Posted on 08/13/2013 5:47:05 AM PDT by MichCapCon
Grand Rapids Public Schools is laying off teachers this year and will be using an evaluation system that takes performance — rather than seniority — into account, according to WOOD-TV.
The local teachers union president is unhappy, calling the system "unfair and subjective."
Previously, when school districts made layoffs in response to declining enrollment (Grand Rapids will be down about 700 students this year), they did so based strictly on longevity, ignoring how good teachers actually were at their jobs. And when districts had a problem teacher, even criminal, the tenure process made it nearly impossible to remove them.
Recent legislation dealing with teacher effectiveness and tenure means schools have to try to measure educators' performance when making personnel decisions. While layoffs based on ability may seem extreme to union leaders, it is the norm in the rest of the working world.
So the options are an evaluation system that would lay off employees based on how well they do their job or letting people go based on the method of "last in, first out." There may be problems with evaluation systems, so the union, teachers and administration should try and improve them. It’s certainly a better option than making decisions based on the number of years a teacher has been on the job, regardless of whether they are effective in the classroom.
If it is "all about the kids," as school unions and administrators repeatedly say, layoffs based on seniority make little sense. The union should work to make evaluations better instead of clamoring for the old system, which was far worse.
Should be interesting to watch what happens in the schools with a union vote this month.
Well, its gotta be first in first out because salary (and thus dues) is a function of years of service
Be careful what you wish for. Seniority is not always a bad thing.
There is also the fact that many long time teachers recognize that dues are a scam.
Evaluations sound like a great idea, but they do not fix the problem. Let me try to explain what’s happening with our new evaluation system in Ohio.
The first part of the evaluation is based on Student Learning Objectives or SLOs. I create an SLO that tests my students on about 75% of the Common Core standards for that school year. My school board -made up of attorneys, small business owners, and professional idlers- approves my test. They’ve no idea what’s in each standard band, nor are they familiar with the terminology. As for the CC terminology, it is so vague that it allows teachers to define terms as they see fit. It’s sickening. The students take the SLO at the beginning and end of the school year, and I receive an evaluation mark based not on what my students know or should know, but how much they learned from the beginning of the school year. What this means is that LaFawnda could have been passed on to my junior American literature class from our ineffective, piece of crap sophomore world literature teacher without ever making the standards, and all she needs to do to show improvement is get one point higher on the SLO at the end of the year than she did at the beginning. Finally, nobody is looking over my shoulder. Not a single person -building, local, or state- is watching to ensure that I’m not writing down bogus scores. We’ve not even been instructed by the state to keep the SLOs. So what’s an ineffective teacher to do if she wants to keep her job?
The second part of the evaluation is my principal actually sitting in my room observing, performing random walk-throughs, and holding pre- and post-observation meetings with me. This process is estimated to take about 9-10 hours per teacher. We have about 45 teachers in our building. Do the math. Now if I’m found ineffective, my principal must spend an additional 10-15 hours with me developing an action plan for improvement. Finally, all of the teachers’ evaluations are published for the public. So, if you’re the principal and you want to neither look ineffective nor lose federal funding due to lack of effectiveness, what do you do?
The answer to the questions at the end of each of the previous paragraphs is simple: Cheat. The system is set up to cheat. They expect us to cheat, just like Mouch told Rearden. It only benefits the powers that be, because then they can say, “Hey, the system is worse than we thought. We need MORE money!”
Sorry for any typos. At 37 weeks pregnant, I’m swelling like a prize fighter and my digits are the worst!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.