Tenure Confusion in NJ Eases; However...
So I got a copy of the actual Ruiz tenure bill here in NJ from someone in the know. I was worried because there was some confusion as to what was actually passed. I can tell you that the bill has some changes from thelatest version posted at NJ Spotlight. They are significant, but I wouldn't consider them earth-shattering.
One change is that the state has to provide training not only on the evaluation rubrics, but also on "demonstrations of competence on the evaluation system." I'm not sure if that means the evaluator has to demonstrate competence, or the evaluatee, but whatever.
A more significant change is that if you are rated "partially effective" one year, and if you're then rated "ineffective" the next, you are up on inefficiency charges. The original bill said you had to be "ineffective" two years in a row. Not a small difference.
Other than that, the bills are the same - which means:
One change is that the state has to provide training not only on the evaluation rubrics, but also on "demonstrations of competence on the evaluation system." I'm not sure if that means the evaluator has to demonstrate competence, or the evaluatee, but whatever.
A more significant change is that if you are rated "partially effective" one year, and if you're then rated "ineffective" the next, you are up on inefficiency charges. The original bill said you had to be "ineffective" two years in a row. Not a small difference.
Other than that, the bills are the same - which means:
- Seniority is still being used in layoff decisions, and not teacher "effectiveness."