Regents Wrestle with Teacher Evaluation Law

The state education department released its recommendations for fine-tuning recent changes to the state’s teacher evaluation law, along with ways for districts to apply for short-term waivers from the law based on hardships.

The law that was passed by the legislature earlier this spring was intended to make it tougher for teachers to get high ratings, after the governor complained that fewer than 5 percent of teachers statewide were ineffective.

Teacher evaluations still rely on a combination of student test scores and classroom observations, but there are several tweaks in the law. For one thing, it required teachers to be observed by someone outside of their school, in addition to their principal. This prompted many complaints from school districts that it would become too expensive and time-consuming.

The state education department is now recommending that independent evaluations should only count for 20 percent of the teacher’s overall observation. Ken Wagner, the state’s senior deputy commissioner for education policy, said this was done “in order to recognize very clearly that the principal is the instructional leader of the building.” Many had worried their authority would be diminished.

He also said the independent observers could watch video recordings of classroom lessons, to shorten the amount of time spent on travel if schools are spread far apart. The New York State School Boards Association had made similar recommendations and was pleased.

But the state ignored recommendations from New York City around scoring teacher observations. For example, the union had recommended that an overall score of 88 would be enough for a teacher to get a rating of highly effective on his or her observation, while New York City recommended a score of 94. The state chose 90.

Wagner said changes could still be made before the Regents vote on the teacher evaluation package in June.

There are other controversial pieces in the recommendations. The new evaluation law is supposed to go into effect in November. Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch had said school districts should have until next September if necessary, prompting Gov. Andrew Cuomo to say waivers should only be granted when absolutely necessary.

The state’s solution is to grant short-term extensions, of two months at a time. “The waiver would not be all or nothing,” said Wagner. “It would be granted in shorter increments to provide incentives for people to continue their good faith attempts to implement the new system.”

The state assembly, however, is preparing to vote on legislation to extend the deadline for all districts until next year.

Some members of the Board of Regents were troubled by the continued reliance on standardized test scores and spoke out against the system, as reported by the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle. Michael Mulgrew, president of the New York City teachers union, said the recommendations “make it clear that the New York State Education Department has not been listening to the voices of thousands of parents and teachers, who have clearly said our schools need less reliance on testing, not more.” Many more parents than usual opted out of this year’s state tests.

When Cuomo proposed changes to the teacher evaluation system this year, he originally wanted student test scores and classroom observations to each count for 50 percent (previously observations counted for more). The legislature wound up approving a matrix system in which teachers who are rated ineffective on either category cannot be rated effective or highly effective overall.

The law allows districts to use a second test if they don’t want to rely solely on those administered by the state. But the recommendations to the Regents say that second test should only count for 20 percent of the overall measure of student growth - which could wind up increasing the weight of the state tests in some districts.

Wagner said this was done to discourage districts from adding more tests. Regardless of how people feel about testing, he said his department had to comply with the new law.

“Those who object to the law can continue to object to the law and propose additional laws,” he said. “But in the meantime we have an obligation to enact regulations under the current law by June 30.”