ESSA Loosens Reins On Teacher Evaluations, Qualifications

With the enactment of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the federal government’s significant involvement in teacher licensing and evaluation has come to a close. One notable change is that states are no longer required to implement teacher-evaluation systems that heavily rely on students’ test scores, which was a key requirement under the U.S. Department of Education’s previous state-waiver system for the No Child Left Behind Act.

Symbolically, ESSA represents a rejection of one of the Obama administration’s major policy initiatives. However, it remains uncertain to what extent the new law will encourage states to revise or abandon their current methods of grading teachers.

Some states, such as New York, Oklahoma, and South Carolina, are already considering reevaluating their evaluation policies, while others plan to uphold them. "Some states may initially reverse evaluation laws, but I believe most states will engage in longer discussions," expressed Daniel Weisberg, the CEO of TNTP, a teacher-training and advocacy group that supports the administration’s efforts to reform teacher evaluation. "The main variable is the level of opposition states face for proposing to go back to a time when most teachers were considered good or great without any consideration of their impact on students."

The push for changes in teacher evaluation stems largely from the stark contrast between the inflated evaluation scores given to teachers and research indicating that teachers vary significantly in their ability to improve student achievement. In 2011, the Education Department conditioned state waivers for the No Child Left Behind Act on the implementation of new teacher-evaluation systems. Many states struggled to establish these systems, and the emphasis on test scores received strong backlash from teachers, resulting in numerous lawsuits and contributing to the "opt-out" movement among parents.

Given these political obstacles, it remains unclear whether states will continue to adhere to a challenging and controversial policy when they are no longer mandated to do so.

Another less noticed change in the Every Student Succeeds Act concerns the state teacher-quality grants program, also known as Title II, which receives $2.3 billion in funding. The formula for allocating these funds now places greater weight on poverty levels, shifting resources away from the Rust Belt region and towards Southern states. The formula also eliminates the minimum award amount guaranteed to each state since 2002. The new formula will be gradually implemented to prevent sudden and drastic shifts. However, by fiscal year 2023, the Congressional Research Service predicts that annual grants to states such as Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Puerto Rico will decrease by $10 million or more compared to their 2016 grants. Conversely, states like California, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas will receive an additional $10 million annually compared to their 2016 grants.

Among other changes, states are now allowed to use their teacher-quality funds to support residency-based teacher-preparation programs, where teacher-candidates receive guided training from mentors for a year. They can also establish independent teacher-preparation academies separate from traditional higher education institutions and quality-control systems. However, over time, these academies must demonstrate that they produce teachers with a track record of effectiveness.

In Oklahoma, school districts have encountered difficulties when it comes to implementing measures to assess the growth of students in subjects that are not tested. The superintendent of Oklahoma, Joy Hofmeister, suggests following the approach taken by the Tulsa school district, which uses student surveys as a means of evaluation. Though she believes that teachers should still receive information on the progress of their students’ tests, she does not think it should result in negative consequences such as dismissals. Hofmeister emphasizes the need for a system that focuses on self-reflection, continuous improvement, and professional growth. She acknowledges that changes are necessary to achieve this goal without disrupting the work of the state.

In New York, the decision to delay the integration of test scores into teacher evaluations for four years could be more influenced by political circumstances rather than the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), according to Jenny Sedlis, the executive director of StudentsFirst NY, an advocacy group that supports using scores for evaluations. Sedlis highlights the atypical high rate of test opt-outs in New York and the efforts made by the teachers’ union to promote the movement. By stepping back, Governor Andrew Cuomo aims to rebuild support for evaluation and accountability. However, Sedlis argues that after consistently rating 98 percent of teachers as effective, it will be challenging to convince parents and legislators that teachers are being held to a fair standard.

Despite the introduction of ESSA, some state officials have expressed their commitment to maintaining the evaluation systems established during the waiver era. Hanna Skandera, the superintendent in New Mexico, has faced legal challenges in implementing the new evaluation system but remains steadfast in her resolve. June Atkinson, the state chief in North Carolina, envisions only minor changes to their existing system. Even Aaron Pallas, a critic of the Obama-era teacher evaluations, believes that the passage of ESSA will not significantly impact evaluation systems in states since it still requires state testing systems for teacher evaluations.

Teachers’ unions perceive an opportunity to change policies that their members have firmly rejected and hold more influence among state legislatures compared to Congress. They anticipate a more cooperative process in revisiting teacher evaluation. The American Federation of Teachers plans to utilize its political power to address this issue. AFT President Randi Weingarten emphasizes the need to advocate for better policies rather than solely focusing on eliminating unfavorable ones.

Revising teacher-evaluation policies will not be an easy task since they are already established in law or regulation in 42 states and the District of Columbia. Most states would need to rewrite legislation or regulations to implement changes. Additionally, advocacy groups that support evaluation reform have emerged in the last decade and will likely continue to pressure lawmakers to preserve the existing systems. Furthermore, the ESSA law no longer requires states to employ "highly qualified" teachers in each core academic class, instead only necessitating that teachers meet their state’s licensing requirements in schools receiving Title I funds.

To illustrate, the NCLB legislation explicitly prohibited teachers who did not have the relevant expertise or were teaching under emergency certificates from being classified as "highly qualified." In addition, under ESSA, parents will no longer receive written notifications if their children are being taught by such teachers. The Coalition for Teaching Quality, which comprises over 100 national and state organizations including teachers’ unions and the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, emphasized the need for clear expectations for educators responsible for students’ education. These concerns hold particular significance amidst regional teacher shortages, prompting urgent efforts in states like Oklahoma and Nevada to expedite teacher recruitment. "The HQT regulations impose significant limitations on filling these vacancies; it will be intriguing to observe the approaches that states and districts adopt in their absence," noted Eubanks of the NEA.