Unsatisfactory Evaluations: Georgia

Exiting Ineffective Teachers Policy

Goal

The state should articulate consequences for teachers with unsatisfactory evaluations, including specifying that teachers with multiple unsatisfactory evaluations should be eligible for dismissal.

Nearly meets
Suggested Citation:
National Council on Teacher Quality. (2011). Unsatisfactory Evaluations: Georgia results. State Teacher Policy Database. [Data set].
Retrieved from: https://www.nctq.org/yearbook/state/GA-Unsatisfactory-Evaluations-10

Analysis of Georgia's policies

Georgia instructs local districts to place teachers receiving unsatisfactory evaluations on professional development plans. The state also requires that a teacher who receives two unsatisfactory evaluations within a five-year period after issuance of a valid teacher license not be permitted to receive a renewable certificate.

However, state policy does not explicitly direct the district to make such teachers eligible for dismissal and allows the district to issue a one-year nonrenewable waiver certificate. Interestingly, the state also requires local districts to report, to a state-operated central clearinghouse, information about those teachers who have received a negative evaluation and those who are on an improvement plan.

Citation

Recommendations for Georgia

Make eligibility for dismissal a consequence of unsatisfactory evaluations.
Georgia is commended for requiring that all teachers who receive an unsatisfactory evaluation, regardless of whether they have tenure, be placed on an improvement plan. However, the state should strengthen its policy and explicitly require that all teachers who receive two consecutive unsatisfactory evaluations or have two unsatisfactory evaluations within five years be formally eligible for dismissal. 

State response to our analysis

Georgia recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis.

Research rationale

To review the process and types of personnel evaluations observed in other job sectors, including the problems inherent to some evaluation systems see, for example, Gliddon, David (October 2004). Effective Performance Management Systems, Current Criticisms and New Ideas for Employee Evaluation in Performance Improvement 43(9), 27-36.