The Future of Education in Colorado

1. The Future of Education in Colorado S. B. 10-191

2. No Child Left Behind Act (2002) Numerous States Have Recently Enacted Education Reform Several States Have Attempted Reforms But Have Failed National Debate Regarding Education Reform

3. In Colorado the Debate Culminated With The Passage of S.B. 10-191 Sponsored by Senator Michael Johnston, D-Denver Signed into Law by Governor Bill Ritter on May 21st, 2010

4. Impetus Behind Education Reform Race to the Top Quality of Teacher in the Classroom Colorado Student Performance

5. Changes Implemented by S.B. 10-191 Repealed the State Licensed Personnel Performance Evaluation Council Redefined Non-Probationary Teacher Development of a System that Measures Teacher Effectiveness Through a Set of Quality Standards

6. State Licensed Personnel Performance Evaluation Council was Repealed Replaced by the Governor’s Council for Educator Effectiveness (Council) By Executive Order on January 13th, 2010 15 Member Body Representatives Chosen and Elected From Throughout the Colorado Public School System

7. Duties of the Council Promulgate Rules Concerning a System to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Educators Establish Guidelines for Establishing Performance Standards for Different Categories of Educators Determine the Involvement of Parents in a Child’s Education as it Relates to Teacher Effectiveness Create a Statewide Definition of Principal and Teacher Effectiveness, to be Centered on a Demonstrated Ability to Achieve and Sustain Adequate Student Academic Growth Measure Effectiveness Through a Set of Quality Standards Design a Process by Which a Non-Probationary Teacher May Appeal Rating of Ineffectiveness

8. Timeline March 2011 – Council provides the State Board of Education with recommendations regarding a new teacher-principal evaluation system September 2011 – State Board promulgates rules using the Council’s recommendations and submits them to the Legislature by January 2012 January 2012 – Council submits its recommendation for a process by which a non-probationary teacher may appeal a second consecutive “ineffective” performance rating September 2012 (2012-13 school year) – New evaluation system is pilot tested; non-probationary teachers begin to be evaluated annually September 2013 (2013-14 school year) – New system is fully implemented statewide; teachers are evaluated on quality standards during this school year; demonstrated effectiveness is considered in determining probationary and non-probationary status September 2014 (2014-15 school year) – New evaluation system is finalized and put into full statewide use

9. Teacher “Tenure” Redefined

10. History of Teacher Tenure in Colorado The Word “Tenure” was Literally Removed from Colorado Law in 1990 with Passage of House Bill 90-1159 The Teacher Employment, Compensation and Dismissal Act of 1990 The System Remained in Tact In Place of Tenure, Teachers Became Classified as Either Probationary or Non-Probationary Probationary Teachers Were Defined as a Teacher who has not Completed Three Full Years of Continuous Employment with the Employing School District and who has not Been Reemployed for the Fourth Year

11. Advantages and Protections Granted by Tenure Probationary Teachers may be Dismissed for Virtually any Reason Non-Probationary Teachers cannot be Dismissed without Due-Process 14th Amendment Provides Property Interests in Teacher’s Jobs Non-Probationary Teachers cannot be Dismissed without Cause

12. S.B. 10-191: Effects on Tenure Redefines Probationary Teacher as a Teacher who has not Completed Three Consecutive Years of Demonstrated Effectiveness or a Non-Probationary Teacher who has had Two Consecutive Years of Demonstrated Ineffectiveness Does Make Provision for a Teacher to Appeal Ineffective Rating Burden of Proof and Shared Cost of Review Does not Challenge 14th Amendment Rights

13. Why was this Deemed Necessary? Estimated that 5% of Teachers are Ineffective Yet Only 1% are Dismissed Can Take up to 3 Years to Dismiss a Teacher Can Cost up to $100,000 to Dismiss a Teacher

14. Quality Standards

15. System that Measures Teacher Effectiveness Through a Set of Quality Standards Unknown What the System Will be Until March of 2011 By Law, 50% of Teachers Evaluation Will be Determined by the Academic Growth of the Teacher’s Students High Probability That System Will Include Value-Added Analysis Through the use of Standardized Tests

16. The Problems with Standardized Tests

17. Problems with Standardized Tests and Value-Added Analysis 25% of Value-Added Assessments are Likely to be in Error National Academy of Sciences Discourages Sole Use Fear of Teaching to the Test

18. Recognition of the Weaknesses of Value-Added Analysis by S.B. 10-191 Special Education Student Mobility Student Population Composed of 95% of High-Risk Students Unsure What the Criteria for the Other 50% of a Teacher’s Evaluation Will be Comprised Of

19. Conclusion and Questions Alters Teacher Tenure Links Teacher Effectiveness with Student Performance Funding Transfer by Mutual Consent Potential Teachers and Veteran Teachers May Chose to Leave the Profession