What's happening
This bill replaces the use of state tests in teacher evaluations with a new model developed by certified educator committees and overseen by the board of regents.
Why it matters
Shifts focus from test scores to professional input. By removing state test-based metrics and creating a new educator-developed evaluation system, this bill moves teacher evaluations away from standardized test performance, emphasizing professional judgment and expertise instead.
Empowers educators and the Board of Regents. The new evaluation model will be designed by a committee of certified New York educators and overseen by the Board of Regents, increasing educator voice and potentially leading to more relevant and fair assessments.
Limits use of controversial evaluation elements. The bill explicitly prohibits the use of state-created or administered tests, parent or student feedback instruments, and certain other measures (like unapproved local assessments) in teacher evaluations, aiming to reduce stress, teaching to the test, and inappropriate evaluation metrics.
Could affect teacher development and employment decisions. Since evaluations remain central to promotion, retention, tenure, and professional development, changing the criteria may influence not only job security for teachers but also the broader teaching environment, professional growth opportunities, and student experience.
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Change Teacher Evaluation Rules
Plain English, a few words. Used as the page title.
Sponsors
History
- Referred to education
- Referred to education
Companion bill
The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.
Change Teacher Evaluation Rules
In Assembly Committee · Education · Sponsor Anthony Brindisi
Full text
6 pagesUnderlined is new[Struck] is removedOfficial text on nysenate.gov ↗
STATE OF NEW YORK
4390
2017-2018 Regular Sessions
IN SENATE
February 13, 2017
Introduced by Sens. GRIFFO, AVELLA, BOYLE, FUNKE, KAMINSKY, LATIMER, SEWARD -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Education
AN ACT to amend the education law, in relation to annual teacher evaluations
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:
Section 1. Section 3012-d of the education law, as added by section 2 of subpart E of part EE of chapter 56 of the laws of 2015 and subparagraph 1 of paragraph a of subdivision 4 as amended by section 3 of subpart C of part B of chapter 20 of the laws of 2015, is amended to read as follows:
§ 3012-d. Annual teacher and principal evaluations. 1. General provisions. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rule or regulation to the contrary, the annual teacher and principal evaluations (hereinafter, evaluations) implemented by districts shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of this section. Such annual evaluations shall be a [significant] factor for employment decisions including but not limited to, promotion, retention, tenure determination, termination, and supplemental compensation. Such evaluations shall also be a [significant] factor in teacher and principal development including but not limited to coaching, induction support, and differentiated professional development.
2. Definitions.
a. "District" shall mean school district and/or board of cooperative educational services[, except that for purposes of subdivision eleven of this section it shall only mean a school district];
b. "Principal" shall mean a building principal or an administrator in charge of an instructional program of a board of cooperative educational services[;
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD01874-01-7
S. 4390 2
c. "Student growth" shall mean the change in student achievement for an individual student between two or more points in time.
d. "State-designed supplemental assessment" shall mean a selection of state tests or assessments developed or designed by the state education department, or that the state education department purchased or acquired from (i) another state; (ii) an institution of higher education; or (iii) a commercial or not-for-profit entity, provided that such entity must be objective and may not have a conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict of interest; such definition may include tests or assessments that have been previously designed or acquired by local districts, but only if the state education department significantly modifies growth targets or scoring bands for such tests or assessments or otherwise adapts the test or assessment to the state education department's requirements].
3. Ratings. The annual evaluations conducted pursuant to this section shall rate teacher and principal effectiveness using the following categories: highly effective or "H", effective or "E", developing or "D" and ineffective or "I".
4. Categories. The annual evaluation system shall consist of [multiple measures in two categories: student performance] teacher evaluations and teacher observations.
a. [Student performance category. Such category shall have at least one subcomponent and an optional second subcomponent as follows:
(1) For the first subcomponent, (A) for a teacher whose course ends in a state-created or administered test for which there is a state-provided growth model, such teacher shall have a state-provided growth score based on such model, which shall take into consideration certain student characteristics, as determined by the commissioner, including but not limited to students with disabilities, poverty, English language learner status and prior academic history and which shall identify educators whose students' growth is well above or well below average compared to similar students for a teacher's or principal's students after the certain student characteristics above are taken into account; and (B) for a teacher whose course does not end in a state-created or administered test such teacher shall have a student learning objective (SLO) consistent with a goal-setting process determined or developed by the commissioner, that results in a student growth score; provided that, for any teacher whose course ends in a state-created or administered assessment for which there is no state-provided growth model, such assessment must be used as the underlying assessment for such SLO;
(2) For the optional second subcomponent, a district may locally select a second measure in accordance with this subparagraph. Such second measure shall apply in a consistent manner, to the extent practicable, across the district and be either: (A) a second state-provided growth score on a state-created or administered test under clause (A) of subparagraph one of this paragraph, or (B) a growth score based on a state-designed supplemental assessment, calculated using a state-provided or approved growth model. The optional second subcomponent shall provide options for multiple assessment measures that are aligned to existing classroom and school best practices and take into consideration the recommendations in the testing reduction report as required by section one of subpart F of the chapter of the laws of two thousand fifteen which added this section regarding the reduction of unnecessary additional testing.
The commissioner shall determine the weights and scoring ranges for the subcomponent or subcomponents of the student performance category
S. 4390 3
that shall result in a combined category rating. The commissioner shall also set parameters for appropriate targets for student growth for both subcomponents, and the department must affirmatively approve and shall have the authority to disapprove or require modifications of district plans that do not set appropriate growth targets, including after initial approval. The commissioner shall set such weights and parameters consistent with the terms contained herein.] Teacher evaluation category. The evaluation category for teachers shall be based on and created from the findings of a committee established by the board of regents consisting of certified educators who are residents of this state created by the board of regents pursuant to subdivision five of this section.
b. Teacher observations category. The observations category for teachers shall be based on a state-approved rubric and shall include [up to three subcomponents. Such category must include: (1)] a subcomponent based on classroom observations conducted by a principal or other trained administrator [and must also include (2) a subcomponent based on classroom observations by an impartial independent trained evaluator or evaluators selected by the district. An independent trained evaluator may be employed within the school district, but not the same school building, as the teacher being evaluated. Such category may also include a subcomponent based on classroom observations conducted by a trained peer teacher rated effective or highly effective from the same school or from another school in the district].
The [commissioner] board of regents shall determine the weights, and/or weighting options and scoring ranges for the subcomponents of the observations category that result in a combined category rating. The [commissioner] board of regents shall also determine the minimum number of observations to be conducted annually, including frequency and duration, and any parameters therefor. The [commissioner] board of regents shall set such weights and scores consistent with the terms contained herein.
5. The board of regents shall establish a committee consisting of certified educators who are residents of this state to develop a research based evaluation model to measure a teacher's performance. The committee shall present its findings to the board of regents no later than one year after the committee's creation.
6. Rating determination. The overall rating determination shall be determined according to a methodology as follows:
a. The following rules shall apply: a teacher or principal who is (1) [rated using two subcomponents in the student performance category and receives a rating of ineffective in such category shall be rated ineffective overall; provided, however, that if the measure used in the second subcomponent is a state-provided growth score on a state-created or administered test pursuant to clause (A) of subparagraph one of paragraph a of subdivision four of this section, a teacher or principal who receives a rating of ineffective in such category shall not be eligible to receive a rating of effective or highly effective overall; (2) rated using only the state measure subcomponent in the student performance category and receives a rating of ineffective in such category shall not be eligible to receive a rating of effective or highly effective overall; and (3)] rated ineffective in the teacher observations category shall not be eligible to receive a rating of effective or highly effective overall and (2) rated ineffective in the teacher evaluation category shall not be eligible to receive a rating of effective or highly effective overall.
S. 4390 4
b. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph a of this subdivision, a teacher's composite score shall be determined as follows:
(1) If a teacher receives an H in the teacher observation category, and an H in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be H;
(2) If a teacher receives an H in the teacher observation category, and an E in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be H;
(3) If a teacher receives an H in the teacher observation category, and a D in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be E;
(4) If a teacher receives an H in the teacher observation category, and an I in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be D;
(5) If a teacher receives an E in the teacher observation category, and an H in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be H;
(6) If a teacher receives an E in the teacher observation category, and an E in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be E;
(7) If a teacher receives an E in the teacher observation category, and a D in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be E;
(8) If a teacher receives an E in the teacher observation category, and an I in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be D;
(9) If a teacher receives a D in the teacher observation category, and an H in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be E;
(10) If a teacher receives a D in the teacher observation category, and an E in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be E;
(11) If a teacher receives a D in the teacher observation category, and a D in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be D;
(12) If a teacher receives a D in the teacher observation category, and an I in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be I;
(13) If a teacher receives an I in the teacher observation category, and an H in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be D;
(14) If a teacher receives an I in the teacher observation category, and an E in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be D;
(15) If a teacher receives an I in the teacher observation category, and a D in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be I;
(16) If a teacher receives an I in the teacher observation category, and an I in the [student performance] teacher evaluation category, the teacher's composite score shall be I.
[6.] 7. Prohibited elements. The following elements shall no longer be eligible to be used in any evaluation subcomponent pursuant to this section:
a. [evidence of student development and performance derived from lesson plans, other artifacts of teacher practice, and student portfo-
S. 4390 5
lios, except for student portfolios measured by a state-approved rubric where permitted by the department;
b.] use of an instrument for parent or student feedback;
[c.] b. use of professional goal-setting as evidence of teacher or principal effectiveness;
[d.] c. any district or regionally-developed assessment that has not been approved by the department; [and]
[e.] d. any growth or achievement target that does not meet the minimum standards as set forth in regulations of the [commissioner] board of regents adopted hereunder; and
e. any state-created or administered test.
Reflowed for reading: line numbers and page breaks removed. Cite the official text.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the education law, in relation to annual teacher evaluations
Purpose
Directs the Board of Regents to establish a committee of educators to develop a research based evaluation model to measure teacher performance and to minimize the link between student test scores and the professional performance evaluation of educators. The bill also shifts the determination of evaluations provisions from the Commissioner of Education to the Board of Regents.
Summary of provisions
Section 3012-d of the education law, as added by section 2 of subpart E of part EE of chapter 56 of the laws of 2015 and subparagraph 1 of paragraph a of subdivision 4 as amended by section 3 of subpart C of "part B of chapter 20 of the laws of 2015, is amended.
Justification
Our state's educational testing procedures have run amok of the original intent and have evolved into such a complex set of regulations that even educational experts struggle to keep up with the convoluted edicts. And, when our experts struggle, we must recognize the devastating impact this has on laypeople, like parents, students, and taxpayers who foot the bill for something they no longer understand.
These regulations have resulted in the strangulation of educators' classroom creativity, the stifling of imagination and the prevention of the cultivation of the innovative brand of talent we need in our future workforce. This cookie-cutter approach to learning and teaching has always overlooked a critical element of education that our state's educators have always recognized - there are many paths leading to success and those paths can be as diverse as our state's student population.
It is past time that we take the first step toward dismantling this ill-advised climate of high-stakes testing. This bill will diminish the link between student test scores and professional teacher evaluations, thereby allowing our teachers to truly teach once again, allowing our school administrators to run their schools and evaluate the people who educate our children in a manner that can be understood by the people paying the bills.
Legislative history
2016 - S. 7463a - Education Committee/A. 10057a - Education Committee.
Fiscal implications
To be determined.
Effective date
This act shall take effect on the first of August next succeeding the date on which it shall have become a law.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.