Press "Enter" to skip to content

HB 1234 Teacher Evaluation Work Group Holds First Meeting

The Teacher Evaluation Work Group created by Governor Dennis Daugaard's not-yet enacted education reform bill met last week, June 12 and 13, in Pierre. In one of the few positive signs to come out of the tar and feathers of HB 1234, the TEWG and the other work groups thus far named appear to be taking a wholly public approach to their work. Participants are viewing the meetings as open, and we can expect the Department of Education to post minutes online, so there are at least no secrets about what havoc these groups will help foist upon our schools.

Recall that the Teacher Evaluation Work Group's raison d'être is to develop the teacher evaluation and rating system that HB 1234 mandates that all school districts use starting in the 2014-2015 school year. The referral drive against HB 1234 will have no impact on the Teacher Evaluation Work Group's development of this tool. Even if we put HB 1234 on hold and kill it on the November ballot, the Department of Education wants this state teacher evaluation model on record as a minimum standard or model that schools can choose to follow. The TEWG will meet again July 23-24, then twice more to finalize work by November and report to the Legislature by December, regardless of whether the legal mandate for said work and report withstands referendum.

The only thing that the defeat of HB 1234 may change about the model evaluation instrument is the weight given to quantitative data and test scores. I suspect that change will come because the educators in the room recognize that giving so much weight to test scores in evaluating both teacher and student performance is a flawed, toxic policy that only feeds the privatizing corporate beast. Giving the TEWG that freedom to improve the teacher evaluation model is reason enough to repeal HB 1234.

Quantitative tests will figure somehow into the evaluation formula. HB 1234 requires that teachers of English, math, and science in grades 3-8 and 11 be evaluated on the basis of the state-mandated Dakota STEP tests. To evaluate teachers in other fields and grades, districts must approve some other quantitative assessment.

Consider what that means for me. As the French teacher at Spearfish High School, I am the only district staff member capable of putting together any sort of French language assessment, not to mention score it. Spearfish could allow me to write and score the tests that will determine my evaluation and my pay. But the math and English teachers next door don't get that privilege. To protect their rating and pay, they have to teach to a test whose questions and answers they don't get to see or score.

Now I happen to think I can write a more authentic and challenging assessment of French speaking, listening, reading, and writing skills than any bubble test Pearson and the Dakota STEP may throw at my kids. But how many of you think I can? More importantly, how many of you trust me to do so when an easy test producing high student scores might boost my pay?

If my kids' scores on a French test I write earn me a distinguished rating and $5000 in merit pay, but one of my math or English colleagues sees kids sandbag the mandatory Dakota STEP and thus misses out on a top rating and bonus, there may be blood. To prevent a riot at the next teacher meeting, my administration will have a strong motivation to buy external French tests... and history tests... and art tests... and PE tests... and tests for every other field and every other grade not covered by the Dakota STEP.

There is some discussion of incorporating ACT, SAT, AP, and IP scores, but no one knows yet if Pierre will permit schools to include that data in teacher evaluations.

The TEWG doesn't get to decide how often we will test students to produce the quantitative data we need to make the state-mandated teacher evaluation scheme work. The Governor said in January that he wants standardized tests for all students three times a year, pre-, mid-, and post-tests to show student growth. Economically, schools and the state may have to settle for post-tests.

The Teacher Evaluation Work Group is one of three groups meeting to put the policies of HB 1234 into practice, whether we the voters want them or not. Each group has a webpage and a DoE contact person. If you want to know and perhaps have input on what's coming to your school, contact those folks and tell them what you think:

Related: Don't blame the committee members; they're just good folks from around the state with a lot of different views about HB 1234, trying to serve their community and make the best lemonade they can. But Diane Ravitch reminds us that HB 1234 is part of a nationwide wave of "reforms" that stand opposed to democracy, not to mention good educational practice.

15 Comments

  1. Donald Pay 2012.06.17

    If the underlying bill is not enacted, under what authority are the work groups and advisory council meeting? How can state funds be expended for something that is not legally authorized?

  2. Stace Nelson 2012.06.17

    @Donald welcome to Pierre! You keep asking questions like that and the (former) Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader will be calling out additional security (that the governor's office claims was never authorized or happened) and concocting lies to the newspapers that you threatened to kill Nick Moser. :-D

  3. Donald Pay 2012.06.17

    Yeah, I know about Pierre, but this is far in excess of what even Janklow tried to get away with. Daugaard seems to have assumed powers he doesn't have. I'm not sure these people can be appointed legally.

    If I were on any of those work groups I would want some legal opinion about what my liability and authority is. Do they have to take an oath? I think I saw that meetings are being held under open meetings laws, but what about open records?

  4. Donald Pay 2012.06.17

    I ask about open records because educational and educational consulting companies often claim they have proprietary interest in their software. They aren't going to open that up to these work groups and their staff probably at all, but if they did it would require some sort of confidentiality agreement. Thus, there would be no way for the public to validate anything they say.

  5. Mike Larson 2012.06.18

    You provide good analysis, but I think it leads into the whole putting HB1234 up for vote by the general public as a bad idea. I fear it may become another Scott Walker moment. By placing it on the general election ballot, you will have a lot of people who don't really understand what it does voting for it, or they will vote for it because they believe this is not the way to deal with things. Then if it fails, you have the supporters of destroying public education being able to contend that they have a strong public support (when they really don't because people are voting for something with which they don't understand the impact it will have to their kids lives or their life.

    The State's reply to any recall of the bill will be plain and simple. "We are just starting this process. Why are the teachers afraid of change? We will listen to the public and produce what you want. Give us a chance to make this law better."

  6. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.18

    I don't think the Walker analogy works here. South Dakotans' default setting on referenda is that if they don't understand it, they vote no. We can still win on the "make it better" argument by saying, "We are giving you a chance to make it better. Repealing this law doesn't stop you from proposing a better law in two months when the 2013 Legislature meets. We're saying get rid of the bad law and do it right next time."

  7. Mike Larson 2012.06.18

    This is exactly what I am worried about. Dauggard will make this a war against the evil teacher union and his administration that cares about good teachers and establishing good school.

    Gov. Dennis Daugaard also issued this statement at 11:35 a.m. concerning the referral of HB1234:“I’m not surprised that the Teacher Bonus Bill was referred because the teachers’ union put a lot of work into collecting signatures. I look forward to furthering the discussion with the people of South Dakota on this very important topic. The bill is aimed at improving student achievement by channeling extra money directly to our best teachers and phasing out teacher tenure.”

    http://news.sd.gov/newsitem.aspx?id=13087

  8. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.18

    Yup. Governor Daugaard will do exactly that. We will need to find a bunch of people who are good at leading conversations and explaining complicated issues to help people understand what's really happening. Know any folks like that?

  9. Donald Pay 2012.06.18

    Here's the campaign. This isn't about teachers, so don't have teachers out front on this. It's about students and incompetence in Pierre. Put parents, students out front against the bumbling idiots in Pierre.

    This is, after all, a Pierre power grab. It's Pierre-based educrats and high-priced out-of-state education consultants taking more power away from parents and local officials, as they siphon more money from the classroom and into gadgets and contracts for politically connected education lobbyists. If South Dakota education is so bad, it is precisely because these educrats have been running education into the ground for thirty years. And now they want to lay blame on people other than themselves, because they have failed.

  10. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.18

    Listen to Donald, SDEA! (Hey, Donald, does that mean I need to quit blogging about it? ;-) )

  11. Steve O'Brien 2012.06.18

    Governor Daugaard had the opportunity to persuade legislators on the actual merits of 1234 - on that he failed. Then using party politics and political arm twisting, he was able to force in exactly the voted needed to pass the house. Why would I assume the people of SD will be more persuaded by the Governors wrong-minded rhetoric than many members of his own party were in Pierre?

    If 1234 had been a landslide victory I could see some of the points made here - especially the analogy to the Walker recall - being relevant, but this was pure politics in the final vote. Now the 1234 has to stand on its own merits, and in defending in on those terms, I think the Governor has an up-hill battle.

    The evaluation work group is also an outgrowth of work from a year ago and I think the DOe can independently work to create a good teacher evaluation tool. The implementation of the tool as a singular tool for every district is the 1234 onus on the group.

    Where else but our state legislature would we accept reasoning that says, "this is bad - let's do it (and fix it later)." My radical proposal is this: pass only into law things believed to be good. If something is not good, fix it BEFORE enacted into law. To me, that seems more reasonable.

  12. Mike Larson 2012.06.19

    I agree with Donald too. If I set out to make a huge fight over this, then I am just the guy fighting to take tax-payer money. The voice of the business person, the voice of the retired farmer drinking coffee, and the voice of the parent talking about the reasons to reject this bill are the most powerful tool available.

    The battle lines will be with Tea party thinking people that think it is as simple as controlling the big bad unions that are trying to destroy our children and the American way of life. They fail to listen to reason and go with what they want to be true.

    In District 16, I e-mailed all of our Congresspeople. I heard from Jim Bolin (R) who has experience as a teacher and spoke out against this bill and voted it down every time. I also heard from Patty Miller that said in her cracker-barrel meeting that she would in no way vote for this bill. Her response after she voted for it was that many people thanked her for her vote. (I ignored all of the misspelled words.) I never heard from Senator Lederman.

    The idea that came out of it was, what does Jim Bolin know. I know more than him.

  13. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.19

    At the same time, as I walked petitions around Spearfish and Madison telling people about HB 1234 and apologizing for giving such a short summary of a really complicated bill, a number of people said to me something like, "You're a teacher, so I trust what you say about this bill. If you say it's bad, it's bad."

    Having slept on it, I wonder: if we take Donald's advice, are we succumbing to, or perhaps even reinforcing, the attitude the teachers aren't professionals, aren't the key experts to be listened to when forming education policy?

  14. Donald Pay 2012.06.19

    Well, sure, there usually is a lot of respect for teachers. Most people like their children's teachers, and think they do an excellent job. But putting on a teacher to pat themselves on the back is not the same as having a student or a parent do the same thing.

    The bill really isn't a South Dakota product. The concepts of the bill are imported from out-of-state. The size and scope of this bill usually come about through a legislative study. This just pop up from model legislation from some undisclosed think tank. It's really anti-South Dakota in its origin.

    Maybe there are places in this country (inner city schools) where something like this bill would deserve consideration. But it's a pretty drastic step to take in a state where education is pretty darn good.

  15. Carter 2012.06.19

    The problem I see in that is dedications. Cory's incredibly dedicated to the cause. Parents may be concerned about it, too, especially if teachers talk to them about it. Like you've said, Donald, parents trust teachers and think they're doing an excellent job. If teachers don't bring up HB 1234 to them, parents in general may very well just let it slide by, trusting that it's the right thing, since teachers aren't very upset about it.

    I think trying to get students to do it is something of a lost cause. You might find a handful that are willing to petition, sure, but how many high school students do you know that would give up countless hours over the summer to campaign about an issue when they could be out on the lake, or at the pool, or something?

    Plus, you have the additional problem that the students who have the most to lose are the younger ones, who mostly can't really understand the bill. Some juniors and seniors might, but they don't really have the same risk. When they're done in a year, anyway, they have much less concern about what happens in the school.

    I do like your idea about getting parents to get out there and campaign. Maybe it would even get Daugaard to shut up about his Illuminati-like Teachers' Union (Cory, if you join, I think you get a fancy costume with a mask. Maybe they'll even let you sacrifice a goat!!). If parents campaign alongside teachers, I think it will show that there's concern for it from all areas, not just one or the other.

    The students idea is good, too, but like I said about, I don't think it would be terribly successful, and it might be time wasted that could be spend getting the word out.

Comments are closed.