Marcellus Central Schools Annual Professional Performance Review Plan (APPR)
September 2012 – June 2013
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. The board of education shall
adopt a plan which may be a multi-year plan, for the annual professional performance
review of teachers providing instructional services and building principals. The
Marcellus Central Schools have determined that the Teacher and Principal Evaluation
Process will be reviewed annually and presented to the BOE for approval at its annual
re-organization meeting.
Statement of Purpose
The overarching goal of the teacher evaluation system is to promote student learning
and improve teaching and professional practice. The APPR encourages professional
growth and development through a process that is based on current research on best
practice and aligned with New York’s Teaching Standards. It assures a common
language and common expectations among all teachers and evaluators. To ensure
teacher-driven professional development and support, it is intentionally linked with the
district’s Professional Development Plan
Process
The Superintendent, in collaboration with the Marcellus Faculty Association and the
Marcellus Administrators’ Association, developed this professional performance review
plan. Collective bargaining occurred as specified by regulation. Once approved by the
Board of Education, the plan will be filed in the district office and posted to the district
website. In addition, the Superintendent will submit the plan through the NYS portal for
approval by the Commissioner of Education.
Counselors, speech therapists, librarians, OT, PT and staff not covered by the Teacher
Evaluation System will be evaluated using the current APPR process.
Plan Requirements
Under Education Law 3012-c, each teacher must receive an APPR resulting in a single
composite effectiveness score and a rating of “highly effective,” “effective,” “developing,”
or “ineffective.” The composite score will be determined as follows:
 20 % student growth on state assessments or a comparable measure of student
growth.


20% other locally selected measures of student achievement that are determined
to be rigorous and comparable across classrooms which are to be developed
locally through collective bargaining.
60% based on multiple measures of effective teaching practice aligned with the
state’s teaching standards. These measures are to be established locally
through collective bargaining.
The intent of the evaluation system is to foster a culture of continuous growth for
professionals. The APPR is required to be a significant factor in employment decisions
including, but not limited to: retention, tenure determination, termination, supplemental
compensation and professional development. Each decision is made in accordance
with locally developed procedures that have been collectively bargained.
Should the APPR Plan be rejected by the Commissioner of the State Education for any
deficiencies, each such deficiency shall be resolved through collective bargaining and
when concluded, the APPR Plan will be re-submitted. The District and the Marcellus
Faculty Association, through a joint labor-management committee known as the APPR
Committee, will meet at least annually for the purpose of reviewing guidelines,
procedures, measurements, targets, point allocations, and assessments related to the
APPR. This meeting will take place as soon as practical, but not later than March 1 of
each school year.
Student Growth Measures
State-provided Measure of Student Growth
For classroom teachers of grades 4-8 ELA and Math, state assessments will be used
for the growth component. Teachers of subjects where there is no state-provided
measure of student growth on state assessments (i.e. subjects without a state
assessment and subjects where a state provided growth measure has not yet been
created based on the state assessment) must use other comparable measures of
growth. These teachers will have a growth measure based on methodology prescribed
by SED.
Student Learning Objectives (SLO)
SLOs, by definition, require an understanding of local needs and objectives. Because
of this, SLOs will need to be developed collaboratively between administrators and an
individual teacher or groups of teachers. For subject courses that do not end in a state
assessment, the district will provide time for the development of assessments by
individuals or teams of teachers. A form has been included in the Appendix to help
members develop individual SLOs.
It is anticipated that SED will score and report the state-provided growth measure (or
value-added measure after the VAM system is approved by the Board of Regents) no
later than September 1st, following the year the teacher is evaluated. Teachers will not
be penalized in any way because of such data not being received in a timely manner,
which results in an incomplete rating.
Locally Selected Measure of Student Achievement
The locally selected measure of student achievement shall be determined annually by a
committee of teachers and administrators. For the 2012-13 school year, the APPR
committee has determined that the district measure of student achievement will reflect
mastery rates on the 5 required Regents for graduation.
The APPR Committee will review the components of the Locally Selected Measure of
Student Achievement annually and determine if Marcellus will continue to use a district
assessment to measure students’ achievement or change to a committee of each grade
level and subject area.
The APPR committee will annually review the locally selected measures of student
achievement to ensure their continued validity, reliability and appropriateness. The
selection of other local measures of student achievement shall be the exclusive
responsibility of the APPR committee. The Superintendent shall, to the extent practical,
provide all APPR committee members with time during the contractual work day to
meet.
Multiple Measures of Effectiveness
The teacher evaluation process & criteria will be based upon the 60% multiple
measures aligned with the NYS Teaching Standards.
New York Teaching Standards
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.
Professional Growth: Teachers set informed goals and strive for continuous
professional growth.
Process for Multiple Measures of 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. The New York State Teaching
Standards rubric will be used to evaluate classroom teachers. That rubric is included in
the appendix.
In order to support continuous professional growth, 60 points shall be based on
observations of teacher and submission of a portfolio binder that demonstrates
competency in the NYS Teaching Standards.
Deadline for choosing the observation option is October 1, 2012. Once a decision is
made you are not allowed to change it.
One observation will be announced, with a pre-conference before the observation and a
post conference within 5 school days. Tenured teachers will have the choice of one
announced and one unannounced full period observation or one announced full period
observation and 3 unannounced mini observations (15-20 min). Each observation will
be followed within 5 school days with a post conference meeting. Non Tenured
teachers will have two announced full period observations and 3 unannounced mini
observations (15-20 min). Each observation will be followed by a post conference
within 5 school days. Unannounced mini observations will result in the evaluator
leaving a card that indicates possible dates for the teacher to select from for the post
conference. The teacher will return a copy of the card to the evaluator. It is the
responsibility for both parties to schedule the post conference within 5 school days.
Teachers will have 5 school days following the post conference to provide supporting
evidence on the NYS standards relating to the observation. Teachers will be able to
provide supporting evidence of competency in the standards on an ongoing basis to
support those standards that are not readily observed within the classroom observation
up to May 31, 2013. Evidence should include but not be limited to student work, videos,
lesson plans, conversations, or student outcomes.
The first observation (tenured) or the first two observations (non-tenured) must be
completed by December 15, 2012. The remaining observations or mini observations
must be completed by April 1, 2013.
Teachers and lead evaluators will have a mid-year review to discuss evidence collected
to date by January 31, 2013. Teachers who select the 1:1 observations will schedule a
March meeting that may be cancelled if the teacher chooses. All other teachers have
the option of requesting a second review by March 31, 2013 to review their evidence of
competency. A joint email from the administration and MFA will be sent out by February
16th reminding teachers of this option...
Evidence collected through observations will focus on standards 3, 4 and the first
element of standard 5. Supporting documentation for standards 1, 2, the remainder of
5, 6 and 7 will be provided by the teacher. All evidence points will be documented and
will be accessible throughout the year by the teacher through a web based process.
Teachers and lead evaluators will have a summative meeting to review the 60%
measure between May 1-24, 2013. The teacher may submit additional evidence in
support of his/her competencies up to 5 days after his/her summative conference.
Teachers will earn points as follows:


Administrators will allocate 31 points based upon evidence observed in the
observation and post conference discussions: 17 points for Standard 3, 12
points for Standard 4 and 2 points for Standard 5, indicator 1.
Teachers will allocate 29 points based upon evidence provided during postconferences or throughout the year as listed above: 6 points for standard 1, 6
points for standard 2, 8 points for standard 5, 5 points for standard 6 and 4 points
for standard 7.
Subcomponent and Composite Scoring Ranges
The State Education Department has set the following scoring ranges for the overall
rating categories, the rating categories for the State assessment and other comparable
measures subcomponent, and the locally selected measures subcomponent.
Level
Student Growth on
State Assessments
or Other
Comparable
Measures
Locally Selected
Measures of
Student
Achievement
60% Other
Measures
Ineffective
Results are wellbelow State
Results are wellbelow district or
Overall
performance and
average for similar
students (or district
goals if no State
test).
BOCES-adopted
expectations for
growth or
achievement of
student learning
standards for
grade/subject.
results are well
below standards.
Developing
Results are below
State average for
similar students (or
district goals if no
State test).
Results are below
district or BOCESadopted
expectations for
growth or
achievement of
student learning
standards for
grade/subject.
Overall
performance and
results need
improvement in
order to meet
standards
Effective
Results meet State
average for similar
students (or district
goals if no State
test).
Results meet
district or BOCESadopted
expectations for
growth or
achievement of
student learning
standards for
grade/subject.
Overall
performance and
results meet
standards.
Highly Effective
Results are wellabove State
average for similar
students (or district
goals if no State
test).
Results are well
above district or
BOCES-adopted
expectations for
growth or
achievement of
student learning
standards for
grade/subject.
Overall
performance and
results exceed
standards.
Subcomponent
and Composite
Scoring
Ranges
Level
Ineffective
Developing
Effective
Highly Effective
Student
Growth on
State
Assessments
or Student
Learning
Objective
Locally
Selected
Measures of
Student
Achievement:
Graduation
rate
Other 60
Points
Overall
Composite
Score
0-2
3-8
9-17
18-20
0-2
3-8
9-17
18-20
0-49
50-56
57-58
59-60
0-64
65-74
75-90
91-100
The State Education Department is responsible for determining the subcomponent
scoring ranges for student growth on state assessments or other comparable measures
and the locally selected measures of student achievement. It is also responsible for
determining the overall composite score. The subcomponent scoring ranges in the
above chart for the other 60 points have been developed locally.
Summative Evaluation meeting
The summative evaluation includes the teacher’s annual rating of effectiveness and the
rationale supporting the rating. Both, areas of strength and areas in need of
improvement, should be identified as specific recommendations made to improve
effectiveness. The summative evaluation will include all of the evidence of effective
teaching practice and the measures of student achievement.
Composite Score
Rating System
The rating system will be developed and evaluated annually by the APPR committee.
On the first day of school for teachers, or no later than October 1, 2012 teachers will be
informed of the rating procedures and made aware of what is required for teacher to be
rated “highly effective,” “effective,” “developing,” or “ineffective” for the 20% locallyselected measure and the 60% other measure of teacher effectiveness. The stateprovided 20% growth measure, or comparable measure subcomponent, shall be
formulated by the state.
Notification of Score
The entire APPR must be completed and provided to each teacher as soon as
practicable, but in no case later than the first day for school of the year next following
the school year for which the teacher performance is being measured.
The teacher's rating and score on the 60% other measures of teacher effectiveness
shall be computed and provided to the teacher, in writing, no later than the last day of
school in which the teacher is being evaluated. The 20% locally-selected measure
based on mastery rate for the 5 required Regents for Graduation will be notified of their
score within 10 school days of the district receiving the Regents data. Teachers, who
utilize SLO for their growth scores, will be notified of their score by the last day of school
if a regional or district assessment was used to determine growth, or within 10 business
days of the district receiving the state assessment scores used to evaluate growth on
their SLO. This timeline may be adjusted to accommodate delays at the State level.
The purpose of this notification is to provide teachers sufficient time to assess their
practices and plan accordingly, including seeking professional development and other
supports through the summer.
Collection and Reporting of Teacher and Student Data
Working with the Central New York Regional Information Center, the district will provide
all of the data elements described by SED. Data will be submitted to the SED through
the portal each year.
Growth Measure
The District shall ensure that the State Education Department receives accurate teacher
and student data, including enrollment and attendance data, and any other student,
teacher, school, course, and teacher/student linkage data necessary to comply with the
Regulations of the Board of Regents by providing such data in a format and timeline
prescribed by the Commissioner. The process shall also provide an opportunity for
every classroom teacher and building principal to verify the subjects and or student
rosters assigned to them prior to using student growth and or achievement data in an
APPR. Any classroom teacher who believes that the list is incorrect and or inconsistent
with the standards established by the Commissioner’s regulations for making teacher of
record determinations shall be entitled to see a review of this determination through an
appeal to the 3 member APPR Appeal Committee.
Data Verification
Beginning of school year: Teachers will be given an initial roster no later than the last
day of the third week of school for initial review and will be required to sign off on the
final verification the day before BEDS day.
Throughout the school year teachers will be able to go into the SED website to verify
the student-teacher data on their roster. Teachers will notify the data warehouse
coordinator of any discrepancies in writing and will receive written response to the
outcome of their concern. Teachers will be able to appeal any issues or concerns to the
3 person APPR Appeal Committee. Teachers will be notified of any changes made by
the State Education Department as soon as possible.
The district will notify teachers of all student verification procedures and timelines.
Reporting to SED
The district will follow all Regulations and requirements for reporting sub-component
and composite scores to the NYSED. A unique identification number will be used and
the names of individual teachers will not be provided. Upon request of a parent or legal
guardian, the District shall disclose the final quality rating and composite effectiveness
score for each of the teachers the student is assigned to, after verifying the parent or
guardian is entitled to review and receive the information. Except as provided above for
parents or legal guardians, the APPRs of individual teachers shall not be subject to
discloser pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law. No public release of APPR
information by the district shall include any personally identifying information for a
teacher. The clause is subject to modification based upon any regulation or reporting
requirement to allow the district to comply with all current laws and requirements for
disclosure.
Evaluator and Staff Training
The superintendent will ensure that all evaluators have been trained and that all lead
evaluators have been trained and certified in accordance with regulation. The district will
utilize BOCES Network Team evaluator training and lead evaluator training and
certification in accordance with SED procedures and processes. Lead evaluator training
will include training on:
1) The New York State Teaching Standards, and their related elements and
performance indicators and the Leadership Standards and their related functions, as
applicable;
2) Evidence-based observation techniques that are grounded in research;
3) Application and use of the student growth percentile model and the value-added
growth model;
4) Application and use of the teacher or principal rubric(s), including training on the
effective application of such rubrics to observe a teacher or principal's practice;
5) Application and use of any assessment tools that the school district or BOCES
utilizes to evaluate its classroom teachers or building principals, including but not limited
to,
Structured portfolio reviews; student, parent. Teacher and/or community surveys;
professional growth goals and school improvement goals, etc.
6) Application and use of any locally selected measures of student achievement used
by the district evaluate its teachers or principals;
7) Use of the Statewide Instructional Reporting System;
8) The scoring methodology including how scores are generated for each
subcomponent and the composite effectiveness score and application and use of the
scoring ranges prescribed by the Commissioner for the four designated rating
categories used for the teacher's or principal's overall rating and their subcomponent
ratings; and
9) Specific considerations in evaluating teachers and principals of English language
learners and students with disabilities.
The superintendent will ensure that lead evaluators participate in annual training and
are re-certified on an annual basis. The BOCES Network Team will be utilized to
provide the training and recertification.
Any evaluation or APPR rating that is determined in part or whole by an administrator
who is not fully trained and certified by the end of the school year in which the APPR
rating was completed shall upon appeal by the subject of the evaluation or APPR rating,
be deemed to be invalid and shall be expunged from the teacher’s record and will be
inadmissible as evidence in any subsequent disciplinary proceeding. The invalidation of
a lead evaluator for an evaluation or APPR rating for this reason shall also preclude its
use in any and all other employment decisions.
Staff Training
All professional staff subject to the district’s APPR will be provided with an orientation
and or training on the evaluation system that will include a review of the content and the
use of the evaluation system, a review of the NYS Teaching Standards, a review of the
NYSUT Rubric, forms and procedures to be followed consistent with the approved
APPR plan, and associated contractual provisions prior to the implementation of the
APPR process.
All new staff will be trained at the District’s New Teacher Orientation program or within
seven business days of starting work.
Professional Development
The District Professional Development Committee shall be responsible for developing
all aspects of the professional development plan as it relates to the needs of teachers
for implementation of the APPR. This plan is reviewed and updated on a regular basis
and is the foundation of all professional development related to APPR.
Teacher Improvement Plans
If a teacher’s performance is evaluated as “ineffective” or “developing”, the supervisor
shall be required to develop a Teacher Improvement Plan in consultation with the staff
member. The MFA President will be notified if a teacher is placed on a Teacher
Improvement Plan and will be given a copy of the plan. Such Plan will be provided to
the staff member and implemented within ten days of the start of the school year within
which the Plan will be applied. The Plan shall include, but not be limited to, an
identification of the areas in need of improvement, a timeline for achieving improvement,
suggestions for improvement, support to be provided, and measurable outcomes to be
evaluated. Costs associated with the recommended improvements will be provided by
the district at no cost to the teacher.
The plan will describe the professional learning activities that the teacher must
complete. These activities will be connected to the areas needing improvement. The
artifacts that the teacher must produce that could serve as benchmarks for improvement
and as evidence for the successful completion of their improvement plan will be
described and could include such items as lessons, student work, or unit plans for a
teacher and for a principal. The plan will include the additional support and assistance
that will be provided to the teacher. The teacher and administrator will meet according
to the schedule identified in the TIP to assess the effectiveness and appropriateness of
the TIP for the purpose of assisting the teacher to achieve the goals set forth in the TIP.
No disciplinary action predicated upon ineffective performance will be taken against the
teacher until the TIP has been fully implemented and its effectiveness in improving the
teacher’s performance has been evaluated. Upon completion of the teacher
improvement plan, the supervisor will meet with the teacher to review the plan, including
artifacts and evidence, in order to provide a final, summative rating for the staff member.
Successful attainment of TIP goals will result in termination of the TIP, communication
on the successful completion to the teacher in writing, and reflection in the summative
evaluation of the teacher.
Evidence collected during the teacher evaluation observations will not be used for
purposes of Article 11 in the current collective bargaining agreement.
Appeals
The following procedure is the exclusive means for initiating, reviewing, and resolving
any and all challenges and appeals related to a teacher’s or principal’s performance
review, and/or improvement plan.
A teacher who receives an effectiveness composite score rating of “ineffective” or
“developing” may appeal his or her performance review. Ratings of “highly effective” or
“effective” cannot be appealed.
A teacher may appeal only the school district’s adherence to standards and
methodologies required for such reviews, adherence to applicable regulations of the
commissioner of education, and compliance with the procedures for the conduct of
performance reviews set forth in the annual professional performance review plan.
A teacher may not file multiple appeals regarding the same performance review. All
grounds for appealing a particular performance review must be raised within the same
appeal. Any grounds not raised at the time the appeal is filed shall be deemed waived.
Appeals concerning a teacher’s performance review must be filed no later than fifteen
(15) calendar days of the date when the teacher receives it.
A teacher wishing to initiate an appeal must submit, in writing, to the Superintendent a
detailed description of the precise point(s) of disagreement over his or her performance
review, along with any and all additional documents or written materials that he or she
believes are relevant to the resolution of the appeal. Any such additional information not
submitted at the time the appeal is filed shall not be considered in the deliberations
related to the resolution of the appeal.
Under this appeals process the teacher bears the burden of proving by substantial
evidence the merits of his or her appeal.
The decision will be rendered by a three person review panel for an appeal concerning
a teacher’s performance review. The superintendent, working with the Marcellus Faculty
Association President, will appoint the panel comprised of the superintendent, one
district lead evaluator who has not participated in the evaluation process for that
teacher, and one MFA executive board member (teacher). The panel shall issue a
written decision on the merits of the appeal no later than thirty (30) calendar days from
the date when the teacher filed his or her appeal.
The decision of the panel shall be final and an appeal shall be deemed completed upon
the issuance of that decision. The decision of the panel shall not be subject to any
further appeal.
Appeals related to the issuance of an improvement plan are limited to issues regarding
compliance with the requirements prescribed in applicable law and regulations for the
issuance of improvement plans, and must be initiated within fifteen (15) calendar days
of the alleged failure of the District to comply with such requirements.
Termination and Tenure Determinations for Probationary Teachers
The APPR is to be a significant factor for termination and tenure determination. If a
teacher is at risk of not receiving tenure or being dismissed based upon the APPR
process, the district will follow the current negotiated timeline and requirements for
notification and decision-making as stipulated in the collective bargaining agreement.