Professional Development Plans and Other Related Requirements for School Districts and BOCES

NY-ADR

10/3/18 N.Y. St. Reg. EDU-40-18-00010-P
NEW YORK STATE REGISTER
VOLUME XL, ISSUE 40
October 03, 2018
RULE MAKING ACTIVITIES
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
PROPOSED RULE MAKING
NO HEARING(S) SCHEDULED
 
I.D No. EDU-40-18-00010-P
Professional Development Plans and Other Related Requirements for School Districts and BOCES
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following proposed rule:
Proposed Action:
Amendment of sections 52.21, 75.8, 90.18, 100.2, 100.13, 100.15, 100.17, 100.19, 200.2; Subparts 57-2, 151-1, 154-2; Parts 30 and 80 of Title 8 NYCRR.
Statutory authority:
Education Law, sections 101, 207(not subdivided), 305, 3004, 3006, 3006-a and 3009
Subject:
Professional development plans and other related requirements for school districts and BOCES.
Purpose:
To improve the quality of teaching and learning for teachers and leaders for professional growth.
Substance of proposed rule (Full text is posted at the following State website:http://www.counsel.nysed.gov/rules andregs):
The proposed amendments to subdivision 100.2(dd) are designed to create greater coherence with other statutory and Department initiatives related to ensuring that all educators – teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders - have the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the needs of all students. Specifically, the amendments further align the Commissioner’s Regulations with requirements related to the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA), the Continuing Teacher and Leader Education (CTLE) statutory requirements, and the Department’s recently approved Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan. These changes include:
• A shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning, which is consistent with the changes to the standards adopted by the PSPB. This shift is more than just a change in language. Professional organizations and educational researchers, including Learning Forward, the Learning Policy Institute (LPI), and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), have adopted this change in language, which emphasizes the importance of educators taking an active role in their continuous development. Rather than being passive recipients of information, educators should be active partners in determining the content of their learning, how their learning occurs, and how they evaluate its effectiveness.
• Requires the professional learning plan to describe how professional learning related to educator practice and curriculum development are culturally responsive and reflect the needs of the community that the school district or BOCES serves.
• Clarifying the Department’s expectations regarding the use of data – both qualitative and quantitative – in determining appropriate professional learning and measuring its impact on educators and student learning, consistent with research on effective professional learning.
• Clarifying that professional learning plans must describe the professional learning opportunities that are available to teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders, whereas the existing regulations do not consistently include references to educators other than teachers.
• Technical edits to remove references to dates, professional learning requirements for teachers, pupil personnel service providers and educational leaders, and certain structures in the New York City Department of Education that are no longer relevant.
Consistent with the shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning related to school district and BOCES professional learning plans, the amendments make conforming edits to other provisions of the Commissioner’s Regulations. Specifically, Sections 52.21, 57-2, 75.8, 80-1, 80-2, 80-3, 80-5, 80-6, 90.18, 100.2, 100.13, 100.15, 100.17, 100.19, 151-1, 154-2, and 200.2 of the Commissioner’s Regulations and 30-1, 30-2, and 30-3 of the Rules of the Board of Regents are amended to change references to professional development to professional learning. Additionally, Section 80-3.6 of the Commissioner’s Regulations, which prescribed professional development requirements for teachers through the 2016-17 school year, is repealed since that school year has ended and the section is no longer applicable. Conforming edits were also made to other sections of Part 80 consistent with the repeal of Section 80-3.6.
Text of proposed rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
Kirti Goswami, NYS Education Department, 89 Washington Avenue, Office of Higher Education, Albany, NY 12234, (518) 473-2183, email: legal@nysed.gov
Data, views or arguments may be submitted to:
Allison Armour Garb, NYS Education Department, 89 Washington Avenue, Office of Higher Education, Albany, NY 12234, (518) 486-3633, email: Allison.Armour-Garb@nysed.gov
Public comment will be received until:
60 days after publication of this notice.
Regulatory Impact Statement
1. STATUTORY AUTHORITY:
Education Law 101 (not subdivided) charges the Department with the general management and supervision of all public schools and all of the educational work of the state.
Education Law 207 (not subdivided) grants general rule-making authority to the Regents to carry into effect State educational laws and policies.
Education Law 305(1) authorizes the Commissioner to enforce laws relating to the State educational system and execute Regents educational policies. Section 305(2) provides the Commissioner with general supervision over schools and authority to advise and guide school district officers in their duties and the general management of their schools.
Education Law 3004(1) authorizes the Commissioner to promulgate regulations governing the certification requirements for teachers.
Education Law 3006 establishes the types of teaching certificates and licenses that the Commissioner may issue and the registration requirements for holders of a certificates in the classroom teaching service, teaching assistant, or educational leadership certificates that are valid for life as prescribed by the commissioner in regulations.
Education Law 3006-a establishes continuing education requirements for holders of professional certificates in the classroom teaching service, holders of Level III teaching assist certificates, holders of professional certification in the educational leadership service.
Education Law 3009 prohibits school district money from being used to pay the salary of an unqualified teacher.
2. LEGISLATIVE OBJECTIVES:
The purpose of the proposed amendment to improve the quality of teaching and learning by ensuring that teachers, level III teaching assistants, and school leaders receive ongoing learning and have opportunities for professional growth, remain current with their profession, and meet the learning needs of their students. The plan is also intended to ensure that substitute teachers who work on a long-term basis are provided the opportunity to participate in the professional development program of the school district or BOCES.
3. NEEDS AND BENEFITS:
The proposed amendments to subdivision 100.2(dd) are designed to create greater coherence with other statutory and Department initiatives related to ensuring that all educators – teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders - have the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the needs of all students. Specifically, the amendments further align the Commissioner’s Regulations with requirements related to the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA), the Continuing Teacher and Leader Education (CTLE) statutory requirements, and the Department’s recently approved Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan. These changes include:
• A shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning, which is consistent with the changes to the standards adopted by the PSPB. This shift is more than just a change in language. Professional organizations and educational researchers, including Learning Forward, the Learning Policy Institute (LPI), and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), have adopted this change in language, which emphasizes the importance of educators taking an active role in their continuous development. Rather than being passive recipients of information, educators should be active partners in determining the content of their learning, how their learning occurs, and how they evaluate its effectiveness.
• Requires the professional learning plan to describe how professional learning related to educator practice and curriculum development are culturally responsive and reflect the needs of the community that the school district or BOCES serves.
• Clarifying the Department’s expectations regarding the use of data – both qualitative and quantitative – in determining appropriate professional learning and measuring its impact on educators and student learning, consistent with research on effective professional learning.
• Clarifying that professional learning plans must describe the professional learning opportunities that are available to teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders, whereas the existing regulations do not consistently include references to educators other than teachers.
• Technical edits to remove references to dates, professional learning requirements for teachers, pupil personnel service providers and educational leaders, and certain structures in the New York City Department of Education that are no longer relevant.
Consistent with the shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning related to school district and BOCES professional learning plans, the amendments make conforming edits to other provisions of the Commissioner’s Regulations. Specifically, Sections 52.21, 57-2, 75.8, 80-1, 80-2, 80-3, 80-5, 80-6, 90.18, 100.2, 100.13, 100.15, 100.17, 100.19, 151-1, 154-2, and 200.2 of the Commissioner’s Regulations and 30-1, 30-2, and 30-3 of the Rules of the Board of Regents are amended to change references to professional development to professional learning. Additionally, Section 80-3.6 of the Commissioner’s Regulations, which prescribed professional development requirements for teachers through the 2016-17 school year, is repealed since that school year has ended and the section is no longer applicable. Conforming edits were also made to other sections of Part 80 consistent with the repeal of Section 80-3.6.
4. COSTS:
a. Costs to State government: The amendments do not impose any costs on State government, including the State Education Department.
b. Costs to local government: The amendments do not impose any costs on local government.
c. Costs to private regulated parties: The amendments do not impose any costs on private regulated parties.
d. Costs to regulating agency for implementation and continued administration: The amendments do not impose any costs on the regulating agency for implementation and continued administration.
5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATES:
See Needs and Benefits Section.
6. PAPERWORK:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional paperwork requirements beyond what was currently required in regulation.
7. DUPLICATION:
The proposed amendment does not duplicate existing State or Federal requirements.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
No alternatives were considered.
9. FEDERAL STANDARDS:
There are no applicable Federal standards.
10. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE:
Following the 60-day public comment period required under the State Administrative Procedure Act, it is anticipated that the proposed amendments will be presented to the Board of Regents for adoption at its January 2019 meeting. If adopted at the January 2019 meeting, the proposed amendments will become effective on January 30, 2019.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(a) Small businesses:
The proposed amendment relates to the requirements for professional development plans for school districts and BOCES, as further described below. Because it is evident from the nature of the proposed amendment that it does not affect small businesses, no further measures were needed to ascertain that fact and none were taken. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis for small businesses is not required and one has not been prepared.
(b) Local governments:
1. EFFECT OF RULE:
The proposed amendment applies to public school districts and BOCES.
2. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS:
The proposed amendments to subdivision 100.2(dd) are designed to create greater coherence with other statutory and Department initiatives related to ensuring that all educators – teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders - have the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the needs of all students. Specifically, the amendments further align the Commissioner’s Regulations with requirements related to the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA), the Continuing Teacher and Leader Education (CTLE) statutory requirements, and the Department’s recently approved Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan. These changes include:
• A shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning, which is consistent with the changes to the standards adopted by the PSPB. This shift is more than just a change in language. Professional organizations and educational researchers, including Learning Forward, the Learning Policy Institute (LPI), and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), have adopted this change in language, which emphasizes the importance of educators taking an active role in their continuous development. Rather than being passive recipients of information, educators should be active partners in determining the content of their learning, how their learning occurs, and how they evaluate its effectiveness.
• Requires the professional learning plan to describe how professional learning related to educator practice and curriculum development are culturally responsive and reflect the needs of the community that the school district or BOCES serves.
• Clarifying the Department’s expectations regarding the use of data – both qualitative and quantitative – in determining appropriate professional learning and measuring its impact on educators and student learning, consistent with research on effective professional learning.
• Clarifying that professional learning plans must describe the professional learning opportunities that are available to teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders, whereas the existing regulations do not consistently include references to educators other than teachers.
• Technical edits to remove references to dates, professional learning requirements for teachers, pupil personnel service providers and educational leaders, and certain structures in the New York City Department of Education that are no longer relevant.
Consistent with the shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning related to school district and BOCES professional learning plans, the amendments make conforming edits to other provisions of the Commissioner’s Regulations. Specifically, Sections 52.21, 57-2, 75.8, 80-1, 80-2, 80-3, 80-5, 80-6, 90.18, 100.2, 100.13, 100.15, 100.17, 100.19, 151-1, 154-2, and 200.2 of the Commissioner’s Regulations and 30-1, 30-2, and 30-3 of the Rules of the Board of Regents are amended to change references to professional development to professional learning. Additionally, Section 80-3.6 of the Commissioner’s Regulations, which prescribed professional development requirements for teachers through the 2016-17 school year, is repealed since that school year has ended and the section is no longer applicable. Conforming edits were also made to other sections of Part 80 consistent with the repeal of Section 80-3.6.
3. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
The proposed rule does not impose any additional professional services requirements on local governments.
4. COMPLIANCE COSTS:
The proposed amendment does not impose any additional costs on regulated parties beyond the current regulations.
5. ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL FEASIBILITY:
The proposed amendment does not impose any new technological requirements on school districts or BOCES. Economic feasibility is addressed in the Costs section above.
6. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT:
The Department believes that uniform standards for professional development plans must be established across the State. Therefore, no alternatives were considered for those located in rural areas of the State.
7. LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION:
Comments on the proposed rule were solicited from school districts through the offices of the district superintendents of each supervisory district in the State, from the chief school officers of the five big city school districts.
Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
1. TYPES AND ESTIMATED NUMBER OF RURAL AREAS:
This proposed amendment applies to all school districts and BOCES in New York State, including those located in the 44 rural counties with fewer than 200,000 inhabitants and the 71 towns and urban counties with a population density of 150 square miles or less.
2. REPORTING, RECORDKEEPING, AND OTHER COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS; AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
The proposed amendments to subdivision 100.2(dd) are designed to create greater coherence with other statutory and Department initiatives related to ensuring that all educators – teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders - have the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the needs of all students. Specifically, the amendments further align the Commissioner’s Regulations with requirements related to the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA), the Continuing Teacher and Leader Education (CTLE) statutory requirements, and the Department’s recently approved Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) plan. These changes include:
• A shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning, which is consistent with the changes to the standards adopted by the PSPB. This shift is more than just a change in language. Professional organizations and educational researchers, including Learning Forward, the Learning Policy Institute (LPI), and the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), have adopted this change in language, which emphasizes the importance of educators taking an active role in their continuous development. Rather than being passive recipients of information, educators should be active partners in determining the content of their learning, how their learning occurs, and how they evaluate its effectiveness.
• Requires the professional learning plan to describe how professional learning related to educator practice and curriculum development are culturally responsive and reflect the needs of the community that the school district or BOCES serves.
• Clarifying the Department’s expectations regarding the use of data – both qualitative and quantitative – in determining appropriate professional learning and measuring its impact on educators and student learning, consistent with research on effective professional learning.
• Clarifying that professional learning plans must describe the professional learning opportunities that are available to teachers, teaching assistants, and school leaders, whereas the existing regulations do not consistently include references to educators other than teachers.
• Technical edits to remove references to dates, professional learning requirements for teachers, pupil personnel service providers and educational leaders, and certain structures in the New York City Department of Education that are no longer relevant.
Consistent with the shift in terminology from professional development to professional learning related to school district and BOCES professional learning plans, the amendments make conforming edits to other provisions of the Commissioner’s Regulations. Specifically, Sections 52.21, 57-2, 75.8, 80-1, 80-2, 80-3, 80-5, 80-6, 90.18, 100.2, 100.13, 100.15, 100.17, 100.19, 151-1, 154-2, and 200.2 of the Commissioner’s Regulations and 30-1, 30-2, and 30-3 of the Rules of the Board of Regents are amended to change references to professional development to professional learning. Additionally, Section 80-3.6 of the Commissioner’s Regulations, which prescribed professional development requirements for teachers through the 2016-17 school year, is repealed since that school year has ended and the section is no longer applicable. Conforming edits were also made to other sections of Part 80 consistent with the repeal of Section 80-3.6.
3. COSTS:
a. Costs to State government: The amendments do not impose any costs on State government, including the State Education Department.
b. Costs to local government: The amendments do not impose any costs on local government.
c. Costs to private regulated parties: The amendments do not impose any costs on private regulated parties.
d. Costs to regulating agency for implementation and continued administration: The amendments do not impose any costs on the regulating agency for implementation and continued administration.
4. MINIMIZING ADVERSE IMPACT:
The Department believes that uniform standards for professional development plans must be established across the State. Therefore, no alternatives were considered for those located in rural areas of the State.
5. RURAL AREA PARTICIPATION:
Copies of the proposed amendments have been provided to Rural Advisory Committee for review and comment.
Job Impact Statement
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to update professional development requirements for school districts and BOCES. Under existing regulations, school districts and BOCES are required to develop Professional Development Plans. The purpose of these plans is to improve the quality of teaching and learning by ensuring that teachers, level III teaching assistants, and school leaders receive ongoing learning and have opportunities for professional growth, remain current with their profession, and meet the learning needs of their students. The plan is also intended to ensure that substitute teachers who work on a long-term basis are provided the opportunity to participate in the professional development program of the school district or BOCES.
The Department is proposing to revise the requirements for professional development plans to ensure that these regulations are consistent with other statutory and regulatory initiatives related to professional development educators. The proposed revisions also change the term “professional development” to “professional learning” consistent with a larger shift in the field. The Department is also repealing regulations related to professional development requirements for teachers and school leaders applicable only through the 2016-17 school year.
Because it is evident from the nature of the proposed amendment that it will have no impact on the number of jobs or employment opportunities in New York State, no further steps were needed to ascertain that fact and none were taken.
End of Document© 2018 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.