“On what planet is that a bad idea?” you ask regarding the use of teacher evaluations ahead of seniority in determining layoffs. (Sunday editorial, “Protect good teachers first.”) Answer: any planet
that has the same system as ours.
I am not defending seniority, I am calling your advocacy of teacher evaluations for employment misguided and no better than the current system.
The public, and probably you, base your belief in evaluations on the “real world” where supervisors hire and fire this way. However, whereas a business supervisor has a personal, financial stake in protecting good workers, principals don’t. Under your proposal, there is no incentive for a principal to keep an outstanding classroom teacher, but is a personal annoyance, and instead is fired.
“… a district facing layoffs, teachers should be retained based on their performance in raising student achievement…” you quote from a poll. Make up your mind. Are you supporting the use of evaluations or student performance? These are two different things. You ridicule anyone not supporting that statement, then go on to set up a straw man by imagining what those people think. Why don’t you find one and ask them?
Allow me; that’s not a good idea either until you come up with a valid test of student performance that controls for variations in income, previous knowledge, special education, attendance, just to get started. At this time, there is no such measurement tool.
Tie principal compensation to teacher performance, which in turn is based on student performance measured by a valid metric, and you’ll have my support.
Jeff Riechel
Snohomish
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
