I went to a meeting after school yesterday.
Power point.
The purpose of the meeting was to update us on the implementation of Senate Bill 7 in our district.
Because we are a high performing district we do not have to change our present evaluation system until 2016.
Except.
Except we have to change our present three performance rankings to four. At the present time we have something like “excellent,” “satisfactory,” and “unsatisfactory.” We have to add “needs improvement.” Okay. No big deal.
We needed legislation for that?
Teachers have to be placed into four groups for the purpose of laying them off. Non-tenured are in group one and excellent tenured are in group four. I don’t know. We haven’t had reductions in force due to budgets and enrollment, except for first year teachers, in so long that I’m not concerned about this right now either.
That is what we needed to do this year.
Next year? Trouble.
Next year principals get evaluated based on some new principal evaluation system. It includes the use of student growth measures. This is a major concern. Our principal is already an incomprehensible petty tyrant. Put pressure on her to have increases in student growth measures in a school where 100% of 4th graders meet and exceed grade level on the ISAT?
Hmmm. I just smell Trouble (notice the capital “T”}.
Next year principals also get training on how to do evaluation.
Apparently they received no training before. I’m not surprised.
Our union cannot file a grievance on the substance of a principal evaluation. We can only file a grievance if the procedures weren’t followed. Last year we filed a grievance about every single evaluation of tenured teachers at my school. Every evaluation was withdrawn.
Principals will be trained by outside trainers. But they will be trained by outside trainers on an inside collectively bargained evaluation procedure. Am I the only one who sees a problem here?
No. I am not.
Then we must set up a committee of Association members and board designates to create a new evaluation system by 2016. 30% of it must be based on student growth measures. That’s bad enough for classroom teachers. Art teachers beware. Music too. Watch out PE. Speech pathologists. Social Workers.
If the two sides can’t agree within 180 days, we must use the evaluation procedure created by the state that doesn’t exist yet.
If we can’t do it in 180 days, we can never go back and try again. Never. Not until there’s a new reform bill. Which is likely.
They do come around frequently.
Fred Klonsky 