Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This case study analyzes controversial teacher evaluation policies in the context of collective bargaining. Dr. Jill Abrams, a new superintendent in a struggling school district, is at the center of the case. Her school board demands a form of teacher evaluation she finds problematic because it includes value-added modeling. Moreover, the board insists on excluding the union in the process of developing the new evaluation system. This case explores the potential consequences of implementing specific teacher evaluation policies and competing demands of relevant stakeholders in the process. The case weaves rich policy issues that frequently present to school leaders at the local level. Other policy and ethical dilemmas emerge as the case develops.

Keywords

teacher evaluation value-added models collective bargaining school administration school governance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alsbury

T. L.

(2008). School board member and superintendent turnover and the influence on student achievement: An application of the dissatisfaction theory. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7, 202-229.

Armour-Garb

(2009). Should value added models be used to evaluate teachers? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28, 692-712.

Baker

E. L.

Barton Paul

Darling-Hammond

Haertel

Ladd

Linn

Shepard

(2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://www.epi.org/page/-/pdf/bp278.pdf

Brill

(2009, August 31). The rubber room. The New Yorker. Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/31/090831fa_fact_brill

Carlson

Eller

(2008). So now you’re superintendent! Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Education Press.

Council of the Great City Schools Report. (2010). Urban school superintendents: Characteristics, tenure, and salary. Seventh survey and report. Retrieved from http://www.cgcs.org/cms/lib/DC00001581/Centricity/Domain/4/Supt_Survey2010.pdf

Darling-Hammond

Prince

C. D.

(2007). Strengthening teacher quality in high-need schools: Policy and practice. Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from http://ti_sp.alsde.edu/qt/Shared%20Documents/Strengthening%20Teacher%20Quality%20in%20High%20Need%20Schools-Policy%20and%20Practice.pdf

DeMitchell

(2010). Labor relations in education: Policies, politics, and practices. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Duncan

(2009). The race to the top begins—Remarks by Secretary Arne Duncan. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/07/07242009.html

10.

Edwards

(2010, Winter). Public sector unions and the rising costs of employee compensation. Cato Journal, 30, 87-112.

11.

Felch

Garrison

Song

(2009, December 20). Failure gets a pass: Bar set low for lifetime job in L.A. Schools. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/20/local/la-me-teacher-tenure20-2009dec20

12.

Glazerman

Loeb

Goldhaber

Staiger

Raudenbush

Whitehurst

G. J.

(2010). Evaluating teachers: The important role of value-added. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

13.

Goe

Bell

Little

(2008). Approaches to evaluating teacher effectiveness: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

14.

Goldhaber

(2009). Teacher pay reform: The political implications of recent research. The Center for American Progress. Retrieved from http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2006/12/pdf/teacher_pay_report.pdf

15.

Goldstein

(2007). Easy to dance to: Solving the problems of teacher evaluation with peer assistance and review. American Journal of Education, 113, 479-508.

16.

Hanushek

E. A.

(2010). Generalizations about using value-added measures of teacher quality. American Economic Review, 100, 267-271.

17.

Hanushek

E. A.

Kain

J. F.

O’Brien

D. M.

Rivkin

S. G.

(2005). The market for teacher quality. National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w11154

18.

Harris

D. N.

(2009). Teacher value-added: Don’t end the search before it starts. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 28, 693-699.

19.

Harris

D. N.

(2011). Vale added measures in education: What every educator needs to know. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

20.

Hazi

H. M.

Arredondo-Rucinski

(2009). Teacher evaluation as a public policy target for improved student learning: A fifty-state review of statute and regulatory action since NCLB. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 17(5). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/7/7

21.

Hess

Kelly

A. P.

(2006). Scapegoat, albatross, or what? The status quo in teacher collective bargaining. In Hannaway

Rotherham

(Eds.), Collective bargaining in education (pp. 53-88). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

22.

Hill

Kapitula

Umland

(2011). A validity argument approach to evaluating teacher value-added scores. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 794-831.

23.

Hill

(2006). The costs of collective bargaining agreements and related district policies. In Hannaway

Rotherham

(Eds.), Collective bargaining in education (pp. 89-110). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

24.

Hinchey

P. H.

(2010). Getting teacher assessment right: What policymakers can learn from research. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center. Retrieved from http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/getting-teacher-assessment-right

25.

In re Pittsfield School District, 744 A.2d 594, 144 N.H. 536 (N.H. 1999)

26.

Jinkins

(2010, February 10). For Texas school superintendents, frequent turnover becomes part of the job. Star-Telegram. Retrieved from http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/02/21/1985573/new-educational-realities-shrink.html

27.

Johnson

S. M.

Donaldson

(2006). The effects of collective bargaining on teacher quality. In Hannaway

Rotherham

(Eds.), Collective bargaining in education (pp. 111-140). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

28.

Kahlenberg

(2006). The history of collective bargaining among teachers. In Hannaway

Rotherham

(Eds.), Collective bargaining in education (pp. 7-26). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

29.

Kane

T. J.

Staiger

D. O.

(2008). Estimating teacher impacts on student achievement: An experimental evaluation. National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w14607

30.

Kupermintz

(2003). Teacher effects and teacher effectiveness: A validity investigation of the Tennessee Value Added Assessment System. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 287-298.

31.

Lindy

(2011). The impact of teacher collective bargaining laws on student achievement: Evidence from a New Mexico natural experiment. Yale Law Journal, 120, 1130-1191.

32.

Malin

(2009). The paradox of public sector labor law. Indiana Law Journal, 84, 1369-1399.

33.

Milanowski

A. T.

(2005). Split roles in performance evaluation—A field study involving new teachers. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 18(3), 153-159.

34.

Moskowitz

(2006, Summer). Breakdown. Education Next. Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/files/ednext20063_24.pdf

35.

Munoz

M. A.

Chang

F. C.

(2007). The elusive relationship between teacher characteristics and student academic growth: A longitudinal multilevel model for change. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 20(3-4), 147-164.

36.

Newton

Darling-Hammond

Haertel

Thomas

(2010). Value-added modeling of teacher effectiveness: An exploration of stability across models and contexts. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 18(23). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/810

37.

Odden

Kelley

(2002). Paying teachers for what they know and do: New and smarter compensation strategies to improve schools (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

38.

Paige

(2012). Using VAMs in high stakes employment decisions. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(3), 29-32.

39.

Paige

(2013). Applying the “paradox” theory: A law and policy analysis of collective bargaining rights and teacher evaluation reform from selected states. Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal, 1, 21-43.

40.

Rothstein

(2010). Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking decay and student achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125, 175-214.

41.

Sanders

W. L.

(1998). Research findings from Tennessee value-added assessment system (TVASS) database: Implications for educational evaluation and research. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12, 247-256.

42.

Sawchuck

(2011, February 2). Wanted: Ways to measure most teachers. Education Week, 30(19), 1.

43.

Wang

Lin

Spalding

Klecka

Odell

(2011). Quality teaching and teacher education: A kaleidoscope of notions. Journal of Teacher Education, 62, 331-338.

44.

Weisberg

Sexton

Mulhern

Keeling

(2009). The widget effect. New York, NY: The New Teacher Project. Available from http://widgeteffect.org/

Teacher Evaluation and Collective Bargaining

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References