Comments on: Tenure not quite automatic in L.A. http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/02/11/tenure-not-quite-automatic-in-l-a/ Analysis, opinion and ruminations on California education policy Wed, 30 May 2012 07:31:37 +0200 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Mary Bergan http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/02/11/tenure-not-quite-automatic-in-l-a/comment-page-1/#comment-5382 Mary Bergan Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:44:29 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1246#comment-5382 To add some more history, the probationary period was reduced from three to two years as part of SB813 in 1983. Since then districts may have to evaluate probationary teachers, but they don't have to pay any attention to the evaluation. They don't need to -- and they won't - give a teacher who doesn't make tenure a reason. The exception is those few districts that have peer assistance and review programs for new teachers, programs which give potentially good teachers the support they need to stick with it, and those individuals that don't belong in teaching a way out with some insight and dignity. More time to tenure is much less the issue than a supportive system of induction that includes credible evaluation. BTW, I think John M was referring to the Stull Act, which was signed in 1971. To add some more history, the probationary period was reduced from three to two years as part of SB813 in 1983. Since then districts may have to evaluate probationary teachers, but they don’t have to pay any attention to the evaluation. They don’t need to — and they won’t – give a teacher who doesn’t make tenure a reason. The exception is those few districts that have peer assistance and review programs for new teachers, programs which give potentially good teachers the support they need to stick with it, and those individuals that don’t belong in teaching a way out with some insight and dignity. More time to tenure is much less the issue than a supportive system of induction that includes credible evaluation.
BTW, I think John M was referring to the Stull Act, which was signed in 1971.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: John Fensterwald http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/02/11/tenure-not-quite-automatic-in-l-a/comment-page-1/#comment-5355 John Fensterwald Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:16:09 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1246#comment-5355 That some penance, John. That some penance, John.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]> By: john mockler http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/02/11/tenure-not-quite-automatic-in-l-a/comment-page-1/#comment-5329 john mockler Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:32:36 +0000 http://educatedguess.org/blog/?p=1246#comment-5329 John You should know better. The laws of California, signed by the republican governor in office in 1972 require all probationary and permenant employees to be evaluated in part by student academic progress towards standards of achievement. The law signed by our current governor had nothing to do with this.His law just eliminated the prohibition that achievement data linked to individual teacher be sent to the state. A law, by the way that this same governor signed two years earlier. You really need to slow down on cocktail party gossip and start reading the codes. John You should know better. The laws of California, signed by the republican governor in office in 1972 require all probationary and permenant employees to be evaluated in part by student academic progress towards standards of achievement. The law signed by our current governor had nothing to do with this.His law just eliminated the prohibition that achievement data linked to individual teacher be sent to the state. A law, by the way that this same governor signed two years earlier. You really need to slow down on cocktail party gossip and start reading the codes.

Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity

]]>