Welcome to your Member Dashboard! You’ll find information here that is specific to your membership level.
You are currently not logged in or aren’t a member yet. Log in, join online, or view our Member Benefits below.

Presidential and Member Login

– OR –

Join Online

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

Bethpage Florist

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

Older Resources

May 2016


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.