Â鶹¹ÙÍø

Back toÌýTeacher and Principal Practice Rubrics

If an approved rubric provider is selected by an LEA* to provide training, professional development, or any other service related to the use of the rubric,Ìýfor a cost, the LEA and provider are advised to enter into an agreement before the rubric is used for evaluation purposes. Any organization submitting a rubric without any related services for a cost would not be expected to enter into an agreement with an LEA. Approval and placement on the approved list does not require any provider to enter into an agreement to provide services to any other entity.

It is the responsibility of the service provider and LEA to reach an agreement on the rubric(s) to be used and any related services to be provided, if deemed necessary by the respective parties. Â鶹¹ÙÍø will not be party to or responsible for agreements between service providers and LEAs. However, in order to support the service providers and LEAs, Â鶹¹ÙÍø recommends minimum guidelines to be followed, or at least considered, for agreements between an approved provider and LEA.

• A detailed description of the teacher and/or principal practice rubric model to be used, including providing the partnering LEA with a copy of the rubric tool;
• A detailed description of the professional development, training, and/or other related services agreed to between the parties that is deemed necessary for successful implementationÌý(e.g. participants, initiation date, frequency, and duration of professional development services), and by whom such services would be provided (e.g., by the provider itself or by an identified partner of the provider);
• The location where services would be provided;
• A provision that the term of the agreement shall not exceed the end of the academic year in which the LEA first received such services (for purposes of teacher and principal evaluation practice rubrics, an academic year is defined as September 1 – August 31);
• A provision that the agreement shall terminate immediately upon the provider’s removal from the Department’s list ofÌýApproved Teacher and Principal Practice Rubrics;
• A provision detailing the provider's suggested method for successful implementation of the rubric for use in teacher/principal evaluation, with the understanding that in no way is the suggested method the only method for successful implementation.
• A provision that the provider shall produce documentation that evidences sufficient staffing levels, or appropriate partnerships, and fiscal viability and soundness to provide training, professional development and/or other related services agreed to by the parties as a prerequisite for implementation of the tool;
• Payment provisions that are based on delivery of teacher and/or principal practice rubric services, if any, and/or the tool itself; and
• Provisions that subject all individuals employed by or otherwise associated with the approved provider, including support staff, etc., who have direct contact with students, to the fingerprint and criminal history record check pursuant to Education Law §§305(30), 1125(3), 1604(39), 1604(40), 1709(39), 1709(40), 1804(9), 1804(10), 1950(4)(ll), 1950(4)(mm), 2503(18), 2503(19), 2554(25), 2554(26), 2590-h (20), 2854(3)(a-2), 2854(3)(a-3) and 3035, and Part 87 of the regulations of the Commissioner of Education.

* These guidelines are for both LEAs as well as BOCES.