PETITION TO MAKE DOE A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROVIDER

There is an online petition that I support calling for the Department of Education to become an approved state provider of professional development. Teachers with professional certificates need to do 100 hours of PD and since the DOE is not an approved PD provider, the endless hours that teachers do after school do not count.

I'm not sure whether DOE not becoming an approved state PD provider is due to incompetence or malice toward teachers?

Here is a part of the petition:

The new professional certification requirements state that New York State teachers must earn 100 hours of professional development through SED (State Education Department) approved CTLE (Continuing Teacher & Leader Education) sponsors over a five year period. 

The teachers of New York City insist that our school districts become approved CTLE sponsors ASAP. 

According to the law, school districts are eligible to become sponsors.

 http://www.nysut.org/resources/all-listing/2016/january/faqs-about-certificate-registration-and-ctle-requirements

http://www.highered.nysed.gov/tcert/news/newsitem05122015.html

Teachers participate in professional development on a weekly basis, as per contract requirements. 

These hours should absolutely count towards the 100 hour SED requirement. However, since the NYC DOE is currently not an approved CTLE sponsor, none of these hours can be used towards our certification requirements. This does not make sense. 

 http://www.uft.org/files/attachments/moa-contract-2014.pdf 

The petition throws in a little dig at the UFT at the end:

We request that the United Federation of Teachers help us in making this a reality, instead of encouraging union members to pay for the CTLE courses offered at UFT Teacher Centers. 

PEP GETS POLITICAL AGAINST TRUMP TONIGHT AT TWEED

It is very interesting how the Panel for Education Policy and the Chancellor who tell teachers to be neutral politically are having a special meeting tonight at Tweed to oppose Betsy DeVos for national Secretary of Education.

I of course oppose DeVos and urge everyone to do what they can to fight her confirmation but if we succeed, do you think President Donald Trump is going to appoint someone to the job who supports public education?

The emergency PEP meeting looks to me like part of Mayor Bill de Blasio's reelection campaign. About a week ago, we predicted that he would run against Donald Trump for reelection as mayor no matter who his opponent is. Tonight's spectacle at DOE Central just kind of confirms our thinking.

Add to this the Mayor's fundraising legal troubles might be catching up to him, as Reality Based Educator told us in a comment here at the ICEUFT blog, and we can see clearly that the obvious reelection strategy for Democrats is to run as if Trump is on the ballot.

It is a smart strategy but it doesn't do much for us working in the schools.

UPDATE
The PEP voted on Monday night against DeVos. Here is Chancellor Farina's statement.

Was she neutral?
“People need to understand that we live in a democracy, and a democracy is a place where educators teach students and adults to use their intelligence to make decisions based on facts,” she said. “I admire the PEP for deciding that this is an issue that is of importance to them … It’s all about leadership and making decisions, and then standing up and saying ‘This is what I believe.’” 

UNION MEMBERSHIP DOWN IN US AND NYS

Union membership is slipping both nationally and in New York State. If one wants to examine the causes of wages and benefits slipping for working and middle class people in this country, start looking at the decline of unions as a major factor.

This is troubling reading from City Limits via Mike Schirtzer.

The number of U.S. workers who belonged to labor unions fell by a quarter million nationwide in 2016, continuing a decline of worker power that has spanned decades.

The federal Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Thursday that 10.7 percent of wage and salary workers belonged to unions, a 0.4 percent drop over 2015 and the lowest share of the workforce recorded over the 33 years for which detailed statistics are available. With 14.6 million union members, the U.S. now has 3.1 million fewer than it did when reliable data begins in 1983, when one in five workers belonged.

Public-sector workers continued to have far higher unionization rates than their private-sector counterparts, and from 24.7 percent in 2015 to 23.6 percent in 2016. New York’s union membership fell from 2.038 million to 1.942 million last year.

Republicans as well as corporate Democrats are the enemies of working people.

Many here would argue that the leadership of the unions are also not our friends.

DOE SPENDING 70% MORE ON CENTRAL STAFF UNDER DE BLASIO

Lindsey Christ on NY 1 reported that the NYC Department of Education is spending much more on central bureaucracy now compared to when Mayor Michael Bloomberg was mayor.

She reports:
Under Mayor Bill de Blasio, the Department of Education is spending a lot more on its staff at headquarters.

Under the preliminary budget the mayor unveiled Tuesday, the city would be spending 70 percent more on education bureaucrats than under Mayor Michael Bloomberg four years ago.

Later in the story Lindsey provides some specific figures:

The city spent $123 million on central staff at the Education Department in the year that began July 2013. That number has steadily grown to a projected $210 million in the year beginning this July 1.

UFT President Michael Mulgrew is interviewed in the story but he doesn't quite sound agitated about the increased spending on the central DOE bureaucracy. UFT criticism of the Mayor and Chancellor is usually quite mild these days.

The city argues that new programs like pre-K and Renewal Schools have forced the bureaucracy to expand. Their defense even sounds ridiculous.

Non personnel spending is up too at central.

Is anyone surprised?

We covered why hiring a "Senior Adviser for Talent Management" is a waste of money earlier this month.

Anyone else know of any excess spending by the DOE?

CITY BUDGET CALLS FOR INCREASED SPENDING BUT CITY COULD SOON CRY POVERTY

On Tuesday, Mayor de Blasio released the fiscal year 2018 budget. It has huge reserves. The budget calls for almost $85 billion in spending, which is an increase over this year.

This is from the Mayor's Fact Sheet on the budget:

The City does recognize the need to be cautious in the face of uncertainty. As a result, this administration has put a record amount of funding in reserves. Specifically:

• The General Reserve is at $1 billion in FY18 and every year of the financial plan, compared to the traditional $300 million.
• The Retiree Health Benefits Trust Fund is at $4 billion, $3.3 billion the result of this Administration.
• The Capital Stabilization Reserve that was established under this Administration in FY16 has been modified to include $250 million in every year of the four-year plan, compared to the one-time $500 million previously established.

As a result, independent monitors and rating agencies continue to affirm the City’s strong budgetary management.

The Administration is also managing out-year gaps and continuing to find savings across City government. As of the Preliminary Budget, agency and debt savings will reduce expenses by $1.1 billion in FY17-18. This is addition to the $1 billion found in the FY17 November Plan and with more to come in the Executive Budget this spring.

It looks like the city is flush with cash however when President Donald Trump announced yesterday that the federal government could cut funding to sanctuary cities, the Mayor came out fighting. De Blasio now has an issue to claim the city might be broke and he also has his de facto adversary for reelection: Trump.

Here is part of de Blasio's reaction to Trump's Executive Order on sanctuary cities from Politico New York.

"President Trump issued an executive order today and it's purported purpose was to enhance public safety, but here in New York City and in cities across this nation this executive order could in fact undermine public safety," de Blasio said during a quickly arranged press conference at City Hall, as the New York Police Department Commissioner James O'Neill and a dozen other senior city officials stood at his side.

De Blasio argued that the "potential funding cuts suggested in the executive order would first and foremost fall on the NYPD," and that "the executive order on its face contradicts its stated purpose," which is to help keep Americans safe. 

Look for the Mayor to blame Washington for whatever problems the city may have. It is a smart reelection strategy.

When municipal labor contracts come due, expect the city to scream that it is broke.

PORT JEFFERSON STATION TEACHERS ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT RESPONDS TO SENATOR FLANAGAN ENDORSING DEVOS

COPE funds are voluntary political contributions that NYSUT members, including UFT members, make.

Beth Dimino is the President of the Port Jefferson Station Teachers Association on Long Island. She and the other Long Island Presidents (teacher union local leaders) led the fight against Senator John Flanagan's reelection in 2016. Flanagan is the Republican leader in the New York State Senate. NYSUT contributed the maximum amount to Flanagan's committee to elect Republicans. Flanagan won. To be fair it should be noted that NYSUT contributed the maximum to Democrats as well. However, NYSUT would not endorse Flanagan's opponent in the election.

Flanagan has rewarded our generosity by signing a letter in support of confirming Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education. He is the only New York official who signed the letter.

Beth responds as only she can:

A note from PJSTA President Beth Dimino…

NYSUT Members…

Here’s a reminder that I believe is pertinent at this time. Last August there was a NYSUT President’s endorsement conference to decide who NYSUT would endorse in the November elections. Well, even though I knew it was a farce, I went to that meeting to represent my members. The Long Island Presidents were tasked with deciding whether or not Flanagan and Marcellino should get a NYSUT endorsement. Not only did we as a group demand that these men not get the endorsement, we had other candidates that NYSUT could have endorsed. Our recommendations went to the NYSUT Board of Directors. Andy Pallotta brought John Flanagan to that Board of Directors meeting to try and convince the Board of Directors to overturn what the LI Presidents decided.

NYSUT leadership has their own agenda completely devoid of the needs or wants of rank and file. As the Executive Vice President of NYSUT, Pallotta, has gotten us Tier 5/6, 50% of our APPR dependent upon our student’s scores on the NYS Assessments, and another term for Flanagan and Marcellino. Pallotta has unfettered access to ALL Vote Cope Funds. Donating any money at all to Vote Cope is counter productive and is in direct opposition to our own best interests. Call your business office tomorrow and reduce your Cope contribution to $0 until NYSUT Leadership changes.

A FEW THOUGHTS ON YESTERDAY'S PROTEST MARCHES

I totally support yesterday's Women's March on DC as well as the many other marches around the country and the world.


ABC is talking about over a million protesters at these marches. That is nothing to sneeze at. Great job everyone. Protesting President Donald Trump in these numbers sends a powerful message.This is just the beginning.

That said, I am a bit perplexed about this UFT poster.





This UFT poster was published on the Raging Horse blog.

UFT and revolution? I have a hard time accepting the two together. Our union can't even get a good contract or decent evaluation system with two observations a year for most teachers.

Maybe I am too cynical about our union.

Enough with criticizing our union. I think they did the right thing by participating in the marches. In the end, I salute everyone who marched, including activists from Middle College High School, ICE and MORE.

As for the next four years, please check out the Perdido Street School blog. Reality Based Educator is prognosticating incompetence mixed with insanity. Hard to argue with that.

 

UFT LOSES TWU-UFT APPLES TO APPLES SALARY INCREASE COMPARISON

The figures are now in for a real life 2009-2018 comparison of the UFT and the Transport Workers Union Local 100 (NYC subway and bus workers) contracts. It is clear if we are comparing salaries, the TWU wins handily even if their last two years don't quite measure up to the UFT's final two.

TWU's negotiators also didn't accept adding in back pay piecemeal like the UFT did for 2009-2011. To date, only 4% of the 8% we were supposed to have received in those years has been added to our pay. The money won't be added in full until May of 2018.

When the interest free loan UFT members made to the city for all that arrears that the city won't pay us back fully until 2020 is placed into this comparison, UFT loses hands down.



Let's add in the actual 2017 and 2018 TWU raises. These are the two years the TWU just agreed to in their new contract.

           UFT                                  TWU
2017 -  2.5%                                 2.5%
2018 -    3%                                 2.5%
Total     18%                                  24%

TWU still wins big.

(Add on three extra months for the TWU as it is a 28 month agreement, but I doubt the UFT will get 6% for those 3 months. Oh yeah and there is a $500 bonus for TWU too.)

FEWER OBSERVATIONS FOR TEACHERS VOTED DOWN BY UNITY

I tried folks; I really tried to convince our union's majority Unity Caucus to see reason and vote for fewer observations for teachers. Below is the motion I introduced earlier at the Delegate Assembly for two observations for teachers followed by my motivation in support of it.

The DA Unity majority (Michael Mulgrew's political party) voted the motion down after UFT Secretary Howie Schoor spoke against me. I respectfully asked that the speaker against be a teacher who is subject to Danielson and not an officer or retiree but I guess Unity didn't trust one of their people who actually works in a school.

President Michael Mulgrew after the vote stated for the record that the UFT pushed for two observations for teachers. They must have not pushed very hard as we have four as the minimum.

In negotiations with the city, all Mulgrew had to do was say more than two observations and we're walking away from the table. Most unions around the state have two observations. Some of us in our sleep could negotiate better than this group.

The only way it changes is if people get the word about this outrage into the schools.

Motion for Delegate Assembly

January 18, 2017

Whereas, State law now mandates 2 observations per year for teachers; and

Whereas, many teachers would benefit from fewer observations than the minimum 4 UFT agreed to; be it therefore

Resolved, that the UFT will demand for 2017-18 and beyond 2 observations per year for most teachers.

Talking Points

The teacher observation system, particularly under the Danielson framework, is broken beyond repair. In many schools, administrators use the observations to scare the living daylights out of teachers. Comments on the ICE blog tell horror stories where teachers live in fear of drive bys where they can be unfairly criticized on those cookie cutter domains. For most of the rest of us the observations are a huge waste of time where we learn virtually nothing to improve our teaching practice.

Under these circumstances, the vast majority of teacher unions across the state are agreeing to have a minimum of two observations per year for teachers based on the new education law 3012D. New York City has a minimum of four for this year. It’s excessive.

For the future, we should go to two like most other districts. Teachers would be happy as would sane administrators. The argument against fewer observations is that the more observations administrators do, it forces them to do their job properly and if they don’t, we can fight them in APPR complaints. The reality is by compelling more observations, administrators are getting practice and practice makes them do the hatchet job better. I’ve seen this with my wife who has been relentlessly attacked by administration and we fight off what we can but they are getting better after they lose.

Administration could always do as many observations as they like. We could put in a little clause that says two is the minimum and there should be more for teachers who have particular needs as the Office of Appeals and Reviews mandated under the old S or U system. Putting this little line in would force the viscous principals to do it right while sparing the rest of us from the ordeal that is the 4 observations per year.

I would also like to point out to the Delegates that Friedrichs the Sequel is working its way through the federal courts and mandatory union dues may soon be a thing of the past. Members need to know the UFT is fighting on their behalf. By pushing for fewer observations, it would take a giant step in the right direction.

In closing, I respectfully ask that a speaker against this motion at least be someone who is evaluated by Danielson and not an officer or retiree who has never been subjected to it. Instead, I urge you to pass this motion to push for fewer observations.

LIVE BLOGGING FROM JANUARY DA (unedited)

President's Report
I came in when President Mulgrew was talking about inauguration. Might be more people protesting. DC buses filled to women's march. Rally in NYC Saturday. March to Trump Tower.

State
Michigan and Indiana are labs for what will happen nationally. Total free market in education. Education does not matter. Indiana has vouchers. Public schools left for special ed mostly in those two states.

Parent leader and Board of Ed president from Michigan came to Albany. State went from top 20% to bottom 20%. Rural, suburban and urban all ruined. Cyberschools hurt too. Legislators need to know we are not talking about conspiracy theories. It is reality. DeVos coming to DC. She will more than likely be Education Secretary and she thinks education is just about making money.

DeVos talking about people in schools needing guns because of possible grisly bears is a national joke. DeVos didn't do well at confirmation hearing according to pundits. Talking point is to say something is fake news. Grassroots campaign highlighting public schools.

Positive campaign needed for Albany. Not just NYC. Need people to stand up and fight for their public schools.

State budget
Decent starting number for education. Governor now our friend. Asking him to protect public education. He says he will work to keep Millionaires tax. Money tight in Albany. Eva Moskowitz in Albany today pushing for more per pupil funding.

Waiting to see if there is an opening on evaluations to keep moratorium on common core testing going. DeVos funded tuition tax credit to take money from public schools in NY.

New evaluation system
900 chapter leaders showed up at evaluation training. We advocated for a fair system. Looking to phased in student learning measures.

Make sensible changes. Tell principals: my kids learn, you lose.

Not more observations. If we are working as teams, we would want intervisitations. Danielson now a dirty word. Need no new paperwork with intervisitations.

DOE
9 schools set to close this year or are consolidating. Does that mean renewal schools are failing? Politically dangerous to say schools are failing, particularly when other schools with same demographics are doing fine. DOE has to tell principals that principal autonomy is not working. One paperwork arbitration is because principal defied central paperwork committee.

Positive Campaign called Public School Proud
We are learning from field. Design something transferable from NYC to rest of country. Celebrate neighborhood public schools. Public wants strong neighborhood public schools. Champion public schools, honor student accomplishments.  "Show your love for public schools" is the slogan.

We need to talk about our classrooms, our students, and our school communities. Many ways to tell our story. Things like holding a showcase fair, or holding a school spirit rally, or making videos. Positive messaging.

Steps
Sign up on UFT website, figure out what to do and then share story with UFT. Populate UFT website with activities and then spread it nationally. Inspire country.

Mulgrew then showed an anti-DeVos commercial made by a chapter leader. 300,000 hits on video. Need to show friends and colleagues around the country how it is done.

Resolution on public school proud was proposed. It passed unanimously.

Staff Director's Report

Leroy Barr gave a bunch of dates including next DA Feb 8.

Question period
Questions on the save room, evaluations and more were asked. Nothing earth shattering in answers.

Motions
Mike Schirtzer from MORE made a motion for next month to further support immigrants. He said we need to do more for immigrants. He said we should not call the kids illegals.

Leroy Barr spoke against saying resolution was poorly worded.

The motion received many votes but failed.

I raised a motion to push for 2 observations per year for UFT members for 2017-18 and beyond. ( will put up my talking points in favor later but it kind of speaks for itself.)

Howie Schoor spoke against saying basically the new observation system is great. Fewer ineffective ratings now. My motion was voted down by Delegates. Mulgrew said for the record we pushed for two observations per year.

Special Orders of Business
A resolution opposing vouchers and one in opposition to DeVos both passed unanimously.  Finally, a resolution to get a staff loung/cafeteria in every school passed.

More later.

NYC TRANSIT WORKERS CONTRACT NOTHING TO BE ASHAMED OF

Transport Workers Union Local 100 settled their contract right after it expired on January 15th. We have seen the details and in this age of concessionary unionism, there are no concessions that we can see. There are also two raises for NYC subway and bus workers that beat the current inflation rate. Here are the details from the Daily News:

The deal for the 28-month contract — arriving hours after the current contract expired Sunday night — includes two raises of 2.5% over the first 26 months, plus a $500 bonus for the final two months for 38,000 subway and bus workers, according to two sources.

Not being a member of this union, I have no standing to tell them how to vote. I will say that the salary increases come to a little over 2% a year which is not horrible. It also looks like there are no givebacks. The one concern is that the TWU extended the contract to 28 months so in the future the TWU contract will expire in May.

If there ever is another transit strike, it will not come in the dead of winter; it will be in the middle of spring, unless they wait for months after their contract expires to hit the streets. That has to be seen as a win for management.

IS IT THIS BAD IN THE SCHOOLS?

This is a comment from our last post on the UFT's history:

I am making $85,000 right now. (Been teaching in NYC for 18 years) I would literally take a ten grand pay cut if we could revert to the old "S" and "U" evaluation system with only one announced observation per year. I suffer severe anxiety and insomnia due to the stress of Danielson drive by observations. Every day I go into school wondering if today is "the day" of an unannounced observation. I feel like I am walking on eggshells filled with acid.

My wife Camille is working in a school, Humanities and the Arts Magnet High School, where the conditions for teachers described above are replicated. She has felt the same way since 2015, after being on the receiving end of relentless, brutal attacks from Principals Omard and Ayetiwa as well as AP Stergiopolous.

On the other hand, I have worked under very good conditions since arriving at Middle College High School in 2014. Before that, I taught for many years at Jamaica High School where we had a very strong Chapter so very few people had to deal with an abusive work environment.

How about the rest of you? From meeting some of you, our readership contains a mix of both left, center and right, political and apolitical teachers.

What are conditions like for teachers in most schools these days?

We know how some rotating ATRs have described the many hell-holes. Is that the norm? I'd really like to know what your schools are like since I am still a UFT Delegate and at the Delegate Assembly I hear from the UFT President how wonderful the schools are.

Chancellor Carmen Farina wrote a letter to the NY Post saying that these are the best days ever for the NYC schools. She cites the record graduation rate as proof. Is she right or are the diploma mills known as the NYC schools the mess most of us who read this blog think they are?

Please keep it as clean as possible if you are going to comment.

MORE MONEY FOR MOREY

A couple of weeks back we posted a piece that was in part about the UFT becoming a one party state. It received many hits. In the posting, we copied an excerpt from Class Struggles: the UFT Story by Jack Schierenbeck concerning the 1962 UFT strike.

I was curious about how far we've come since those days before the UFT had its initial contract. In terms of class size, we haven't made any gains since the 1960's as Arthur Goldstein's Daily News Op-Ed shows. But back in those days, we actually were able to get class size limits in the contract. Having a union actually improved teacher working conditions. Before the UFT, no contract at all.

What about in terms of salary?

Don Morey was a brave picketer during the 1962 strike. He was not embarrassed to be asking for more money for himself. He held a sign saying, "More Money for Morey." According to the Class Struggles account, he was a 7 year teacher who was earning $6,810 back then. If we use an inflation calculator, that comes to $54,420.30 in 2017 dollars.

What is the base salary for a teacher in 2017 on Step 7A who has worked at least five of those years in the NYC system?

$58,870. Considering that we work a longer day these days, it appears that we have only improved by a few hundred dollars compared to 1962.

However, if we take the Masters salary, still counting a half hour longer day (that endless PD on Monday and Tuesdays for most schools counts as part of our day), we are making $65,282 so teachers are considerably better off financially because of the UFT. Remember, the UFT fought for the promotional differential for all teachers. At the Masters +30 credits level, the salary comparison becomes even more in favor of the benefits of a union as it jumps to $71,692.

Those sixties militants who went on strike four times in that decade also won a Tier I pension which is far superior to what the current Tier IV-TierVI teachers have, class size limits (we haven't improved on them since), and more. Teachers became respected because they stood up for themselves.

If we look at the deterioration of the pension for Tier VI hires, weakened due process, an awful evaluation system and more, it is abundantly clear that our Union leadership has been accepting givebacks to throw away much of what people like Don Morey fought for. That makes me sad, angry and concerned about the future. If, or maybe I should say when, the UFT is weakened so teachers no longer have to pay union dues, too many people who read this blog are going to cut off their noses to spite their faces by quitting the union. Their reasonable rationale will be that the UFT does not work in their interests.

That might be a compelling argument but in some ways it's on us to fix it, not Michael Mulgrew. Yes his Unity Caucus has rigged the game with their patronage system that compels people to be loyal to the caucus to get union perks and Unity controls the flow of information so most teachers only hear the Unity spin. However, what if that Unity system was brought down by the people who have the power to do it: the membership? What is the teachers en masse woke up? I still say it is possible.

We can either wait for Friedrichs the Sequel to come around so some of us can choose not to pay union dues or we can work to stop the deterioration of our working conditions by uniting to become a militant union again.

 The gains teachers made in their lives were won when teachers fought the hardest collectively for their rights. I would like to start the process to do just that again.

THE NEW "SENIOR ADVISER FOR TALENT MANAGEMENT" IS JUST ANOTHER DOE WASTE OF MONEY

NYC Educator and Chaz have already written about the Department of Education creating a new position called "Senior Adviser for Talent Management." Who was the genius who created this title? His job will be to find positions in schools for Absent Teacher Reserves according to the Daily News.

Breaking News: ATR's already have jobs. We are teachers who work for the NYC school system.

The cost to the taxpayers for the Senior Adviser for Talent Management will be $185,298 per year. My understanding is he will have a staff in the ATR office. NYC Educator is cautiously optimistic about this new position. Chaz is more skeptical. I see it as comical. We don't need a Senior Adviser for Talent Management. We need someone to just place the Absent Teacher Reserves and end the program. It would be very easy to accomplish this task. I could do it for free.

This blog came up with a solution to this totally fake crisis that we proposed back before the latest UFT contract was settled in 2014.

We described the history of the Absent Teacher Reserve system, how the pool exploded under Mayor Bloomberg and we proposed a quick, easy answer.

We explained how right wing and neo-liberal, union haters want hiring and firing of teachers to be up to principals exclusively. This flies in the face of civil service laws which were put in place to cut down on what was massive government corruption back in the late 19th century. We also discussed seniority and unionism.

Seniority rights are a basic union principle.  If the DOE wants to terminate a tenured teacher, they have to go through the legally mandated 3020A process, which still exists although it certainly is weaker under the new teacher evaluation law.

We also pointed out why Absent Teacher Reserves, who are usually senior teachers, are generally not hired for permanent positions in schools.

If a principal were to hire someone like me with twenty-eight years experience, I would take my rightful place on the school's seniority list and probably be one of the senior people in that school in the Social Studies Department.  If that school then was downsized due to decreased enrollments or there was a budget cut (always a possibility), the Principal would be stuck with me and have to place into excess a newer teacher.  I understand why principals would want to protect their junior people who will more than likely not be tenured and can be made to do whatever administration wants (for example pass every student) as opposed to someone like me who might have some problems with that.

Looking back, I predicted my own future. I have been an ATR-Provisional Teacher since Jamaica High School closed in June of 2014. Most of the time I have been at Middle College HS as a Provisional Teacher replacing someone who has been on Child Care Leave. If I am appointed permanently, I would become the senior teacher in the Social Studies Department and a junior teacher would then be put at risk if the school is downsized due to budget cuts (always a possibility). I don't blame the Principal, a wonderful human being and excellent administrator, for being reluctant to hire me permanently although we are trying to work something out. As of today, I'm still officially an ATR. A one year subsidy doesn't really help her much.

How can this fake problem be solved citywide? It's easy.

We had the answer back in 2014. Go back to a version of the system we used before Randi Weingarten and Joel Klein created this mess in the 2005 UFT contract. Let teachers teach where they want to. Here is what I proposed:

The best way to get the ATRs back in the classroom this fall would be to make hiring decisions for people from closing schools (and other ATRs) in a similar manner to the way it was done before the horrific 2005 contract.  Back then teachers were given placement choices within the widest range possible by the Board of Education if a school was closed or reorganized (old Contractual Article 18G).  Senior teachers were not seen as ogres who caused schools to shut down in those days (nor did we cost principals more on their annual budgets).

A teacher was given a wish-list of six schools and then was sent to one of them. Since some principals are reluctant to take veteran teachers in the current educational climate because we may talk too much, there would have to be a deal reached to influence some of them to accept ATRs.

The DOE should give ATRs the six school wish-list but instead of sticking ATRs on principals and making them pay on the school budget, the DOE should pay for ATRs centrally for their entire salary for as long as necessary (maybe up to a decade) when an ATR is placed in a school. A principal would not be charged a dime from the school's budget.  There would be no extra charge for the city taxpayers either as it's just a matter of paying for people on a central budget-line as opposed to a school budget-line.  Any subsequent downsizing caused by budget cuts or declining enrollments would be neutralized by this real subsidy. ATR's could be used to lower class sizes and guidance caseloads, a not so novel idea.

Under this plan, no ATR who had an ounce of sense would apply for a school that had a vicious anti-teacher principal unless they didn't do homework on schools.  (Yes I know principal turnover is high but at least ATRs could start out at places where they want to be.)

The 2011 policy, still in effect, of forcing ATRs go to a different school every week as highly compensated substitute teachers makes no sense and is a complete waste of  resources. 

Other proposed ATR solutions that keep provisional hiring going - a teacher stays at a school for a year and then can leave or be sent back to the ATR pool by a principal or yearly substitute rotations - will just keep a class of teachers going around from school to school for decades until the last ones retire. Why not just end it now? 

If someone is so bad, document it and use the 3020A process.  Principals could even make someone a co-teacher, as the ATR would not cost them any money, if they are seriously concerned about damage done to children by a specific ATR.  Administrators would actually have more control than they have now as ATRs are sent weekly to different schools to cover classes and principals must accept a different set of ATRs each week.

Fast forward three years to 2017 and watch the city waste more money to hire a "Senior Adviser for Talent Management" and give him a staff to try to find jobs for people who are already working in the system. 

Place the ATRs and save that $100 million as well as the millions that the ATR bureaucracy is costing the city taxpayers.

How about someone at the Daily News or somewhere else writing about how this new job is just adding to the out of control DOE bureaucracy? It is more money being spent on the school system that is not going to the classroom. Where is the press?

NYC TEACHER MILITANCY CAME ORIGINALLY FROM HIGH SCHOOLS 58 YEARS AGO

Norm Scott and Kit Wainer have combined on a concise history of the opposition groups within the UFT. Kit wrote a piece for MORE and Norm added in some of the pre-UFT history. It is excellent reading but it leaves out a group that was very important to our history which was called the High School Teachers Association.

The HSTA was led by two militant leaders named Roger Parente and Samuel Hochberg. They backed the first teacher strike in New York City in January of 1959 when Evening High School Teachers walked off the job.

Many of the details are contained Class Struggles: The UFT Story, Part 4 by Jack Schierenbeck. The entire series is required reading for anyone who wants to know the history of the UFT. Jack was an objective reporter who treated non-Unity Caucus members with respect.

Here is the part on the Evening High School walkout. Note that the Guild and High School Teachers Association eventually merged to form the UFT in 1960.

It’s not surprising, then, that with resistance and rebellion swirling throughout the country, New York teachers stayed out from work for the first time in the city’s history. Fed up with years of rotten conditions and even worse pay — $12.50 a night for four hours — close to 1,000 evening high school teachers all handed in their resignations in January 1959. In resigning they’d hoped to avoid the stiff penalties for striking in defiance of New York’s Condon-Wadlin Act. Enacted in 1947, the law permitted the automatic firing of striking public employees. Even for workers not let go there would be no salary increases for three years and a four-year probationary period.

Resigned or striking, the net effect was the same — night schools were shut down. The job action was a classic wildcat strike, unauthorized by any union. But since most of the teachers also taught in the day high schools, the action won the backing of the High School Teachers Association, especially two of its officers, Samuel Hochberg and Roger Parente — himself an evening school teacher.

Fearing that a successful strike would strengthen the rival HSTA, many in the Guild wanted to do nothing. Ely Trachtenberg showed them where they were wrong. He convinced the Guild’s executive board “that it did not matter which organization sponsored a particular militant action,” Selden recalled in his book. “What mattered was that the workers, in this case the teachers, advance. It was the struggle that was important, not the organization.”

The Guild threw its whole support to the strikers, Guild members walking side by side on the picket line with high school militants. Among the nightly picketers were Selden, Shanker, Trachtenberg and Altomare. In fact, both Shanker and Selden made stops at the various schools in their station wagons, christened “Guild Coffeemobiles,” passing out coffee and donuts. When a rally was called at City Hall, it was the Guild’s telephone network, mimeo machine and tight-knit organizational structure which turned out the crowd.

After a couple of weeks the Board of Education threw in the towel. Wages were raised to $24 a night.

A LOOK BACK AT 2012-2013 OBSERVATION MINIMUMS

I never dreamed I would be nostalgic for old Board of Education rules but after seeing what the UFT has negotiated in the new evaluation system where they want more observations for teachers than the state requires, I thought it would be a good idea to look back to the rules before the 2013-14 school year when the last new evaluation system went into effect.

We learned from Arthur Goldstein's report from last night's Executive Board meeting that the UFT has no intention of reducing the required number of observations. According to Arthur, UFT Personnel Specialist Amy Arundell said the following:

We're not interested in reducing number of for stakes observations. Principals are. Does everyone remember drive bys with S and U? We wanted to overrule people giving judgments based on little data.

As usual, the UFT does not present a complete picture. First of all, someone had to be rated based on formal observations under the old system so drive bys alone could not lead to an adverse rating. We dealt with this successfully through the grievance process at Jamaica High School.

What were the minimum number of observations in the old Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory system?

This is from the Office of Appeals and Reviews. It is page 4 of the old Rating Pedagogical Staff Members guide.

Please note the minimum number of observations for tenured teachers in the districts was one per year and it was the same for high school teachers on maximum.

There was even wording in there to make sure teachers who were in danger of receiving adverse ratings were observed more often.

For teachers with special needs it said, "As many additional observations as are needed should be made for teachers who have particular needs and for any teacher whose performance is less than satisfactory."

That simple safeguard could have been put into the new evaluation agreement instead of 20 pages of "legaleze" favoring management that the UFT agreed to put in with double the number of observations than the state mandates.

One observation from administration in the school and one from an independent outside evaluator is all that is required in the state law and it is what so many teacher unions and their superintendents are agreeing to in New York State outside of NYC.

If I was negotiating, I could have negotiated this in about a minute and a half so that the vast majority of teachers in NYC would be having two observations per year but teachers in danger of adverse Measures of Teacher Practice ratings could have more. It's that simple.

I wonder where the incompetence starts and the malevolence towards teachers ends with UFT leadership.

DRUNK ADMINISTRATOR HAS POWER OVER TEACHERS

If anyone is really interested in fixing, the New York City School's, they could start by cleaning house at Tweed headquarters. Chancellor Carmen Farina made her biggest mistake by keeping most of Mayor Bloomberg's appointments in place at the Central Department of Education.

Next on the agenda if we one day get a pro-public education Chancellor is to end the war on teachers by reigning in what are clearly a set of really horrible administrators in many of the schools.

Sue Edelman has a story in the NY Post on an assistant principal from Brooklyn named Diana Rendon who was caught on camera boozed up, falling off a bed in a hotel during a school retreat. This 33 year old assistant principal has the power to ruin careers of teachers through subjective observations using the Danielson Framework.

Edelman writes:
Staffers said the images were brought to light because Rendon, despite her fun-loving behavior, was a bullying administrator who created a “culture of fear.”

At the end of the 2014-15 school year, some 25 teachers — nearly half the staff — left the school.

“It was posed as an optional weekend of professional development,” one employee said of the retreat. “But if you refused to go you would be retaliated against in the form of negative observations.”

 People like this need to be stopped if there is any chance of restoring teacher confidence and moving the school system ahead with what it most lacks in too many places: integrity.

THIS IS WHAT UNION SURRENDER LOOKS LIKE

Someone sent me the current New York City approved APPR (teacher and principal evaluation) plan.

Read it and weep.

The matrix from that the state approved is a little bit different than the one that Mulgrew touts as there is this tiny asterisk in the city's approved version that you won't see in the UFT Matrix. This is for the two categories where someone is rated Ineffective for the Measures of Student Learning portion of the rating but they are supposed to be rated Developing overall because their observations are Highly effective or Effective. Here is what the city says in explaining the asterisk.

 5.2) Scoring Matrix for the Overall Rating

 * If a teacher is rated Ineffective on the Student Performance category, and a State-designed supplemental assessment was included as an Optional subcomponent of the Student Performance category, the teacher can be rated no higher than Ineffective overall (see Education Law §3012-d (5)(a) and (7))

You can bet that "a State-designed supplemental assessment" will be somewhere on many teacher MOSL scores so as to ensure Ineffective ratings.

As for observations, the plan is now 20 pages worth of "legaleze" that is totally slanted toward management.

The entire attachment on observations is copied for your reading pleasure, or disgust. But first, here is an observation plan from outside of NYC. This one is from Albany.

4.7) Number and Method of Observations
Indicate the minimum number of unannounced and announced observations for each type of observer, as well as the method of observation, in the tables below.

Tenured Teachers
Minimum 1 Announced from Principal
Minimum 1 Unannounced from Independent Evaluator.

There is one additional observation for probationary teachers.

That's it for Albany teachers.

Now for observations in NYC. (I know nothing about the status of a possible waiver the UFT said NYC is trying to get from the independent, outside evaluations.)

Note for NYC it specifically says that the evaluator has sole discretion as to how many observations to do. These are just minimums.

Here is the entire 20 page attachment:

Task 4.7 – Number and Method of Observations Indicate the minimum number of unannounced and announced observations for each type of observer, as well as the method of observation. Note: The following information relates to the observation process for both tenured and probationary teachers.  

The entire Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (2013 Revised Edition) shall be used for formative purposes only. Evaluators (principal/other school-based trained administrator) will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the New York City Measures of Teacher Practice Rubric (NYC MOTP Rubric), a variance of the Danielson Framework for Teaching (2013), consisting of eight (8) components of the Framework for Teaching to determine a teacher’s score on the Teacher Observation Category (“Measures of Teacher Practice” or “MOTP”), which shall apply: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), 3(d), and 4(e). These eight (8) components shall be referred to herein as the “NYC MOTP Rubric.” The NYC MOTP Rubric addresses all seven (7) NYS Teaching Standards and shall be reviewed annually by the evaluator. Impartial Independent Trained Evaluators (“Independent Evaluators”) will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. 

The NYC MOTP Rubric will be rated on a 1-4 scale as “Highly Effective”, “Effective”, “Developing”, or “Ineffective.” No other rating may be given to a component. Once all evaluations are complete, the different types of observations (by the principal/other school-based trained administrator and Independent Evaluator, as required) will be combined using a weighted average, producing an overall MOTP score between 0-4.   

If—and only if—a teacher receives scores of one (1) in all components across all observations, the overall MOTP score automatically results in a score of zero (0). In addition, the overall MOTP score shall be converted into an overall MOTP rating, using permissible ranges as prescribed in Subparts §30-3.4 and §30-3.6 of the Rules of the Board of Regents (the Commissioner's Regulations). Please see section 4.4 for scoring ranges.  

Certain schools are designated by the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York (DOE) and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) jointly as participating in the Progressive Redesign Opportunity Schools for Excellence (PROSE) program.  A subset of PROSE schools have been (and additional may be in the future) jointly approved by the UFT and DOE to allow teachers in these schools to choose Observation Option PROSE (“PROSE/PBAT Schools”). All other provisions of the district’s APPR Plan remain the same for these schools and all teachers across the district will be evaluated using the NYC MOTP Rubric. Observation Option PROSE is an option that is available only to teachers in select PROSE/PBAT Schools. Teachers in all other PROSE schools will be able to select options 1, 2, 3, or 4 only. The DOE and UFT joint PROSE Panel may rescind a school’s PROSE designation and, in this event, teachers in schools whose PROSE designation has been rescinded will no longer be eligible for observation Option PROSE in subsequent school years and shall be observed and evaluated under Options 1-4 only. In the event that a school’s PROSE designation is rescinded prior to the completion of the current school year, teachers may continue to be evaluated under observation Option PROSE for the remainder of that year only. The DOE and UFT joint PROSE Panel may approve additional schools as PROSE/PBAT schools annually, so long as approval is in place by the start of the school year. 

Teachers will be assigned an overall MOTP score from 0-4 points based on multiple classroom observations using the NYC MOTP Rubric, with the exception of teachers in PROSE/PBAT schools who select Observation Option PROSE.  Teachers selecting Observation Option PROSE will have multiple classroom observations done by the principal/other school-based trained administrator and a Structured Review using the NYC MOTP rubric as described herein.  These two elements will be combined with a weighting of 60% for the observations done by the principal/other school-based trained administrator and 40% for the Structured Review.  Combined, these two elements will account for a 90% weighting of the Teacher Observation Category, with the remaining 10% weighting of the Teacher Observation Category from the Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator. 

Any changes to the listed processes described in this attachment, will be submitted to NYSED as a material change request to the approved APPR plan. Any forms related to the evaluation of teachers as referenced in this Task 4.7 

attachment will be locally negotiated to the extent required by law and will be consistent with the approved APPR plan and consistent with Education Law 3012-d and Subpart 30-3 of Rules of the Board of Regents.  

OBSERVATIONS OVERVIEW Note: The following information relates to the observation process for both tenured and probationary teachers. 

For school year 2016-17 only Option 1 1 Formal/Long  (Minimum of 1, announced) 3 Informal/Short (Minimum of 3, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1      shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

Option 2  6 Informal/Short (Minimum of 6, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1    shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

Option 3 (Teachers who have received “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year only) 3 Informal/Short  (Minimum of 3, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced,       1 shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator)  3 non-evaluative Classroom Visits (Maximum of 3 unless teacher consents to additional) 

Option 4 (Teachers who have received “Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year only) 4 Informal/Short (Minimum of 4, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1 shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

Option PROSE (Teachers in approved participating PROSE/PBAT schools [as defined below] only) 3 Informal/Short  (All Can Be Unannounced, minimum of 3, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1 shall be by an     Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

All Options done in-person and/or video in accordance with this plan.  


For school year 2017-18 and beyond Option 1 1 Formal/Long  (Minimum of 1, announced) 3 Informal/Short (Minimum of 3, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1      shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

Option 2 6 Informal/Short (Minimum of 6, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1      shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

Option 3 (Teachers who have received “Effective” or “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year only) 4 Informal/Short  (Minimum of 4, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced,       1 shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator)  2 non-evaluative Classroom Visits     (Maximum of 2 unless teacher consents to additional) 

Option 4 (Teachers who have received “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year only) 3 Informal/Short (Minimum of 3, all can be unannounced, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1      shall be by an Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

3 non-evaluative Classroom Visits     (Maximum of 3 unless teacher consents to additional) 

Option PROSE (Teachers in approved participating PROSE/PBAT schools [as defined below] only) 3 Informal/Short  (All Can Be Unannounced, minimum of 3, minimum of 1 must be unannounced, 1 shall be by an     Impartial Independent Trained Evaluator) 

All Options done in-person and/or video in accordance with this plan.  

OBSERVATIONS EXPANDED  Teachers will have a choice based of the four (4) options (five options for teachers in PROSE/PBAT schools) listed as to the minimum number of observations and the types of observations that will be conducted for the Teacher Observation Category component. Teachers in approved participating PROSE/PBAT schools only will have a choice based on the Observation Options 1, 2, 3, 4, and PROSE described below. Teachers will indicate which observation option they have chosen during the initial planning conference conducted at the beginning of the school year. 

All four options (five for teachers in PROSE/PBAT schools) for teachers to select from for their observations will include the following: formal announced classroom observations (formal) and/or informal short unannounced/announced classroom observations (informal). The formal observation will encompass a three-tiered evaluation process incorporating a pre-observation conference, formal observation, and a post-observation conference. The informal observations may all be unannounced, but at least one (1) must be unannounced, and shall not require a pre- or postobservation conference. A complete detailed analysis of evaluation processes and procedures for both the formal threetiered observation and the informal observation are provided below. 

If the evaluation is conducted for evaluative purposes then the evaluator shall use the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report. The evaluator shall provide feedback within fifteen (15) school days of the observation to the teacher through an in-person conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her file within 45 school days of the observation. A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45 school-day time frame. From the time an observation (formal or informal, as defined herein) is conducted until the time the teacher receives the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report for that observation, only one (1) additional evaluative observation (formal or informal) may be conducted. Please note that additional informal observations by the principal or other school-based trained administrator are allowable for formative or evaluative purposes and are recommended. Based on evidence from any observations – those for evaluative purposes or those for formative purposes – evaluators should note for teachers areas of strength and also note one or two areas for growth and next steps. The evaluator is not required to provide the teacher with the lowinference notes taken during any classroom visits described herein and below. 

In addition to the evaluative observations by a principal/other school-based trained administrator as described above, the Independent Evaluator will conduct a single announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) observation of teachers, in person for a minimum of 30 minutes, as required by and in accordance with Education Law §3012-d(4)(b)(2) and Subpart 30-3 of the Regulations of the Board of Regents (the “Regulations”). Such observations shall, except as set forth herein, be informal and scored and conducted in the same manner as observations by school-based evaluators. The Independent Evaluator shall be selected by the NYCDOE pursuant to Education Law §3012-d and the Regulations but shall not have worked within the past five (5) years in the school with the current BEDS code as the teacher being observed.  

In accordance with the collective bargaining agreement and, to the extent permitted under the law, for evaluative purposes, no more than one (1) evaluator (as defined herein) and two (2) school-based observers (i.e., the Superintendent or Assistant Superintendent or trained administrator of the teacher’s school) may be present during a formal or informal observation. The evaluator shall be solely responsible for the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report. In extraordinary circumstances, only one (1) of the two (2) observers described herein may be an observer from outside of the school. The outside observer may only be either a Network Leader or Deputy Network Leader (or its functional equivalent). 

For formative purposes, no more than four (4) observers (either school-based or from outside of the school) may be present in a classroom. Additional observers may be present in teacher’s classroom with the teacher’s consent. The formative visits described in this paragraph shall not be considered when scoring the Measures of Teacher Practice component.  
  
In school year 2016-17, the following observation options (by the principal/other school-based trained administrator and Independent Evaluator, as required) shall apply: 

Observation Option 1 In addition to both the mandatory initial planning conference and the summative end-of-year conference held at the beginning and end of school year, respectively, teachers who elect Observation Option 1 on their Measures of Teacher Practice (MOTP) Observation Option Selection Form (completed during the initial planning conference) as the process by which they will be observed and evaluated will have the following observations performed throughout the year: 

Evaluation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator:  One (1) formal announced classroom observation lasting a full class period; and  Minimum of two (2) informal unannounced/announced classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each. Both may be unannounced but at least one must be unannounced. 

Evaluation by an Independent Evaluator:   One (1) informal, unannounced or announced classroom observation lasting a minimum of 30 minutes. 

The formal and informal observations shall not be conducted prior to the initial planning conference held between the teacher and school-based evaluator. No initial planning conference shall be held after the last Friday in October, with observations commencing on a rolling basis thereafter with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). 

Optional Video Observation Process within Option 1 The use of video as an alternative observational tool may only be used for the formal announced classroom observation and/or informal classroom observation with the express written consent of the teacher.  Whether and how the formal and/or informal observations will be videotaped shall be discussed and determined pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement during the initial planning conference, memorialized in writing on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form, and placed in the teacher’s file. Evaluators must be present when classroom observations are videotaped, unless the teacher and evaluator agree that the evaluator does not need to be present. Within Option 1, if a teacher chooses to have his/her observations videotaped he/she shall select among the following options: (a) the evaluator will choose what observations, if any, will be videotaped; or (b) the evaluator shall videotape the formal observation. The teacher shall be provided with an unedited copy of all such videos. The ability to capture a lesson on video can help an evaluator play back parts of the lesson that are addressed in the NYC MOTP Rubric while filling out the rubric and writing observation analysis notes. Videos can also help during a post-observation conference to show a teacher what is being critiqued. 

Observation Option 1 is in effect from school year 2016-17 and beyond, excluding further amendments to the option described herein. 

1. FORMAL ANNOUNCED CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS 

A three-tier observation process will be performed for all formal announced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator consisting of a pre-observation conference, formal announced classroom observation, and a post-observation conference between the evaluator and teacher. As indicated above, the one (1) formal announced classroom observation three- tiered evaluation process will be conducted after the initial planning conference/pre-conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late in the year). Prior to the formal announced classroom observation performed by the evaluator, a pre-observation conference must be scheduled and held as described below. A post-observation conference will be conducted following the formal observation also outlined below. 

A. Pre-Observation Conference Before the evaluator may conduct a formal announced classroom observation, a pre-observation conference must be scheduled by the evaluator and the teacher. The pre-observation conference shall be scheduled and held no less than one (1) school day and a maximum of twenty (20) school days from the date on which the scheduled formal announced classroom observation is to occur. 

For teachers who choose Option 1, the teacher may request to conduct the initial planning conference and the preobservation conference at the same time. Therefore, at the initial planning conference, a teacher may elect to also have a pre-observation conference to discuss the lesson focus, activities, and expectations prior to the formal announced classroom observation being performed. If combined, the initial planning conference and the pre-observation conference must still be held no less than one (1) school day or a maximum of twenty (20) school days from the date on which the scheduled formal announced classroom observation is to occur. If the initial planning conference and the preobservation conference are conducted separately, the formal observation option must include a pre-observation conference no less than one (1) school day and a maximum of twenty (20) school days prior to the formal observation.  

The scheduled pre-observation conference shall be conducted during normal school day hours as described herein.  The pre-observation conference shall be defined as an individual face-to-face conversation between the teacher and evaluator, the purpose of which is to discuss the lesson focus, activities, and expectations prior to the formal announced classroom observation being performed. The evaluator shall address any questions and/or concerns the teacher may have and both shall agree on a time and date on which the formal announced classroom observation is to take place. During the pre-observation conference, the evaluator will take and maintain all relevant notes and communications between the evaluator and the teacher.  

B. Formal Announced Classroom Observation Following the pre-observation conference, the evaluator will conduct a formal announced classroom observation of the teacher on the date and time agreed upon during the pre-observation conference (no earlier than one school day and a maximum of twenty school days from the date in which the pre-observation conference was held). The formal announced classroom observation will last a full class period. Please see the scoring process described in Section 4.3 of the Review Room Submission. 

C. Post-Observation Conference Following the formal announced classroom observation a post-observation conference between the evaluator and teacher shall be held at a mutually agreed upon time no later than twenty (20) school days from which the formal announced classroom observation was performed. The post-observation conference shall be defined as an individual inperson/ face-to-face meeting between the evaluator and teacher during which the parties will reflect upon the teacher’s performance during the classroom visit, discuss student work and learning outcomes, and guide future teaching practice. The post-observation conference will provide an opportunity to discuss any evidence obtained during the formal announced classroom observation using a dialogue which incorporates the NYC MOTP Rubric as a framework for the conversation. The post-observation conference shall be used to discuss the teacher’s progress, prioritize areas in need of further development, and discuss agreed upon concrete next steps to ensure the teacher has the opportunity to continuously improve and develop. 

The formal observation shall be memorialized in the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report. All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter). Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 

2. INFORMAL CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 1, a minimum of two (2) informal classroom observations will be performed in addition to the one (1) formal announced classroom observation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator. These informal observations may be unannounced, but at least one must be unannounced. Similar to the formal announced classroom observation, the informal observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Unlike the threetiered formal announced classroom observation process, the informal classroom observations shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference; however, a post- observation may occur for formative purposes at the sole discretion of the principal. These classroom observations will provide evaluators with an opportunity to get an authentic sense of each teacher’s workday with students. As such, it will enable evaluators to note areas for targeted growth and development observed during the visit and a formative post-observation conference can facilitate critical conversations between the evaluator and the teacher. For informal observations, the evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher through an in-person conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication within fifteen (15) school days of the observation. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, for informal observations, the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her file within 45 school days of the observation.  A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45-day time frame. 

The informal classroom observation will consist of an evaluator observing a class for a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes and shall be memorialized in the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report.  The method in which the evaluator may conduct the informal observation may be either in person or via video following the requirements previously outlined in this Section. All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter).  Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 

The evaluator shall have the sole discretion as to how many informal classroom observations will be performed through the year, however in no case will a covered teacher who chooses Observation Option 1 receive less than one (1) formal observation and two (2) informal observations conducted by the principal or school-based trained administrator, and one (1) Independent Evaluator observation in a given school year except that, when a covered teacher is unexpectedly absent the remainder of the school year (e.g. extended leave), the teacher shall have a minimum of two (2) observations. At least one (1) of these must be unannounced.  

3. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 1, one (1) informal classroom observation will be performed in person by an Independent Evaluator for a minimum of 30 minutes, in addition to the one (1) formal announced and two (2) informal announced/unannounced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator as described herein. Similar to the formal announced classroom observation and informal classroom observations by the school-based evaluator, the Independent Evaluator observation shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Independent Evaluators will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. The Independent Evaluator observation may be announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference. Furthermore, an Independent Evaluator shall not communicate with the school’s administration or the observed teacher except for brief, social niceties that do not in any way relate to the teacher, the school’s performance, or any other substantive matter. However, a teacher who is observed by an Independent Evaluator may, at the teacher’s option, provide the Independent Evaluator, in writing only, additional information regarding the lesson that was observed and such information shall be provided within two (2) school days after the observation.  
  
Observation Option 2 In addition to both the mandatory initial planning conference and the summative end-of-year conference held at the beginning and end of the school year, respectively, teachers who elect to use Observation Option 2 on their MOTP Observation Option Selection Form (completed during the initial planning conference) as the process by which they will be observed and evaluated will have the following observations performed throughout the year: 

Evaluation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator:  Minimum of five (5) informal classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each. All may be unannounced but at least one must be unannounced. 

Evaluation by an Independent Evaluator:   One (1) informal, unannounced or announced classroom observation lasting a minimum of 30 minutes.   

For teachers who choose Option 2, the informal classroom observations shall not be conducted prior to the initial planning conference held between the teacher and evaluator. In addition, the observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). 

Optional Video Observation Process within Option 2 The use of video as an alternative observational tool may only be used for the informal classroom observation with the express written consent of the teacher. Whether and how the informal observations will be videotaped shall be discussed and determined pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement during the initial planning conference, memorialized in writing on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form, and placed in the teacher’s file. Evaluators must be present when classroom observations are videotaped, unless the teacher and evaluator agree that the evaluator does not need to be present. Within Option 2, if a teacher chooses to have his/her observations videotaped he/she shall select among the following options: (a) the evaluator will choose what observations, if any, will be videotaped; or (b) the evaluator shall videotape two (2) of the informal observations (at the evaluator’s option). The teacher shall be provided with an unedited copy of all such videos. The ability to capture a lesson on video can help an evaluator play back parts of the lesson that are addressed in the NYC MOTP Rubric while filling out the rubric and writing observation analysis notes. Videos can also help during a formative post-observation conference to show a teacher what is being critiqued. 

Observation Option 2 is in effect from school year 2016-17 and beyond, excluding further amendments to the option described herein. 

1. INFORMAL CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 2, a minimum of five (5) informal classroom observations will be performed by a principal or other school-based trained administrator. These informal observations may be unannounced, but at least one must be unannounced. Informal observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year), and shall not require a pre- or postobservation conference; however, a post- observation may occur for formative purposes at the sole discretion of the principal. These classroom observations will provide evaluators with an opportunity to get an authentic sense of each teacher’s workday with students. As such, it will enable evaluators to note areas for targeted growth and development observed during the visit and a formative post-observation conference can facilitate critical conversations between the evaluator and the teacher. For informal observations, the evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher through an inperson conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication within fifteen (15) school days of the observation. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, for informal observations, the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her file within 45 school days of the observation.  A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45-day time frame. 

The informal classroom observation will consist of an evaluator observing a class for a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes and shall be memorialized in the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report.  The method in which the evaluator may conduct the informal observation may be either in person or via video following the requirements previously outlined in this Section. All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter). Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 

The evaluator shall have the sole discretion as to how many informal classroom observations will be performed through the year, however in no case will a covered teacher who chooses Observation Option 2 receive less than five (5) informal observations conducted by the principal or school-based trained administrator, and one (1) Independent Evaluator observation in a given school year except that, when a covered teacher is unexpectedly absent the remainder of the school year (e.g., extended leave), the teacher shall have a minimum of two (2) observations. At least one (1) of these must be unannounced.  

2. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 2, one (1) informal classroom observation will be performed in person by an Independent Evaluator for a minimum of 30 minutes, in addition to the five (5) informal announced/unannounced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator as described herein. Similar to the informal classroom observations by the school-based evaluator, the Independent Evaluator observation shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Independent Evaluators will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. The Independent Evaluator observation may be announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference. Furthermore, an Independent Evaluator shall not communicate with the school’s administration or the observed teacher except for brief, social niceties that do not in any way relate to the teacher, the school’s performance, or any other substantive matter. However, a teacher who is observed by an Independent Evaluator may, at the teacher’s option, provide the Independent Evaluator, in writing only, additional information regarding the lesson that was observed and such information shall be provided within two (2) school days after the observation.  


Observation Option 3 [IN SCHOOL YEAR 2016-17 ONLY] In addition to both the mandatory initial planning conference and the summative end-of-year conference held at the beginning and end of the school year, respectively, teachers who have received “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year may elect to use Observation Option 3 on their MOTP Observation Option Selection Form (completed during the initial planning conference) as the process by which they will be observed and evaluated. Teachers who select Option 3 will have the following observations performed throughout the year:   Evaluation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator:  Minimum of two (2) informal classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each. All may be unannounced but at least one must be unannounced. 

Evaluation by an Independent Evaluator:   One (1) informal, unannounced or announced classroom observation lasting a minimum of 30 minutes.   

In addition, a teacher who chooses Option 3 shall make his/her classroom available for three (3) classroom visits by a colleague per school year. The classroom visits described herein shall not be used for any evaluative purpose.  

If there is an appeal pending during the observation option selection period and a teacher is later rated Highly Effective as a result of this appeal and would like to select Observation Option 3, the teacher will have ten (10) school days from the result of the appeal to notify their principal of their updated observation choice. Any formal or informal observations completed prior to the selection of Observation Option 3 will count toward the minimum number of informal evaluative observations required in Observation Option 3. 

For teachers who choose Option 3, the informal classroom observations shall not be conducted prior to the initial planning conference held between the teacher and evaluator. In addition, the observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Option 3 is subject to the same procedures and scoring rules as Options 1 and 2. 

Optional Video Observation within Option 3 The use of video as an alternative observational tool may only be used for informal classroom observation with the express written consent of the teacher.  Whether and how the informal observations will be videotaped shall be discussed and determined pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement during the initial planning conference, memorialized in writing on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form, and placed in the teacher’s file. Evaluators must be present when classroom observations are videotaped, unless the teacher and evaluator agree that the evaluator does not need to be present.  Within Option 3, if a teacher chooses to have his/her observations videotaped he/she shall select among the following options: (a) the evaluator will choose what observations, if any, will be videotaped; or (b) the evaluator shall videotape one (1) informal observation (at the evaluator’s option). The teacher shall be provided with an unedited copy of all such videos.  The ability to capture a lesson on video can help an evaluator play back parts of the lesson that are addressed in the NYC MOTP Rubric while filling out the rubric and writing observation analysis notes. Videos can also help during a formative post-observation conference to show a teacher what is being critiqued. 

This Observation Option 3 is in effect for school year 2016-17 only, excluding further amendments to the option described herein. 

1. INFORMAL CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 3, a minimum of two (2) informal classroom observations will be performed by a principal or other school-based trained administrator. These informal observations may be unannounced, but at least one must be unannounced. Informal observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year), and shall not require a pre- or postobservation conference; however, a post- observation may occur for formative purposes at the sole discretion of the principal. These classroom observations will provide evaluators with an opportunity to get an authentic sense of each teacher’s workday with students. As such, it will enable evaluators to note areas for targeted growth and development observed during the visit and a formative post-observation conference can facilitate critical conversations between the evaluator and the teacher. For informal observations, the evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher through an inperson conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication within fifteen (15) school days of the observation. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, for informal observations, the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her file within 45 school days of the observation. A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45-day time frame. 

The informal classroom observation will consist of an evaluator observing a class for a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes and shall be memorialized in the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report. The method in which the evaluator may conduct the informal observation may be either in person or via video following the requirements previously outlined in this Section. All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter). Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 

The evaluator shall have the sole discretion as to how many informal classroom observations will be performed through the year, however in no case will a covered teacher who chooses Observation Option 3 receive less than two (2) informal observations conducted by the principal or school-based trained administrator, and one (1) Independent Evaluator observation in a given school year except that, when a covered teacher is unexpectedly absent the remainder of the school year (e.g. extended leave), the teacher shall have a minimum of two (2) observations. At least one (1) of these must be unannounced.  

2. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 3, one (1) informal classroom observation will be performed in person by an Independent Evaluator for a minimum of 30 minutes, in addition to the two (2) informal announced/unannounced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator as described herein. Similar to the informal classroom observations by the school-based evaluator, the Independent Evaluator observation shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Independent Evaluators will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. The Independent Evaluator observation may be announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference. Furthermore, an Independent Evaluator shall not communicate with the school’s administration or the observed teacher except for brief, social niceties that do not in any way relate to the teacher, the school’s performance, or any other substantive matter. However, a teacher who is observed by an Independent Evaluator may, at the teacher’s option, provide the Independent Evaluator, in writing only, additional information regarding the lesson that was observed and such information shall be provided within two (2) school days after the observation.  


3. COLLEAGUE VISITATION PROCESS  Teachers who have received “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year may choose Option 3. Option 3 consists of a minimum number of informal observations that are used for evaluative purposes as described above. In addition, a teacher who chooses Option 3 shall make his/her classroom available for three (3) classroom visits by a colleague per school year consistent with the applicable collective bargaining agreements. The classroom visits described herein shall not be used for any evaluative purpose. Any additional classroom visits by colleagues shall only be with the consent of the teacher selecting Option 3. The date and time of such visits shall be scheduled jointly by the teacher selecting Option 3 and the principal.   


Observation Option 3 [IN SCHOOL YEAR 2017-18 AND BEYOND] In addition to both the mandatory initial planning conference and the summative end-of-year conference held at the beginning and end of the school year, respectively, teachers who have received “Effective” or “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year may elect to use Observation Option 3 on their MOTP Observation Option Selection Form (completed during the initial planning conference) as the process by which they will be observed and evaluated. Teachers who select Option 3 will have the following observations performed throughout the year: 

Evaluation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator:  Minimum of three (3) informal classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each. All may be unannounced but at least one must be unannounced. 

Evaluation by an Independent Evaluator:   One (1) informal, unannounced or announced classroom observation lasting a minimum of 30 minutes.  

In addition, a teacher who chooses Option 3 shall make his/her classroom available for two (2) classroom visits by a colleague per school year. The classroom visits described herein shall not be used for any evaluative purpose.  

If there is an appeal pending during the observation option selection period and a teacher is later rated Effective or Highly Effective as a result of this appeal and would like to select Observation Option 3, the teacher will have ten (10) school days from the result of the appeal to notify their principal of their updated observation choice. Any formal or informal observations completed prior to the selection of Observation Option 3 will count toward the minimum number of informal evaluative observations required in Observation Option 3. 

For teachers who choose Option 3, the informal classroom observations shall not be conducted prior to the initial planning conference held between the teacher and evaluator.  In addition, the observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Option 3 is subject to the same procedures and scoring rules as Options 1 and 2. 

Optional Video Observation within Option 3 
The use of video as an alternative observational tool may only be used for informal classroom observation with the express written consent of the teacher.  Whether and how the informal observations will be videotaped shall be discussed and determined pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement during the initial planning conference, memorialized in writing on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form, and placed in the teacher’s file. Evaluators must be present when classroom observations are videotaped, unless the teacher and evaluator agree that the evaluator does not need to be present.  Within Option 3, if a teacher chooses to have his/her observations videotaped he/she shall select among the following options: (a) the evaluator will choose what observations, if any, will be videotaped; or (b) the evaluator shall videotape one (1) informal observation (at the evaluator’s option). The teacher shall be provided with an unedited copy of all such videos. The ability to capture a lesson on video can help an evaluator play back parts of the lesson that are addressed in the NYC MOTP Rubric while filling out the rubric and writing observation analysis notes. Videos can also help during a formative post-observation conference to show a teacher what is being critiqued. 

This Observation Option 3 is in effect from school year 2017-18 and beyond, excluding further amendments to the option described herein. 

1. INFORMAL CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 3, a minimum of three (3) informal classroom observations will be performed by a principal or other school-based trained administrator. These informal observations may be unannounced, but at least one must be unannounced. Informal observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late in the year), and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference; however, a post- observation may occur for formative purposes at the sole discretion of the principal. These classroom observations will provide evaluators with an opportunity to get an authentic sense of each teacher’s workday with students. As such, it will enable evaluators to note areas of strength and also note one or two areas for growth and next steps observed during the visit and a formative post-observation conference can facilitate critical conversations between the evaluator and the teacher. For informal observations, the evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher through an in-person conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication within fifteen (15) school days of the observation. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, for informal observations, the Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her file within 45 school days of the observation. A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45-day time frame. 

The informal classroom observation will consist of an evaluator observing a class for a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes and shall be memorialized in the Teacher Observation Report.  The method in which the evaluator may conduct the informal observation may be either in person or via video following the requirements previously outlined in this Section. All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter).  Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 

The evaluator shall have the sole discretion as to how many informal classroom observations will be performed through the year, however in no case will a covered teacher who chooses Observation Option 3 receive less than three (3) informal observations conducted by the principal or school-based trained administrator, and one (1) Independent Evaluator observation in a given school year except that, when a covered teacher is unexpectedly absent the remainder of the school year (e.g. extended leave), the teacher shall have a minimum of two (2) observations. At least one (1) of these must be unannounced.  

2. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 3, one (1) informal classroom observation will be performed in person by an Independent Evaluator for a minimum of 30 minutes, in addition to the three (3) informal announced/unannounced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator as described herein. Similar to the informal classroom observations by the school-based evaluator, the Independent Evaluator observation shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Independent Evaluators will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. The Independent Evaluator observation may be announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference. Furthermore, an Independent Evaluator shall not communicate with the school’s administration or the observed teacher except for brief, social niceties that do not in any way relate to the teacher, the school’s performance, or any other substantive matter. However, a teacher who is observed by an Independent Evaluator may, at the teacher’s option, provide the Independent Evaluator, in writing only, additional information regarding the lesson that was observed and such information shall be provided within two (2) school days after the observation.  

3. COLLEAGUE VISITATION PROCESS Teachers who have received “Effective” or “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year may choose Option 3. Option 3 consists of a minimum number of informal observations that are used for evaluative purposes as described above.  In addition, a teacher who chooses Option 3 shall make his/her classroom available for two (2) classroom visits by a colleague per school year consistent with the applicable collective bargaining agreements. The classroom visits described herein shall not be used for any evaluative purpose. Any additional classroom visits by colleagues shall only be with the consent of the teacher selecting Option 3. The date and time of such visits shall be scheduled jointly by the teacher selecting Option 3 and the principal. 


Observation Option 4 [IN SCHOOL YEAR 2016-17 ONLY] In addition to both the mandatory initial planning conference and the summative end-of-year conference held at the beginning and end of the school year, respectively, teachers who have received “Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year may elect to use Observation Option 4 on their MOTP Observation Option Selection Form (completed during the initial planning conference) as the process by which they will be observed and evaluated. Teachers who select Option 4 will have the following observations performed throughout the year: 

Evaluation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator:  Minimum of three (3) informal classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each. All may be unannounced but at least one must be unannounced. 

Evaluation by an Independent Evaluator:   One (1) informal, unannounced or announced classroom observation lasting a minimum of 30 minutes.   

If there is an appeal pending during the observation option selection period and a teacher is later rated Effective as a result of this appeal and would like to select Observation Option 4, the teacher will have ten (10) school days from the result of the appeal to notify their principal of their updated observation choice. Any formal or informal observations completed prior to the selection of Observation Option 4 will count toward the minimum number of informal evaluative observations required in Observation Option 4. 

For teachers who choose Option 4, the informal classroom observations shall not be conducted prior to the initial planning conference held between the teacher and evaluator. In addition, the observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late in the year). Option 4 is subject to the same procedures and scoring rules as Options 1 and 2. 

Optional Video Observation within Option 4 The use of video as an alternative observational tool may only be used for the informal classroom observation with the express written consent of the teacher.  Whether and how the informal observation will be videotaped shall be discussed and determined pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement during the initial planning conference, memorialized in writing on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form, and placed in the teacher’s file. Evaluators must be present when classroom observations are videotaped, unless the teacher and evaluator agree that the evaluator does not need to be present.  Within Option 4, if a teacher chooses to have his/her observations videotaped he/she shall select among the following options: (a) the evaluator will choose what observations, if any, will be videotaped; or (b) the evaluator shall videotape one (1) informal observation (at the evaluator’s option). The teacher shall be provided with an unedited copy of all such videos.  The ability to capture a lesson on video can help an evaluator play back parts of the lesson that are addressed in the NYC MOTP Rubric while filling out the rubric and writing observation analysis notes. Videos can also help during a formative post-observation conference to show a teacher what is being critiqued. 

This Observation Option 4 is in effect for school year 2016-17 only, excluding further amendments to the option described herein. 

1. INFORMAL CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 4, a minimum of three (3) informal classroom observations will be performed by a principal or other school-based trained administrator. These informal observations may be unannounced, but at least one must be unannounced. Informal observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year), and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference; however, a post- observation may occur for formative purposes at the sole discretion of the principal. These classroom observations will provide evaluators with an opportunity to get an authentic sense of each teacher’s workday with students. As such, it will enable evaluators to note areas for targeted growth and development observed during the visit and a formative post-observation conference can facilitate critical conversations between the evaluator and the teacher. For informal observations, the evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher through an in-person conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication within fifteen (15) school days of the observation. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, for informal observations, the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her file within 45 school days of the observation.  A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45-day time frame. 

The informal classroom observation will consist of an evaluator observing a class for a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes and shall be memorialized in the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report.  The method in which the evaluator may conduct the informal observation may be either in person or via video following the requirements previously outlined in this Section. All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter).  Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 

The evaluator shall have the sole discretion as to how many informal classroom observations will be performed through the year, however in no case will a covered teacher who chooses Observation Option 3 receive less than three (3) informal observations conducted by the principal or school-based trained administrator, and one (1) Independent Evaluator observation in a given school year except that, when a covered teacher is unexpectedly absent the remainder of the school year (e.g. extended leave), the teacher shall have a minimum of two (2) observations. At least one (1) of these must be unannounced.  

2. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 3, one (1) informal classroom observation will be performed in person by an Independent Evaluator for a minimum of 30 minutes, in addition to the three (3) informal announced/unannounced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator as described herein. Similar to the informal classroom observations by the school-based evaluator, the Independent Evaluator observation shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Independent Evaluators will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. The Independent Evaluator observation may be announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference. Furthermore, an Independent Evaluator shall not communicate with the school’s administration or the observed teacher except for brief, social niceties that do not in any way relate to the teacher, the school’s performance, or any other substantive matter. However, a teacher who is observed by an Independent Evaluator may, at the teacher’s option, provide the Independent Evaluator, in writing only, additional information regarding the lesson that was observed and such information shall be provided within two (2) school days after the observation.  


Observation Option 4 [IN SCHOOL YEAR 2017-18 AND BEYOND] In addition to both the mandatory initial planning conference and the summative end-of-year conference held at the beginning and end of the school year, respectively, teachers who have received “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year may elect to use Observation Option 4 on their MOTP Observation Option Selection Form (completed during the initial planning conference) as the process by which they will be observed and evaluated. Teachers who select Option 4 will have the following observations performed throughout the year: 

Evaluation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator:  Minimum of two (2) informal classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each. All may be unannounced but at least one must be unannounced. 

Evaluation by an Independent Evaluator:   One (1) informal, unannounced or announced classroom observation lasting a minimum of 30 minutes.  

In addition, a teacher who chooses Option 4 shall make his/her classroom available for three (3) classroom visits by a colleague per school year. The classroom visits described herein shall not be used for any evaluative purpose.  

If there is an appeal pending during the observation option selection period and a teacher is later rated Effective as a result of this appeal and would like to select Observation Option 4, the teacher will have ten (10) school days from the result of the appeal to notify their principal of their updated observation choice. Any formal or informal observations completed prior to the selection of Observation Option 4 will count toward the minimum number of informal evaluative observations required in Observation Option 4. 

For teachers who choose Option 4, the informal classroom observations shall not be conducted prior to the initial planning conference held between the teacher and evaluator. In addition, the observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Option 4 is subject to the same procedures and scoring rules as Options 1 and 2. 

Optional Video Observation within Option 4 The use of video as an alternative observational tool may only be used for the informal classroom observation with the express written consent of the teacher.  Whether and how the informal observation will be videotaped shall be discussed and determined pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement during the initial planning conference, memorialized in writing on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form, and placed in the teacher’s file. Evaluators must be present when classroom observations are videotaped, unless the teacher and evaluator agree that the evaluator does not need to be present.  Within Option 4, if a teacher chooses to have his/her observations videotaped he/she shall select among the following options: (a) the evaluator will choose what observations, if any, will be videotaped; or (b) the evaluator shall videotape one (1) informal observation (at the evaluator’s option). The teacher shall be provided with an unedited copy of all such videos. The ability to capture a lesson on video can help an evaluator play back parts of the lesson that are addressed in the NYC MOTP Rubric while filling out the rubric and writing observation analysis notes. Videos can also help during a formative post-observation conference to show a teacher what is being critiqued. 

This Observation Option 4 is in effect from school year 2017-18 and beyond, excluding further amendments to the option described herein. 

1. INFORMAL CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 4, a minimum of two (2) informal classroom observations will be performed by a principal or other school-based trained administrator. These informal observations may be unannounced, but at least one must be unannounced. Informal observations shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year), and shall not require a pre- or postobservation conference; however, a post- observation may occur for formative purposes at the sole discretion of the principal. These classroom observations will provide evaluators with an opportunity to get an authentic sense of each teacher’s workday with students. As such, it will enable evaluators to note areas for targeted growth and development observed during the visit and a formative post-observation conference can facilitate critical conversations between the evaluator and the teacher. For informal observations, the evaluator shall provide feedback to the teacher through an inperson conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication within fifteen (15) school days of the observation. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, for informal observations, the Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her file within 45 school days of the observation. A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45-day time frame. 

The informal classroom observation will consist of an evaluator observing a class for a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes and shall be memorialized in the Teacher Observation Report. The method in which the evaluator may conduct the informal observation may be either in person or via video following the requirements previously outlined in this Section. All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter).  Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 

The evaluator shall have the sole discretion as to how many informal classroom observations will be performed through the year, however in no case will a covered teacher who chooses Observation Option 4 receive less than two (2) informal observations conducted by the principal or school-based trained administrator, and one (1) Independent Evaluator observation in a given school year except that, when a covered teacher is unexpectedly absent the remainder of the school year (e.g. extended leave), the teacher shall have a minimum of two (2) observations. At least one (1) of these must be unannounced.  

2. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR OBSERVATION PROCESS For teachers who select Observation Option 4, one (1) informal classroom observation will be performed in person by an Independent Evaluator for a minimum of 30 minutes, in addition to the two (2) informal announced/unannounced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator as described herein. Similar to the informal classroom observations by the school-based evaluator, the Independent Evaluator observation shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Independent Evaluators will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. The Independent Evaluator observation may be announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference. Furthermore, an Independent Evaluator shall not communicate with the school’s administration or the observed teacher except for brief, social niceties that do not in any way relate to the teacher, the school’s performance, or any other substantive matter. However, a teacher who is observed by an Independent Evaluator may, at the teacher’s option, provide the Independent Evaluator, in writing only, additional information regarding the lesson that was observed and such information shall be provided within two (2) school days after the observation.  

3. COLLEAGUE VISITATION PROCESS Teachers who have received “Highly Effective” as their overall APPR rating in the previous year may choose Option 4. Option 4 consists of a minimum number of informal observations that are used for evaluative purposes as described above.  In addition, a teacher who chooses Option 4 shall make his/her classroom available for three (3) classroom visits by a colleague per school year consistent with the applicable collective bargaining agreements. The classroom visits described herein shall not be used for any evaluative purpose. Any additional classroom visits by colleagues shall only be with the consent of the teacher selecting Option 4. The date and time of such visits shall be scheduled jointly by the teacher selecting Option 4 and the principal. 


Observation Option PROSE Teachers in approved participating PROSE/PBAT schools may choose Option PROSE. Option PROSE consists of a minimum of three (3) informal/short unannounced classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each. Additionally, Option PROSE includes a structured review, which allows teachers to select and focus on a specific area of their teaching with a defined purpose in mind. Within the Structured Review process, teachers will create and submit a Structured Review Plan, in which they identify a specific area of focus, the teacher’s purpose in focusing on the area of focus, the activities the teacher will undertake that align with his/her purpose and area of focus, and at least 3 components of the NYC MOTP Rubric upon which the teacher’s work shall be evaluated based on items discussed and presented at the Structured Review. Within the Structured Review, the evaluator will score the teacher-selected documentation discussed during the Structured Review on all components of the NYC MOTP Rubric that are included in the Structured Review Plan, as well as any and all other components of the NYC MOTP Rubric for which there is evidence. 

GENERAL OVERVIEW 
  
In addition to both the mandatory initial planning conference and the summative end of year conference held at the beginning and end of the school year, respectively, teachers in PROSE/PBAT schools who elect to use observation option PROSE on their PROSE/PBAT MOTP selection form (completed during the initial planning conference) as the process by which they will be observed and evaluated will have the following performed throughout the year: 

Evaluation by a principal or other school-based trained administrator:  Minimum of two (2) informal classroom observations lasting a minimum of 15 minutes each (both may be unannounced but one must be unannounced); and  A Structured Review (described below) that includes a Mid-Year Check-In conference (described below) to discuss how the teacher is progressing with the implementation of the SRP (defined below). 

Evaluation by an Independent Evaluator:   One (1) informal, unannounced or announced classroom observation lasting a minimum of 30 minutes.   

1.  INFORMAL/SHORT UNANNOUNCED CLASSROOM OBSERVATION PROCESS 

For teachers who select observation option PROSE, a minimum of two (2) informal/short unannounced classroom observations will be performed throughout the school year by the principal/other school-based trained administrator.  The informal/short unannounced classroom observations conducted through observation option PROSE shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year, absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late in the year), and shall not require a post-observation conference; however, a post- observation may occur for formative purposes at the sole discretion of the principal. These unannounced classroom observations will provide evaluators with an opportunity to get an authentic sense of each teacher’s workday with students. As such, it will enable evaluators to note areas for targeted growth and development observed during the visit and a post-observation conference can facilitate critical conversations between the evaluator and the teacher.  For informal observations, the evaluator shall provide feedback within fifteen school days of the observation to the teacher through an in-person conversation, in writing, via email or through any other form of communication. Feedback must be evidence-based and aligned to the NYC MOTP Rubric. In addition, for informal observations, the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report must be provided to the teacher and placed in the file within 45 school days of the observation. A teacher’s absences shall not count toward the 45 -day time frame. 

The informal observations will consist of an evaluator observing a class for a minimum of 15 minutes using the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report. The evaluator shall have the sole discretion as to how many informal/short unannounced classroom observations will be performed throughout the year, however in no case will a teacher who chooses observation option PROSE receive less than two short unannounced observations for the purposes of an APPR evaluation in a given school year.  The method in which the evaluator may conduct the informal observation may either be in person or via video as described below. 

The informal observation shall be memorialized in the Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report.  All components of the NYC MOTP Rubric shall be rated for which there is observed evidence. An evaluator may assess a teacher’s preparation and professionalism only if the evaluator’s conclusions are based on observable evidence pertaining to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e of the NYC MOTP Rubric during an observation or if the evaluator observes evidence for these components during the fifteen (15) school days immediately preceding a classroom observation. An evaluator shall not include or consider evidence regarding the preparation and professionalism on an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report if such evidence (or conduct) is also contained in a disciplinary letter to the teacher’s file, unless the evidence was directly observed by the evaluator during a classroom observation (in which case the evidence may be on both an Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report and in a disciplinary letter).  Evidence not related to components 1a, 1e, and/or 4e, or directly observed by the evaluator in the fifteen (15) school day period immediately preceding a classroom observation shall not be considered in a teacher’s evaluation. 
  
Optional Video Observation The use of video as an alternative observational tool may only be used for the informal classroom observation with the express written consent of the teacher.  Whether and how the informal observations will be videotaped shall be discussed and determined pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement during the initial planning conference, memorialized in writing on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form, and placed in the teacher’s file. Evaluators must be present when classroom observations are videotaped, unless the teacher and evaluator agree that the evaluator does not need to be present.  Within Option PROSE, if a teacher chooses to have his/her observations videotaped he/she shall select among the following options:  (a) the evaluator will choose what observations, if any, will be videotaped; or (b) the evaluator shall videotape one (1) of the informal observations (at the evaluator’s option).  The teacher shall be provided with an unedited copy of all such videos.  The ability to capture a lesson on video can help an evaluator play back parts of the lesson that are addressed in the NYC MOTP Rubric while filling out the rubric and writing observation analysis notes.  Videos can also help during a formative post-observation conference to show a teacher what is being critiqued. 

2.  STRUCTURED REVIEW 

Teachers selecting observation option PROSE shall participate in a Structured Review Plan (SRP) that allows them to select and focus on a specific area of their teaching with a defined purpose in mind. For example, teachers might seek to:   attain greater mastery of a component of the NYC MOTP Rubric   refine strategies for a subgroup of students with a common challenge  deepen content knowledge   attain greater mastery of strategies that address areas of the curriculum (for example, the teaching of academic vocabulary; scientific modeling; reading in a content area, etc.) 

Steps in the Structured Review Plan process: 

1. For teachers selecting Option PROSE the area of focus will be proposed by the teacher and discussed with the evaluator at the Initial Planning Conference (IPC).  

2. By seven (7) school days after the last Friday in October (the deadline by which all IPCs must be conducted), the teacher will create and submit a Structured Review Plan (SRP) to the evaluator.  The SRP will identify:  a. The specific area of focus  b. The teacher’s purpose in focusing on this area c. The activities the teacher will undertake that align with his/her purpose and area of focus d. At least 3 components of the NYC MOTP Rubric upon which the teacher’s work shall be evaluated based on items discussed and presented at the structured review.   

Activities may include but will not be limited to the following, provided they are conducted in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement:  visiting the classrooms of other teachers (who have chosen Option 3, Option 4 (beginning in school year 2017-18 and beyond) or have consented)/inviting teachers to visit their class (including working with other teachers who have a  similar area of focus)   video-taping lessons for self–review or formative review with others   conducting action research   implementing a focused unit of lessons and assessments   gathering student work as part of a cycle of inquiry  attending  professional development activities  engaging in reflective conversations with peers or administrators and writing reflective pieces associated with the various activities, and documenting their overall experience,  and/or their own successes and challenges with the project  

3. The SRP must be submitted to the evaluator who must either request changes or approve the plan by November 15. The evaluator and teacher must both sign the SRP by November 17, indicating that the plan has been approved. If the SRP is not co-signed by this date, the teacher shall be observed and evaluated under Observation Option 2. 

4. Between the first Friday in January and the second Friday in February, the teacher and evaluator shall participate in a face-to-face Mid-Year Check-In conference. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss how the teacher is progressing with the implementation of the SRP.  

5. Upon the completion of the activities associated with the teacher’s SRP, between the last Friday of April and no later than the last Friday of June, the teacher and evaluator will participate in an individual, face-to-face Structured Review. The purpose of the Structured Review is to discuss the teacher’s overall experience with each part of the SRP, as well as reviewing teacher-selected documentation that the teacher has gathered or created during the implementation of the SRP.  

6. The Structured Review and the summative end of year conference can be conducted at the same time, if there is mutual consent between the teacher and the evaluator.   

7. Using the Structured Review Evaluator Form/Teacher Observation Report, the evaluator will score the teacherselected documentation discussed during the Structured Review on all components of the NYC MOTP Rubric that are included in the SRP, as well as any and all other components of the NYC MOTP Rubric for which there is evidence (see section on scoring below for more information). 

8. For teachers using observation option PROSE, additional attendees may be present at the IPC, Mid-Year Checkin, Structured Review and summative end of year conference with mutual consent of the teacher and the evaluator to the extent permitted under the law. 

Scoring the Structured Review Plan: 

All NYC MOTP Rubric components that are included in the SRP, as well as any and all other components on the NYC MOTP Rubric for which there was evidence in the Structured Review will be weighted equally and averaged to create a Structured Review Score on a scale from 1-4. 

3.  INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR OBSERVATION PROCESS 

For teachers who select Observation Option PROSE, one (1) informal classroom observation will be performed in person by an Independent Evaluator for a minimum of 30 minutes, in addition to the two (2) informal announced/unannounced classroom observations by a principal or other school-based trained administrator as described herein. Similar to the informal classroom observations by the school-based evaluator, the Independent Evaluator observation shall be conducted after the initial planning conference occurs with no observations performed later than the first Friday in June of the current school year absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). Independent Evaluators will rate teachers for evaluative purposes on the NYC MOTP Rubric in the following components, as consistent with applicable law: 1(a), 1(e), 2(a), 2(d), 3(b), 3 (c), and 3(d), as required. The Independent Evaluator observation may be announced or unannounced (at the discretion of the Independent Evaluator) and shall not require a pre- or post-observation conference. Furthermore, an Independent Evaluator shall not communicate with the school’s administration or the observed teacher except for brief, social niceties that do not in any way relate to the teacher, the school’s performance, or any other substantive matter. However, a teacher who is observed by an Independent Evaluator may, at the teacher’s option, provide the Independent Evaluator, in writing only, additional information regarding the lesson that was observed and such information shall be provided within two (2) school days after the observation. 

INITIAL PLANNING CONFERENCE OVERVIEW An initial planning conference ("IPC") is a mandatory component of all teachers’ evaluations for the Teacher Observation Category component. This initial planning conference must be held no later than the last Friday in October between the teacher and the evaluator, and must be held prior to conducting any teacher observations absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late year). School administrator(s) selected to conduct the initial planning conference shall be determined at the school level. 

The evaluator will discuss with the teacher which observation option the teacher will select for the school year and whether observations will occur via video or in-person, to be memorialized on the MOTP Observation Option Selection Form. While not required it is recommended that teachers consider choosing to self-assess on the NYC MOTP Rubric during the initial planning conference as a part of best practice, and to set formative professional goals (2 to 4 are recommended) for the school year. It is also recommended that these formative goals align and help leverage Student Learning Objectives (SLOs), as applicable, to ensure formative instructional decisions and approaches will support academic improvement for all students. Teachers shall have the sole discretion whether to set professional goals as part of the IPC. During the initial planning conference a MOTP Observation Option Selection Form will be completed accordingly and signed by both parties. Notwithstanding anything else in this section, professional goal-setting will not be used as evidence of teacher effectiveness.  

Teachers in PROSE/PBAT schools – and only those teachers – will be given the PROSE/PBAT MOTP selection form that includes option PROSE. 

For teachers who know they intend to choose Option 1, the teacher may request to conduct the IPC and the preobservation conference at the same time. Therefore, at the IPC, a teacher may elect to also have a pre-observation conference conducted simultaneously to discuss the lesson focus, activities, and expectations prior to the formal announced classroom observation being performed. If combined, the IPC and the pre-observation conference must be held no less than one (1) school day and a maximum of twenty (20) school days from the date on which the scheduled formal announced classroom observation is to occur. If the IPC and the pre-observation conference are conducted separately, the formal observation must include a pre- observation conference a maximum of twenty (20) days prior to the formal observation.   


Timelines Note that all timelines must be adhered to absent extraordinary circumstances (e.g., teacher on medical leave, teachers hired mid-year or late in the year).  On or before the last Friday in October: Initial planning conference held  After the Initial Planning Conference occurs (no later than the last Friday in October) and the first Friday in June: All formal, informal, and Independent Evaluator (as required) observations take place  Between the last Friday of April and no later than the last Friday of June on which school is in session: Summative End-of-Year Conference to discuss feedback from evidence-based observations of practice, and steps for continued professional growth.  Following the Summative End-of-Year Conference and no later than September 1 of the following school year of the evaluation: The overall APPR rating (MOTP and MOSL combined) shall be provided to the teacher and placed in his/her personnel file as soon as practicable but no later than September 1st of the school year following the year of the evaluation. During the transition years, the original rating (also known as the Advisory Result) will be provided to the teacher by September 1st of the school year following the year of the evaluation, or as soon as practicable thereafter.