In a stunning reversal,the Tennessee Legislature overwhelmingly repealed a law to evaluate teachers by test scores, and the law was swiftly signed by Governor Haslam. On a day when Arne Duncan withdrew Washington State’s failure to enact test-based teacher valuation system, this is a remarkable turn of events.
Joey Garrison of The Tennessean reports:
“Gov. Bill Haslam has signed into law a bill that will prevent student growth on tests from being used to revoke or not renew a teacher’s license — undoing a controversial education policy his administration had advanced just last summer.
“The governor’s signature, which came Tuesday, follows the Tennessee General Assembly’s overwhelming approval this month of House Bill 1375 / Senate Bill 2240, sponsored by Republicans Rep. John Forgety and Sen. Jim Tracy, which cleared the House by a unanimous 88-0 vote and the Senate by a 26-6 vote.
“That marked a major repudiation of a policy the Tennessee Board of Education in August adopted — at Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman’s recommendation — that would have linked license renewal and advancement to a teacher’s composite evaluation score as well as data collected from the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System, which measures the learning gains of students.
“The bill to reject the policy had been pushed chiefly by the Tennessee Education Association, the state’s largest teachers’ organization, which engineered a petition drive to encourage Haslam to sign the legislation despite it passing with large bipartisan support.
“Huge, huge win for teachers,” the TEA wrote on its Twitter page, thanking both bill sponsors as well as Haslam for “treating teachers as professionals.”
“Eyeing a 2015 implementation, the state board in January had agreed to back down from using student learning gains as the sole and overriding reason to revoke a license. Composite evaluation scores, in which 35 percent is influenced by value-added data, were to centerpiece.”
********************
Two interesting points here: one, Duncan has been hailing Tennessee as a demonstration of the “success” of Race to the Top, in which test-based evaluation of teachers is key. What happens now?
Second, state Commissioner Kevin Huffman is so unpopular that anything he supports is likely to be rejected. His enemies hope he doesn’t leave Tennessee because whatever he recommends generates opposition, even among his allies.
Diane,
I have been waiting for you to comment on the news in NC. Have you heard? Please let us know what you think.
Sincerely, Julie Nussman Parent – CMS Schools Charlotte, NC
http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/04/24/3807903/nc-committee-recommends-replacing.html
http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/04/24/3808127/large-nc-school-districts-back.html
Julie, I am no fan of Common Core but the thought of standards written by the current crop of politicians is frightening.
Our State Board of Ed is not the ALEC infested crew that our General Assembly is. I think this is good news; it makes me feel American again. As a mother of a young child just starting our schooling path, this is what I have been waiting to hear.
A friend from Greece who attended my alma mater in NC told me that in 1991, he was advised not to come to NC because we are racist and very religious. But he did, and he loved the school. We will make it through this. The Common Core is a little too far left for the comfort level of many parents in our state. And as for prevailing ideas that are a little too far right, we can get that in check.
Again, I think this is good news and I am a North Carolinian. (What appeals to us might not be what appeals to folks from the north who were not raised in the Bible Belt). I come from a long line of preachers. We need our place, too. Somewhere safe where we can thrive as who we are too. That’s why we are America. That’s why NC is NC–because we don’t look like New York in many many ways (fewer dairy cows, if nothing else).
Modern NC was built on tobacco and we are still figuring out our new identity (beer seems to be bringing some work opportunities). We can be liberal, but we have to be liberal within the realms of who we are as a state. Our own standards are a much better idea, in my opinion.
Quote from the article that worries me:
“Although the bill does delete legislative language referencing Common Core standards, it does not take them out of play right away. Rather, the measure would create an Academic Standards Review Commission to develop standards “tailored to the needs of North Carolina’s students.”
The commission would be part of the state Department of Administration, not the Department of Public Instruction. It would be instructed to finish a first run at revising the standards by 2015, in time for the 2016 legislative session.
The revised standards would go to State Board of Education for approval, but if lawmakers don’t agree with the board’s position, they could override it and enact new standards themselves.”
The part that worries me is this commission who will develop these standards. Who will be a part of this commission? It seems as though we could end up with another mess.
“This bill puts education back where the Constitution says it belongs – in the hands of North Carolina,” said Sen. Jerry Tillman, an Archdale Republican.”
Does he mean the legislators hands? If so, with our current group, that doesn’t mean much.
I still think this is all better than having it come from a federal or national effort.
If you have family business and you have difficult family members, wouldn’t you still rather work out your own family matters than have some high, far-removed standardizing force deciding priorities for you? I would.
It can get worked out—-the good news is, it will get worked out in NC by North Carolinians. Careful not to back into a corner where there are no answers. Having it home is best.
Also, we can’t take them out of play right away. . .that would be catastrophic and a waste of money. Gradual change is fine. . .and realistic.
Well if that family member is a hot mess, and proved repeatedly that they make bad choices concerning our business, I think I would dissolve the business partnership. Think about the education laws this crew has passed.
I wold prefer national standards written by highly qualified individuals vs. standards written by a committee of our legislators choosing. Properly written national standards could give teachers more flexibility than ones written by our fearsome state leaders.
In one of her books, Diane mentioned she worked on developing national standards. They were beaten down early on because, (If my memory serves me) because some people in TX disapproved of the history portion. National standards are not necessarily a bad thing.
I think it’s interesting that the News Observer reporter described the Common Core this way:
“Developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association, the standards are fewer but deeper and attempt to promote more critical thinking and problem solving.”
No mention of Bill Gates’ funding. No mention of the role of Achieve, funded by big business. No mention of the ACT and the College Board. No mention of all the testing that goes along with the Common Core. And the implicit acceptance of the notion that the Common Core really is all about critical thinking.
The News Observer article points out that if new standards are written in North Carolina, they will be developed by the state board, and by an “Academic Standards Review Commission, made up of political appointees.” Given what the state legislature and governor are like, this can hardly be called a positive change.
Moreover, the president of the state teachers association seems to be siding with the Common Core.
to quote David Byrne: “Same as it ever was….”
I love how the reporters always say that there are “fewer” standards. The are far more “standards” than we had originally in my state. So much for “fewer, deeper” standards.
I teach in Tennessee. This piece of legislation is welcome news. I wonder what is going to replace it? Are our evaluations going to be based solely on observations? There is so much subjectivity in these, despite a massive rubric. Some principals follow the rubric to the core, while others take substantial shortcuts. Some teachers are evaluated extensively, while others basically get a drive-by evaluation. This can occur in the same building.
Yes, same in CT. Proficient vs. Exemplary is a roll of the dice. It varies from evaluator to evaluator from building to building in the same district. All are staying focused on the kids while going through the motions.
Jeeze, so much breaking news! I can’t keep up!
I keep trying to wrap up my Weekly Update and then Diane sends out another breaking news item!
Keep ’em comin’!
Dora
Dora,
Washington State will be Arne’s Waterloo.
I sure hope so.
He was in our state recently trying to convince our Governor that he should get with the program.
The Governor might have been swayed but our stalwarts in Olympia were not.
Dora
Thanks for this good news – I look forward to see what the Obama Administration does as well. I just posted this comment about Washington state on Valarie Strauss’ article:
This is not a good sign – I thought the Obama administration was FOR public schools, but I’m beginning to wonder how I ever thought that this was the case. These draconian rules that tie student test scores to teacher evaluations just so that states can get the Federal funding they’ve always received are ridiculous. This is a type of bully tactic that won’t be helpful to Dems around the country this November, and we might just lose the Senate because of moves like this one. How many teachers, parents and grandparents will look at decisions like this one and say, “I might as well stay home in November.” If you’re not a strong public school advocate, then I don’t see you as as a Democrat worth supporting and I don’t vote for a Republican-Lite candidate.
Not only should we not collect data on students through a company like inBloom (thankfully, this has been stopped nationally), but we should totally remove these unnecessary high cost tests from our schools. Repeal and Replace them with authentic assessments which are collections of actual student work throughout the year, not just on one day. This could be done through technology based portfolios on DVDs or on-line which could be available to parents at any time. If the family moved, these portfolios could easily follow the students and be given to the new school for perusal. High Stakes Testing is NOT teaching and does not lead to a well rounded student or an informed citizenry. Turn this around quickly, President Obama, or you will have dubious honor of being known as the president that dismantled Public Education in America.
It is getting so hard to figure out who is on our side and who is not. Here we have a democratic president, with an Education Secretary that is an anathema to public school teachers. And now in Tennessee republicans are siding with teachers to question the value of using tests for evaluations. Politics sure make for strange alliances!
The Tennessee Republicans were answering to the Tennessee people, and the Washington State Democrats were answering to the Washington people. I think the timelines might be related, even.
State legislators who are facing their voters have realized Arne Duncan’s money doesn’t vote (and neither does DFER’s, or ALEC’s).
I hope public school parents figure out that any politician who tells you that they agree there is an over-emphasis on testing and at the same time tells you it is absolutely essential that teachers are ranked on test scores is either an idiot or is lying.
They can’t say they intend to reduce the reliance on test scores after creating this elaborate web of consequences and sanctions and metrics that rests on test scores. That doesn’t make any sense. They can’t get to # 2 (less reliance on test scores) without going back to #1 (everything rests on test scores). They have to start at #1.
Well said Chmtchr
I like the fast turn around. I hope that pattern takes off. Reverse these bad policies quickly.
This law makes it impossible for us to lose our teaching license if we have low scores–we are still evaluated on the TEAM model- but they can’t strip us of our license if we score too low two out of three years. That was the plan.
This law does not remove test scores from our evaluations. This law removed the policy of tying our license to our test scores. We were going to have our license revoked or renewed based on our evaluations. Now, they can’t strip us of our license- at least-even if we are 2’s and 1’s instead of the “perfect 3.”
Would never have predicted this a year ago! So great to read.
Reblogged this on Transparent Christina and commented:
When will Delaware’s GA wake up?
Also- the Tennessean failed to mention the effort from BATs, BEARs, and TREEs. TEA is awesome- many BATs are TEA- and TEA tweeted to BATs- and asked for our help.
I hope this was done because people are recognizing
a. that the tests and VAM are invalid and
b. that extrinsic punishment and reward systems undermine autonomy and motivation and lead to worse, not better, performance and outcomes
At any rate, good news
Good point about Huffman in your remarks… There are people who will not support Haslam if he runs for re-election solely because of Huffman.
If I read this correctly, the bill bans the use of growth data in licensure decisions.
It does change VAM based evaluations for rating teachers, pay, or even firiring.
None of these have to affect certifications.
OMG Peter. Nice catch.
The fact the governor signed it so quickly makes me nervous.
Peter Smyth, I don’t trust anything coming from the governor and legislature in Tennessee, North Carolina, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, to name a few states where the anti-teacher, anti-public school, anti-intellectual forces reign.
In SC the GOP governor has not done so much teacher bashing, perhaps because her kids are in public schools. Trust I a different matter.
The legislature is starting to catch up with TN et. al. And the charge is being led by SE. Paul Thurmond. The last name may sound familiar.
OK, you are sitting in your year-end evaluation session, and you’ve heard from every other teacher in your school that their scores were a full level lower this year than last, and so you know that the central office has leaned on the principal to give fewer exemplary ratings even though your school actually doesn’t have a problem with its test scores and people are doing what they did last year but a bit better, of course, because one grows each year as a teacher, one refines what one did and one never stops learning.
But you know that this doesn’t have anything, really, to do with improvement. It has to do with everyone, all along the line, covering his or her tushy and playing the game and doing exactly what he or she is told. And, at any rate, everyone knows that the tests are not particularly valid and that’s not really the issue at your school because, the test scores are pretty good because this is a suburban school with affluent parents, and the kids always, year after year, do pretty well.
The test scores aren’t the issue. The issue is that by some sort of magic formula, each cohort of kids is supposed to perform better than the last–significantly better–though they come into your classes in exactly the same shape they’ve always come into them in because, you know, they are kids and they are just learning and teaching ISN’T magic. It’s a lot of hard work.
So, the stuff you’ve been told to do in your “trainings” (“Bark. Roll over. Sit. Good Boy”) is pretty transparently teaching-to-the-test because that’s the only way the insane demand that each cohort will be magically superior to the last, as measured by these tests, can be met, but you feel in your heart of hearts that doing that would be JUST WRONG–it would short-change your students to start teaching InstaWriting for the Test Grade 5 instead of, say, teaching writing, for example. And despite all the demeaning crap you are subjected to, you still give a damn.
You get the picture.
cx: his or her, not their, in the first sentence, of course
and cut the “for example” from the penultimate sentence
in the fourth paragraph 🙂
And you sit there and you actually feel sorry for this principal because she, too, is trapped like a fly in amber in the muck that is Education Deform, and she knows she has fantastic teachers who knock it out of the park year after year, but her life has become a living hell of accountability reports and data chats to the point that she doesn’t have time for much of anything else anymore, and now she has to sit there and tell these amazing veteran teachers who have worked so hard all these years and who care so much and give so much that they are just satisfactory, and she feels like hell doing this and is wondering when she can retire.
And the fact that you BOTH know this hangs there in the room–the big, ugly, unspoken thing. And the politicians and the plutocrats and the policy wonks at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and that smarmy no-nothing David Coleman, and the Secretary of the Department for the Privatization of Education, formerly the USDE, and the Vichy collaborators with these people barrel ahead, like so many drunks in a car plowing through a crowd of pedestrians.
cx: that would be, of course, “that smarmy know-nothing David Coleman”
Sometimes, I get so furious about these Deforms and the abuse being heaped on teachers and kids that I type too quickly and hit the Send button and then see, OMG, those egregious, typos and other errors
My apologies
A bit off-thread here, though I AM a TN teacher 🙂 Bob, I enjoy your blog and respect your expertise in English/Language arts and curriculum. I would appreciate your honest opinion about a benchmark test I was required to give today. If you’re agreeable, what would be the best way for me to get that to you? Thanks!
Hi, bookworm23
I would be happy to have a look. You can email me at bobshepherd.praxis@gmail.com
Peter is correct. This law overrules the state board policy regarding licensing decisions. It does not apply to our evaluations for any other purpose. We are still ALL evaluated using VAM whether our course is tested or not.
This is, of course, preposterous… but if I were living in TN and saw the overwhelming vote to get rid of VAM for licensing I’d be heartened and I’d be on the phone to my local legislator asking him or her to expand this to cover evaluations ASAP… and I’d make it an issue in the next election if they voted one way for licenses and another for evaluations… Dr. Sanders must be peeved, eh?
Anyone realize this may not be so forward thinking.. If licenses are pulled, there wouldn’t be enough teachers.
Using VAM in evaluations doesn’t necessarily remove teachers from the force.
I hope this is a first step to sanity. But I doubt it. These are, after all, ALEC puppets.
As a teacher in TN, I’m pleased to see a measure of sanity among the legislature, but until VAM plays no role in teacher evaluations, I won’t be satisfied.
Teachers can always help, but not always cure every child.
When motivation is not intrinsic, teaching to the test becomes teaching to the heart.
Accountability therefore, is the responsibility of everyone.
Actually I think this is a different one about the same thing. This doesn’t explain funding
Sent from my iPad
>
This is huge!!!! Governor Cuomo, are you watching? How can he invalidate the scores for students but still use them for teacher eval? Will he fire all of the special ed and ell teachers whose students will fail the flawed tests? If so, who could replace them???!!!
Cuomo is triangulating. Here’s an alarming little update from the Auburn Citizen
“With all that, Cuomo has since moved away from possibly linking, at this time, test results to teacher evaluations, possibly to secure the NYSUT endorsement. It does leave one big fiscal problem for the governor: Albany may not be able to keep the $700 million it received from Washington, if it doesn’t comply with Common Core requirements. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan can go after states for non compliance, and it sounds as if he is looking for some examples. For Cuomo, that is an issue he can only hope is raised after Election Day.”
http://auburnpub.com/news/opinion/columnists/guy_cosentino/cosentino-a-political-retreat-not-policy-reform-on-common-core/article_2d855e8c-f459-540e-8ece-ba7e938f942b.html
These actions by Tennessee and Washington probably portend that the NY legislature will probably do the same. Cuomo will just be exposed as a coward, whether if he backs down or not on his teacher evaluation insistence.
The alarming suggestion here is that NYSUT’s new leadership might remotely dare to endorse Cuomo in “exchange” for his for making a meaningless “deal” to back down. Was that why this leadership was installed?
I do know that the new leadership of NYSUT pretty quickly organized a “Picket In The Pines” in response to the PHILO Education Deformer’s retreat that will be taking place in the Northern mts. of NY in Early May. I am not sure that the old leadership would have done the same.
Cuomo is as bad anyone on this. Don’t trust him for a second.
Ohio algebra teacher: Cuomo is as bad as a rightwing governor when it comes to teacher-bashing and privatization.
Chemtchr, I promise you that Cuomo will do nothing more than delay implementation until after the election. Then, he will resume his crusade to evaluate teachers by VAM and to enrich charter schools.
Maybe there is hope.
I should have realized this seemed too good to be true. If VAM is still part of the evaluation process, this is a very small advance. Now, if it causes Duncan to rescind a waiver…
Reblogged this on 21st Century Theater.
This IS good news. Unfortunately we in Idaho face similar challenges as Idaho has its own mini Gates Foundation. It’s the Albertson Foundation and in the good old days used to be quite supportive of teachers. Now that the young ones have taken over, they’ve fallen for TFA and privatization, and of course blaming the teachers. One of the big initiatives is “teacher effectiveness”. Our own local indeptendent media sees through it all! http://www.boiseweekly.com/boise/crumbling-foundations-5/Content?oid=3098169
FYI –
This was sent my way from a colleague in Connecticut:
Dear Colleague,
Connecticut has parted company with those who would reduce teaching and learning to a single test score.
Today the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC) voted to recommend the prohibition of the further use of a single, isolated standardized test score in teacher evaluations. The recommendation will be forwarded to the State Board of Education for action.
From cafeterias in our schools to kitchen tables in our communities, this action will be hailed by students, families, and teachers as a significant improvement. It is an improvement that will help all students acquire the skills and knowledge they need to succeed and will promote the joy of learning that sadly has diminished under the weight of an overreliance on testing.
Poll after poll and boycott after boycott around the nation indicate that the public is deeply concerned about the overreliance on testing and data that has consumed our schools. Today’s PEAC action should relieve some of the concern here in Connecticut.
The most significant action taken by PEAC specifies:
One half (22.5%) of the indicators of academic growth and development used as evidence of whether goals/objectives are met shall not be determined by a single, isolated standardized test score, but shall be determined through the comparison of data across assessments administered over time.
Today’s action by PEAC is long overdue, and it could not have happened without the leadership of the executive branch of government, legislative leaders from both sides of the aisle, and other public education stakeholders. In collaboration with CEA, they created a climate that was receptive to improvement and underscored the need for PEAC to revisit teacher evaluation guidelines.
We will continue to advocate for a teacher-led, student-centered public education system, where young people can have high-quality education experiences pre-K through grade 12. While today’s PEAC action is meaningful, we also are counting on legislative passage of the historic Smart Start measure because it is research-based, genuine reform that is guaranteed to close the achievement gap. We applaud legislative leaders, Senate President Don Williams, Speaker of the House Brendan Sharkey, Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, and House Majority Leader Joe Aresimowicz, who have been at the forefront of the pre-K debate and support improving Connecticut’s public schools.
Sincerely,
Sheila Cohen
CEA President
Not sure if this is an improvement. PARCC, for example, requires tests at both the 70% and 90% course completion (with an optional 50% test). Not a single test…and the potential for more tests.
The tone does sound like an improvement, but I’m always hesitant to get excited by these messages.
As a teacher of non-EOC courses, I applaud the legislature in seeing the logic that I should not be held responsible for gains/losses in other teacher’s classrooms!
I think Huffman should be evaluated on the efficiency of another department headed by a different commissioner. Let him see the logic behind it.