Dismissal for Poor Performance: Florida
Exiting Ineffective Teachers Policy
Analysis of Florida's policies
Florida ensures that teacher ineffectiveness is
grounds for dismissal. All new teachers are placed on annual
contracts (see "Tenure" analysis), and the state requires that such contracts are
not renewed if a teacher's performance is unsatisfactory. An annual
contract may not be awarded if the teacher has received "two consecutive
annual performance evaluation ratings of unsatisfactory, two annual
performance ratings of unsatisfactory within a three-year period, or
three consecutive annual performance evaluation ratings of needs
improvement or a combination of needs improvement and unsatisfactory."
The
state also distinguishes between the due process rights of teachers dismissed
for ineffective performance as determined by annual performance
evaluations and those facing other charges commonly associated with
license revocation such as a felony and/or morality violations.
A
teacher dismissed for "just cause," which includes "immorality,
misconduct in office, incompetency, gross insubordination, willful
neglect of duty, and being convicted or found guilty of, or entering a
plea of guilty to, regardless of adjudication of guilt, any crime
involving moral turpitude" is entitled to more than one appeal. After
receiving written notice of dismissal, the teacher may file an appeal with the district school board within 15 days. The hearing on the appeal must then take place within 60 days. A
teacher then has 30 days to appeal the district school board's decision
for judicial review.
In contrast, a teacher may contest his or
her dismissal based on a performance evaluation rating by requesting a hearing with the
district school board, and that hearing must take place within 60 days.
The district school board's decision is final.
Recommendations for Florida
As a result of Florida’s strong dismissal policies, no recommendations are provided.
State response to our analysis
Florida recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis.
-
Florida
Select another topic
Delivering Well Prepared Teachers
- Admission into Teacher Preparation
- Elementary Teacher Preparation
- Elementary Teacher Preparation in Reading Instruction
- Elementary Teacher Preparation in Mathematics
- Early Childhood
- Middle School Teacher Preparation
- Secondary Teacher Preparation
- Secondary Teacher Preparation in Science and Social Studies
- Special Education Teacher Preparation
- Special Education Preparation in Reading
- Assessing Professional Knowledge
- Student Teaching
- Teacher Preparation Program Accountability
Expanding the Pool of Teachers
Identifying Effective Teachers
- State Data Systems
- Evaluation of Effectiveness
- Frequency of Evaluations
- Tenure
- Licensure Advancement
- Equitable Distribution
Retaining Effective Teachers
Exiting Ineffective Teachers
Pensions
Research rationale
States need to be
explicit that teacher ineffectiveness is grounds for dismissal.
Most states have laws on their books that address teacher
dismissal; however, until recently these laws were much more likely to consider criminal and
moral violations than performance. While many states have amended their dismissal policy to be more explict about classroom ineffectiveness, some still retain euphemistic terms such as "incompetency,"
"inefficiency" or "incapacity." These terms are ambiguous
at best and may be interpreted as concerning dereliction of duty rather than
ineffectiveness. Without laws that clearly state that teacher ineffectiveness
is grounds for dismissal, districts may feel they lack the legal basis for
terminating consistently poor performers.
Due process must be
efficient and expedited.
Nonprobationary teachers who are dismissed for any grounds,
including ineffectiveness, are entitled to due process. However, due process
rights that allow for multiple levels of appeal are not fair to teachers,
districts and especially students. All parties have a right to have disputes
settled quickly. Cases that drag on for years drain resources from school
districts and create a disincentive for districts to attempt to terminate poor
performances. Teachers are not well served by such processes either, as they are
entitled to final resolution quickly.
Decisions about
teachers should be made by those with educational expertise.
Multiple levels of appeal almost invariably involve courts
or arbitrators who lack educational expertise. It is not in students' best interest
to have the evidence of teachers' effectiveness evaluated by those who are not
educators. A teacher's opportunity to appeal should occur at the district level
and involve only those with educational expertise. This can be done in a manner
that is fair to all parties by including retired teachers or other
knowledgeable individuals who are not current district employees.
Dismissal for Poor Performance: Supporting Research
One
of the greatest shortcomings of teacher performance appraisals has been school
systems' unwillingness and inability
to differentiate instructional competency. The New Teacher Project, 2009, "The
Widget Effect: Our National Failure to Acknowledge and Act on Differences in
Teacher Effectiveness" at http://widgeteffect.org.
See
NCTQ, State of the States: Trends and Early Lessons on Teacher Evaluation and Effectiveness Policies (2011) as
well as studies by The New Teacher Project of human resource and dismissal
policies in various districts at: http://tntp.org/ideas-and-innovations.
For
information on the high cost of teacher dismissals, see Steven Brill, "The
Rubber Room," The New Yorker, August 31, 2009 at: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/31/090831fa_fact_brill.
Also,
see S. Reeder, "The Hidden Costs of Tenure: Why are Failing Teachers
Getting a Passing Grade?" Small Newspaper Group, 2005 at: http://thehiddencostsoftenure.com.