March 6, 2011
Most reasonable people would agree that, when layoffs become necessary, teachers should be let go through objective evaluations of how well they improve student performance, and not merely on the basis of seniority. The problem throughout most of the country is that evaluation systems are not in place. In New York City, only about 12,000 of 80,000 teachers have been evaluated, based on their students’ grades on standardized tests.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo had this in mind last week when he introduced a bill that would speed up introduction of a comprehensive, statewide evaluation system that New York State legislators ordered developed last year. Under the original schedule, the evaluation period was to begin this fall in math and English for fourth through eighth grades, with the remaining teachers’ evaluations starting in 2012. Under the Cuomo bill, all teachers would be covered beginning in September.
Over the next few years, the new law should give the state’s nearly 700 school districts a system for deciding which teachers to retain and which ones to let go. But that does not address the complaints of Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, who is saying teachers may have to be laid off this year. He wants an exception from the state law’s “last hired, first fired” provision.
A bill that would give the mayor that power narrowly passed the State Senate last week but was dead on arrival in the Assembly, because of opposition by both the governor and Speaker Sheldon Silver. The bill was hurt by the conclusion — among even some Republicans who voted for it — that it was too broad and might have led to arbitrary dismissals. It was also deeply, almost unintelligibly complex. The mayor needs to simplify the bill and convince lawmakers of its fairness.
Under the proposed plan, the city would be able to lay off teachers based on where they stood on nine often-confusing factors. For instance, teachers would be vulnerable to dismissal if they had an “unfavorable” rating over the previous five years under the old, discredited evaluation format. One problem is that ineffective teachers improve, sometimes dramatically, over years. An initial negative rating might no longer be accurate.
The state evaluation system will involve more intensive monitoring and would finally take student performance into account. Teachers would be categorized as highly effective, effective, developing or ineffective. Those who need help would be given it. Those rated ineffective for two consecutive years could be fired. Hearings would last no longer than 60 days.
It will take a Herculean effort to put this system in place. The Legislature should require all districts to subscribe right away, instead of rotating onto it as they negotiate new union contracts, as was specified under last year’s statute. The Legislature must make sure that the scoring system weighs student performance most heavily, so that unfit teachers aren’t allowed to remain on the job by performing well in peripheral areas. Finally, the Legislature must place reasonable limits on the time that teachers can spend appealing unfavorable ratings.
The New York Times
Gov. Andrew Cuomo had this in mind last week when he introduced a bill that would speed up introduction of a comprehensive, statewide evaluation system that New York State legislators ordered developed last year. Under the original schedule, the evaluation period was to begin this fall in math and English for fourth through eighth grades, with the remaining teachers’ evaluations starting in 2012. Under the Cuomo bill, all teachers would be covered beginning in September.
Over the next few years, the new law should give the state’s nearly 700 school districts a system for deciding which teachers to retain and which ones to let go. But that does not address the complaints of Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, who is saying teachers may have to be laid off this year. He wants an exception from the state law’s “last hired, first fired” provision.
A bill that would give the mayor that power narrowly passed the State Senate last week but was dead on arrival in the Assembly, because of opposition by both the governor and Speaker Sheldon Silver. The bill was hurt by the conclusion — among even some Republicans who voted for it — that it was too broad and might have led to arbitrary dismissals. It was also deeply, almost unintelligibly complex. The mayor needs to simplify the bill and convince lawmakers of its fairness.
Under the proposed plan, the city would be able to lay off teachers based on where they stood on nine often-confusing factors. For instance, teachers would be vulnerable to dismissal if they had an “unfavorable” rating over the previous five years under the old, discredited evaluation format. One problem is that ineffective teachers improve, sometimes dramatically, over years. An initial negative rating might no longer be accurate.
The state evaluation system will involve more intensive monitoring and would finally take student performance into account. Teachers would be categorized as highly effective, effective, developing or ineffective. Those who need help would be given it. Those rated ineffective for two consecutive years could be fired. Hearings would last no longer than 60 days.
It will take a Herculean effort to put this system in place. The Legislature should require all districts to subscribe right away, instead of rotating onto it as they negotiate new union contracts, as was specified under last year’s statute. The Legislature must make sure that the scoring system weighs student performance most heavily, so that unfit teachers aren’t allowed to remain on the job by performing well in peripheral areas. Finally, the Legislature must place reasonable limits on the time that teachers can spend appealing unfavorable ratings.
The New York Times
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário