Congressional Democrats: WATCH AND LISTEN!
9 hours ago
An effort to think critically about what is best for students, teachers and the future of education in Montgomery County, Maryland, and beyond.
Process for Changing the Evaluation System: The current unit member evaluation system, including the instrument and the teacher evaluation system booklet of the Montgomery County Public Schools, Rockville, Maryland, (also known as the Professional Growth System Handbook) shall not be changed without following the procedures set out below:We need Board members who are willing to question what's best for education in Montgomery County- not rubber stamp the latest program. Build and attract the greatest professional staff of teachers in the United States- and watch real reform happen. Not a pipe dream. A decision.
1. Preceding the proposed implementation of any proposed changes, the Board shall notify MCEA of its desire to change the evaluation system.
2. Thereafter, the parties shall confer in good faith over the content of any proposed changes in the evaluation system, until agreement is reached, or until 90 days following receipt by MCEA of notification that the Board desires to change the evaluation system. The conferring teams shall be headed by the chief negotiator for each party.
3. If no agreement is reached within 90 days following receipt by MCEA of notification that the Board desires to change the evaluation system, the Board may unilaterally implement changes in the evaluation system.
"Evaluate the Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) program, to ensure that it is providing both the support and assessment to teachers as was intended, or whether it is being used inappropriately to remove teachers. If the teachers are satisfied, then it is doing its job. If not, it needs to be reworked."The Peer Assistance and Review program is run- in part- by MCEA. If teachers don't like this- then we've got a serious problem.
“RACE TO TOP": Race to the Top's worthy goals of college/career readiness and measuring teacher effectiveness by student achievement are already part of our Board's existing reform efforts. We should now strive to preserve our successful professional growth system and not change what works just to chase funds.Lisa Lloyd
"RACE TO TOP": The premise of "Race to the Top" is to improve the academic outcomes for all students. I have concerns about using test scores to evaluate teachers because of the differences in student cohorts each year. Working collaboratively with staff, parents and the BOE will strengthen planning instruction.Mike Ibanez
"RACE TO TOP": Maryland is eligible for $250 million from President Obama's RTTT. How much of that money will come to MCPS is unsure but the consequences for county schools could mean dumbing down curriculum standards, linking teacher evaluation and pay to student test scores, and more teacher union concessions.Mike Durso
"RACE TO TOP": I have some concerns with " RaceTo The Top ", especially as it ties school systems -states to a fairly restrictive set of guidelines. Though student progress as measured by test scores is one indicator of teacher effectiveness, it is not the only factor. There are many other variables involved.Martha Schaerr
"RACE TO TOP": Although I commend the state BOE for participating in the Race to the Top program I believe the state’s strategy needs to be focused more on empowering parents by giving them the information and tools they need to help their children succeed.
I’m concerned that the current system does not distinguish among teachers based on their performance. To say that one group is “not meeting standard” and another group “meets standard” lumps together people with a very broad range of skill, experience, and effectiveness. I would propose adopting a new system in which teachers are compensated based on their demonstrated competence in their respective fields. There are plenty of observable, measurable behaviors that a trained observer *who is an expert in your field* (i.e. not a generic administrator) can readily identify. So I would advocate for paying teachers based on skill attainment, not mere longevity. And CPD credits? These are useful only insofar as they impact the teacher’s behavior.
I would also question the wisdom of paying all teachers the same salary. I happen to think my discipline (mathematics) is especially challenging to teach, and requires unusual efforts to teach well. Each level (ES, MS, HS) and each discipline comes with its own unique challenges, but I don’t believe the same level of effort is required across the board to produce the same level of success. So it seems unfair to me that all teachers get paid the same.
James Key
Math teacher, Sherwood High School
.
The reputation of the school system, and the reporting of statistics and test scores, have been more tied into the personality and the image of [Superintendent Jerry Weast] as our leader, than the students and teachers who are impacted even more," Durso said. "We always haven't been as candid about some of our shortcomings, as opposed to publishing our positives.
1. What would you consider the biggest weakness of the current teacher evaluation system in Montgomery County? What should be done to address this weakness?
Besides the seniority system I see a problem with the lack of recognition either monetarily or otherwise for teachers who perform beyond the minimum requirements or who take on tough teaching assignments.
As I understand it MCPS teachers either “meet standard” or “do not meet standard”. There is no further breakdown in their evaluations. No one can reasonably argue that all teachers who meet standards are equally effective, and yet there is no recognition for teachers who are more effective or who take on challenging assignments.
I would reward teachers by adding at least one additional rating—superior—for teachers to achieve. What constitutes “superior” can be defined by either the union, administration, by a group of teachers outside the union, or a group of educators and parents together. I would reward teachers who take on tough class assignments with a “challenging assignment bonus” . This would give the best teachers an incentive beyond basic professionalism to take tough classes.
I also believe that allowing underperforming teachers three years to improve is too long. I believe two years is long enough. We need to be serious about improving the way EVERY day is spent in school, and great effort should be made speed up improvement.
2. Pay for MCPS teachers is currently decided by a seniority system. If consensus could be reached on a new evaluation system, would you support a merit based pay scale to reward the highest performing teachers?
Yes. While the value of classroom experience is great and should be included in the evaluation system, teachers who work hard, are more effective, and taken on tough assignments should be compensated accordingly. We should do everything we can to improve the quality of classroom instruction.
3. What are your reflections on Michelle Rhee? Should the search committee consider interviewing her for the Superintendent position?
I admire Michelle Rhee’s courage and effectiveness at getting rid of low-performing teachers and in focusing on improving classroom instruction. I’m not sure she’s the right person for MCPS, however. I worry that Ms. Rhee would not be able to get the union to cooperate with her, and the current budget crisis will require that.
It’s broke. Let’s fix it! American students consistently lag behind their counterparts in other industrialized countries. The current American education model is not working. As educators, we can point fingers at a number of variables—bad parenting, bad administrators, poverty, the achievement gap, a “dumb is cute” culture, effect of technology on attention spans and literacy, No Child Left Behind, etc. Or we can be part of the solution to overcome these challenges and increase the quality of education our children receive. Our children deserve a fresh approach. We deserve to be compensated based on effort and growth, not to achieve some silly 100% metric, but to improve the quality of education for ALL students. We’re generally hard-working professionals. We’re not immune to accountability, high standards, and professional development. Professional growth must be incentivized. We need an evaluation and compensation system that rewards and promotes hard work. Yes, we should proceed with caution as reform is research and implemented. But the solution is not to reject any change to the status quo. A carefully designed and implemented system can benefit both children and educators.
-Joe Sangillo
Ultimately, we are not afraid of comparisons — in fact, we embrace them. All we ask is that those comparisons are made using statistics that actually mean something.The employment of statistics is indeed a useful endeavor. Data tells a story. And the story it tells can help hardworking organizations and people get feedback about what they do well and what they need to improve. MCPS often uses statistics to celebrate it's own accomplishments. However, I have recently come to wonder to what extent MCPS uses data to analyze its weaknesses.
Randi Weingarten is the last person you could possibly describe as hiding in a cave, plotting to destroy America. She has appeared on so many panels and television programs as part of the WFS roll-out – and she’s taken quite a public beating in many of them – that ‘cowardly terrorist’ is the last phrase you’d use to describe her. (You’ll notice that the NEA, which unlike the AFT has been totally absent from just about any real reform discussion in the last few years, hardly even appears in WFS. Surely because Randi granted access and the NEA didn’t.)
Although teachers need and want higher pay, they are strongly opposed to individual merit pay.A generalization that brings me to an article I recently read in the Christian Science Monitor. Melanie Stetson Freeman wrote a piece more than a year ago about the evolution of performance pay in Denver, CO. I was struck by this snippet:
Back in 2004, when the Denver teachers union voted on ProComp, many teachers had a deeply ingrained opposition to "merit pay." One poll about a month before the vote showed that just 19 percent of them were in favor. The district undertook a public-relations blitz and massive information campaign, and it ended up winning the support of 59 percent of teachers.Teachers, once they understand that they can have due process side by side with merit pay, are willing to support an opportunity to earn more money in a less traditional manner. However it requires leadership and stake holder input. Off hand claims made by Ravitch are harmful to the dialogue. She continues to say of merit pay that it,
destroys the collaboration and teamwork that are essential to the culture of the school.However, the very same study that Ravitch notes as proof pudding that merit pay won't work actually concludes those who received merit pay were more likely to collaborate:
...what can we say about the way treatment teachers responded? Treatment teachers...were more likely to report thatthey collaborated with other teachers (planning, reviewing student test results, coaching and being coached or observed)And I suppose this is my biggest beef with how merit pay is treated by its opponents. Merit pay is not perfect. Value added modeling has limitations. And charter schools will not fix all our educational ills. But neither will the status quo. We need to spend less time yelling and making sweeping generalizations and more time figuring out how school reform can go forward recognizing the strengths and weaknesses put forward by both sides of the argument.