National Debate Regarding Education Reform No Child Left Behind Act (2002) Numerous States Have Recently Enacted Education Reform Several States Have.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Why does ERA Need to Flourish
Advertisements

Understanding Student Learning Objectives (S.L.O.s)
Foundations of American Education, Fifth Edition
Mississippi Statewide Teacher Appraisal Rubric (M-STAR)
Putting it Together ….Student + Teacher Standards = ?
Property Tax Abatement For Job Creation Presentation to the Orange County Board of County Commissioners September 20, 2011.
Teacher Effectiveness Evaluation Pilot September 1, 2011 – September 30, 2012 NJ State Board of Education, July 13, 2011.
On-the-job Evaluation of Principals Jacquelyn O. Wilson, Ed.D. Delaware SAELP Director Wallace Foundation National Conference October 25-28, 2006.
Leon County Schools 2011 Legislative Session Summary Report District Advisory Council May 12 th 2011.
1 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) U.S. Department of Education Adapted by TEA September 2003.
Fiscal Year Budget Overview Citizen Academy September 3, 2013 Citizen Academy September 3, 2013.
Michael Barlow Teacher Evaluation and Career Status under Senate Bill 2033
Discuss the charge of the Michigan Council for Educator Effectiveness (MCEE) Summarize the MCEE Interim Report Provide an Overview of the Pilot.
Navigating the New Teacher Contract Office of Human Resources December 14, 2010.
Tenure Law: Teacher Contracts Office of Human Resource Services Durham Public Schools 1.
New Hanover County Schools Board of Education Presentation November 5, 2013.
Chapter 11 Graphic Organizer Jonathan Kniss. The 10 th Amendment makes education largely a state function. The Chain of Command: student, teacher, principal,
No Child Left Behind The reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), also known as the “No Child Left Behind Act,” will have.
Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Michigan Education Association Spring 2011.
Educator Effectiveness 101 Senate Bill Overview [Insert your name]
Alaska’s Standards for Culturally Responsive Schools Chris Simon Director of Rural Education Department of Education & Early Development
. Information from “Countdown to Accountability” Summer Leadership Institute July 2002 Arizona School Boards Association from presentations by Chris Thomas.
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education Updated: July 2011.
Title I, Part A Targeted Assistance 101 Field Services Unit Office of School Improvement.
Performance Evaluation Legislation Illinois Audrey Soglin Illinois Education Association May 4, 2010 Great Lakes TURN.
General Fund Budget Calendar Review Niagara Falls City School District Budget Cynthia Bianco Superintendent of Schools Tim Hyland Rebecca Holody.
Katonah-Lewisboro School District Annual Professional Performance Review Update 5/23/
Understanding Title I Programs: An Overview for Parents.
Why were PERA and SB7 passed? What will be the consequences? Dr. Richard Voltz, Associate Director Illinois Association of School Administrators.
Race to the Top Discussion Points to determine LUSD’s interest in participating in the State program January 7, 2010.
By the end of this session we will have an understanding of the following:  A model for teacher evaluation based on current research  The FEAPs as a.
AYP to AMO – 2012 ESEA Update January 20, 2013 Thank you to Nancy Katims- Edmonds School District for much of the content of this presentation Ben Gauyan.
National Council on Teacher Quality Advancing Teacher Quality in New Jersey New Jersey State Board of Education July 13, 2011.
NOT SO FAST! Why We Must “KILL THE BILL” Boulder Valley Education Association.
North Santiam School District State Report Cards
MARYLAND’S REFORM PLAN RACE TO THE TOP. This presentation is a product of the Maryland State Department of Education 03/03/10 American Recovery and Reinvestment.
Teacher Evaluation Instructional Collaboration Day #2 January 3, 2014.
TEACHER EVALUATION What it is going to look like….
Teacher Practice in  In 2012, the New Jersey Legislature unanimously passed the TEACHNJ Act, which mandates implementation of a new teacher.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY12/13 Governing Board Presentation May 10, 2012.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 9, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
California AB 2244 Applicants Under Age 19 Final Starting March 2, 2011.
 MAISA Summer Conference Lansing, MI, June 20-21, 2012.
TEACHER QUALITY AND DISTRIBUTION Principals and Teachers Effectiveness and Evaluation NSBA’s Federal Relations Network Conference February
Presented by Dr. Joe Robinson SENATE BILL Senate Bill 2033 Became Effective on May 28, 2010 Senate-Coffee, Jolley, Ford, Rice and Leftwich House-Benge.
Race to the Top Update Illinois Education Association Representative Assembly March 2010.
Behavioral Health Board Chapter 31, Title 39 Idaho Code.
Educator Effectiveness in Colorado State Policy Framework & Approach October 2014.
1 NCAE LEGAL How we got where we are How we get where we need to be.
Classified Exemption Review Project March AGENDA  WHY? Recent Legislation Absence of Salary Increases for Classified Increases in Benefit Premiums.
Budget Webinar (as passed by the Ohio House) May 23, 2011 OSBA: Michelle Francis, Jay Smith, Damon Asbury OASBO: Barbara Shaner.
DECEMBER 10, 2014 MARK SASS EDUCATION REFORM. GOALS FOR TODAY Overview of three main pieces of legislation that impact our practice NCLB RTT SB 191 Philosophical.
Behavioral Health Board. As of July 1, 2014… Regional Behavioral Health Boards are established. The RAC and Mental Health Board will no longer exist.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
Teacher Employment Provisions In HB 2227: Impact and Implications for School Districts Chris Thomas, ASBA General Counsel AASBO Bi-Monthly Meeting, May.
Regional Behavioral Health Boards Chapter 31, Title 39 Idaho Code.
No Child Left Behind No Child Left Behind  NCLB Overview  Assessment and Accountability Requirements  Educator Quality.
Legal Issues in Administrator Evaluation, Dismissal and Nonrenewal Nancy Hungerford, The Hungerford Law Firm Dec. 3, 2015.
FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL INFLUENCE ON EDUCATION.
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education September 2010.
Excellent Public Schools Act of 2013 Instructional Collaboration Day II January 3, 2014.
1 Senate Bill 130 Innovation Schools Act of 2008.
What county clerks should know about Idaho public defense reform
Overview of SB 191 Ensuring Quality Instruction through Educator Effectiveness Colorado Department of Education Updated: June 2012.
2007 Article VII # ELFA 8 Education, Labor, and Family Assistance
Rockingham County Public Schools Teacher Evaluation Process
Chapter 13 Governance and Financing of Elementary and Secondary Schools By Delis Corke EDU /30/13.
APPR Overview 3012c Draft Revision March 2012
Colorado Department of Education
EDN Fall 2002.
Presentation transcript:

National Debate Regarding Education Reform No Child Left Behind Act (2002) Numerous States Have Recently Enacted Education Reform Several States Have Attempted Reforms But Have Failed

In Colorado the Debate Culminated With The Passage of S.B Sponsored by Senator Michael Johnston, D- Denver Signed into Law by Governor Bill Ritter on May 21 st, 2010

Impetus Behind Education Reform Race to the Top Quality of Teacher in the Classroom Colorado Student Performance

Changes Implemented by S.B Repealed the State Licensed Personnel Performance Evaluation Council Redefined Non-Probationary Teacher Development of a System that Measures Teacher Effectiveness Through a Set of Quality Standards

State Licensed Personnel Performance Evaluation Council was Repealed Replaced by the Governor’s Council for Educator Effectiveness (Council) By Executive Order on January 13 th, Member Body Representatives Chosen and Elected From Throughout the Colorado Public School System

Duties of the Council Promulgate Rules Concerning a System to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Educators Establish Guidelines for Establishing Performance Standards for Different Categories of Educators Determine the Involvement of Parents in a Child’s Education as it Relates to Teacher Effectiveness Create a Statewide Definition of Principal and Teacher Effectiveness, to be Centered on a Demonstrated Ability to Achieve and Sustain Adequate Student Academic Growth Measure Effectiveness Through a Set of Quality Standards Design a Process by Which a Non-Probationary Teacher May Appeal Rating of Ineffectiveness

Timeline March 2011 – Council provides the State Board of Education with recommendations regarding a new teacher-principal evaluation system September 2011 – State Board promulgates rules using the Council’s recommendations and submits them to the Legislature by January 2012 January 2012 – Council submits its recommendation for a process by which a non- probationary teacher may appeal a second consecutive “ineffective” performance rating September 2012 ( school year) – New evaluation system is pilot tested; non-probationary teachers begin to be evaluated annually September 2013 ( school year) – New system is fully implemented statewide; teachers are evaluated on quality standards during this school year; demonstrated effectiveness is considered in determining probationary and non- probationary status September 2014 ( school year) – New evaluation system is finalized and put into full statewide use

Teacher “Tenure” Redefined

History of Teacher Tenure in Colorado The Word “Tenure” was Literally Removed from Colorado Law in 1990 with Passage of House Bill The Teacher Employment, Compensation and Dismissal Act of 1990 The System Remained in Tact In Place of Tenure, Teachers Became Classified as Either Probationary or Non-Probationary Probationary Teachers Were Defined as a Teacher who has not Completed Three Full Years of Continuous Employment with the Employing School District and who has not Been Reemployed for the Fourth Year

Advantages and Protections Granted by Tenure Probationary Teachers may be Dismissed for Virtually any Reason Non-Probationary Teachers cannot be Dismissed without Due-Process 14 th Amendment Provides Property Interests in Teacher’s Jobs Non-Probationary Teachers cannot be Dismissed without Cause

S.B : Effects on Tenure Redefines Probationary Teacher as a Teacher who has not Completed Three Consecutive Years of Demonstrated Effectiveness or a Non-Probationary Teacher who has had Two Consecutive Years of Demonstrated Ineffectiveness Does Make Provision for a Teacher to Appeal Ineffective Rating Does not Challenge 14 th Amendment Rights Burden of Proof and Shared Cost of Review

Why was this Deemed Necessary? Estimated that 5% of Teachers are Ineffective Yet Only 1% are Dismissed Can Take up to 3 Years to Dismiss a Teacher Can Cost up to $100,000 to Dismiss a Teacher

Quality Standards

System that Measures Teacher Effectiveness Through a Set of Quality Standards Unknown What the System Will be Until March of 2011 By Law, 50% of Teachers Evaluation Will be Determined by the Academic Growth of the Teacher’s Students High Probability That System Will Include Value-Added Analysis Through the use of Standardized Tests

The Problems with Standardized Tests

Problems with Standardized Tests and Value-Added Analysis 25% of Value-Added Assessments are Likely to be in Error National Academy of Sciences Discourages Sole Use Fear of Teaching to the Test

Recognition of the Weaknesses of Value-Added Analysis by S.B Special Education Student Mobility Student Population Composed of 95% of High-Risk Students Unsure What the Criteria for the Other 50% of a Teacher’s Evaluation Will be Comprised Of

Conclusion and Questions Alters Teacher Tenure Links Teacher Effectiveness with Student Performance Funding Potential Teachers and Veteran Teachers May Chose to Leave the Profession Transfer by Mutual Consent