Frequency of teacher reviews reduced Frequency of teacher reviews reduced (November 12, 2004)

District moves to lengthen timeline between evaluations of tenured teachers

by Alexandria Rocha

In an effort to better use their resources, Palo Alto school officials have decided to spend less time formally evaluating long-term teachers and more time turning up the heat on the new hires.

The plan comes tucked inside the teachers' contract approved this week by their union and the Board of Education. Under the contract, high-performing teachers who have been with the district for more than 10 years will now be formally evaluated once every four years, instead of every two.

The formal paperwork and classroom observations will then be shifted onto the new and less-experienced teachers who need the most attention. The long-term teachers will still be required to annually develop goals and discuss them with their supervisors.

"This is a forward-looking way of looking at the evaluation process," said Superintendent Mary Frances Callan.

The change comes at a time when the district has cut its new-teacher mentoring program. Although administrators and teachers have high hopes for the new plan, no one really knows if the evaluation cycle will work.

Board members were initially wary of the idea and didn't understand why the district would evaluate, or watch, teachers less often.

"For me, and I think for most people, reviewing an employee every five years is insufficient," said board member Mandy Lowell, adding that "a whole class of high school students, and almost two classes of middle school students, would graduate before a teacher got a review."

Steve Sabbag, president of the local teachers' union, also admitted there is some risk involved.

"I'm not going tell you that I have 1,000 teachers here and none of them are going to use this to their advantage," he said. "But it's not like they said, 'You've been here for 10 years, you can just coast now.'"

Lowell and the other board members who expressed similar uncertainties warmed up to the idea after learning that long-term teachers would continue to receive sufficient reviews, only on a more casual basis.

But regardless of the formal evaluations, all kindergarten through 12th-grade teachers are required to seek written input from students and parents every year.

"I see this as cutting down on paperwork, but increasing the discussion on positive teaching," Lowell said.

California law currently requires school districts to evaluate teachers every two years. New legislation, however, gives districts the option to evaluate long-term teachers on a five-year cycle.

The local district decided to use a four-year review cycle, rather than a five-year rotation. Assistant Superintendent Marilyn Cook said the shorter period was more suitable for the district's needs.

Some may think it sounds like a free pass for lazy teachers, but Sabbag and other school officials said it's necessary to improve the entire evaluation process.

"The expectation is that you don't just goof off until you're evaluated anyway," Sabbag said. "People who are lasting 10 years around here are doing all the professional things they should be doing anyway."

The change is optional for districts, and no one is tracking how many are now using it, said Sophia Kwong, a spokeswoman for Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, D-Los Angeles, who wrote the legislation.

It is supported, however, by the California Teachers Association, which oversees the local teachers' union.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.