Greenport School's State-Approved APPR Plan, 2013

THESTATEEDUCATIONDEPARTMENT/THEUNIVERSITYOFTHESTATEOFNEWYORK
CommissionerofEducation
PresidentoftheUniversityoftheStateofNewYork 89WashingtonAve.,Room111 Albany,NewYork12234
Email:commissioner@mail.nysed.gov Twitter:@JohnKingNYSED Tel:(518)4745844 Fax:(518)4734909
December 13, 2012
Michael Comanda, Superintendent Greenport Union Free School District 720 Front Street Greenport, NY 11944 Dear Superintendent Comanda: Congratulations. I am pleased to inform you that your Annual Professional Performance Review Plan (APPR) meets the criteria outlined in Education Law 3012-c and Subpart 30-2 of the Commissioners Regulations and has been approved for the 2012-2013 school year. As a reminder, we are relying on the information you provided on your APPR form, including the certifications and assurances that are part of your approved APPR. If any material changes are made to your approved APPR plan, your district/BOCES must submit such material changes to us for approval. Please see the attached notes for further information. Please be advised that, pursuant to Education Law 3012-c, the Department will be analyzing data supplied by districts, BOCES, and/or schools and may order a corrective action plan if there are unacceptably low correlation results between the student growth subcomponent and any other measures of teacher and principal effectiveness and/or if the teacher or principal scores or ratings show little differentiation across educators and/or the lack of differentiation is not justified by equivalently consistent student achievement results. The New York State Education Department and I look forward to continuing our work together, with the goal of ensuring that every school has world-class educators in the classroom, every teacher has a world-class principal to support his or her professional growth, and every student achieves college and career readiness. Thank you again for your hard work. Sincerely,
John B. King, Jr. Commissioner Attachment c: Dean Lucera
NOTES: If your district/BOCES has provided for value-added measures (15 points vs. 20 points scale and categorization of your district/BOCESs grade configurations) in your APPR and no valueadded measures are approved by the Board of Regents for a grade/subject and/or grade configuration for the 2012-13 school year, your district/BOCES will be required to revise and resubmit its APPR accordingly. Conversely, if your district/BOCES has not provided for valueadded measures in your district/BOCES's APPR submission and value-added measures are approved for the 2012-13 school year, your district/BOCES will be required to revise and resubmit its APPR accordingly. Only documents that are incorporated by reference in your APPR have been reviewed and are considered as part of your APPR; therefore, any supplemental documents such as memorandums of agreement or understanding that were uploaded with your APPR but are not incorporated by reference in your APPR have not been reviewed. However, the Department reserves the right to review the uploaded attachments at any time for consistency with your APPR form and/or to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations; and as a result of such review, the Department may reject your APPR plan and/or require corrective action.
Annual Professional Performance Reviews: 2012-13

Created Thursday, June 07, 2012 Updated Tuesday, December 11, 2012
1
Disclaimers
The Department will review the contents of each school district's or BOCES' APPR plan as submitted using this online form, including required attachments, to determine if the plan rigorously complies with Education Law section 3012-c and subpart 30-2 of the Rules of the Board of Regents. Department approval does not imply endorsement of specific educational approaches in a district's or BOCES' plan.
The Department will not review any attachments other than those required in the online form. Any additional attachments supplied by the school district or BOCES are for informational purposes only for the teachers and principals reviewed under this APPR plan. Statements and/or materials in such additional attachments have not been approved and/or endorsed by the Department. However, the Department reserves the right to request further information from the school district or BOCES, as necessary, as part of its review.
If the Department reasonably believes through investigation or otherwise that statements made in this APPR plan are not true or accurate, it reserves the right to reject this plan at any time and/or to request additional information to determine the truth and/or accuracy of such statements.
1. SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATION 1.1) School District's BEDS Number : 581010020000

If this is not your BEDS Number, please enter the correct one below 581010020000
1.2) School District Name: GREENPORT UFSD

If this is not your school district, please enter the correct one below GREENPORT UFSD
1.3) School Improvement Grant (SIG) Districts Only

SIG districts only: Indicate whether this APPR plan is for SIG schools only or for the entire district. Other districts and BOCES, please skip this question. (No response)
1.4) Award Classification

Please check if the district has applied for and/or has been awarded any of the following (if applicable): (No response)
Page 1
1.5) Assurances
Please check all of the boxes below: 1.5) Assurances | Assure that the content of this form represents the district/BOCES' entire APPR plan and that the APPR plan is in compliance with Education Law 3012-c and Subpart 30-2 of the Rules of the Board of Regents 1.5) Assurances | Assure that this APPR plan will be posted on the district or BOCES website by September 10, or within 10 days after approval, whichever is later 1.5) Assurances | Assure that it is understood that this district/BOCES' APPR plan will be posted in its entirety on the NYSED website following approval Checked
Checked Checked
1.6) Is this a first-time submission, a re-submission, or a submission of material changes to an approved APPR plan?
Re-submission to address deficiencies
1.7) Is this submission for an annual or multi-year plan?

If the plan is multi-year, please write the years that are included. Annual (2012-13)
Page 2
2. Growth on State Assessments or Comparable Measures (Teachers)

Created Thursday, June 07, 2012 Updated Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Page 1
STATE-PROVIDED MEASURES OF STUDENT GROWTH (25 points with an approved value-added measure)
For teachers in grades 4 - 8 Common Branch, ELA, and Math, NYSED will provide a value-added growth score. That score will incorporate students' academic history compared to similarly academically achieving students and will use special considerations for students with disabilities, English language learners, students in poverty, and, in the future, any other student-, classroom-, and school-level characteristics approved by the Board of Regents. NYSED will also provide a HEDI subcomponent rating category and score from 0 to 25 points.
While most teachers of 4-8 Common Branch, ELA and Math will have state-provided measures, some may teach other courses in addition where there is no state-provided measure. Teachers with 50 100% of students covered by State-provided growth measures will receive a growth score from the State for the full Growth subcomponent score of their evaluation. Teachers with 0 49% of students covered by State-provided growth measures must have SLOs for the Growth subcomponent of their evaluation and one SLO must use the State-provided measure if applicable for any courses. (See guidance for more detail on teachers with State-provided measures AND SLOs.)
Please note that if the Board of Regents does not approve a value-added measure for these grades/subjects for 2012-13, the State-provided growth measure will be used for 20 points in this subcomponent. NYSED will provide a HEDI subcomponent rating category and score from 0 to 20 points.
2.1) Assurances
Please check the boxes below: 2.1) Assurances | Assure that the value-added growth score provided by NYSED will be used, where applicable. 2.1) Assurances | Assure that the State-provided growth measure will be used if a value-added measure has not been approved for 2012-13. Checked Checked
STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AS COMPARABLE GROWTH MEASURES (20 points)

Student Learning Objectives will be the other comparable growth measures for teachers in the following grades and subjects.(Please note that for teachers with more than one grade and subject, SLOs must cover the courses taught with the largest number of students, combining sections with common assessments, until a majority of students are covered.)
For core subjects: grades 6-8 Science and Social Studies, high school English Language Arts, Math, Science, and Social Studies courses associated in 2010-11 with Regents exams or, in the future, with other State assessments, the following must be used as the evidence of student learning within the SLO:
State assessments(or Regents or Regent equivalents), required if one exists

Page 1
If no State assessment or Regents exam exists:
District-determined assessments from list of State-approved 3rd party assessments; or District, regional or BOCES-developed assessments provided that it is rigorous and comparable across classrooms For other grades/subjects: district-determined assessments from options below may be used as evidence of student learning within the SLO:
State assessments, required if one exists List of State-approved 3rd party assessments District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessments provided that it is rigorous and comparable across classrooms School- or BOCES-wide, group or team results based on State assessments Please note: If your district or BOCES does not have grade/subject-specific teachers for one or more of the rows in questions 2.2 through 2.9, choose "Not applicable" from the drop-down box and type N/A in the assessment box. This would be appropriate if, for example, common branch teachers also teach 6th grade science and/or social studies and therefore would have State-provided growth measures, not SLOs; the district or BOCES does not have certain grades; the district does not offer a specific subject; etc.
Districts or BOCES that intend to use a district, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment must include the name, grade, and subject of the assessment. For example, a regionally-developed 7th grade Social Studies assessment would be written as follows: [INSERT SPECIFIC NAME OF REGION]-developed 7th grade Social Studies assessment.
2.2) Grades K-3 ELA

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. State assessments must be used where applicable. ELA K 1 2 District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment Assessment Greenport developed grade k ela assessment Greenport developed grade 1 ela assessment Greenport developed grade 2 ela assessment
ELA 3 State assessment
Assessment 3rd Grade State Assessment
For K-3 ELA: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance.
Page 2
Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below.
Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100
Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well-above state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well-below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test).
Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 59
2.3) Grades K-3 Math

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. State assessments must be used where applicable. Math K 1 2 District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment Assessment Greenport developed grade k math assessment Greenport developed grade 1 math assessment Greenport developed grade 2 math assessment
Math 3 State assessment
Assessment 3rd Grade State Assessment
For Grades K-3 Math: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below. Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100
Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well-above state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test).
Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73
Page 3
Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well-below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test).
Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages from below 59
2.4) Grades 6-8 Science

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. State assessments must be used where available. Science 6 7 District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment Assessment Greenport developed grade 6 science assessment Greenport developed grade 7 science assessment
Science 8 State assessment
Assessment 8th Grade State Science Assessment
For Grades 6-8 Science: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below. Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100
Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well-above state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well-below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test).
Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 59
2.5) Grades 6-8 Social Studies

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. State assessments must be used where available. Social Studies 6 District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment
Page 4
Assessment Greenport developed grade 6 soc studiesassessment
7 8
District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment
Greenport developed grade 7 soc studiesassessment Greenport developed grade 8 soc studiesassessment
For Grades 6-8 Social Studies: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below. Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100 Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 59
Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well-above District goals for similar students. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District goals for similar students. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District goals for similar students. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well-below District goals for similar students.
2.6) High School Social Studies Regents Courses

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Regents assessments must be used where available.
Note: Additional high school social studies courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. Assessment Global 1 District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment Greenport developed Global 1 assessment
Social Studies Regents Courses Global 2 American History Regents assessment Regents assessment
Assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment
For High School Social Studies Regents Courses: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below.
Page 5
Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of
students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well-above District goals for similar students. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District goals for similar students. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District goals for similar students. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well-below District goals for similar students. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100 Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 58
2.7) High School Science Regents Courses

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Regents assessments must be used where available.
Note: Additional high school science courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. Science Regents Courses Living Environment Earth Science Chemistry Physics Regents Assessment Regents Assessment Regents Assessment Regents Assessment Assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment
For High School Science Regents Courses: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below. Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100 Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 59
2.8) High School Math Regents Courses

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Regents assessment must be used where available.
Page 6
Note: Additional high school math courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. Math Regents Courses Algebra 1 Geometry Algebra 2 Regents assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment Assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment
For High School Math Regents Courses: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below. Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100 Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 59
2.9) High School English Language Arts

Using the drop-down boxes below, please first select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Regents assessment must be used where available.Be sure to select theEnglish Regents assessment in at least one grade in Task 2.9 (9, 10, and/or 11).
Note: Additional high school English courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. High School English Courses Grade 9 ELA Grade 10 ELA Grade 11 ELA District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment Regents assessment Assessment Greenport developed grade 9 ELA assessment Greenport developed grade 10 ELA assessment ELA Regents
For High School English Language Arts: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance.
Page 7
Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below.
Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100 Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 59
2.10) All Other Courses

Fill in, as applicable, for all other teachers in additional grades/subjects that have Student Learning Objectives. If you need additional space, duplicate this form and upload (below) as an attachment to your APPR plan. You may combine into one line any groups of teachers for whom the answers in the boxes are the same including, for example, "all other teachers not named above" . Course(s) or Subject(s) All other course not named above Option District, Regional or BOCES-developed Assessment Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments
For all other courses, as applicable: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to teachers based on SLO results consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 2.11, below. Students will be given a pretest to establish a baseline score. Using the baseline data, teachers and principal will set individual growth targets for students. HEDI points will be allocated to teachers based on the percentage of students meeting or exceeding their individual growth targets on final assessments. Teachers with percentages from 74 to 100 Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73 Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages below 59
Page 8
If you need additional space, upload a copy of "Form 2.10: All Other Courses" as an attachment for review. Click here for a downloadable copy of Form 2.10. (MS Word) (No response)
2.11) HEDI Tables or Graphics

For questions 2.2 through 2.10 above, if you are using tables or other graphics to explain your general process for assigning HEDI categories, please combine all such tables or graphics into a single file, labeling each so it is clear which grades/subjects it applies to, and upload that file here. assets/survey-uploads/5364/139925-TXEtxx9bQW/Greenport HEDI Chart.xls
2.12) Locally Developed Controls

Describe any adjustments, controls, or other special considerations that will be used in setting targets for Comparable Growth Measures, the rationale for including such factors, and the processes that will be used to mitigate potentially problematic incentives associated with the controls or adjustments.
Note: The only allowable controls or adjustments for Comparable Growth Measures are those used in State Growth measures, which include:student prior academic history, students with disabilities, English language learners, students in poverty, and, in the future, any other student-, classroom-, and school-level characteristics approved by the Board of Regents. Not applicable
2.13) Teachers with more than one growth measure

If educators have more than one state-provided growth or value-added measure, those measures will be combined into one HEDI rating and score for the growth subcomponent according to a formula determined by the Commissioner. (Examples: Common branch teacher with state-provided value-added measures for both ELA and Math in 4th grades; Middle school math teacher with both 7th and 8th grade math courses.)
If educators have more than one SLO for comparable growth (or a State-provided growth measure and an SLO for comparable growth), the measures will each earn a score from 0-20 points which Districts must weight proportionately based on the number of students in each SLO.
2.14) Assurances
Please check all of the boxes below: 2.14) Assurances | Assure the application of locally developed controls will be rigorous, fair, and transparent and only those used for State Growth will be used for Comparable Growth Measures. 2.14) Assurances | Assure that use of locally developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students in accordance with applicable civil rights laws. 2.14) Assurances | Assure that enrolled students in accordance with teacher of record policies are included and may not be excluded. 2.14) Assurances | Assure that procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized. 2.14) Assurances | Assure that district will develop SLOs according to the rules established by SED (see: http://usny.nysed.gov/rttt/teachers-leaders/slo/home.html).
Page 9
Checked Checked Checked Checked Checked
2.14) Assurances | Assure that past academic performance and/or baseline academic data of students will be taken into account when developing an SLO. 2.14) Assurances | Assure that the process for assigning points for SLOs for the Growth Subcomponent will use the narrative HEDI descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate educators in ways that improve student learning and instruction. 2.14) Assurances | Assure that it is possible for an educator to earn each point, including 0, for SLOs in the Growth subcomponent scoring range. 2.14) Assurances | Assure that processes are in place to monitor SLOs to ensure rigor and comparability across classrooms.
Checked Checked
Checked Checked
Page 10
3. Local Measures (Teachers)

Created Tuesday, June 26, 2012 Updated Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Page 1
Locally Selected Measures of Student Achievement or Growth
"Comparable across classrooms" means that the same locally-selected measures of student achievement or growth must be used across all classrooms in the same grade/subject in the district or BOCES.
Please note: If your district or BOCES does not have grade/subject-specific teachers for one or more of the rows in questions 3.1 through 3.11, choose "Not applicable" from the drop-down box and type N/A in the assessment box. This would be appropriate if, for example, the district does not have certain grades, the district does not offer a specific subject, etc.
Locally selected measures for common branch teachers: This form calls for locally selected measures in both ELA and math in grades typically served by common branch teachers. Districts may select local measures for common branch teachers that involve subjects other than ELA and math. Whatever local measure is selected for common branch teachers, please enter it under ELA and/or math and describe the assessment used, including the subject. Use N/A for other lines in that grade level that are served by common branch teachers. Describe the HEDI criteria for the measure in the same section where you identified the locally selected measure and assessment.
.Please note: Only one locally-selected measure is required for teachers in the same grade/subject across the district, but some districts may prefer to havemore than onemeasure for all teachers within a grade/subject. Also note: Districts may use more than one locally-selected measure for different groups of teachers within a grade/subject if the district/BOCES verifies comparability based on Standards of Educational and Psychological Testing. This APPR form only provides space for one measure for teachers in the same grade/subject across the district. Therefore,if more than one locally-selected measure is used forall teachers in anygrades or subject, districts must complete additional copies of this form and upload as attachments for review.
LOCALLY SELECTED MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT FOR TEACHERS IN GRADES FOR WHICH THERE IS AN APPROVED VALUE-ADDED MEASURE (15 points)
Growth or achievement measure(s) from these options.
One or more of the following types of local measures of student growth or achievement may be used for the evaluation of teachers.
Page 1
The options in the drop-down menus below are abbreviated from the following list:
Measures based on:
1) The change in percentage of a teachers students who achieve a specific level of performance as determined locally, on such assessments/examinations compared to those students level of performance on such assessments/examinations in the previous school year (e.g., a three percentage point increase in students earning the proficient level (three) or better performance level on the 7thgrade math State assessment compared to those same students performance levels on the 6thgrade math State assessment, or an increase in the percentage of a teachers students earning the advanced performance level (four) on the 4thgrade ELA or math State assessments compared to those students performance levels on the 3rdgrade ELA or math State assessments)
2) Teacher specific growth score computed by the Department based on the percent of the teachers students earning a State determined level of growth. The methodology to translate such growth into the State-established sub-component scoring ranges shall be determined locally
3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed in a manner determined locally based on a measure of student performance on the State assessments, Regents examinations and/or Department approved alternative examinations other than the measure described in subclause 1) or 2) of this clause
4) Student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined locally based on a State-approved 3rd party assessment
5) Student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined locally based on a district, regional or BOCES-developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms
6) A school-wide measure of either student growth or achievement based on either: (i) A State-provided student growth score covering all students in the school that took the State assessment in ELA or Math in Grades 4-8; or (ii) A school-wide measure of student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined locally based on a State, State-approved 3rd party, or district, regional or BOCES developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
3.1) Grades 4-8 ELA

Using the drop-down boxes below, select the assessment that will be used for the locally-selected measure for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures 4 5 6 7 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments
Page 2
Assessment Right Reason student assessmnents Right Reason student assessmnents Right Reason student assessmnents Right Reason student assessmnents
4) State-approved 3rd party assessments
Right Reason student assessmnents
For Grades 4-8 ELA: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.3, below. Highly Effective (14 - 15 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (8- 13 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 7 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.2) Grades 4-8 Math

Using the drop-down boxes below, select the assessment that will be used for the locally-selected measure for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures 4 5 6 7 8 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments Assessment Right Reason student assessment Right Reason student assessmnents Right Reason student assessmnents Right Reason student assessmnents Right Reason student assessmnents
For Grades 4-8 Math: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box.
Page 3
Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.3, below. Highly Effective (14 - 15 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (8- 13 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 7 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject.
HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better

For questions 3.1 and 3.2 above, if you are using tables or other graphics to explain your general process for assigning HEDI categories, please combine all such tables or graphics into a single file, labeling each so it is clear which grades/subjects it applies to, and upload that file here. assets/survey-uploads/5139/145809-rhJdBgDruP/Greenport 20 15 HEDI Chart_1.xls
LOCALLY SELECTED MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT FOR ALL OTHER TEACHERS (20 points)
Growth or achievement measure(s) from these options.
One or more of the following types of local measures of student growth or achievement may be used for the evaluation of teachers.
Measures based on:
1) The change in percentage of a teachers students who achieve a specific level of performance as determined locally, on such assessments/examinations compared to those students level of performance on such assessments/examinations in the previous school year (e.g., a three percentage point increase in students earning the proficient level (three) or better performance level on the 7thgrade math State assessment compared to those same students performance levels on the 6thgrade math State assessment, or an increase in the percentage of a teachers students earning the advanced performance level (four) on the 4thgrade ELA or math State assessments compared to those students performance levels on the 3rdgrade ELA or math State assessments)
2) Teacher specific growth score computed by the Department based on the percent of the teachers students earning a State determined level of growth. The methodology to translate such growth into the State-established sub-component scoring ranges shall be determined locally
Page 4
3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed in a manner determined locally based on a measure of student performance on the State assessments, Regents examinations and/or Department approved alternative examinations other than the measure described in 1) or 2), above
4) Student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined locally based on a State-approved 3rd party assessment
5) Student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined locally based on a district, regional or BOCES-developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms
6) A school-wide measure of either student growth or achievement based on either: (i) A State-provided student growth score covering all students in the school that took the State assessment in ELA or Math in Grades 4-8; or (ii) A school-wide measure of student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined locally based on a State, State-approved 3rd party, or district, regional or BOCES developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms
7) Student Learning Objectives (only allowable for teachers in grades/subjects without a Value-Added measure for the State Growth subcomponent). Used with one of the following assessments: State, State-approved 3rd party,or a district, regional or BOCES-developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms
3.4) Grades K-3 ELA

Using the drop-down boxes below, select the assessment that will be used for the locally-selected measure for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures K 1 2 3 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments Assessment Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments Right Reason student assessment
For Grades K-3 ELA: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box.
Page 5
Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18-20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9-17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject.
HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.5) Grades K-3 Math

Using the drop-down boxes below, select the assessment that will be used for the locally-selected measure for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures K 1 2 3 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 4) State-approved 3rd party assessments Assessment Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments right Reason student assessmnet
For Grades K-3 Math: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18-20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9-17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better
Page 6
Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District -or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject.
Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.6) Grades 6-8 Science

Using the drop-down boxes below, select the assessment that will be used for the locally-selected measure for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures 6 7 8 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments Assessment Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments
For Grades 6-8 Science: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.7) Grades 6-8 Social Studies

Using the drop-down boxes below, select the assessment that will be used for the locally-selected measure for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures 6 7 6(ii) School wide measure computed locally 6(ii) School wide measure computed locally
Page 7
Assessment Right Reason student assessment Right Reason student assessment
6(ii) School wide measure computed locally
Right Reason student assessment
For Grades 6-8 Social Studies: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students, school wide, scoring 65 or better on the final assessment. Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.8) High School Social Studies

Using the drop-down boxes below, select the assessment that will be used for the locally-selected measure for the grade/subject listed. Then name the specific assessment, listing the full name of the assessment.
Note: Additional high school social studies courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures Global 1 Global 2 American History 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally Assessment Greenport developed Global 1 assessmnet Global History Regents Us History and Government Regents
For High School Social Studies: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Page 8
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.9) High School Science

Note: Additional high school science courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures Living Environment Earth Science Chemistry Physics 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally Assessment Living Environment Regents Earth Science Regents Chemistry Regents Physics Regents
For High School Science: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below.
Page 9
HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment
Highly Effective (18-20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9 - 17points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject.
Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.10) High School Math

Note: Additional high school math courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures Algebra 1 Geometry Algebra 2 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally Assessment Algebra 1 Regents Geometry Regents Algerbra 2 and Trig Regents
For High School Math: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject.
Page 10
HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of studetns scoring 65 or better on teh final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better
Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject.
Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.11) High School English Language Arts

Note: Additional high school English courses may be listed below in the "All Other Courses" section of this form. Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures Grade 9 ELA Grade 10 ELA Grade 11 ELA 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 5) District, regional, or BOCESdeveloped assessments 3) Teacher specific achievement or growth score computed locally Assessment Greenport developed Grade 9 ELA Assessment Greenport developed Grade 10 ELA Assessment English Regents
For High School English Language Arts: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
3.12) All Other Courses

Fill in for additional grades/subjects, as applicable. If you need additional space, complete additional copies of this form and upload (below) as attachments.
Page 11
Course(s) or Subject(s) All other courses not named above
Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures 5) District/regional/BOCESdeveloped
Assessment Greenport developed grade/subject specifc assessment
For all additional courses, as applicable: describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a teacher to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a teacher to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the general process for assigning HEDI categories for these grades/subjects in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic at 3.13, below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES -adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. HEDI points will be allocated to a teacher based on the percentage of students scoring 65 or better on the final assessment Teachers achieving 85-100% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 70-84% of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving 55-69 % of their students scoring 65 or better Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better
If you need additional space, upload a copy of "Form 3.12: All Other Courses" as an attachment for review. Click here for a downloadable copy of Form 3.12. (MS Word) (No response)

For questions 3.4 through 3.12 above, if you are using tables or other graphics to explain your general process for assigning HEDI categories, please combine all such tables or graphics into a single file, labeling each so it is clear which grades/subjects it applies to, and upload that file here. assets/survey-uploads/5139/145809-y92vNseFa4/Greenport 20 15 HEDI Chart.xls
Page 12

Describe any adjustments, controls, or other special considerations that will be used in setting targets for local measures, the rationale for including such factors, and the processes that will be used to mitigate potentially problematic incentives associated with the controls or adjustments. Not applicable
3.15) Teachers with More Than One Locally Selected Measure

Describe the district's process for combining multiple locally selected measures, each scored from 0-15 or 0-20 points as applicable, into a single subcomponent HEDI category and score. Examples may include: 4th grade teacher with locally-selected measures for both ELA and Math; High School teacher with more than 1 SLO. For those teachers teaching multiple different courses the percentage will be proportionally calculated and one score will result.
3.16) Assurances
Please check all of the boxes below: 3.16) Assurances | Assure the application of locally-developed controls will be rigorous, fair, and transparent. 3.16) Assurances | Assure that use of locally-developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students in accordance with any applicable civil rights laws. 3.16) Assurances | Assure that enrolled students in accordance with teacher of record policies are included and may not be excluded. 3.16) Assurances | Assure that procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized. 3.16) Assurances | Assure that the process for assigning points for locally selected measures will use the narrative HEDI descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate educators' performance in ways that improve student learning and instruction. 3.16) Assurances | Assure that it is possible for an educator to earn each point, including 0, for the locally-selected measures subcomponent. 3.16) Assurances | Assure that locally-selected measures are rigorous and comparable across all classrooms in the same grade/subject in the district. 3.16) Assurances | If more than one type of locally-selected measure is used for different groups of teachers within a grade/subject, certify that the measures are comparable based on the Standards of Educational and Psychological Testing. 3.16) Assurances | Assure that all locally-selected measures for a teacher are different than any measures used for the State assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent. Checked Checked Checked Checked Checked
Checked Checked Checked
Checked
Page 13
4. Other Measures of Effectiveness (Teachers)

Page 1
4.1) Teacher Practice Rubric
Select a teacher practice rubric from the menu of State-approved rubrics to assess performance based on NYS Teaching Standards. If your district has been granted a variance by NYSED through the variance process, select "district variance" from the menu.
The "Second Rubric" space is required for districts that have chosen an observation-only rubric (CLASS or NYSTCE) from the State-approved list. (Note: Any district may use multiple rubrics, as long as the same rubric(s) is used for all classroom teachers in a grade/subject across the district.) NYSUT Teacher Practice Rubric
(No response)
4.2) Points Within Other Measures

State the number of points (if any) that will be assigned to each of the following measures, making sure that the points total 60. If you are not using a particular measure, enter 0. This APPR form only provides one space for assigning points within other measures for teachers. If your district/BOCES prefers to assign points differently for different groups of teachers, enter the points assignment for one group of teachers below. For the other group(s) of teachers, fill out copies of this form and upload as an attachment for review. Is the following points assignment applicable to all teachers? Yes
If you checked "no" above, fill in the group of teachers covered (e.g., "probationary teachers"): (No response)
Multiple (at least two) classroom observations by principal or other trained administrator, at least one of which must be unannounced [at least 31 points] One or more observation(s) by trained independent evaluators Observations by trained in-school peer teachers Feedback from students using State-approved survey tool Feedback from parents/caregivers using State-approved survey tool Structured reviews of lesson plans, student portfolios and other teacher artifacts
Page 1
40 (No response) 20 (No response) (No response) 0
If the above points assignment is not for "all teachers," fill out an additional copy of "Form 4.2: Points Within Other Measures" for each group of teachers, combine them into a single file, and upload as an attachment for review. Click here for a downloadable copy of Form 4.2. (MS Word ) (No response)
4.3) Survey Tools (if applicable)

If you indicated above that 1 or more points will be assigned to feedback using a State-approved survey tool, please check the box below: (No response)
If the district plans to use one or more of the following surveys of P-12 students from the menu of State-approved surveys, please check all that apply. If your district has been granted a variance by NYSED through the variance process, select "district variance" from the menu. Note: As the State-approved survey lists are updated, this form will be updated with additional approved survey tools. [SurveyTools.0] Tripod Early Elementary Student Perception Survey K-2 [SurveyTools.1] Tripod Elementary Student Perception Survey 3-5 [SurveyTools.2] Tripod Secondary Student Perception Survey [SurveyTools.3] District Variance (No response) (No response) (No response) (No response)
4.4) Assurances
Please check all of the boxes below: 4.4) Assurances | Assure that all NYS Teaching Standards not addressed in classroom observations are assessed at least once a year. 4.4) Assurances | Assure that the process for assigning points for the "other measures" subcomponent will use the narrative HEDI descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate educators' performance in ways that improve student learning and instruction. 4.4) Assurances | Assure that it is possible for an educator to earn each point, including 0, for the "other measures" subcomponent. 4.4) Assurances | Assure that the same rubric(s) is used for all classroom teachers in a grade/subject across the district. Checked Checked
Checked Checked
4.5) Process for Assigning Points and Determining HEDI Ratings

Describe the process for assigning points and determining HEDI ratings using the teacher practice rubric and/or any additional instruments used in the district. Include, if applicable, the process for combining results of multiple "other measures" into a single result for this subcomponent. Each element within a standard will be scored on a 1-4 scale and will be averaged together to result in a standard score. Standard scores will be averaged together to get an overall rubric score from 1-4 which will then be converted to 0-60 using the attached conversion chart. All observations will be averaged to get the final rubric score. The rubric score listed is the minimum score necessary to achieve the corresponding HEDI rating. We understand the composite score must be reported in whole numbers.
If you are using tables or other graphics to explain your process for assigning points and determining HEDI ratings, please clearly label them, combine them into a single file, and upload that file here.
Page 2
assets/survey-uploads/5091/145830-eka9yMJ855/Greenport 0-60 conversion chart_1.xls
Describe the level of performance required for each of the HEDI rating categories, consistent with the narrative descriptions in the regulations for the "other measures" subcomponent. Also describe how the points available within each HEDI category will be assigned. Highly Effective: Overall performance and results exceed NYS Teaching Standards. Effective: Overall performance and results meet NYS Teaching Standards. Developing: Overall performance and results need improvement in order to meet NYS Teaching Standards. Ineffective: Overall performance and results do not meet NYS Teaching Standards. Exemplary, above average performance is achieved in delivering instruction,managing classroom environment, planning,preparation, professional responsibilities Effective, average performance is achieved in delivering instruction,managing classroom environment, planning, preparation, professional responsibilities Average performance is achieved in delivering instruction,managing classroom environment, planning, preparation, professional responsibilities Unsatisfactory performance is achieved in delivering instruction,managing classroom environment, planning, preparation, professional responsibilites
Provide the ranges for the 60-point scoring bands. Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective 51-60 35-50 16-34 0-15
4.6) Observations of Probationary Teachers

Enter the minimum number of observations of each type, making sure that the number of observations "by building principal or other trained administrators" totals at least 2. If your APPR plan does not include a particular type of observation, enter 0 in that box.
By building principals or other trained administrators 4.6) Observations of Probationary Teachers | Formal/Long 4.6) Observations of Probationary Teachers | Informal/Short 4.6) Observations of Probationary Teachers | Enter Total 2 0 2
By trained in-school peer teachers or other trained reviewers Formal/Long Informal/Short 0 2
Independent evaluators
Page 3
Formal/Long Informal/Short
0 0
Will formal/long observations of probationary teachers be done in person, by video, or both? Both
Will informal/short observations of probationary teachers be done in person, by video, or both? Both
4.7) Observations of Tenured Teachers

Enter the minimum number of observations of each type, making sure that the number of observations "by building principal or other trained administrators" totals at least 2. If your APPR plan does not include a particular type of observation, enter 0 in that box.
By building principals or other trained administrators 4.7) Observations of Tenured Teachers | Formal/Long 4.7) Observations of Tenured Teachers | Informal/Short 4.7) Observations of Tenured Teachers | Total 2 0 2
By trained in-school peer teachers or other trained reviewers Formal/Long Informal/Short 0 1
Independent evaluators Formal/Long Informal/Short 0 0
Will formal/long observations of tenured teachers be done in person, by video, or both? Both
Will informal/short observations of tenured teachers be done in person, by video, or both? Both
Page 4
5. Composite Scoring (Teachers)

Created Tuesday, June 26, 2012 Updated Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Page 1
Standards for Rating Categories Growth or Comparable Measures Locally-selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (Teacher and Leader standards) Highly Effective Results are well above state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for student growth or achievement for grade/subject. Overall performance and results exceed NYS Teaching Standards. Effective Results meet state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for student growth or achievement for grade/subject. Overall performance and results meet NYS Teaching Standards. Developing Results are below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for student growth or achievement for grade/subject. Overall performance and results need improvement in order to meet NYS Teaching Standards. Ineffective Results are well below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for student growth or achievement for grade/subject. Overall performance and results do not meet NYS Teaching Standards.
Page 1
For the 2013-2014 school year and beyond, the Commissioner shall review the specific scoring ranges for each of the rating categories annually before the start of each school year and shall recommend any changes to the Board of Regents for consideration.
5.1) The 2012-13 scoring ranges for educators for whom there is no approved Value-Added measure of student growth will be:
2012-13 where there is no Value-Added measure Growth or Comparable Measures Locally-selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (60 points)
Overall Composite Score Highly Effective 18-20 18-20 Ranges determined locally--see below 91-100 Effective 9-17 9-17 75-90 Developing 3-8 3-8 65-74 Ineffective 0-2 0-2 0-64
Page 2
Insert district's or BOCES' negotiated HEDI scoring ranges for the Other Measures of Effectiveness subcomponent (same as question 4.5), from 0 to 60 points Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective 51-60 35-50 16-34 0-15
5.2) The 2012-13 scoring ranges for educators for whom there is an approved Value-Added measure for student growth will be:
2012-13 where Value-Added growth measure applies Growth or Comparable Measures Locally-selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (60 points)
Overall Composite Score Highly Effective 22-25 14-15 Ranges determined locally--see above 91-100 Effective 10-21 8-13 75-90 Developing 3-9 3-7
Page 3
65-74 Ineffective 0-2 0-2 0-64
Page 4
6. Additional Requirements - Teachers

Page 1
6.1) Assurances -- Improvement Plans
Please check the boxes below: 6.1) Assurances -- Improvement Plans | Assure that teachers who receive a Developing or Ineffective rating will receive a Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP) within 10 school days from the opening of classes in the school year following the performance year 6.1) Assurances -- Improvement Plans | Assure that TIP plans shall include: identification of needed areas of improvement, a timeline for achieving improvement, the manner in which the improvement will be assessed, and, where appropriate, differentiated activities to support a teacher's improvement in those areas Checked
Checked
6.2) Attachment: Teacher Improvement Plan Forms

As a required attachment to this APPR plan, upload the TIP forms that are used in the school district or BOCES. For a list of supported file types, go to the Resources folder (above) and click Technical Tips. assets/survey-uploads/5265/145849-Df0w3Xx5v6/TIP-Teacher Improvement Form_1.doc
6.3) Appeals Process

Pursuant to Education Law section 3012-c, a teacher may only challenge the following in an appeal: (1) the substance of the annual professional performance review
(2) the school district's or BOCES' adherence to the standards and methodologies required for such reviews, pursuant to Education Law section 3012-c
(3) the adherence to the regulations of the Commissioner and compliance with any applicable locally negotiated procedures, as well as the school district's or BOCES' issuance and/or implementation of the terms of the teacher or principal improvement plan, as required under Education Law section 3012-c Describe the procedure for ensuring that appeals of annual performance evaluations will be handled in a timely and expeditious way: STEP 1 Appeal
An appeal maybe filed challenging the APPR based on the following:
Page 1
o The Districts failure to adhere to the standards and methodologies required for the APPR, pursuant to Fed Law 3012-c. o The Districts failure to comply with either the regulations of the commissioner or locally negotiated procedures. o The Districts failure to issue and implement the terms of the TIP. The appeal process will be as follows: o Must be filed with 10 working days of receiving the APPR. o The appeal shall state the basics of the appeal to the Superintendent of Schools. o Failure to respond within the 10 working days (including the school year, summer recess, etc)in writing shall be deemed a waiver of that claim.
STEP 2 The APPR committee shall review the appeal. The committee makeup shall be: o One administrator o Two tenured teachers appointed by the President of the teachers association The Committee may recommend modification of the TIP and must provided a written rationale for such a change. The review shall be completed within 10 working days upon receipt of the appeal The committees finding (in writing) shall be given to the Superintendent and the teacher upon completion. If consensus cannot be reached the committee will present (in writing) the opposing viewpoints. STEP3 The Superintendent shall consider the written review within 10 working days and render a decision. This determination shall be final and non-grieve able, arbitral, nor review-able in any other form.
6.4) Training and Certification of Lead Evaluators and Evaluators

Describe the process by which evaluators will be trained and the process for how the district will certify and re-certify lead evaluators. Describe the process for ensuring inter-rater reliability. Describe the duration and nature of such training. *Training provided by ESBOCES for Lead Evaluators, additionally, MESTRACT will be utilized for additional training which will be based on using the NYSUT rubric and evidenced based training. *Training will be ongoing throughout the school year. *Successful completion of training will result in certification and re certification will follow the same process. *Successful completion of training will insure inter rater reliability.
6.5) Assurances -- Evaluators

Please check the boxes below: Checked
(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
Page 2
(3) application and use of the student growth percentile model and the value-added growth model as defined in section 30-2.2 of this Subpart
(4) application and use of the State-approved teacher or principal rubric(s) selected by the district or BOCES for use in evaluations, including training on the effective application of such rubrics to observe a teacher or principals 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 State-approved locally selected measures of student achievement used by the school district or BOCES to evaluate its teachers or principals
(7) use of the Statewide Instructional Reporting System
(8) the scoring methodology utilized by the Department and/or the district or BOCES to evaluate a teacher or principal under this Subpart, 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 teachers or principals overall rating and their subcomponent ratings
(9) specific considerations in evaluating teachers and principals of English language learners and students with disabilities
Checked
6.6) Assurances -- Teachers

Please check all of the boxes below: 6.6) Assurances -- Teachers | Assure the entire APPR plan will be completed for each teacher as soon as practicable, but in no case later than September 1 of the school year next following the school year for which the classroom teacher's performance is being measured. 6.6) Assurances -- Teachers | Assure that the district or BOCES will provide the teacher's score and rating on the locally selected measures subcomponent, if available, and on the other measures of teacher and principal effectiveness subcomponent for a teacher's annual professional performance review, in writing, no later than the last school day of the school year for which the teacher or principal is being measured. 6.6) Assurances -- Teachers | Assure that the APPR will be put on the district website by September 10 or within 10 days after approval, whichever is later. 6.6) Assurances -- Teachers | Assure that the evaluation system will be used as a significant factor for employment decisions. 6.6) Assurances -- Teachers | Assure that teachers will receive timely and constructive feedback as part of the evaluation process.
Page 3
Checked
Checked
Checked Checked Checked
6.6) Assurances -- Teachers | Assure the district has appeal procedures that are consistent with the regulations and that they provide for the timely and expeditious resolution of an appeal.
Checked
6.7) Assurances -- Data

Please check all of the boxes below: 6.7) Assurances -- Data | Assure that SED will receive accurate teacher and student data, including enrollment and attendance data, and any other student, teacher, school, course, and teacher/student linkage data necessary to comply with regulations, in a format and timeline prescribed by the Commissioner. 6.7) Assurances -- Data | Certify that the district provides an opportunity for every classroom teacher to verify the subjects and/or student rosters assigned to them. 6.7) Assurances -- Data | Assure scores for all teachers will be reported to NYSED for each subcomponent, as well as the composite rating, as per NYSED requirements. Checked
Checked Checked
Page 4
7. Growth on State Assessments or Comparable Measures (Principals)

Page 1
7.1) STATE-PROVIDED MEASURES OF STUDENT GROWTH (25 points with an approved Value-Added Measure)
For principals in buildings with Grades 4-8 ELA, Math and/or High School courses with State or Regents assessments, (or principals of programs with any of these assessments), NYSED will provide value-added measures. NYSED will also provide a HEDI subcomponent rating category and score from 0 to 25 points.
In order for a principal to receive a State-provided value-added measure, at least 30% of the students in the principal's school or program must take the applicable State or Regents assessments. This will include most schools in the State.
Value-Added measures will apply to schools or principals with the following grade configurations in this district (please list, e.g., K-5, PK-6, 6-8, 6-12, 9-12): K-6 7-12 (No response) (No response) (No response) (No response) (No response)
7.2) Assurances -- State-Provided Measures of Student Growth

Please check the boxes below: 7.2) Assurances -- State-Provided Measures of Student Growth | Assure that the value-added growth score provided by NYSED will be used, where applicable 7.2) Assurances -- State-Provided Measures of Student Growth | Assure that the State-provided growth measure will be used if a value-added measure has not been approved for 2012-13 Checked Checked
7.3) STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AS COMPARABLE GROWTH MEASURES (20 points)

Student Learning Objectives will be the other comparable growth measures for principals in buildings or programs in which fewer than 30% of students take Grades 4-8 ELA, Math, and/or High School courses with State or Regents assessments. SLOs will be developed using the assessment covering the most students in the school or program and continuing until at least 30% of students in the school or program are covered by SLOs. District-determined assessments from the options below may be used as evidence of student learning within the SLO:
Page 1
State assessments, required if one exists District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessments that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms List of State-approved 3rd party assessments
First, list the school or program type this SLO applies to. Then, using the drop-down boxes below, please select the assessment that will be used for SLOs for the school/program listed. Finally, name the specific assessment listing the full name of the assessment.Districts or BOCES that intend to use a district, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment must include the name, grade, and subject of the assessment. For example, a regionally-developed 7th grade Social Studies assessment would be written as follows: [INSERT SPECIFIC NAME OF REGION]-developed 7th grade Social Studies assessment.
Please remember that State assessments must be used with SLOs if applicable to the school or program type. School or Program Type Not Applicable SLO with Assessment Option Name of the Assessment
Describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of performance required for each HEDI rating category and the process for assigning points to principals based on SLO results, consistent with regulations and assurances in the Comparable Growth Measures subcomponent. Include any district-determined expectations for student performance. Use this box, if needed, to describe the process for assigning HEDI categories in this subcomponent. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Effective (9 - 17 points) Results meet state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
If you are using tables or other graphics to explain your process for assigning HEDI categories, please clearly label them, combine them into a single file, and upload that file here. (No response)
7.4) Special Considerations for Comparable Growth Measures

Describe any adjustments, controls, or other special considerations that will be used in setting targets for Comparable Growth Measures, the rationale for including such factors, and the processes that will be used to mitigate potentially problematic incentives associated with the controls or adjustments.
Page 2
Note: The only allowable controls or adjustments for Comparable Growth Measures are those used in State Growth measures, which include:prior student achievement results, students with disabilities, English language learners, students in poverty, and, in the future, any other student-, classroom-, and school-level characteristics approved by the Board of Regents. Not Applicable
7.5) Principals with More Than One Growth Measure

If educators have more than one state-provided growth or value-added measure, those measures will be combined into one HEDI category and score for the growth subcomponent according to a formula determined by the Commissioner. (Examples: Principals of K-8 schools with growth measures for ELA and Math grades 4-8.)
If Principals have more than one SLO for comparable growth (or a State-provided growth measure and an SLO for comparable growth), the measures will each earn a score from 0-20 points and Districts will weight each in proportion to the number of students covered by the SLO to reach a combined score for this subcomponent.
7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures

Please check all of the boxes below: 7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures | Assure the application of locally developed controls will be rigorous, fair, and transparent and only those used for State Growth will be used for Comparable Growth Measures. 7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures | Assure that use of locally developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students in accordance with applicable civil rights laws. 7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures | Assure that procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized. 7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures | Assure that district will develop SLOs according to the rules established by NYSED for principal SLOs: http://usny.nysed.gov/rttt/teachers-leaders/slo/home.html. 7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures | Assure that the process for assigning points for SLOs for the Growth Subcomponent will use the narrative HEDI descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate educator performance in ways that improve student learning and instruction. 7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures | Assure that it is possible for a principal to earn each point, including 0, for SLOs in the Growth subcomponent scoring range. 7.6) Assurances -- Comparable Growth Measures | Assure that processes are in place to monitor SLOs to ensure rigor and comparability across classrooms. Checked
Checked
Checked Checked
Checked
Checked Checked
Page 3
8. Local Measures (Principals)

Page 1
Locally-Selected Measures of Student Achievement or Growth
Locally comparable means that the same locally-selected measures of student achievement or growth must be used for all principals in the same or similar programs or grade configurations across the district or BOCES.
Please note: only one locally-selected measure is required for principals in the same or similar programs or grade configurations, but some districts may prefer to have more than one measure for principals in the same or similar programs or grade configurations. This APPR form therefore provides space for multiple locally-selected measures for each principal in the same or similar program or grade configuration across the district.Therefore,if more than one locally-selected measure is used forall principals in the same or similar program or grade configuration, districts must complete additional copies of this form and upload as attachments for review.
Also note:districts may use more than one locally-selected measure fordifferentgroups of principalswithin the same or similar programs or grade configurationsif the district/BOCES prove comparability based on Standards of Educational and Psychological Testing. If a district is choosing different measures for different groups of principals within the same or similar programs or grade configurations, they must complete additional copies of this form and upload as attachments for review.
8.1) LOCALLY SELECTED MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT FOR PRINCIPALS WITH AN APPROVED VALUE-ADDED MEASURE (15 points)
In the table below, list all of the grade configurations used in your district or BOCES (e.g., K-5, 6-8, 9-12). Then for each grade configuration, select a local measure from the menu.
Note: Districts and BOCES may select one or more types of growth or achievement measures for each grade configuration. If you are using more than one type of local measure for the evaluation of principals in a given grade configuration, list that grade configuration multiple times. If more space is needed, duplicate this portion of the form and upload additional pages (below) as an attachment.
(a) student achievement levels on State assessments in ELA and/or Math in Grades 4-8 (e.g., percentage of students in the school whose performance levels on State assessments are proficient or advanced) (b) student growth or achievement on State assessments in ELA and/or Math in Grades 4-8 for students in each specific performance level (e.g., Level 1, Level 2) (c) student growth or achievement on State assessments in ELA and/or Math in Grades 4-8 for students with disabilities and English Language Learners in Grades 4-8
Page 1
(d) student performance on any or all of the district-wide locally selected measures approved for use in teacher evaluations (e) four, five and/or six-year high school graduation and/or dropout rates for principals employed in a school with high school grades (f) percentage of students who earn a Regents diploma with advanced designation and/or honors for principals employed in a school with high school grades (g) percentage of a cohort of students that achieve specified scores on Regents examinations and/or Department approved alternative examinations (including, but not limited to, AdvancedPlacement examinations, International Baccalaureate examinations, SAT II, etc.), for principals employed in a school with high school grades (e.g., the percentage of students in the 2009 cohort that scored at least a 3 on an Advanced Placement examination since entry into the ninth grade) (h) students progress toward graduation in the school using strong predictive indicators, including but not limited to 9th and/or 10th grade credit accumulation and/or the percentage of students that pass 9th and/or 10th grade subjects most commonly associated with graduation and/or students progress in passing the number of required Regents examinations for graduation, for principals employed in a school with high school grades
Grade Configuration K-6 7-12
Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures (d) measures used by district for teacher evaluation (d) measures used by district for teacher evaluation
Assessment Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments, Right Reason student assessmnents Greenport developed grade/subject specific assessments, Right Reason student assessments; all regents exams
Describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a principal to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a principal to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the process for assigning HEDI categories. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic below. Highly Effective (14 - 15 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (8- 13 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 7 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject.
Page 2
HEDI points will be allocated to a principal based on the percentage ,school wide, that score 65 or better on the final assessment. percentages between 85-100
percentages between 70-84
percentages between 55-69
percentages below 55
If you need additional space, upload a copy of "Form 8.1: Locally Selected Measures for Principals with an Approved Value-Added Measure" as an attachment for review. Click here for a downloadable copy of Form 8.1. (MS Word) (No response)
If you are using tables or other graphics to explain your process for assigning HEDI categories, please clearly label them, combine them into a single file, and upload that file here. assets/survey-uploads/5366/145867-qBFVOWF7fC/Greenport 20 15 HEDI Chart_1.xls
8.2) LOCALLY SELECTED MEASURES OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT FOR ALL OTHER PRINCIPALS (20 points)
In the table below, list all of the grade configurations used in your district or BOCES (e.g., K-5, 6-8, 9-12). Then for each grade configuration, select a local measure from the menu.
Note: Districts and BOCES may select one or more types of growth or achievement measures for each grade configuration. If you are using more than one type of local measure for the evaluation of principals in a given grade configuration, list that grade configuration multiple times. If more space is needed, duplicate this portion of the form and upload additional pages (below) as an attachment.
The options in the drop-down menus below are abbreviated from the following list:<!--
(a) student achievement levels on State assessments in ELA and/or Math in Grades 4-8 (e.g., percentage of students in the school whose performance levels on State assessments are proficient or advanced) (b) student growth or achievement on State assessments in ELA and/or Math in Grades 4-8 for students in each specific performance level (e.g., Level 1, Level 2) (c) student growth or achievement on State assessments in ELA and/or Math in Grades 4-8 for students with disabilities and English Language Learners in Grades 4-8 (d) student performance on any or all of the district-wide locally selected measures approved for use in teacher evaluations (e) four, five and/or six-year high school graduation and/or dropout rates for principals employed in a school with high school grades (f) percentage of students who earn a Regents diploma with advanced designation and/or honors for principals employed in a school with high school grades (g) percentage of a cohort of students that achieve specified scores on Regents examinations and/or Department approved alternative examinations (including, but not limited to, AdvancedPlacement examinations, International Baccalaureate examinations, SAT II, etc.), for principals employed in a school with high school grades (e.g., the percentage of students in the 2009 cohort that scored at least a 3 on an Advanced Placement examination since entry into the ninth grade) (h) students progress toward graduation in the school using strong predictive indicators, including but not limited to 9th and/or 10th grade credit accumulation and/or the percentage of students that pass 9th and/or 10th grade subjects most commonly associated with graduation and/or students progress in passing the number of required Regents examinations for graduation, for principals employed in a school with high school grades (i) student learning objectives (only allowable for principals in programs/buildings without a Value-Added measure for the State
Page 3
Growth subcomponent). Used with one of the following assessments: State, State-approved 3rd party, or a District, regional, or BOCES-developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable across classrooms
Grade Configuration Not Applicable
Locally-Selected Measure from List of Approved Measures
Assessment
Describe the district-adopted expectations for the level of growth or achievement needed for a principal to earn each of the four HEDI rating categories and the process for assigning points within rating categories that ensures it is possible for a principal to earn any of the points in a scoring range, consistent with regulations and assurances.
Note: when completing the HEDI boxes below, it is not acceptable to just repeat the text descriptions from the regulations and/or assurances listed to the left of each box. Use this box, if needed, to describe the process for assigning HEDI categories. If needed, you may upload a table or graphic below. Highly Effective (18 - 20 points) Results are well above District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Effective (9- 17 points) Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Developing (3 - 8 points) Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Ineffective (0 - 2 points) Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
If you need additional space, upload a copy of "Form 8.2: Locally Selected Measures for All Other Principals" as an attachment for review. Click here for a downloadable copy of Form 8.2. (MS Word) (No response)
If you are using tables or other graphics to explain your process for assigning HEDI categories, please clearly label them, combine them into a single file, and upload that file here. (No response)

Page 4
Describe any adjustments, controls, or other special considerations that will be used in setting targets for local measures, the rationale for including such factors, and the processes that will be used to mitigate potentially problematic incentives associated with the controls or adjustments. Not Applicable
8.4) Principals with More Than One Locally Selected Measure

Describe the district's process for combining multiple locally selected measures where applicable for principals, each scored from 0-15 or 0-20 points as applicable, into a single subcomponent HEDI category and score. For principals with multiple measures the percentage will be proportionally calculated and one score will result.
8.5) Assurances
Please check all of the boxes below: 8.5) Assurances | Assure that the application of locally developed controls will be rigorous, fair, and transparent 8.5) Assurances | Assure that use of locally developed controls will not have a disparate impact on underrepresented students, in accordance with any applicable civil rights laws. 8.5) Assurances | Assure that enrolled students are included in accordance with policies for student assignment to schools and may not be excluded. 8.5) Assurances | Assure that procedures for ensuring data accuracy and integrity are being utilized. 8.5) Assurances | Assure that the process for assigning points for locally selected measures will use the narrative HEDI descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate principals' performance in ways that improve student learning and instruction. 8.5) Assurances | Assure that it is possible for a principal to earn each point, including 0, for the locally selected measures subcomponent. 8.5) Assurances | Assure that locally-selected measures are rigorous and comparable across all principals in the same or similar programs or grade configurations across the district. 8.5) Assurances | If more than one type of locally-selected measure is used for different groups of principals in the same or similar grade configuration or program, certify that the measures are comparable based on the Standards of Educational and Psychological Testing. 8.5) Assurances | Assure that all locally-selected measures for a principal are different than any measures used for the State assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent. Check Check Check Check Check
Check Check Check
Check
Page 5
9. Other Measures of Effectiveness (Principals)

Page 1
9.1) Principal Practice Rubric
Select the choice of principal practice rubric from the menu of State-approved rubrics to assess performance based on ISLLC 2008 Standards. If your district has been granted a variance by NYSED through the variance process, select "district variance" from the menu. The "Second Rubric" space is optional. A district may use multiple rubrics, as long as the same rubric(s) is used for all principals in the same or similar programs or grade configurations across the district. Multidimensional Principal Performance Rubric
(No response)
9.2) Points Within Other Measures

State the number of points that will be assigned to each of the following measures, making sure that the points total 60. If you are not assigning any points to the "ambitious and measurable goals" measure, enter 0. Some districts may prefer to assign points differently for different groups of principals. This APPR form only provides one space for assigning points within other measures for principals. If your district/BOCES prefers to assign points differently for different groups of principals, enter the points assignment for one group of principals below. For the other group(s) of principals, fill out copies of this form and upload as an attachment for review. Is the following points assignment for all principals? Yes
If you checked "no" above, fill in the group of principals covered: (No response)
State the number of points that will be assigned to each of the following measures, making sure that the points total 60. If you are not assigning any points to the "ambitious and measurable goals" measure, enter 0. Broad assessment of principal leadership and management actions based on the practice rubric by the supervisor, a trained administrator or a trained independent evaluator. This must incorporate multiple school visits by supervisor, trained administrator, or trained independent evaluator, at least one of which must be from a supervisor, and at least one of which must be unannounced. [At least 31 points] Any remaining points shall be assigned based on results of one or more ambitious and measurable goals set collaboratively with principals and their superintendents or district superintendents. 60
Page 1
If the above points assignment is not for "all principals," fill out an additional copy of "Form 9.2: Points Within Other Measures" for each group of principals, combine them into a single file, and upload as an attachment for review. Click here for a downloadable copy of Form 9.2. (MS Word) (No response)
9.3) Assurances -- Goals

Please check the boxes below (if applicable): 9.3) Assurances -- Goals | Assure that if any points are assigned to goals, at least one goal will address the principal's contribution to improving teacher effectiveness based on one or more of the following: improved retention of high performing teachers; correlation of student growth scores to teachers granted vs. denied tenure; or improvements in proficiency rating of the principal on specific teacher effectiveness standards in the principal practice rubric. 9.3) Assurances -- Goals | Assure that any other goals, if applicable, shall address quantifiable and verifiable improvements in academic results or the school's learning environment (e.g. student or teacher attendance). (No response)
(No response)
9.4) Sources of Evidence (if applicable)

If you indicated above that one or more points will be assigned to the "ambitious and measurable goals" measure, identify at least two of the following sources of evidence that will be utilized as part of assessing every principal's goal(s): 9.4) Sources of Evidence (if applicable) | Structured feedback from teachers using a State-approved tool 9.4) Sources of Evidence (if applicable) | Structured feedback from students using a State-approved tool 9.4) Sources of Evidence (if applicable) | Structured feedback from families using a State-approved tool 9.4) Sources of Evidence (if applicable) | School visits by other trained evaluators 9.4) Sources of Evidence (if applicable) | Review of school documents, records, and/or State accountability processes (all count as one source) (No response) (No response) (No response) (No response) (No response)
9.5) Survey Tool(s) (if applicable)

If you indicated above that 1 or more points will be assigned to feedback using a State-approved survey tool, please check the box below: (No response)
Note: When the State-approved survey list is posted, this form will be updated with dropdown menus of approved survey tools. Principal Evaluation Tripod School Perception Survey for Teachers K12 Insight Student Survey (Grades 3-5) for Principal Evaluation in New York K12 Insight Student Survey (Grades 6-12) for Principal Evaluation in New York K12 Insight Parent Survey for Principal Evaluation in New York K12 Insight Teacher/Staff Survey for Principal Evaluation in New York District variance
Page 2
(No response) (No response) (No response) (No response) (No response) (No response)
9.6) Assurances
Please check all of the boxes below: 9.6) Assurances | Assure that all ISLLC 2008 Leadership Standards are assessed at least one time per year. 9.6) Assurances | Assure that the process for assigning points for the "other measures" subcomponent will use the narrative HEDI descriptions described in the regulations to effectively differentiate principals' performance in ways that improve student learning and instruction 9.6) Assurances | Assure that it is possible for a principal to earn each point, including 0, for the "other measures" subcomponent. 9.6) Assurances | Assure that the same rubric(s) is used for all principals in the same or similar programs or grade configurations across the district or BOCES. Checked Checked
Checked Checked
9.7) Process for Assigning Points and Determining HEDI Ratings

Describe the process for assigning points and determining HEDI ratings using the principal practice rubric and/or any additional instruments used in the district. Include, if applicable, the process for combining results of multiple "other measures" into a single result for this subcomponent. MPPR measures calculated accordingly and applied to HEDI rating. Each element within a standard will be scored on a 1-4 scale and will be averaged together to result in a standard score. Standard scores will be averaged together to get an overall rubric score from 1-4 which will then be converted to 0-60 using the attached conversion chart. The rubric score listed is the minimum score necessary to achieve the corresponding HEDI rating. We understand the composite score must be reported in whole numbers.
If you are using tables or other graphics to explain your process for assigning points and determining HEDI ratings, please clearly label them, combine them into a single file, and upload that file here. assets/survey-uploads/5143/145868-pMADJ4gk6R/Greenport 0-60 conversion chart_1.xls
Describe the level of performance required for each of the HEDI rating categories, consistent with the narrative descriptions in the regulations for the "other measures" subcomponent. Also describe how the points available within each HEDI category will be assigned. Highly Effective: Overall performance and results exceed standards. Exemplary performance in setting a vision for learning, goals, instructional program, evaluation of programs,creating a safe environment, fostering collaborative among staff and community. Effective performance in setting a vision for learning, goals, instructional program, evaluation of programs,creating a safe environment, fostering collaborative among staff and community. Average performance in setting a vision for learning, goals, instructional program, evaluation of programs,creating a safe environment, fostering collaborative among staff and community. Unsatisfactory performance in setting a vision for learning, goals, instructional program, evaluation of programs,creating a safe environment, fostering collaborative among staff and community.
Page 3
Effective: Overall performance and results meet standards.
Developing: Overall performance and results need improvement in order to meet standards.
Ineffective: Overall performance and results do not meet standards.
Please provide the locally-negotiated 60 point scoring bands. Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective 51-60 35-50 16-34 0-15
9.8) School Visits

Enter the minimum number of school visits that will be done by each of the following evaluators, making sure that the number of visits "by supervisor" is at least 1 and the total number of visits is at least 2, for both probationary and tenured principals. If your APPR plan does not include visits by a trained administrator or independent evaluator, enter 0 in those boxes.
Probationary Principals By supervisor By trained administrator By trained independent evaluator Enter Total 2 2 0 4
Tenured Principals By supervisor By trained administrator By trained independent evaluator Enter Total 2 1 0 3
Page 4
10. Composite Scoring (Principals)

Page 1
Standards for Rating Categories Growth or Comparable Measures Locally-selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (Teacher and Leader standards) Highly Effective Results are well above 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 for grade/subject. Overall performance and results exceed ISLLC leadership standards. Effective Results meet state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Results meet District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Overall performance and results meet ISLLC leadership standards. Developing Results are below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Results are below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Overall performance and results need improvement in order to meet ISLLC leadership standards. Ineffective Results are well below state average for similar students (or District goals if no state test). Results are well below District- or BOCES-adopted expectations for growth or achievement for grade/subject. Overall performance and results do not meet ISLLC leadership standards.
Page 1
For the 2013-2014 school year and beyond, the Commissioner shall review the specific scoring ranges for each of the rating categories annually before the start of each school year and shall recommend any changes to the Board of Regents for consideration.
10.1) The 2012-13 scoring ranges for principals for whom there is no approved Value-Added measure of student growth will be:
2012-13 where there is no Value-Added measure Growth or Comparable Measures Locally-selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (60 points)
Overall Composite Score Highly Effective 18-20 18-20 Ranges determined locally--see below 91-100 Effective 9-17 9-17 75-90 Developing 3-8 3-8 65-74 Ineffective 0-2 0-2
Page 2
0-64
Insert district's or BOCES' negotiated HEDI scoring ranges for the Other Measures of Effectiveness Subcomponent (same as question 9.7), from 0 to 60 points Highly Effective Effective Developing Ineffective 51-60 35-50 16-34 0-15
10.2) The 2012-13 scoring ranges for principals for whom there is an approved Value-Added measure for student growth will be:
2012-13 where Value-Added growth measure applies Growth or Comparable Measures Locally-selected Measures of growth or achievement Other Measures of Effectiveness (60 points)
Overall Composite Score Highly Effective 22-25 14-15 Ranges determined locally--see above 91-100 Effective 10-21 8-13 75-90 Developing 3-9 3-7
Page 3
65-74 Ineffective 0-2 0-2 0-64
Page 4
11. Additional Requirements - Principals

Page 1
11.1) Assurances -- Improvement Plans
Please check the boxes below. 11.1) Assurances -- Improvement Plans | Assure that principals who receive a Developing or Ineffective rating will receive a Principal Improvement Plan (PIP) within 10 school days from the opening of classes in the school year following the performance year 11.1) Assurances -- Improvement Plans | Assure that PIPs shall include: identification of needed areas of improvement, a timeline for achieving improvement, the manner in which the improvement will be assessed, and, where appropriate, differentiated activities to support a principal's improvement in those areas Checked
Checked
11.2) Attachment: Principal Improvement Plan Forms

As a required attachment to this APPR plan, upload the PIP forms that are used in your school district or BOCES. For a list of supported file types, go to the Resources folder (above) and click Technical Tips. assets/survey-uploads/5276/145875-Df0w3Xx5v6/GPO Prin PIP.doc
11.3) Appeals Process

Pursuant to Education Law section 3012-c, a principal may only challenge the following in an appeal: (1) the substance of the annual professional performance review
(2) the school district's or BOCES' adherence to the standards and methodologies required for such reviews, pursuant to Education Law section 3012-c
(3) the adherence to the regulations of the Commissioner and compliance with any applicable locally negotiated procedures, as well as the school district's or BOCES' issuance and/or implementation of the terms of the teacher or principal improvement plan, as required under Education Law section 3012-c Describe the procedure for ensuring that appeals of annual performance evaluations will be handled in a timely and expeditious way: APPENDIX G APPEAL PROCESS A. Any principal who receives an ineffective or developing rating on their annual total composite APPR or a tenured principal who receives a developing on the 60 Rubric HEDI rating, shall be entitled to appeal their annual APPR rating, based upon a paper submission to the Superintendent of Schools or the Superintendents administrative designee, who shall be trained in accordance with the requirements of the statute and regulations and also possesses
Page 1
either an SDA or SDL Certification. Upon separation of the current Superintendent from the district, or the position of Superintendent, the following clause shall go into effect at the discretion of the administrators: In the event that the Superintendent or the Superintendents administrative designee served as an evaluator or lead evaluator he or she shall not hear the appeal. B. 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 principal who is placed on a Principal Improvement Plan (PIP) shall have a corresponding right to appeal concerns regarding the PIP in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 3012-c of the Education Law. C. An appeal of an APPR evaluation or a PIP must be commenced within ten (10) school days of the presentation of the final document to the principal, in the case of a tenured principal, and fifteen business days of the presentation of the final document to a probationary principal (extended by an additional period of up to 10 calendar days if he or she is going to be on a planned vacation during the 15 business days as referenced above) or else the right to appeal shall be deemed waived in all regards; provided, however, that in the case of a PIP appeal, there shall be a second fifteen business day period for a PIP appeal following the end date of the PIP. In the event that the PIP has an ending date after June 1st, the time for appealing the PIP shall be extended until no later than the 10th day after classes begin during the September immediately following the last day of the PIP. D. The Superintendent or the Superintendents administrative designee shall respond to the appeal with a written answer granting the appeal and directing further administrative action, or a written answer denying the appeal that must include explanation and rationale behind that decision. The Superintendent or the Superintendents administrative designee shall review the evidence underlying the observations of the principal along with all other evidence submitted by the principal prior to rendering a decision. Such decision shall be made within fifteen business days of the receipt of the appeal and shall be considered preliminary. E. If not satisfied by the preliminary decision of the Superintendent or his/her designee the building principal shall within three (3) school days request a review be performed by a mutually agreed upon retired administrator. Within five (5) calendar days the parties from the request for review the parties shall be furnished a list of retired administrators willing to conduct a review from the New York State Retired Supervisors and Administrators Association or any other organization that may maintain such a list. The list of names shall also include resume and fees. If the parties within five (5) business days cannot mutually agree upon the selection of the retired administrator the list shall be provided to the AAA for selection the selection will be made within 10 days. The cost of the AAA will be borne equally by both parties. The fee for the review shall in no event exceed customary AAA arbitrator rates. The cost of the independent review shall be born equally by both parties. ALTERNATIVELY TO THE ABOVE- THE PARTIES COULD ALSO AGREE ON A PANEL SEE BELOWE(1)- An Internal Review Panel consisting of three members (Superintendents Designee, Principals Mentor (must be included within PIP for this option), and Administrative Designee) may hear an appeal of an administrator who receives an "ineffective" rating. The Internal Review Panel may modify the evaluation, set aside the rating and/or call for a new review conducted by a trained non-bargaining unit administrator other than the original evaluator. The Internal Review Committee shall have the authority to uphold, rescind or revise the Building Principals ineffective" evaluation. The decision of the Internal Review Panel shall be final and binding upon the parties and must be made within 15 days upon receipt of the appeal. F. The review shall consist of reviewing the preliminary decision, the evidence underlying the observations/evaluations of the principal, and all other evidence submitted by the principal and/or the district. The evidence and arguments shall be presented to the retired administrator for review within fifteen (15) business days after his/her selection. Upon completion of the review the retired administrator shall render a written advisory opinion within ten (10) business days after receipt of the evidence and arguments from both sides. The advisory opinion may recommend upholding, reversing, or modifying the preliminary determination as well as provide recommendations, including but not limited to, adjustments to the principal improvement plan or other corrective actions. G. Upon receipt of the advisory decision the Superintendent shall within five (5) school days review said advisory opinion and in his/her sole discretion either adopt, reject, in whole, or in part, the advisory opinion. The decision of the Superintendent or the Superintendents administrative designee upon review of the advisory opinion shall be final and binding in all regards and shall not be subject to review at arbitration, before any administrative agency or in any court of law. H. Procedural objections to the appeal process or PIP plan shall be subject to the grievance procedure within the parties collective bargaining agreement. I. Notwithstanding the aforementioned language, nothing herein shall be construed as limiting the right of the employee to challenge any evaluation including the second consecutive ineffective annual composite APPR evaluation in any proceeding brought pursuant to Education Law Section 3020-a or an alternative disciplinary arbitration to the extent allowed by law. J. Effective upon separation of employment of the Superintendent of Schools presently employed by the district as of June 30, 2012, the advisory opinion contained in paragraph F above shall become final and binding in all regards and shall not be subject to review by the Superintendent, or at arbitration, or before any administrative agency or in any court of law. K. This appeal shall sunset, becoming null and void in all regards on the close of business after the last appeal is finally determined for the 2012-13 School Year.
Page 2
11.4) Training and Certification of Lead Evaluators and Evaluators

Describe the process by which evaluators will be trained and the process for how the district will certify and re-certify lead evaluators. Describe the process for ensuring inter-rater reliability. Describe the duration and nature of such training. *Training provided by ESBOCES for Lead Evaluators, additionally, MESTRACT will be utilized for additional training which will be based on using the MPPR rubric and evidenced based training. *Training will be ongoing throughout the school year. *Successful completion of training will result in certification and re certification will follow the same process. *Successful completion of training will insure inter rater reliability.
11.5) Assurances -- Evaluators

Please check the boxes below: Checked
(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 as defined in section 30-2.2 of this Subpart
(4) application and use of the State-approved teacher or principal rubric(s) selected by the district or BOCES for use in evaluations, including training on the effective application of such rubrics to observe a teacher or principals 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 State-approved locally selected measures of student achievement used by the school district or BOCES to evaluate its teachers or principals
(7) use of the Statewide Instructional Reporting System
(8) the scoring methodology utilized by the Department and/or the district or BOCES to evaluate a teacher or principal under this Subpart, 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 teachers or principals overall rating and their subcomponent ratings
Page 3
(9) specific considerations in evaluating teachers and principals of English language learners and students with disabilities
Checked
11.6) Assurances -- Principals

Please check all of the boxes below: 11.6) Assurances -- Principals | Assure the entire APPR plan will be completed for each principal as soon as practicable, but in no case later than September 1 of the school year next following the school year for which the building principal's performance is being measured. 11.6) Assurances -- Principals | Assure that the district will provide the principal's score and rating on the locally selected measures subcomponent, if available, and on the other measures of principal effectiveness subcomponent for a principal's annual professional performance review, in writing, no later than the last school day of the school year for which the principal is being measured. 11.6) Assurances -- Principals | Assure that the APPR will be put on the district website by September 10 or within 10 days after approval, whichever is later. 11.6) Assurances -- Principals | Assure that the evaluation system will be used as a significant factor for employment decisions. 11.6) Assurances -- Principals | Assure that principals will receive timely and constructive feedback as part of the evaluation process. 11.6) Assurances -- Principals | Assure the district has appeal procedures that are consistent with the regulations and that they provide for the timely and expeditious resolution of an appeal. Checked
Checked
Checked Checked Checked Checked
11.7) Assurances -- Data

Please check all of the boxes below: 11.7) Assurances -- Data | Assure that the NYSED will receive accurate teacher and student data, including enrollment and attendance data and any other student, teacher, school, course, and teacher/student linkage data necessary to comply with this Subpart, in a format and timeline prescribed by the Commissioner. 11.7) Assurances -- Data | Certify that the district provides an opportunity for every classroom teacher to verify the subjects and/or student rosters assigned to them. 11.7) Assurances -- Data | Assure scores for all principals will be reported to NYSED for each subcomponent, as well as the composite rating, as per NYSED requirements. Checked
Checked Checked
Page 4
12. Joint Certification of APPR Plan

Created Tuesday, June 26, 2012 Updated Thursday, December 13, 2012
Page 1
12.1)Upload the Joint Certification of the APPR Plan
Please obtain the required signatures, create a PDF file, and upload your joint certification of the APPR Plan using this form: APPR District Certification Form assets/survey-uploads/5581/145882-3Uqgn5g9Iu/greenport sign 121312.pdf
File types supported for uploads

PDF (preferred) Microsoft Office (.doc, .ppt, .xls) Microsoft Office 2007: Supported but not recommended (.docx, .pptx, .xlsx) Open Office (.odt, .ott) Images (.jpg, .gif) Other Formats (.html, .xhtml, .txt, .rtf, .latex)
Please note that .docx, .pptx, and .xlsx formats are not entirely supported. Please save your file types as .doc, .ppt or .xls respectively before uploading.
Page 1
HEDI Points % of Students Meeting Targets 20 93-100 19 84-92 18 74-83 17 73 16 72 15 71 14 70 13 69 12 68 11 87 10 66 9 65 8 64 7 63 6 62 5 61 4 60 3 59 2 40-58 1 30-39 0 0-29
HEDI Points % of Students Meeting Targets 20 95-100 19 90-94 18 85-89 17 83-84 16 81-82 15 79-80 14 77-78 13 75-76 12 73-74 11 72 10 71 9 70 8 67-69 7 64-66 6 61-63 5 59-60 4 57-58 3 55-56 2 40-54 1 30-39 0 0-29
HEDI/15 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
% of students 92-100 85-91 82-84 79-81 76-78 74-75 72-73 70-71 67-69 64-66 61-63 58-60 55-57 40-54 30-39 0-29
HEDI/15 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
% of students 92-100 85-91 82-84 79-81 76-78 74-75 72-73 70-71 67-69 64-66 61-63 58-60 55-57 40-54 30-39 0-29
Rubric 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4
HEDI 0 3 6 8 15 16 20 22 24 26 30 32 34 35 37 39 40 42 43 44 45 47 48 49 50 51 53 54 55 58 60
Band I I I I I D D D D D D D D E E E E E E E E E E E E H H H H H H
Greenport Union Free School District T.I.P (Teacher Improvement Plan)* Goals to improve teacher performance
This form is to be used when a teacher achieves an ineffective rating.
Teacher ___ _
Date Administrator
School Subject/Grade 1 What does the teacher need to change? 1.
2. 1.
What evidence will demonstrate that the teacher has changed?
3. 1. 2.
What is the time frame in which the change must occur?
4 1.
Are there intermediate benchmarks that will indicate progress? If so, when should these occur?
5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 6. 1.
What, directives, recommendations, requirements, and/or suggestions have been given to the teacher?
What resources, guidance, follow-up will be provided for the teacher?
(Continued on back)
~2~
7.
Record of meetings, observations, conferences, support activities, professional development, shadowing etc. related to improving teacher performance. (Collected by the principal and supervisor) ACTIVITY DATE NOTE (if necessary)
8.
Signatures of teacher, principal, supervisor (indicates awareness of plan to help teacher improve) NAME SIGNATURE DATE
POSITION Teacher DPTA Representative Principal Supervisor (if applicable)
A copy of this T.I.P must be submitted to the Superintendent
HEDI/15 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
% of students 92-100 85-91 82-84 79-81 76-78 74-75 72-73 70-71 67-69 64-66 61-63 58-60 55-57 40-54 30-39 0-29
Rubric 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4
HEDI 0 3 6 8 15 16 20 22 24 26 30 32 34 35 37 39 40 42 43 44 45 47 48 49 50 51 53 54 55 58 60
Band I I I I I D D D D D D D D E E E E E E E E E E E E H H H H H H
APPENDIX _F Principal Improvement Plan

The Principal Improvement Plan (PIP) 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 PIP is to assist principals to work to their fullest potential. The PIP provides assistance and feedback to the principal and establishes a timeline for assessing its overall effectiveness. A PIP must be initiated whenever a principal receives a rating of developing or ineffective in a year-end evaluation. The PIP must be in place no later than 10 school days following the start of the student instructional year. Prior to its implementation the PIP will be signed and dated by all parties. The area or areas in need of improvement will be drawn from the evaluation criteria contained in the agreed upon rubric. The attached forms will be used during the PIP plan. A PIP shall be designed by the principal and the superintendent. The Principal must be offered the opportunity for a volunteer peer mentor. The principal will select the mentor, with the approval of the Superintendent. All dealings between the mentor and principal will be confidential. If there are no suitable mentors or volunteers from the District, the District shall offer an outside mentor to the Principal. A statement of differentiated activities to support improvement shall be developed by the Superintendent of Schools after consultation with the Principal on the PIP and may include, but shall not be limited to: working with mentors, in-service training, education conferences and reference to professional writings based upon scientific research, collaboration with administrative colleagues. All costs associated with the aforementioned shall be born by the District. No later than November 15th shall the Superintendent meet with the Building Principal on the PIP to discuss and assess the building principals progress and provide written feedback to the principal regarding his/her progress on the PIP; on or before February 15th the Superintendent shall again meet with the Building Principal on the PIP to discuss and assess the building principals progress and provide written feedback to the principal regarding his/her progress on the PIP; on or before April 15th the Superintendent shall again meet with the Building Principal on the PIP to discuss and assess the building principals progress and provide written feedback to the principal regarding his/her progress on the PIP. If at anytime, the Superintendent believes that the goals have been met by the principal he/she shall sign a written acknowledgement of attainment. In addition the above meetings with the Superintendent the building principal shall meet with the Assistant Superintendent in charge of Curriculum periodically throughout the school year in order to discuss and assess the building principals progress on the PIP and to be provided written feedback regarding his/her progress on the PIP. All meetings shall be documented on the attached form. If at the end of the year the PIP goals are met or the administrator is rated effective the PIP will terminate. If the principal is rated as developing or ineffective for any school year in which a PIP was in effect, a new plan will be developed by the principal and the Superintendent adhering to the requirements contained herein with any additional measures in that subsequent school year the following the guidelines below. The Principal Improvement Plan set forth herein will be used only for principals rated ineffective or developing in the 2012-13 school years and its use shall sunset for all evaluations completed after the 2012-13 school years. The parties agree to begin to renegotiate all aspects of the PIP no later than February 1, 2013.
Any PIP plan created for the 2012-13 school year must consist of the following components: I. SPECIFIC AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT: Identify specific areas in need of improvement. Develop specific, behaviorally written goals for the principal to accomplish during the period of the Plan. EXPECTED OUTCOMES OF THE PIP: Identify specific recommendations for what the principal is expected to do to improve in the identified areas. Delineate specific, realistic, achievable activities for the principal. RESPONSIBILITIES: Identify steps to be taken by Superintendent and the principal throughout the Plan. Examples: school visits by the Superintendent; supervisory conferences between the principal and Superintendent; written reports and/or evaluations, etc. RESOURCES/ACTIVITIES: Identify specific resources available to assist the principal to improve performance. Examples: colleagues; courses; workshops; peer visits; materials; etc. EVIDENCE OF ACHIEVEMENT: Identify how progress will be measured and assessed. Specify next steps to be taken based upon whether the principal is successful, partially successful or unsuccessful in efforts to improve performance. TIMELINE: Provide a specific Timeline for implementation of the various components of the PIP and for the final completion of the PIP. Identify the dates for preparation of written documentation regarding the completion of the Plan and finalize the dates as to required meetings and/or school visits, and/or workshops, etc. SAMPLE COMPONENTS OF A PRINCIPAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN I. TARGETED GOALS: AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT 1. 2. 3. 4. Student Performance and/or Engagement Supervision of Staff Fiscal Management Community Relations
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
II.
EXPECTED OUTCOMES List of specific expectations related to targeted goals identified in Section I
III.
RECOMMENDED RESOURCES/ACTIVITIES 1. 2. 3. 4. List of specific activities related to targeted goals identified in Section I List specific materials, people, workshop to be used to support the PIP Identify the instrument or rubrics used to monitor progress Danielson video or online PD (Educational Impact or ASCD )
IV.
EVIDENCE OF ACHIEVEMENT
1. Identify how progress will be measured and assessed 2. Specify next steps to be taken based upon progress or lack thereof V. TIMELINE FOR MEASURING ACHIEVEMENT OF EXPECTED OUTCOMES 1. Identify dates for school visitations consistent with APPR Plan 2. Identify dates for progress meetings with Superintendent related to each identified targeted goal 3. Identify dates for quarterly assessment of overall progress
_____________________________________ Superintendent
___________________ Date
_____________________________________ Principal
____________________ Date
PRINCIPAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

AREA(S) OF IMPROVEMENT
STRATEGIES THE PRINCIPAL WILL USE TO IMPROVE SPECIFIC RESOURCES TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO HELP
PROPOSED MEASUREMENTS & TIMELINE FOR IMPROVEMENT
VISIONOFLEARNING
SCHOOLCULTURE; INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
COMMUNITYRELATIONS
INTEGRIY,FAIRNESS, ETHICS
CULTURALCOURTESY
COLLABORATION
eparatesheetsmaybeattachedforeachAreaofImprovementinordertocompletetherequiredinformation.
rincipalSignature_______________________________________________________________Date_________________ ssistantSupt.Signature__________________________________________________________Date________________ uperintendentSignature_________________________________________________________Date_________________
PRINCIPAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROGRESS RECORD FORM

Summary of meeting (Superintendent or Assist Supt)
SIGN-OFF BY BOTH PARTIES
________________ ________________
Meeting #1 Date ____________
_______________
Meeting #2 Date ____________ _______________
________________
Meeting #3 Date ____________ ________________
________________
Meeting #4 Date ____________ ________________
________________
Meeting #5 Date ____________ ________________
_________________
Meeting #6 Date ____________ _________________
_________________ __________________
Meeting #7 Date ____________

Greenport School's State-Approved APPR Plan, 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Greenport School's State-Approved APPR Plan, 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Greenport School's State-Approved APPR Plan, 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THESTATEEDUCATIONDEPARTMENT/THEUNIVERSITYOFTHESTATEOFNEWYORK

PresidentoftheUniversityoftheStateofNewYork 89WashingtonAve.,Room111 Albany,NewYork12234

Email:commissioner@mail.nysed.gov Twitter:@JohnKingNYSED Tel:(518)4745844 Fax:(518)4734909

December 13, 2012

John B. King, Jr. Commissioner Attachment c: Dean Lucera

Annual Professional Performance Reviews: 2012-13

1. SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATION 1.1) School District's BEDS Number : 581010020000

1.2) School District Name: GREENPORT UFSD

1.3) School Improvement Grant (SIG) Districts Only

1.4) Award Classification

1.7) Is this submission for an annual or multi-year plan?

2. Growth on State Assessments or Comparable Measures (Teachers)

STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES AS COMPARABLE GROWTH MEASURES (20 points)

State assessments(or Regents or Regent equivalents), required if one exists

If no State assessment or Regents exam exists:

2.2) Grades K-3 ELA

ELA 3 State assessment

Assessment 3rd Grade State Assessment

2.3) Grades K-3 Math

Math 3 State assessment

Assessment 3rd Grade State Assessment

Teachers with percentages from 65 to 73

Teachers with percentages from 59 to 64 Teachers with percentages from below 59

2.4) Grades 6-8 Science

Science 8 State assessment

Assessment 8th Grade State Science Assessment

2.5) Grades 6-8 Social Studies

Assessment Greenport developed grade 6 soc studiesassessment

District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment District, regional or BOCES-developed assessment

2.6) High School Social Studies Regents Courses

Assessment Regents assessment Regents assessment

2.7) High School Science Regents Courses

2.8) High School Math Regents Courses

2.9) High School English Language Arts

2.10) All Other Courses

2.11) HEDI Tables or Graphics

2.12) Locally Developed Controls

2.13) Teachers with more than one growth measure

Checked Checked Checked Checked Checked

3. Local Measures (Teachers)

Measures based on:

3.1) Grades 4-8 ELA

4) State-approved 3rd party assessments

Right Reason student assessmnents

3.2) Grades 4-8 Math

3.3) HEDI Tables or Graphics

Measures based on:

3.4) Grades K-3 ELA

3.5) Grades K-3 Math

3.6) Grades 6-8 Science

3.7) Grades 6-8 Social Studies

Assessment Right Reason student assessment Right Reason student assessment

6(ii) School wide measure computed locally

Right Reason student assessment

3.8) High School Social Studies

3.9) High School Science

3.10) High School Math

Teachers achieving below 55% of their students scoring 65 or better