Page 11 - Flathead Beacon // 5.20.2015

FLATHEADBEACON.COM NEWS MAY 20, 2015 | 11
Bigfork School Board to Audit Teacher Evaluations After Dismissal
community
Parents raised concerns about the process after a popular teacher was dismissed this year
By JUSTIN FRANZ of the Beacon
BIGFORK – Parents have raised concerns over the teacher-evaluation process in Bigfork after a popular kin- dergarten teacher was dismissed with- out explanation earlier this spring even though she had previously received high marks.
Now the Bigfork school board is creating a committee to audit teacher evaluations over the last five years. The three-person committee is expected to gather in coming weeks and begin open- ing teacher personnel files to review their number of evaluations.
The issue of teacher evaluations was first recognized by a group of parents when, earlier this year, Kelli Whalen, a kindergarten teacher at the school for the last two years, was dismissed with little explanation. Parents who sup- ported Whalen said they were confused when they found out that Whalen, who taught in Alaska and Bozeman for near- ly a decade before coming to Bigfork, had received high marks on her employee evaluations. Whalen, however, had not been at the school long enough to be ten- ured and thus could be dismissed with- out cause.
“It seems so strange to me that this amazing teacher was not able to stay at the school and that there is no recourse
for her,” said Monica Harris, the mother of a child in Whalen’s class. “We accept this legally, but it does not seem fair.”
Bigfork school district officials have declined to publically say Whalen’s con- tract was not renewed.
However, parents looking into Wha- len’s dismissal found that the teacher had only had two evaluations in two years at the school. According to the school district, non-tenured staff should be evaluated once per school semester and all evaluations must be completed and submitted before May 1. A post-eval- uation conference is supposed to be held within five days of completing the evalu- ation. Bigfork’s elementary school is on a trimester schedule, meaning Whalen only received two of the six evaluations she was supposed to have.
According to a school district docu- ment titled “Classified Evaluation In- strument Process and Description,” the teachers are judged using 24 general performance factors, including how they interact with students and col- leagues; attendance; and quality of work and initiative, among other standards. The evaluations are intended to help employees understand their jobs, help them develop, and “aid the administra- tion in the selection, assignment, reten- tion and promotion process.”
Whalen received evaluations in February and November 2014 and was found to be professionally proficient, although parts of the second evaluation were incomplete. Regardless, Whalen was surprised when she was informed in February that she would not be return- ing in the fall.
When parents found that Whalen
had not even received the proper num- ber of evaluations, they urged the school board to look into it, which they did dur- ing the May 13 meeting. Harris and oth- er parents said they found evidence that other teachers, including tenured ones, had not received evaluations in years.
Vice Chair Paul Sandry said the Board of Trustees would not go into specifics about why it decided not to re- hire Whalen, but it did acknowledge the school was not following its own guide- lines in regards to evaluations.
“If we have a policy that states we need to do multiple evaluations every year then we need to do that,” Sandry said during the meeting.
Sandry said there was no excuse for the school district to not do evaluations every semester; however, he noted that one reason the reviews have not been completed is that there has been some turnover in the administration. Matt Jensen became superintendent in 2014 after being principal at the elementary and middle school.
The three-person committee made up of Board of Trustees members is ex- pected to report back to the full board later this summer with its findings.
Harris said she was pleased the school board decided to look into the matter, but she believes there should be a standing committee to keep an eye on this issue in the future. She worries that the issue may again fall through the cracks once the board completes the five-year audit.
“I don’t want any other teacher to find themself in Kelli’s position again,”
she said.
banking...
What does it mean to you?
Board Selects Renovation Plan for High School
Redevelopment and addition could cost over $12 million
By BEACON STAFF
The Bigfork school board approved plans for a proposed renovation and addition of the high school during last week’s meeting.
The seven-member Bigfork School District Board of Trustees on May 13 selected a project plan that would seek to add 23,260 square feet and upgrade another 46,890 square feet at the high school.
Planners from CTA Architects En- gineers estimated the renovation and addition could cost between $12 million and $14 million. CTA officials described the plan at last week’s meeting, calling it
the “Agora option,” which translates to gathering place.
A separate plan that was considered would have sought to build slightly more new space and likely cost more.
The school board would need voter approval for a bond to move forward with the project.
School administrators have restart- ed a dialogue with the Bigfork communi- ty about its high school, which was built in the 1960s and has received few reno- vations over the last five decades.
After conducting the latest site as- sessment last year that once again found structural issues and growing needs throughout the campus, the Bigfork school board voted to embark on an “ed- ucational visioning and strategic facility plan,” which aimed to develop goals and options for the school, including possi- ble renovations.
CTA Architects Engineers, which
was hired to conduct the study, found the school is largely outdated and lack- ing proper space.
Enrollment in Bigfork has now risen for five straight years.
The school district hosted commu- nity meetings to discuss ideas that could be incorporated into any future redevel- opment plans in recent months.
Nearly seven years ago, the school district failed twice in five months to pass a bond for high school renovations. Administrators followed a similar strat- egy as the latest effort, hiring an archi- tecture firm to analyze needs and costs over 18 months. The district proposed an $11.1 million bond for the high school and a $5.5 million bond for the middle school.
According to administrators, the situation remains the same and in some ways has worsened.
[email protected]
www.ThreeRiversBankMontana.com
[email protected]