Important SED APPR Revisions

The link below was released by the State Education Department the morning of February 25. The link provides access to a field memorandum issued by Julia Rafal-Baer, executive director of the SED Office of Teacher and Leader Effectiveness, Policy and Programs. The memorandum pertains to APPR revisions accruing from the Board of Regents February 2014 meeting, including the following actions:

• Effective February 11, 2014,  Expedited APPR Reviews to reduce unnecessary testing
• Effective February 11, 2014, Core Subject Areas permitting school-wide, group, or team measures
• Effective March 2, 2014, no APPR plan shall be approved by SED for 2014-15 that includes traditional standardized third party or vendor assessments to students in kindergarten through grade 2.
• Effective March 2, 2014, SED will eliminate from its list of State-Approved Assessments for 2014-15, traditional standardized assessments for use in kindergarten through grade 2.
• Effective March 2, 2014, any APPR plan submitted for approval in 2014-15 must certify that no more than 1 percent of total instructional time in each classroom or program will be spent taking locally-determined traditional standardized assessments from the state’s approved list or traditional standardized district, regional or BOCES-developed assessments for APPR purposes. (This requirement does NOT apply to assessments that are used for formative or diagnostic purposes.)
• Updates will be made to SED resources according to the following schedule:

Week of February 24, 2014
– Review Room 2.0 Portal – add school-wide option for 6-7 science and 6-8 social studies
– APPR Guidance and Purple Memo
– SLO Guidance
– Task-by Task Guidance

Week of March 3, 2014
– Certifying Instructional Time APPR Guidance
– State-approved third party assessment list
– Review Room 2.0 – change third party assessment option for K-2
__________________________________________________________________
To: NYSDATA@listserv.nysed.gov
Subject: memo re: APPR and recent BOR meeting posted

Summary of the Board of Regents Recently Announced Regulatory Changes to Subpart 30-2 of the Rules of the Board of Regents, Relating to Annual Professional Performance Reviews (APPR) for Teachers and Principals ha been posted at

http://www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/appr-impact-field-memo-2-24-14.pdf
__________________________________________________________________

The SAANYS Government Relations Committee will discuss this memorandum, as well as all of SED’s 19 “Adjustment Options” with Commissioner King and Deputy Commissioner Ken Slentz on February 26.

We hope that you will find this information helpful. We will continue to keep you updated. All the best. …Jim Viola

Read Full Post »

Education Conference Board (ECB) Presents Testimony to the Common Core Implementation Panel

On Wednesday, February 19, SAANYS was called along with the other six organizations comprising the Education Conference Board (ECB) to present testimony and answer questions from the Common Core Implementation Panel in regard to Common Core implementation. John Yagielski, ECB Chairperson, presented testimony on the behalf of the seven ECB organizations, expressing support of the common core concept with the proviso that five additional actions must be implemented to support successful transition:
1.       Statewide campaign to build a common understanding
2.       Investment in professional development
3.       Ensure adequate funding
4.       Reassess and revise the state’s approach to student assessment
5.       Establish a process of ongoing review and refinement

Five others also presented testimony to the Panel:

• Michael Cohen,  Achieve
• Carmel Martin, Center for American Progress
• Jonathan Schleifer, Educators 4 Excellence
• Pam Allyn, LitWorld
• Theresa O’Brien, Watervliet Elementary School Principal

All those presenting testimony expressed support for the common core standards – some much more effusively than others. (It appears to some that panel members may have been selected partly due to their positive predisposition in this regard.) So too was there general agreement about the need for better communication and more professional development. In addressing the panel, I pointed out that there appears to be general agreement that teachers have not received the professional development and support needed for successful common core implementation,  and that such professional development and support is even more lacking for school principals and other school administrators. In terms of benchmarking, several presenters cited Tennessee and Kentucky as states that “got it right.”

The Governor’s panel is chaired by Stanley Litow, IBM International Foundation. Other panel members are:

• John Flanagan, Chairperson of Senate Education Committee
• Catherine Nolan, Chairperson of Assembly Education Committee
• Linda Darling-Hammond, Stanford University Graduate School of Education
• Todd Hathaway, East Aurora High School Teacher
• Alice Jackson-Jolley, Parent from Westchester County
• Anne Kress, Monroe Community College
• Nick Lawrence, Teacher at the East Bronx Academy for the Future
• Delia Pompa, National Council of La Raza
• Charles Russo, Superintendent of East Moriches UFSD
• Dan Weisberg, The New Teacher Project

The Panel is next scheduled to meet on March 5, 2014, and the focus areas will be frequency of student testing and standardized testing in K-2. In delivering his closing remarks for the meeting, Mr. Litow did not indicate a target date for the release of the Panel’s report and recommendations. We hope that you will find this information helpful. We will keep you updated. All the best. …Jim Viola

Read Full Post »

State Board of Regents Acts to Adjust Common Core Implementation

On February 10 and 11 the State Board of Regents met in Albany. Clearly, the matter garnering the greatest interest at this meeting was an action item including the report, The Path Forward: Common Core Learning Standards, Assessments, and Teacher & Principal Evaluation in New York State. The report is based upon the first three and a half years of Common Core implementation, and sets forth “Adjustment Options” to improve statewide implementation.  The report was issued by a Regents Work Group comprised of Regents Robert Bennett, from Tonawanda; James Dawson, from Plattsburgh; James Tallon, from Binghamton; Roger Tilles, from Great Neck; Kathleen Cashin, from Brooklyn;  and Wade Norwood, from Rochester, who served as chairperson.

 

The Regents report includes 19 Adjustment Options. Some of the Adjustment Options were in progress under other initiatives, before the report was issued. Option 6, allow students with severe disabilities to be assessed based on instructional level rather than chronological age; and Option 7, allow English language learners to be assessed via the language acquisition tests (NYSESLAT) rather the English language arts exam for two years are included in the department’s ESEA Waiver Application.

 

For some of the Adjustment Options, the Board of Regents place the responsibility for implementation in the hands of other entities.

• Three Options are contingent upon additional funding by the Governor and state legislature: Option 2 – Equitable funding for common core implementation, including funding for professional development; Option 5 – Reduce field testing and provide increased access to test questions; and Option 8 – develop a native language arts assessments for Spanish-speaking English language learners.
• Two Options, 6 and 7 (discussed above), are dependent upon approval of the department’s ESEA Waiver Application by the US Department of Education.

 

Some of the Adjustment Options may be expected to have significant impact, and others are expected to have little or no impact.

•  Option 1 – Periodically review and update the Common Core learning standards, calls upon New York  and other states to engage stakeholders in order to periodically review and update the Common Core standards. The impact of this option will be dependent upon the willingness of the State Education Department to “listen” to the stakeholders in identifying systemic needs and opportunities for improvement. Although NYSED has demonstrated a willingness to meet, it has generally demonstrated a “damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead” response to any recommendations for implementation or schedule revisions.
• Option 11 – Conduct expedited review of Annual Professional Performance Review plans for district/BOCES requests that would reduce testing. SAANYS has raised this issue repeatedly with SED – to no avail. We are glad that the department now plans to take such action, in a manner consistent with legislative bills drafted by the Senate and Assembly.
• Option 17, will result in the development of a “Teacher Portal” to facilitate and promote teacher-to-teacher sharing of curricular resources, including adaptations of modules. Although educational data and technology issues were beyond the scope of the Work Group’s charge, the department will delay the launch of the EngageNY Portal in order to work with the State Legislature to address concerns related to 3rd party vendors, including inBloom.
• Option 14 may be expected to somewhat reduce local testing time by extending APPR flexibility in allowing schoolwide measures for teachers middle school social studies (grades 6-8) and science (grades 6-7).
• Options 16, 18 and 19 will provide needed curricular support for students with disabilities and English language learners. Option 16 entails the development of additional companion materials to the common core modules focused on differentiated instructional practices and supports. Option 18 calls for the development of guidelines to be used by Committees on Special Education (CSEs) to ensure that the individualized education programs (IEPs) of students with disabilities are common core-aligned. Option 19 will result in the development of “guiding questions” for use by parents at CSE meetings and at parent-teacher meetings so as to be better informed as to how their children will be supported to progress in common core curricula.
• Option 15 is intended to safeguard teachers and principals from negative APPR consequences by allowing those who are undergoing a 3020-a termination hearing due to ineffective ratings in the 2012-13 and /or 2013-14 school years to raise as a defense an alleged failure of the board of education to timely implement the common core with adequate professional development and guidance. This option is expected to have no impact, as any principal or teacher undergoing such a procedure may raise such a deficiency regardless of the department’s permission to do so; and there is no assurance that teachers and principals will not be negatively impacted by a lower APPR evaluation due to the flawed roll-out of the Common Core. However, due to many comments received by the department in connection with this option (including Governor Cuomo), the Regents have directed that this option be posted for public comment, with action to be taken at their April meeting.

 

Moreover, up to the present time, the State Education Department has been adamant that APPRs must be a significant factor in employment decisions. Now, the Regents item states that the department advises districts “…to be judicious in considering data when making employment decisions during the (common core) transition period.”

 

Some of the Adjustment Options raise other questions.

• Option 3 will extend the phase-in for Common Core-aligned Regents examination required for graduation from the class of 2017 to the class of 2022 – an option supported by SAANYS.  However, the extent of the transition is unclear. Will students be required to “pass” at a 65 level of proficiency in 2021, and at a 75/80 level of English language arts and math proficiency in 2022?
• Option 4 is intended to reduce (but does not prohibit) high stakes consequences such as promotion and retention decisions for students in grades 3 through 8, based on the common core-aligned tests. The item states that school districts “should” base such decision upon multiple measures.
• Option 9 is intended to “clarify” that level 2 performance on the common core-aligned grade 3-8 tests in aligns with “On Track for Regents Exam Passing for Graduation,” constituting what some would describe as a Low Pass Score. At the March and July meetings of the Board of Regents, action was taken to change the description of level 2 performance from “meets basic standards” to “below proficient,” but was not equated to a 65 on a Regents examination.
• Option 10 would extend through 2014-15 the “hold harmless” provision for the provision of Academic Intervention Services. Although such action reflects sensitivity to fiscal challenges faced by many school districts, the provision of additional resources to provide additional academic services to students is an option that many school districts would prefer.
• Options 12 and 13 over time eliminate the administration of commercially developed standardized tests to students in kindergarten through grade two. Beginning in 2014-15, Option 12 will result in such tests being removed from the SED list of approved locally-selected assessments and the disapproval of district and BOCES APPR plans that include such tests. Option 13 further limits APPR testing by establishing a 1 percent cap on the administration of locally-selected standardized tests for APPR purposes. These measures will require many school districts and BOCES to renegotiate administrator and teacher collective bargaining agreements prior to their expiration. Will SED provide additional guidance in this regard?

 

Several Regents members expressed frustration that they did not have sufficient time to carefully read the item prior to the meeting due to the late release of the item Sunday night. In fact, Regent Rosa reported that some Regents did not have the opportunity to read the report at all prior to the meeting. The item was passed, despite Regents Rosa, Cashin and Cea voting in opposition.

 

For more information regarding the Board of Regents’ adjustments to Common Core implementation, contact James Viola, Director of Government Relations, at JViola@saanys.org.

– See more at: http://www.saanys.org/viewarticle.asp?id=3908#sthash.dSuODMxj.dpuf

Read Full Post »

SAANYS’ Positions on NYSUT and inBloom

On January 28, SAANYS presented testimony at a joint hearing conducted by the state legislature regarding Governor Cuomo’s proposed Executive Budget. Our written testimony, upon which verbal testimony is based, is available by clicking here. However, since the legislative hearing, we have received numerous inquiries about two matters:

Does SAANYS plan any action similar to that taken by NYSUT, in taking a Vote of No Confidence in Commissioner King?
What is the SAANYS position in regard to Personally Identifiable Information – including inBloom?
We are taking this opportunity to address both of these issues, and it is likely that we will include this information in News & Notes as well.
 
NYSUT’s Vote of No Confidence
 
NYSUT took their Vote of No Confidence on January 25. SAANYS was aware of such a planned action and discussed this matter on this same day with this association’s board of directors. At the close of this discussion the SAANYS board of directors determined that we would not embark upon a similar course of action. There were many reasons for this position including the following:

Is the NYSUT action properly directed? The NYSUT action solely addresses Commissioner King, and the SAANYS board had misgivings as to whether this is appropriate. The board recalled that the current reform effort began with Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch and former Commissioner David Steiner. It has been supported by a majority of the Board of Regents, by Regents Research Fellows that some have described as a shadow government, by a legislature that was willing to pass APPR legislation in two days without a hearing, by two different governors, a variety of private foundations and commercial interests, as well as by Secretary Duncan and President Obama. In short, the pro-reform advocates are far more than any one person.

What is to be gained? Board members did not feel that there is any great likelihood that John King would resign or  be fired. Even if he did, the Board of Regents would select a successor who would also continue to pursue implementation of the Regents’ education reform agenda. That said, the SAANYS board reviewed the draft resolution that was presented to the NYSUT board of directors and was sympathetic to much of the rationale NYSUT cited in support of its resolution. The implementation of the reform has been unpiloted, uneven across school districts, and not timely supported by promised curriculum or professional development. There has been excessive testing and a lack of empathy at SED toward students, parents and professional staff at schools. While a No Confidence Vote might provide short-term visceral satisfaction, it takes no real step toward fixing the damage done. The SAANYS board is instead focusing on advocating for the following, which have already been communicated to members of the State Legislature and Board of Regents:

• We support a moratorium on the use of state assessments for high stakes consequences for students and educators until there has been a properly sequenced implementation of the common core curriculum.
• There may not be a properly sequenced implementation until such time as SED generates common core-aligned curricula and professional staff have received professional development in applicable instructional shifts.
• Test questions and answers should be released to allow in-depth item analysis to inform instruction and improve student learning.
•  After implementation, we support an informed, neutral third party analysis of the reform effort to determine what adjustments may be appropriate.

SAANYS Position on “Personally Identifiable Information”
Ordinarily, at Legislative Hearings, verbal testimony will highlight salient aspects of written testimony. The Executive Budget did not address the issue of Personally Identifiable Information and so our written testimony did not address this topic. It is planned that we will lobby the State Education Department and legislature in this regard. We also engaged the SAANYS Board of Directors on this topic at their January 25 meeting. However, because some members of the legislature asked  questions in this regard to those testifying before SAANYS, we took license in going “off script” and addressing this in our verbal testimony. We said that, SAANYS supports the recommendation in the report accruing from the five Senate Hearings conducted by Senator Flanagan for a one-year delay – a stop — in any Race to the Top activities related to the data portal. This time would be essential to thoughtfully consider (and reconsider) this matter.  In that New York State is a local control state, we recommended that decisions regarding whether to opt-in or opt-out of data portal utilization should be done at the local level – as has been the case up to this time. We recommended that the State Education Department “drop inBloom.” We also expressed support for the safeguards included in Senate Bill 6007 and Assembly Bill 6059-a.

These safeguards include:

•     Access based on having a legitimate educational interest.
•     Indemnification for school districts, BOCES and the State.
•     Encryption to protect data in motion.
•     Restrictions on how student data may be used.
•     Specification of what happens upon termination of contract.
•     Actions for suspected and actual data breaches.
•     Prohibited use for commercial purposes.
•     Graduated fines and penalties for Vendors violating requirements.

 

We are doing all that we can to advance the above positions, and other SAANYS positions. SAANYS Executive Director Kevin Casey and I met with Senator Flanagan on February 3 (yesterday), today we discussed considerations related to successful school completion with Deputy Commissioners Slentz and Smith, and tomorrow I am scheduled to meet with Assembly member Nolan.  Coincidentally, moments ago, two news articles were released (attached below), one by leaders of the State Assembly, the other by leaders of the State Senate. Both articles address common core phase-in, and recommend delays in the use of common core-aligned tests for high stakes purposes. Further, leaders from the Assembly recommend, “delay the use of inBloom or any third party vendor in developing a ‘data portal,'” and leaders from the Senate recommend, “delay operation of the Education Data Portal for at least one year.” These calls by the Assembly and Senate are consistent with positions advanced by SAANYS.

Note: On February 10 and 11, the Board of Regents is expected to present their adjusted plan for roll-out of their education reforms. SAANYS will be at this meeting, and we will keep you informed.
 
We hope this information is helpful. All the best. …Jim Viola



New Release 1:

Assembly leader calls for Common Core delay

February 4, 2014 – 11:13 AM

by Tom Precious

ALBANY – Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Assembly Education Chairwoman Cathy Nolan today called on the state Board of Regents to delay the state’s common core program for two years. The views of the Assembly Democrats generally influence the Regents, since its members are essentially selected by the Democrats who control the Assembly.

In a written statement, the two lawmakers said:

“New Yorkers share the same goal – to improve our schools and help prepare our students to be successful and college- and career-ready upon graduation. However, given the serious issues that have been raised over the past year, we feel it is both prudent and wise to take the following actions. The use of Common Core aligned tests for high-stakes decisions for teachers, principals and students should be delayed, at a minimum, for two years. At the same time, SED (State Education Department) should continue to develop Common Core aligned curricula and assist local school districts in developing their own curricula so that teachers will be able to successfully teach Common Core aligned subjects while at the same time helping students reach their maximum potential.

“As we have stated in the past, there are equally serious concerns and potential flaws regarding plans to share student data with a private third party vendor. There are persistent questions regarding the ability to protect such data from security breaches, the necessity of the details and categories of such student data that is being shared, as well as the highly inappropriate potential for commercialization. SED should delay the use of inBloom or any third party vendor in developing a “data portal” until all these questions have been answered and the concerns fully satisfied.”

News Release 2:
 


Senate Co-Leaders Dean Skelos and Jeff Klein, and Senate Education Chair John Flanagan Call for Delay of Common Core and Sharing of Student Privacy Data

Senators Skelos, Klein, and Flanagan issued the following statement:

We continue to support the goals of an improved education curriculum that increases standards and ensures that students are college and career ready.

However, after having spent months listening to parents, teachers, administrators and educational professionals at public hearings conducted throughout New York State, it is our belief that while the implementation of Common Core Learning Standards may have been well intended, it has been poorly executed.

We continue to have grave concerns over this flawed roll-out. Unless the Board of Regents acts to alleviate the concerns of parents, teachers, and other educators, we call on the Regents to delay the use of Common Core tests for high-stakes decisions about teachers, principals and students for a minimum of two years. During this time, SED should continue to develop curricula aligned with higher standards and assist local school districts in developing their own curricula so teachers can successfully implement higher learning standards and help students reach their maximum potential.

In addition, students, parents, teachers, privacy experts, and school administrators have raised serious concerns about the ability of unauthorized third-parties to access personally identifiable information (PII) of students, teachers, and principals that will be collected on the state-wide Education Data Portal (EDP). Therefore, we reiterate our call for the Regents to delay operation of the Education Data Portal for at least one year. 

I

n the end, our goal must continue to be the development of higher learning standards in the best interest of our students and their futures.

Read Full Post »