There  were  another  10%  rated  “developing”  That  is  a total  of  17%  of  teachers.  In  NYC  that  is  about  11,000  teachers  that  were  rated  poorly  on  just  one  component  of  the  APPR. THAT  IS  A  VERY  HIGH  NUMBER!  How  about  the  number  of  teachers  who  will  be  rated  poorly  on  the  other  two  parts?   That  will  be  tens  of  thousands  of  NYC  teachers  every  year   who  will be  rated   “ineffective,  or  developing,”   and  need  some  sort  of  “assistance  plan.”  It  will  result  in  tremendous  costs  in  time  and  money,  demoralization,  panic,  and  quite  a  bit  of  classroom  abandonment  during  the  school  year.  THE  LAW  IS  A  DISASTER!  

It’s not punitive per se, but it can easily be used as such,
as Danielson focuses so much on ‘observable’ engagement
and the highly effective categories are ADMITTEDLY virtually
insurmountable plateaus — was never meant for rating purposes!!!

Aside from that, I agree with almost everything else you said, save
one thing. The Mayor and Chancy have no prob whatsoever starving
schools if it can help ‘em get rid ‘o more teaches (sic, ain’t it?).

And, whether you agree with me or not, the fact is that it’s coming. The reality is that if the APPR isn’t agreed to, Albany will pass a different new evaluation system -one that will probably be more difficult, not require union agreement and make the Mayor and Edreformers much more happy than they are now (remember, they’ve all asked for this one to be scrapped already, more than once. They’re delaying precisely because they want a new more harsh system put into place). 

Look, the days of “U” and “S” are going to be over. Given the other possibilities out there, I just have to ask, can the APPR really be that bad if the Mayor and Chancellor don’t want it and are doing everything within their power (including criminally starving schools that really need the extra funding) to avoid having to do it?

The use of the EPO’s within the DOE will go down in history as one of the worst taxpayer rip offs ever. This may even dwarf Bloombergs “city time ” debacle,were consultants got paid millions to produce nothing. If one investigates the office of EPO’s, you will find a series of people with personal relationships with vendors from an assortment of different places- pair up the resumes of current DOE employees and the EPO employees and you will find a cozy circuit of interplay of consultants and DOE empoyees. Conflict of Interest?
The DOE should improve schools that aren’t performing and provide academic support to struggling students. The 18 million could go a long way towards improving schools, but we need to rethink our operations, not burn money on failed consultants who are not accountable to the taxpayers of NYC.Turnaround failed because because of DOE officials gave the word not to rethink the consultant playbook at places like Newtown, Flushing Richmond Hill- therefore they failed in court as the City could not show how the new schools would be different from the old ones….Marc Sternberg should think twice about his team, their marching orders “change but don’t change the schools”, and his leadership team relates to the consultants.Time to clean house Marc!

Where is the outrage at a city government that is so irresponsible that they willingly withhold $30 million from city school children?