IBJNews

Proposal aims to keep students from inadequate teachers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana students wouldn't be stuck with poor-performing teachers for two years in a row under changes House lawmakers are considering to a bill requiring annual teacher evaluations.

Under an amendment that the GOP-ruled House Education Committee discussed Monday, a school district couldn't place a student for more than one year with teachers rated ineffective, the lowest of the four evaluation categories created by the proposal. If school staffing makes it impossible to assign another teacher, schools would have to send a note home with parents letting them know their child will have an ineffective one for a second year in a row.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett, a Republican, said students shouldn't be trapped with poorly-rated teachers year after year.

"If that has to happen, parents should know," Bennett said. "That would allow a parent to say, 'Do I want to take my child to a different school?'"

Committee chairman Rep. Robert Behning, R-Indianapolis, said he expects the committee to vote on the amendment and the changed bill Wednesday. If it clears the committee, it could be up for a vote next week in the full Republican-led House.

The legislation would link teacher pay to student performance. Teachers who fall into the lowest two evaluation categories wouldn't get automatic pay raises. Local districts would create their own evaluations systems but would have to include objective measures of student achievement such as scores on statewide standardized tests.

The merit pay bill is part of Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels' sweeping education agenda. It seems to have more support from Democrats than some of his other proposals, including a contentious proposal to use taxpayer money for private school vouchers.

Rep. Greg Porter, an Indianapolis Democrat who is a co-sponsor of the proposal, said the bill still needs work and he's concerned about the lack of specifics about how evaluations would work.

"There's no real clarity," he said.

Bill opponents fear student performance will make up too much of the evaluations and question whether large schools can handle evaluating teachers every year.

Bill supporter Emanuel Harper, a French teacher at George Washington Community High School in Indianapolis, said teachers crave evaluations. As a first year teacher, he said he's used feedback from his university advisor and his vice principal to improve lesson plans. He said he supports the proposal to prohibit students from being placed with ineffective teachers for more than one year.

"That's a wonderful idea," he said. "Students need to have effective teachers every single year."

The proposed amendment also changes the way teachers are classified. Under the current system, teachers become "permanent" after five years, and they can only be removed from the classroom for certain reasons, including general incompetence. Under the proposed changes, current teachers would be considered "established" instead of permanent, and new teachers would be classified as probationary or professional. Teachers would earn the professional status by getting three evaluations in the top two categories and could fall into probationary status if they receive an ineffective rating.

All teachers could be removed from the classroom if they earn ineffective ratings, though professional and established teachers would have more time to turn around their evaluations before they could be removed.

Behning suggested the ability for teachers to fall from professional status will help motivate them to keep up professional development.

"They can fall back and forth based on their performance," Behning said. "It's an earned situation. It really will require teachers to keep their skills up throughout their career, as opposed to saying, 'I'm here, I can coast.'"

An education group that supports the bill — Stand for Children, a national group with an Indiana affiliate — says the proposals included in the legislation have broad support from most residents. The group paid for a telephone survey of 600 Indiana voters conducted by DHM Research between March 10 and March 14. The poll, with a margin of error of up to plus or minus 4 percentage points, found that more than 80 percent favor annual evaluations for teachers and using student academic growth as a factor in evaluations.

Bennett said the bill should unite Republicans and Democrats who are on opposite sides of other education proposals.

"This is the issue in my opinion that really should bind us all together," Bennett said. "How do we make sure that Indiana children have high quality teachers?"

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Accountability
    It's about time we start to address teacher quality. If a teacher is ineffective, why is he or she even back a second year? Is that an automatic probation? It sure should be. Sorry union....it's time to put quality in front of dues collection.
  • Sigh.
    Marie, grow up. If the children really mattered, teaching would be one of the best-compensated jobs in the country. It would attract the "best and the brightest" because of fierce competition for those salaries. Education spending would be as sacred as military spending. We'd feed our kids better. We'd make sure a good education is widely and economically available. That's what would happen if we really "think of the children first."
  • And then what?
    And when that student moves to an "effective" rated teacher and still falls below the standards, who will be accountable? When do the parents or students - or the socio-economic conditions that ravage the home - take the blame for poor performance?
  • Get rid of the bad teachers
    The Unions must realize this is needed and support it. It is hurting our children to have bad teachers, and they must think of the children first.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
thisissue1-092914.jpg 092914

Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Cramer agrees...says don't buy it and sell it if you own it! Their "pay to play" cost is this issue. As long as they charge customers, they never will attain the critical mass needed to be a successful on company...Jim Cramer quote.

  2. My responses to some of the comments would include the following: 1. Our offer which included the forgiveness of debt (this is an immediate forgiveness and is not "spread over many years")represents debt that due to a reduction of interest rates in the economy arguably represents consideration together with the cash component of our offer that exceeds the $2.1 million apparently offered by another party. 2. The previous $2.1 million cash offer that was turned down by the CRC would have netted the CRC substantially less than $2.1 million. As a result even in hindsight the CRC was wise in turning down that offer. 3. With regard to "concerned Carmelite's" discussion of the previous financing Pedcor gave up $16.5 million in City debt in addition to the conveyance of the garage (appraised at $13 million)in exchange for the $22.5 million cash and debt obligations. The local media never discussed the $16.5 million in debt that we gave up which would show that we gave $29.5 million in value for the $23.5 million. 4.Pedcor would have been much happier if Brian was still operating his Deli and only made this offer as we believe that we can redevelop the building into something that will be better for the City and City Center where both Pedcor the citizens of Carmel have a large investment. Bruce Cordingley, President, Pedcor

  3. I've been looking for news on Corner Bakery, too, but there doesn't seem to be any info out there. I prefer them over Panera and Paradise so can't wait to see where they'll be!

  4. WGN actually is two channels: 1. WGN Chicago, seen only in Chicago (and parts of Canada) - this station is one of the flagship CW affiliates. 2. WGN America - a nationwide cable channel that doesn't carry any CW programming, and doesn't have local affiliates. (In addition, as WGN is owned by Tribune, just like WTTV, WTTK, and WXIN, I can't imagine they would do anything to help WISH.) In Indianapolis, CW programming is already seen on WTTV 4 and WTTK 29, and when CBS takes over those stations' main channels, the CW will move to a sub channel, such as 4.2 or 4.3 and 29.2 or 29.3. TBS is only a cable channel these days and does not affiliate with local stations. WISH could move the MyNetwork affiliation from WNDY 23 to WISH 8, but I am beginning to think they may prefer to put together their own lineup of syndicated programming instead. While much of it would be "reruns" from broadcast or cable, that's pretty much what the MyNetwork does these days anyway. So since WISH has the choice, they may want to customize their lineup by choosing programs that they feel will garner better ratings in this market.

  5. The Pedcor debt is from the CRC paying ~$23M for the Pedcor's parking garage at City Center that is apprased at $13M. Why did we pay over the top money for a private businesses parking? What did we get out of it? Pedcor got free parking for their apartment and business tenants. Pedcor now gets another building for free that taxpayers have ~$3M tied up in. This is NOT a win win for taxpayers. It is just a win for Pedcor who contributes heavily to the Friends of Jim Brainard. The campaign reports are on the Hamilton County website. http://www2.hamiltoncounty.in.gov/publicdocs/Campaign%20Finance%20Images/defaultfiles.asp?ARG1=Campaign Finance Images&ARG2=/Brainard, Jim

ADVERTISEMENT