Teacher evaluation bill meant to help, not punish, co-sponsor says

Rep. Adam Zemke (courtesy photo)

Rep. Adam Zemke, D-Ann Arbor, is one of the sponsors of two bills that would revamp Michigan’s teacher evaluation system. He spoke with Bridge about why Michigan residents should care about the annual reviews of teachers.

Bridge: What’s wrong with the current teacher evaluation system?

Rep. Adam Zemke: The current evaluation system is incomplete: the teacher tenure act created the (Michigan) Council on Educator Effectiveness (MCEE) to suggest structure for evaluating teacher and administrator effectiveness. These bills are designed to implement the state's structure so that teachers and administrators can receive fair and multi-faceted evaluations to help them improve achievement, which doesn't exist right now in statute. The bills are not punitive like the tenure changes are; they are designed specifically to help teachers and administrators improve so that they can help Michigan students' improve their achievement.

Bridge: How does this legislation differ from recommendations made last summer by the Michigan Council on Educator Effectiveness?

Zemke: The legislation is very similar to the recommendations made by the MCEE: they are derived from the report issued by this group. In fact, (MCEE chair and University of Michigan School of Education) Dean Deborah Ball will be testifying in support of the legislation in coming weeks.

The main differences lie in the use of a value-added growth model that is suggested by the MCEE that is not specifically adopted in the bills. This is not to state that a local district cannot adopt a VAM on their own – they can – our bills just give them the option to do so if they choose.

Bridge: In the proposed evaluation, teachers will be judged partly on the test scores of their students. How is the system being designed to account for differences in student ability rather than raw test scores?

Zemke: The legislation does not address any value-added measures to apply statistical weights for differences in race, gender, ability, etc. The bills only directly address student growth, but are not prohibitive or encouraging of the use of VAMs.

Bridge: Teachers will also receive more evaluation in the classroom, probably from their building’s principal. That sounds like a great idea, but it sounds time-consuming for school administrators. What kind of input are you getting from principals? And are there plans that would allow principals to spread this work among other administrators and high-performing teachers?

Zemke: Principals and teachers alike have been supportive of our work - including a number of the administration associations. The bills specifically address the ability for administrators to delegate evaluations to others, but require that persons performing evaluations be trained in doing so. Further, any evaluations that have been delegated are still under the responsibility of the administrator, and said administrator will be held accountable for the quality of these evaluations within their own evaluation. This was done to hold administrators accountable for good evaluations being performed, even if they are delegating them.

Bridge: How much will this new evaluation system cost? And will that be new money provided by the state, or will schools pick up the tab?

Zemke: The House Fiscal Agency has estimated that costs for this system range between $16 and $42 million - the documents for this can be found on its website.

The bills submitted are not appropriations bills, and as such, do not have a cost built into them. This being said, Rep. (Margaret) O'Brien and I have done everything we can to ensure that the system is funded in fidelity - including having Rep. Bill Rogers in every one of our workgroup discussions since August. We are strongly recommending that the State pay for the programs.

Bridge: How well teachers are scored on the new evaluations could influence tenure, layoffs and, in extreme examples, terminations. How do you sell that as a positive to teachers?

Zemke: HB 5223 and 5224 are positive legislation - they provide a detailed, multi-faceted, objective criteria structure that help teachers and administrators improve student achievement and prevent teachers and administrators from being the victims of unfair games of 'playing favorites' by evaluators and supervisors, the latter of which is possible under current law.

Bridge: Why should this matter to the public?

Zemke: It has been researched and stated that the best thing we can do to help students succeed is to have an effective, inspiring teacher in their classroom - followed up by effective, supportive administrators. The United States has been falling behind for years in our educational achievement when compared to other wealthy countries. If we want to improve our 21st Century economic outlook, which all members of the public should care about, we must improve educational achievement. Supporting effective classrooms has a high ROI (return on investment) for achievement improvements, and our legislation takes Michigan a step towards this goal.

Bridge: What are the obstacles to teacher evaluation bills passing this term?

Zemke: As Gov. Rick Snyder mentioned in his State of the State address, this legislation is a priority for him. And as it has been a bipartisan, highly-collaborative effort with dozens of stakeholders from the education management community – including both teachers' unions – we expect that this legislation to move in reasonable speed through the committee and floor processes. For the sake of Michigan students, teachers and administrators, I surely hope it does.