Statement regarding June 8 letter

The Wareham Education Association would clarify that the leadership of the association did not author the letter discussed at the June 8 School Committee meeting. Members of the Association may have been involved with its authorship, but the concept and text were never subject to discussion or vote by the Board of the WEA. That should not be interpreted as disagreement with its contents or concerns. Rather, any educator willing to stand up for a smart and safe learning environment for Wareham's children should be commended. The Association does reiterate that it will sign any letter to the School Committee or community.

----

Speaking personally, I wrote this statement is just to make clear that this particular letter was not a WEA missive.  I am not seeking to undermine or contradict the issues raised in the letter, but do not want any confusion on who wrote it.

Annual meeting, and teleconference

Thanks to all members whose opinions at Annual Meeting today offer thoughts and guidance on discussions going forward about evaluations and internal WEA matters. Glad to see officers, reps, and members coming together on these difficult topics!

Interested in joining a teleconference with MTA leadership on efforts to push back against the growth of standardized testing? Email Brian Fitzgerald for login and password info. The teleconference takes place on Wednesday June 3 at 7pm.

Ask yourself...

My colleagues,

This May 15, as has happened  over the past few years, evaluations came due, and in the past 48 hours I've heard of many cases in many buildings where evaluations were simply not done according to the contract.  I encourage all members to look at their evaluation and ask themselves these questions:

• Was I observed ten times?  If you were observed less than that, the evaluation process was not followed correctly.
• Was each piece of evidence used only once in my year-end evaluation?  If the same piece of evidence, opinion, observation, etc., was applied to different indicators, the evaluation process was not followed correctly.
• Was hearsay used?  What a child, colleague, or parent reported to an evaluator is not admissible for evidence.  If such rumor or innuendo is used, the evaluation process was not followed correctly.
• Was the rubric the only piece used?  Evaluators cannot invent criteria for evaluation beyond the rubrics that are available.  If they did, the evaluation process was not followed correctly.
• Was my overall rating impacted by whether I followed my goals?  We are educators, not goal-setters.  Our expertise is in educating children, not guessing what a fair benchmark would be before we even receive our schedules.  Relying on goals to make an overall decision means your evaluator did not follow the process correctly.
• Did I receive feedback on my observations?  If observations did not result in feedback, the whole intent to use this as a coaching tool is lacking.  If your evaluator did not complete that vital step, the evaluation process was not followed correctly.

 If you answered yes to any of these questions, please contact me at

This is a complex system, and mistakes will be made -- but getting this system right is critical.  An educator's career should not be threatened by another's error. If you have any questions whether the evaluation system was used correctly, contact a WEA officer, or contact me directly.  This is too important to let mistakes slide.

My guiding principle on evaluations

I think we'd all known for quite some time that there were going to be a lot of questions this time of year regarding evaluations as the process completed for the year. The Commonwealth rushed through a new system before they'd thought it out, much less written it out. They're still doing that regarding "district-determined measures" meant to supplement the MCAS as a purported measure of educator impact -- a lassitude that would be unacceptable in a classroom but somehow okay coming from an education bureaucrat. Regardless, the system was new to everyone, from setting goals to writing up observations. Then a software package was layered on, all as the system is implementation spread across several buildings. Let's be clear: any chaotic, wobbly implementation is going to discover and create mistakes. That's foreseeable and understandable. Hundreds of people working together in good faith are still going to stumble badly under such circumstances. However, my guiding principle as president of the WEA is that these mistakes should not cost any person their job security, nor should an error of omission or commission bring into question the integrity and skill of an accomplished educator. This is not to question all negative evaluation results, but to set the highest standard for the way they are reached. If you have any question or concern, even the vaguest one, please contact a building rep or WEA officer including me. If a mistake costs you this year, your colleague may be affected the next. Speak up, and you will find help.

Deadline delay

Colleagues, You may have noticed a slight change in the WEA calendar. That is because of the revent weekend outage in TeachPoint. To ensure that summative reports for those on one-year plans reach the required standard of accuracy, rigor, and reliability, the deadline has been pushed from May 15 to May 20. This was upon a vote by the WEA Board of Directors.

Insurance, budget, and evaluations

On insurance, a meeting has been scheduled for March 7. All indications are that the town is moving ahead with unilateral changes to our health insurance as allowed under the law. A further update will be on offer after the meeting. To my understanding the School Committee announced its perception that the current state of the budget will necessitate cutting 14 to 16 full-time equivalent positions in Wareham over the summer. This is an initial prognosis and experience shows that it is far too early to take this as a final number. Finally, please contact the WEA with concerns about evaluations. The Association cannot protect all of us without being told what is occurring in the hallways of the schools; I'm committed to ensuring that the WEA ensures everyone has a fair go, but cannot contest an issue about which I know nothing. As is often said in our buildings in other circumstances, if you have a question or concern, chances are other people have the same.

Principal's Checklist

Note: There is a document on the Curriculum and Instruction website about evaluations with the title "Principal's Checklist". Initial response from the superintendent confirms that this document is outmoded and does not show changes made since the beginning of the year. While it is in your interest to allow time for evaluators to go through artifacts that have been submitted, January 10th is not a hard deadline for submission for inclusion in the formative assessment in one-year plans.

Principal's Checklist

Note: There is a document on the Curriculum and Instruction website about evaluations with the title "Principal's Checklist". Initial response from the superintendent confirms that this document is outmoded and does not show changes made since the beginning of the year. While it is in your interest to allow time for evaluators to go through artifacts that have been submitted, January 10th is not a hard deadline for submission for inclusion in the formative assessment in one-year plans.

About artifacts

After an afternoon meeting, the WEA can report the following:

• Artifacts do not need to be electronic. There is no requirement to scan or photograph anything.
• There is no minimum number of artifacts to submit.
• The cover sheet remains a work in progress. Sheets with much of the language already completed will be available at the WEA website in the future.
• The timeline has been moved up significantly.

See our FAQs on evaluations for more detail. The WEA advises all Unit A and B members to submit artifacts for any indicator for which they have received no feedback, or negative feedback.