Colorado’s Race to the Top application foundered, as expected, on its lack of progress on teacher evaluation and tenure. To give Colorado a second chance at RTTT funding, State Senator Michael Johnston has introduced SB10-191 to change the state’s evaluation and tenure process.
Tenure hit with new bill
Currently, teachers get tenure with three years of satisfactory probationary teaching, and it’s very difficult (at least three years) to remove teachers with tenure. With SB10-191, new teachers must show three years of “highly effective” teaching in their first three years, and if tenured teachers receive two years of unsatisfactory reviews, their tenure can be yanked.
The state will define “highly effective” teaching. Fifty percent of teacher evaluation will depend on student performance, based on annual yearly progress on state tests. Sixty-six percent of principal evaluation will depend on student performance.
Teacher evaluation goes from once every three years to once a year
The bill will change the current evaluation system from once every three years for tenured teachers to once each year. The bill also will “reward” excellent teacher performance with career development and compensation.
No new state dollars for the program
What the bill does not do is provide extra dollars for compensation. It assumes, apparently, that those dollars will come from RTTT. At some point, however, Colorado, and all states, will need to get serious about compensation if they expect teachers to play to the new tune.
In the Denver metropolitan area, new teachers make roughly $35,000 per year. That’s about the same as a retail store manager. A starting engineer will make somewhat north of $65,000, depending on the engineering field. A starting lawyer will make about $75,000, depending on the size of the firm. A new physician can make up to $100,000, depending on the practice.
Teachers will get paid less at least through 2011
The incentive for new teachers to become “highly effective” based on compensation is nil. The only incentive is pride and love of the job because the opportunity for a raise in the current economic environment is not what it was even two years ago. Right now, most school districts in the state are cutting their budgets, telling staff that they will make the same in 2011 as they did in 2010. In fact, they will probably have made more in 2009 than they’ll make in 2011.
The state legislature is cutting about $250 million from the 2010-2011 school budget. That’s the wrong direction if the state intends to implement a system that puts a teacher’s employment at risk each year.
State hopes for RTTT to add to compensation
If the state is serious about implementing a new evaluation system, it also needs to get serious about compensation. Offering a new teacher at least $45,000 seems reasonable. That’s the only way school districts will be able to attract and retain highly competent new teachers after firing all those incompetent old teachers.
State doesn’t fund evaluation program
The state also needs to come up with a support system for the increase in teacher evaluations. The main complaint from principals is that they don’t have time for frequent evaluation. If that’s the case, then schools may have to create a whole new class of educator, the teacher evaluator, which may be a good thing. This person theoretically can be an instructional leader.
But the teacher evaluator position does not currently exist in Colorado. Will this position be supervisory or licensed? Will it be a part of the new “career ladder” envisioned in the law, or one more trend that eventually is discarded.
Democrats will fight over the bill; GOP just needs to stay out of it
Many in Colorado support education reform. A huge fight is already heating up between Democrats who want schools to get better faster and Democrats who receive much of their candidate funding from the Colorado Education Association. Republicans can just stay out of the way and watch the pots boil over.
But more money? To get more money, teacher supporters have to come up with a 2/3 majority of legislators who are willing to put an initiative on the ballot. That’s not likely.
So if teacher evaluation goes forward, and nothing changes related to compensation, the state may get the opposite of what it wants: a system with fewer teachers, doing less with less, facing an evaluation program requiring them to do more with less. It’s difficult to figure how that scenario can lead to anything but complete breakdown in the entire system.
Tags: highly effective teaching, principal evaluation, State Senator Michael Johnston, teacher compensation, teacher evaluation, teacher evaluator
I totally agree with you that great teachers deserve much more money. It’s crazy how little they make when the work they do is so important.
The problem I see is that unless we see more success in public education, then it becomes a chicken and egg question. I am deeply beholden to the marvelous teachers who made all of the difference in the lives of my daughters. But I am equally angry about the teachers who shrugged their shoulders at me when confronted by data proving their ineffective strategies.
I support SB 191 because it will provide objective evaluations created by CDE teachers on the Governor’s Council for Educator Effectiveness. In your post, it seems as if you are saying no money is being spent on evaluations now. I know that isn’t true. DPS is currently using over $8 million of Gates Foundation money to create an effective teacher analysis. SB 191 ensures that the knowledge learned from that study is implemented.
Here is a link to a teacher who states his reasons why he supports the bill.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2_1BZj7WL0
Thanks for the dialog on this issue.
Elisa: DPS is lucky to have the Gates money. Over in Jeffco, there’s none of that - just principals who say they don’t have the time to do all the evaluations envisioned in the bill. I think the evaluations are crucial to any successful enterprise, and that the legislature should ante up. But when I talk to them, they don’t even seem to get how their funding decisions have undermined schools.
As an example, the state has given out $552 million in tax exemptions to farmers and ranchers who apply for conservation easements. Every crummy farm out there seems to qualify. There are a lot of farms. If this keeps up, billions of dollars will go to farmers, money now unavailable for education. That’s a piece of the economic reality that hardly anyone knows about - and it’s one of the reasons that schools are underfunded, and that Jeffco doesn’t have the money to do evaluations once a year. Paula Noonan