Reform Alert--PEAC Update

Reform Alert: PEAC Update

We want to alert you to conflicting news reports that are misrepresenting the status of the work of the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC).

The PEAC deadline to have recommendations for guidelines and a model teacher evaluation and support program to the State Board of Education is still July 1, but the process is hitting some bumps in the road—in terms of disagreement among members—relative to what has been decided and approved by the State Board of Education and still remains to be discussed.

On Feb. 10, the State Board of Education unanimously accepted PEAC’s recommendation for a new educator evaluation framework—that was a compromise by consensus, which was reached after many months of long, tough conversations—with no more than 22.5% of the teacher’s evaluation coming from student test scores.

As we and others reported, it was and continues to be our understanding that under the PEAC plan:

• 45% of the teacher evaluation would include multiple indicators of student academic growth and development—22.5% would include test scores and the other 22.5% would NOT include test scores.
• Teacher performance and professional practice will be weighted at 40%.
• Other peer, student, and parent feedback will be weighted at 5% with professional activities counting for 10%.

PEACs recommendations will be the basis for guidelines that will advise local school districts as they go back and design local plans working with their local teachers unions. The PEAC guidelines will be piloted in at least eight, but no more than 10, school districts in the 2012-2013 school year, providing opportunities to review and improve initial approaches.

Understanding the process employed by PEAC with Commissioner Pryor at the helm

Commissioner Pryor has hired a large number of out-of-state consultants, at least six of whom have been exerting a heavy hand in trying to direct nearly a dozen subcommittees and work groups and meeting with the different stakeholder groups separately, and over CEA’s objections—leading to very different understandings, controversy, and in our opinion, a lack of clarity on the issue. We are now in a position where the teacher unions and those representing management (CABE, CAPSS, and CAS) believe we agreed to a very different framework. 

We have continuously raised our concerns about the process of meeting separately with each group and have characterized it as a “divide and conquer” approach—leading each group to agree to very different concepts in order to get consensus.

We want to assure you that we continue to strongly advocate for you—to develop a structure for a fair, reliable, and valid evaluation system with accountability for all—that does not over rely on test scores. 

There are many subcommittees at work—and many voices speaking up on the issues. CEA staff members, along with more than a dozen teachers from districts across the state, are participating on every subcommittee and working group, advocating for you and the teaching profession, to ensure that teachers’ voices are part of the conversation and ultimately the recommendations.  Rest assured that these teachers are speaking up and speaking out for you.

The PEAC process is not over yet, and we will keep you updated on new developments.

Phil Apruzzese                        Mary Loftus Levine

CEA President                        CEA Executive Director