Home » 2010 Issues » December 08, 2010 » EDU-18-10-00015-E Annual Professional Performance Reviews for Teachers in the Classroom Teaching Service
EDU-18-10-00015-E Annual Professional Performance Reviews for Teachers in the Classroom Teaching Service
12/8/10 N.Y. St. Reg. EDU-18-10-00015-E
NEW YORK STATE REGISTER
VOLUME XXXII, ISSUE 49
December 08, 2010
RULE MAKING ACTIVITIES
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
EMERGENCY RULE MAKING
I.D No. EDU-18-10-00015-E
Filing No. 1210
Filing Date. Nov. 23, 2010
Effective Date. Nov. 23, 2010
Annual Professional Performance Reviews for Teachers in the Classroom Teaching Service
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following action:
Action taken:
Amendment of section 100.2(o) of Title 8 NYCRR.
Statutory authority:
Education Law, sections 207 (not subdivided) and 305(4)
Finding of necessity for emergency rule:
Preservation of general welfare.
Specific reasons underlying the finding of necessity:
The proposed amendment relates to annual professional performance reviews of teachers in the classroom teaching service.
As part of the current Annual Professional Performance Review ("APPR") set forth in section 100.2 of the Commissioner's regulations, school districts and BOCES are required to perform annual evaluations of their teachers and the evaluation must be based on at least eight evaluation criteria prescribed in regulation. As part of its reform agenda for strengthening teaching, the Board of Regents have made a policy determination to make four major changes to the current requirements for the annual professional performance reviews of teachers.
First, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include student growth as a mandatory criteria to be used in the evaluation of teachers. The proposed amendment defines student growth as a positive change in student achievement between at least two points in time as determined by the school district or BOCES, taking into consideration the unique abilities or disabilities of each student, including English language learners.
Secondly, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to implement the following uniform qualitative rating categories/criteria in the evaluation of its teachers: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing and Ineffective. The proposed amendment also defines each of these quality rating categories/criteria.
The proposed amendment also requires that school districts and BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to the teacher. The proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include in their professional performance review plan a description of how it will provide timely and constructive feedback to its teachers on all criteria evaluated, including data on student growth for each of their students, the class and the school as a whole and feedback and training on how the teacher can use such data to improve instruction as part of the teacher's APPR.
Lastly, the proposed amendment eliminates the reporting requirements which previously required school districts and BOCES to annually report information related to the school district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is rated as unsatisfactory.
Following the Board of Regents adoption of the proposed amendment by emergency action at its April 2010 meeting, the Legislature and the Governor enacted Chapter 103 of the Laws of 2010. This new law establishes a new comprehensive annual evaluation system for teachers and principals based on multiple measures of effectiveness, including student achievement measures, which will result in a single composite effectiveness score for every teacher and principal. It also provides for the establishment of an advisory committee comprised of representatives of teachers, principals and other stakeholders that will make recommendations to the Commissioner and Regents prior to the adoption of implementing regulations and the use of a value-added growth model in evaluations. Department staff are conducting a review of the provisions of the statute and evaluating its impact on the existing APPR regulation. When the Department's review and the work of the advisory committee is complete, we anticipate making further revisions to the proposed amendment. Pursuant to section 202 of the State Administrative Procedure Act, these revisions may not be adopted until publication of a Notice of Revised Rule Making in the State Register and expiration of a 30-day public comment period. However, the emergency rule adopted at the September 2010 Regents meeting will expire on November 23, 2010. A lapse in the emergency rule will cause disruptions in the administration of annual professional performance reviews of teachers.
Emergency action is necessary at the November 2010 Board of Regents meeting in order to ensure that the rule remains continuously in effect until such time as it can be revised to conform to Chapter 103 of the Laws of 2010 and adopted as a permanent rule, after expiration of the 30-day public comment period for revised rule makings prescribed in the State Administrative Procedure Act, and thereby avoid disruption in the annual professional performance reviews of teachers.
Subject:
Annual professional performance reviews for teachers in the classroom teaching service.
Purpose:
To require school districts and BOCES to incorporate student growth as an evaluation criteria and establishes rating categories.
Substance of emergency rule:
The Commissioner of Education proposes to amend section 100.2(o) of the Commissioner's regulations, relating to the Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) for teachers in New York State. The following is a summary of the substance of the proposed amendment.
Annual Professional Performance Review for Teachers
Section 100.2(o) will be repealed effective May 1, 2010.
A new subdivision 100.2(o) will be added, effective May 1, 2010.
A new paragraph (1) of subdivision (o) of section 100.2 shall be added and shall apply for school years commencing on or after July 1, 2000 and ending prior to June 30, 2001. This paragraph shall contain the same provisions as the prior version of 100.2(o) that expires on May 1, 2010, except the requirement that school districts and BOCES report on an annual basis information related to the school district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is unsatisfactory has been eliminated.
A new paragraph (2) of subdivision (o) shall be added for school years commencing on or after July 1, 2011. The requirements for the annual professional performance reviews of teachers shall be the same as in paragraph (1) of this subdivision, except for the following changes:
Section 100.2(o)(2)(b) will add a new definition of "teacher providing instructional services" to be a teacher in the classroom teaching service as defined in section 80-1.1 of the Commissioner's regulations.
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iii) creates four quality rating categories/criteria to be used in the annual professional performance review of teachers (Highly Effective, Effective, Developing and Ineffective) and defines each of these categories.
Section 100.2 (o)(2)(iii)(a) defines a teacher rated as Highly Effective being a teacher who is performing at a higher level than is typically expected based on the evaluation criteria listed in the subdivision, including acceptable rates of student growth.
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iii)(b) defines a teacher rated as Effective being a teacher who is performing at a level that is typically expected of a teacher based on the evaluation criteria listed in the subdivision, including acceptable rates of student growth.
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iii)(c) defines a teacher rated as Developing as one who is not performing at a level that is typically expected of a teacher based on the evaluation criteria listed in the subdivision, including less than acceptable rates of student growth.
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iii)(d) defines a teacher rated as Ineffective as one whose performance is unacceptable based on the evaluation criteria listed in the subdivision, including unacceptable or minimal rates of student growth.
Professional Performance Review Plan
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iv)(a)(1) requires the governing body of each school and BOCES to adopt a professional performance review plan of its teachers by September 1, 2011.
Content of the Plan
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iv)(b)(1)(vii) adds student growth as a new evaluation criteria. This item defines student growth as follows: the teacher shall demonstrate a positive change in student achievement for his or her students between at least two points in time as determined by the school district or BOCES, taking into consideration the unique abilities and/or disabilities of each student, including English language learners. Student achievement is defined as a student's scores on State assessments for tested grades and subjects and other measures of student learning, including student scores on pre-tests and end-of-course tests, student performance on English language proficiency assessments and other measures of student achievement determined by the school district or BOCES to be rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iv)(b)(4) requires the APPR plan to describe how the new rating categories (Highly Effective, Effective, Developing and Ineffective) are used to differentiate professional development, compensation, and promotion for teachers providing instructional services. The procedures for implementation of the rating categories shall be consistent with the requirements of article 14 of the Civil Service Law.
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iv)(b)(5) requires the plan to describe how the school district or BOCES will provide timely and constructive feedback to teachers on all criteria evaluated as part of their annual evaluation, including providing teachers with data on student growth for each of their students, the class and the school as a whole. The plan must also describe how the school or BOCES will provide feedback and training on how the teacher can use such data to improve instruction.
Section 100.2(o)(2)(iv)(b)(6) requires the plan to describe how the school district or BOCES addresses the performance of teachers whose performance is evaluated as ineffective, and shall require a teacher improvement plan for teachers so evaluated or documentation of a prior teacher improvement plan, which shall be developed by the district or BOCES in consultation with such teacher.
Variance
Section 100.2(o)(2)(vii)(a) grants a variance from the requirements of this paragraph, upon a finding by the commissioner that a school district or BOCES has executed prior to May 1, 2010 an agreement negotiated pursuant to article 14 of Civil Service Law whose terms continue to effect and are inconsistent with such requirement.
This notice is intended
to serve only as a notice of emergency adoption. This agency intends to adopt the provisions of this emergency rule as a permanent rule, having previously submitted to the Department of State a notice of proposed rule making, I.D. No. EDU-18-10-00015-P, Issue of May 5, 2010. The emergency rule will expire January 21, 2011.
Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
Christine Moore, New York State Education Department, 89 Washington Avenue, Room 148 EB, Albany, NY 12234, (518) 473-8296, email: cmoore@mail.nysed.gov
Regulatory Impact Statement
1. STATUTORY AUTHORITY:
Section 207 of the Education Law grants general rule making authority to the Board of Regents to carry into effect the laws and policies of the State relating to education.
2. LEGISLATIVE OBJECTIVES:
The proposed amendment carries out the legislative objectives of the above- referenced statute by requiring school districts and BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to teachers as part of their annual evaluations; implementing uniform designated rating categories for the evaluation of teachers, and requiring that school districts and BOCES include a ninth evaluation criteria, i.e., student growth, in the evaluation of their teachers.
3. NEEDS AND BENEFITS:
As part of the current Annual Professional Performance Review ("APPR") set forth in section 100.2 of the Commissioner's regulations, school districts and BOCES are required to perform annual evaluations of their teachers and the evaluation must be based on at least eight evaluation criteria prescribed in regulation. As part of its reform agenda for strengthening teaching, the Board of Regents have made a policy determination to make four major changes to the current requirements for the annual professional performance reviews of teachers.
First, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include student growth as a mandatory criteria to be used in the evaluation of teachers. The proposed amendment defines student growth as a positive change in student achievement between at least two points in time as determined by the school district or BOCES, taking into consideration the unique abilities or disabilities of each student, including English language learners.
Secondly, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to implement the following uniform qualitative rating categories/criteria in the evaluation of its teachers: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing and Ineffective. The proposed amendment also defines each of these quality rating categories/criteria.
The proposed amendment also requires that school districts and BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to the teacher. The proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include in their professional performance review plan a description of how it will provide timely and constructive feedback to its teachers on all criteria evaluated, including data on student growth for each of their students, the class and the school as a whole and feedback and training on how the teacher can use such data to improve instruction as part of the teacher's APPR.
Where the Commissioner finds that a collective bargaining agreement was executed by a school district or BOCES pursuant to Article 14 of the Civil Service Law prior to the effective date of this regulation and whose terms are inconsistent with the new provisions of this regulation the Commissioner will grant a variance from that portion of the regulation for the duration of the existing collective bargaining agreement.
Lastly, the proposed amendment eliminates the reporting requirements which previously required school districts and BOCES to annually report information related to the school district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is rated as unsatisfactory.
4. COSTS:
(a) Costs to State government: The proposed amendment will not impose any additional costs on State government, including the State Education Department.
(b) Costs to local governments: The proposed amendment will not impose any additional costs on local governments, including school districts and BOCES.
(c) Costs to private regulated parties: In general, the proposed amendment does not impose any additional compliance costs on school districts and BOCES. The Annual Performance Review already requires teachers to measure student's progress in learning based on the analysis of available student performance data. Secondly, the proposed amendment requires districts and BOCES to utilize four designated quality rating categories/criteria. The addition of such rating categories should not impose any additional costs.
Finally, the proposed amendment requires the district/BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to teachers as part of their annual evaluation. This feedback should already be provided to teachers to guide their analysis of student progress. If teacher training is necessary, all districts are already required to provide professional development to improve the quality of teaching within the district. Therefore, providing training to teachers to interpret and use student growth data to improve instruction should be incorporated into their current professional development plan, thus avoiding any additional training costs.
(d) Costs to regulating agency for implementing and continued administration of the rule: As stated above in "Costs to State Government," the amendment will not impose any additional costs on the State Education Department.
5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES:
The proposed amendment applies to both school districts and boards of cooperative educational services. Therefore, the mandates in Section 3 apply to school districts and BOCES. The State Education Department has determined that uniform requirements are necessary to ensure the quality of the State's teaching workforce and consistency in the evaluations of teachers in the classroom teaching service across the State.
6. PAPERWORK:
The proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include in their professional performance plan a description of how it will provide timely and constructive feedback to its teachers, including data on student growth for each of their students, the class and the school as a whole and feedback and training on how the teacher can use such data to improve instruction as part of the teacher's APPR.
7. DUPLICATION:
The amendment does not duplicate any existing State or Federal requirements.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
The proposed amendment establishes the evaluation criteria for teachers employed in the classroom teaching service in school districts and BOCES. Because these requirements apply to teachers, school districts and BOCES located in all areas of the State, no viable alternatives were considered.
9. FEDERAL STANDARDS:
There are no Federal standards that establish procedures for the evaluation of teachers.
10. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE:
School districts and BOCES will be required to comply with the proposed amendments by the 2011-2012 school year.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(a) Small Businesses:
The proposed amendment applies to school districts and boards of cooperative educational services (BOCES) and relates to the annual professional performance reviews for teachers in the classroom teaching service. Because it is evident from the nature of the proposed amendment that it does not affect small businesses, no further measures were needed to ascertain that fact and none were taken. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis for small businesses is not required and one has not been prepared.
(b) Local Governments:
The proposed amendment relates to the criteria for the evaluation of teachers in the classroom teaching service in school districts and BOCES across New York State.
1. EFFECT OF RULE:
The proposed amendment applies to school districts and BOCES located in New York State and relates to the evaluation of teachers in the classroom teaching service.
2. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS:
As part of the current Annual Professional Performance Review ("APPR") set forth in section 100.2 of the Commissioner's regulations, school districts and BOCES are required to perform annual evaluations of their teachers and the evaluation must be based on at least eight evaluation criteria prescribed in regulation. As part of its reform agenda for strengthening teaching, the Board of Regents have made a policy determination to make four major changes to the current requirements for the annual professional performance reviews of teachers.
First, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include student growth as a mandatory criteria to be used in the evaluation of teachers. The proposed amendment defines student growth as a positive change in student achievement between at least two points in time as determined by the school district or BOCES, taking into consideration the unique abilities or disabilities of each student, including English language learners.
Secondly, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to implement the following uniform qualitative rating categories/criteria in the evaluation of its teachers: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing and Ineffective. The proposed amendment also defines each of these quality rating categories/criteria.
The proposed amendment also requires that school districts and BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to the teacher. The proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include in their professional performance review plan a description of how it will provide timely and constructive feedback to its teachers on all criteria evaluated, including data on student growth for each of their students, the class and the school as a whole and feedback and training on how the teacher can use such data to improve instruction as part of the teacher's APPR.
Where the Commissioner finds that a collective bargaining agreement was executed by a school district or BOCES pursuant to Article 14 of the Civil Service Law prior to the effective date of this regulation and whose terms are inconsistent with the new provisions of this regulation the Commissioner will grant a variance from that portion of the regulation for the duration of the existing collective bargaining agreement.
Lastly, the proposed amendment eliminates the reporting requirements which previously required school districts and BOCES to annually report information related to the school district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is rated as unsatisfactory.
3. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
The proposed amendment does not mandate that school districts or BOCES contract for additional professional services to comply.
4. COMPLIANCE COSTS:
In general, the proposed amendment does not impose any additional compliance costs on school districts and BOCES. The Annual Performance Review already requires teachers to measure student's progress in learning based on the analysis of available student performance data.
Secondly, the proposed amendment requires districts and BOCES to utilize four designated quality rating categories/criteria. The addition of such rating categories should not impose any additional costs.
Finally, the proposed amendment requires the district/BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to teachers as part of their annual evaluation. This feedback should already be provided to teachers to guide their analysis of student progress. If teacher training is necessary, all districts are already required to provide professional development to improve the quality of teaching within the district. Therefore, providing training to teachers to interpret and use student growth data to improve instruction should be incorporated into their current professional development plan, thus avoiding any additional training costs.
5. ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional technological requirements. Economic feasibility is addressed under the Compliance Costs section above.
6. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT:
The proposed amendment applies to school districts and BOCES and relates to the criteria for the evaluation of teachers in the classroom teaching service. The State Education Department has determined that uniform annual professional performance review standards are necessary to ensure the quality of the State's teaching workforce across the State for teachers in the classroom teaching service. Therefore, no exemption from these requirements has been provided for local governments. However, the Department has eliminated the current reporting requirement which previously required school districts and BOCES to annually report information related to the school district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is rated unsatisfactory.
7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION:
Comments on the proposed rule were solicited from the State Professional Standards and Practices Board for Teaching. This is an advisory group to the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education on matters pertaining to teacher education, certification, and practice. The Board has representatives of school districts and BOCES across the State. Comments on the proposed rule were also solicited from the BOCES District Superintendents, New York State Council of School Superintendents, New York State United Teachers, New York State School Boards Association, School Administrators Association of New York State, and New York State Association of School Personnel Administrators.
Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
1. TYPES AND ESTIMATE OF THE NUMBER OF RURAL AREAS:
The proposed amendment will affect teachers in school districts and boards of cooperative services in all areas of New York State, including the 44 rural counties with fewer than 200,000 inhabitants and the 71 towns and urban counties with a population density of 150 square miles or less.
2. REPORTING, RECORDKEEPING, AND OTHER COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
As part of the current Annual Professional Performance Review ("APPR") set forth in section 100.2 of the Commissioner's regulations, school districts and BOCES are required to perform annual evaluations of their teachers and the evaluation must be based on at least eight evaluation criteria prescribed in regulation. As part of its reform agenda for strengthening teaching, the Board of Regents have made a policy determination to make four major changes to the current requirements for the annual professional performance reviews of teachers.
First, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include student growth as a mandatory criteria to be used in the evaluation of teachers. The proposed amendment defines student growth as a positive change in student achievement between at least two points in time as determined by the school district or BOCES, taking into consideration the unique abilities or disabilities of each student, including English language learners.
Secondly, the proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to implement the following uniform qualitative rating categories/criteria in the evaluation of its teachers: Highly Effective, Effective, Developing and Ineffective. The proposed amendment also defines each of these quality rating categories/criteria.
The proposed amendment also requires that school districts and BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to the teacher. The proposed amendment requires school districts and BOCES to include in their professional performance review plan a description of how it will provide timely and constructive feedback to its teachers on all criteria evaluated, including data on student growth for each of their students, the class and the school as a whole and feedback and training on how the teacher can use such data to improve instruction as part of the teacher's APPR.
Where the Commissioner finds that a collective bargaining agreement was executed by a school district or BOCES pursuant to Article 14 of the Civil Service Law prior to the effective date of this regulation and whose terms are inconsistent with the new provisions of this regulation the Commissioner will grant a variance from that portion of the regulation for the duration of the existing collective bargaining agreement. Lastly, the proposed amendment eliminates the reporting requirements which previously required school districts and BOCES to annually report information related to the school district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is rated as unsatisfactory.
3. COSTS:
In general, the proposed amendment does not impose any additional compliance costs on school districts and BOCES. The Annual Performance Review already requires teachers to measure student's progress in learning based on the analysis of available student performance data.
Secondly, the proposed amendment requires districts and BOCES to utilize four designated quality rating categories/criteria. The addition of such rating categories should not impose any additional costs.
Finally, the proposed amendment requires the district/BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to teachers as part of their annual evaluation. This feedback should already be provided to teachers to guide their analysis of student progress. If teacher training is necessary, all districts are already required to provide professional development to improve the quality of teaching within the district. Therefore, providing training to teachers to interpret and use student growth data to improve instruction should be incorporated into their current professional development plan, thus avoiding any additional training costs.
4. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT:
The proposed amendment establishes uniform evaluation standards for teachers employed in the classroom teaching service in school districts and BOCES across the State. The State Education Department has determined that uniform standards for the evaluation of teachers should be applied across the State. Therefore, no exemption has been provided from these requirements for school districts and BOCES located in rural areas of the State. However, the Department has eliminated the current reporting requirement which previously required school districts and BOCES to annually report information related to the school district's efforts to address the performance of teachers whose performance is rated unsatisfactory.
5. RURAL AREA PARTICIPATION:
Comments on the proposed rule were solicited from the State Professional Standards and Practices Board for Teaching. This is an advisory group to the Board of Regents and the Commissioner of Education on matters pertaining to teacher education, certification, and practice. The Board has representatives of school districts and BOCES located in rural areas of New York State. Comments on the proposed rule were also solicited from the District Superintendents, New York State Council of School Superintendents, New York State United Teachers, New York State School Boards Association, School Administrators Association of New York State, and New York State Association of School Personnel Administrators, the constituencies of which include those from rural areas.
Job Impact Statement
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to require school districts and BOCES to provide timely and constructive feedback to teachers as part of their annual evaluations; designate uniform quality rating categories/criteria for the evaluation of teachers; and mandate that a ninth evaluation criteria, i.e., student growth be utilized in the evaluation of teachers. Because it is evident from the nature of this regulation that it will have no impact on the number of jobs or employment opportunities in New York State, no further steps were needed to ascertain that fact and none were taken. Accordingly, a job impact statement is not required and one has not been prepared.
