Monticello Central School District 2014 8.25.14.pdf · Monticello Central School District Monticello ... The District will use Marshall’s Teacher Evaluation Rubric by Kim Marshall,

1 | P a g e

Monticello Central School District

Monticello, NY

2014-2016

Annual Professional Performance Review

For:

Classroom Teachers

PLAN ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION:

Availability of Districts APPR Plan

A. A written copy of the Plan was adopted by the BOE at the Board of Education meeting on________. This document was included in the official published minutes of the Board of Education meeting, which is distributed throughout the school district.

B. The written copy of the Plan was published on the DISTRICT website by .

2 | P a g e

Table of Contents

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………….………4

Training for Evaluators…………………………………………………………………………………………… 5

Teacher Practice Rubric………………………………………………………………………………..………….5

Teacher Evaluation…………………………………………………………………………………………………..5

NYS Teaching Standards…………………………………………………………..……………..…...5

State Growth Scores/SLOs (20)……………………………………………………………………..6

Local Measures of Growth or Achievement (20)…………………………………………..7

Multiple Measures of Teacher Effectiveness (60)………………………………………...7

Notification………………………………………………………………………………………………………………8

Teacher Observations

Clinical Observation Model……………………………………………………………..……………………….8

Mini Observation Cycle………………………………………………………………………………..8

Pre-observation Conference…………………………………………………………………………8

Pre-observation Cycle Planning Meeting………………………………………………………9

Classroom Observations…………………………………………………....…………………………9

Post Observation Conference……………………………………………………………………..10

Post Mini Observation Discussion……………………………………………………………….11

Rubric Meetings………………………………………………………………………………………….11

Scoring Methodology………………………………………………………………………………………………12

Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP)…………………………………………………………………………….12

Appeals Process for Teacher Evaluation………………………………………………………………….14

Re-Opener Clause…………………………………………………………………………………………….……..17

Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………18

A. Pre Observation Conference Form—Formal Observations

3 | P a g e

B. Pre Observation Planning Guide—Mini Observations

C. Marshall Teacher Evaluation Rubric

D. Classroom Observation Report

E. Post Observation Reflection form

F. Classroom Observation Summary

G. Mini-Observation Report

H. Marshall Rubric Domain Averaging sample with NYSUT conversion chart

I. K-8 Local Scoring Rubric Conversion Chart

J. J1 and J2 9-12 Local Scoring Rubric Conversion Chart (20 and 15 point versions)

K. Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP) form

L. State Growth HEDI Scale for Teachers Not Receiving a State Provided Growth Score

4 | P a g e

Introduction

On May 28, 2010, the Governor signed Chapter 103 of the Laws of 2010, which added a new section 3012-c to the Education Law, establishing a comprehensive evaluation system for classroom teachers and building principals. This APPR document is intended to provide a process to allow a

teacher to continue to grow within his/her profession. The MCSD and the MTA place a high value on student

achievement. Teachers and administrators who demonstrate the highest professional responsibility and a

solid commitment to on-going learn can best ensure this objective.

3012-c requires an evaluation rating for classroom teachers which is made up of a three part score. The three

parts are 20% student growth measures (increased to 25% upon implementation of the value-added model),

20% local selected measures of growth or achievement (decreased to 15% upon implementation of value-

added model) and 60% multiple measures of teacher effectiveness. All teachers will be given a HEDI rating in

writing no later than September 1 of the school year following the evaluation year. These yearly ratings shall

be based on the scores in each of the above mentioned three areas.

The scores that teachers receive in each of these areas are categorized as indicated in the chart below.

Training for Evaluators

The Lead Evaluator is the primary person responsible for a teacher’s evaluation. The Lead Evaluator is the person who conducts the formal observation (pre-conference, observation, post-conference) cycle or mini observations for the purposes of APPR. The Lead Evaluator is the person who completes and signs the summative annual professional performance review.

1. All Monticello administrators will be trained as Lead Evaluators. 2. Only MCSD hired MASA members, the Superintendent of Schools and the Assistant Superintendent for

Curriculum and Instruction of schools will receive Lead Evaluator training. (i.e. no person who may have administrative certification but is not hired by MCSD as an administrator and is not a member of MASA can be trained as an evaluator or do observations.)

3. Positions designated as Lead Evaluators: Superintendent of Schools, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction, Building Principals, Assistant Principals and Directors.

HEDI SCORE

20% Local Assessment

20% State Assessment

60% Teacher Observations

and Goals

2012-2013 (no approved Value-Added measure)

20 State Assessment

20 Local Measures

60 Teacher Effects

NYSED Composite Scoring Bands

Ineffective 0-2 0-2 0-49 0-64

Developing 3-8 3-8 50-56 65-74

Effective 9-17 9-17 57-58 75-90

Highly Effective

18-20 18-20 59-60 91-100

5 | P a g e

4. Sullivan County BOCES or another approved provider will provide training of Lead Evaluators in use of Marshall’s Rubric in compliance with all state regulations.

5. The District will ensure the training and certification of its Lead Evaluators in accordance with the requirements prescribed in the Commissioner’s Regulations. The District will further ensure that Lead Evaluators maintain inter-rater reliability over time and that they are recertified on an annual basis in the rubric selected by the district and the MTA.

6. Administrators who do not attend district provided training on the APPR process shall not be permitted to perform Evaluator or Lead Evaluator duties until such training is completed.

Teacher Practice Rubric

The District will use Marshall’s Teacher Evaluation Rubric by Kim Marshall, (Revised August, 2011), to measure

teacher effectiveness aligned to the NYS Teaching Standards. The district will provide staff development time to

collaborate for the purposes of expanding the language in the rubric (for in district use only) to provide clarity,

consistency and calibration for all staff. (Appendix C)

Teacher Evaluations Teacher evaluations shall be based on the NYS Teaching standards and the measures of teacher effectiveness in the negotiated rubric. New York Teaching Standards The professional performance review plan for teachers is based on the New York State Teaching Standards. These, therefore, are the criteria that will be used to evaluate teachers:

Knowledge of Students and Student Learning: Teachers acquire knowledge of each student, and demonstrate knowledge of student development and learning to promote achievement for all students.

Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning: Teachers know the content they are responsible for teaching, and plan instruction that ensures growth and achievement for all students.

Instructional Practice: Teachers implement instruction that engages and challenges all students to meet or exceed the learning standards.

Learning Environment: Teachers work with all students to create a dynamic learning environment that supports achievement and growth.

Assessment for Student Learning: Teachers use multiple measures to assess and document student growth, evaluate instructional effectiveness, and modify instruction. This includes assessment techniques based on appropriate learning standards designed to measure students' progress in learning and that he or she successfully utilizes analysis of available student performance data (for example: State test results, student work, school-developed assessments, teacher-developed assessments, etc.) and other relevant information (for example: documented health or nutrition needs, or other student characteristics affecting learning) when providing instruction.

Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration: Teachers demonstrate professional responsibility and engage relevant stakeholders to maximize student growth, development, and learning. This includes the development of effective collaborative relationships with students, parents or caregivers, as needed, and appropriate support personnel to meet the learning needs of students; and

Professional Growth: Teachers set informed goals and strive for continuous professional growth. Teacher Effectiveness

6 | P a g e

Annual professional performance reviews shall differentiate teacher effectiveness using a composite effectiveness score. Based on such a composite effectiveness score a classroom teacher shall be rated as Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, or Ineffective. The composite score is determined as follows*: Student Growth Measures 20% is based on student growth on State assessments or other comparable measures of student growth (increased to 25% upon implementation of a value-added growth model). Student growth means the change in student achievement for an individual student between two or more points in time. Student growth percentile score shall mean the 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. Value-added growth score shall mean the 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. Data that are provided by SED will provide the number of points (out of the possible 20 or 25) toward the composite score a teacher will be awarded for the student growth portion. The state will assign a score of 0-20 points for this subcomponent, which will contribute to the educator’s composite effectiveness score using the standards and scoring ranges for this subcomponent as prescribed in regulation. For subject areas for which there is no growth data provided by the state, the state determined district-wide growth

goal setting process will be employed as established in the MCSD in the 2013-14 school year. All teachers with a SLO will

calculate growth based on 50% gap closure between the pre-assessment and the mastery score of 90. For example a

student who scores a 30 on the pre-assessment will be expected to score at least a 60 on the post-assessment in order

for growth goals to be met. Teachers with students who take the NYS Alternate Assessment will agree to the expected

growth in consultation with their lead evaluator. Principals will assess the teacher’s evidence of student learning at year

end using the state scoring guidelines. Assessments will be secure and not disseminated to students prior to the

assessment administration. Teachers will not score their own students’ work if the results of the assessments will factor

into their evaluation. (see Appendix L) In addition, teachers will not proctor their post-assessments if the score derived

from the exam will be used as the basis of a pre-assessment score for the following year’s teachers.

A student must be enrolled for 90% of the school year to count towards a teacher’s growth score.

Student Achievement Measures 20% of the composite effectiveness score is based on locally-selected measures of student achievement that are determined to be rigorous and comparable across classrooms as defined by the Commissioner (decreased to 15% upon implementation of value-added growth model). In recognition of the role that all teachers play in developing student literacy and the emphasis in the Common Core Standards on subject area literacy, the MCSD will use a team scoring model based on student results on ELA exams. In grades K-8 all teachers will be scored based on their students’ benchmark performance on the NWEA Reading test. The teacher’s achievement score (local 20) will be determined by the percentage of all students taught who meet or exceed the benchmark. The attached chart (Appendix I) outlines the score K-8 teachers will receive based on the outlined student achievement/growth.

7 | P a g e

Teachers in grades 9-12 will be scored based on the combined January and June results of the ELA Regents exams. The teacher’s achievement score (local 20) will be determined by the percentage of all students taking the exam who meet or exceed the benchmark as outlined on the chart. The attached chart (Appendix J) outlines the score teachers will receive based on the outlined student achievement. Multiple Measure of Teacher Effectiveness

The remaining 60% (or 60 out of the total 100 point composite score) of the composite effectiveness score is based on other measures of teacher effectiveness consistent with standards prescribed by the Commissioner in Regulation 3012-c. Based on its inclusion of the SED-approved list of rubrics, the Teacher Evaluation Rubric by Kim Marshall (August 2011) will be used to evaluate all teachers consistent with the Commissioner’s regulations. The rubric is included in the appendix (C). 60% Teacher Evaluation Scoring Rubric Bands

*In the event that a grade 4-8 ELA or Math teacher receives an ineffective or developing composite score for the 2013-14 or 2014-15 school year as a result of the teacher’s state provided growth score, a new score will be calculated in accordance with NYS regulation.

Notification

The teacher shall receive notice of all subcomponent scores available to the District, in writing, by the last day of the

school year. The final summative evaluation which determines the HEDI rating shall be provided to the teachers in

writing by September 1st of the following school year.

Teacher Classroom Observations

The purpose of classroom observation is to support the development of the APPR, and to improve the quality of teaching and education in the District and, in the case of probationary employees or those teachers rated as “Developing” or “Inefficient”, to provide useful information to the District in considering whether to continue the employee’s employment with the District and/or to grant tenure. In addition, the process will provide the employee with sufficient notice of his/her deficiencies, if any, to allow him/her a reasonable opportunity for corrective action. The formal observation model is based on the assumption that the teacher and the Lead Evaluator will work together in a collaborative fashion to help the teacher grow as a professional. It is comprised of three steps, Pre-Observation Conference, Observation and Post-Observation Conference.

Rating Band

Teacher Evaluations/ Professional

Ineffective 0-49

Developing 50-56

Effective 57-58

Highly Effective

59-60

8 | P a g e

The mini observation cycle, based on Kim Marshall’s philosophy of observation and evaluation over time, consists of a pre-observation cycle planning meeting and a series of ten (10) to fifteen (15) minute mini classroom observations.

1. The process of mini observations will begin after a pre-cycle meeting between the teacher and his/her Lead Evaluator. At this pre-cycle meeting the rubric and any concerns will be discussed.

2. All pre-cycle meetings must be held no later than the first four full weeks after the start of the school year.

3. Mini observations must be spread out through the entire observation cycle and no more than two mini observations can take place within a two week period.

4. Every possible attempt must be made to observe a variety of class periods and/or subjects for each teacher. At the minimum, no more than half of the mini observations can take place in the same class period and/or subject.

5. The timeline for mini observations will be from the beginning of school, following the pre-cycle meeting, until the third Friday in May.

6. Following each mini observation there will be a brief (five minute) chat and the completion of the four-square mini observation form. The post observation chat must occur within 48 hours of the mini observation.

7. The entire process of mini-observations (observation, post observation chat and receipt of the 4 Square) will take no longer than 5 school days.

8. Meetings to complete the observation process and determine a rubric score for Multiple Measures of Teacher Effectiveness will begin no earlier than May 15th each year and be concluded by the last day of classes each school year.

Pre-Observation Conference (formal)

1. The substance of this conference will include but not be restricted to the setting of mutual goals, a review of district and building goals, a review of the categories for evaluation, a sharing of a lesson plan and/or a discussion of procedures involved in the evaluation process.

2. A pre-observation conference is required for formal evaluations. 3. A concerted effort should be made between the administrator and the teacher to reach a common

understanding of the teacher’s goals and an agreed upon time of the observation. Those goals shall be selected from the NYS Teaching Standards or the Marshall Rubric.

4. All teachers to whom it applies will be given adequate notice in writing (no less than 4 school days) of the pre-conference date.

5. The pre-observation conference shall take place three (3) to five (5) school days prior to the observation.

6. All teachers to whom it applies will be required to complete the Pre-Observation Planning Form (Appendix A). Teachers should complete this form and submit it to their Lead Evaluator with the lesson plan, and any other relevant information at least two school days before the pre-observation conference. This will be the basis of the pre-observation conversation between the teacher and the evaluator.

Pre-Observation Cycle Planning Meeting

1. The substance of this conference will include but not be restricted to the setting of mutual goals, a review of district and building goals, a review of the categories for evaluation, a sharing of a lesson plan and/or a discussion of procedures involved in the evaluation process.

9 | P a g e

2. A pre-meeting with the teacher’s Lead Evaluator to set the tone for the year’s mini observations will be held prior to the start of the mini observation cycle. The Marshall Rubric will be collaboratively scored by the teacher and the Lead Evaluator. This pre-scoring is for discussion purposes only and will not be used as part of the final score. The Pre-Observation Planning Guide (Appendix B) is a useful but not required tool for this meeting.

3. All teachers will have seven (7) to ten (10) mini observations each year. 4. If deficiencies are noted during the mini observations and changes are not noted in the two successive

mini observations, the Lead Evaluator shall complete a formal observation of a full class period as guided by the formal observation definitions above.

Observation The evaluator will observe the teacher in the performance of professional duties. A written evaluation must be completed based on the Teacher Evaluation Rubrics by Kim Marshall. (Appendix C)

1. Only MCSD [hired—MASA members] district administrators will evaluate MTA members.

2. All classroom observations shall be conducted in person, openly, with full knowledge of the classroom

teacher. The use of public address or audio systems or any other type of monitoring or surveillance

device is strictly prohibited.

3. Each formal classroom observation report, attached as Appendix D, shall evaluate the lesson observed

and shall not extend past the Marshall Rubric measures.

4. No formal observations can take place the day before or after a holiday/long weekend.

5. All formal observations for the purpose of APPR must take place between October and May.

6. The formal observation must encompass the entire teaching period of one subject. Given the

difference in the schedules between buildings and subject areas, teachers will have the option of

requesting the observation encompass a longer period of time to adequately cover an entire lesson.

a. High School minimum of 40 minutes (one class period) with intent that a block period be

observed for the entire block period.

b. Middle School 50 minutes (one class period)

c. Elementary 40 minutes (beginning to end of one lesson period)

7. No observation report shall be prepared when a teacher is performing duties other than in his/her

certification area.

8. No observation report shall be prepared when a teacher is performing duties other than their regular

assigned teaching duties.

9. Teachers shall receive a copy of all observation and APPR reports placed in their personnel files.

10. A teacher may reply in writing to any observation or APPR report placed in his/her personnel file as

he/she sees fit; e.g., by a personal statement, by statements of other persons who have observed the

teacher's classroom performance, etc. Any such reply shall be affixed to the observation report to

which it relates and shall be included in the teacher’s personnel file.

11. In buildings where there is more than one administrator who is trained to be a Lead Evaluator there

will be a clear rotation cycle established so that teachers have different Lead Evaluators.

10 | P a g e

Post-Observation Conference (formal)

1. Within five (5) school days after a formal classroom observation is completed, the evaluator shall prepare and provide to the observed classroom teacher a tentative or proposed observation report covering that observation. The post observation conference must be held at a mutually convenient time. This conference must take place within two (2) school days after the report is provided to the teacher. Following such conference, the evaluator may either submit the report as originally prepared or, alternatively, prepare a revised observation report. The final or revised observation report shall be placed in the classroom teacher's personnel file.

2. The teacher will complete the Post-Observation Reflection (Appendix E) document and provide it to the observing administrator within 2 school days of the observation. The observation report should be provided within 5 days of the lesson. The classroom observation report should be presented to the teacher, and the teacher should have at least two (2) school days to review the observation document prior to the post-observation conference. During this conference, the teacher and evaluator will discuss the results of the observed lesson. The Classroom Observation Summary (Appendix F) can be helpful in creating the final summative evaluation.

3. Teachers will provide collected evidence based on Marshall’s Rubric Domains A-F to apply as necessary.

4. The teacher and evaluator will review the rubric for common and different applications of the rubric. In the event that the evaluator and teacher do not arrive at consensus, administrative rating is applied and the teacher is invited to submit a written response to the formal observation report.

5. The final formal observation report is signed by the evaluator and teacher on all copies. A signed copy is sent to the teacher for the teacher’s records. Electronic copies of the formal observation report are stored in the personnel office. The evaluator will forward the original signed copies of the formal observation report to the personnel department.

6. A teacher’s signature on the written formal observation or APPR document does not signify agreement but merely indicates that the teacher has received the report.

Post Mini Observation Discussion

1. Discussion of the mini observation shall take place preferably the same day but always within 48 hours (two school days) of the observation.

2. This discussion will take approximately ten minutes in line with Kim Marshall’s philosophy of the purpose of such talks. The discussion will take place prior to the evaluator completing the 4-square mini observation form (Appendix G).

3. A teacher shall be entitled to schedule a more in depth meeting after receiving the mini observation form if it is deemed necessary.

4. Teachers will provide collected evidence based on Marshall’s Rubric Domains A-F to apply as necessary.

Rubric Meetings

1. All observations shall be completed by the third Friday in May. 2. Meetings to complete the rubric and determine a score for the Multiple Measures of Teacher

Effectiveness held between the Lead Evaluator and the teacher shall take place during the months of May & June. These meetings shall begin no earlier than May 1st and must be completed by June 15th.

11 | P a g e

3. Prior to June 15th the first Rubric meeting for APPR scoring shall take place. The majority of APPR post-rubric conversations should only take one meeting to complete.

4. In the case of the necessity for multiple meetings to reach agreement on the rubric score all meetings shall be completed no later than June 30th.

5. It is incumbent upon the Lead Evaluator and the teacher to provide evidence to substantiate their areas of disagreement on rubric scores.

Scoring Methodology The Commissioner’s regulations require that each teacher be evaluated annually on the NYS Teaching Standards using an approved rubric as part of the Multiple Measures of Teacher Effectiveness. This portion of the teacher’s evaluation is worth 60% of the composite score. Teachers will meet with their lead evaluator at the end of the school year to discuss the summative evaluation and the completion of the Marshall Rubric with their score for the Measures of Teacher Effectiveness. These meetings shall take approximately thirty (30) minutes in accordance with Kim Marshall’s philosophy of evaluation. At this meeting the rubric scores will be discussed and teachers will provide evidence as necessary for the accurate completion of the rubric. The District will use an averaging formula based on the six separate domains of the Marshall rubric. The subdomain scores will all be added and divided by ten to come up with an average score for that domain. All six domain averages will be added and that total will be divided by six resulting in an overall average score for teacher effectiveness (Sample scoring grid Appendix H). That score will then be converted to the 60 point scale using the NYSUT conversion chart attached (Appendix H).

Teacher Improvement Plan

Upon receiving a composite effectiveness rating of “developing” or “ineffective”, a teacher shall be provided

with a Teacher Improvement Plan (“TIP”).

1. The parties understand and agree that the sole and exclusive purpose of a TIP is the improvement of

teaching practice and that the issuance of a TIP is not a disciplinary action.

2. The process for implementing a TIP Plan shall be as follows:

a. The TIP shall be developed in consultation with the teacher within the first ten school days of

the school year following a developing or ineffective annual composite rating or within 10

school days of receipt of such rating, should that occur later. The MTA President shall be

informed of the District’s intent to provide a TIP to a teacher within ten (10) school days of the

teacher’s receipt of a “developing” or “ineffective” rating.

b. The teacher must be offered the opportunity for a peer mentor from the District’s mentor

program. Mentors shall offer the services to the district and will be compensated. Mentors will

12 | P a g e

receive the contractual negotiated mentor stipend. The teacher will select the mentor with the

approval of the Superintendent and the Association President. If a teacher cannot decide on a

mentor the Superintendent and the Association President or his/her designee will select a

mentor. All dealings between the mentor and the teacher/principal will be confidential. The

mentor and the teacher will collaborate during the first quarter of the school year. During that

time, the teacher will be observed by the Lead Evaluator who will concentrate on observing and

evaluating goals identified in the TIP.

c. After the first quarter of the teacher/principal/mentor collaboration, the administrator will

assess the effectiveness of the intervention and the level of improvement. Based on that

assessment, the TIP may be adjusted appropriately and quarterly meetings among all parties

will continue. At the end of the school year the TIP will terminate. Notwithstanding the above,

the length of the TIP may be shortened by mutual agreement of the District and unit member

who is on the TIP. The culmination of the TIP will be communicated in writing to the teacher.

Both parties will sign the TIP at the end of the school year.

d. If the teacher is again rated as “developing” or “ineffective”, a new plan will be developed by

the teacher and the building principal/administrator, as appropriate, in collaboration with the

Association for the subsequent school year.

e. If the teacher has been assigned a mentor, at the option of the teacher, he/she shall be

permitted to bring the mentor during any meeting associated with the TIP. At the option of the

teacher, he/she shall be permitted to bring a union representative during any meeting

associated with the TIP. It is understood by both parties that the union representative is

present to provide counsel to the teacher.

f. It is acknowledged that probationary teachers may have their assigned mentor present as

described in letter e above and that any tenured teacher who receives an “ineffective” or

“developing” rating on the 60 point rubric shall be entitled to have a mentor assigned.

3. Appendix K is the only approved TIP form.

4. The TIP must consist of the following components:

a. Specific Areas for Improvement/Goal: Identify specific areas in need of improvement.

Develop specific behaviorally written goals for the teacher to accomplish during the period of

the plan.

b. Measurable Objectives: Identify specific recommendations for what the teacher is expected to

do to improve in the identified areas. Delineate specific, realistic, achievable activities for the

teacher.

c. Resources and Supports: Identify specific resources and support systems available to assist the

teacher to improve performance. Examples: colleagues, coaching, role playing, activities,

visitations, courses, workshops, peer visits, materials, modeling by administrators etc.

d. Responsibilities/Action Plan: Identify responsible administrator(s) and steps to be taken by

administrator(s) and the teacher throughout the plan. Examples: classroom observations of

the teacher, supervisory conferences between the teacher and administrator(s), written reports

and/or evaluations etc.

13 | P a g e

e. Evidence of Achievement: Identify how progress will be measured and assessed. Specify next

steps to be taken based upon whether the teacher is successful, partially successful or

unsuccessful in efforts to improve performance.

f. Timeline: Provide a specific timeline for implementation of the various components of the TIP

for its final completion. Identify the dates for preparation of written documentation regarding

the completion of the plan.

5. In the event that the administrator recommends coursework, any tuition costs or registration fees shall

be borne by the District in their entirety. No disciplinary action predicated upon ineffective

performance shall be taken by the District against a teacher until a TIP has been completed. However,

nothing herein shall prevent the District from introducing into evidence an evaluation or TIP in a

subsequent disciplinary action.

6. The TIP shall be provided as soon as practicable but in no case later than ten (10) school days after the

opening of classes for the school year. However, notwithstanding any Education Law provisions to the

contrary, in the event the District does not receive the State data on students’ assessments by the first

day of the school year, and therefore no composite APPR rating exists for a teacher, the TIP shall be

developed and implemented within ten (10) school days after receipt of the State score that indicates a

composite “developing” or “ineffective” APPR rating.

7. The above-referenced TIP process and the Form contained below shall be incorporated into the

District’s APPR Plan Document for the 2012-13 school year and thereafter.

Appeals Process

General Appeals Process:

1. A tenured teacher who receives an “ineffective” or “developing” composite APPR rating, having also

received a developing or ineffective on his/her 60 points Measures of Teacher Effectiveness, or a

probationary teacher who receives an ineffective rating on his/her composite APPR, shall be entitled

to appeal the annual APPR rating, based upon a written submission to the Superintendent of Schools

or the Superintendent’s administrative designee, who shall be trained in accordance with the

requirements of the statute and regulations and also possess an district-wide administrative

certification. In the event that the Superintendent or the Superintendent’ administrative designee

served as an Evaluator or Lead Evaluator he/she shall not hear the appeal.

2. While an appeal may not be commenced until the teacher’s receipt of his/her annual composite APPR

rating, nothing herein shall prevent a teacher from informally discussing the Final Summative

Evaluation or the Local 20 Points allocation (if available) with the Lead Evaluator prior to the issuance

of the composite APPR rating.

3. The appeal must be brought in writing, specifying the area(s) of concern, but limited to those matters

that may be appealed as prescribed in Section 3012-c of the Education Law. Further, a teacher who is

placed on a Teacher Improvement Plan (“TIP”) shall have a corresponding right to appeal concerns

regarding the TIP in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 3012-c of the Education

Law.

14 | P a g e

4. An appeal of an APPR evaluation or a TIP must be commenced within fourteen business days of the

presentation of the final document to the teacher or else the right to appeal shall be deemed waived in

all regards; provided, however, that in the case of a TIP appeal, there shall be a second fourteen

business day period for a TIP appeal following the end date of the TIP and failure to appeal the TIP

within fourteen business days following the end date thereof shall be deemed a waiver of the right to

appeal the implementation of the TIP.

5. The Superintendent or the Superintendent’s administrative designee shall review appeals by first

considering procedural issues, then by considering the observational evidence/artifacts of instruction

and thereafter shall respond to all appeals with a written answer granting the appeal and directing

further administrative action, or denying the appeal with the specific reason for the appeal denial. The

decision of the Superintendent or the Superintendent’s administrative designee shall be made within

fourteen business days of the receipt of the appeal. In the event that a substantial procedural violation

is found, the evaluation under appeal shall be determined to be null and void in all regards.

6. In the event of an unsuccessful appeal to the Superintendent or the Superintendent’s administrative

designee the teacher shall have the right to file an appeal with one of the four agreed upon arbitrators

set forth below (in section 1) selected on a rotating basis from the list. The decision of the arbitrator

shall be final and binding. The cost of the arbitrator shall be borne equally by the District and the

Association.

7. The provisions set forth above shall not be construed to alter or affect the rights of probationary

teachers pursuant to §3031 of the New York State Education Law.

Optional Appeals Process for a tenured teacher who has received a second consecutive ineffective APPR

composite rating:

1. Notwithstanding Sections 1 through 7 above, in the event that a tenured teacher has received two

consecutive ineffective APPR evaluation ratings, the appeal shall be made to one of the four agreed

upon arbitrators set forth below1 selected on a rotating basis from the following list, based on order

and reasonable timeframe of availability: Dennis Campagna, Jeffrey Selchick, Howard Edelman and Jay

Siegel, who shall make a final and binding decision upon the appeal of the APPR evaluation and/or TIP.

In the event that either party has a question regarding the authenticity of such documentation, the

same shall be presented in writing immediately to the arbitrator and copied to the other party for the

arbitrator’s review and consideration. The Arbitrator shall review the evidence underlying the

observations of the teacher along with all other evidence submitted by the teacher prior to rendering a

decision. In the event that the district then proceeds to a probable cause finding under Section 3020-a

of the Education law, and determines to conduct such a hearing, the arbitrator who ruled upon the

appeal shall be jointly selected by the teacher and the district to be the Section 3020-a hearing officer.

1 In the event any of the above-named arbitrators are no longer serving in such capacity or are otherwise unavailable, parties shall mutually agree

upon alternative named arbitrators to be placed within this paragraph.

15 | P a g e

Notwithstanding the aforementioned language, nothing herein shall be construed as limiting the right

of the employee to challenge said evaluation in any proceeding brought pursuant to Education law

§3020-a, so long as the identical issue wasn’t resolved in the earlier appeal to the arbitrator or clearly

should have been presented in the earlier appeal and was not; provided, however, in the event that

SED will not pay for the costs of the hearing, that expense and transcription expenses shall be borne by

the District and the proceedings shall be in the nature of a disciplinary arbitration and not a statutory

hearing under Section 3020-a of the Education Law. The disciplinary arbitration procedure shall be

consistent with the statutory procedure and penalty parameters as set forth in Education Law Section

3020-a. During the pendency of a disciplinary arbitration the pay rights of the teacher shall be the

same as those afforded to teachers who are subject to statutory proceedings under Section 3020-a of

the Education Law.

2. In order to take advantage of the procedure outlined in paragraph 2(A) above, the tenured teacher

must consent to the use of one of the above-named arbitrators should the District proceed to find

probable cause under Section 3020-a of the Education Law. If the tenured teacher is unwilling to do

so, the appeal shall be heard by the Superintendent or the Superintendent’s administrative designee.

Re-Opener Clause

All areas of this APPR agreement shall be subject to re-negotiation in June 2015 following the experiences of

the 2014-15 school year and again in June 2016 after the experiences of the 2015-16 school year.

16 | P a g e

Appendix A—Pre-Observation Form


For formal Observation for Probationary teachers and tenured teachers rated as “Developing” or “Ineffective”

TEACHER PRE-OBSERVATION REPORT

_____ Tenured _____ Tenure-Eligible _____ Probationary _____ Leave Replacement

Teacher/Position: School:

Lesson Date: Subject / Grade:

Time & Minutes: # Students:

Supervisor/Title:

Pre-Conference Date (optional): Post-Conference Date:

Please complete this form and submit it along with your lesson plan, and any other relevant

materials a minimum of (2) days before the pre-observation conference.

1. Describe the students in this class, including those with special needs. (NYS Teaching Standard I, Element 1.1; Marshall Rubric A, Components e, i, g)

2. What are the goals for the lesson (key knowledge and concepts)? What do you want the students to learn? (NYS Teaching Standard I, Elements 1.2, 1.3; NYS Teaching Standard II Element I; Marshall Rubric A, Components a, f,

d, h; Marshall Rubric C, Component C)

3. How do these goals support your curriculum and the Common Core Curriculum? (NYS Teaching Standard II, Element, 1; Marshall Rubric A, Components b, c)

4. How will you assess students’ prior knowledge and skills? (NYS Teaching Standard I, Elements 1.3, 1.4; Marshall Rubric A, Component d; Marshall Rubric C Components d, e, g)

17 | P a g e

5. How do you plan to engage students in the content? What will you do? What will the students do? (NYS Teaching Standard II, Element 2,3,4; Standard III, Elements 3.1, 3.4; Marshall Rubric A, Components e, g, i;

Marshall Rubric B, Components I, j; Marshall Rubric C, Components d, f, g, h)

6. What difficulties do you anticipate students may have? What will you do to address those needs? (NYS Teaching Standard II, Element 6; Marshall Rubric A, Components e, i; Marshall Rubric B, Components b, e, g, h,

i, j; Marshall Rubric C, Components a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j)

7. What instructional materials or other resources, if any will you use? (Attach sample materials you will be using in the lesson).

(NYS Teaching Standard II, Element 6; Marshall Rubric A, Components h, j)

8. How do you plan to assess student achievement of the goals? What procedures will you use (attach any tests of performance tasks, with rubrics or scoring guides)

(NYS Standard V, Element 1; Marshall Rubric C, Components a, b, c, d, e, f)

9. How do you plan to use the results of the assessment? (NYS Teaching Standard V, Element 2; Marshall Rubric C, Components g, h, i, j)

List any comments you might want to bring to the attention of the administrator.

For example:

1. What would you like the administrator to see? 2. What area(s) would you like the administrator to pay close attention to in order to provide assistance in that

area?

18 | P a g e

3. What do you think your strength will be in the lesson? 4. Would you like to administrator to provide management suggestions for the class or a particular student? 5. What suggestions for a formative assessment does the administrator have that may be applicable? 6. Provide examples of which resources or materials that are not available currently to you and explain how they

would add value to the lesson.

19 | P a g e

Appendix B—Pre Observation Planning Guide


Pre Observation Planning Guide



Meeting Date: Subject / Grade:

Lead Evaluator/Title:

Please complete this form if desired and submit it and any other relevant materials before your scheduled Pre

Observation Cycle Meeting.

1. Describe the students in your classes (by period number and course title), including those with special needs.

(NYS Teaching Standard I, Element 1.1; Marshall Rubric A, Components e, i, g)

2. How do you establish learning goals for your lessons (key knowledge and concepts)? How do you determine and

communicate what do you want the students to learn?

(NYS Teaching Standard I, Elements 1.2, 1.3; NYS Teaching Standard II Element I; Marshall Rubric A, Components a, f,

d, h; Marshall Rubric C, Component C)

3. How do these goals support your curriculum and the Common Core Curriculum?

(NYS Teaching Standard II, Element, 1; Marshall Rubric A, Components b, c)

10. How will you assess students’ prior knowledge and skills this school year (provide examples)? (NYS Teaching Standard I, Elements 1.3, 1.4; Marshall Rubric A, Component d; Marshall Rubric C Components d, e, g)

20 | P a g e

11. How do you plan to engage students in the content? What will you do? What will the students do? Give examples of your practices.

(NYS Teaching Standard II, Element 2,3,4; Standard III, Elements 3.1, 3.4; Marshall Rubric A, Components e, g, i;

Marshall Rubric B, Component I, j; Marshall Rubric C, Components d, f, g, h)

12. What difficulties do you anticipate students may have this year? What will you do to address those needs? (NYS Teaching Standard II, Element 6; Marshall Rubric A, Components e, i; Marshall Rubric B, Components b, e, g, h,

i, j; Marshall Rubric C, Components a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j)

13. What instructional materials or other resources, if any will you use? (NYS Teaching Standard II, Element 6; Marshall Rubric A, Components h, j)

14. How do you plan to assess student achievement of learning goals? What procedures will you use (attach any tests of performance tasks, with rubrics or scoring guides)

(NYS Standard V, Element 1; Marshall Rubric C, Components a, b, c, d, e, f)

15. How do you plan to use the results of assessments? (NYS Teaching Standard V, Element 2; Marshall Rubric C, Components g, h, i, j)

21 | P a g e

List any comments you might want to bring to the attention of the administrator.

For example:

7. What would you like the administrator to see this year? 8. What area(s) would you like the administrator to pay close attention to in order to provide assistance in that

area? 9. What do you think your strengths will be in your teaching practice this year? 10. Would you like to administrator to provide management suggestions for the class or a particular student? 11. What suggestions for a formative assessment does the administrator have that may be applicable? 12. Provide examples of which resources or materials that are not available currently to you and explain how they

would add value to the lesson.

22 | P a g e

Appendix C—Marshall Rubric

Teacher Evaluation Rubrics by Kim Marshall – Revised August 21, 2011 Rationale and suggestions for implementation

1. These rubrics are organized around six domains covering all aspects of a teacher’s job performance:

A. Planning and Preparation for Learning

B. Classroom Management

C. Delivery of Instruction

D. Monitoring, Assessment, and Follow-Up

E. Family and Community Outreach

F. Professional Responsibilities

The rubrics use a four-level rating scale with the following labels:

4 – Highly Effective

3 – Effective

2 – Improvement Necessary

1 – Does Not Meet Standards

2. The rubrics are designed to give teachers an end-of-the-year assessment of where they stand in all performance areas

–and detailed guidance on how to improve. They are not checklists for classroom visits. To knowledgeably fill out the

rubrics, supervisors need to have been in classrooms frequently throughout the year. It is irresponsible to fill out the

rubrics based on one classroom observation. Unannounced mini-observations every 2-3 weeks followed by face-to-face

conversations are the best way for supervisors to have an accurate sense of teachers’ performance, give ongoing praise

and suggestions, and listen to concerns. For a detailed account of the development of these rubrics and their broader

purpose, see Kim Marshall’s book, Rethinking Teacher Supervision and Evaluation (Jossey-Bass, 2009).

3. The Effective level describes solid, expected professional performance; teachers should feel good about scoring at this

level. The Highly Effective level is reserved for truly outstanding teaching that meets very demanding criteria; there will

be relatively few ratings at this level. Improvement Necessary indicates that performance has real deficiencies; no

teacher should be content to remain at this level (although some novices might begin here). Performance at the Does

Not Meet Standards level is clearly unacceptable and should lead to dismissal if it is not improved immediately.

4. When scoring, take each of the ten criteria, read across the four levels (Highly Effective, Effective, Improvement

Necessary, and Does Not Meet Standards), find the level that best describes the teacher’s performance and circle or

highlight that cell. This creates a clear graphic display of areas for commendation and areas that need work. Then give

an overall score for that domain at the bottom of the page (averaging the scores on the page) and make brief comments

in the space provided. When all six pages have been scored, record the ratings on the summary sheet (page 8).

5. Evaluation conferences are greatly enhanced if the supervisor and teacher fill out the rubrics in advance, then meet

and compare scores one page at a time. The supervisor has the final say, of course, but the discussion should aim for

consensus based on actual evidence of the more accurate score for each criterion. Supervisors should go into the

evaluation process with humility since they can’t know everything about a teacher’s instructional activities, collegial

interactions, parent outreach, and professional growth. Similarly, teachers should be open to feedback from someone

with an outside perspective. For a discussion of the role of student achievement in teacher evaluation, see “Merit Pay or

Team Accountability”(Education Week, Sept. 1, 2010) by Kim Marshall.

23 | P a g e

6. Some supervisors sugar-coat criticism and give inflated scores to keep the peace and avoid hurting feelings. This does

not help teachers improve. The kindest thing a supervisor can do for an underperforming teacher is give candid,

evidence based feedback, listen to the teacher’s concerns, and provide robust follow-up support.

7. If an entire staff is scored honestly using these rubrics, it’s possible to create a color-coded spreadsheet that can serve

as a powerful (confidential) road-map for school wide professional development (see the sample on page 9).

8. These rubrics are “open source” and may be used and adapted by schools and districts as they see fit.

**Insert scanned

Marshall Rubric

Here**

24 | P a g e

Appendix D—Classroom Observation Report


FORMAL TEACHER OBSERVATION REPORT





Supervisor/Title:


Reviews Completed During this Observation Cycle:

____ Lesson/Unit Plans reviewed. (Underline as appropriate) Comment:

____ Grade Book reviewed. Comment:

____ Parental Contact Log reviewed. Comment:

NARRATIVE OF LESSON:

25 | P a g e

STRENGTHS and COMMENDATIONS:

1. Knowledge of Students and Student Learning- (NYS Teaching Standard I; Marshall Rubric A, Components a, e, g, i)

2. Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning- (NYS Teaching Standard II; Marshall Rubric A, Components a, b, c, d, f, h)

3. Instructional Practice- (NYS Teaching Standard III; Marshall Rubric A, Components f, h; Marshall Rubric C, Components a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i,

j)

4. Learning Environment- (NYS Teaching Standard IV; Marshall Rubric B, Components a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j)

5. Assessment for Student Learning- (NYS Teaching Standard V; Marshall Rubric D, Components a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j)

6. Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration (NYS Teaching Standard VI; Marshall Rubric E, Components a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j)

7. Professional Growth (NYS Teaching Standard VII; Marshall Rubric F, Components a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j)

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Knowledge of Students and Student Learning-

26 | P a g e

-

2. Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning- -

3. Instructional Practice- -

4. Learning Environment- -

5. Assessment for Student Learning- -

6. Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration- -

7. Professional Growth- -

SUMMARY:

This lesson is not meeting, approaching, meeting, exceeding district standards. This lesson showed strengths in the

Professional Performance Review criteria of (Knowledge of Students and Student Learning, Knowledge of Content and

Instructional Planning, Instructional Practice, Learning Environment, Assessment for Student Learning, Professional

Responsibilities and Collaboration, Professional Growth. Continue working on Knowledge of Students and Student

Learning, Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning, Instructional Practice, Learning Environment, Assessment for

Student Learning, Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration, Professional Growth. Please let me know what I can

do to support you in your professional growth.

SIGNATURES:

27 | P a g e

My signature indicates that a Post-Observation Conference was held, not that I necessarily agree with the contents of

this Observation Report.

_________________________________________________ ______________________________

Teacher’s Signature / Position Date

_________________________________________________ ______________________________

Supervisor’s Signature / Title Date

DISTRIBUTION: ______ Personnel File (Original Copy)

_____ Teacher ______ Principal _____ Content Supervisor _____ Asst. Supt. /Supt.

28 | P a g e

Appendix E—Post Observation Reflection


FORMAL TEACHER POST-OBSERVATION REPORT



Curriculum Area:



Supervisor/Title:


Please complete this form and submit to the evaluator within 48 hours of the observed lesson.

1. To what extent were the students productively engaged in the lesson? What is the basis for this assessment? If you were able to bring samples of student work, what would those samples reveal about those students’ levels of engagement and understanding?

2. Did all students learn what was intended? Were the instructional goals met? What is the evidence? 3. Did the goals get altered or was the instructional plan changed as the lesson was taught? If so, how and why? 4. If there was the opportunity to teach this lesson again, what would be done differently? Why? 5. What are the next steps? How does this lesson connect to future instruction? 6. How can the administrator observing this lesson be of assistance in facilitating professional growth as a result of

this lesson?

Demonstrates Knowledge of

Content Area

(content and discipline

structure, prerequisite skills

and content related

pedagogy)

Creating an Environment of

Respect and Rapport

(teacher interaction with students,

student interactions with other

students)

Setting Instructional

Outcomes

(Value, sequence,

alignment, clarity,

balance, suitability for

diverse learners)

Designing Student

Assessments

(congruence with

instructional outcomes,

criteria and standards,

design of formative

assessments, use for

planning)

Demonstrates Knowledge of

Students

(child and adolescent

development, learning

process, student skills and

language proficiency, student

interests and cultural

heritage, students’ special

needs)

Establishing a Culture for

Learning

(importance of the content,

expectations for learning and

achievement, student pride in

work)

Designing Coherent

Instruction

(learning activities,

materials and resources,

instructional groups,

lesson and unit structure)

Using Questioning and

Discussion Techniques

(quality of questions,

discussion techniques,

student participation)

Demonstrating Knowledge of

Resources

(use of materials that align

with learning outcomes,

materials that are

appropriately challenging for

students, resources to extend

content knowledge and

pedagogy for teachers)

Managing Student Behaviors

(of instructional groups,

transitions, materials and supplies,

performance of non-instructional

duties, supervision of volunteers

and paraprofessionals)

Managing Student

Behavior

(appropriate & respectful

behavior, subtle

monitoring, clear

standards, sensitive to

students, ownership of

conduct by students)

Using Assessment and

Instruction

(formative assessment,

student knowledge of

assessment criteria,

accurate & varied

feedback, continual

diagnosis of learning)

Organizing Physical Space

(safety and accessibility,

arrangement of furniture and

resources)

Communicating With

Students

(expectation for learning,

directions & procedures,

explanations of content,

use of oral and written

language)

Engaging Students in

Learning

(activities and

assignments, grouping of

students, instructional

materials and resources,

structure and pacing)

Demonstrating Flexibility

and Responsiveness

(lesson adjustment,

response to students,

persistence)

Appendix F—Classroom Observation Summary

Points of Post-Mini Observation Discussion with Teacher & Lead Evaluator

Teachers should be collecting and able to provide evidence for each of these areas.

Teacher________________________ Grade_______ Date________

Curriculum Area_________________

A. Planning and Preparation B. Classroom Environment C. Instruction D. Assessment

E. and F. Family/Community Outreach and Professional Responsibilities

Reflecting on Teaching

(accuracy, use in future teaching)

Maintaining Accurate Records

(student completion of assignments, student progress in learning, non-instructional records)

Communicating with Families

(information about the instructional program, information about individual students,

engagement of the families in the instructional program)

Participating in a Professional Community

(relationships with colleagues, involvement in a culture of professional inquiry, service to the

school, participation in school and district projects)

Growing and Developing Professionally

(enhancement of content knowledge and pedagogical skill, receptivity to feedback from

colleagues, service to the profession)

Showing Professionalism

(integrity and ethical conduct, service to students, advocacy, decision making, compliance with

school and district regulations)

Appendix G—Mini Observation Report


4 Square Mini Observation Report

Provided to teacher post mini-observation discussion between teacher & Lead Evaluator


What’s going well….

Any concerns….

Next Steps…

What can I do?

Teacher:

Evaluator:

Appendix H—Marshall Scoring Rubric Example

Kim Marshall Rubric Example Assessment of Teacher Effectiveness Domain Score Domain Based on Average of Criteria **Scores are arrived at by averaging the scores received in each of the ten criteria in each domain. In each domain the teacher receives a score from 1-4 for each of the ten criteria. Those ten scores are then averaged for a score for the domain as a whole. Each of the six domain scores is added and then divided by six to come up with a total rubric score. That rubric score is then slotted on the conversion chart to arrive at the point total out of 60 for the Measures of Teacher Effectiveness score.**

Domain Name Scores

Domain 1 (10 criteria) Planning and Preparation of Learning

3.4

Domain 2 (10 criteria) Classroom Management 3.5 Domain 3 (10 criteria) Delivery of Instruction 3.7 Domain 4 (10 criteria) Monitoring, Assessment and

Follow-up 3

Domain 5 (10 criteria) Family and Community Outreach

2.9

Domain 6 (10 criteria) Professional Responsibilities 3.6 Total Rubric Score 20.1/6 = 3.35 HEDI Rating Effective Sub Component Score (out of 60) using conversion chart

58.8

60 Point Conversion Chart

HEDI Bands

Average Rubric Score

Conversion Score


Conversion Score


Conversion Score

H=59-60 1 0 1.25 31 2.7 57.4

E=57-58 1.008 1 1.258 32 2.8 57.6

D=50-56 1.017 2 1.267 33 2.9 57.8

I=0-49 1.025 3 1.275 34 3 58

1.033 4 1.283 35 3.1 58.2

1.042 5 1.292 36 3.2 58.4

1.05 6 1.3 37 3.3 58.6

1.058 7 1.308 38 3.4 58.8

1.067 8 1.317 39 3.5 59

1.075 9 1.325 40 3.6 59.3

1.083 10 1.333 41 3.7 59.5

1.092 11 1.342 42 3.8 59.8

1.1 12 1.35 43 3.9 60

1.108 13 1.358 44 4 60.25

1.115 14 1.367 45

1.123 15 1.375 46

1.131 16 1.383 47

1.138 17 1.392 48

1.146 18 1.4 49

1.154 19 1.5 50

1.162 20 1.6 50.7

1.169 21 1.7 51.4

1.177 22 1.8 52.1

1.185 23 1.9 52.8

1.192 24 2 53.5

1.2 25 2.1 54.2

1.208 26 2.2 54.9

1.217 27 2.3 55.6

1.225 28 2.4 56.3

1.233 29 2.5 57

1.242 30 2.6 57.2

Appendix I—Local 20 Measure K-8--NWEA MAP Assessment VARC Conversion

Charts - HEDI Chart

The following chart represents a value added score that will be generated by NWEA and result in a

growth score (“GS”) + or – standard deviation from 0 as an indicator of a year’s worth of growth. (eg if

the building growth is .5 above the expected growth model 16 points will be assigned for local score to

all teachers in the building.)

Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective

20 points: GS > 1.3

19 points: 1.1 < GS ≤1.3

18 points: 0.9 < GS ≤1.1

17 points: 0.5 < GS ≤0.9

16 points: 0.1 < GS ≤0.5

15 points: -0.1< GS ≤ 0.1

14 points: -0.3< GS ≤ -0.1

13 points:- 0.5< GS ≤ -0.3

12 points:- 0.6< GS ≤- 0.5

11 points: -0.7< GS ≤ -0.6

10 points: -0.8< GS ≤ -0.7

9 points: -0.9 < GS ≤ -0.8

8 points: -1.1 < GS ≤ -0.9

7 points: -1.3 < GS ≤ -1.1

6 points: -1.5 < GS ≤-1.3

5 points: -1.7 < GS ≤-1.5

4 points: -1.9 < GS ≤-1.7

3 points: -2.1 < GS ≤-1.9

2 points: -2.3< GS ≤-2.1

1 point: -2.5 < GS ≤-2.3

0 points: GS ≤ -2.5

Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective

15 points: GS > 1.3

14: points: 0.9 < GS≤1.3

13 points: 0.5< GS≤0.9

12 points: 0.1< GS≤0.5

11 points: -0.3< GS≤0.1

10 points: -0.6< GS≤-0.3

9 points: -0.8< GS≤-0.6

8 point: -0.9 < GS≤-0.8

7 points: -1.3 < GS≤ -0.9

6 points: -1.5 < GS≤ -1.3

5 points: -1.7 < GS≤ -1.5

4 points: -1.9 < GS≤ -1.7

3 points: -2.1 < GS≤ -1.9

2 points: -2.3 < GS≤ -2.1

1 point: -2.5 < GS≤ -2.3

0 points: GS≤ -2.5

Appendix J1—Local 20 Measure 9-12 HEDI Scale

(Agreed upon by District and the MTA on to sunset at the conclusion of the

school year)

Local 20 Points Achievement Measure for all Teachers Grades 9-12 based upon the results of all students

taking the Comprehensive English Regents Examination in January and June each year.

Rating Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective

Points 18-20 9-17 3-8 0-2

Target

range

85-100% 65-84 50-64% 0-49%

% of

Students

Achieving a

Score of 65

or Greater

Points % of students

meeting target


meeting target Points % of students


meeting target

20 95-100% 17 84% 8 60-64% 2 26-49%

19 90-94 16 82-83 7 55-59 1 1-25

18 85-89 15 80-81 6 53-54 0 0

14 78-79 5 52

13 76-77 4 51

12 73-75 3 50

11 71-72

10 68-70

9 65-67

Appendix J2—Local 15 Measure 9-12 HEDI Scale


school year)

Local 20 Points Achievement Measure for all Teachers Grades 9-12 based upon the results of all students

taking the Comprehensive English Regents Examination in January and June each year.


Points 14-15 8-13 3-7 0-2

Target

range

85-100% 65-84 50-64% 0-49%

% of

Students

Achieving a

Score of 65

or Greater


meeting target




meeting target

15 92-100% 13 80-84% 7 62-64% 2 26-49%

14 85-91 12 76-79 6 59-61 1 1-25

11 72-75 5 56-58 0 0

10 69-71 4 53-55

9 67-68 3 50-52

8 65-66

Appendix K—TIP Plan


Teacher Improvement Plan

Staff Member: Ms./Mr. , Teacher Date Initiated:

Administrator: Ms./Mr. , Principal Date Revised:

Mentor: Ms./Mr. , Teacher

The Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP) is a structured plan designed to identify specific concerns in

instruction and outlines a plan of action to address these concern. The purpose of a TIP is to assist

teachers to work to their fullest potential. The TIP provides assistance and feedback to the teacher and

establishes a timeline for assessing its overall effectiveness.

I. Areas of Strengths and Rationale:

NYS Teaching Standard

Rubric Strengths Rationale

I. Knowledge of Students and Student Learning

A, C

II. Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning

A

III. Instructional Practice A, C

IV. Learning Environment

B

V. Assessment for Student Learning

D

VI. Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration

E, F

VII. Professional Growth

F

II. Areas of Deficiencies and Rationale:

NYS Teaching Standard

Rubric Deficiencies Rationale

I. Knowledge of Students and Student Learning

A, C

II. Knowledge of Content and Instructional Planning

A

III. Instructional Practice A, C

IV. Learning Environment

B

V. Assessment for Student Learning

D

VI. Professional Responsibilities and Collaboration

E, F

VII. Professional Growth

F

III. Plan for Improvement: (one per deficiency as cited above)

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (use one for each goal)

GOAL

(Specific Area

for

Improvement)

Describe Goal:

ADMINISTRATIVE

RESPONSIBILITY:

TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY:

MENTOR RESPONSIBILITY:

Measurable

Objective

(Expected

Set the measurable target that will define whether the goal is

met

Outcomes) ADMINISTRATIVE

RESPONSIBILITY:

TEACHER RESPONSIBILITY: MENTOR RESPONSIBILITY:

Resources

and Supports

Provide resources and supports to help in meeting the goal

including necessary release time

ADMINISTRATIVE

RESPONSIBILITY:



Action Plan

Describe plan for meeting the goal, including staffing,

scheduling, and funding:

ADMINISTRATIVE

RESPONSIBILITY:



Evidence

Identify the objective evidence that will be used to evaluate

the progress toward meeting the goal:

Identify teacher as successful,

partially successful or

unsuccessful in efforts to

improve performance to this

specific goal

ADMINISTRATIVE

RESPONSIBILITY:



Timeline

IV. TIMELINE FOR OVERALL COMPLETION:

V. BENCHMARKS/ CHECKPOINTS: (i.e. how many meetings, when will the meetings take place, who

will attend meetings)

VI. MTA Representative (officer or building rep)* __________________________________

I decline MTA Representation at this time. I reserve the right to request representation at a future

date during the TIPS process. _____________________________________

*Teacher has the choice of which MTA Representative they want

_______________________________________ _____________________

Teacher Date

_______________________________________ _____________________

Administrator Date

_______________________________________ _____________________

Administrator Date

_______________________________________ _____________________

Superintendent Date

Distribution of Copies:

____ Teacher ____ Principal ____ Content Supervisor ___Asst. Supt./Supt. ___ Personnel File

Implementation Plan Log

This form should be completed by both teacher and an administrator dealing with the associated TIPS

Date TIP recommended: _________

Completed Meetings

Date Topic Discussed Action Items and dates Teacher’s

Initials

Admin

Initials

Appendix L— State Growth HEDI Scale for Teachers Not Receiving a State

Provided Growth Score


school year)


Points 18-20 9-17 3-8 0-2

Target

range

85-100% 65-84 50-64% 0-49%

% of

Students

Achieving a

Score of 65

or Greater


meeting target




meeting target

20 95-100% 17 84% 8 60-64% 2 26-49%

19 90-94 16 82-83 7 55-59 1 1-25

18 85-89 15 80-81 6 53-54 0 0

14 78-79 5 52

13 76-77 4 51

12 73-75 3 50

11 71-72

10 68-70

9 65-67

Documents

Monticello Central School District 2014 8.25.14.pdf · Monticello Central School District Monticello ... The District will use Marshall’s Teacher Evaluation Rubric by Kim Marshall,