AFT-WV encourages educators to comment on Policy 5310

Several proposed policies from the WV Board of Education are on public comment, including 5310 -Educator Evaluations. AFT-WV President Christine Campbell addressed the WV Board of Education in May, asking for more time for the Teacher Evalaution Task Force to complete their work and implement the system. Despite this, the BOE voted to put the policy on public comment until June 16.

 Learn how these changes may affect you by reading the outline of concerns below.

AFT-WV encourages all educators to comment on this policy (especially the concerns noted below by AFT-WV)  by using the WVDE's Online Comment Form.

Policy 5310- AFT-WV's Comments & Concerns

1. West Virginia State Law (18A-2-12) requires that the State Board of Education shall adopt a written system of the employment performance of personnel, which shall be applied uniformly by county boards and must be consistent with state law. WVDE policy 5310 does not adhere to these requirements.

1. The proposed policy will require that teachers of tested grades (3-8, 11grades) and teach Reading/Language Arts and Math be required to use two consecutive years of summative assessment data from the state wide assessment.  The teachers who do not teach in the tested grades and subjects of the state-wide assessment shall have 15% of their evaluation based on the use of evidence at two points in time over the instructional term to demonstrate student learning, which is required by WV Code 18A-3C- 2(c). 
2.  Teachers of tested grades and subjects will not be required to develop and submit two learning goals as currently required by WVDE policy 5310 because they will be using data from statewide assessment. Teachers of non-tested grades and subjects will continue to develop and submit yearly student learning goals. 
3. A definition of school-wide growth was also added to the proposed policy, which will require 20% of a teacher’s evaluation based on results of data from the state summative assessment for teachers in tested grades and subjects.  Teachers of non-tested grades and subjects will have 5% of their evaluation based on school-wide growth from the state summative assessment, which is required by all teachers in WV Code 18A-3C-2(2).      

2. Definitions
   1. Progression (p. 3, section 4.18, and subsections 4.18 a-d) – AFT-WV believes substitute teaching should count as experience if these educators are evaluated under Policy 5310. A definition of “substitute experience” should be added to the policy. For example, if a substitute has completed a year(s) of teaching experience and was given a satisfactory rating under 5310, the experience would factor in determining the level of progression.  This is a current practice in a number of counties and would be beneficial to make the practice uniform throughout the state.

2. School -Wide Growth (p.4, section 4.23) is defined in the proposed policy as “an aggregate measure of student growth within a school, based upon results data from the state summative assessment in Reading/Language Arts and Mathematics.” AFT-WV believes this definition to be extremely vague. Defining aggregate measure would clarify data points.

3. Teacher of Record (p.4, section 4.27) is defined as “the educator who is responsible for a significant portion of a student’s instruction time (based on enrollment) within a given subject or course that is aligned to a state assessment; or other relative assessment in grades/subjects that do not have a state assessment.” AFT-WV believes this section of policy is unclear.  How do special educators fit into this definition? WVDE has responded that this would be explained in the Guiding Documents; however the guidelines have not been seen by stakeholders. This should be in policy.

4. WV state code §18A- 3C requires “the use of two pieces of evidence at two points of time over the instructional term to demonstrate student learning as an indicator of educator performance.” Two Points of Time is defined in the policy as “the first point in time shall be the first day of the instructional term.” The baseline is the summative assessment results from the previous year’s test results. This definition is different for teachers not teaching the content and grade levels on the state assessment. The definition for these teachers will be two data points determined within the instructional year in which each educator measures student learning. This is to measure achievement between two points in time. Adequate time, instruction and formative assessment are used to measure, not summative assessment. Hence, this group of educators will be treated differently in the evaluation process.

3. Educator Evaluation (§126-142-9)

1. Section 9.1.b.1 was added to the policy stating “school-wide growth for educators in Pre-K to 3 settings shall match the growth score of the 4^th grade feeder school” without discussion by the task force. Section 9.1.b.2 states “school-wide growth for educators in Career and Technical Education Center settings will be based on the state summative assessment results of the students they serve.” There was no discussion by the Task Force on these two items.

1. The school-wide growth language for educators in Pre-K to 3 and Career and Tech Centers should remain as it is in current policy.  The policy does not account for the students that may not have been served at feeder schools. The proposed policy changes would completely eliminate sections 9.1.b.1 and 9.1.b.2 in current policy.  

4. 9.1.c- The guidelines for calculating growth percentile at the classroom level are based on “meaningful consultation” with the Educator Evaluation Task Force and through a pilot program. Current policy required the guidelines for calculating the student growth percentile to be developed during the 2013-14 school year through meaningful consultation with the task force and also through a pilot program. The January meeting only identified concerns with changes in the policy. The pilot program was not discussed.  The pilot is currently in operation for May-June 2014 and only includes 15 schools.  This is inadequate time to conduct a pilot that will effectively gauge the successfulness or potential problems. The pilot will actually still be in progress if the state board votes to put this out on public comment at the May meeting.   Policy 5310 pilot programs implemented by the WVDE have typically run for one full school year.

5. Section 9.5.b states the growth measures must include a minimum effective size of 10 students. The policy does not specify the procedure if a teacher has less than ten students. What measures are used in this case?

6. In regards to roster verification, when will the teachers be given adequate time to complete this requirement?  A middle or high school content teacher (of a tested subject area) may have as many as 150 students on their class roster for verification.   

7. 9.6.d-   In regards to online learning teachers, how can the Board hold a teacher, who supervises a credit recovery class, accountable for student growth (15% of their evaluation) if they do not instruct but only supervise these students on the computers?                                    

8. Plans to Support Continuous Improvement (§126-142-10)
   1. The last sentence of section 10.1.b.2 states “the area of unsatisfactory performance guides the choice of evidence within a Corrective Action Plan that may include observation if appropriate.”  This should be changed to “shall include observation.”
   2.  

10.1.b.1-  This section should be changed to require a minimum of two observations with conferences (after each observation) be included in a corrective action plan. In current policy, it is only a recommendation to include observations.                                                     

9. Evaluation Process for Teachers (§ 126-142-13)
   1. Section 13.7 – The last sentence of the section reads, “An evaluator may request goals be modified.” This was never discussed at the task force meetings. An identical statement is contained within the section regarding the evaluation process for counselors (§126-142-15.4.) There is also no timeframe in proposed policy for evaluators to modify the goals.

10. Summary Points

1. This policy is not ready for public comment.  There are discrepancies with current state law and much of the policy is vague. Additionally, there is a tremendous amount of reference by the WVDE to the “Guidance Documents” that will be provided to county boards upon implementation of this policy.  However, these documents are not available to any stakeholder at this time. AFT-WV believes it would be premature for the WV Board of Education to pass a policy so heavily dependent on “Guidance Documents.” The Board should not put this policy on comment, but rather continue to work on revising Policy 5310 through the task force. 
2. The previous pilots have run for one school year. The current pilot needs to be in place for at least the same period of time to get an accurate measure of progress.
3.  There was not adequate consultation and discussion with the task force concerning the change of student learning goals for teachers in tested subjects and tested grades.