A five-year federal grant will help RSU 12 introduce a new teacher evaluation model, one that includes incentive pay, in the next school year.
RSU 12 recently received a portion of a Teacher Incentive Fund grant distributed to Maine Schools for Excellence (MSFE) districts, of which it is a participant. The grant will help MSFE schools introduce incentive pay to teachers in high performing school districts.
MSFE districts are attempting to introduce a new teacher evaluation model that offers “regular, specific measurement and feedback; on-going, instructionally focused professional development; fair and sensible recognition and reward.”
“What we hope for this next year is that the system…will align all educators toward a common purpose of improved student learning,” MSFE Project Leader Scott Harrison told the RSU 12 Board of Directors at their monthly meeting Jan. 19.
RSU 12 is one of five districts, comprising 18 schools, 458 teachers, and 5000 students, taking part in the revamped evaluation process. While the grant was awarded in September 2010, RSU 12 just recently became part of the process.
“From a district standpoint you got a late start,” Harrison said to the board.
Harrison said, however, that the late start would allow RSU 12 to follow examples from other participating districts around the state.
A sample performance “scorecard” released by MSFE shows teachers being evaluated in several categories, including student proficiency and improvement in math and reading, graduation rates, and average daily student attendance.
Individual RSU 12 schools have already begun development on their own teacher performance standards. Wiscasset High School, for example, is considering scoring teachers on student SAT scores, on-time graduation rates, dropout rates, and the percentage of students taking advanced studies.
Teachers can earn up to $500 in incentive pay if they meet certain predetermined goals. Goal success is determined at a school level, though Harrison indicated that individual-based performance standards were “on the horizon.”
The scorecard is based on standards set down by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. RSU 12’s model is being developed by a 30-person board with heavy teacher input.
“You’re doing a great job,” Harrison said. “You can’t impose this project, it has to be from the ground up.”
The sample scorecard drew criticism from some board members, who took issue with some of the proposed criteria. Chelsea board member Barbara Swanson attacked the attendance criterion as unfair to teachers.
“Unless you’re giving me the keys to the car to pick up kids for school, then I have a problem,” Swanson said, arguing that student attendance is out of teacher control. “Some groups have worse attendance than others. You’re going to dock me for that?”
RSU 12 Superintendent Greg Potter disagreed, saying that better teachers encourage students to come to class.
Somerville board member Chris Johnson urged caution when considering student attendance in teacher evaluations.
“There’s a difference between those bored at school and those staying home because of economic reasons,” he said. “We should be careful applying a measure like this.”
Johnson said the RSU should examine why attendance is getting better or worse to see if it is an internal or community-based issue.
Other board members feared the teacher evaluation model was being implemented too quickly and without proper consideration.
“Teachers want professional development,” Whitefield board member Joan Morin said, “The issue that I’m hearing though is that [the new evaluation model] is being pushed down their throat. It’s being rushed too fast for them to feel comfortable with this thing.”
Harrison said the teacher evaluation model would be developed with the involvement of as many people as possible, including teachers.
