Senate Bill 402 (Ratified): Understanding Teacher Contracts and the Selection of 25% of Eligible Teachers to Receive Four-Year Contracts with

Monetary Implications

Alvera J. Lesane, Ed.DJed Stus

Ethan ToddDecember 2013

Suggested Norms• Our spirit celebrates all teachers• We accept the charge of doing our best work

creating a 25% contract plan• We will listen as allies• We will save space for different thoughts• We will be flexible as information comes that may

change our course of action• After considering all options, we will work together

to produce a collaborative plan

SB 402 (Ratified) Basics• No tenure for those who did not have it in 2012-2013• Tenure eliminated for all on July 1, 2018• One-year contracts offered to those with < three years

experience• Superintendent evaluates all with three+ years experience by

June 30, 2014– Recommend 25% rated proficient or higher for four-year

contracts effective July 1, 2014 and include $500 annual increase

– BOE can adjust 25% pool offered 4 year contracts– Contracts may be 1, 2 or 4 years (2 and 4 yrs reserved for

those rated prof.)• Current due process retained, except:

– No written reason required to nonrenew admin and classified staff

– Hearing officer review process eliminated– Judicial appeal eliminated for all except teachers

• Ends tenure for grandfathered principals (retain 2 and 4 year contracts)

Local decisions, planning and review of teacher performance and evaluation in preparation for issuance of contracts

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Today

Permanent elimination of career status for all career status teachers (Full repeal of old GS 115C-325)

6/30/2018

New laws regarding new teacher contracts, suspensions, dismissals, demotions, hearings before the BOE and appeal rights (excludes teachers electing to maintain career status)7/1/2014

Deadline for all 4-year contracts to be made and accepted6/30/2014

SBE to provide a model contract to LEAs1/1/2014

No new awards of career status8/1/2013

9/1/2013 - 5/1/2014

TIMELINE

One –Time Event (affecting next 4 years)

Timeline - Phase 2(July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2018)

By June 30, 2014… 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018

25% of all teachers with 3+ years (w/ $40,000 salary incentive example)

$40,500 $41,000 $41,500 $42,000

Teachers with Career Status who do not receive 4-year contract

Teachers without Career Status who do not receive 4-year contract

FOUR-YEAR CONTRACT(must relinquish tenure)

ONE-YEAR CONTRACTCONTINUED CAREER STATUS

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

Timeline - Phase 3(effective July 1, 2018)

By June 30, 2014… 2014-2015

2015-2016

2016-2017

2017-2018 2018-2019

25% of all teachers with 3+ years (w/ $40,000 salary incentive example) $$$$$

$40,500 $41,000 $41,500 $42,000

1. No Career Status2. Three types of contracts:

• One-year• Two-year• Four-year

3. Little guidance on salary implications with intent of implementing pay for performance based on effectiveness (GS 115C-83.11 Section 9.5)

Teachers with Career Status who do not receive 4-year contract

Teachers without Career Status who do not receive 4-year contract

FOUR-YEAR CONTRACT

CONTINUED CAREER STATUS

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

ONE YEAR CONTRACT

Future Intention?• Section 9.5 of SB 402

“When a robust evaluation instrument and process that accurately assesses and evaluates the effectiveness of

teacher, especially in the area of student growth, is wholly implemented in North Carolina, it is the intent of the

General Assembly that the evaluation instrument and process be utilized in the implementation of a plan of

performance pay for teachers in this State.”

Definition of a “Teacher”• As defined by NC GS 115C-325(a)(6), “teacher” includes:

- Classroom teachers and instructional support personnel- With a standard professional or vocational license- Who are employed to fill fulltime, permanent position

• According to NCDPI’s Policy manual (14.2.3), the following positions are eligible for career status:- Audiologists - Classroom Teachers- Guidance Counselors - School Psychologists- School Social Workers - Speech Language Pathologists- CTE Teachers - Media Coordinators

- Coaches (i.e. IFs, Blended Learning, AIG)

CALCULATING THE 25%

Total eligible classroom teachers 926Total eligible other “teachers” 141

------------------------------------------------------------------Total eligible teachers 1067

x 25%---------

Teachers eligible to be offered 4-year contract 266

TEACHER CAUTIONS• Teacher Turnover• Teacher Growth Process

– New Teachers– Experienced Teachers

• Threats to Collaboration• Impact on Morale• Potential to create Divisiveness• Future Use = Pay for Performance

What do we want?

Defining our Approach

Approach Designed for

UsCurrent Enacted Provisions of SB402

Future Implications from the Law

Model for the State

Empowerment through Teacher

Voices

What are we challenged to accomplish?In response to SB402, the Teacher of the Year Forum was tasked with helping the superintendent decide the parameters which define the 25%, including:• Approach• Criteria• Prioritization of the Criteria

 

APPROACH• Quantitative by District• Quantitative by Site• Qualitative• Hybrid

– Rubric• And the winner is … Hybrid by Site/Support Area

Criteria Overview• Criteria for consideration:

– Evaluation data– EVAAS– Leadership– Advanced Degrees/National Board Certification– Attendance– Seniority/Longevity– Discipline– Collaboration

EVALUATIONPROS• Evidence-Based• Related to Performance

CONS• Inter-rater reliability among

administrators and sites• Large pool of eligibility based

on ratings (i.e. proficient, accomplished and distinguished)

• Differences in full and abbreviated evaluation cycles

• Support Staff– Different evaluation instruments– Differences in implementation

• One year vs. multiple years

EVALUATION DATAStatewide Eligibility for Four-Year Contract

Eligible(Proficient or better on NCEES 1-5)

Not Eligible(At least one below proficient rating on

NCEES 1-5)

89,288Teachers

3,321Teachers

96.41%

3.59%

*** Figures do NOT exclude teachers who have been in the district less than 3 years and, therefore, are not eligible for a 4-year contract.

Category # of Teachers Percentage

Not Eligible 3321 3.59%

Eligible – Proficient(at or above) 45512 49.14%

Eligible – Accomplished(at or above) 38174 41.22%

Eligible - Distinguished 5602 6.05%

EVALUATION DATAStatewide Eligibility for Four-Year Contract

LEADERSHIPPROS• Opportunity to define

leadership within the I-SS, considering factors such as:

– Assigned position vs. volunteer– Over time vs. one-time event– Peer perspective

CONS• Standardizing the understanding of leadership

• Availability of opportunities for consideration for all

• Individuals may be compensated for the leadership role

• Duplicative as a factor on evaluation instrument

• Effectiveness in the role vs. simply serving in the role

• Inter-rater reliability• How to define for support roles• One year vs. multiple years

SENIORITY/LONGEVITYPROS• Can assist with retention

efforts• Objective criteria• Highlights commitment to

I-SS

CONS• No clear connection to

performance• District vs. school site

Failure to consider could impact more seasoned teachers

DISCIPLINEPROS• Easy to rate based on

district personnel file• Employee must be aware

CONS• One year vs. multiple years• Identify discipline issues to

include• Consistency across district

(what is documented)• Changes in administration

EVAASPROS• Measures teacher impact

(student growth)• Related to Performance

CONS• Data not currently available

for everyone• One year vs. multiple years• May not work as well to

select from the entire eligibility pool (perhaps second level qualifier)

• Lack of understanding regarding EVAAS and how it is determined

• Impact of varied and increasing class sizes on teacher performance

ADVANCED DEGREES/NATIONAL BOARD CERTIFICATION

PROS• Easy to measure• Indicates commitment to

continual learning• Provides opportunities to

share knowledge within educational environment

CONS• No clear connection to the

performance• Inequities due to recent lack

of compensation and financial constraints

• Contradicts intent of General Assembly

ATTENDANCEPROS• Connection to student

performance• Would not include

acceptable leave (i.e. FMLA)

CONS• One year vs. multiple years• May not work as well to

select from the entire eligibility pool (perhaps second level qualifier)

• Determining an acceptable absence vs. and unacceptable absence

COLLABORATIONPROS• Assists with the

maintenance of collaborative efforts built over time in I-SS

CONS• Difficult to measure for

teachers without a subject or school-based PLC

Our ability to collaborate is at the center of everything we do for students. Our key successes as a district are related to our

ability to collaborate.

CRITERIA PRIORITIZATION• Potential First Level Criteria

– Evaluation data (56)– Leadership (136)– Seniority/Longevity (161)– Collaboration (162)– Discipline (168)

• Potential Second Level Criteria– EVAAS (180)– Advanced Degrees/National Board Certification (208)– Attendance (224)

Next StepsAction Item TimelineAdminister online tool for teacher feedback on contract options

Jan – Feb

Receive BOE approval for teacher contract options

Feb

Develop rubric for eligible teacher evaluation

Jan – Mar

Administer rubric to principals and process feedback

Jan – Mar

Offer four-year contracts to identified candidates

Apr – May

Finalize contract offers May

Provide final report to principals and BOE

June

Action Item TimelineOrient the BOE to process Nov

Convene “Teacher” of the Year Forum

Nov – Jan

Conduct meetings and post online resources

Nov – Feb

Develop a contract template Dec – Jan

Submit teacher contract options and template to attorney

Jan

Obtain feedback from BOE on teacher contract options

Jan

Create online tool for teacher feedback on contract options

Jan

Create intent form for eligible Nov – Jan

QUESTIONS AND ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK