School District Sorting Out APPR

In response to the settlement announced in February between NYSUT and state officials to implement a state-wide teacher evaluation system by January 2013, the Northport Board of Ed adopted Danielson’s Framework for Teaching (2007), a rubric which will be utilized in the annual professional performance review of teachers.

UTN President Antoinette Blanck said that the newly created APPR Advisory Committee, which is comprised of six teachers and six administrators, will hold its first meeting March 29 to discuss how to implement the rubric in the evaluation process. Districts must have a  plan in place by Jan. 17, 2013 or risk losing an increase in state aid.

The APPR plan settles NYSUT’s lawsuit that successfully challenged regulations conflicting with the 2010 APPR. Under the guidelines, 80 percent of the evaluation specifics must be bargained collectively at the local level, including observations which comprise 60 percent of the grade, and 20 percent based on student achievements on tests selected on a local level. The balance of twenty percent is based on state test scores.

Of the sixty percent based on observations, 31 percent would be based on classroom observations conducted by principals or administrators, with at least one unannounced observation. The remaining 29 percent, which is subject to collective bargaining, could be based on a combination of things, including observations by independent trained evaluators, student portfolios, and/or student and parent feedback.

Teachers would receive a rating of ineffective, developing, effective, and highly effective. Those rated ineffective in the 40 points under student achievement could not receive a developing, effective or highly effective score overall. A teacher who receives an ineffective rating must receive support and training to improve. Two consecutive ineffective ratings could lead to dismissal. The appeals process must be bargained collectively.

The UTN and the district had proposed an appeals process as part of a for a three year contract in January. That MOA was ultimately rejected by the rank-and-file by a nearly two-to-one margin.

UTN President Antoinette Blanck said on Friday that the appeals process
outlined in the MOA could still be incorporated into the final contract. “I’m hopeful that we could maintain that piece of it.” Under the proposal, teachers who receive an “ineffective” rating would have ten days to appeal in writing to the Superintendent’s designee who would have ten days to respond. The affected teacher could then ask for a review by one outside expert chosen by a panel of three people selected by the District and UTN.

The Superintendent would consider the expert’s findings and recommendation and would issue a determination within ten days. The decision would not be grievable, arbitrable, or reviewable.

The two sides remain far apart in the negotiations process. At the , district counsel John Gross said that PERB (Public Employee Relations Board) had been notified of the union’s rejection of the MOA. Blanck said she had spoken with Board President Stephen Waldenburg and Superintendent Marylou McDermott after the meeting, who both told her that they felt the two sides could still work together to hammer out an agreement. About a week ago, she said she was surprised to learn that the district had filed to move into fact-finding. She spoke with both McDermott and Waldenburg and was told that the filing was a formality to basically “hold a place” in line in case subsequent talks fail.  Fact-finding can often take months.

In a hopeful sign, both sides held a small meeting on Thursday, March 1. "We had some good dialogue," Blanck said, adding that another meeting has been set for later in the month. "We're still talking."