Clarifying Misconceptions About Governor Malloy’s Education Bill (SB 24)
With all of the coverage of Governor Malloy’s education bill, also known as SB 24, we’ve noticed that there are some misconceptions surrounding the content of the bill and what it actually proposes. Therefore, this is the first in a series of posts that seek to clarify some of the misconceptions and inaccuracies regarding interpretation of Governor Malloy’s Education Reform Bill (SB 24) that we’ve come across.
Unpacking the Governor’s Proposal to Reform Tenure
“And so when I say it’s time we reform teacher tenure, I mean it.”
– Governor Malloy in his State of the State Address, February 8, 2012
We began this week by taking a look at Connecticut’s teacher tenure policies– how they work (or don’t) and why they need to be reformed. Today, we’re going to look at the specifics of Governor Malloy’s plan for reforming tenure, based upon his proposed bill, which is currently being reviewed by the Joint Committee on Education.
A Look at Connecticut’s Current Teacher Tenure Policies
Where Does the Idea of Tenure Come From?
The concept of tenure is rooted in higher education, where it was implemented in order to provide protection to professors so that they could pursue politically charged and controversial research without fear of retribution from their administrations. Then, in 1885, the National Education Association (NEA) began to advocate for tenure in the public school setting – in order to protect a group of state employees who, at that point in history, had few protections: the then-disenfranchised class of college-educated women. Before teacher tenure was established, public schools benefited greatly from the limitations placed on these women – gaining a monopoly on a capable and educated workforce that did not require high wages or high-quality working conditions.
“Let’s speak bluntly: many parts of our system of public education are broken.”
“Let’s be honest with ourselves, and let’s speak bluntly: many parts of our system of public education are broken.”
– Gov. Malloy introduces the topic of education in his State of the State Address
The 2012 Legislative Session is now underway. For those of us who insist time and again that the only way to bring lasting changes to Connecticut is to introduce a portfolio of reforms that link issues of policy, funding and action to the needs and experiences of the students (rather than the adults) – our time is now.
In the past few weeks, Governor Malloy and Commissioner Pryor have unfolded a bold and impressive proposal for education reform that is highly aligned with the recommendations put forth by the Connecticut Commission on Educational Achievement, CCER’s precursor organization, in its 2010 Report. From intensive school turnaround strategies to forward-thinking models of educator preparation, certification, evaluation, compensation, retention, and professional development – we believe the Governor is on the right track. What follows is a discussion of a few of the areas of alignment between CCER’s recommendations and Governor Malloy’s education proposals:
The Vice President of the National Council on Teacher Quality Weighs in on PEAC’s Recommendations and Needed Next Steps
Sandi Jacobs is Vice President of the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ). In January, NCTQ released its fifth annual State Teacher Policy Yearbook, a 52-volume report on the state laws, regulations and policies that shape teacher effectiveness. To download a copy of Connecticut’s report or a national overview report, go to: http://www.nctq.org/stpy11/reports.jsp
Over the last few years, the National Council on Teacher Quality’s (NCTQ) State Teacher Policy Yearbook has chronicled a sea change in teacher evaluation policy. Across the states we’ve seen real movement toward rethinking how to evaluate teacher performance, including by explicitly tying assessments of teacher effectiveness to student results. If the State Board in Connecticut adopts the recommendations of the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC) this month, the state will become the eighteenth state in the nation to include student achievement as a significant criterion in teacher evaluations (in 12 of those states, student achievement is required to be the most significant factor in assessments of teacher performance).
Even as the PEAC recommendations are a step in the right direction, the key will be what steps Connecticut takes to ensure that these evaluation guidelines translate into more effective teachers in classrooms across the state.
Our Thoughts on the Governor’s Call to Simplify Teacher Certification
Rae Ann Knopf, Executive Director of the Connecticut Council for Education Reform
We at the Connecticut Council for Education Reform applaud Governor Malloy for acting swiftly to eliminate unnecessary barriers faced by Boards of Education and Superintendents as they work to place the most effective teachers and principals in our schools. Revising Connecticut's teacher certification and employment policies as Malloy has proposed will facilitate the raising of student achievement by
helping to ensure that we have great teachers and leaders working side-by-side on behalf of Connecticut's children. Similarly, creating
flexibility in support of reciprocity with other states will open the doors for Connecticut schools to attract the best and brightest from across the country. These most recent proposals are highly aligned with many of CCER's 65+ policy recommendations on how to close Connecticut's achievement gap while raising academic excellence for all students. The momentum is truly building for meaningful education reform in Connecticut this year and we salute Governor Malloy and his administration for leading the way.
Commissioner’s Role in Turnaround, Part 2: New Authority Needed
Recently, the Connecticut Council for Education Reform (CCER) highlighted Massachusetts’ five-tiered Framework for District and School Accountability, and explained why it might be a useful model for Connecticut. Given the importance of a clearly defined and effective intervention framework for Connecticut, we’ve asked Jesse Dixon, the Director of the Office of District and School Turnaround in Massachusetts, to share three main takeaways from Massachusetts’ process and success with their school-turnaround plan and intervention framework.
In 2010, the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education began a partnership with nine districts to turn around the Commonwealth’s lowest performing 34 schools. A new law was passed in January that gave flexibilities to superintendents to turn around the schools, but required each school to turn around in three years or face state takeover.
Teacher and Administrator Preparation: Another SBE Opportunity
Did you know research has shown that teacher quality is the most important factor in the academic achievement of students? Or that in 2010, the CT State Department of Education identified an “urgent need” for effective school leaders in the state? Given the importance of teacher and school leader effectiveness, we think it’s time to explore the programs that prepare Connecticut's educators.
Powers of the SBE, Part 3: Student Achievement in Evaluations
The final State Board of Education superpower that we’ll look at for this week is the ability to require that student growth be given significant weight in teacher and principal evaluations.
Now let’s take a time-out to talk about what we mean when we say “student growth” because we know this phrase alarms some interested parties.