SAANYS Supports Regents’ APPR Recommendations

SAANYS commends Regents Kathleen Cashin, Judith Chin, Catherine Collins, Josephine Finn, Judith Johnson, Beverly Ouderkirk, and Betty Rosa for setting forth recommendations to statute and regulation that will:

  • Promote the establishment of a comprehensive, valid and fair annual professional performance review system for teachers and principals
  • Reduce the need for continued annual statutory and regulatory revisions to address flaws in a system that was developed in a hasty manner and is inconsistent with research and best practices.
  • Better support and enhance the skills of teachers and principals, and thereby “ensure that our students benefit from the most effective teaching practices identified in research.”

SAANYS supports the Regents’ proposals to:

  • Extend the timeline for implementing the new APPR system until September 1, 2016, while requiring a letter of intent by November 15, 2015.
    -This timeline is necessary to complete the research and public engagement necessary for development the next APPR system, and to promote improved implementation of the current APPR system during the intervening year.
  • Require that student performance on standardized tests account for no more than 20 percent, with 80 percent based on student performance through local assessments, portfolios, etc.
  • Specify that for teacher observation, the NYSUT and UFT scoring ranges are more fair to educators; and rounding-up (a.k.a., normal rounding) should be used in generating category evaluations.
  • Limit to 10 percent, observation scores conducted by external or peer evaluators.
  • Develop weighting algorithms that accommodate the developmental stages of English language learners, and students with disabilities. Prohibiting testing of English language learner students who have less than three years of English language instructions.
  • Establish work groups to analyze the common core learning standards and to determine the validity, reliability, rigor and appropriateness of the developmental aspiration levels embedded in assessment items.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


four + 1 =