§ 3012-c. Annual professional performance review of classroom teachers
and building principals. 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
rule or regulation to the contrary, the annual professional performance
reviews of all classroom teachers and building principals employed by
school districts or boards of cooperative educational services shall be
conducted in accordance with the provisions of this section. Such
performance reviews which are conducted on or after July first, two
thousand eleven, or on or after the date specified in paragraph c of
subdivision two of this section where applicable, shall include measures
of student achievement and be conducted in accordance with this section.
Such annual professional performance reviews shall be a significant
factor for employment decisions including but not limited to, promotion,
retention, tenure determination, termination, and supplemental
compensation, which decisions are to be made in accordance with locally
developed procedures negotiated pursuant to the requirements of article
fourteen of the civil service law where applicable. Provided, however,
that nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the unfettered
statutory right of a school district or board of cooperative educational
services to terminate a probationary teacher or principal for any
statutorily and constitutionally permissible reasons, including but not
limited to misconduct and until a tenure decision is made, the
performance of the teacher or principal in the classroom. Such
performance reviews shall also be a significant factor in teacher and
principal development, including but not limited to, coaching, induction
support and differentiated professional development, which are to be
locally established in accordance with procedures negotiated pursuant to
the requirements of article fourteen of the civil service law.

2. a. (1) The annual professional performance reviews conducted
pursuant to this section for classroom teachers and building principals
shall differentiate teacher and principal effectiveness using the
following quality rating categories: highly effective, effective,
developing and ineffective, with explicit minimum and maximum scoring
ranges for each category, for the state assessments and other comparable
measures subcomponent of the evaluation and for the locally selected
measures of student achievement subcomponent of the evaluation, as
prescribed in the regulations of the commissioner. There shall be: (i) a
state assessments and other comparable measures subcomponent which shall
comprise twenty or twenty-five percent of the evaluation; (ii) a locally
selected measures of student achievement subcomponent which shall
comprise twenty or fifteen percent of the evaluation; and (iii) an other
measures of teacher or principal effectiveness subcomponent which shall
comprise the remaining sixty percent of the evaluation, which in sum
shall constitute the composite teacher or principal effectiveness score.
Such annual professional performance reviews shall result in a single
composite teacher or principal effectiveness score, which incorporates
multiple measures of effectiveness related to the criteria included in
the regulations of the commissioner.

(2) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph b of this subdivision for the two thousand
eleven--two thousand twelve school year and for annual professional
performance reviews conducted in accordance with paragraphs f and g of
this subdivision for the two thousand twelve--two thousand thirteen
school year, the overall composite scoring ranges shall be in accordance
with this subparagraph. A classroom teacher and building principal shall
be deemed to be:

(A) Highly Effective if they achieve a composite effectiveness score
of 91-100.

(B) Effective if they achieve a composite effectiveness score of
75-90.

(C) Developing if they achieve a composite effectiveness score of
65-74.

(D) Ineffective if they achieve a composite effectiveness score of
0-64.

(3) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph b of this subdivision for the two thousand
eleven--two thousand twelve school year and for annual professional
performance reviews conducted in accordance with paragraph f of this
subdivision for the two thousand twelve--two thousand thirteen school
year for classroom teachers in subjects and grades for which the board
of regents has not approved a value-added model and for building
principals employed in schools or programs for which there is no
approved principal value-added model, the scoring ranges for the student
growth on state assessments or other comparable measures subcomponent
shall be in accordance with this subparagraph. A classroom teacher and
building principal shall receive:

(A) a highly effective rating in this subcomponent if the teacher's or
principal's results are well-above the state average for similar
students and they achieve a subcomponent score of 18-20;

(B) an effective rating in this subcomponent if the teacher's or
principal's results meet the state average for similar students and they
achieve a subcomponent score of 9-17; or

(C) a developing rating in this subcomponent if the teacher's or
principal's results are below the state average for similar students and
they achieve a subcomponent score of 3-8; or

(D) an ineffective rating in this subcomponent, if the teacher's or
principal's results are well-below the state average for similar
students and they achieve a subcomponent score of 0-2.

(4) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph g of this subdivision for the two thousand
twelve--two thousand thirteen school year for classroom teachers in
subjects and grades for which the board of regents has approved a
value-added model and for building principals employed in schools or
programs for which there is an approved principal value-added model, the
scoring ranges for the student growth on state assessments or other
comparable measures subcomponent shall be in accordance with this
subparagraph. A classroom teacher and building principal shall receive:

(A) a highly effective rating in this subcomponent if the teacher's or
principal's results are well-above the state average for similar
students and they achieve a subcomponent score of 22-25;

(B) an effective rating in this subcomponent if the teacher's or
principal's results meet the state average for similar students and they
achieve a subcomponent score of 10-21; or

(C) a developing rating in this subcomponent if the teacher's or
principal's results are below the state average for similar students and
they achieve a subcomponent score of 3-9; or

(D) an ineffective rating in this subcomponent, if the teacher's or
principal's results are well-below the state average for similar
students and they achieve a subcomponent score of 0-2.

(5) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph b of this subdivision for the two thousand
eleven--two thousand twelve school year and for annual professional
performance reviews conducted in accordance with paragraph f of this
subdivision for the two thousand twelve--two thousand thirteen school
year for classroom teachers in subjects and grades for which the board
of regents has not approved a value-added model and for building
principals employed in schools or programs for which there is no
approved principal value-added model, the scoring ranges for the locally
selected measures of student achievement subcomponent shall be in
accordance with this subparagraph. A classroom teacher and building
principal shall receive:

(A) a highly effective rating in this subcomponent if the results are
well-above district-adopted expectations for student growth or
achievement and they achieve a subcomponent score of 18-20; or

(B) an effective rating in this subcomponent if the results meet
district-adopted expectations for growth or achievement and they achieve
a subcomponent score of 9-17; or

(C) a developing rating in this subcomponent if the results are below
district-adopted expectations for growth or achievement and they achieve
a subcomponent score of 3-8; or

(D) an ineffective rating in this subcomponent if the results are
well-below district-adopted expectations for growth or achievement and
they achieve a subcomponent score of 0-2.

(6) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph b of this subdivision for the two thousand
eleven--two thousand twelve school year and for annual professional
performance reviews conducted in accordance with paragraph g of this
subdivision for the two thousand twelve--two thousand thirteen school
year for classroom teachers in subjects and grades for which the board
of regents has approved a value-added model and for building principals
employed in schools or programs for which there is an approved principal
value-added model, the scoring ranges for the locally selected measures
of student achievement subcomponent shall be in accordance with this
subparagraph. A classroom teacher and building principal shall receive:

(A) a highly effective rating in this subcomponent if the results are
well-above district-adopted expectations for student growth or
achievement and they achieve a subcomponent score of 14-15; or

(B) an effective rating in this subcomponent if the results meet
district-adopted expectations for growth or achievement and they achieve
a subcomponent score of 8-13; or

(C) a developing rating in this subcomponent if the results are below
district-adopted expectations for growth or achievement and they achieve
a subcomponent score of 3-7; or

(D) an ineffective rating in this subcomponent if the results are
well-below district-adopted expectations for growth or achievement and
they achieve a subcomponent score of 0-2.

(7) For the two thousand thirteen--two thousand fourteen school year
and thereafter, the commissioner shall review the specific scoring
ranges for each of the rating categories annually before the start of
each school year and shall recommend any changes to the board of regents
for consideration.

(8) Except for the student growth measures on the state assessments or
other comparable measures of student growth prescribed in paragraphs e,
f and g of this subdivision, the elements comprising the composite
effectiveness score and the process by which points are assigned to
subcomponents shall be locally developed, consistent with the standards
prescribed in the regulations of the commissioner and the requirements
of this section, through negotiations conducted, pursuant to the
requirements of article fourteen of the civil service law.

b. (1) Annual professional performance reviews conducted by school
districts or boards of cooperative educational services for the two
thousand eleven--two thousand twelve school year of classroom teachers
of common branch subjects or English language arts or mathematics in
grades four to eight and all building principals of schools in which
such teachers are employed shall be conducted pursuant to this
subdivision and shall use two thousand ten--two thousand eleven school
year student data as the baseline for the initial computation of the
composite teacher or principal effectiveness score for such classroom
teachers and principals.

(2) Subject to paragraph k of this subdivision the entire annual
professional performance review shall be completed and provided to the
teacher or principal as soon as practicable but in no case later than
September first, two thousand twelve. The provisions of subparagraphs
two and three of paragraph c of this subdivision shall apply to such
reviews.

c. (1) Annual professional performance reviews conducted by school
districts or boards of cooperative educational services for the two
thousand twelve--two thousand thirteen school year and thereafter of all
classroom teachers and all building principals shall be conducted
pursuant to this subdivision and shall use two thousand eleven--two
thousand twelve school year student data as the baseline for the initial
computation of the composite teacher or principal effectiveness score
for such classroom teachers and principals. For purposes of this
section, an administrator in charge of an instructional program of a
board of cooperative educational services shall be deemed to be a
building principal.

(2) Subject to paragraph k of this subdivision the entire annual
professional performance review shall be completed and provided to the
teacher or principal as soon as practicable but in no case later than
September first of the school year next following the school year for
which the classroom teacher or building principal's performance is being
measured. The teacher's and principal's score and rating on the locally
selected measures subcomponent, if available, and on the other measures
of teacher and principal effectiveness subcomponent for a teacher's or
principal's annual professional performance review shall be computed and
provided to the teacher or principal, in writing, by no later than the
last day of the school year for which the teacher or principal is being
measured. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to authorize a
teacher or principal to trigger the appeal process prior to receipt of
his or her composite effectiveness score and rating.

(3) Each such annual professional performance review shall be based on
the state assessments or other comparable measures subcomponent, the
locally selected measures of student achievement subcomponent and the
other measures of teacher and principal effectiveness subcomponent,
determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of this section
and the regulations of the commissioner, for the school year for which
the teacher's or principal's performance is measured.

d. Prior to any evaluation being conducted in accordance with this
section, each individual who is responsible for conducting an evaluation
of a teacher or building principal shall receive appropriate training in
accordance with the regulations of the commissioner of education.

e. (1) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph b of this subdivision for the two thousand
eleven--two thousand twelve school year, forty percent of the composite
score of effectiveness shall be based on student achievement measures as
follows: (i) twenty percent of the evaluation shall be based upon
student growth data on state assessments as prescribed by the
commissioner or a comparable measure of student growth if such growth
data is not available; and (ii) twenty percent shall be based on other
locally selected measures of student achievement that are determined to
be rigorous and comparable across classrooms in accordance with the
regulations of the commissioner and as are developed locally in a manner
consistent with procedures negotiated pursuant to the requirements of
article fourteen of the civil service law.

(2) Such locally selected measures may include measures of student
achievement or growth on state assessments, regents examinations and/or
department approved equivalent, provided that such measures are
different from those prescribed by the commissioner pursuant to clause
(i) of subparagraph one of this paragraph. The regulations of the
commissioner shall describe the types of measures of student growth or
achievement that may be locally selected. The selection of the local
measure(s) as described in this paragraph to be used by the school
district or board of cooperative educational services shall be
determined through collective bargaining.

f. (1) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph c of this subdivision for the two thousand
twelve--two thousand thirteen school year and thereafter for classroom
teachers in subjects and grades for which the board of regents has not
approved a value-added model and for building principals employed in
schools or programs for which there is no approved principal value-added
model, forty percent of the composite score of effectiveness shall be
based on student achievement measures as follows: (i) twenty percent of
the evaluation shall be based upon student growth data on state
assessments as prescribed by the commissioner or a comparable measure of
student growth if such growth data is not available; and (ii) twenty
percent shall be based on other locally selected measures of student
achievement that are determined to be rigorous and comparable across
classrooms in accordance with the regulations of the commissioner and as
are developed locally in a manner consistent with procedures negotiated
pursuant to the requirements of article fourteen of the civil service
law.

(2) One or more of the following types of locally selected measures of
student achievement or growth may be used for the evaluation of
classroom teachers:

(i) student achievement or growth on state assessments, regents
examinations and/or department approved alternative examinations as
described in the regulations of the commissioner including, but not
limited to, advanced placement examinations, international baccalaureate
examinations, and SAT II, using a measure that is different from the
growth score prescribed by the department for student growth on such
assessments or examinations for purposes of the state assessment or
other comparable measures subcomponent that is either:

(A) the change in percentage of a teacher's students who achieve a
specific level of performance as determined locally, on such
assessments/examinations compared to those students' level of
performance on such assessments/examinations in the previous school year
such as a three percentage point increase in students earning the
proficient level (three) or better performance level on the seventh
grade math state assessment compared to those same students' performance
levels on the sixth grade math state assessment, or an increase in the
percentage of a teacher's students earning the advanced performance
level (four) on the fourth grade English language arts or math state
assessments compared to those students' performance levels on the third
grade English language arts or math state assessments; or

(B) a teacher specific growth score computed by the department based
on the percent of the teacher's students earning a department determined
level of growth. The methodology to translate such growth into the
state-established subcomponent scoring ranges shall be determined
locally; or

(C) a teacher-specific achievement or growth score computed in a
manner determined locally based on a measure of student performance on
the state assessments, regents examinations and/or department approved
alternative examinations other than the measure described in item (A) or
(B) of this subparagraph;

(ii) student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined
locally based on a student assessment approved by the department
pursuant to a request for qualification process established in the
regulations of the commissioner;

(iii) student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined
locally based on a district, regional or BOCES-developed assessment that
is rigorous and comparable across classrooms;

(iv) a school-wide measure of either student growth or achievement
based on either:

(A) a state-provided student growth score covering all students in the
school that took the state assessment in English language arts or
mathematics in grades four through eight;

(B) a school-wide measure of student growth or achievement computed in
a manner determined locally based on a district, regional or board of
cooperative educational services developed assessment that is rigorous
and comparable across classrooms or a department approved student
assessment or based on a state assessment; or

(v) where applicable, for teachers in any grade or subject where there
is no growth or value-added growth model approved by the board of
regents at that grade level or in that subject, a structured
district-wide student growth goal-setting process to be used with any
state assessment or an approved student assessment or a district,
regional or BOCES-developed assessment that is rigorous and comparable
across classrooms.

(3) One or more of the following types of locally selected measures of
student achievement or growth may be used for the evaluation of
principals, provided that each measure is rigorous and comparable across
classrooms and that any such measure shall be different from that used
for the state assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent:

(i) student achievement levels on state assessments in English
language arts and/or mathematics in grades four to eight such as
percentage of students in the school whose performance levels on state
assessments are proficient or advanced, as defined in the regulations of
the commissioner;

(ii) student growth or achievement on state or other assessments in
English language arts and/or mathematics in grades four to eight for
students in each of the performance levels described in the regulations
of the commissioner;

(iii) student growth or achievement on state assessments in English
language arts and/or mathematics in grades four to eight for students
with disabilities and English language learners in grades four to eight;

(iv) student performance on any or all of the district-wide locally
selected measures approved for use in teacher evaluations;

(v) for principals employed in a school with high school grades, four,
five and/or six-year high school graduation and/or dropout rates;

(vi) percentage of students who earn a regents diploma with advanced
designation and/or honors as defined in the regulations of the
commissioner, for principals employed in a school with high school
grades;

(vii) percentage of a cohort of students that achieve specified scores
on regents examinations and/or department approved alternative
examinations including, but not limited to, advanced placement
examinations, international baccalaureate examinations and SAT II, for
principals employed in a school with high school grades such as the
percentage of students in the two thousand nine cohort that scored at
least a three on an advanced placement examination since entry into the
ninth grade; and/or

(viii) students' progress toward graduation in the school using strong
predictive indicators, including but not limited to ninth and/or tenth
grade credit accumulation and/or the percentage of students that pass
ninth and/or tenth grade subjects most commonly associated with
graduation and/or students' progress in passing the number of required
regents examinations for graduation, for principals employed in a school
with high school grades.

(ix) For school districts or boards of cooperative educational
services that choose to use more than one set of locally selected
measures described in this paragraph for principals in the same or
similar grade configuration or program such as one set of locally
selected measures is used to evaluate principals in some K-5 schools and
another set of locally selected measures is used to evaluate principals
in the other K-5 schools in the district, the superintendent or district
superintendent shall, in their professional performance review plan,
certify that the sets of measures are comparable, in accordance with the
testing standards as defined in regulations of the commissioner.

(x) For building principals employed in schools or programs for which
there is no approved principal value-added model, the types of locally
selected measures of student achievement or growth specified in
subparagraph three of paragraph g of this subdivision may be used. In
addition, a structured district-wide student growth goal-setting process
to be used with any state assessment or an approved student assessment
or a district, regional of BOCES-developed assessment that is rigorous
and comparable across classrooms may be a locally selected measure.

(4) The selection of the local measure or measures as described in
subparagraphs two and three of this paragraph to be used by the school
district or board of cooperative educational services shall be
determined through collective bargaining.

g. (1) For annual professional performance reviews conducted in
accordance with paragraph c of this subdivision for the two thousand
twelve--two thousand thirteen school year and thereafter for classroom
teachers in subjects and grades in which there is a value-added growth
model approved by the board of regents and for building principals
employed in schools or programs for which there is an approved principal
value-added model, forty percent of the composite score of effectiveness
shall be based on student achievement measures as follows: (i)
twenty-five percent of the evaluation shall be based upon student growth
data on state assessments as prescribed by the commissioner or a
comparable measure of student growth if such growth data is not
available; and (ii) fifteen percent shall be based on other locally
selected measures of student achievement that are determined to be
rigorous and comparable across classrooms in accordance with the
regulations of the commissioner and as are locally developed in a manner
consistent with procedures negotiated pursuant to the requirements of
article fourteen of the civil service law. The department shall develop
the value-added growth model and shall consult with the advisory
committee established pursuant to subdivision seven of this section
prior to recommending that the board of regents approve its use in
evaluations.

(2) One or more of the following types of locally selected measures of
student achievement or growth may be used for the evaluation of
classroom teachers:

(i) student achievement or growth on state assessments, regents
examinations and/or department approved alternative examinations as
described in the regulations of the commissioner including, but not
limited to, advanced placement examinations, international baccalaureate
examinations and SAT II, using a measure that is different from the
growth score prescribed by the department for student growth on such
assessments or examinations for purposes of the state assessment or
other comparable measures subcomponent that is either:

(A) the change in percentage of a teacher's students who achieve a
specific level of performance as determined locally, on such
assessments/examinations compared to those students' level of
performance on such assessments/examinations in the previous school year
such as a three percentage point increase in students earning the
proficient level (three) or better performance level on the seventh
grade math state assessment compared to those same students' performance
levels on the sixth grade math state assessment, or an increase in the
percentage of a teacher's students earning the advanced performance
level (four) on the fourth grade English language arts or math state
assessments compared to those students' performance levels on the third
grade English language arts or math state assessments; or

(B) a teacher specific growth score computed by the state based on the
percent of the teacher's students earning a state determined level of
growth. The methodology to translate such growth into the
state-established subcomponent scoring ranges shall be determined
locally; or

(C) a teacher-specific achievement or growth score computed in a
manner determined locally based on a measure of student performance on
the state assessments, regents examinations and/or department approved
alternative examinations other than the measure described in item (A) or
(B) of this subparagraph;

(ii) student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined
locally based on a student assessment approved by the department
pursuant to a request for qualification process established in the
regulations of the commissioner;

(iii) student growth or achievement computed in a manner determined
locally based on a district, regional or BOCES-developed assessment that
is rigorous and comparable across classrooms;

(iv) a school-wide measure of either student growth or achievement
based on either:

(A) a state-provided student growth score covering all students in the
school that took the state assessment in English language arts or
mathematics in grades four through eight; or

(B) a school-wide measure of student growth or achievement computed in
a manner determined locally based on a district, regional or board of
cooperative educational services developed assessment that is rigorous
and comparable across classrooms or a department approved student
assessment or based on a state assessment.

(3) One or more of the following types of locally selected measures of
student achievement or growth may be used for the evaluation of
principals, provided that each measure is rigorous and comparable across
classrooms and that any such measure shall be different from that used
for the state assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent:

(i) student achievement levels on state assessments in English
language arts and/or mathematics in grades four to eight such as
percentage of students in the school whose performance levels on state
assessments are proficient or advanced, as defined in the regulations of
the commissioner;

(ii) student growth or achievement on state or other assessments in
English language arts and/or mathematics in grades four to eight for
students in each of the performance levels described in the regulations
of the commissioner;

(iii) student growth or achievement on state assessments in English
language arts and/or mathematics in grades four to eight for students
with disabilities and English language learners in grades four to eight;

(iv) student performance on any or all of the district-wide locally
selected measures approved for use in teacher evaluations;

(v) for principals employed in a school with high school grades, four,
five and/or six-year high school graduation and/or dropout rates;

(vi) percentage of students who earn a regents diploma with advanced
designation and/or honors as defined in the regulations of the
commissioner, for principals employed in a school with high school
grades;

(vii) percentage of a cohort of students that achieve specified scores
on regents examinations and/or department approved alternative
examinations including, but not limited to, advanced placement
examinations, international baccalaureate examinations and SAT II, for
principals employed in a school with high school grades such as the
percentage of students in the two thousand nine cohort that scored at
least a three on an advanced placement examination since entry into the
ninth grade; and/or

(viii) students' progress toward graduation in the school using strong
predictive indicators, including but not limited to ninth and/or tenth
grade credit accumulation and/or the percentage of students that pass
ninth and/or tenth grade subjects most commonly associated with
graduation and/or students' progress in passing the number of required
regents examinations for graduation, for principals employed in a school
with high school grades.

(ix) For school districts or boards of cooperative educational
services that choose to use more than one set of locally selected
measures described in this paragraph for principals in the same or
similar grade configuration or program, the superintendent or district
superintendent shall, in their professional performance review plan,
certify that the sets of measures are comparable, in accordance with the
testing standards as defined in regulations of the commissioner.

(4) The selection of the local measure or measures as described in
subparagraphs two and three of this paragraph to be used by the school
district or board of cooperative educational services shall be
determined through collective bargaining.

h. The remaining sixty percent of the evaluations, ratings and
effectiveness scores shall be locally developed, consistent with the
standards prescribed in the regulations of the commissioner, through
negotiations conducted pursuant to article fourteen of the civil service
law.

(1) A majority of the sixty points for classroom teachers shall be
based on multiple classroom observations conducted by a principal or
other trained administrator, which may be performed in-person or by
video. For evaluations for the two thousand twelve--two thousand
thirteen school year and thereafter, at least one such observation shall
be an unannounced visit.

(2) For the remaining portion of these sixty points for evaluations
for the two thousand eleven--two thousand twelve school year, the
commissioner's regulation shall prescribe the other forms of evidence of
teacher and principal effectiveness that may be used.

(3) For evaluations of classroom teachers for the two thousand
twelve--two thousand thirteen school year and thereafter, the remaining
portion of these sixty points shall be based on one or more of the
following:

(i) one or more classroom observations by independent trained
evaluators selected by the school district or board of cooperative
educational services who are teachers or former teachers with a
demonstrated record of effectiveness and have no prior affiliation with
the school in which they are conducting the evaluation and no other
relationship with the teachers being evaluated that would affect their
impartiality;

(ii) classroom observations by trained in-school peer teachers; and/or

(iii) use of a state-approved instrument for parent or student
feedback; and/or

(iv) evidence of student development and performance through lesson
plans, student portfolios and other artifacts of teacher practices
through a structured review process.

(4) A majority of these sixty points for building principals shall be
based on a broad assessment of the principal's leadership and management
actions based on the principal practice rubric by the building
principal's supervisor, a trained administrator or a trained independent
evaluator, with one or more visits conducted by the supervisor, and, for
evaluations for the two thousand twelve--two thousand thirteen school
year and thereafter, that such assessment must incorporate multiple
school visits by a supervisor, a trained administrator or other trained
evaluator, with at least one visit conducted by the supervisor and at
least one unannounced visit. For the remaining portion of these sixty
points for evaluations for the two thousand eleven--two thousand twelve
school year, such regulations shall also prescribe the other forms of
evidence of principal effectiveness that may be used consistent with the
standards prescribed by the commissioner.

(5) For evaluations of building principals for the two thousand
twelve--two thousand thirteen school year and thereafter, the remaining
portion of these sixty points shall include, in addition to the
requirements of subparagraph three of this paragraph, at least two other
sources of evidence from the following options: feedback from teachers,
students, and/or families using state-approved instruments; school
visits by other trained evaluators; and/or review of school documents,
records, and/or state accountability processes. Any such remaining
points shall be assigned based on the results of one or more ambitious
and measurable goals set collaboratively with principals and their
superintendents or district superintendents as follows:

(i) at least one goal must address the principal's contribution to
improving teacher effectiveness, which shall include one or more of the
following: improved retention of high performing teachers, the
correlation between student growth scores of teachers granted tenure as
opposed to those denied tenure; or improvements in the proficiency
rating of the principal on specific teacher effectiveness standards in
the principal practice rubric.

(ii) any other goals shall address quantifiable and verifiable
improvements in academic results or the school's learning environmental
such as student or teacher attendance.

(6) The district or board of cooperative educational services shall
establish specific minimum and maximum scoring ranges for each
performance level within this subcomponent before the start of each
school year and shall assign points to a teacher or principal for this
subcomponent based on the standards prescribed in the regulations of the
commissioner, all in accordance with, and subject to, the requirements
of paragraph j of this subdivision.

i. For purposes of this section, student growth means the change in
student achievement for an individual student between two or more points
in time.

j. (1) The process by which points are assigned in subcomponents and
the scoring ranges for the subcomponents must be transparent and
available to those being rated before the beginning of each school year.
The process by which points are assigned in the respective subcomponents
are to be determined as follows:

(i) For the state assessment or other comparable measures
subcomponent, that process shall be formulated by the commissioner with
the approval of the board of regents.

(ii) For the locally selected measures of the student achievement
subcomponent, that process shall be established locally through
negotiations conducted under article fourteen of the civil service law.

(iii) For the other measures of teacher and principal effectiveness
subcomponent, that process shall be established locally through
negotiations conducted under article fourteen of the civil services law.

(2) Such process must ensure that it is possible for a teacher or
principal to obtain each point in the applicable scoring ranges,
including zero, for the state assessment or other comparable measures
subcomponent, the locally selected measures of student achievement
subcomponent and the overall rating categories. The process must also
ensure that it is possible for a teacher or principal to obtain each
point in the scoring ranges prescribed by the district or board of
cooperative educational services for the other measures of teacher and
principal effectiveness subcomponent.

(3) The superintendent, district superintendent or chancellor and the
president of the collective bargaining representative (where one exists)
shall certify in its plan that the process will use the narrative
descriptions of the standards for the scoring ranges provided in the
regulations of the commissioner to effectively differentiate a teacher
or principal's performance in each of the subcomponents and in their
overall ratings to improve student learning and instruction.

(4) The scoring ranges for the other measures of teacher and principal
effectiveness subcomponent shall be established locally through
negotiations conducted under article fourteen of the civil service law.

k. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rule or regulation to
the contrary, by July first, two thousand twelve, the governing body of
each school district and board of cooperative educational services shall
adopt a plan, on a form prescribed by the commissioner, for the annual
professional performance review of all of its classroom teachers and
building principals in accordance with the requirements of this section
and the regulations of the commissioner, and shall submit such plan to
the commissioner for approval. The plan may be an annual or multi-year
plan, for the annual professional performance review of all of its
classroom teachers and building principals. The commissioner shall
approve or reject the plan by September first, two thousand twelve, or
as soon as practicable thereafter. The commissioner may reject a plan
that does not rigorously adhere to the provisions of this section and
the regulations of the commissioner. Should any plan be rejected, the
commissioner shall describe each deficiency in the submitted plan and
direct that each such deficiency be resolved through collective
bargaining to the extent required under article fourteen of the civil
service law. If any material changes are made to the plan, the school
district or board of cooperative educational services must submit the
material changes, on a form prescribed by the commissioner, to the
commissioner for approval. To the extent that by July first, two
thousand twelve, or by July first of any subsequent year, if all the
terms of the plan have not been finalized as a result of unresolved
collective bargaining negotiations, the entire plan shall be submitted
to the commissioner upon resolution of all of its terms, consistent with
article fourteen of the civil service law.

k-1. If material changes are submitted pursuant to paragraph k of this
subdivision for an approved plan that solely relates to the elimination
of student assessments that are not required by state or federal law,
the commissioner shall expedite his or her review of such material
changes and solely review those sections of the plan that relate to the
eliminated student assessments to ensure compliance with this section
and the regulations of the commissioner, provided that the governing
body of such school district or board of cooperative educational
services provide a written explanation of the material changes submitted
for approval, on a form prescribed by the commissioner, and certify that
no other material changes have been made to any other sections of the
currently approved plan, and provided further that the commissioner
shall complete such review of material changes properly and completely
submitted under this paragraph within ten business days of submission.

k-2. The commissioner shall take actions to reduce time spent on field
tests for students taking the state administered standardized English
language arts and mathematics assessments for grades three through eight
to the extent federal funds are allowable for such purpose under the
state stabilization fund of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 or are otherwise available.

l. In the event a school district does not have an annual professional
performance review plan approved by the commissioner for the applicable
school year as of September first of that year, the collectively
bargained plan most recently approved or the plan determined by the
commissioner shall remain in effect until a subsequent plan is agreed to
by the parties in accordance with this section and is approved by the
commissioner.

3. Nothing in this section shall be construed to excuse school
districts or boards of cooperative educational services from complying
with the standards set forth in the regulations of the commissioner for
conducting annual professional performance reviews of classroom teachers
or principals, including but not limited to required quality rating
categories, in conducting evaluations prior to July first, two thousand
eleven, or, for classroom teachers or principals subject to paragraph c
of subdivision two of this section, prior to July first, two thousand
twelve.

4. Notwithstanding any other law, rule or regulation to the contrary,
upon rating a teacher or a principal as developing or ineffective
through an annual professional performance review conducted pursuant to
subdivision two of this section, the school district or board of
cooperative educational services shall formulate and commence
implementation of a teacher or principal improvement plan for such
teacher or principal as soon as practicable but in no case later than
ten school days after the opening of classes for the school year. Such
improvement plan shall be consistent with the regulations of the
commissioner and developed locally through negotiations conducted
pursuant to article fourteen of the civil service law. Such improvement
plan shall include, but need not be limited to, identification of needed
areas of improvement, a timeline for achieving improvement, the manner
in which improvement will be assessed, and, where appropriate,
differentiated activities to support a teacher's or principal's
improvement in those areas.

5. a. An appeals procedure shall be locally established in each school
district and in each board of cooperative educational services by which
the evaluated teacher or principal may only challenge the substance of
the annual professional performance review, the school district's or
board of cooperative educational services' adherence to the standards
and methodologies required for such reviews, pursuant to this section,
the adherence to the regulations of the commissioner and compliance with
any applicable locally negotiated procedures, as well as the school
district's or board of cooperative educational services' issuance and/or
implementation of the terms of the teacher or principal improvement
plan, as required under this section. Appeal procedures shall provide
for the timely and expeditious resolution of any appeal under this
subdivision. The specifics of the appeal procedure shall be locally
established through negotiations conducted pursuant to article fourteen
of the civil service law. An evaluation which is the subject of an
appeal shall not be sought to be offered in evidence or placed in
evidence in any proceeding conducted pursuant to either section three
thousand twenty-a of this article or any locally negotiated alternate
disciplinary procedure, until the appeal process is concluded.

b. Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter or diminish the
authority of the governing body of a school district or board of
cooperative educational services to grant or deny tenure to or terminate
probationary teachers or probationary building principals during the
pendency of an appeal pursuant to this section for statutorily and
constitutionally permissible reasons including the teacher's or
principal's performance that is the subject of the appeal.

c. Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize a teacher
or principal to trigger the appeal process prior to receipt of their
composite effectiveness score and rating from the district or board of
cooperative educational services.

5-a. In the city school district of the city of New York,
notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the following
shall apply to classroom teachers:

a. A teacher who did not receive an ineffective rating in the annual
professional performance review for the prior school year is in "year
one status".

b. A teacher who received an ineffective rating in the previous school
year is in "year two status", until and unless that rating is either
changed by the principal or reversed on appeal in accordance with the
provisions of this subdivision, or until and unless the teacher reverts
to year one status in accordance with the provisions of this
subdivision.

c. A teacher who is rated ineffective for a school year in which the
teacher has year one status shall have a right to appeal that rating to
the chancellor of the city school district, who shall make a final
determination, unless an appeal is initiated to a three-member panel
subject to the following requirements. The united federation of teachers
(UFT) may appeal to a three-member panel the ineffective ratings of up
to thirteen percent of teachers who received such ineffective ratings
for a school year. Any such appeal may only be made on the ground that
the ineffective rating was given due to harassment or reasons not
related to job performance. These appeals shall be known as a "panel
appeals". The three-member panel shall consist of a person selected by
the UFT, a person selected by the chancellor of the city school district
and an independent person, not affiliated with the UFT or the district
and selected by the state education department, who shall be the chair
of the panel and conduct the appeal hearing. If the panel sustains the
appeal, the principal must submit to the panel a different rating, which
must be approved by the panel. Any ineffective rating that is appealed
to the panel may not be appealed to the chancellor of the city school
district.

d. The chancellor of the city school district shall notify the UFT of
all ineffective ratings. Each school year, if the UFT is notified of an
ineffective rating prior to October first, a panel appeal of that rating
must be initiated by the UFT by November first, provided that more than
thirteen percent of these ratings may be appealed to the panel. The UFT
and the board of education shall negotiate, pursuant to article fourteen
of the civil service law, a procedure for ensuring that each school
year, not more than thirteen percent of the ratings received by the UFT
after October first are appealed to the panel. The board of education
shall make all reasonable efforts to issue ratings and notify the UFT of
ineffective ratings by October first. Any rating not appealed to the
panel may be appealed by the individual teacher to the chancellor of the
city school district. Appeals made to the chancellor of the city school
district must be filed within ten school days after the UFT would
otherwise be required to notify the board of education of a panel
appeal.

e. For all teachers in year two status, unless and until the
ineffective rating they received in the prior year is changed by a
principal or otherwise changed in accordance with the provisions of this
subdivision, an independent validator shall be appointed to evaluate the
teacher on each component of the annual professional performance review
in which the scoring of the component is at the discretion of the
principal. These components shall not necessarily be limited to teacher
performance, but shall not include any components in which the scoring
of the component is outside the discretion of the principal, even if the
principal has discretion in a related goal-setting process prior to
scoring. The independent validator shall perform three observations
during the course of the school year. The terms and conditions of the
observations shall be negotiated pursuant to the requirements of article
fourteen of the civil service law.

f. The UFT and the board of education shall jointly select an
organization or organizations that employ certified educators, including
teachers, to perform the work as independent validators. Independent
validators shall not be employed simultaneously by the board of
education or simultaneously have an individual contract with the board
of education. Should either the board of education or the UFT notify the
department that after a good faith effort the board of education and the
UFT are unable to jointly select organizations, the commissioner shall
name organizations subject to the following requirements. The board of
education shall set forth a required number of validators, and the
commissioner shall name organizations that can provide at least this
number of validators whom the commissioner deems qualified. The
commissioner shall name organizations based on the criteria set forth in
this subdivision that apply to the mutual selection process for the
board of education and the UFT and shall also consider potential
conflicts of interest.

g. In an instance in which the independent validator does not complete
the review process due to circumstances beyond the control of the board
of education, the teacher shall remain in year two status the following
school year. Should the independent validator not complete the review
process for a second consecutive school year and for any reason in the
second year for other than a leave of absence or chronic absence on the
part of the teacher, the teacher shall return to year one status the
following school year.

h. An independent validator shall be deemed to have agreed with the
principal when an independent validator's scoring, in conjunction with
the scoring of components not reviewed by the independent validator in
accordance with this subdivision, would result in a rating in the same
category on the annual professional performance review than would result
from the principal's rating.

i. For purposes of this subdivision, an independent validator shall be
deemed to have disagreed with the principal when an independent
validator's scoring, in conjunction with the scoring of components not
reviewed by the independent validator in accordance with this
subdivision, would result in a rating in a different category on the
annual professional performance review than would result from the
principal's rating.

j. If a teacher receives an ineffective rating for a school year in
which the teacher is in year two status and the independent validator
agrees, the district may bring a proceeding pursuant to sections three
thousand twenty and three thousand twenty-a of this article based on a
pattern of ineffective teaching or performance. In such proceeding, the
charges shall allege that the employing board has developed and
substantially implemented a teacher improvement plan in accordance with
subdivision four of this section for the employee following the
evaluation made for the year in which the employee was in year one
status and was rated ineffective. The pattern of ineffective teaching or
performance shall give rise to a rebuttable presumption of incompetence
and if the presumption is not successfully rebutted, the finding, absent
extraordinary circumstances, shall be just cause for removal. In these
hearings, the teacher shall have up to three days to present his or her
case for every one day used by the district to present its case. The
hearing officer shall render a written decision within ten days of the
last day of the hearing.

k. If the teacher receives an ineffective rating by the principal in a
school year in which they are in year two status and the independent
validator disagrees, the ineffective rating remains but the district may
not bring proceeding based on a pattern of ineffective teaching or
performance, as defined in this section, provided however that nothing
in this section shall prevent the board of education from charging a
teacher based on incompetence and entering the principal's evaluations
into evidence.

l. If upon the completion of a hearing pursuant to sections three
thousand twenty and three thousand twenty-a of this article, based
either on a pattern of ineffective teaching or performance or charges of
incompetence in which year one or year two evaluations were entered into
evidence, and a hearing officer finds the teacher incompetent, but
decides not to terminate, the teacher remains in year two status for the
school year in progress or the following school year if the finding is
made in between school years. If upon the completion of the hearing, the
hearing officer exonerates the teacher of charges of incompetence the
teacher shall revert to year one status if in the middle of the school
year or at the beginning of the following school year if the finding is
made in between school years.

m. If the teacher receives an ineffective rating in year two by the
principal and the validator agrees, and the district does not bring an
expedited proceeding pursuant to sections three thousand twenty and
three thousand twenty-a of this article, the teacher may appeal the year
two ineffective rating to the chancellor of the city school district,
who shall make a final determination. If the rating is upheld, the
teacher shall remain in year two status for the subsequent school year,
but if following that year the teacher is not charged, the teacher
reverts to year one status for the next school year.

n. A process shall be established to evaluate the effectiveness of the
specific procedures established in this subdivision after two years from
the effective date of this subdivision, provided however that a failure
or delay in establishing that process shall not invalidate any
provisions of this subdivision.

o. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the
board of education and the UFT may alter any provisions of this
subdivision through collective bargaining.

6. For purposes of disciplinary proceedings pursuant to sections three
thousand twenty and three thousand twenty-a of this article, a pattern
of ineffective teaching or performance shall be defined to mean two
consecutive annual ineffective ratings received by a classroom teacher
or building principal pursuant to annual professional performance
reviews conducted in accordance with the provisions of this section.

7. The regulations adopted pursuant to this section shall be developed
in consultation with an advisory committee consisting of representatives
of teachers, principals, superintendents of schools, school boards,
school district and board of cooperative educational services officials
and other interested parties. The regulations shall also take into
account any (i) professional teaching standards; (ii) standards for
professional contexts; and (iii) standards for a continuum of system
support for teachers and principals developed in consultation with the
advisory committee. Regulations promulgated pursuant to this section
shall be effective no later than July first, two thousand eleven, for
implementation in the two thousand eleven--two thousand twelve school
year.

8. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rule or regulation to
the contrary, all collective bargaining agreements applicable to
classroom teachers or building principals entered into after July first,
two thousand ten shall be consistent with requirements of this section.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to abrogate any conflicting
provisions of any collective bargaining agreement in effect on July
first, two thousand ten during the term of such agreement and until the
entry into a successor collective bargaining agreement, provided that
notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, upon
expiration of such term and the entry into a successor collective
bargaining agreement the provisions of this section shall apply.
Furthermore, nothing in this section or in any rule or regulation
promulgated hereunder shall in any way, alter, impair or diminish the
rights of a local collective bargaining representative to negotiate
evaluation procedures in accordance with article fourteen of the civil
service law with the school district or board of cooperative educational
services.

9. a. The department shall annually monitor and analyze trends and
patterns in teacher and principal evaluation results and data to
identify school districts, boards of cooperative educational services
and/or schools where evidence suggests that a more rigorous evaluation
system is needed to improve educator effectiveness and student learning
outcomes. The criteria for identifying school districts, boards of
cooperative educational services and/or schools shall be prescribed in
the regulations of the commissioner.

b. A school, school district or board of cooperative educational
services identified by the department in one of the categories
enumerated in paragraph a of this subdivision may be highlighted in
public reports and/or the commissioner may order a corrective action
plan, which may include, but not be limited to, requirements that the
district or board of cooperative educational services arrange for
additional professional development, provide additional in-service
training and/or utilize independent trained evaluators to review the
efficacy of the evaluation system, provided that the plan shall be
consistent with law and not in conflict with any applicable collective
bargaining agreement.

10. Each school district and board of cooperative educational services
shall fully disclose and release to the public and the department the
final quality ratings and composite effectiveness scores from the annual
professional performance reviews of its teachers and principals as
provided in this subdivision.

a. The commissioner shall fully disclose professional performance
review data for teachers and principals in each school district and
board of cooperative educational services on the department website and
in any other manner to make such data widely available to the public.
Such data shall be suitable for research, analysis and comparison of
professional performance review data for teachers and principals. Such
public disclosure shall include but not be limited to the final quality
ratings and composite effectiveness scores by school district for
principal evaluation data, by school building for teacher evaluation
data and, within each district and school building, by class, subject
and grade; final quality ratings and composite effectiveness scores by
region, district wealth, district need category, student enrollment,
type of school (i.e. elementary, middle and high school), student need
(e.g., poverty level), and district spending; final quality ratings and
composite effectiveness scores by the percentage or number of teachers
and principals in each final quality rating category, moving to a higher
rating category than the previous year, moving to a lower rating
category than the previous year, and retained in each rating category;
and data on tenure granting and denial based on the final quality rating
categories.

b. Each school district and board of cooperative educational services
shall fully disclose and release to the parents and legal guardians of a
student the final quality rating and composite effectiveness score for
each of the teachers and for the principal of the school building to
which the student is assigned for the current school year upon the
request of such parents and legal guardians. The governing body of each
school district and board of cooperative educational services shall
provide conspicuous notice to parents and legal guardians of the right
to obtain such information. Parents and legal guardians may review and
receive such data in any manner, including by phone or in person; shall
receive an oral or written explanation of the composite effectiveness
scoring ranges for final quality ratings; and be offered opportunities
to understand such scores in the context of teacher evaluation and
student performance. Reasonable efforts shall be made to verify that any
such request is a bona fide request by a parent or guardian entitled to
review and receive such data pursuant to this paragraph.

c. The department and each school district and board of cooperative
educational services shall ensure that any release to the public of
annual professional performance review data, or any other data that is
used as a component of annual professional performance reviews, does not
include personally identifying information for any teacher or principal,
provided, however, that nothing shall impair the right of parents and
legal guardians to review and receive the final quality rating and
composite effectiveness score of individual teachers and principals as
provided in paragraph b of this subdivision. Annual professional
performance reviews of individual teachers and principals shall not be
subject to disclosure pursuant to article six of the public officers
law.

d. Nothing in this subdivision shall prohibit the department from
collecting such data and materials from school districts and boards of
cooperative educational services as is necessary to carry out its
functions and duties, including its responsibilities related to the
federal Race to the Top program.