Exiting Ineffective Teachers Policy
The state should require that its school districts consider classroom performance as a factor in determining which teachers are laid off when a reduction in force is necessary.
Nevada requires that seniority is not the sole factor in determining which teachers are laid off during a reduction in force, and the following factors may also be considered: 1) whether the teacher is employed in a "hard to fill" position, 2) whether a teacher has earned national board certification, 3) the teacher's performance evaluations, 4) the teacher's disciplinary and criminal record, 5) which type of license the teacher has earned and 6) the degree earned by the teacher (including whether it relates to the subject area in which he or she teaches).
Require that districts consider classroom performance as a factor in determining which teachers are laid off during reductions in force.
Nevada is commended for taking steps to ensure that seniority is no longer the sole factor in determining which teachers are laid off and for making it possible for teachers' performance evaluations to be considered during reductions in force. The state could strengthen this policy by making the consideration of classroom performance a requirement rather than an option.
Nevada had no comment on this goal.
LIFO policies put adult interests before student needs.
Across the country, most districts utilize "last in, first out" policies in the event of teacher layoffs. Most states leave these decisions to district discretion; some states require layoffs to be based on seniority. Such policies fail to give due weight to a teacher's classroom performance and risk sacrificing effective teachers while maintaining low performers.
Policies that prioritize seniority in layoff decisions can also cause significant upheaval in schools and school districts. As teachers who are newer to the classroom traditionally draw lower salaries, a seniority-based layoff policy is likely to require that districts lay off a larger number of probationary teachers rather than a smaller group of ineffective teachers to achieve the same budget reduction.
States can leave districts flexibility in determining layoff policies, but they should do so while also ensuring that classroom performance is considered. Further, if performance is prioritized, states need not prohibit the use of seniority as an additional criterion in determining who is laid off.
Reductions in Force: Supporting Research
See National Council on Teacher Quality, "Teacher Layoffs: Rethinking 'Last-Hired, First-Fired' Policies", 2010; The New Teacher Project, "The Case Against Quality-Blind Teacher Layoffs" (2011); D. Boyd, H. Lankford, S. Loeb, and J. Wyckoff, "Teacher Layoffs: An Empirical Illustration of Seniority v. Measures of Effectiveness", Calder Institute, July 2010, Brief 12; D. Goldhaber and R. Theobald, "Assessing the Determinants and Implications of Teacher Layoffs." Calder Institute, Working Paper 55, December 2010; C. Sepe and M. Roza, "The Disproportionate Impact of Seniority-Based Layoffs on Poor, Minority Students." Center on Reinventing Public Education, May 2010.