The state should articulate consequences for teachers with unsatisfactory evaluations, including specifying that teachers with multiple unsatisfactory evaluations should be eligible for dismissal.
New legislation in Nevada specifies that a postprobationary teacher who receives an unsatisfactory evaluation will be evaluated three times in the following school year. The teacher may request assistance in correcting noted deficiencies. If a teacher's overall evaluation for two consecutive school years is deemed to be "below average," the teacher will return to probationary status.
Require that all teachers who receive unsatisfactory evaluations be placed on improvement plans.
The state does not articulate policy that formal remediation plans will be utilized for teachers who receive unsatisfactory evaluations. The state should adopt a policy to require that teachers who receive a single unsatisfactory evaluation be placed on structured improvement plans. These plans should focus on performance areas that directly connect to student learning and should list noted deficiencies, define specific action steps necessary to address these deficiencies and describe how and when progress will be measured.
Make eligibility for dismissal a consequence of unsatisfactory evaluations.
Reverting a teacher back to probationary status for poor performance makes it easier to dismiss said teacher, but it is not equivalent to articulating that a teacher is eligible for dismissal for unsatisfactory evaluations. The state should consider articulating policy that makes teachers who receive two consecutive unsatisfactory evaluations or have two unsatisfactory evaluations within five years formally eligible for dismissal, regardless of whether they have tenure.
Nevada recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis.
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.