In light of new laws changing the way teachers are evaluated, The Post talked with Joseph Womack, president and founder of Schoolstation, to get a handle on the new guidelines and how they will affect teachers.

Joseph Womack is president and founder of Schoolstation, a Murfreesboro-based software development firm specializing in applications for Tennessee’s public school systems.

The software he creates is used by 20 school districts statewide, handling aspects of administration including teacher recertification and continuing education, asset management and facility maintenance.

For the last three years, his company has offered software solutions for Tennessee’s teacher evaluation process.

In light of new laws changing the way teachers are evaluated, Post reporter Jonathon Fagan sat down with Womack to get a handle on the new guidelines and how they will affect teachers.

Q: You are intimately familiar with both the old and new evaluation process. How did the old process work and how does it differ from the new process?
A: The old was very complicated and consisted of “comprehensive” evaluations and informal “walk-through” evals. “Walk throughs” were actually very similar to the new model. The “comprehensive” evaluation required tremendous amounts of paperwork with teachers required to submit “growth plans,” which were then approved by the principal. The new evals add various ratings such as test scores or retention rates to the process, and get rid of the comprehensive evals.

Q: What is the major difference between the old and new process?
A: The numbers of evaluations. An apprentice teacher, which includes all those without tenure, is evaluated six times per year under this new model and, of course, the tenure laws changed during this process as well, which made things a little more confusing. The old eval system required yearly informal “walk-through” evals once every year and one yearly comprehensive eval for non-tenured teachers. Tenured teachers received one comprehensive evaluation every two years.

Q: In recent weeks, there has been a lot of talk in the press about teachers and principals such as Smyrna High Principal Bud Raikes retiring due to these new guidelines for teacher evaluations. Where do you think this fear among educators is coming from?
A: I think it comes from the sheer number of evaluations that they will have to do.
Principals and administrators had to attend a four- to five-day training session over the summer just to be certified as evaluators. In the case of Rutherford, they have actually hired outside consultants because there are a lot of evaluations to do, especially if you have a lot of non-tenured teachers in your school system.

Q: Besides the sheer number of evaluations, how does the new process compare with the old?
A: It’s nothing too dramatic.
The old comprehensive evals involved a multi-step submittal process for a growth plan that could go on for months, even a full year. Principals and administrators were the evaluators, who also approved the growth plans. The new model doesn’t really have that. It’s more straightforward. I think the reason for so many teachers and administrators retiring is the number of evals. That’s a real problem. For example, if an evaluator had to go on sick leave, it could throw off the entire year’s eval schedule depending on how many they had to evaluate.

Q: But the old comprehensive process would seem to take a lot of time as well.
A: Right. But they didn’t have to do it as often.

Q: So there have also been some lawsuits arising from teachers. One in particular has been brought by award-winning Siegel High teacher Fonda Blair against the School Board. She claims her TVAAS scores have been skewed by improper reporting and she states in the suit that these TVAAS scores will now be 35 percent of her evaluation, which has implications for her continued employment as a teacher. There are a lot of teachers who are downright fearful of these evals because of the scoring. Are these fear valid?
A: I don’t think so. The state has said that this is an evaluation year for the new evaluation model. There are going to be some necessary changes made. If you look at the requirements, the teachers will actually be a past of how that score is determined.
Each November, they will be able to select which “achievement measurement” they want to use, whether it’s TCAP testing, TVAAS, ACT scores, even ninth grade promotion rates or graduation rates. And they can change them from year to year depending on what they are comfortable with.
I’ve been all over the state talking to teachers about different concerns, and I think the biggest thing is scheduling these evals, keeping on track, keeping up with the massive amounts of data. I think that is the biggest concern right now.

Q: Another complaint among teachers is under this new system principals and administrators have so much more control over the retention of teachers through this process. Is that a valid complaint?
A: No. They were evaluated by principals and administrators before, too. The only difference is now a score measured on the state level is factored in.
The sheer number of evals means that a teacher will most likely not be evaluated by the same person under the new model.

Q: Is there any confusion on your part, as the software engineer, about what will take place?
A: Its been a very long summer and fall getting this stuff all figured out. There’s been some confusion on the state side. Each department has told me that another department has the info I need for certain aspects, and I’m sure local school systems are dealing with this too. I was hard to get the same correct info from all involved. Things are changing every day. Training on the state’s data management system began this week, which is the last big question in the process.

Q: But didn’t the evals begin in January? What have school systems done for the past 10 months?
A: Everything is being done on paper since January. The deadline for entering the data is June and I expect the state’s system to be up this month. The state hired an out-of-state contractor to manage the data system.

Q: Wait, so the state hired an out-of-state contractor for all of that work?
A: Yes. MyLearningPlan.com based in Great River, New York, a direct competitor of my company.

Q: Will evaluators be using laptops, iPads, etc. in the classroom for eval data? Does your company offer an iPad app for this?
A: Yes, but it’s a budgetary issue. Many school systems have been able to buy iPads for their evaluators, some can only afford to do it on paper. Some will simply use laptops, and we offer applications for that too. School systems are understandably wary about spending money on something before knowing what the final product should be.

Q: Have any legislators been helpful to you in the process of finding answer to your
questions?
A: I have had very productive meetings with state Sen. Jim Tracy (R-Shelbyville). Legislators are trying to find answers, much like everyone else involved. It’s a learning process for everyone.