Tenure & Seniority Discussion Changes to tenure and seniority are occurring nationwide and plans to modify the system are underway in New Jersey as well! Plans in New Jersey to change current tenure and seniority rules build on a proposed educator evaluation system that would rate staff as highly effective, effective, partially ineffective, or ineffective based on a mix of student growth data and evidence of educator practice. This system would facilitate changes to due process rules, tenure, seniority, and compensation. Proposed change require statutory and code modifications that will involve action by the State Legislature and the State Board of Education. It is expected that changes in re‐tenure and seniority may be heard as early as the lame duck legislative session (post election)! Proposed Changes • Tenure Reform o To earn tenure rights, teachers and leaders would have to be rated as effective or higher for three consecutive years. If a teacher fails to earn the necessary performance ratings they would remain in non‐tenured status during their employment. o Similarly, educators could lose tenure status through poor performance. Under the Governor’s proposal an educator would lose tenure if rated ineffective for one year or partially effective for two consecutive years—and revert to a non‐tenured status. Non‐
tenured status does not mean that the teacher automatically loses his/her job; rather, it means that the teacher will no longer enjoy the due process protections of tenure. • Seniority Reform—LIFO—Last in First Out The proposal seeks to eliminate current seniority rules during reductions in force to have effectiveness ratings, not seniority, determine which employees are retained on the job. Under the proposal, seniority would apply but within the four ratings categories so that an employee’s effectiveness rating would be the primary factor with seniority a secondary factor in determining retention during layoffs. • “Mutual Consent” on Job Placements. o Teachers and principals would have to both agree to a job placement in the event of the elimination of a position or a school closing. o The teacher would retain employment rights and the district would assist the teacher in finding another job. If that teacher is unable to find a district teaching position within a year, the teacher would be placed on unpaid leave. o Mutual consent policies do exist in some school districts in other states via collective bargaining provisions. In addition, some states are beginning to adopt such policies on a statewide basis. o The intent is to place a teacher where they will be dedicated to their work and to give principals a say in the hiring of staff whose performance they will be evaluated on in terms of the student achievement/leader performance. 12 Centre Drive x Monroe Township, New Jersey 08831‐1564 Tel: 609‐860‐1200 Fax: 609‐860‐2999 E‐Mail: [email protected] Web: www.njpsa.org •
Improvement Panels o Each school would be required to convene a school improvement panel. The panel would include the principal, an assistant or vice‐principal, and a teacher or other member of the instructional staff nominated by the principal and approved by the instructional staff. The panel would be involved in the hiring of new teachers, oversee the mentoring of teachers, and conduct annual evaluations of teachers. The panel would also identify professional development opportunities for all instructional staff members. The panel would be required to conduct a mid‐year evaluation of any tenured teacher who is evaluated as ineffective in his or her most recent annual evaluation. o The principal, in consultation with the panel, would be required to revoke the tenure granted to an employee in the position of teacher, assistant principal, or vice‐principal if the employee is evaluated as ineffective in two consecutive annual evaluations. Similarly, the bill provides that the superintendent, or his designee, must revoke a principal’s tenure if the principal is evaluated as ineffective in two consecutive annual evaluations. The revocation of the tenure status of a teacher, principal, assistant principal, or vice‐principal will not be subject to grievance or appeal unless the grievance or appeal relates to a charge that the principal, superintendent, or designee of the superintendent failed to adhere substantially to the approved evaluation system. National Movement The conversation around school reform isn’t just occurring in New Jersey, however. Several states (Idaho, Florida, Nevada, Ohio, Tennesse, Texas, Michigan and Utah) ended the practice of seniority when reductions in force are necessary. Eight states linked evaluations to student achievement, with most requiring that 50 percent of an evaluation score be based on student data, a direct result of the Race to the Top program. 2 NJPSA Policy Positions Since 1990 during the debate over the elimination of superintendent tenure in New Jersey, NJPSA has strongly advocated for the continuation of the due process protections of tenure for school employees. In 2011, a strong reform movement, led by Governor Christie, has brought the issue of tenure and seniority reform at the center of public policy discussions and public debate. As NJPSA engages its ongoing discussion of the issues at hand, NJPSA members should consider the specific policy positions that NJPSA has adopted in the past: Tenure – The Ongoing Need 1. Protects Educational Decision‐making NJPSA believes in the continued need for tenure or fair dismissal rights for school employees, tenure provides educators the necessary level of job security to make difficult and often politically controversial decisions in the best interests of students. Tenure is the counterweight when there is a clash between educational decisions and political consequences. 2. Tenure =Due Process Tenure is not lifetime job protection; rather, tenure is a simple right to due process for educators who have successfully performed their jobs for the statutorily required time period (currently 3 years). This due process rights consist of notice of the charges, an opportunity to respond and the right to a hearing before dismissal on tenure charges. 3. Ongoing Accountability Even After Tenure School employees continue to be accountable for job performance even after they earn tenure rights. In fact, annual performance evaluations, professional improvement plans and multi‐year, mandatory professional growth plans are additional accountability measures for educators to enhance their job performance and professional growth. These tools coupled with a statutory discipline (withholding increments, demotions, involuntary transfers) and dismissal system hold educators accountable for performance today. 4. Continuity in School Leadership Key to Successful Reform Strong leadership leads to better schools. Continuity and strength in school leadership are critical to achieving any real momentum for change at the school level. Tenure ensures this continuity. In New Jersey, principals and supervisors are leading the school‐based effort to revise curriculum standards and graduation requirements, to establish stable and safe learning environments, to meet rising performance goals, and to retool our educational delivery systems to meet 21st Century Standards. These outcomes require strong partnerships, staff credibility and stable leadership to achieve. Reform Issues NJPSA Can Support 1. Evaluation Reform is Critical To make a real difference in school performance, NJPSA supports the collaborative development of a state system of evaluation for educators based upon professional standards of practice and multiple performance measures including evidence of student growth. The implementation of a fair, performance‐based evaluation system will not only define and direct the professional growth/supports of school staff; it will facilitate the removal of non‐performing staff who fail to meet performance standards. Our support is contingent however upon the collaborative development of this evaluation instrument, professional development of all staff, the use of multiple measures and the availability of consistent, timely and reliable growth data in all subject areas. 3 2. Professional Growth and Development is Key to Successful Reform NJPSA strongly supports the ongoing professional growth of all educators at all stages of their careers. Historically, NJPSA has been pro‐active on this issue. NJPSA initiated the adoption of professional standards to guide the licensing and certification process in New Jersey, (ISSLLC standards), the development and adoption of the professional growth plan requirement for school leaders, strong support for novice leaders through enhanced mentoring requirements (NJL2L) and created alternate pathways to the profession through our NJEXCEL program. We believe professional growth is critical to student learning and both a professional obligation of the board and the school leader. Accordingly, any proposed reforms must include a mandatory investment in the professional growth of staff. 3. Streamlined Removal Process NJPSA acknowledges the criticism that the current tenure dismissal process can be too costly and overly time‐consuming to effectively remove non‐performing staff. Accordingly, NJPSA has initiated and supported efforts to streamline the tenure hearing process since the Whitman Administration. Most recently, NJPSA has proposed efforts to continue the expedited tenure reforms adopted in 1998 by adopting additional expedited timelines within the administrative process, by developing a cadre of specially trained administrative law judges to hear these cases, and to hire the needed number of judges to handle the caseload. Additionally, NJPSA supports efforts to promote increased settlements through mediation and by limiting the review role of the State Board of Examiners in all tenure matters. NJPSA has also supported the alternative idea of hearing tenure cases through arbitration as an expedited hearing process in tenure matters. 4. Attainment of Tenure Rights Over the past year, NJPSA committees and the Board of Directors have considered proposals to change the requirements to attain tenure rights. As a result of these discussions, the membership has voiced its support for extending the time period to attain tenure rights from three years to four years. This change would give school leaders more time to assess the performance of novice staff and provide the new teacher additional time to address areas of deficiency without being dismissed under the deadline of a tenure decision. However, NJPSA members have raised concerns about proposed language that required certain evaluation ratings that are “consecutive” to achieve tenure rights. Specifically, NJPSA members have supported the attainment of tenure by new employees who earn at least “effective” ratings in three out of four years. 5. Uniformity of Tenure Rights Across Job Titles NJPSA believes that the due process rights and procedures established by law should be uniform across all job titles eligible for tenure rights. 4 Discussion Questions Please answer each of the below questions. Discussion members should weigh in individually by supporting or not supporting each item as outlined below. Total number of participants at table: Composition: Principal Asst/Vice Principal Supervisor/Director Other (please specify): 1. Tenure loss: Should NJPSA support a proposal that removes tenure protections from an employee where we or she received an ineffective rating or two partially effective ratings under the proposed evaluation system? What concerns, if any do you have with the proposal? (In answering this question, consider how your performance and the performance of teachers will be evaluated under the new system (i.e. student growth measures based on state tests and other measures, effective professional practice and your ability to recruit retain and dismiss staff as needed.) POLL: Support Do Not Support: 2. What are the benefits and detriments to you as a school leader of our current system of seniority rights in terms of teachers and your own rights? 5 3. Do you support or oppose the proposal to have effectiveness ratings of your teachers determine their retention in a lay off situation, i.e. retain most effective not necessarily the most senior staff member? (Keep in mind that under the future school leader evaluation system, your performance ratings will be based, in significant part, on the performance outcomes of your teaching staff.) POLL: Support Do Not Support: 4. Do you feel the same way if the same rule is applied to you? If not, how do you justify the difference? POLL: Support Do Not Support: 5. Since your evaluation will rely in significant part on the performance of your teachers, do you support or oppose the idea of mutual consent in teacher placements? What are your concerns, if any, with such a proposal? POLL: 6 Support Do Not Support: 6. What concerns, if any, do you have with the “Improvement Panels” proposed under Senator Ruiz’s legislation, S‐2925? Do you support such an idea? How would you change this proposal? POLL: Support Do Not Support: 7. Do you see any obstacles to the implementation of this concept in New Jersey school districts? What issues would have to be resolved? How will your relationship with your superintendent or board be impacted? 7