School District
Annual Professional Performance Review
Classroom Teachers
and
Building Principals
PLAN ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION: January 11, 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Part I: Definitions
Part II: APPR 2012-2013 School Year for All Teachers
Part III: APPR 2012-2013 School Year for All Principals
Part IV: Teacher Improvement Plans (“TIP”)
Part V: Principal Improvement Plans (“PIP”)
Part VI: Appeals – Teachers
Part VII: Appeals - Principals
Part VIII: Training of Evaluators
Part IX: Data Management
Part X: Miscellaneous
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Teachers’ Growth Measures and HEDI Descriptions
Appendix B – Teachers’ Locally Selected Measures and HEDI Descriptions
Appendix C – Teachers’ Rubric
Appendix D – Addition Multiple Measures Rubric
Appendix E – Principals’ Growth Measures and HEDI Descriptions
Appendix F – Principals’ Locally Selected Measures and HEDI Descriptions
Appendix G – Principals’ Rubric
Appendix H – Principals’ Other Measures of Effectiveness Raw Score to HEDI
Conversion Table
Appendix I – TIP Form
Appendix J – PIP Form
2
INTRODUCTION
The Board of Education of the Berne-Knox-Westerlo Central School District (the “District”), in
public session at its meeting of January 11, 2013, adopts this Annual Professional Performance
Plan (the “APPR Plan”) for the 2012-2013 school year pursuant to the requirements of Education
Law §3012-c and accompanying regulations of the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of
Education.
Annual Professional Performance Review (“APPR”) supports the professional growth of our
educators. A successful review system should provide timely feedback, an opportunity to
acknowledge educators’ strengths as well as their weakness, and an opportunity for growth as an
educator.
This APPR system will be a significant factor in all employment decisions, including but not
limited to:






Retention
Tenure Determination
Termination
Supplemental Compensation
Promotion
Professional Development
Nothing in this Plan shall affect the District’s right to terminate a probationary teacher or
principal for statutorily or constitutionally permissible reasons other than the performance of the
teacher or principal in the classroom or school, including but not limited to misconduct.
3
PART I
DEFINITIONS
Approved Teacher or Principal Practice Rubric: Rubric approved by the Commissioner of
Education for inclusion on SED’s list of approved rubrics for teacher or principal evaluations.
Approved State Assessment: Standardized student assessments approved by the Commissioner
for inclusion in SED’s lists of approved standardized student assessments for the locally selected
measures subcomponent and/or to measure student growth in non-tested subjects for the State
assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent.
Building Principal or Principal: Principal, co-principal or administrator in charge of an
instructional program of the District.
Classroom Teacher or Teacher: Teacher in the classroom teaching service as defined by
section 80-1.1 of the Commissioner’s regulations who is the teacher of record, except evening
school teachers of adults enrolled in nonacademic, vocational subjects and supplemental school
personnel including teacher aides and teaching assistants.
Common Branch Subject: Any or all of the subjects usually included in the daily program of
an elementary school classroom such as arithmetic, civics, visual arts, elementary science,
English language, geography, history, hygiene, physical activities, practical arts, reading, music,
writing, and such other similar subjects.
Comparable across classrooms: The same locally selected measure(s) of student achievement
or growth is used across a subject and/or grade level within the school district.
Composite Effectiveness Score: Total effectiveness scores out of 100 points assigned to a
teacher or principal for an evaluation in accordance with this APPR plan. The composite
effectiveness score is calculated based on the sum of the following three subcomponent scores:
(1) student growth on State assessments or other comparable measures; (2) locally-selected
measures of student achievement; and (3) other measures of teacher and principal effectiveness.
Co-Principal: Certified administrator designated to have executive authority, management, and
instructional leadership responsibility for all or a portion of school-operated instructional
program, where more than one such administrator is so designated. The term implies equal line
authority with each reporting to a district-level supervisor.
Evaluator: Individual who conducts an evaluation of a classroom teacher or building principal.
Lead Evaluator: Primary individual responsible for conducting and completing an evaluation
under this APPR plan.
4
Leadership Standards: The Educational Leadership Policy Standards: ISLLC 2008 as adopted
by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration.
Rigorous: The locally selected measure is aligned to the New York State learning standards or,
in instances where there are no such standards that apply to a subject/grade level, evidence of
alignment to research-based learning standards and, to the extent practicable, the locally selected
measure must be valid and reliable as defined by the Testing Standards.
Student Growth: Change in individual student achievement between two or more points in time.
Student Growth Percentile Score: Result of a statistical model that calculates each student’s
change in achievement between two or more points in time on a State assessment or other
comparable measure and compares each student’s performance to that of similarly achieving
students.
Student Learning Objective (“SLO”): State-determined district-wide student growth goalsetting process.
Subcomponents: The three subcomponents of a teacher’s or principal’s evaluation and
composite effectiveness scores.
Teacher or Principal Student Growth Percentile Score: Measure of central tendency of the
student growth percentile scores for teacher’s or principal’s students after one or more of the
following student characteristics are taken into consideration: poverty, students with disabilities
and English language learners.
Testing Standards: The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, American
Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, and American
educational Research Association; 1999.
Value Added Growth Score: Result of a statistical model that incorporates a student’s academic
history and may use other student demographics and characteristics, school characteristics and/or
teacher characteristics to isolate statistically the effect on student growth from those
characteristics that are generally not in the teacher’s or principal’s control. The characteristics
may be different for teachers and principals.
5
PART II
ANNUAL PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW
ALL TEACHERS
2012-2013
Each teacher reviewed pursuant to this Part will receive a composite effectiveness score, which
shall reflect that teacher’s rating as: (1) Highly Effective, (2) Effective, (3) Developing or (4)
Ineffective.
Positions Evaluated
All classroom teachers or teachers in the classroom teacher service who are a teacher of record as
defined by the Commissioner. 1
Composite Rating System
The rating system shall define the overall categories of performance as follows:
 Highly Effective: Performing at a Higher Level (91-100)
 Effective: Performing at Level Typically Expected (75-90)
 Developing: Not Performing at Level Typically Expected (65-74)
 Ineffective: Performance is unacceptable (0-64)
Expedited Hearings
The parties agree that the new APPR should focus on the professional development of teachers.
During the implementation of this new teacher evaluation system, the parties agree that the
District will not use ineffective ratings as a means of using the expedited hearing process until
the annual ratings for teachers are completed in the 2014-15 school year.
Annual Professional Performance Criteria
1. Growth on State Assessments or Comparable Measure 2: Twenty (20) points (Twenty-five
(25) points if there is a value-added growth model) of the teacher’s composite effectiveness
score shall be based upon the teacher’s student growth percentile score on State assessments
or comparable measure.
a. For all classroom teachers who teach English Language Arts and/or Mathematics in
grades 4-8 or teach a subject for which there is a State assessment with a SED
approved value-added growth model, a value-added growth score will be provided by
SED. SED will also provide a HEDI subcomponent rating category and score from 0
to 25 points.
1
2
Please note: Any teacher being evaluated as a Principal under Part III shall not also be evaluated as a teacher.
Baseline for state assessments will be the 2010-2011 school year.
6
b. For all other grades/subjects for which there is no value-added growth model, the
District must measure student growth based on SLOs 3 or a State assessment if one
exists, State-approved 3rd party assessments, District, regional, or BOCES-developed
assessments provided that the District or BOCES verifies comparability and rigor, or
School- or BOCES-wide, group or team results based on State assessments. Please
see Appendix A for assessments and HEDI descriptions.
Locally Developed Controls: None.
Teachers with More than One Growth or Comparable Measure: Please note that if an
educator has more than one state-provided growth or value-added measure, those
measures will be combined into one HEDI rating and score for the growth subcomponent
according to a formula determined by the Commissioner. If educators have more than
one SLO for comparable growth (or a State-provided growth measure and an SLO for
comparable growth) the measures will each earn a score from 0-20 which the District will
weigh proportionately based on the number of students in each SLO.
Assurances:
 Application of locally developed controls will be rigorous, fair, and transparent, and only
those used for State Growth will be used for Comparable Growth Measures.
 Locally developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students
in accordance with civil rights laws.
 Enrolled students in accordance with teacher of record policies will be included and may
not be excluded.
 Procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized.
 The District will establish SLOs in accordance with the rules established by SED.
 Past academic performance and/or baseline academic data of students will be taken into
account when developing an SLO.
 Process for assigning points for SLOs for the Growth Subcomponent will use the
narrative HEDI descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate
educators in ways that improve student learning and instruction.
 It is possible to earn each point, including 0, for SLOs in the Growth subcomponent
scoring range.
 Processes are in place to monitor SLOs to ensure rigor and comparability across
classrooms.
2. Locally-Selected Measures: Twenty (20) points (fifteen (15) points if there is a value-added
growth model) of the teacher’s composite effectiveness score shall be based upon locallyselected measures that are determined to be “rigorous” and “comparable across classrooms.”
Please see Appendix B for locally-selected measure chosen and HEDI descriptions.
3
Please refer to SED’s rules for number of SLOs required for each grade/subject.
7
Teachers with More than One Locally-Selected Measure: If educators have more than one
local measure of student achievement, the measures will each earn a score from 0-20 points,
or 0-15 points, if value-added measures were used in computing their SLO, which will be
weighted proportionately based on the number of students in each Local Achievement
Measure.
Assurances:
 Application of locally developed controls will be rigorous, fair, and transparent.
 Locally developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students
 Enrolled students in accordance with teacher of record policies will be included and may
not be excluded.
 Procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized.
 Process for assigning points for locally selected measures will use the narrative HEDI
descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate educators’
performance in way that improves student learning and instruction.
 It is possible for an educator to earn each point, including 0, for the locally-selected
measures subcomponent.
 Locally-selected measures are rigorous and comparable across all classrooms in the same
grade/subject in the district.
 If more than one type of locally-selected measure is used for different groups of teachers
within a grade/subject, the District certifies that the measures are comparable based on
the Standards of Educational and Psychological Testing.
3. Other Measures of Effectiveness: Sixty (60) points of the teacher’s composite
effectiveness score shall be based upon multiple measures aligned with the New York State
Teaching standards. The District and the Berne-Knox-Westerlo Teachers Association have
chosen the Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (2007 Edition). Please see Appendix C for
a copy of the rubric chosen. For evaluations conducted in the 2012-2013 school year and
thereafter, at least one such observation shall be an unannounced visit.
a. Observations:
Observations of Probationary Teachers
By Building Principal or Other Trained Administrators
Formal/Long
Informal/Short
Total
#
4
0
4
Observations of Tenured Teachers
By Building Principal or Other Trained Administrators
Formal/Long
Informal/Short
Total
#
2
0
2
Every observation will be followed by a post observation conference to be conducted within 5
school days of the end of the observation. The evaluator will bring a written post-observation
8
summary to share the items on the rubric that were assessed. If the evaluator is unable to review
all items for each domain of the rubric in the above allotted number of observations, then the
evaluator, in his/her discretion, may informally observe the teacher in order to complete all areas
of the rubric.
Processes for Assigning Points: The Process by which points are assigned in subcomponents and
the scoring ranges for the subcomponents is as follows:
Area of Review
Multiple classroom observations by principal or other
trained administrator
Additional Multiple Measures
Points Assigned (if applicable)
35
25
Classroom Observations will be based on a point allocation of 35 possible points. If an item is
observed more than once, then an average of the item will be taken.
The fourth domain of the Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (2007) will be used to evaluate
the components of practice beyond classroom instructions with students. These components are
broadly defined as “professional responsibilities” and include teacher reflection, maintaining
accurate records, communication with families, contributions to school and district, professional
growth, advocacy, and collaboration with colleagues.
Evidence collected through observation and artifacts collected over the school year will
determine the number of points earned (Out of a possible 5 points) based on the Danielson
Framework’s domain 4.
Danielson’s
Framework for
Teaching (2007)
Domain 1 (23 items)
Domain 2 (15 items)
Domain 3 (18 items)
Domain 4 (20 items)
Ineffective
Developing
Effective
Highly
Effective
Total
Points
0-2
0-2
0-3
0-1
3-4
3-4
4-6
1.5-2.5
5-6
5-7
7-9
3-4
7-8
8-10
10-12
5
Total
8
10
12
5
35
None of the evidence considered in the Observation component will be used in the Additional
Multiple Measures component.
Assigning Points and Determining HEDI Ratings: The following steps outline the process used
to calculate the HEDI teacher evaluation score. See Appendix C for Rubric Conversion Chart.
The score aggregates teacher’s rating across observed elements within the framework to result in
a single score.
1. Determine the rating for each indicator under each of the 4 domains on the
Danielson’s Framework for Teacher (2007).
9
2. Each rating score for each domain on the rubric will then be multiplied by a weighted
factor.
3. Each resulting weighted column is then added, resulting in a total number of points
out of a possible 35.
4. This score is then added to the 25 possible points earned in the additional multiple
measures.
b. Additional Multiple Measures: These measures are to be used to establish a
teacher’s contribution to the community and dedication to his or her profession. These measures
encourage teachers to engage in their jobs meaningfully and effectively. Teachers should use
these measures as a tool to encourage participation leading to full credit whenever possible.
Teachers will combine three categories each school year to reach a sum of 25 possible
points. The choices of categories will be documented in the teacher’s professional plan that is
established at the beginning of the school year. In that professional plan the teacher will select
two categories to count for 10 points each, and one category to count for 5 points. While
selecting those categories that will count for 10 points the teacher must use each category (from
one to eight on the list below) once every five years. The evidence of completion of “additional
measures” will be submitted by the teacher to the evaluator no later than May 15th. The
categories are as follows:
1. Observation of/by Peer
2. Structured Review of Lesson Plans
3. Student Portfolios and/or other teaching artifacts
4. Goal Setting
5. Personal Reflection: Narrative
6. Committees
7. Community Service: Service to BKW students outside of school day
8. Involvement in Professional Development Opportunities
9. Other mutually agreed to measures
Please see Appendix D for rubric of these additional multiple measures.
Highly Effective: Performing at a
Higher Level
2012-2013 Scoring Ranges for Educators
Description of Level of
Performance
Overall performance and results
exceed NYS Teaching Standards
10
60-Point Scoring Bands
59-60
Effective: Performing at Level
Typically Expected
Developing: Not Performing at
Level Typically Expected
Ineffective: Performance is
unacceptable
meet NYS Teaching Standards
need improvement in order to meet
NYS Teaching Standards
Overall performance and results do
not meet NYS Teacher Standards
57-58
50-56
0-49
Assurances:
 NYS Teaching Standards not addressed in classroom observations are assessed at least
once a year.
 The Process for assigning points for the “other measures” subcomponent will use the
educators’ performance in way that improves student learning and instruction.
 It is possible for an educator to earn each point, including 0, for the “other measures”
subcomponent.
 The same rubric(s) is used for all classroom teachers in a grade/subject across the
District.
 If applicable, the District will use survey tool(s) from the State-approved list or approved
through the NYSED survey variance process.
11




Highly Effective: Performing at a Higher Level (91-100)
Effective: Performing at Level Typically Expected (75-90)
Developing: Not Performing at Level Typically Expected (65-74)
Ineffective: Performance is Unacceptable (0-64)
No Value-Added Measure
Growth or
Locally-selected
Comparable
Measures of
Measures
Growth or
Achievement
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
18-20
9-17
3-8
0-2
18-20
9-17
3-8
0-2
Value-Added Measure
Growth or
Locally-selected
Comparable
Measures of
Measures
Growth or
Achievement
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
22-25
10-21
3-9
0-2
14-15
8-13
3-7
0-2
Other Measures of
Effectiveness
59-60
57-58
50-56
0-49
Other Measures of
Effectiveness
59-60
57-58
50-56
0-49
Assurances
 Teachers receiving a Developing or Ineffective rating will receive a Teacher
Improvement Plan within 10 school days from the opening of classes in the school year
following the performance year.
 TIP plans will include: Identification of needed areas of improvement, a timeline for
achieving improvement, the manner improvement will be assessed, and, where
appropriate, differentiated activities to support the teacher’s improvement in those areas.
 The entire APPR plan will be completed for each teacher as soon as practicable, but in no
case later than September 1 of the school year next following the school year for which
the classroom teacher’s performance is being measured.
 The District will provide the teacher’s score and rating on the locally selected measures
subcomponent, if available, and on the other measures of teacher and principal
effectiveness subcomponent for a teacher’s annual professional performance review, in
writing, no later than the last school day of the school year for which the teacher or
principal is being measured.
12






The APPR will be put on the District’s website by September 10 or within 10 days after
approval, whichever is later.
The evaluation system will be used as a significant factor for employment decisions.
Teachers will receive timely and constructive feedback as part of the evaluation process.
The Process for assigning points for SLOs for the Growth Subcomponent will use the
It is possible for an educator to earn each point, including 0, for SLOs in the Growth
subcomponent scoring range.
Processes are in place to monitor SLOs to ensure rigor and comparability across
classrooms.
13
PART III
ANNUAL PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW
PRINCIPALS
2012-2013
Each building principal reviewed pursuant to this Part will receive a composite effectiveness
score, which shall reflect that teacher or principal’s rating as: (1) Highly Effective, (2) Effective,
(3) Developing or (4) Ineffective.
Positions Evaluated
All Principals
 Highly Effective: Performing at a Higher Level (91-100)
 Effective: Performing at Level Typically Expected (75-90)
 Developing: Not Performing at Level Typically Expected (65-74)
 Ineffective: Performance is Unacceptable (0-64)
Annual Professional Performance Criteria
1. Growth on State Assessments or Comparable Measures 4:
a. Value-Added Measure: Twenty-five (25) points will be based upon State-provided
value-added growth measures. SED will provide value-added measures, HEDI
subcomponent rating category and score from 0 to 25 points.
b. SLO: Where a value-added measure is not approved by SED or less than 30% of the
students in the principal’s program are taking applicable state assessments, twenty (20)
points will be based upon SLOs based upon any State assessments, approved
assessments, or district, regional or BOCES-developed assessments that are rigorous
and comparable across classrooms. Please see Appendix E for comparable growth
measures.
Principals with More than One Growth or Comparable Measure: Please note that if a
principal has more than one state-provided growth or value-added measure, those measures will
be combined into one HEDI rating and score for the growth subcomponent according to a
formula determined by the Commissioner.
Assurances:
 The value-added growth scored provided by NYSED will be used, where applicable.
4
Baseline for state assessments will be the 2010-2011 school year.
14

The State-provided growth measure will be used if a value-added measure has not been
approved for 2012-13.

Application of locally developed controls will be rigorous, fair, transparent, and only
those used for State Growth will be used for Comparable Growth Measures.

Locally-developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students

Procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized.

The District will establish SLOs in accordance with the rules established by SED.

The Process for assigning points for SLOs for the Growth Subcomponent will use the

It is possible for an educator to earn each point, including 0, for SLOs in the Growth
subcomponent scoring range.

Processes are in place to monitor SLOs to ensure rigor and comparability across
classrooms.
2. Locally-Selected Measures: Twenty (20) points (fifteen (15) points if there is a value-added
growth model) of the principal’s composite effectiveness score shall be based upon locallyselected measures that are determined to be “rigorous” and “comparable across classrooms.”
Please see Appendix F for locally-selected measures.
Principals with More Than One Locally Selected Measure: No principal has more than one
locally selected measure.
Assurances:
 Application of locally developed controls will be rigorous, fair, and transparent.

Locally-developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students

Enrolled students in accordance with teacher of record policies will be included and may
not be excluded.

Procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized.
15

Process for assigning points for locally selected measures will use the narrative HEDI
descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate educators’
performance in way that improve student learning and instruction.

It is possible for a principal to earn each point, including 0, for the locally-selected
measures subcomponent.

Locally-selected measures are rigorous and comparable across all principals in the same
or similar programs or grade configurations across the district.

If more than one type of locally-selected measure is used for different groups of
principals in the same or similar grade configuration or program, the District certifies that
the measures are comparable based on the Standards of Educational and Psychological
Testing.

All locally-selected measures for a principal are different groups than any measures used
for the State assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent.
3. Other Measures of Effectiveness: Sixty (60) points of a principal’s composite effectiveness
score shall be based upon multiple measures aligned with the Leadership Standards. The
District and the Helderberg Administrators Association have chosen the Multidimensional
Principal Performance Rubric. Please see Appendix G for rubric(s) chosen.
Area of Review
Broad assessment of principal leadership and
management actions based on the practice rubric by the
supervisor, a trained administrator or a trained
independent evaluator This must incorporate multiple
school visits by supervisor, trained administrator, or
trained independent evaluator, at least one of which must
be from a supervisor, and at least one of which must be
unannounced. {At least 31 points}
Points Assigned (if applicable)
60 points
Observation
School Visits (Indicate Number of School Visits)
Probationary Principal
By Supervisor
2 (one will be unannounced)
By trained Administrator
0
By trained Independent Evaluator
0
TOTAL
2
School Visits (Indicate Number of School Visits)
Tenured Principal
By Supervisor
2 (one will be unannounced)
By trained Administrator
0
By trained Independent Evaluator
0
TOTAL
2
16
Assigning Points and Determining HEDI Ratings: The following steps outline the process used
to calculate the HEDI principal evaluation score. Please see Appendix H for the Rubric
Conversion Chart. The score aggregates principal’s rating across observed elements with the
framework to result in a single score.
1. Determine the rating for each element under each of the 6 domains on the Multidimensional
Principal Performance Rubric. Ratings will be converted to numeric values as follows:
Highly Effective = 4
Effective = 3
Developing = 2
Ineffective = 1
2. An average score of 1-4 will be calculated for each domain.
3. In order to determine the overall point value an average will be calculated based on the points
earned for the 6 domains. Each domain will be weighted equally.
4. This overall rubric raw score will be converted to a 60 point score using the HEDI conversion
table.
Highly Effective: Performing at a
Higher Level
Effective: Performing at Level
Typically Expected
Developing: Not Performing at
Level Typically Expected
Ineffective: Performance is
unacceptable
Scoring Ranges for Principals
Description of Level of
Performance
exceed standards
meet standards
need improvement in order to meet
standards
Overall performance and results do
not meet standards
60-Point Scoring Bands
59-60
57-58
50-56
0-49
Assurances:
 If any points are assigned to goals, at least one goal will address the principal’s
contribution to improving teacher effectiveness based on one or more of the following:
improved retention of high performing teachers; correlation of student growth scores to
teachers granted vs. denied tenure; or improvement in proficiency rating of the principal
on specific teacher effectiveness standards in the principal practice rubric.

Any other goals if applicable, shall address quantifiable and verifiable improvements in
academic results or the school’s learning environment (e.g. student or teacher
attendance).

If using a survey tool, the District will use survey tool(s) from the State-approved list or
approved through the NYSED variance process.

All ISLLC 2008 Leadership Standards are assessed at least one time per year.
17

The process for assigning points for the “other measures” subcomponent will use the
principals’ performance in way that improve student earning and instruction.

It is possible for a principal to earn each point, including 0, for the “other measures”
subcomponent.

The same rubric(s) is used for all principals in the same or similar programs or grade
configurations across the district.
18




Highly Effective: Performing at a Higher Level (91-100)
Effective: Performing at Level Typically Expected (75-90)
Developing: Not Performing at Level Typically Expected (65-74)
Ineffective: Performance is Unacceptable (0-64)
No Value-Added Measure
Growth or
Locally-selected
Comparable
Measures of
Measures
Growth or
Achievement
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
18-20
9-17
3-8
0-2
18-20
9-17
3-8
0-2
Value-Added Measure
Growth or
Locally-selected
Comparable
Measures of
Measures
Growth or
Achievement
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
22-25
10-21
3-9
0-2
14-15
8-13
3-7
0-2
19
Other Measures of
Effectiveness
59-60
57-58
50-56
0-49
Other Measures of
Effectiveness
59-60
57-58
50-56
0-49
PART IV
TEACHER IMPROVEMENT PLANS
Pursuant to Education Law §3012-c, if a teacher is rated “developing” or “ineffective” on the
Annual Rating (composite score), the District shall develop and implement a Teacher
Improvement Plan (“TIP”). The primary intent of the Teacher Improvement Plan is to improve
identified areas of weakness and/or deficiency in a teacher’s performance. A TIP is written as a
recommendation or plan of action to help a teacher found to have unsatisfactory performance as
defined in the APPR plan. Development of a TIP is to be a helpful, professional conversation(s),
identifying solutions and resources that will help the teacher become more effective.
A Teacher Improvement Plan resulting from the Annual Rating (“developing” or “ineffective”)
shall be in place no later than ten (10) days after the opening of classes for the next school year.
The Teacher Improvement Plan will focus on the Domains listed in The Framework for Teaching
2007 rubric. TIPs are to be developed by the district in consultation with the teacher, building
principal, and a union representative. The department chair/curriculum coordinator will be a part
of this consultation, if available.
The Teacher Improvement Plan will set specific time periods for achieving goals. During the
Teacher Improvement Plan period, the initiating administrator as well as other mutually agreed
upon certified evaluator(s) shall observe the teacher in question. Using the form included in this
section, the following shall be identified:








Identify areas of improvement
Identify timeline for improvement, with intermediate benchmarks as determined by the
members creating the TIP.
Identify how improvement will be assessed
Identify what the teacher agrees to do to make the required changes.
A statement of who will support the teacher and monitor progress.
Identify differentiated activities to support improvement, if any.
o Resources may include mentors, district professional development activities,
Teacher Centers, BOCES, Higher Education institutions, personal counselors, and
employee assistance programs.
Release time will be permitted for support activities occurring during the school day
where it is recommended by or determined by the members creating the TIP that such
activities are most appropriate to support improvement.
Signatures by the teacher and district representative.
TIP consultation meetings should not be adversarial or be used as a negotiation tool. The TIP is
NOT to be used as a threat or as a disciplinary tool by a district representative. Consent to a TIP
in no way indicates that a teacher has waived any or all of their contractual protections.
All costs associated with the implementation of a TIP including, but not limited to, tuition, fees,
books and travel, shall be borne by the District in their entirety. All costs not specified in the
TIP require prior written, approval of the Building Principal.
20
If courses lead to a masters degree, doctoral degree, national teacher certification or Certificate
of Clinical Competency, then the teacher will be compensated in accordance with collective
bargaining agreement currently in effect as to compensation for those degrees.
The Association President shall be informed in writing prior to the first day of school whenever a
teacher is placed on a TIP. Upon agreement of the teacher, the Association President shall be
provided a copy of the TIP. The Association President will ensure that the building
representatives know who has been identified as needing to participate in the TIP process.
The District will comply with the law regarding any disciplinary actions taken. No disciplinary
action predicated upon ineffective rating on the APPR shall be taken by the District against a
teacher until a TIP has been fully implemented and its effectiveness in improving the teacher’s
performance has been evaluated. No disciplinary action solely based upon an ineffective rating
on the APPR shall be taken by the District against a teacher who has met the performance
expectations set by the TIP.
The District reserves all rights and authority to exercise its managerial prerogatives concerning
counseling and discipline for probationary and tenured teachers. The TIP process does not
preclude dismissal during a teacher’s probationary period consistent with Education Law and the
Commissioner’s regulations.
This does not preclude the ability of the District is to implement a TIP for other purposes
unrelated to the APPR evaluation.
Please see Appendix I for TIP form used by the District.
21
PART V
PRINCIPAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
If a principal is rated “developing” or “ineffective” the District shall develop and implement a
Principal Improvement Plan (“PIP”). The PIP is a structured plan designed to identify specific
concerns in instruction and outline a plan of action to address these concerns. The purpose of a
PIP is to assist principals in working to their fullest potential. The PIP provides assistance and
feedback to the principal and establishes a timeline for assessing its overall effectiveness.
A PIP from the Annual Rating (“developing” or “ineffective”) shall be in place no later than ten
(10) days after the opening of classes for the next school year. PIPs are to be developed by the
district in by the Superintendent and principal.
The PIP will set specific time periods for achieving goals. During the PIP time period, the
initiating administrator as well as other mutually agreed upon certified evaluator(s) shall observe
the principal in question. Using the form included in this section, the following shall be
identified:




Identify Areas of Improvement
Identify Timeline for Improvement
Identify How Improvement will be Assessed
Identify Differentiated Activities to Support Improvement
Please see Appendix J for PIP form used by the District.
22
PART VI
APPEALS - TEACHERS
Basis
The burden of proof to establish a rational basis for the appeal rests with the Teacher, who may
only appeal an overall evaluation for one of the following reasons:
 The substance of the APPR;

The District’s failure to adhere to the standards and methodologies required for the APPR
that are set for in Education Law 3012-c and applicable rules and regulations;

The District’s failure to comply with locally negotiated procedures; and

The District’s failure to issue and/or implement the terms of the Teacher Improvement
Plan, where applicable, as required under Education Law 3012-c.
Appeals Process
A. Teacher Request for Supporting Documents:
Within five (5) school days of receipt of the APPR, a teacher may request, in writing that
the administrator issuing the APPR provide to the teacher a copy of any and all
documents and written materials upon which the APPR was based. The authoring
administrator shall provide all such documents to the teacher and the BKWTA President
within five school days of the request. Only materials provided in response to this
request shall be considered in the deliberations as to the validity of the APPR.
B. Right to Appeal:
Only teachers who receive an APPR rating of “ineffective” or “developing” may appeal
their APPR through the procedure herein. A teacher may file only one appeal from a
single APPR.
C. Filing of Appeal:
23
A teacher may file a written appeal of the APPR within ten (10) school days of the
receipt of the requested supporting documents. Any appeal shall be filed with the
administrator who issued the APPR. A copy of this appeal will also be provided to the
Superintendent.
The written appeal document must clearly identify the grounds for appeal and shall
explain, in detail why the appealing teacher believes the APPR should be modified.
D. Evaluator’s Obligation
Within five (5) school days of receipt of an appeal, the administrator who issued the
APPR must submit a written response to the appeal to the teacher and Superintendent of
Schools. The response must include any and all additional documents or written
materials specific to the point(s) of disagreement that support the district’s response and
are relevant to the resolution of the appeal. Any such information that is not submitted at
the time the response is filed shall not be considered in the deliberations related to the
resolution of the appeal. The Superintendent of Schools shall then forward the written
response to the APPR Appeals Committee within five (5) school days.
E. Review by APPR Appeals Committee:
Appeals shall be referred for consideration by the APPR Appeals Committee, a standing
committee made up of two administrators from within the District appointed by the
Superintendent of Schools, and two tenured teachers from within the District appointed
by the president of the BKWTA. All members of the committee shall be required to
complete the training required of lead evaluators under the APPR regulations. The
parties agree that in the event the work of the committee would require a member of the
committee to consider an appeal from an APPR that the committee member authored, the
appeal is made by a committee member, or if a member of the committee wishes to be
excused from consideration of any appeal, the appealing teacher shall have the following
options:

They may have the appeal considered by a subcommittee of one administrator and
one teacher; or

They may have the appeal considered by the remaining members of the
committee and a substitute member selected, for that appeal only.
24
The committee member must exercise this option at the beginning of the process. Once
the process has started, it is the professional obligation of the committee member to
complete the process.
The Superintendent of Schools shall select a substitute administrator in the event an
administrator is excused, or the president of the BKWTA in the event a teacher is
excused. While substituting administrators must have completed the training required of
lead evaluators under the APPR regulation, such training shall not be required of
substituting teachers.
The APPR Appeals Committee shall convene to consider the appeal within ten (10)
school days of receipt of the appeal and written response and must render a decision or
recommendation within five (5) school days of this meeting. A copy of the decision shall
be provided to the teacher and the administrator responsible for issuing the annual teacher
evaluation or Teacher Improvement Plan. The entire appeals process consists of a review
of evidence. It is not a hearing. No testimony will be taken or provided. However, this
does not preclude the APPR Appeals Committee from asking clarifying questions, as
necessary. It shall be the duty of the APPR Appeals Committee to answer the question,
“Has the teacher demonstrated that the APPR should be modified?” In the course of
answering this question, the committee may consider claim of procedural violations and
shall determine whether the claimed violations are significant enough to modify the
APPR.
F. Determination of Appeal:
The APPR Appeals Committee must reach a majority decision to either uphold or modify
the evaluation within five (5) school days of this meeting. The decision of the four
members is final.
If the APPR Appeals Committee fails to reach a majority decision, the APPR Appeals
Committee shall write a brief statement setting forth and explaining each member’s
recommendation for disposition of the appeal. This statement does not have to state the
author of each recommendation. The APPR Appeals Committee’s brief statement,
together with the full record of the appeal, shall then be forwarded to a Review
Committee within five (5) school days of issuing the statement.
The Review Committee shall be made up of two educators not employed at the District.
On an annual basis on or before September 1, two outside educators shall be jointly
selected and appointed by the Superintendent of Schools and the President of the
BKWTA to serve on such committee, if needed. The willingness and availability of the
outside educators to serve on the Review Committee, if needed during the following
25
school year, shall be confirmed prior to such annual appointment. The cost of any
compensation for such committee members shall be borne equally by the District and the
BKWTA. The Review Committee shall review such recommendation and make a final,
written determination within ten (10) school days of receipt of the record from the APPR
Appeals Committee. The decision of the Review Committee shall be in writing together
with the full record of the appeal. This decision shall be final and there shall be no
further appeal available.
If the Review Committee is unable to make a consensus recommendation, then within ten
(10) school days of receipt of the record the Review Committee shall write a brief
statement setting forth and explaining each member’s recommendation for disposition of
the appeal. This statement, together with the full record of the appeal shall be forwarded
to the Superintendent within ten (10) school days. The Superintendent shall review such
recommendation and make a final, written determination within ten (10) school days of
receipt of the record from the Review Committee. The decision of the Review
Committee shall be in writing together with the full record of the appeal. This decision
shall be final and there shall be no further appeal available.
G. Exclusivity of §3012-c Appeal Procedure: The 3012-c appeal procedure shall
constitute the exclusive means for initiating, reviewing and resolving any and all
challenges and appeals related to a teacher APPR or claimed violations of the substantive
requirements of the APPR process.
26
PART VII
APPEALS - PRINCIPALS
Basis
The burden of proof to establish a rational basis for the appeal rests with the principal and they
may only appeal an overall evaluation for one of the following reasons:
 The substance of the APPR;

The District’s failure to adhere to the standards and methodologies required for the APPR
that are set for in Education Law 3012-c and applicable rules and regulations;

The District’s failure to comply with locally negotiated procedures; and

The District’s failure to issue and/or implement the terms of the Principal Improvement
Plan, where applicable, as required under Education Law 3012-c.
Appeals Process
A. Principal Request for Supporting Documents:
Within five (5) school days of receipt of the APPR, a principal may request, in writing
that the Superintendent provide to the principal a copy of any and all documents and
written materials upon which the APPR was based. The Superintendent shall provide all
such documents to the principal and within five (5) school days of the request. Only
materials provided in response to this request shall be considered in the deliberations as
to the validity of the APPR.
B. Right to Appeal:
Only principals who receive an APPR rating of “ineffective” or “developing” may appeal
their APPR through the procedure herein. A principal may file only one appeal from a
single APPR.
C. Filing of Appeal:
A principal may file a written appeal of the APPR within ten (10) school days of the
receipt of the requested supporting documents. Any appeal shall be filed with the
27
Superintendent of Schools. The written appeal document must clearly identify the
grounds for appeal and shall explain, in detail why the appealing principal believes the
APPR should be modified.
D. Review by a Superintendent:
An independent superintendent from a regional committee of superintendents will be
forwarded the appeal within ten (10) school days. The independent superintendent will
consider the appeal and render a decision within fifteen (15) school days of receipt of the
appeal. A copy of the decision shall be provided to the principal and the Superintendent.
The entire appeals process consists of a review of evidence. It is not a hearing. No
testimony will be taken or provided. However, this does not preclude the independent
superintendent from asking clarifying questions, as necessary.
The decision of the independent superintendent shall be final and there shall be no further
appeal available.
E. Exclusivity of §3012-c Appeal Procedure: The 3012-c appeal procedure shall
constitute the exclusive means for initiating, reviewing and resolving any and all
challenges and appeals related to a principal APPR or claimed violations of the
substantive requirements of the APPR process.
Tenured principals with a pattern of ineffective teaching or performance may be charged with
incompetence and considered for termination through an expedited hearing process.
The District retains its rights with respect to termination of probationary principals to the extent
permitted by law.
28
PART VIII
TRAINING OF EVALUATORS
The District will ensure that all Lead Evaluators/Evaluators are properly trained and certified to
complete an individual’s performance review consistent with Education Law §3012-c and
implementing regulations. Evaluator training will be conducted by appropriately qualified
individuals or entities. Evaluator training will directly correlate to any and all rubrics chosen for
teacher and principal evaluation including evidence based observation, inter-rater reliability and
scoring consistent with this plan.
The Superintendent will certify lead evaluators upon receipt of proper documentation that the
individual has fully completed the appropriate training. The Superintendent will maintain
records of certification of evaluators.
Evaluator training will occur regionally in cooperation with Capital Region BOCES. Training
will be conducted by Capital Region BOCES Network Team personnel who have participated in
the NYSED evaluator training for Network Teams and/or personnel authorized to train on behalf
of an evaluation rubric approved by NYSED throughout the 2012-13 school year.
The District will establish a process to maintain inter-rater reliability over time in accordance
with NYSED guidance and protocols recommended in training for lead evaluators. The District
anticipates that these protocols will include measures such as: data analysis; periodic
comparisons of assessments; and/or annual calibration sessions across evaluators.
This training will include the following Requirements for Lead Evaluators/Evaluators:

New York State Teaching Standards and ISLLC Standards 
Evidence based observation 
Application and use of Student Growth Percentile and Value Added Growth Model data 
Application and use of the State-approved teacher or principal rubrics 
Application and use of any assessment tools used to evaluate teachers and principals 
Application and use of State-approved locally selected measures of student achievement 
Use of Statewide instructional Reporting System 
Scoring methodology used to evaluate teachers and principals 
Specific considerations in evaluating teachers and principals of ELLS and students with
disabilities. 29
Lead Evaluator/Responsibilities
To the extent possible, the lead evaluators shall be the Superintendent, each Principal and the
Director of Special Education. Lead Evaluators will be trained and certified as a lead evaluator
according to SED’s model to ensure consistency and defensibility.
The Board of Education will certify lead evaluators consistent with State requirements.
The Lead Evaluators will train and certify all evaluators in the District based on the same model.
All trained evaluators may do observations, but are prohibited from summative evaluations until
they are appropriately certified.
Timing
For the 2012-2013 school year and thereafter, all lead evaluators shall be appropriately trained
and certified by September 1st of each school year or thirty (30) days after appointment.
Re-Certification and Updated Training
The District will work to ensure that lead evaluators are re-certified each year and receive
updated training on any changes in the law, regulations or applicable collective bargaining
agreements.
Assurances:
This training will include the following Requirements for Lead Evaluators/Evaluators:
 New York State teaching Standards, and their related elements and performance
indicators;
 Leadership Standards and their related functions, as applicable;
 Evidence-based observation techniques that are grounded in research;
 Application and use of Student Growth Percentile Model and Value Added Growth
Model;
 Application and use of the State-approved teacher or principal rubrics, including training
on the effective application of such rubrics to observe a teacher or principal’s practice;
 Application and use of any assessment tools used to evaluate teachers and principals;
 Application and use of State-approved locally selected measures of student achievement;
 Use of Statewide Instructional Reporting System;
 Scoring methodology used by the Department and/or the District or BOCES to evaluate a
teacher or principal under this APPR plan, including how scores are generated for each
subcomponent and the composite effectiveness scores and application and use of the
scoring ranges prescribed by the Commissioner for the four designated rating categories
used for the teacher’s or principal’s overall rating and their subcomponent ratings; and
 Specific considerations in evaluating teachers and principals of ELLs and students with
disabilities.
 Inter-rate reliability will be maintained over time.
30
PART IX
DATA MANAGEMENT
The District will work with the State Education Department (“SED”) to develop a process that
aligns its data systems to ensure that SED receives timely and accurate teacher and student data,
including enrollment and attendance data and any other student, teacher, school, course, and
teacher/student linkage data necessary to comply with this APPR plan, in a format and timeline
prescribed by the Commissioner.
Ensuring Accurate Teacher and Student Data
The District shall ensure that SED receives accurate teacher and student data, including
enrollment and attendance data and any other student, teacher, school, course and teacher/student
linkage data necessary to comply with the Regulations of the Board of Regents and
Commissioner of Education by providing such data in a format and timeline prescribed by the
Commissioner.
The District’s student data system records now identify teacher assignments and student
enrollment and attendance. The District will verify assignments of classroom teachers. The
District collects data on student enrollment, attendance, and achievement on Statewide
assessments as indicated by NYSED.
The New York State Education Department’s APPR Guidance and field memos relating to the
Student Information Repository System (SIRS) provide detailed guidance related to the
collection and reporting of data, including student-teacher linkage and student attendance. The
District will continue to monitor data and develop additional processes, as needed and consistent
with NYSED reporting requirements, to verify that the data submitted to the State are complete
and accurate. The NYSED advises that it will provide roster verification reports to assist in this
process (see APPR Guidance, L4). The NYSED also will provide guidelines for the use of
student-teacher instructional weighting and student exclusion flags (see APPR Guidance, L8).
Verification: The District’s student data system identifies teacher assignments and student
enrollment and attendance. The District has obtained the NYSED statewide unique identifier for
certain certified individuals employed by the District through “TEACH.” This information has
or will be entered into the District’s data system and will be extracted from the District’s system
and reported to SIRS in accordance with NYSED guidance. The District will follow the state
process for verifying assignments of classroom teachers.
Reporting Individual Subcomponent Scores: The District will report to SED the individual
subcomponent scores and the total composite effectiveness score for each classroom teacher and
building principal in the District in a format and timeline prescribed by the Commissioner. The
District will develop a process for timely and accurate extraction of such data and will use SIRS
data reporting extracts protocols for reporting these data to NYSED. Total Composite
Effectiveness Scores will not be reported until data on student achievement on state assessments
is transmitted to the District.
31
Development, Security and Scoring of Assessments: The District shall ensure the development,
security and scoring processes of all assessments and/or measures used to evaluate teachers and
principals under this section are not disseminated to students before administration and that
teachers and principals do not have a vested interest in the outcome of the assessments they score.
Development: The District will work with applicable parties to determine decisions about
local measures of student achievement; teacher and principal practice rubrics; any other
instruments (such as surveys, self-assessments, portfolios); and the scoring methodology
for the assignment of points to locally selected measures of student achievement and
other measures of teacher or principal effectiveness.
Security: The District will ensure assessments are not disseminated to students before
administration and that teachers or principals do not have a vested interest in the outcome
of the assessments they score. Also, the District will work with SED, and the regional
testing center, to ensure assessments are secure and are not disseminated to students
before administration and that teachers or principals do not have a vested interest in the
outcome of the assessments they score.
Scoring: The District will ensure that all assessments are scored in the manner as
proscribed by the assessment.
Assurances:
 SED will receive accurate teacher and student data, including enrollment and attendance
data and any other student, teacher, school, course and teacher/student linkage data
necessary to comply with the Regulations of the Board of Regents and Commissioner of
Education by providing such data in a format and timeline prescribed by the
Commissioner.

The District provides an opportunity for every classroom teacher to verify the subjects
and/or student rosters assigned to them.

Scores for all teachers will be reported to NYSED for each subcomponent, as well as
composite rates, as per NYSED requirements.
32
PART X
MISCELLANEOUS
Required Certificates
The District shall include with this APPR Plan any certifications required by the Board of
Regents regulations.
Filing and Publication of APPR Plan
This APPR Plan shall be adopted by the Board of Education, filed in the office of the District,
and shall be made available to the public on the District’s website within ten days after its
approval by the Commissioner.
Procedures for the performance review of principals shall be filed in the district office and
available for review by any individual no later than September 10th of each year or 10 days after
approval.
Monitoring
The District agrees to collaborate with SED regarding any concerns and/or monitoring of the
district regarding evaluation implementation.
33
APPENDIX A
Growth on State Assessments or Comparable Measure
Grade
K
I
2
3
Highly
Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Grade
5
6
7
8
Highly
Effective
Effective
Elementary – K-3
ELA Assessment
Math Assessment
Achievement on the Measures of Academic
Progress (Primary Grades)
District-Developed Assessment
Expectations
Expectations
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a large
majority of students will demonstrate growth, meet
majority of students will demonstrate growth by
target growth, and/or demonstrate achievement at
meeting the growth target.
targeted levels as evaluated by the assessments
specified for each group of teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a
majority of students will demonstrate growth, meet
majority of students will demonstrate growth by
target growth, and/or demonstrate achievement at
targeted levels as evaluated by the assessments
specified for each group of teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, some
students will demonstrate growth, meet target
students will demonstrate growth by meeting the
growth, and/or demonstrate achievement at targeted
growth target.
levels as evaluated by the assessments specified for
each group of teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few
students will demonstrate growth, meet target
students will demonstrate growth by meeting the
growth target.
levels as evaluated by the assessments specified for
each group of teachers.
Middle – 6-8
Science Assessment
State Assessment
Expectations
majority of students will demonstrate growth, meet target
levels as evaluated by the assessments specified for each
group of teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a majority of
students will demonstrate growth, meet target growth,
and/or demonstrate achievement at targeted levels as
evaluated by the assessments specified for each group of
teachers.
Social Studies Assessment
District Developed Assessment
Expectations
large majority of students will demonstrate
growth by meeting the growth target.
majority of students will demonstrate growth
by meeting the growth target.
Developing
Ineffective
students will demonstrate growth, meet target growth,
and/or demonstrate achievement at targeted levels as
evaluated by the assessments specified for each group of
teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few students
will demonstrate growth, meet target growth, and/or
demonstrate achievement at targeted levels as evaluated
by the assessments specified for each group of teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities,
some students will demonstrate growth by
Based on the District’s goals and priorities,
few students will demonstrate growth by
High School
Course
Global 1
Global 2
American
History
Highly
Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Regents assessment
Regents assessment
Expectations
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a large majority of students will demonstrate
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a majority of students will demonstrate growth
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, some students will demonstrate growth by
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few students will demonstrate growth by
High School - Science
Course
Living
Environment
Earth Science
Regents assessment
Regents assessment
Chemistry
Regents assessment
Physics
Regents assessment
Highly
Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Expectations
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a majority of students will demonstrate
High School - Math
Course
Algebra 1
Geometry
Algebra 2
Highly
Effective
Regents assessment
Regents assessment
Regents assessment
Expectations
2
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
High School - ELA
Course
Grade 9 ELA
Grade 10
ELA
Grade 11
ELA
Highly
Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Achievement on the Measures of Academic Progress (ELA)
Regents assessment
Expectations
OTHER COURSES
SUBJECT
ELEMENTARY
Art 1
Art 2
Art 5
AIS Reading 1st
AIS Math/ELA 4
Skills Math
Music 1
Music 2
Music 3
Music 5
PE 3
PE 4
PE 5
Honors Math
Chorus 6
SECONDARY
ACADEMIC (Non-Regents)
Astronomy
Economics
Financial Math
French III
Spanish 8
General Physics
Health 6
Health 8
Assessment
Achievement on the Measures of Academic Progress (Primary Grades)
State Assessment
Achievement on the Measures of Academic Progress (Math)
6th Grade State Math Assessment
Proficiency Examination
3
Home and Careers
Peaks English 8
Physical Education
Pre-Calculus
Achievement on the Measures of Academic Progress (Math)
ARTS
Art 8
Chorus 7
Chorus 8
High School Band
High School Chorus
Drawing and Painting
Studio in Art
SPECIAL EDUCATION
AIS ELA/AIS Math
English/Math Skills
Resource Room
Living Environment Consult
New York State Assessment
Achievement on the Measures of Academic Progress (ELA, Math)
Achievement on the Measures of Academic Progress (ELA, Math)
TECHNOLOGY
Construction Systems
Technology 7
Technology 8
Web Page Design I
ADVANCED PLACEMENT
AP Chemistry
AP English Literature/Writing
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Expectations
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a large majority of students
will demonstrate growth by meeting the growth target.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a majority of students will
demonstrate growth by meeting the growth target.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, some students will
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few students will
4
Growth Measure
Percentage of
Students
Making
Target
95.06-100%
90.11-95.05%
84.16-90.10%
82.82-84.15%
81.48-82.81%
80.14-81.47%
78.80-80.13%
77.46-78.79%
76.12-77.45%
74.78-76.11%
73.44-74.77%
72.10-73.43%
70.09-72.09%
68.08-70.08%
66.07-68.07%
64.06-66.06%
62.05-64.05%
60.04-62.04%
40.02-60.03%
20.00-40.01%
0-19.99%
Points
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
5
6
APPENDIX B
Teachers
Locally-Selected Measures
Grade K ELA
Grade 1 ELA
Grade 2 ELA
Grade 3 ELA
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Grade 4 ELA
Grade 5 ELA
Grade 6 ELA
Grade 7 ELA
Grade 8 ELA
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Grade K Math
Grade 1 Math
Grade 2 Math
Grade 3 Math
Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures
Measures of Academic Progress (ELA)
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a large majority of students will
demonstrate achievement at targeted levels as evaluated by the assessments specified
for each group of teachers.
achievement at targeted levels as evaluated by the assessments specified for each
group of teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, some students will demonstrate
group of teachers.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few students will demonstrate
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
Measures of Academic Progress (Math)
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Grade 4 Math
Grade 5 Math
Grade 6 Math
Grade 7 Math
Grade 8 Math
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Grade 6 Science
Grade 7 Science
Grade 8 Science
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
2
Grade 6 Social Studies
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Global 1
Global 2
American History
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Living Environment
Earth Science
Chemistry
Physics
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
District-developed assessments
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
3
Algebra 1
Geometry
Algebra 2
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
Grade 9 ELA
Grade 10 ELA
Grade 11 ELA
Grade 12
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
Ineffective
SUBJECT
ELEMENTARY
Art 1-6
AIS ELA/Math
Music 1-6
PE K-6
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
Assessment
Measures of Academic Progress (ELA, Math)
SECONDARY
4
ACADEMIC (NonRegents)
Astronomy
Financial Math
French III
Spanish 8
General Physics
Health 6,8
Home and Careers
Peaks English 8
Physical Education
Pre-Calculus
ARTS
Art 6-8
Drawing and Painting
Band 6-8
Band 6-8
High School Band
High School Chorus
Independent Art
Photograph I
Studio in Art
SPECIAL
EDUCATION
AIS ELA/AIS Math
English/Math Skills
Resource Room
Living Environment
Consult
TECHNOLOGY
Construction Systems
Technology 7-8
Transportation Systems
Web Page Design I
ADVANCED
PLACEMENT
AP Chemistry
AP English
Literature/Writing
Highly Effective
Effective
Developing
group of teachers.
5
Ineffective
group of teachers.
group of teachers.
6
Locally Selected Measure
Where there is no Value-Added Growth Model
Percentage of Students
Points
Making Target
95.06-100%
20
90.11-95.05%
19
84.16-90.10%
18
82.82-84.15%
17
81.48-82.81%
16
80.14-81.47%
15
78.80-80.13%
14
77.46-78.79%
13
76.12-77.45%
12
74.78-76.11%
11
73.44-74.77%
10
72.10-73.43%
9
70.09-72.09%
8
68.08-70.08%
7
66.07-68.07%
6
64.06-66.06%
5
62.05-64.05%
4
60.04-62.04%
3
40.02-60.03%
2
20.00-40.01%
1
0-19.99%
0
Where there is a Value-Added Growth Model
Percentage of Students
Points
Making Target
92.17-100%
15
84.16-92.16%
14
82.65-84.15%
13
81.14-82.64%
12
79.63-81.13%
11
78.12-79.62%
10
76.61-78.11%
9
75.10-76.60%
8
73.59-75.09%
7
72.08-73.58%
6
68.06-72.07%
5
64.05-68.05%
4
60.04-64.04%
3
40.02-60.03%
2
20.00-40.01%
1
0-19.99%
0
7
APPENDIX C
Teachers
Rubric
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Appendix D
Additional Multiple Measures
Note: The rubrics below are set up to define the distribution of points when the teacher
chooses to use a category for 10 points. If a teacher chooses to use one of the categories
below for 5 points the point distribution within the rubric will be as follows:
Ineffective - 0 points
Developing – 1 point
Effective – 3 points
Highly Effective – 5 points
INEFFECTIVE (0)
Teacher fails to make
any observation of any
other teacher’s class.
or
Teacher fails to be
observed by another
Teacher.
OBSERVATION OF/BY PEER (10 points)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
Teacher engages in an
observation of another
observation of another
teacher’s class (or is
class (or has a class
observed by another
observed by another
Teacher), but there is no Teacher), but there is no
conversation about what formal follow up or
was learned.
conversation afterward.
HIGHLY EFFECTIVE (10)
observation of at least two other
classes (or the Teacher has at
least two of their classes
observed by another Teacher)
, assesses best practices and
then demonstrates evidence of
applying those practices in
his/her own teaching.
The teacher will not disclose the
names or linkages between the
observed teachers and his/her
evaluation of their best
practices.
STRUCTURED REVIEW OF LESSON PLANS (10 points)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
Teacher hands in
Administrator reviews the Lesson plans are reviewed by an
incomplete lesson plans lesson plans, but no
administrator and evaluated by
or lesson plans that
conversation ensues.
criteria agreed upon by both
cannot be evaluated.
Criteria for evaluation are administrator and teacher. A
left up to the
productive conversation ensues
administrator.
based on the review, leading to
effective suggestions for
changes in instruction.
STUDENT PORTFOLIOS AND/OR OTHER TEACHING ARTIFACTS (10 points)
INEFFECTIVE (0)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
No artifacts are
Teacher has some
Teacher collects some
Teacher collects
available.
portfolios or artifacts,
portfolios/artifacts from
portfolios/artifacts from
but does not use them
some students to use as
majority of students from at
for anything in
exemplars.
least one activity during the
particular.
year and can demonstrate
exemplary examples of the
assignment.
COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION (10 points)
INEFFECTIVE (0)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
INEFFECTIVE (0)
No lesson plans are
available for an
administrator.
Teacher refuses to
attend any meeting
outside of his or her
basic professional
duties.
Teacher agrees to
participate in a
committee when asked,
but does not contribute
or attend regularly.
Teacher volunteers to
participate in a committee
but does not attend
regularly and does not
contribute substantially.
participate in at least one
committee and substantially
contributes to the effective work
of the committee.
COMMUNITY SERVICE TO STUDENTS (10 points)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
Teacher agrees to
Teacher volunteers in a
participate in one
participate in activities but substantial activity involving
activity and only under
only rarely, and only when students such as but not
duress.
asked.
exclusively: coaching, advising
clubs, chaperoning, directing
plays or musicals, food drives,
poetry readings, etc.
GOAL SETTING (paired with goal implementation) (10 points)
INEFFECTIVE (0)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
No goals are set or
Establishes vague goals Teacher establishes a
Teacher establishes clear goals
considered.
for this year.
vague but workable goal
for this year based on
for this year based on at
consideration of various sources
least one source of
of feedback.
feedback.
PERSONAL REFLECTION NARRATIVE (10 points)
INEFFECTIVE (0)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
No narrative is written.
Teacher writes a
Teacher writes a narrative Teacher engages in a significant
reflection, but it is
reflection, but the details
consideration of events from the
unreadable or off topic.
are sketchy and
year and is able to communicate
conclusions are nebulous.
clearly how his or her year
went. This may be based on
various sources of feedback or
from simple self reflection.
Narrative is detailed and
demonstrates genuine
engagement in the process.
INVOLVEMENT IN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES (10 points)
INEFFECTIVE (0)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
No Goals are set and no Vague goals are set by
Goals are set by the
Goals are set by the teacher and
narrative is written. No the teacher. Minimal
teacher. Teacher
agreed upon with
Professional
goals are accomplished. participates in
Administration. Teacher
development activities
Minimal professional
professional development
participates in professional
are attended. No signs
development activities
pertaining to the
development pertaining to the
of professional
are attended. Minimal
developed goals. No
developed goals and
development strategies
professional
communication with
implements the goals
are implemented by the
development strategies
administration in regards
effectively. Teacher provides a
teacher.
are implemented by the
to how the goals will be
written plan of action as well as
teacher.
accomplished and
a narrative explaining the
implemented. No written
effectiveness and of the process.
plan of action. Profession Profession development
development strategies are strategies are implemented by
implemented by the
the teacher.
teacher.
INEFFECTIVE (0)
Teacher refuses to
participate in any events
outside of school.
2
MUTUALLY DEVELOPED (rubric to be developed by teacher and administrator) (10 points)
INEFFECTIVE (0)
DEVELOPING (3)
EFFECTIVE (7)
No mutually developed
Vague mutually
Clear mutually developed
Clear mutually developed
measure (based on an
developed measure
measure (based on an
measure (based on an element
element from the
(based on an element
element from the
from the Danielson 2007 Rubric
Danielson 2007 Rubric
from the Danielson
Danielson 2007 Rubric
domains 1-4) is created.
domains 1-4) is created
2007 Rubric domains 1- domains 1-4) is created.
Detailed communication with
that will establish a
4) is created. Minimal
Little communication with administration in regards
teacher’s contribution to implementation of the
administration in regards
accomplishments or
the community,
measure is
accomplishments or
implementation.
dedication to his or her
accomplished.
implementation.
profession, or promote
Teacher provides a written plan
meaningful and
of action as well as a narrative
effective engagement in
explaining the effectiveness of
their job.
the process.
3
APPENDIX E
Principal
Growth on State Assessments or Comparable Measures
School Type
Elementary (K-6)
Type of Assessment
Measures used by District for
Teacher Evaluation or State
Assessment
Note
Will add grades and/or subjects as
growth/Value-Added measures
apply
Secondary (7-12)
State Assessments and/or graduation
rates
Will add grades and/or subjects as
growth/Value-Added measures
apply
HEDI Ratings
Highly Effective: (18-20 points) Results are well
above District-adopted expectations for growth or
achievement for grade/subject.
Effective: (9-17 points) Results meet Districtadopted expectations for growth or achievement
for grade/subject.
Developing: (3-8 points) Results
District-adopted expectations for
Ineffective: (0-2 points) Results are
District-adopted expectations for
are below
growth or
well below
growth or
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a large majority of
students will demonstrate growth, meet target growth, and/or
demonstrate achievement at targeted levels as evaluated by the
assessments.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a majority of students
will demonstrate growth, meet target growth, and/or demonstrate
achievement at targeted levels as evaluated by the assessments.
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, some students will
demonstrate growth, meet target growth, and/or demonstrate
Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few students will
demonstrate growth, meet target growth, and/or demonstrate
4
Growth Measure
Percentage of
Students
Making
Target
95.06-100%
90.11-95.05%
85.16-90.10%
82.82-84.15%
81.48-82.81%
80.14-81.47%
78.80-80.13%
77.46-78.79%
76.12-77.45%
74.78-76.11%
73.44-74.77%
72.10-73.43%
70.09-72.09%
68.08-70.08%
66.07-68.07%
64.06-66.06%
62.05-64.05%
60.04-62.04%
40.02-60.03%
20.00-40.01%
0-19.99%
Points
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2
APPENDIX F
Principal
Local Measures
Grade Configuration
K-6
7-12
Principals with Value-Added Measure
Locally-Selected Measures
Achievement on the Northwest Evaluation Association’s Measures of
Academic Program in grades K-6 in Math and English Language Arts.
Achievement on the Northwest Evaluation Association’s Measures of
Academic Program in grades 7-12 in Math and English Language Arts.
HEDI Ratings
Highly Effective: Results are well above District-adopted Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a large
expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. majority of students will demonstrate growth and meet
target growth in the areas of language arts and math as
evaluated by the results of the MAP assessments by
NWEA.
Effective: Results meet District-adopted expectations for Based on the District’s goals and priorities, a majority
growth or achievement for grade/subject.
of students will demonstrate growth and meet target
growth in the areas of language arts and math as
NWEA.
Developing: Results are below District-adopted Based on the District’s goals and priorities, some
expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. students will demonstrate growth and meet target
NWEA.
Ineffective: Results are well below District-adopted Based on the District’s goals and priorities, few
expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. students will demonstrate growth and meet target
NWEA.
3
Where there is a Value-Added Growth Model
Percentage
Points - ELA
Points - Math
91.67-100.00%
7.5
7.5
83.46-91.66%
7.0
7.0
81.65-83.45%
6.5
6.5
79.84-81.64%
6.0
6.0
78.03-79.83%
5.5
5.5
76.22-78.02%
5.0
5.0
74.41-76.21%
4.5
4.5
72.60-74.40%
4.0
4.0
70.09-72.59%
3.5
3.5
67.58-70.08%
3.0
3.0
65.07-67.57%
2.5
2.5
62.56-65.06%
2.0
2.0
60.05-62.55%
1.5
1.5
40.03-60.04%
1.0
1.0
20.01-40.02%
.5
.5
0-20%
0
0
**For the “Locally Selected Measures for Principals with an Approved
Value-Added Measure” point totals in both columns will be added. General
rounding rules will apply.
Where there is no Value-Added Growth Model
Percentage
Points - ELA
Points - Math
91-100%
10
10
81-90%
9
9
71-80%
8
8
61-70%
7
7
51-60%
6
6
41-50%
5
5
31-40%
4
4
21-30%
3
3
11-20%
2
2
5-10%
1
1
0-4%
0
0
4
APPENDIX G
Principal
Other Measures – Rubric
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
APPENDIX H
Principals
Other Measures of Effectiveness Raw Score to HEDI Conversion Table
HEDI Level
Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective HEDI Point Score Range
59-60
57-58
50-56
0-49
Calculated Rubric Score
3.76-4.00
3.51-3.75
3.26-3.50
2.51-3.25
2.40-2.50
2.25-2.39
2.10-2.24
1.95-2.09
1.80-1.94
1.65-1.79
1.51-1.64
1.49-1.50
1.48
1.47
1.46
1.45
1.44
1.43
1.42
1.41
1.4
1.39
1.38
1.37
1.36
1.35
1.34
1.33
1.32
1.31
1.3
1.29
1.28
1.27
1.26
1.25
1.24
1.23
1.22
1.21
1.2
1.19
1.18
1.17
1.16
1.15
1.14
1.13
1.12
1.11
1.1
1.09
1.08
1.07
1.06
1.05
1.04
1.03
1.02
1.01
1
Converted Score for Other
Measures of Effectiveness
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
APPENDIX I
Berne-Knox-Westerlo Central School District
Teacher Improvement Plan
Form
Date/ Pre conference_______
Date/ Observation____
Review Mtg Dates: ______ _________
TIP Committee Members:_________________________________________________________________________ Supervisor
Responsibilities
Standards Chosen For Further Development
Evidence of Change
Timeline For Completion
Desired Change
Improvements Made & Documented
Indicators Of Success
*Use tangible or visible indicators to determine success for the chosen standard
Resources to be provided:
Supervisor Signature:___________________________________
Teacher Signature:_____________________________________
Date______________
Date______________
Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP) cont.
Plan Modifications:
Plan Summary Comments:
Supervisor Signature:___________________________________
Date______________
Teacher Signature:_____________________________________
Date______________
2
APPENDIX J
Berne-Knox-Westerlo Central School
Principal Improvement Plan
Form
Name of Principal: ________________________________
The PIP is a structured plan designed to identify specific concerns in instruction and outline a plan of action to address these concerns. The purpose of a PIP is to
assist principals in working to their fullest potential. The PIP provides assistance and feedback to the principal and establishes a timeline for assessing its overall
effectiveness.
The PIP will set specific time periods for achieving goals. During the PIP time period, the initiating administrator as well as other mutually agreed upon certified
evaluator(s) shall observe the principal in question. Using the form included in this section, the following shall be identified:

Identify Areas of Improvement:

Identify Timeline for Improvement:

Identify How Improvement will be Assessed:

Identify Differentiated Activities to Support Improvement:
_____________________
Principal
__________
Date
__________________________
Superintendent of Schools
__________
Date

Berne-Knox-Westerlo Central School District

Transcription

Similar documents

Nieuwe Uitleg 7F € 3.100,

Brochure

Transcende Brochure

Braga meeting evaluation_Karalius Mindaugas Vocational training

Panther Press - Olathe Schools

AMS Brochure

green barrier

nyLearns.org Roadmap

A NEW VISION OF LOCAL EXCELLENCE IN ASSESSMENT Rick