As most teachers are aware, USD #453 is listed as a school district that is “on improvement”with the Kansas Department of Education.
Dr. Harris and central office staff are focusing closely on this issue, and we take their efforts seriously and appreciate their desire and the desire of all employees of the district to address this issue.
Reflecting upon statements made several different times by Dr. Harris, however, that “tenure or not,” no teacher is “safe” when a district is on improvement, we decided to research this issue with a bit of scrutiny. We want to make you aware of several facts, provided to us by KNEA and KSDE:
1. The due process (tenure) law, K.S.A. 72-5436 et. seq., does not become null and void when a district goes “on improvement.” Nowhere in any document or statute does it state that districts “on improvement” have the right to ignore the due process law. Due process still applies for non-probationary teachers. Due process means that before a non-probationary teacher can be non-renewed, administration must provide ample evidence that a teacher is not responding to efforts to provide assistance regarding improvement of job performance.
2. There is no statute or regulation to our knowledge that connects a teacher’s job performance to student scores. Lily Kober, our UniServ director, states:
The only statute that references student test scores is the Evaluation statute. The pertinent section is K.S.A. 72-9004. a. “Consideration shall be given to the following employee attributes: Efficiency, personal qualities, professional deportment, ability, results and performance, including improvement in the academic performance of pupils or students insofar as the evaluated employee has authority to cause such academic improvement, in the case of teachers the capacity to maintain control of pupils or students, and such other matters as may be deemed material.”
There is no statute that directly links continuing employment with students making AYP on any standardized test. No Kansas laws have been amended to include NCLB as some part of continuing employment.
The evaluation procedure negotiated by each school district provides the “tool” or “vehicle” by which administration may document a teacher’s failure to perform adequately as a professional. Please read the documents included in USD #453’s Professional Appraisal System closely, so that you are familiar with the process, and understand clearly your responsibilities as a classroom teacher. You can find the Professional Appraisal System posted on the district intranet.
3. Peg Dunlap, KNEA’s Director of Instructional Advocacy, responded to our questions regarding USD #453’s status with KSDE. In part, she states:
According to KSDE information, presented at the August, 2008 State Board meeting, Leavenworth has been on improvement for 2 years for Title 1 purposes because of not making AYP in reading at the district level. [the upcoming school year would be year 3]
For the 2008-9 school year, 19 Title 1 districts were on improvement [all but 1 KS USD receive Title 1 funds]. Of those, 3 were for the 1st year, 5 in the second year, 7 were in the third year, 4 were in the 5th year. As you can tell from the length of time that some USDs have been on the list, and the fact that they’re still operating, and in some cases, getting MORE money to help them, nothing evil will happen to Leavenworth.
Districts on improvement had to submit an improvement plan to KSDE. That plan is a matter of public record, and you should request a copy from your superintendent to see what was submitted to KSDE.
On improvement means that for 2 or more years, the district has not met AYP goals. No individual schools in Leavenworth are on improvement. The district getting the designation is the result of aggregating all the building data. What happens is that sub-groups don’t have enough students to “count” at the building level but get enough to “count” when aggregated at the district level. It’s statistical.
Because of that kind of aggregation, districts often get identified for situations that are beyond their control. That said, if there are groups of students who are not progressing as they should, it is worth discussing why, and how that situation can be remedied. Is it the curriculum? Is it instruction? Is it parent participation and support? It’s often a combination of all those elements. It can also be the result of NCLB requirement for testing that are out-of-touch with reality, as for some special education students.
Any district has the right, and responsibility, to ensure that teachers are meeting expectations and teaching effectively. Most districts do that through the evaluation system. One thing for LNEA to consider is working with the district to ensure that the evaluation system, which is pretty new, as I remember, is being used appropriately.
We will secure a copy of the district’s improvement plan, and will try to post specific information on GoogleDocs regarding all districts and buildings on improvement in the state, so that you can see Leavenworth relative to other districts in the same kind of situation.
We encourage all staff, regardless of our standing with KSDE, to work diligently to improve scores. Especially now we all have a common desire for our district to join the ranks of those districts who are consistently making AYP in reading and math.
As always, please contact us with any questions you may have.
No comments:
Post a Comment