The 2015 state law 3012-d calls for at least two observations per year for teachers. The districts around the state had to negotiate a new evaluation system with their local teacher unions by the end of 2016 based on this law. I have looked at districts where there are agreements and they are having two observations for tenured teachers for the year and a few have more for non-tenured teachers. State law calls for a minimum of two observations and most districts and unions are agreeing to two. It makes sense. You can judge the plans for yourself here.
Even the UFT couldn't mess this one up, right?
The UFT somehow managed to agree to more minimum observations for effective and highly effective teachers than the current system calls for. Right now a teacher rated effective can opt for four informal observations per year. Under the new system it will be four by administration and two (not for evaluation) by other teachers. Who is in there in negotiations representing the classroom teacher? That is three times as many observations as the state calls for.
Does anyone want more observations?
As for the rest of the agreement, it looks like test scores or student growth will count for half of teacher ratings instead of the current 40%. There are new options coming in for the Measures of Student Learning portion that won't be tests but will increase paperwork documentation by leaps and bounds to show how students are learning. Who grades these new "authentic assessments"? Will it be the same principals who continually harass our members?
Below is Mulgrew's email explaining the new system. That is followed by Chancellor Farina's email to principals.