Retaining Effective Teachers Policy
Link to Evidence of Effectiveness: Hawaii requires teachers to earn at least two consecutive overall ratings of effective or better. If a collective bargaining agreement provides for fewer than six semesters of probation, the state must extend the probationary period of any teacher who receives an overall evaluation rating of less than effective in the second year.
Basis for Tenure: Hawaii's evaluation policy does not allow teachers rated ineffective for student growth to be rated effective overall. Therefore, basing tenure decisions on these evaluation ratings ensures that classroom effectiveness is appropriately considered.
As a result of Hawaii's strong tenure policies, no recommendations are provided.
Hawaii had no comment on this goal.
9B: Tenure
Tenure should be a significant and consequential milestone in a teacher's career. The decision to give teachers tenure (or permanent status) is usually made automatically, with little thought, deliberation or consideration of actual performance.[1] State policy should reflect the fact that initial certification is temporary and probationary, and that tenure is intended to be a significant reward for teachers who have consistently shown effectiveness and commitment.[2] Tenure and advanced certification are not rights implied by the conferring of an initial teaching certificate. No other profession, including higher education, offers practitioners tenure after only a few years of working in the field.[3]
States should also ensure that evidence of effectiveness is the preponderant (but not the only) criterion for making tenure decisions.[4] Most states confer tenure at a point that is too early for the collection of sufficient and adequate data that reflect teacher performance. Ideally, states would accumulate such data for four to five years. This robust data set would prevent effective teachers from being unfairly denied tenure based on too little data and ineffective teachers from being granted tenure.