2015-16 APPR Ratings
During the transition period (beginning in 2015-16), transition scores and HEDI ratings were generated for teachers and principals whose HEDI scores were based, in whole or in part, on State assessments in grades 3-8 ELA or math (including where State-provided growth scores are used) or on State-provided growth scores on Regents examinations. During the 2015-16 school year, overall transition scores/ratings were determined based upon the remaining subcomponents/categories of the APPR that were not based on the grade 3-8 ELA or math State assessments or a State provided growth score.*
Education Law §3012-c
Below are 2015-16 Education Law §3012-c APPR data for teachers and principals.** In the 2015-16 academic year, 606 districts, BOCES, and charter schools were operating under Education Law §3012-c with an approved Hardship Waiver. Data has only been included for those districts, BOCES, and charter schools with an approved APPR plan for the 2015-16 school year under Education Law §3012-c, including both original and transition (as applicable) scores and ratings. Each classroom teacher and building principal received an overall rating of Highly Effective, Effective, Developing, or Ineffective (HEDI). This rating was based on a single composite effectiveness score (ranging from 0-100 points) that was calculated based on the scores received by the teacher or principal in each of the three subcomponents (State Growth or Other Comparable Measures, Locally Selected Measures, and Other Measures of Educator Effectiveness).
The figure below shows the percentage of educators in each original rating category for the three subcomponents and the Overall Composite score, as well as the percentage of educators in each transition rating category for the Transition Overall Composite Score: Original Overall Composite Rating (first row), Original State Growth or Other Comparable Measures (second row), Original Locally Selected Measures (third row), Original Other Measures of Educator Effectiveness (fourth row), and Transition Overall Composite Score (last row). Please note: the procedure for scaling of transition subcomponents under Education Law §3012-c was determined at the LEA-level; therefore transition subcomponent data is not displayed for APPR results under Education Law §3012-c.
ORIGINAL OVERALL COMPOSITE RATING
Each classroom teacher and building principal received an overall rating based on a single composite effectiveness score that was calculated based on the scores received by the teacher or principal in each of the three subcomponents.
ORIGINAL STATE GROWTH OR OTHER COMPARABLE MEASURES RATING
Education Law §3012-c required that 20% of a teacher's or principal's evaluation be based on State Growth or Other Comparable Measures (State-provided growth scores or Student Learning Objectives [SLOs]). A State Growth or Other Comparable Measure was the measure of student growth.
ORIGINAL LOCALLY SELECTED MEASURES RATING
Education Law §3012-c required that 20% of a teacher's or principal's evaluation be based on Locally Selected Measures. The Locally Selected Measure could either measure growth or achievement from a selection of available assessment options.
ORIGINAL OTHER MEASURES OF EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS RATING
Education Law §3012-c required that 60% of teacher and principal evaluations be based on multiple measures of teacher/principal effectiveness consistent with standards prescribed by the Commissioner in regulation. This included the extent to which the educator demonstrated proficiency in meeting °ÄÃÅÌØÂëÍõ's teaching or leadership standards.
TRANSITION OVERALL COMPOSITE RATING
Each classroom teacher and building principal whose original measures were based on the grades 3-8 ELA/math State assessments or any State-provided growth scores received an overall rating based on a single composite effectiveness score that was calculated based on the scores received by the teacher or principal in each of the three subcomponents, excluding measures based on the grades 3-8 ELA/math State assessments and any State-provided growth scores.
** Due to rounding rules, percentage totals may not equal 100%.
Education Law §3012-d
Below are 2015-16 Education Law §3012-d APPR data for teachers and principals.** In the 2015-16 academic year, 122 districts and BOCES implemented APPR plans under Education Law §3012-d. Data has only been included for those districts, BOCES, and charter schools with an approved APPR plan for the 2015-16 school year under Education Law §3012-d, including both original and transition (as applicable) scores and ratings. Each classroom teacher and building principal received an overall rating based on the ratings earned by the teacher or principal in the Student Performance and Teacher Observation/ Principal School Visit Categories and determined using a State-prescribed matrix.
The figure below shows the percentage of educators in each original rating category for the two categories and the Overall rating, as well as the percentage of educators in each transition rating category for the two categories and the transition Overall rating: Original Overall rating (first row), Original Student Performance category rating (second row), and Original Teacher Observation/Principal School Visit category rating (third row), Transition Overall rating (last row).
ORIGINAL OVERALL RATING
Each classroom teacher and building principal received an overall rating determined using a State-prescribed matrix based on the ratings earned by the teacher or principal in the Student Performance and Observation/School Visit categories.
ORIGINAL STUDENT PERFORMANCE CATEGORY RATING
Education Law §3012-d required that one component of a teacher's or principal's evaluation be based on one required measure of student growth (State-provided growth scores or Student Learning Objectives [SLOs]) and one optional measure of student growth (a second State-provided growth score on a State-created or administered test or a growth score based on a State-designed supplemental assessment). All measures in the Student Performance category measured student growth.
ORIGINAL TEACHER OBSERVATION/PRINCIPAL SCHOOL VISIT CATEGORY RATING
Education Law §3012-d required that teachers' and principals' evaluations be based on at least two observations (for teachers) or school visits (for principals) scored using a State-approved rubric. The Teacher Observation/Principal School Visit category included two required subcomponents and an optional subcomponent.
TRANSITION OVERALL RATING
Each classroom teacher and building principal whose original measures were based on the grades 3-8 ELA/math State assessments or any State-provided growth scores received an overall rating based on the ratings received by the teacher or principal in the Transition Student Performance and Transition Observation/School Visit categories and determined using a State-prescribed matrix.
TRANSITION STUDENT PERFORMANCE CATEGORY RATING
Education Law §3012-d required that one component of a teacher's or principal's evaluation be based on one required measure of student growth (State-provided growth scores or Student Learning Objectives [SLOs]) and one optional measure of student growth (a second State-provided growth score on a State-created or administered test or a growth score based on a State-designed supplemental assessment). All measures in the Student Performance category measured student growth. During the 2015-16 through 2018-19 school years, transition scores and ratings were also calculated by LEAs that excluded the results of the grades 3-8 ELA/math State assessments and any State-provided growth scores.
TRANSITION TEACHER OBSERVATION/PRINCIPAL SCHOOL VISIT CATEGORY RATING
Education Law §3012-d required that teachers' and principals' evaluations be based on at least two observations (for teachers) or school visits (for principals) scored using a State-approved rubric. The Teacher Observation/Principal School Visit category included two required subcomponents and an optional subcomponent.
Pursuant to Education Law §3012-c(10), viewers of this site will not be able to find personally identifiable information for any teacher or principal, including an individual educator's evaluation ratings by name anywhere on this website. However, parents or legal guardians may contact their child's district or BOCES to obtain information about their child's teacher(s) or principal(s) composite effectiveness score and/or their final overall rating.
* Please note: The total number of educators indicated in the original and transition APPR data for a given APPR subcomponent/category may differ. Additionally, the total number of educators for whom overall APPR ratings were reported may differ when the original and transition APPR data sets are compared. This is because an LEA may submit complete transition data for an educator without having also submitted complete original data for the same educator. While an original overall APPR rating may only be determined where scores/ratings are also determined for all subcomponents/categories of a teacher’s or principal’s APPR, overall transition APPR ratings may be determined and reported based only on an educator’s Other Measures of Educator Effectiveness, or Observation/School Visit Category rating.
** Due to rounding rules, percentage totals may not equal 100%.