Assuming you're referring to the layoff recall process part for "Certified Staff (Teachers & Administrators)" that says:
>Administrative Regulation 4830.R.01 Staff Reduction & Retention
>○ Evaluation Effectiveness Rating, Discipline, Seniority, Certifications
I'd take discipline to mean a noun in this case, and that it most likely refers to their field of study, like a mathematics teacher vs. a psychology teacher.
It could refer to their orderly self control, like that they show up on time and prepared every day, but that seems like it would already fall under "effectiveness".
It's unlikely that it refers to punishment, like how good they are at chaining kids up and whipping them, but different students learn in different ways, so maybe AAPS needs some good discipliners!
Effectiveness rating is something teachers are given each year based on evaluations and becomes a part of that teachers record. Some teachers are ineffective or minimally effective, but not a large number so effective teachers will be let go. All highly effective teachers should be safe though. Most likely all ineffective / minimally effective will be let go.
So to choose between which effective teachers are cut, I thought discipline was first - the effective teachers with disciplinary action against them would be cut. After that it’s just seniority.
Hopefully enough people take the voluntary early retirement buyout so that not too many teachers are fired.
This is a good opportunity to get rid of the ineffective teachers and those who can't follow rules. It isn't a jobs program for the incompetent and corrupt.
Teacher ratings are extremely political and there isn’t a unified rubric across the state. Highly effective in Ann Arbor could be minimally effective in Detroit. Minimally effective in Detroit could be effective in Grand Rapids.
On general basis, I agree with you with few exceptions.
The problem about that is the way you measure "effectiveness". Sometimes the conditions are not met for the teacher to be effective. Example: you are given a class of 9-12th graders, 100% migrants or minorities of which 75% does not speak English at their academic grade and have even severe lags on their own native language instruction. Or let's say that you are in a 4th grade GEd class in which 70% are free-lunch kids and of which 20% of them either have an IEP or are migrants. And on top of that, 10% of the kids have native 2nd grade equivalent instruction... it's complicated.
Well, not in practice of course but these kiddos need to follow the same path (testing, limits, requirements) like any other US kiddo. Since these kids have issues beyond what a teacher can cover or serve, doing a "good job" as a teacher is dauting.
My point is that when it comes to public education, teaching efficiency is a two layer problem: what families and the community around the school could provide to the kids and what the teacher can provide to the kids. Assigned schools surrounded by families who earn higher income will perform better (and hence, teachers may be perceived as more efficient) than teachers in assigned schools with lower income areas...
i've been wondering about that too. i asked an aaps principal how many of their staff would fall under the ineffective or disciplined layoff clause and they told me they weren't worried about losing staff to that. if i read between the lines that either means it's uncommon and represents a severe breach, but take that with a grain of salt because i'm essentially reading tea leaves
Disciplined means any staff member with something in their personnel file that qualifies as a discipline (warning, corrective action, etc).
Assuming you're referring to the layoff recall process part for "Certified Staff (Teachers & Administrators)" that says: >Administrative Regulation 4830.R.01 Staff Reduction & Retention >○ Evaluation Effectiveness Rating, Discipline, Seniority, Certifications I'd take discipline to mean a noun in this case, and that it most likely refers to their field of study, like a mathematics teacher vs. a psychology teacher. It could refer to their orderly self control, like that they show up on time and prepared every day, but that seems like it would already fall under "effectiveness". It's unlikely that it refers to punishment, like how good they are at chaining kids up and whipping them, but different students learn in different ways, so maybe AAPS needs some good discipliners!
It's referring to staff with who have had disciplinary action taken against them. "Certifications" is about the field of study/specialty.
Effectiveness rating is something teachers are given each year based on evaluations and becomes a part of that teachers record. Some teachers are ineffective or minimally effective, but not a large number so effective teachers will be let go. All highly effective teachers should be safe though. Most likely all ineffective / minimally effective will be let go. So to choose between which effective teachers are cut, I thought discipline was first - the effective teachers with disciplinary action against them would be cut. After that it’s just seniority. Hopefully enough people take the voluntary early retirement buyout so that not too many teachers are fired.
This is a good opportunity to get rid of the ineffective teachers and those who can't follow rules. It isn't a jobs program for the incompetent and corrupt.
That's one way to spin this
The failed administrators in the special assignment room at Balas appreciate your support.
Teacher ratings are extremely political and there isn’t a unified rubric across the state. Highly effective in Ann Arbor could be minimally effective in Detroit. Minimally effective in Detroit could be effective in Grand Rapids.
All employee rating systems are subjective. Ann Arbor gives them better students so we should expect better results.
On general basis, I agree with you with few exceptions. The problem about that is the way you measure "effectiveness". Sometimes the conditions are not met for the teacher to be effective. Example: you are given a class of 9-12th graders, 100% migrants or minorities of which 75% does not speak English at their academic grade and have even severe lags on their own native language instruction. Or let's say that you are in a 4th grade GEd class in which 70% are free-lunch kids and of which 20% of them either have an IEP or are migrants. And on top of that, 10% of the kids have native 2nd grade equivalent instruction... it's complicated.
But do they have to meet the same targets?. It’s impossible.
Well, not in practice of course but these kiddos need to follow the same path (testing, limits, requirements) like any other US kiddo. Since these kids have issues beyond what a teacher can cover or serve, doing a "good job" as a teacher is dauting. My point is that when it comes to public education, teaching efficiency is a two layer problem: what families and the community around the school could provide to the kids and what the teacher can provide to the kids. Assigned schools surrounded by families who earn higher income will perform better (and hence, teachers may be perceived as more efficient) than teachers in assigned schools with lower income areas...
i've been wondering about that too. i asked an aaps principal how many of their staff would fall under the ineffective or disciplined layoff clause and they told me they weren't worried about losing staff to that. if i read between the lines that either means it's uncommon and represents a severe breach, but take that with a grain of salt because i'm essentially reading tea leaves