An educator’s overall composite score is based on a combination of three ratings:
Growth: For principals and teachers, these ratings reflect how much students in their classrooms and schools are growing academically in mathematics and English, as measured by the New York State third- to eighth-grade math and ELA assessment tests. This accounts for 20 percent of the overall score.
Local: The system requires that another 20 percent of a teacher or principal evaluation be based on “locally-selected measures of student achievement.” This decreases to 15 percent under some circumstances. Points are assigned to educators in a manner determined locally, through collective bargaining, using regulatory standards and scoring ranges.
For growth and local ratings, highly effective educators receive 18-20 points, effective ones (lose the get) nine to 17 points, developing educators (lose the get) three to eight points and ineffective ones (lose the get) between zero and two points.
Other: Sixty percent of teacher and principal evaluations are based on multiple measures of teacher/principal effectiveness consistent with standards prescribed by the state. The methods for assigning points on a 0-60 scale are locally established through negotiations. For teachers, at least a majority of the 60 points must be based on multiple classroom observations by a principal or other trained administrator. For a principal, at least a majority of the 60 points must be based on a broad assessment of the principal's leadership and management actions based on the principal practice rubric, by the principal's supervisor, a trained administrator, or a trained independent evaluator.
Suppressed scores: The state suppressed some scores state to avoid making it possible to identify individuals. For example, if there were a small number of overall employees or principals in a district, those scores were suppressed. In addition, the state agreed with teacher representatives to suppress an individual's overall composite score if any of the component ratings were developing or ineffective.