The effort to change Colorado educator evaluation and the teacher tenure system was launched formally Monday with introduction of Senate Bill 10-191, the long-awaiting educator effectiveness proposal.
Sen. Mike Johnston, D-Denver, explaining Senate Bill 10-191 on April 12. With him are his cosponsors (from left) Rep. Carole Murray, R-Castle Rock; Rep. Christine Scanlan, D-Dillion, and Sen. Nancy Spence, R-Centennial.
The bill, sponsored by a bipartisan set of House and Senate members, is expected to be the focus of the most significant education policy debate of the 2010 legislative session.
Sen. Mike Johnston, D-Denver, has been working on the bill for six months, seeking to develop support among a wide range of education groups.
Key provisions of the bill include annual teacher and principal evaluations, with teacher evaluations to be based 50 percent on student growth and principal evaluations based two-thirds on student growth and the demonstrated effectiveness of a principal’s teachers.
The bill also would require that tenure be earned after three consecutive years of effectiveness as determined by evaluations. Tenured teachers could be returned to probation if they don’t have good evaluations for two years. The bill also would require the mutual consent for placement of teachers in specific schools and establishes procedures for handling teachers who aren’t placed. It also specifies that evaluations can be considered when layoffs are made.
Many of the details of the new system would be left to the Governor’s Council on Educator Effectiveness, whose work is just getting underway, and to the State Board of Education. A key part of that work would be developing a definition of educator effectiveness on which to base a new evaluations system. (The state board is expected to discuss the bill during its meetings later this week. The effectiveness council will hold its second meeting on April 21.)
The council also would be charged with proposed a career ladder system for teachers and making recommendations for getting top teachers and principals to serve in low-achieving schools.
Once state standards for evaluation are in place, local school districts would be required to “meet or exceed” those standards in their evaluation systems.
Johnston acknowledged Monday that he hasn’t reached agreement with the Colorado Education Association on parts of the bill, especially the sections that would change the tenure process and require mutual principal-teacher consent for placement of teachers in schools.
“We’ve had a lot of concerns” expressed about the bill, Johnston said, adding that there are “misperceptions” about such issues as the proposal’s effects on teachers at low-performing schools.
Senate President Shaffer, D-Boulder, said, “It would be an overstatement to say there is consensus” on the bill. Asked where he stood on the bill, Shaffer described himself as “the moderator” in discussions about the proposal, said he’s working to achieve a form of the bill that can pass the Senate. “It’s something we’d like to tout as part of our application for round two” of the Race to the Top competition.
(Gov. Bill Ritter, asked Tuesday about SB 10-191, sounded much like Shaffer, saying he was “working” with both Johnston and the CEA about the bill and said the measure has the benefit of “prioritizing this conversation” aboout educator effectiveness.)
Bev Ingle, president of the CEA, said Monday the union is opposed to the bill as introduced. Her objections focused on the shorter time line SB 10-191 would impose on the council. “Sen. Johnston’s bill, which deals with educator effectiveness, evaluation, and due process is too much, too fast. [The] bill interferes with current collaborative efforts.”
Ingle continued, “The council should be allowed to do its work as charged by the governor and to make recommendations to the governor and legislature about policy changes and laws needed to achieve these goals. Senator Johnston’s bill hinders the work of the council and potentially sets it up for failure.”
Under its current charge, the council has until the end of this year to develop definitions of teacher and principal effectiveness but doesn’t have to make detailed further recommendations until September 2011. SB 10-191 would compress the council’s work into the rest of this year and give the state board until next March to issue regulations.
Jane Urschel, deputy executive director of the Colorado Association of School Boards, also expressed some concerns about the bill’s timetable and a one-size-fits-all approach that might be hard for small districts. But, Urschel also found much to like in the bill, including the tying of good evaluations to getting and keeping tenure.
“The most exciting thing is that we are finally in this state going to have a good, deep discussion about teaching as professional practice,” Urschel said. CASB doesn’t yet have a position on the bill, Urschel said, but she hopes the association eventually will be able to support it.
Bruce Caughey, deputy executive director of the Colorado Association of School Executives, said, “I think many of the ideas in the bill are going to be welcomed by our members” but that other issues may need some work. “It’s a little bit early in the process for us to commit.” Caughey said he also has some concerns about how a new evaluation system would be supported financially. “As always, it’s the details.”
Johnston has plenty of backing from a variety of education advocacy groups, including the Colorado Children’s Campaign, BizCares, the Urban League, Padres Unidos, Metropolitan Organization for People, A+ Denver and Colorado Concern, among others.
Chris Watney, president of the Colorado Children’s Campaign, said, “We know that in Colorado there are many great teachers and principals effectively educating our kids. This bill will support successful educators in our schools – ensuring that Colorado schools have the ability to recruit, develop and retain the most effective teachers and principals.
“The Colorado Children’s Campaign is firmly committed to ensuring that every child has the opportunity to succeed, and this is why we support Senate Bill 191. … Educator effectiveness is an economic issue, it is an equality issue, but at its core, it is a children’s issue.”
Education Commissioner Dwight Jones
In contract to Shaffer’s “moderator” role, House Speaker Terrance Carroll, D-Denver, is a cosponsor of the proposal. And education Commissioner Dwight Jones wrote a guest column in Monday’s Denver Post supporting the bill.
The bill has 18 sponsors, nine from each party. Johnston and the three Republican members of the eight-member Senate Education Committee are sponsors, but no other committee Democrat is on the bill. SB 10-191 is expected to have its first hearing in Senate Ed next week. Sen. Nancy Spence, R-Centennial, is Johnston’s co-prime sponsor in the Senate.
Four members of the 13-member House Education Committee are sponsors, including prime sponsors Reps. Christine Scanlan, D-Dillon, and Rep. Carole Murray, R-Castle Rock. No House Ed Democrats are on the bill except Scanlan, but Republican Reps. Tom Massey of Poncha Springs and Ken Summers of Lakewood are sponsors.
Johnston said despite that fact that the session is in its final month, it was “the right time” to introduce the bill. It wasn’t ready earlier in the session, he said. And introducing it now fits it with planned changes in the CSAP testing system, with R2T and with what’s happing in other states.
But Johnston said, “This is the right bill regardless of the Race to the Top.”
Do your homework
- Bill text
- Jones’ Post column
- Education News special report on Colorado’s broken teacher evaluation system
[...] in Colorado, State Senator Michael Johnston has just introduced the Educator Effectiveness Bill, a package of legislation that is markedly similar to the D.C. teachers’ [...]
[...] in Colorado, State Senator Michael Johnston has just introduced the Educator Effectiveness Bill, a package of legislation that is markedly similar to the D.C. teachers’ [...]
Parents around the state support this measure too. This is just one step of many to fix what ails our public schools. Objective measures will protect great teachers and leaders and hopefully inspire and support struggling teachers and leaders to improve. As a parent of public school students and a voter, if this measure passes then I will be more inclined to support increased funding for education.
Citizens, parents, teachers and community organizers have put together a petition at http://www.greatteachersandleaders.org in order to show to these legislators that their constituents support SB 10-191.
I think what is key is how student growth will be measured. As a teacher, as long as I am only expected for my students to make a year’s growth I am fine with that. It is when we start talking about test scores that I have problems. Each year 85% of my students make growth of a year or more. This means if a student entering my 4th grade class reads at a beginning first grade level, when they leave my classroom the same student is reading at a beginning 2nd grade level or better. It does not mean that the student is proficient on CSAP. The means for evaluating student growth is essential. If our evaluations are to be based on student growth the way we evaluate student growth must be fair to all teachers, no matter what neighborhood or district in which they teach.
Here is the language in the bill that spells out exactly what you just stated.
At least fifty percent of the evaluation is determined by the academic growth of the teacher’s students and that each teacher is provided with an opportunity to improve his or her effectiveness through a growth plan that links his or her evaluation and level of effectiveness to professional development opportunities. The multiple measures to determine effectiveness of teachers shall include, but need not be limited to, measures of student longitudinal academic growth that are consistent with the measures set forth in section 22-11-204 (2) and achievement levels on any statewide assessments in the relevant subject and grade level or any locally adopted interim assessments approved by the state board to assess student academic growth in the relevant subject and grade level.
[...] on these links to see recent EdNews’ coverage of Johnston’s bill and of Colorado’s Race to the Top [...]
[...] – See this story for more details on SB 10-191. [...]
I understand your desire for increased skills of our children. I share your passion for quality teachers delivering quality education. This is not the way to accomplish those goals.
Let’s address personal accountability of the student and his/her family. How about respectful behavior by the student in the classroom? Then there is the state’s and districts’ micro-management. How about lawsuits around every corner if a parent decides his/her child is not receiving “fair” treatment? Then there is the abundance of disruptive and sometimes violent children with which we contend in most classes. And, of course, CSAP stresses everyone!
There are policies in place that allow administrators to relieve incompetent teachers of their responsibilities. Let’s address core issues first, not teacher tenure.
Teachers in Florida stood united against a similar, but much more extreme, plan- and the Governor vetoed it based on our concerns. Colorado teachers, be sure you know exactly what is in the bill, and stand up for what is right, not just what is politically popular!
Florida defeated this via major grassroots campaigns. Try Facebook Stop Snate Bill 6 as an example. If we can do it, so can you. HIt your computers and organize!
[...] Background story on the bill [...]
[...] 40,000-member CEA was first in line to oppose the bill after it was introduced last week, saying the just-started work of the Governor’s Council on Educator Effectiveness should be [...]
I support the desire to see a better evaluation system for teachers. However, basing the evaluations at least 50% on student achievement is setting us up for failure. For example, I currently teach mostly honors students. My students will likely grow a great deal this year, even if I am a terrible teacher. Next year, I only have one honors class. I will likely see substantially less growth, simply because the students are less motivated to learn. Does this mean that I became a worse teacher? Of course not.
The biggest factor in student success is the student. The second largest is the parent. Only after that comes the teacher and principal. I would love to say that I can motivate every one of my students to do homework, but when I have students who tell me that they can’t do assignments because their parents work three jobs and they have to care for the house and their siblings, I’m not sure how to help. I’ve had parents tell me that my math class is not as important as their child’s social time. At some point, when the child isn’t learning, some responsibility needs to be placed on the student!
W. Edwards Deming pointed out “Reward for good performance may be the same as reward to the weatherman for a nice day.” The same works in reverse. I’m not saying that there aren’t bad teachers, but this isn’t the answer.
As a parent and a teacher, I am truly concerned about the fairness of this bill. I do believe that ineffective teachers need to find another profession. I don’t think that this Bill will solve this problem. If the Bill passes, how will they fund it? We are already taking hits in education because of lack of funding. These proposals might look pretty on paper, but in reality, they are frightening. I have seen incredible teachers alienated by poor leadership. If this bill passes, who can guarantee that good teachers will be protected, which they should? Everyone should have access to Due Process. This bill threatens that basic human right. Inner city schools or schools in more complicated working environments will suffer the most. Let’s face it, the test doesn’t fairly evaluate the whole child. I am fortunate that my curriculum isn’t tested on CSAPs. I would hate to have my creative curriculum minimized and trivialized by test makers who might not get it. If that were the case, I might have to leave education because my creative talents would be stifled as I am expected to stifle the education of my students. I met a teacher who works in a really rough school. She was educated, creative and passionate. She had a couple of major problems, however. She had apathetic parents and students. Some of these kids have been in jail. Parents have been in and out of jail, etc. The only meal for some of these children is the free lunch at school. Until parents and students step up to contribute to a positive education system, our system will fail. Parents and students also need to be accountable. Until then, we need to stop targeting teachers. People that have never taught, especially in a tough school, really need to understand and reevaluate their thoughts on this Bill.
Videos to watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUSkWoWVYeY