Avilés questions undisclosed vendor in Local Law 35 report
Avilés asks why a vendor for the MOSL teacher evaluation algorithmic tool is listed as 'vendor not disclosed' in the Local Law 35 report. DOE officials explain it is an algorithmic tool predating generative AI and say they will follow up on whether it was developed internally or by a third party.
Thank you.
I have a few more questions.
I wanted to ask, so local law 35 speaks to vendor disclosure, and it says that all agencies need to report the use of AI tools.
And the latest report identified seven tools used by New York City public schools.
I won't go through all seven.
But there was one that says annual professional performance review measures of teaching leadership.
Calculation.
Vendor not disclosed.
Is there a reason why this vendor is not being disclosed?
Do you have a sense of what?
Yeah, I'll start and maybe you guys can continue.
So that's the Mosul process that's been in place a long time.
I think the date on that has started maybe 2008, 2013.
It's not really AI.
We put that into the report because it's an algorithmic tool.
It does.
Make observations and then there's scoring that happens in the background.
So that's what the reason it's in there.
It's an algorithmic tool that came way before generative AI hit the marketplace.
MOSL is the measure of student learning, which is part of the teacher evaluation process and principal evaluation process.
Well, not MOSL is in the teacher space.
Yeah.
But regardless, why can't that vendor be specifically disclosed?
Yeah, we'll get back to you on that.
It's possible it was developed internally, but we'll get back to you if there was a third-party vendor or if it was developed internally.
Okay, that would be great.