Our objective , as with every problem that surfaces for our members , is to identify the issue and find an attainable solution
Advocacy notation made along with the score ? A few of our members are taking some time out of the classroom this year , but plan to return , and were concerned that these scores could prevent them from returning to the classroom in coming years . Will anyone remember in a few years time that this was the year that portfolios experienced problems ? Even if so , how could they tell if a low score was truly the result of low student growth rather than an error ? Even if it was a submisison error , how could they get this on the record for future reference ?
Our first request in discussions with the TNDOE was for affected teachers to be able to request some sort of official letter stating that their scores were due to submission errors v . growth for documentation purposes . The outgrowth of this was that a short time later all teachers who were assigned to this “ Scenario 2 ” were notified by the department , along with a description of the potential reasons one may have fallen into that scenario . We offered our members asssitance in having this documentation added to their records , to help protect them from future employment-related conequences . But we didn ’ t stop there .
“
Our objective , as with every problem that surfaces for our members , is to identify the issue and find an attainable solution
”
There were still numerous cases of teachers who could not determine the cause for an error , and firmly believed that there were none . As a prelimiary step , we asked them to request a review from the Portfolio Lead in their distict ’ s central office to see if they could help identify the source of the error . For our members , in every case the district personnel were also unable to determine the supposed error or the teacher received no response to their request for additional review . In some cases , despite TNDOE having notified districts that they would be instituting a process for re-review at the state level , teachers were told that filing a grienvance to request vacating their score was the only option .
Throughout the process , we had been communicating with our members , encouraging them to make sure to download all of their portfolio content before termination of access to the Educopia platform , and asking them to submit all relevant materials to us as we were working closely with the Department to seek further resolution . We continued to communicate with the Department that teachers were having their portfolios reviewed by district leads and questions
remained unanswered . We advocated for our members and pushed for further steps to get real answers .
At long last , the announcement was made that the TNDOE would be accepting names for a statelevel review . We were able to submit our members ’ request for re-review directly , which was especially important in cases where they were not receiving timely responses or were bring misinformed at the district level . According to the Department , if an error is confirmed , the teacher will still have the option to vacate their score . Even better , they will receive additional feedback on what error they made .
Most importantly , if the new review determines that there in fact was not a submission error after all , the collection will be scored and the correct score posted in TNCompass . This process is occurring at the time of publication and we look forward to the results and final resolution for our members .