Unsatisfactory Teachers or Saving Money?

This month, The Baltimore Sun published a front-page article concerning the number of city schools teachers that received unsatisfactory ratings on their mid-year evaluations. The cause for this spike in unsatisfactory ratings, in a city where the majority (around 60% of teachers) were rated proficient last year, is up for debate and sheds light on the issues of a new progressive contract in a depressed economy. With mistrust from teachers and pressure on city and school administrations to increase student achievement, performance improvement plans or PIPs have angered teachers and called into question the motivation of rating a teacher unsatisfactory.

Without a doubt, the historic ways that teachers have been evaluated is outdated and possibly ineffective. Baltimore City has taken the bold step of approving a new contract that rewards teachers monetarily for being highly effective academic leaders in their classrooms and schools. The distrust that existed prior to the contract’s approval is surfacing again though. Are more teachers unsatisfactory to save money or have the standards been raised? Although many teachers regard PIPs as negative or precursors to termination, they can help struggling teachers receive supports, which theoretically increases all teachers’ effectiveness.

In the end, Baltimore City Public Schools is in the business of doing what is best for our children. By rewarding good teaching, all teachers will aspire to be proficient in their craft. Unfortunately, in some cases the label of having a PIP has spurred a conversation that is not focused on the central point of the issue, which is helping all of Baltimore’s children receive the best possible education we can provide them.