The Lawrence Township Board of Education may be displeased with state-mandated policies that it is expected to adopt regarding teacher evaluation and tenure, but it is also mulling over a propos
By Lea Kahn, Staff Writer
The Lawrence Township Board of Education may be displeased with state-mandated policies that it is expected to adopt regarding teacher evaluation and tenure, but it is also mulling over a proposed resolution outlining its objections.
At the heart of the school board’s concerns is the new teacher evaluation system, which quantifies how a teacher is evaluated. Depending on the grade level and academic subject being taught, part of a teacher’s evaluation score includes the academic progress that students make.
A teacher may be deemed to be ineffective, partially effective, effective or highly effective, based on the new evaluation system. If a teacher is found to be ineffective or partially effective for two consecutive years, tenure charges may be filed against the teacher, which may lead to a teacher’s suspension.
School board member Bill Michaelson has expressed his objections about the teacher evaluation system repeatedly. At Monday night’s school board meeting, he proposed a resolution for the board’s consideration that expresses those concerns.
The draft resolution that Mr. Michaelson presented this week says that the new teacher evaluation process “requires teachers to devote excessive amounts of time and attention to defending their jobs rather than teaching children, redefining successful teaching as checklist fulfillment.”
It also points out that reliance on standardized test scores “constrains teaching,” and serves to redefine public education as college or career preparation, and not for the broader purpose of preparing children to be good citizens.
The state-mandated evaluation system also may “cause us to lose the service of good teachers through dismissal or voluntary resignation,” and “will inevitably cause fewer talented people to enter the field of teaching,” the draft resolution said. It may also diminish the quality of applicants for teaching positions.
Mr. Michaelson said he is ready to approve the state-mandated policies, “but I’m going to be holding my nose. In a nutshell, there is nothing to be gained. (The proposed resolution) is a scream in the wilderness.”
When school board member Leon Kaplan said the basic question is whether one believes that student achievement should be a component of a teacher’s evaluation, Mr. Michaelson replied that teachers need to be evaluated, but he does not believe in an evaluation process as irrevocable as the one adopted by New Jersey.
Mr. Michaelson pointed out that while tenure is job protection, it is not absolute. A teacher can still be fired, he said.
School board member Michael Horan said he agreed with Mr. Michaelson, and added there is a tendency to say the public schools are failing. The state Legislature needs to be told that this is not a good law, he said.
The school board agreed to appoint a committee, made up of Mr. Kaplan, Mr. Horan, Mr. Michaelson and school board vice president Kevin Van Hise to review the draft resolution for possible action at a future school board meeting.

