One of the "big gains" in the current 2019 UFT Contract was when NYC joined the other school districts in the state in calling for two observations annually per teacher. Well, at least two observations for tenured teachers rated well previously. This "gain" looks like it is a case of the Department of Education giving to us what we already have.
The current state law on evaluations since 2015 calls for two observations per year for teachers. I recall UFT President Michael Mulgrew at a Delegate Assembly telling us the state will take an annual rating with two observations. I know for a fact he was right as it happened to me in 2016-17 under the current law. I didn't complain as I was rated overall highly effective. I laughed. Most teachers have been unnecessarily stuck with four observations or more per year. A minimum of two in NYC was not supposed to start until the 2019-2020 school year according to the UFT Contract.
However, the UFT has put out something that I found in Gene Mann's The Organizer stating that two observations for this year are perfectly acceptable for a Measures of Teaching Progress part of the annual rating, whether positive or negative.
From The Organizer:
In
the event a teacher does not receive the minimum number of observations
required by his/her Observation Option selection, the teacher shall receive an MOTP (Measures of Teaching Progress)Rating
provided that all of the following criteria are met: (a) there are at least two school-based
evaluator observations (formal and/or informal); (b) all of the following components
are rated: 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3(c), and 3(d); and (c) seven of the eight
components of the NYC MOTP Rubric are rated. If any of the foregoing
requirements are not met, the teacher shall receive an annual rating of
Satisfactory, unless the teacher had excessive absences or otherwise
contributed to the insufficient number of observations in which case the school
administration may provide a Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory rating pursuant to
Article 8(J)(l) of the 2009-2018 CBA. At the conclusion of each school year,
the parties agree to meet and discuss the implementation of this provision and
may collectively agree to modifications for the upcoming school year. Nothing
in this section c shall be interpreted to limit the right of the Department or
a teacher to make any argument in a § 3020-a or § 3020-b
hearing.
Wouldn't it be fair if the UFT insisted on administration doing the four observations if they want to rate a teacher negatively? No administrator would be stupid enough not to rate all of the required components in two observations if they are out to get someone. This document makes it easier for DOE as far as I can tell. I strongly support fewer observations but I think if administration fails to keep their end of the bargain by not doing the required number of observations that they agreed to do, then as a consequence they should not be able to rate someone poorly.
Does anyone know where the document in italics that Gene Mann referred to comes from? I'd be happy to fix this posting if I am missing something.
29 comments:
If this is true then THE UFT BETTER GET ON IT THIS WEEK and ensure that those of us who had two effective observations so far this year do not need any more. I still have two more to go but my first two were effective. I'm still walking on eggshells every day for the next 2 observations. Get this done UFT!
Oh yeah, I don't want to hear that the UFT is too busy with the election. That is the business of the American Arbitration Association. In fact, if the UFT gets us 2 observations right now, it would be a massive "win" for Unity during this election cycle.
Two is the law. The UFT and DOE are saying what happens if the DOE only does 2.
ANNO: 7:01-NYS law says that 2 is all that is needed. However, our current contract says that we have to have at least 4. The 2 observations are not "supposed" to start till next year but why in the hell is this happening? We should be able to have 2 observations right now if the 2 observations were effective or higher. Why is the UFT not making a stand on this???
Wait- if I'm understanding correctly, my three observations so far which are either E or HE may be it for the year? I'll take what I have and happily skip my formal.
Because the UFT is looking out for management, not for you. Isn't that kind of clear?
Just read that at last nights UFT Executive Board meeting there was no mention of this. If those dudes at MORE want votes they should have brought this up. For the life of me, I can't understand what the hell is wrong with people in charge around here.
Just one more reason to drop out.
Two of the MORE people are running with Unity. Where have you been?
5:10 am is the average teacher. Knows next to nothing about the political situation in the UFT.
I proudly voted for the entire soladarity slate. Hope others do as well.
Hey, I'm Anno 5:10am. I am not the "average teacher". I've been busting my ass in the DOE since 1996 and I know exactly what the hell I am talking about. MORE won seats to the ex board during the last election. They promised to question the working conditions for teachers. The point is that they are not following through. And yes, I know that some of them sold out and are running with Unity. However, none of that means shit when it comes to getting us 2 observations right now. Every caucus during this election season should be making an effort to get 2 observations now so they can gain more votes. It seems pretty simple unless you believe there is a Unity conspiracy to not make an effort right now on observations. (This is something that I do believe is somewhat plausible by the way) Oh yeah, I voted MORE slate a week ago.
I voted Solidarity. MORE is the Communists and Unity is basically the corporatist otherwise known as Fascists. New Action did not field officer candidates. That left Solidarity. Easy choice really. I don't think you are very politically savvy if you voted MORE. They purged non leftists.
I made a typo when I was writing at 5:14. I actually voted for Solidarity last week. (I voted MORE in the last election) Solidarity is the only caucus that is dedicated 100% for improving the working conditions for teachers.
2 observations has everyone I know petrified. As I understand it, both will be unannounced drivebys. What?!?! Why aren’t people commenting here? Literally everyone I talk to is deeply concerned.
Two observations is the state law that just about everyone wanted for NYC. Now you want more? I don't understand.
I want full-period, announced observations. Are you pretending not to understand so as to defend this awful contract? That’s what Mulgrew’s people do. I thought you were on our side. Can you imagine what targets experienced teachers are going to be when an AP can ding them in two unannounced 15 minute drivebys?
They can ding you with two unannounced now. Read the agreement sgain if that is unclear. This blog led the fight against this contract and has a petition to get rid of the evaluation system.
NYS law states that the minimum amount of observations for tenured, effective, teachers in 2 informal observations. I agree with the poster above that I would prefer at least one of my observations to be formal but I am way happy that we got two instead of 4 next year. I also agree that principals can "get" you now just as easily as they will be able to do next year. However, the stress level will be mitigated next year as only one observation will be done in each half of the year. My worry is that many asshole principals are going to give shitty observations on the first one just to scare people and then tell the teachers that they can always do 2 more instead of one more. (Can this happen? I do not know)
They can do as many as they like.
James, that is exactly my point. They could always do as many as they like. Thank god that 99% of admins have not gone over what ever number they needed to do. They could have killed us with 4 and next year they could kill us with 2. The rad thing is that now most teachers are not going to have to sweat 4 obsos during ANY TIME OF THE YEAR. You will get one in the first half of the year and then one in the second half of the year. 99% of admis do not want to be spending time stalking teachers. If they hate you it will be obvious right off the bat in the first half of the year.
We will probably end up seeing things we did not expect with the new contract rules on observations. DOE has little, if any, regard for the UFT contract. We will see what happens.
Maybe teachers can ask a principal if they can make one of their observations a formal, announced one. The law is written as the minimum is 2 unannounced observations but there is no harm if both teacher and principal agree to making one of the observations a formal one.
Sorry, i know this is an old post. But I just got my advanced overall rating. I got developing for my MOTP (i was 0.1 short of effective). But my MOSL is effective, and my overall advanced rating is effective. The previous year i was rated effetive. Does it mean I will have 2 obs? or 3 obs? please give me some insight. thanks!
Two minimum. Maximum is as many as admin wants.
James: So sorry to bother you again. The UFT new rule on teacher rating for the previous year or current year, is it basee on MOTP (the rating given by the APs)? Or is it the Advanced Overall Rating (which includes the Regents score)? I can't find any text on the UFT website about this. Thanks so much.
Pretty sure it is overall. It would have to say MOTP and it does not. No bother at all.
Any update on observations. UFT has changed nothing. Why am I paying these dues they suck.
Has anything changed for your school? Update us please.
Post a Comment