One of the many committees that SCTA State Council Representatives have the option of participating in is the Teacher Evaluation and Academic Freedom (TEAF).  As a former State Council Representative, I had the pleasure of attending TEAF's last meeting for the 2005-06 school year at State Council.

 

TEAF works to elevate the options for expression that teachers have in the classroom and determine CTA's policy positions for evaluation that work best for teacher performance.  The basis for teacher evaluation is a wide stroke, because this opens the door to forms of merit pay options that many parents and schools seem keen about.  In June 2006, TEAF met and discussed possible teacher compensation with the overlap of teacher evaluation.  There are many ways to evaluate teachers, some better than others.

 

The dialogue ranged from the current pay structure to types of alternative pay structures and included discussion regarding the Texas model when G.W. Bush was governor and the results that are seen today.  Endpoints came in along the lines of: an instructor's work can never be guaranteed for success; the composition of the class can have a much higher relationship to student success than teacher input. This truth opens a doorway to exploring many ways that are circulated for evaluating teachers and basing compensation methods almost entirely on individual student performance.

 

The consensus of the group, in no uncertain terms, believed that if teachers were paid for their level of education (equivalent to a master's degree or better) when they entered the teaching field, that the desperate need for future teachers would become a non-issue.