Slow start for peer observations in APPR |
On Board Online • September 5, 2016
By Paul Heiser
Senior Research Analyst
State regulations permit school districts to base part of an individual teacher's evaluation score on observations by trained peer teachers, but school districts have been slow to warm to the idea, according to a new NYSSBA report.
A NYSSBA analysis of 100 of the more than 300 state-approved Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) plans selected at random found that no districts incorporated peer observations into their evaluations. The finding is part of a new NYSSBA report called Building Trust at the Table: Lessons for Successfully Negotiating APPR Agreements. Though State Education Department (SED) officials confirm that some districts are using peer observers as part of their approved 3012-d plans, they are clearly in the minority.
"I have not seen one plan that agreed to peer evaluations," said Howard Goldsmith, a school attorney with the Harris Beach law firm.
Karl Kristoff, an attorney with the Hodgson Ross law firm, said the districts he has worked with have avoided using peer evaluators. He said how peer evaluators would perform was too much of an unknown for many districts.
In contrast, he said, direct observation by administrators tended to be a better measure of teacher effectiveness.
Under regulations adopted by SED, at least 80 percent of the teacher observation aspect of the evaluation has to be done by principals or other trained administrators, while at least 10 percent but no more than 20 percent of the observation has to be done by an impartial, independent trained evaluator. The regulations also provide as an option that up to 10 percent of an individual teacher's evaluation score may be based on observation by trained peer teachers.
The regulations were adopted to implement Section 3012-d of state Education Law - enacted in 2015 - which updated how educators are to be evaluated based on student test scores and direct observations. It also required all school districts to gain approval of their new APPR plans from SED by the end of the year or risk losing state aid increases of more than $2 billion that they received for both 2015-16 and 2016-17.
When considering whether to use peer observers as part of the evaluation system, SED officials say that it is important to consider the training, resources, and processes that a district must put into place to ensure that peer observers are properly trained and calibrated to use the teacher or principal practice rubric. When done right, peer observers are an additional measure that can add unique insight into an educators' performance.
For example, some districts using independent evaluators under section 3012-d choose to match teachers to peer observers who teach the same content area or grade level of the teacher being evaluated. Their viewpoint will, in some instances, be different than that of a building principal or independent evaluator who is focusing on other aspects of the educators' practice.
SED also noted the importance of making the independent evaluator process as meaningful as possible. If using principals from other buildings to satisfy this requirement, districts may want to create opportunities for principals to collaborate and discuss how they are rating the same educator's performance and what feedback they would provide to the teacher. In this way, districts can both strengthen inter-rater reliability and provide principals with an opportunity for peer-to-peer learning and problem solving around having conversations with teachers about their practice.
One factor in how school district officials are implementing APPR involves a subjective feeling of "initiative fatigue." The current APPR law was first enacted in 2010. Since then, state lawmakers and the Board of Regents have made multiple changes to the law and regulations.
"This (3012-d) was the fourth plan in three years that we had dealt with," said Darin Saiff, superintendent in the Parishville-Hopkinton school district in St. Lawrence County. "The first was our traditional narrative evaluation that had served us very well for many years. The second was our first version of 3012-c for most of our teachers. The third was a 3012-c version with for teachers with classes ending in state assessments. All of these changes, combined with the other aspects of the Regents Reform agenda, had left my staff and me with 'initiative fatigue.'"
Goldsmith said it's unlikely that schools have seen the last of the changes to the teacher and principal evaluation process.
"Everyone is well aware that given the initiatives over the next few years to develop revised standards, new tests, and a new APPR proposal, additional legislation and regulations are very likely," he said. "Once again, much of the current work and APPR plans will need to be changed and adjusted over time. APPR has and continues to be a moving target. While districts understand that they need to finalize their plans by certain timelines, they seem to be using this effort as a way to continue to work with their teachers to secure more effective plans."
Download a copy of the report at www.nyssba.org/news/reports .