Strong evaluation systems are foundational to improving teacher and principal quality; evaluations recognize excellence, support development, and address ineffectiveness. They must be meaningful, objective, and fair. Commendably, Connecticut has improved educator evaluations; but its evaluation lacks critical criteria of comprehensive systems. While student growth comprises 22.5% of principal and teacher evaluations, this does not go far enough in ensuring teachers are positively impacting student learning. Notably, evaluations are annual and include classroom observations and a four-tier rating of effectiveness; but Connecticut must continue on its path of investing in its educators by including student feedback in teacher evaluations, the effective management of teachers in principal evaluations, and most important, by increasing the weight of student growth in every case. Districts must also have the authority to develop evaluation criteria apart from contract negotiations, ensuring these systems will be subject to change based on student interests alone.

Basing personnel decisions on performance is critical to building schools that retain effective teachers and make student achievement paramount. Connecticut has made positive developments in this area, but it has to place a higher emphasis on student growth to accurately use performance to inform personnel decisions. In regard to tenure, teachers receive this status after a three- or four-year probationary period. Attainment and revocation of tenure are based on performance. Connecticut law is silent regarding forced placement, but dismissal procedures based on performance do exist for tenured teachers. Furthermore, when teachers are forced to be laid off during a budget-induced reduction in force, districts can use both seniority and performance to determine layoffs. However, because Connecticut does not significantly weigh student growth in evaluations, effectiveness cannot accurately inform any of these key personnel decisions. Prioritizing students and great teachers requires that performance, evident through strong evaluations, be the driving influence for all personnel decisions.

To encourage a high-quality, diverse workforce, professional pay should be based on performance rather than other non-classroom factors such as seniority or degrees held. Connecticut law is silent regarding requiring automatic pay increases for teachers with master's degrees and whether school districts can adopt compensation systems that tie pay increases to measures of effectiveness. To strengthen teacher compensation systems across the state, Connecticut should require its school districts to include performance measures that prioritize student outcomes for the purpose of making pay increases.

Connecticut is a leader in alternative certification, because it allows provisional licenses and classroom placement of teachers from alternative programs. Its admissions criteria are high, and there are no limitations on the grades or subjects taught by alternatively certified teachers. The state also requires demonstration of subject-matter knowledge but not an undergraduate major in the content area taught. While Connecticut permits the commissioner to consider the performance of alternative certification graduates on Praxis II exams, the state does not have an established process for authorizing, evaluating and decommissioning alternative certification programs based on teacher effectiveness. Connecticut could strengthen the effective teacher pool by establishing clear processes for assessing the performance of program graduates based on teacher effectiveness data and evaluations.

Currently, Connecticut parents do not have access to meaningful information that enables them to engage in their schools and make informed decisions for their children. There are a number of steps that Connecticut can take to expand parent empowerment. First, Connecticut should require that all PK_12 schools receive an annual report card that includes an A_F letter grade based on student achievement. The state should allow parental access to teacher evaluation information upon request, and it should require notifying parents when their children are placed with a teacher who has been rated ineffective. Also, Connecticut should require that districts obtain parental consent for placement of a student with an ineffective teacher. Finally, the state could further enhance parental empowerment by establishing a parent trigger law that allows a majority of parents to band together at the grassroots level and petition to turn around low-performing schools throughout the state.

Connecticut must ensure students are not trapped in a failing public school; therefore, the state must take bold action to increase the number of high-quality school choice options for parents. The state must lift the current enrollment cap on public charter schools, providing maximum opportunities for parents to utilize an alternative school option. Further, Connecticut should ensure these autonomous schools are held accountable for student achievement by establishing a clear closure trigger with appropriate protocol for closing persistently underperforming public charter schools. Additionally, Connecticut must establish a fast-track renewal process for high-performing public charter schools and ensure a charter school demonstrates a successful record of raising student achievement before that school can be replicated. Providing equal opportunity scholarships for low-income students in chronically failing traditional public schools so they can attend a private school is essential to increasing quality school options for parents. Any private school that accepts an equal opportunity scholarship must meet certain accountability provisions.

Children stuck in chronically failing schools should have an option to attend another school of their choice without being punished by the state through reduced funding. Connecticut provides state-authorized charter schools a set funding amount rather than using the Education Cost Sharing formula that funds traditional public schools. School districts determine the amount of funding provided to charter schools they individually authorize. Connecticut should provide comparable per-pupil funding to public charter schools. It should also strengthen their ability to obtain school facilities, such as by providing the first right of refusal to unused or underutilized space.

The ability to turn around failing schools is often hampered by bureaucratic red tape and politics. However, Connecticut has created some flexibility regarding school governance that enables officials to intervene in low-performing schools. At the state level, Connecticut allows for limited state control of low-performing schools via the Commissioner's Network. The Commissioner's Network allows the commissioner of education to take over a handful of low-performing schools across the state. At the local level, Connecticut could further streamline accountability by allowing for mayoral control of underperforming districts.

Given the limited resources available for public education, states must ensure that the dollars invested drive the greatest change. Connecticut permits charter schools to pool resources to achieve cost efficiencies and does not include less effective class-size restrictions past the third grade, which facilitates staffing flexibility. However, Connecticut should relax other spending requirements tied to certain state grants and empower data-driven decisionmaking by improving the financial data it collects and linking spending to academic achievement. Furthermore, Connecticut should provide for governance changes when resources are mismanaged.

Attracting a high-quality workforce will require a competitive retirement plan. Portable retirement options, such as 401(k) plans, are an essential component of compensation packages and make the teaching profession more competitive. It is a classic win-win for teachers and districts. Under current policy, Connecticut requires employees of traditional schools and charter schools to participate in its defined benefit plan. These plans promise teachers a payout based on years of service and salary, not the actual amount contributed to or earned through the fund. If teachers leave before reaching retirement age, they risk losing a significant portion of their savings. To provide career flexibility and ensure sustainability of the existing system, Connecticut should move to a portable employer-sponsored retirement plan and permit public charter schools to opt out of the plan.