Collective Bargaining Retreat for Management Discussion of the Impact of Measuring Teacher and Leader Effectiveness on Collective Bargaining August 17,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Bargaining Under the New Law. How did we get here? October 2010: ETA members ratify extension of CBA to June 30, 2014 February 2011 : SB 1 (collective.
Advertisements

Presented by OARS and Grants & Contracts Miami University.
Contract Faculty Evaluations. AGENDA Review of Information Packet Ground Rules Purpose of Evaluation Evaluation Procedures Evaluation Criteria Time Line.
Teacher Evaluation and Pay for Performance Michigan Education Association Spring 2011.
Unit A Informational Meeting Unit A MOA Summary and S/E Summary.
Lee County Human Resources Glenda Jones. School Speech-Language Pathologist Evaluation Process Intended Purpose of the Standards Guide professional development.
By the end of this session we will have an understanding of the following:  A new model for teacher evaluation based on current research  The correlation.
W HAT IS M UTUAL AGREEMENT AND P ARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE ? Dr. Eric Oifer Randy Lawson August 26, 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.
PUSD Teacher Evaluation SY 13/14 Governing Board Presentation May 9, 2013 Dr. Heather Cruz, Deputy Superintendent.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN The Robbinsville Board of Education and The Robbinsville Education Association
Important Points The SWF stands for Standard Workload Form. Workload is covered by Article 11 in the collective agreement. Your SWF is your personal contract.
Lead, Engage, Align & Do! (LEAD)
Education Improvement 2014 Meeting of State Superintendents August, 7, 2014.
August 15, 2012 Fontana Unified School District Superintendent, Cali Olsen-Binks Associate Superintendent, Oscar Dueñas Director, Human Resources, Mark.
STRATEGIC STEPS TO A MERIT SYSTEM Reynoldsburg City School District.
 Reading School Committee January 23,
TRACS Toledo Review and Alternative Compensation System.
Educator Evaluation System Salem Public Schools. All DESE Evaluation Information and Forms are on the SPS Webpage Forms may be downloaded Hard copies.
Legislative Changes to the County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (AB 340 and AB 197) Presented by: Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association.
Compensation Model Supervisor Training Presented by: Jennifer Larson
Faculty Affairs presents:.  Conditions of Appointment  Lecturer Evaluation Process  Reappointment  Entitlements  Order of Assignment  Salary  New.
“Teachers do make a difference…” - Jere Brophy, 1979.
Students Come First Senate Bill 1110 and Trailer Bill
Performance Pay Volusia County Schools August 2015.
Marco Ferro, Director of Public Policy Larry Nielsen, Field Consultant With Special Guest Stars: Tammy Pilcher, President Helena Education Association.
Rewarding Excellence in the Classroom Idaho’s Pay for Performance Plan
Tentative Agreement to Faculty Contract July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2014.
First Session of the Annual Meeting Deliberative Session February 5, 2015.
Duke Ellington “A problem is a chance for you to do your best.”
Commission on Teacher Credentialing Ensuring Educator Excellence 1 Biennial Report October 2008.
POLICY & OVERSIGHT DIVISION (POD) February 2014 MILESTONE ACQUISITION PLANS TRAINING 1.
Presented by the Faculty Affairs Office September 2013.
NC Teacher Evaluation Process
Attendance Directors Meeting April 18, 2012 Home School and Homebound.
DOE STAFF DATABASE: Overview of Changes Presenter : Teresa R. Sancho FAMIS 2011 CONFERENCE Tallahassee, Florida June 2011.
Public Hearing on the Budget January 10, 2013 Performing Arts Center 40 Greenough Road, Plaistow, NH Overview of Budget TIMBERLANE REGIONAL SCHOOL.
Standards IV and VI. Possible Artifacts:  School Improvement Plan  School Improvement Team  North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey  Student.
Statutory Groupings Who is where and what rights are attached.
TEACHER EVALUATION After S.B. 290 The Hungerford Law Firm June, 2012.
Denver Public Schools Teacher Compensation Design Team April 23,
New Hanover County Schools Board of Education Presentation November 19, 2013.
Excellent Public Schools Act of 2013 Instructional Collaboration Day II January 3, 2014.
Standards of Achievement for Professional Advancement District 2 Career Ladder Training April 29, 2016 Ronda Alexander & Michael Clawson.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
Collective Bargaining Contracts with Performance Metrics A “Success Pool” and ”Faculty Excellence Awards” Kent State University NCSCBHEP 39 th Annual National.
Lenoir County Public Schools New North Carolina Principal Evaluation Process 2008.
UACT and CVUSD Certificated Employee Development and Evaluation Procedures For The School Year.
CHAIRS AND DIRECTORS ORIENTATION August 16, 2016.
Speech/Language Pathologist Evaluation System Orientation SY Evaluation Systems Office, HR Dr. Doreen Griffeth, Director.
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
Providing Quality Legal Services to SCHOOL DISTRICTS Across Iowa
Review, Revise and Amend from Procedures for State Board Policy 74
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion (RTP) Processes and Procedures
Introduction to the Marzano Teacher Evaluation Model for USD 259
S , F.S., Requirements for Employee Compensation and Salary Schedules Florida Department of Education May 23,
PAc-17 Sabbatical Leave of Absence
Evaluation of Tenure-Accruing Faculty
SOESD’s Teacher Evaluation & Support System
Rockingham County Public Schools Teacher Evaluation Process
Advancing Student and Educator Growth through Peer Feedback
Wethersfield Teacher Evaluation and Support Plan
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
DESE Educator Evaluation System for Superintendents
Speech/Language Pathologist Evaluation System Orientation SY
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
McREL TEACHER EVALUATION SYSTEM
Sabbatical and Difference-in-Pay Leaves Office of Faculty Advancement
Presentation transcript:

Collective Bargaining Retreat for Management Discussion of the Impact of Measuring Teacher and Leader Effectiveness on Collective Bargaining August 17, 2010

Performance Pay I Conway School District Professional Evaluation System Agreement Between Conway Education Association and Conway School Board Conway Annual Teacher Evaluation (CATE) II Conway School District Performance Pay System for Administrators (non-union) III Conway School District AFSCME Support Staff Evaluation (Maintenance, Custodians, Cafeteria Workers & Bus Drivers)

History Pre Performance Pay System – Last CEA Contract April 1998 – No Contract – Board and CEA agree on contract – town supports contract – Board and CEA agree on contract – town supports contract -- February 2000 – Deliberative Session – Board chair and chief board negotiator indicate to voters that “upon adoption of this Article we will work out a reasonable merit system.” -- July 2001 – The CBA reflects Performance Pay

Conway School District Professional Evaluation System Adopted Revised

Conway Annual Teacher Evaluation Based on Charlotte Danielson Work Copyright 1996 Enhancing Professional Practice A Framework for Teaching  Evaluation system mutually developed by the Association and Board – adopted by Board on 10/23/00 + CEA 11/3/00  By CBA – system may be modified by committee made up of equal membership of CEA and management  Modification effective when ratified by formal adoption of the CEA and Board

The First Performance Pay Increase ARTICLE XXVI SALARIES 26-1The salary schedule for hiring (Appendix B) effective July 1, 2001 is for the purpose of placing new teachers on a schedule, and to assure that no new employee’s salary can exceed the salary of a veteran employee with the same qualifications and experience, plus the addition of the appropriate proficient pay raise ($1,250 or $1,750 – see 26-2). –Eligibility for any salary increase is based on supervisor’s evaluation of teacher performance. Effective July 1, 2001, all teachers will receive performance pay increases based on their rating as measured by the Conway School District Professional Evaluation System ( ) approved by the Conway School Board (October 23, 2000) and the Conway Education Association (November 3, 2000) as follows:

school year Unsatisfactory (0-80 points) = $0.00 Basic ( points) and below $30,000 including longevity = $1,000 (cumulative) Basic ( points) and $30,000 or above including longevity = $500 (cumulative) Proficient ( points) and below $38,000 including longevity = $1,750 (cumulative) Proficient ( points) and $38,000 or above including longevity = $1,250 (cumulative) Distinguished ( points) = $500 (one-time bonus)

school year Unsatisfactory (0-80 points) = $0.00 Basic ( points) and below $30,000 including longevity = $1,000 (cumulative) Basic ( points) and $30,000 or above including longevity = $500 (cumulative) Proficient ( points) and below $38,000 including longevity = $1,750 (cumulative) Proficient ( points) and $38,000 or above including longevity = $1,250 (cumulative) Distinguished ( points) = $500 (one-time bonus)

Salary Schedule for Hiring APPENDIX B - Conway School District Salary Schedule for Hiring Step B B+6 B+12 B+18 B+24 B+30 M M+30 M ,000 24,288 24,576 24,864 25,152 25,440 25,728 26,928 28, ,700 24,996 25,293 25,589 25,886 26,182 26,478 27,713 28, ,400 25,705 26,010 26,314 26,619 26,924 27,229 28,499 29, ,100 26,413 26,726 27,040 27,353 27,666 27,979 29,284 30, ,800 27,122 27,443 27,765 28,086 28,408 28,730 30,070 31, ,500 27,830 28,160 28,490 28,820 29,150 29,480 30,855 32, ,200 28,538 28,877 29,215 29,554 29,892 30,230 31,640 33, ,900 29,247 29,594 29,940 30,287 30,634 30,981 32,426 33, ,600 29,955 30,310 30,666 31,021 31,376 31,731 33,211 34, ,300 30,664 31,027 31,391 31,754 32,118 32,482 33,997 35, ,000 31,372 31,744 32,116 32,488 32,860 33,232 34,782 36, ,982 35,567 37, ,733 36,353 37,973 LONGEVITY 4-7 Years = $ Years = $2, Years = $ Years Plus = $2, Years = $1,100 TRACK CHANGE B6 B12 B18 B24 B30 M M30 M60 Factor of previous

ARTICLE XXVI SALARIES 26-1The salary schedule for hiring (Appendix B) effective July 1, 2007 is for the purpose of placing new teachers on a schedule, and to assure that no new employee’s salary can exceed the salary of a veteran employee with the same qualifications and experience, plus the addition of the appropriate proficient pay raise ($1,750 in and $1,825 in ).

school year Unsatisfactory (0%-42%) = $0.00 Basic (43%-59%) and below $30,000 including longevity = $1,000 (cumulative) Basic (43%-59%) and $30,000 or above including longevity = $500 (cumulative) Proficient (60%-84%) = $1,750 (cumulative) Distinguished (85%-100%) = $500 (one-time bonus)

school year Unsatisfactory (0%-42%) = $0.00 Basic (43%-59%) and below $30,000 including longevity = $1,000 (cumulative) Basic (43%-59%) and $30,000 or above including longevity = $500 (cumulative) Proficient (60%-84%) = $1,825 (cumulative) Distinguished (85%-100%) = $500 (one-time bonus)

ANNUAL TEACHER EVALUATION FORM (CATE) Name: Position: Date: Evaluation Summary FOR OFFICE USE Percentage Score:_______________ 0 to 42 percentUnsatisfactory 43 to 59 percentBasic 60 to 84 percentProficient 85 to 100 percentDistinguished

Unsatisfactory Demonstrates unsatisfactory performance by achieving less than 43 percent Makes unsatisfactory improvement on annual goals At risk of nonrenewal A teacher can remain unsatisfactory for up to 1 year. Basic Demonstrates basic performance by achieving percent Makes significant measurable progress toward the achievement of annual goals Faculty new to the district will typically be at Basic level A probationary teacher can remain at the Basic level for up to 3 years. Proficient Demonstrates proficient performance by achieving percent Makes significant measurable progress toward the achievement of annual goals This is the expected level of teacher performance for most teachers Distinguished Demonstrates distinguished performance by achieving percent Achieves Annual Goals Assumes additional responsibilities which will impact the professional development of other staff

Salary Schedule for Hiring –APPENDIX B - Conway School District Salary Schedule for Hiring – –Step B B+6 B+12 B+18 B+24 B+30 M M+30 M+60 –1 27,600 27,931 28,262 28,594 28,925 29,256 29,587 30,967 32,347 –2 28,300 28,640 28,979 29,319 29,658 29,998 30,338 31,753 33,168 –3 29,000 29,348 29,696 30,044 30,293 30,740 31,088 32,538 33,988 –4 29,700 30,056 30,413 30,769 31,126 31,482 31,838 33,323 34,808 –5 30,400 30,765 31,130 31,494 31,859 32,224 32,589 34,109 35,629 –6 31,100 31,473 31,846 32,220 32,593 32,966 33,339 34,894 36,449 –7 31,800 32,182 32,563 32,945 33,326 33,708 34,090 35,680 37,270 –8 32,500 32,890 33,280 33,670 34,060 34,450 34,840 36,465 38,090 –9 33,200 33,598 33,997 34,395 34,794 35,192 35,590 37,250 38,910 –10 33,700 34,098 34,497 34,895 35,294 35,692 36,341 38,036 39,731 –11 37,091 38,821 40,551 –12 37,591 39,321 41,051 –LONGEVITY –4-7 Years = $ Years = $2,000 –8-14 Years = $55025 Years Plus = $2,800 –15-19 Years = $1,10030 Years = $500 in the year of the teacher’s retirement –TRACK CHANGE – B6 B12 B18 B24 B30 M M30 M60 –Factor of previous

 Performance Pay favored new teachers Proficient below $38,000 = $1,750 Proficient above $38,000 = $1,250 B, Step 1 = $24,700 = 7% Increase M+60, Step 12 = $37,973 = 4.6% Increase  Current Proficient = $1,825 B, Step 1 = $27,600 = 6.6% M+60, Step 12 = $41,051 = 4.4%

Status Quo Clause In the event a new collective bargaining agreement is not in place by July 1, 2009, the parties agree that any performance based increases over the levels will only occur through further negotiations. Should negotiations fail, the status quo salary levels for the contract year shall be held at the levels with the exception of track changes, which will be advanced in accordance with the language of the agreement.

Effect of EVERGREEN Legislation  Performance pay will, in all likelihood, be considered a pay plan. Therefore, previous status quo clause will become void.  New approach to negotiations: The agreement also calls for a negotiated COLA increase of 2.5% and performance pay as follows: Unsatisfactory $0 Basic$250 Proficient$850  Note: now Unsatisfactory would get 2.5%, old agreement is 0%.  Contract was not approved by the voters. B, Step 1 - $30,000/$750+$850 = $1,600 or 5.3% M+60, Step 12 - $43,629/$1,090+$850 = $1,940 or 4.4%

Conway School District Performance Pay System for Administrators CONWAY SCHOOL DISTRICT PERFORMANCE PAY SYSTEM FOR ADMINISTRATORS The attached Administrative Performance Evaluation Form will be used to evaluate Conway administrators on an annual basis. Using the Administrative Performance System Overall Evaluation Rating scale on page 6 of this form, an administrator will be evaluated Above Expectation, At Expectation, or Below Expectation. If the administrator is rated At Expectation or Above Expectation, the administrator shall receive a cost of living increase equal to the Social Security increase for that year. If the administrator is rated Below Expectation, 0% increase shall be awarded. An amount equivalent to 3% of the administrator's current salary shall be budgeted for the purpose of performance pay. Performance pay shall be achieved in the following manner: –Using the Individual Objective Statement form on page 7 of the evaluation packet, the evaluator and the administrator shall agree on objectives for the upcoming year. –Strategies shall be developed as outlined on the Individual Objective Statement. –The evaluator and the administrator will agree on performance indicators and they shall be listed under Section C of the Individual Objective Statement. –Any additional comments will be listed under Section D. –The evaluator and the administrator will sign off on the objectives at the objective setting session which shall be conducted in the early fall of each year. –Normally, three (3) objectives will be developed. –In the spring of that year, the evaluator and the administrator will meet, and the administrator will provide evidence of performance indicators. –The evaluator will determine whether the administrator has achieved those objectives. Should the administrator achieve those objectives, he/she will be awarded the performance pay percentage increase that was agreed upon in the fall. –The performance pay awarded shall become part of the administrator's annual salary for the next year, along with the Social Security cost of living increase (if awarded). Approved by Conway School Board – November 14, 2007

Conway School District Performance Pay System for Administrators High Points  Administrator rated At Expectation or above = COLA Increase = to Social Security Increase  Below Expectation = 0% increase  3% of Administrator Salary for Performance Pay  Evaluation Determines  Performance Pay and COLA shall become part of administrator’s salary

AFSCME PERFORMANCE PAY Post Evergreen ARTICLE 27 WAGE RATES Effective July 1, For the school year, all unit members will receive a negotiated COLA of 1.0% on base salary (excluding longevity and stipends). After COLA is figured, the appropriate performance pay will be added as follows: Commendable, 2.0%; Proficient, 1.5%; Basic, 1.0%; Unsatisfactory, 0% as rated on the Conway School District Support Staff Evaluation Form (see Appendix D). The average of the November and May evaluations shall be used to determine the performance pay rate.

AFSCME - SUPPORT STAFF EVALUATION FORM NAME: ________________________________DATE: _______________________ POSITION/TITLE: ____________________SCHOOL/DEPT. __________________ For the performance factors listed below indicate with the appropriate number the effectiveness with which they were applied in achieving the results. When evaluating each factor, apply the following definitions: Commendable:Exceptional performance, role model for peers Proficient: A skillful worker who consistently meets requirements and expectations Basic:Improvement needed to increase effectiveness; growth will strengthen ability to handle responsibilities Unsatisfactory:Unacceptable job performance OVERALL Commendable Proficient Basic Unsatisfactory Total Points

Administrator Evaluation and Effect on Teacher Evaluation (1)Superintendent and Board set yearly or multi-year goals (2)Superintendent sets yearly or multi-year goals with principals and directors (3)Principals and directors set yearly or multi year goals with staff Board Superintendent Principal/Director Staff

What is the impact of measuring teacher and leader effectiveness on collective bargaining?