Florence Shapiro Lays Another Egg

Texas State Senator Florence Shapiro is having a field day with Texas public school teachers this session. Her SB 1643 is a particularly menacing bill that links student progress on standardized tests to whether the teacher should be fired.

I kid you not.

Here’s how it works.

First, Shapiro’s bill redefines what will go into a teacher’s annual professional evaluation. In Texas it is called a PDAS or Professional Development and Appraisal System.

Here, in addition to what is already included in an appraisal, is what Shapiro wants Texas teachers to be evaluated on:

The recommended appraisal process must provide that consideration of criteria relating to student performance under Subsection (a)(2) constitutes a majority of a teacher's appraisal. Additionally, the recommended appraisal process must provide that the portion of a teacher's appraisal that concerns student performance is conducted in accordance with the following guidelines:
(1) at least 25 percent of that portion of the appraisal must be based on objective, quantifiable measures of the achievement and progress of the teacher's students, such as state assessment instruments, local benchmarking systems, portfolio assessments, and value-added assessments;
(2) at least 10 percent of that portion of the appraisal must be based on the overall performance or progress of students enrolled at the teacher's campus;
(3) measures of student progress must be used whenever possible; and
(4) observable measures of student performance may be used when appropriate.

This is the ultimate in adding professional insult to injury. Now we have a State Senator who wants to rate a teacher’s effectiveness based not only on their own students’ test scores but also on the test scores of every other teachers’ students in the school.

Now this ordinarily would bring stretches and yawns to veteran teachers. PDAS evaluations are a joke. They offer no incentive to be highly rated, and are typically not used to get rid of a teacher.

Not this time.

Reading further down we find this in the bill:

Sec. 21.3531. TEACHER PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN;
CONSEQUENCES OF UNSATISFACTORY APPRAISAL
(d) If a teacher receives an unsatisfactory appraisal for three consecutive years, a school district shall decline to renew the teacher's contract in the manner provided by this chapter.

Did you see that? “Shall” not “may”. The district must fire a teacher if after three years their students are still doing poorly on state mandated standardized tests.

That makes the bill unfriendly.

Want to hear some consequences if this bill becomes law?

(1) No teacher will want to teach low ability students. Teaching low ability students will spell a death sentence for a teacher. I personally know teachers who request nothing but students with low learning ability because they feel they are most effective with these kids. Effective enough to get them to pass TAKS? Not always. There are other things to teach these kids – things that they can use.

Imagine teaching a class full of students with sub-100 IQs, dyslexia, Turret’s, Limited English Proficiency, and out and out sociopaths, all of this mixed in with “G/T Gangstas” who are too busy writing computer programs to do their chemistry homework. It’s a zoo.

And it’s a zoo that no one will want to teach anymore if it means that they will be fired in 3 years.

(2) In the public school system, as opposed to private school, all students are welcomed. Private schools have screening tests and “cherry pick” their student body. But if a teacher’s job depends on student performance, doesn’t it become the right of an individual teacher to refuse to teach someone? I am reaching a little here, but not much. I think the US Constitution's 14th Amendment is applicable:

“…nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”.

If it means being fired, then I think this means teachers have the right to say “No” to teaching a student.

(3) Given that (2) above is ignored, what would stop an administrator or a counselor from loading an unwanted or unpopular teacher with classfulls of low performance students? It can be done, you know. Easily. After 3 years the state ties their hands and the teacher has to go.

All I could come up with, for now, are three horrific outcomes. With outcomes like this, who in their right mind would want to teach in Texas public schools? Who does Ms. Shapiro think will step up to the plate to teach Texas youth when all that gets pitched at them are beanballs?

If I think of other outcomes, I will post updates to this.