When we heard that the new Chicago teachers? contract included an appeals process, we were uneasy. Most professionals don?t get to appeal their evaluations as a matter of course, and appeals processes for teachers can often turn into bureaucratic bogs from which it is impossible to extricate meaningful evaluation.
Having taken a closer look at the appeals process in the Chicago contract, we?re guardedly optimistic. As appeals systems go, this one is better than most. Implementation of the process and the timeline in particular, will be critical factors.
Only teachers who have received an unsatisfactory rating and another consecutive developing rating are eligible to appeal, which keeps the pool manageable. The four person appeals committee will be made up of active or retired educators, not professional arbitrators. One member is chosen by CPS, another by the CTU, and the remaining two are chosen jointly.
The process places the burden of proof on the teacher to prove that the rating is wrong. The appeals committee can issue a ruling at any point in the process. The original rating can only be overturned by a vote of three members of the appeals committee. Nothing in the process delays required professional development or remediation.
It gets muddy when you get to the timeline. A complex series of steps must be followed in a short amount of time, but the contract isn?t clear about what happens if deadlines aren?t met. In particular, the schedule for classroom observations seems virtually impossible to keep. If that's the case, the committee may choose to opt out of this step all together, which surely can?t be in the best interest of the teacher making the appeal.
The attempt to make this a speedy process is laudable, but this timeline is unrealistic and could hurt more than it helps. What happens when a deadline is missed? Will the appealing teachers then grieve the process? We would hope not.