TEACHNJ ACT Teacher Effectiveness and Accountability for the Children of New Jersey

1. TEACHNJ ACT Teacher Effectiveness and Accountability for the Children of New Jersey All information taken from http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/bills/al12/26_.htm

2. Goal of the new Legislation • “ To raise student achievement by improving instruction through the adoption of evaluations that provide specific feedback to educators, inform the provision of aligned professional development, and inform personnel decisions”

3. Tenure Changes • Requirements for staff hired on or after August6, 2012 • 4 consecutive years within a period of 5 consecutive academic years • Complete district mentorship program • Be rated as effective or highly effective in 2 annual summative evaluations within first 3 years (Teaching staff) • Be rated as effective or highly effective in 2 annual summative evaluations within first 3 years and after completion of 2nd year (Administrators) • Transfers or Promotions • Employment for 2 academic years in new position • Same position in underperforming school shall remain tenured during good behavior and efficiency after receiving at least effective in annual summative evaluation within first 2 years • Terminated before tenure return to other position at salary which would have occurred during period

4. Professional Development • Supports student achievement • Address unique needs of different instructional staff in different settings • Provide comprehensive training on the evaluation rubric and expectations for Educator Evaluation highly effective performance • Individual Professional Development Plan • Written statement of goals developed by supervisor and teaching staff • Additional Professional Development • To any teaching staff member who fails or is struggling to meet performance standards • Designed to correct needs identified • Corrective Action Plan • Include timelines for corrective action and responsibilities of teaching staff member and school district

5. School Improvement Panel • Include principal or designee that is employed in supervisory role, vice-principal, teacher • Oversee the mentoring and conduct evaluations of teachers (teacher not included in this process) • Identify professional development opportunities for all instructional staff tailored to meet needs of students and staff • Conduct mid-year evaluation of employees rated ineffective or partially effective

6. District Evaluation Advisory Committee • Purpose • Discuss challenges and opportunities • Provide feedback about program development and implementation • Committee Members/ Stakeholders • Teacher from each school, central office administrator, superintendent, administrators evaluating, special education administrator, school board member, and parent

7. Mentor Programs • Implementation • Board of education, research-based program • Experienced teachers matched with new teachers • Outcomes • Enhance teacher knowledge of strategies related to core curriculum content standards • Identify exemplary teaching skills and practices • Inform of duties and adjustment to challenges of teaching • Developed in consultation with the school improvement panels • Districts should tailor to the needs of the individual teacher.

8. Evaluation Rubric • Pilot programs to begin no later then January 31, 2013 • Full implementation during 2013-2014 school year • Not subject to collective bargaining • Criteria • 4 defined annual rating categories: ineffective, partially ineffective, effective , and highly effective • Based on multiple objective measures of student learning that are used to show growth • May include: portfolio projects, teacher-developed assessments, district-established assessments, internships • standardized assessments shall be used, but not be predominant factor • Rubric based on professional standards for Teachers and School Leaders

9. Evaluation Rubric cont’d • Employee receives multiple observations by individual in Supervisory Role • Opportunity to improve • Monitoring and calibration to ensure protocol is being implemented • Process to ensure results of evaluation help inform instructional development

10. Inefficiency Charges • Superintendent files charge of Inefficiency • 30 days to tell Commissioner • Only evaluations following rubric are permitted • Employee rated ineffective or partially ineffective on annual summative and the following year is rated ineffective • Rated partially effective for 2 consecutive years on annual summative and the following year is rated partially ineffective

11. Arbitration Process • Commissioner maintains 25 permanent arbitrators • Hearing held within 45 days of filing with commissioner • Employing board of education has the ultimate burden to provide evidence such as documentation and witness statements to employee or representative • Employee shall provide evidence at least 10 days before hearing • Decision made within 45 days from start of hearing • Commissioner can remove arbitrator if not following timeline • Decision made is not able to be appealed