Presidential and Member Login
Not a member yet? No problem! Use the link below to fill out the membership form.
Member Benefits and Resources
CAS Members have access to a lot of membership perks, including but not limited to these! Join online today to access these membership benefits.
Abenity CAS Member Perks Program
American Safety Council New York State Defensive Driving Online
Avis Car Rental
Budget Car Rental
Buyer’s Edge Website
CAS College Scholarships
CAS CTLE Continuing Teacher and Leader Education Workshops
CAS VSP and DAVIS Vision Care Insurance
Cigna Insurance Benefits
EDP Dental Plan
Empire State Supervisors and Administrators Association
Enterprise Car Rental
Law Offices of Nicole Zuvich, P.C
Lifestage Wealth Advisors
Mutual of Omaha Long Term Care
Mortgage Advantage Affinity Program
T-Mobile Work Perks!
Tax Preparation – Elizabeth Oberg CPA CFE
Working Advantage Discount Program
ALTERNATE APPR “OBSERVATION CATEGORY SCORING”
The CAS APPR SAMPLES sent out to all unit presidents set forth options, criteria, etc., that local unit(s) could explore during APPR negotiations. The samples were not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather simply a reference for local units. There are many different variations that local units could take with each element of APPR.
For instance, in regards to the scoring of the observation category, the statute and regulation state that each observation must receive a score from 1-4. The implementation of the rubric (e.g. scoring) is subject to negotiations. The APPR committee recommended a scoring model that was adopted by a teacher’s unit; however, there are countless alternatives. Certain districts and perhaps SED have taken the simplistic viewpoint that the language within the statute requires simply assigning I = 1 D =2 E=3 HE =4. This is a rather straightforward approach and appears to be one that some local units appear willing to agree upon. However, those units should place greater attention and focus on the use of evidence/school documents that the evaluator must be able to cite to in support of any “developing” or “ineffective” ratings. Also, these units should look to address the non-observable sub-domains in some way. [See attached, CAS Evaluation Procedures (alt 1)].
There are several other ways and options available to units to arrive at their observation score. Attached is yet another example on how the unit could look to address their observation score that would be consistent with the wording in the statute and regulations. [CAS Evaluation Procedures (alt 2)].
With any scoring system, it is strongly advised that the units look to include evidence to support “developing” or “ineffective”.
Although, SED has authority to approve or disapprove plans submitted the parties, under the Taylor Law, and APPR statute itself, many aspects of the plan still must be arrived at though negotiations. Units should look to aggressively pursue fair and strong APPR plans and scoring methodologies. If SED disapproves a plan submitted (and there were several last go around) the parties will be provided an explanation and can look for alternative solutions. However, the possibility of SED rejection should not discourage units from pursing strong plans.
If you or the team have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact your assigned attorney.
APPR GUIDANCE MATERIALS – April 2016
CAS APPR Committee Recommendations
CAS APPR MOA Template for Local Units
CAS Observation Form Template for MPPR
CAS Appeal Template (Example 1)
CAS Appeal Template (Example 2)
Video of Public Hearing: The Regents Reform Agenda: “Assessing” Our Progress
CAS members click link below to access:
The “Flip Side” of DASA – Being Aware of the Rights of the Alleged Bully