BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING, OR IS IT NURTURING MENTOR?

Politics is a rather unsteady business.  It floats and flies through immense sheaves of laws and additions.  We think (well I think) of legislators as law makers and tax moderators.  I rarely think of them as standard bearers. 

HB 249 and HB 251 in the current legislature are legislated standards that are there to implicitly measure teacher competency.  What an interesting object of legislative energy.

HB 249

This is the link to HB 249: "Teacher and School Leader Effectiveness Act"
HB 249

The law sets to set up a mandatory standard of examination, rating and ranking of teacher effectiveness with the resultant ranks:

• (a) exemplary, meets competency;
• (b) highly effective, meets competency;
• (c) effective, meets competency;
• (d) minimally effective, does not meet competency;
• (e) ineffective, does not meet competency;

Interestingly HB 249 leaves the actual management and administration of the examination process to the School District, although it will provide a list of competency measures from which the individual districts will select their own measures.  Implementation is to be in place by 2014-2015.  Principals and other administrators will also be rated for effectiveness.  Those not meeting competency have a 90 day period of mentoring and observation to overcome their perceived deficits.

The measures will be 50% based on State of New Mexico standards, 25% on teacher observation through Principal observation and 25% based on measures selected by each district.

My thoughts- might be fair, could be riddled with bias.  One of the factors noted is that the school may use their A-F rating in the evaluation process.  It doesn't speak directly to using that A-F rating randomly or uniformly.  In general this looks like an attempt at measure based learning and standardized outcome of student proficiency that allows for individual districts to tweak their stats based on not the actual end of year knowledge and competency acquisition by the student, but more the rate of change of the student's learning.  It might level the playing field for those districts with traditionally poor learners and make those with higher achievement rates more likely to push harder to keep higher levels of achievement.

It means good teachers will remain good teachers and those that do not continue to progress and advance will not be rehired.  I think?  Interesting idea that does give individualization to districts, but does give the Principal 25% of the score (at minimum).  This could be a subjective piece (although the observational grading is to be done with standard and research based documents).  It still places the teacher in the dilemma of teaching to a standardized test and limits some flexibility of curriculum. 

Isn't it lovely to be aware that you are part of the new observational and evaluator efforts at teacher excellence.  Challenges make for innovation and hopefully will allow for enthusiasm to be encouraged and the rote acquisition of facts put out as important, but not the entire goal.

HB 251

Here is the link to HB 251 a bill, "CREATING A COUNCIL TO MAKE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A STATE TEACHER EVALUATION FRAMEWORK".


At first glance these appear to be redundant, that is until read and digested.  This is a bill that creates a council of educators, principals, New Mexico Department of Education members and at large members to develop an implementable process to rate teachers and their effectiveness and competency.  It sets time lines and it sets expectations, but gives the council the mandate to create the method of determination.  It does propose a tiered system of teacher rating. There are to be a minimum of four levels:

• (a) distinguished;

• (b) proficient;

• (c) basic;

• (d) unsatisfactory

Much of the document describes the Councils role, makeup and the areas that criteria are to be defined.  It appears to be one that would be universally implemented, but leaves open (by not mentioning it) the Council's ability to allow for variance according to teacher level and school population.  It spends much more time in the process of defining the terms of the outcome of being deemed an unsatisfactory teacher and appears to give teachers with some tenure protection from having one poor evaluation.

Much more eclectic, but also much more based on State direction as opposed to local input.  Of course, that is subject to the recommendations of the Council.

This bill has been deemed GERMANE (acceptable) by the Rules Committee.

DISCUSSION:

HB 249 has the feel of a more democratic and school system centered set of evaluations.  That is on initial reading and on initial overview.  It is suspect in the potential for personalities and conflicts to enter into the equation.  It also is a directive program that is built from more of an individuals' recommendations. 

HB 251 seems a process in action to determine a universal set of criteria and implement them in a universal manner.  It also has protective clauses for teachers who have a poor evaluation after years of at least basic ratings.  It does speak directly of termination of unsatisfactory teachers who are not able to progress through mentoring.

I find the second approach more of a progressive one and appears targeted more to finding ways to improve a teacher and a school system.  It is certainly more a work in progress and if passed would be implemented in a similar time frame as HB 249.  The criteria and the measures are to be research and good practice based, but the actual wording and expectations, as well as the actual flexibility of the evaluative process are yet to be seen.

Neither bill states that there is an expected percentage that will be in any level. 

Worth watching as this will be part of our future. 

Big Brother or Nurturing Mother- time will tell. 


The Eye of God- also known as the Cat's Eye Nebula, a Hubble Telescope observation:

CAT'S EYE NEBULA AS SEEN BY HUBBLE
THE FIERY OBSERVER

A British WWII poster that was proposed but never implemented, felt to be redundant as the British Commonwealth member was inherently thought to have this attitude, therefore to post it might impact the enemy more than the British people.  They might see us as weak and fearful, a trait Winston Churchill proclaimed he had never observed in any subject of His Royal Highness (King George IV).

But it is a mantra for today, that I try to live by:

TEACH YOUR CHILDREN WELL
WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU AND
OUR STUDENTS TO EXCEL

The choice of standards not going to be yours, the outcome confounded by factors that are not in your hands and the outcome of a bad evaluation could be devastating.  But just as teaching students to pass a test is not teaching so is teaching for an evaluation not being an expander of minds  This class, if it represents the majority of educators that will enter NM as teachers, has an enthusiasm and motivation to find ways to teach needed material, excite their students to learn and engage and be their advocate. 


Addenda- also in the House and Senate are Retention Bills that formally address retention:  I suggest reading
 HB 53
This bill speaks to protocol for retention and puts the onus on the teacher to identify these students.  Additional submissions on retention are below and can be viewed by looking up bill number at New Mexico Bill Finder
just click legislation and then click bill finder, you can search by number or by word search.

HB 54 Limit School Retentions Through Intervention (Identical bill to HB 69 and SB 96)
HB 69 Limit School Retentions Through Intervention (Identical bill to HB 54 and SB 96)
SB 50 Limit School Retentions Through Remediation (Identical to HB 53)
SB 96 Limit School Retentions Through Interventions (Identical bill to HB 54 and HB 69)