A CL on the MORE listserve went to the Manhattan training on Tuesday. Here is what he reported- also see powerpoint links, only available until Feb. 2. A lot of this is gibberish to me - acronym city. I think I saw The Matrix Trilogy. Is this a sequel?
Chapter Leader workshop at 52 Broadway for the changes to ADVANCE.
First off, we were running about 20 minutes behind so while we were waiting we had a COPE presentation stressing the importance of generating awareness around the November 7th vote for the Constitutional Convention-clearly this is weighing heavy and is a major concern. The information presented was the same information shared at the December Delegate Assembly meeting, so nothing new here. Don Wright commented that Governor Cuomo is our friend and why he is so convinced to Cuomo’s new found respect for public school teachers and a partnership is in the best interest for Cuomo. Well, more to follow I am sure on this topic.
On to the workshop.
Amy Arundel and Jackie Bennett presented and the workshop was well organized and informative with the last 30 minutes for question and answer. I have attached their powerpoint packet that was issued and here are the highlights in the order of the presentation:
* two major points in regards to this Evaluation Agreement
- simplification of the teacher evaluation process
- increased fairness
*the 1st big change, the most important that affects us in the immediate is the “MATRIX’— the calculating and totaling of scores is gone and the grid is in place. There is no math involved find where you fall in the grid and voila-your score. Page 3 of the PowerPoint packet.
The key point regarding the MATRIX is that it defers to the higher of the two teacher scores MOTP/MOSL or MOSL/MOTP— the benefit of the doubt will go to the teacher. Takes care of teachers who are rated HE in their MOTP but their MOSL score was dragging them down to Effective or Developing.
* the 2nd big change is the adoption of the Single Measure. No longer a State measure 20%, and Local measure 20%. Just one score that is not weighted, period. Reduces the stakes of testing, less complicated, school MOSL selects the Single Measure.
* MOSL Committee at the school level will select and recommend to the principal the Single Measure. At this point it was noted that teachers [high school and some 8th grade science & math] who teach a regents class that ends in a regents exam their Single Measure is the regents. *** MOSL Committee can only use the choices of measure that are available for this year, no new measures for this school year. Next year, introduction of new Single Measure assessment/options.
* this will be a phase-in over the next several years through 2021, for 2017-2018 the development of Project-Based Learning, Student Learning Inventories [portfolios], Performance-Based Assessments [already in use in the DOE] , Progress Monitoring Asssessments. Page 6 of the PowerPoint
* last, a Central MOSL Committee with a 50/50 split between UFT and DOE will provide oversight in review school developed assessments, etc. An entire protocol is in place up to mediation with an outside arbitrator if things cannot be resolved between the upper structures of management.
Overall, a lot of information is forthcoming in MOSL guide, emails, etc. Page 4 of the PowerPoint is worth the review as Amy stressed that there are very very few changes ahead for the MOTP. Any changes will assist and support teachers on a TIP and relate to outside 3rd party reviewers.
- The matrix is in state law. (not in negotiations or regs) It would take another law to override it.- Currently, under state law, teachers are only required to be observed twice. However, the UFT opted to have several observations for city teachers citing the statistical Bell Curve phenomena, where the more variables you have, the more likely it is that they will converge their distribution towards the normal. In other words, you have a better chance of improving your overall score if you have several observations as opposed to just two.- Facilitators encouraged Chapter Leaders to remind teachers that they are being rated by an average of the scores they receive on each Danielson Framework component. Therefore, it would most likely benefit teachers if they are indeed rated on ALL observable Danielson components. If teachers are not rated on the classroom management component, for example, and they know it was observable and executed well, then they should request a rating. This will help their overall score. If this oversight is not rectified, teachers should file an APPR complaint.- This year, observation options remain the same. Next year, however, highly effective teachers will be able to choose between new option versions of numbers 3 and 4. Please refer to the Teacher Guide on the Evaluation System that Mulgrew sent members for specific details. (Page 5)- There is a page 7 to the PowerPoint Presentation document that was handed out at yesterday’s meeting. I scanned the entire document which includes page 7 into a PDF file. It has been attached to this e-mail.
PowerPoints Available until Feb 2, 2017
If there was a Q&A, did anybody ask why the UFT agreed to 4 observations when the majority of NYS school districts are going with the legally required 2 observations? These 4 observations have the staff at my school furious and for good reason. The UFT totally dropped the ball and sold us out on this. Our teachers want answers. Any info is appreciated!
ReplyDelete4 observations help on the "bell curve phenomenon"? What a crock of crap. The UFT should have let individual teachers choose of they wanted 4 observations instead of the state mandated 2 observations. I'd love to see how many teachers would pick 4 observations instead of 2 observations in order to have a better shot at the "bell curve phenomenon". We all know the real reason the UFT agreed to 4 observations is that they are in cahoots with the CSA/DOE. This "bell curve phenomenon" is the biggest joke I have heard in a long time. Why did the UFT not ask the rank and file if they want 4 vs. 2 observations? Seems to me that the number of observations could be kicked back to 2 if NYS agrees to the rest of our observation proposal. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI don't care if I get observed two, four or six times. What I want is the drive-bys with the Danielson rubric to stop! I would not care if I was observed randomly without that WMD A.K.A Danielson rubric. I would get observed one a month if I got to know the period and/or the day. Admins want to come in ... who cares... you want to rape me with a asinine rubric that I helped pay for with my union dues and now I have to have my unity troll CL tell me what a great job the UFT did for me... know i don't think so. ....
ReplyDeleteBeen teaching a long time. I want TWO OBSERVATIONS as the law requires.
ReplyDeleteIn my 43 years of teaching I never, ever saw the word "rape" used so freely, in education blogs no less! The word rape has such deep connotations and as a woman it send shudders up my spine and makes me angry; as my students would say it's a "trigger." However, I feel the word fits quite well in regards how the UFT has treated myself and colleagues! I paid dues for 43 years only to be raped by my union!
ReplyDeleteI feel terribly sorry for anyone trying to teach under these conditions today. I wish teachers all had a chance to teach in the 80's and early 90's, that was teaching! Now we're raped by administrators, raped by the most bile students, and finally raped by our union!
I want TWO observations as NY state law requires. NYC teachers are tired of being crapped on!!!!!
ReplyDeleteEveryone knows these observations are being used to harass and destroy teachers. Does the UFT think we're all stupid???
NYC TEACHERS SHOULD BE TREATED EQUALLY TO OTHER NYS TEACHERS!!!!!!!!!!!