Teacher evaluation reform implementation and labor relations

Defining “Comparable”: An Analysis of Reduction in Force Provisions in Ohio School Districts

“…There is some evidence that unions have adapted to changing economic and political realities, seeking to shape reforms in order to remain relevant and powerful actors in K-12 education policy and practice (Young, 2011), but others note that the increased application of market forces to public education have eroded the unions' capacity to shield members from external forces (Murphy, Hallinger, & Heck, 2013). In the case of the state of Michigan, teacher evaluation was a specific provision barred from collective bargaining by the state legislature (Pogodzinski, Umpstead, & Witt, 2015). In a recent examination of teacher contracts over time in a single urban school district, Cowen and Fowles (2013) found that in spite of a number of state and federal education policy developments, there were very few changes in key contract provisions between 1979 and 2010, suggesting limited impact of such policies on salaries, transfers and assignments, evaluation, dismissal, and working conditions in Louisville schools.…”

Teacher Performance Appraisal Regulation: A Policy Case Analysis

“…Addressing issues of procedural evaluations is not a task that only policy makers in Ontario or other provinces need to undertake. Policy makers in the United States need also to increment their teaching evaluation system considering that studies (Cohen & Goldhaber, 2016; Darling-Hammond, 2015; Pogodzinski et al, 2015) suggest that the teacher evaluations have been a source of collective bargaining controversies in the United States. Cohen and Goldhaber (2016) and Darling-Hammond (2015) argue for the need for education policy makers to improve the systems of teacher performance evaluations for more accuracy, transparency and fairness.…”

Extending the Work of Cowen and Fowles: A Historical Analysis of Kentucky Teacher Contracts

“…Cowen and Strunk (2015) stated that “state laws represent the primary authority not only for labor relations but for education itself, and heavily influence the flexibility with which districts can set local, context-specific regulations and contracts” (p. 221). For example, teacher evaluation was a specific provision barred from collective bargaining by the Michigan State Legislature (Pogodzinski, Umpstead, & Witt, 2015). Pogodzinski et al (2015) found that amidst state-level reforms of teacher evaluations and collective bargaining rights, there remains local variation in the design and implementation of local teacher evaluation systems and the extent to which teacher unions were involved.…”

“…For example, teacher evaluation was a specific provision barred from collective bargaining by the Michigan State Legislature (Pogodzinski, Umpstead, & Witt, 2015). Pogodzinski et al (2015) found that amidst state-level reforms of teacher evaluations and collective bargaining rights, there remains local variation in the design and implementation of local teacher evaluation systems and the extent to which teacher unions were involved. Following changes to teacher evaluation policies in the state of Ohio, Ingle et al (2015) examined provisions in the first wave of CBAs negotiated after teacher evaluation legislation went into effect.…”