One of the most pressing controversies confronting teachers and their unions throughout the nation is the redesign of teacher evaluation systems that include measures of student performance as part of the evaluation. HB 153, the budget bill which was passed by the Ohio General Assembly and signed into law contains provisions on teacher evaluation that require that 50% of a teacher’s evaluation be based on student growth measures (the remaining 50% is based on teaching performance as determined by the evaluator). A model evaluation framework has already been approved by the State Board of Education that includes value-added scores, which are in their own right questionable as valid measures of teacher performance.
Pasted below are links to two recent articles in the New York Times that describe the effects of teacher evaluation systems gone wrong. We encourage you to read these articles, as I believe we will need to take a strong stand to oppose teacher evaluations that rely on standardized test scores or other forms of assessments (even though 69% of our teachers do not teach in content areas that are subject to the current value-added measures, this mandate applies to EVERYONE, regardless of whether it makes sense). Moreover, rating teachers in the four categories approved by the state (Accomplished; Proficient; Developing; Ineffective), and making employment decisions based on these ratings will create divisions among teachers and lead to grievances and court challenges.
Our contract extension ends June 30, 2013, and next September, under our Race to the Top agreements, we begin negotiations on teacher evaluation. We need to resist any efforts to impose a state-mandated system when we have an agreement that requires a membership vote to make any modifications to our current teacher evaluation programs. Our union leadership along with OFT and OEA locals throughout Ohio are considering next steps which will include intense involvement in the 2012 elections.
Again, please read these two NY Times pieces.
Fraternally,
Tom Schmida, President
During the first week of November, NY Times reporter Michael Winerip published a scathing story on Tennessee's new system for evaluating teachers based on students' standardized test scores. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/education/tennessees-rules-on-teacher-evaluations-bring-frustration.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=michael%20winerip%20tennessee&st=cse .
In today's NY Times, Winerip reports on a growing protest among school principals across New York state. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/28/education/principals-protest-increased-use-of-test-scores-to-evaluate-educators.html?scp=1&sq=principals%20protest%20role%20of%20teating%20in%20evaluations&st=cse So far, 658 principals have signed a letter of protest, with the list growing longer each day. One principal complains, "I have a Ph.D. I'm in a school every day, and some consultant is supposed to be teaching me to do evaluations. It takes your breath away it's so awful."