Reform School WEA Summer University

1. Reform SchoolWEA Summer University Kathleen Heiman Alan Sutliff Mike McNett August 1-2, 2011

2. Introductions • Name • Local • Role in the Association • What do you hope to get from this session?

3. Preliminaries • Materials on WEAReformSchool.wikispaces.com • Need home email address if not on registration • Schedule • Breaks

4. The ATTACK

5. Recent Experiences • Seattle • Tacoma • Bellevue

6. Overview: What is Reform? • How would you define the word? • What concepts are part of the public debate? • In what light are unions, including our Association, cast? • What is the impact of “Ed Reform”? • How is this affecting you?

7. The Players • Which groups and individuals are most visible? • What goals are they seeking? • How do they describe these goals?

8. Philosophy • Why is this happening? • What are the underlying motives? • In regard to education? • Politics? • Money? • Power? • Articles: • The Grand Coalition Against Teachers • Schools as Scapegoats

9. This We Believe… • WEA Policies • Evaluation • Alternative Compensation • Priority Schools • Summary of testing and evaluation policies • NEA Evaluation Position (2011) • NEA Resolution F-10 (2011) • Compilation of NBI, resolutions, NERM, BSWT • WEA Comprehensive Strategic Direction

10. Test Scores

11. Value Added Modeling • Attempt at objectivity • Based on standardized tests • Calculates change from year to year • Compares actual scores to expected scores • Calculations adjust for some variables • Difference between actual growth and expected growth place teacher on the distribution

12. Uses of VAM • Evaluation • Salary and bonuses • Layoff • Public disclosure • Termination • School grants, resources, funding

13. Problems with VAM • Tests in few subjects • Quality and nature of tests • Tests address lower-order, measurables • Can not fully or accurate factor out variables • Teacher does not control most variables • 2/3rds are outside of school • Student distribution • Not all classroom cohorts are created equal

14. Problems with VAM • Students do not develop on a steady upward curve • Claims that 3 superior teachers in a row will close the achievement gap are based on statistical extrapolations by Hanushek, Sanders, Rivers

15. Circular Logic • The best teachers are those with students who make higher gains • Higher student gains indicate that the teachers of those students are the best

16. Other Consequences • Narrowing curriculum • Teaching to the test • Cheating • Firing good teachers, keeping mediocre teachers • Demoralization • Limiting those willing to make a career of education • Failure to address poverty, mobility, parenting, etc.

17. Simple Teacher Effect Calculation

20. (6) Stability

21. Value Added Modeling (VAM) • Dr. Sean Corcoran: Can Teachers be Evaluated by their Students’ Test Scores? Should They Be?

22. VAM Resources • Scott Poirier • Policy Statement on Teacher Evaluation and Accountability • The Flaws in Connecting Student Assessment to Teacher Evaluation • Others • Student Test Scores: An Inaccurate Way to Judge Teachers • Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers-- EPI

23. “6696” – An Overview • New evaluation criteria for teachers • Created a new, four-tier rating system • Required OSPI to create a pilot with school districts in 2010-11 (development phase) and 2011-12 (pilot implementation phase) • All districts to adopt new systems in 2013-14

24. “6696” – An Overview • Increased length of provisional status for new teachers • Requires districts to send OSPI information on their current evaluation system for all employee groups beginning in 2010-11 • Created evaluation criteria for principals

25. The Old and The New

26. Bargaining 6696

27. Reporting • Districts must report to OSPI • Evaluation process • Ratings of employees • Districts must report the process to public • Evaluation process is subject to bargaining • (Surprise!) • OSPI: Show them no one statewide model is needed • District can post contract online (public reporting)

28. Assignment • Data is a factor in determining staff assignments • Doesn’t say which data or how to be used • Transfer and assignment are subject to bargaining • Define through bargaining • Need not be student test scores • Don’t have to allow punitive transfers • Can bargain for “combat” pay or incentives

29. The Eight Criteria • Criteria are subject to bargaining • Need not form the outline of the process • Must be somehow contained • Avoid an imposed OSPI model

30. Use of Data • No requirement that student data be used • “When student growth data, if available and relevant to the teacher and subject matter, is referenced…” • Say “no” • Value-added data is flawed and is not relevant • Test data usually applies to only 40% of unit members, so can not be the basis of a fair even-handed system for all teachers • Say “yes” • To inform instruction and to guide planning

31. Four Ratings • 2013 • “…whose work is not judged Satisfactory…” • Law doesn’t say which level is Satisfactory, nor how to define that • Define the terms • Average teacher is average (and satisfactory) • Upper 3 ratings should all be satisfactory to protect mid-level teachers

32. Short-Form • Four years of satisfactory or one of top two ratings • If “satisfactory” is next to bottom level, it will be easier to get onto the short form • If “satisfactory” is only the top two ratings… • Then this sentence in the law doesn’t make sense • But it may cause lazy principals to give the top two ratings to get more staff on to short-form

33. Summary • Some of 6696 is vague and ambiguous • It can be defined locally through bargaining • Decide what you want it to mean • Bargain assertively for a rational and fair system.

34. Tenure? Or just Due Process? • Continuing contracts • Probation • How long does it really take to dismiss a teacher for performance concerns? • Disciplinary process • Everyone deserves due process

35. Layoffs • Seniority • A topic that polls well for ed reform groups? • A topic that is no-win for members • Evaluation • A misunderstood topic • See probation

36. Seniority-Based Layoffs

37. Charter Schools • Control • District • Parents and teachers • University • Community group • Corporate

38. Charter Schools • Funding • Public • Blend • Private • Accountability • Testing • Standards

39. Charter Schools • Admissions • Skim • ADA, IDEA? • Segregation • Union • Lite • NLRA • State law • None

40. KIPP: Five Pillars • High Expectations • Choice and Commitment • More Time • Power to Lead • Focus on Results

41. Harlem Children’s Zone • Neighborhood-based, At-Scale Approach • The HCZ Pipeline • (K-college program, with foundation of community-building programs, and family, social service and health programs) • Building Community • Evaluation • Culture of Success

42. Green Dot Tenets • Small, Safe, Personalized Schools • High Expectations for All Students • Local Control with Extensive Professional Development and Accountability • Parent Participation • Maximize Funding to the Classroom • Keep Schools Open Later

43. Do charter schools work? • http://credo.stanford.edu/reports/MULTIPLE_CHOICE_CREDO.pdf • 17% Better • 37% Worse

44. Alternatives to Charters • What factors cause people to like charters? • Which of those factors can be incorporated into public schools? • Examples?

45. Union Rights

46. Wisconsin • Idaho • Ohio • Indiana • New Jersey • Florida

47. Rick Moore • UniServ Director • Southern Lakes United Educators • Burlington, Wisconsin • Wisconsin Education Association Council WI Gov. Scott Walker

48. Idaho