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. Unfortunately, Missouri's evaluations do not substantively assess teacher and principal quality. In 2012-13, Missouri will pilot an evaluation system that includes student growth, multiple measures, and a 0-7 scale of effectiveness. The pilot does not require evaluations to be annual or define a threshold for student growth, however. Missouri must invest in its educators by conducting annual evaluations, based on multiple measures that significantly weigh rigorous measures of student growth; teacher evaluations should include classroom observations and student feedback, and principal evaluations should include effective staff management. The state's evaluation criteria should not be subject to 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. Missouri is behind in this area. Specifically, the state does not use teacher effectiveness to drive decisions around teacher assignment, layoffs, or tenure. Schools do not have the authority to build and maintain an effective instructional team, including having autonomy over staff hiring and the dismissal of ineffective teachers. Furthermore, when teachers are forced to be laid off during a budget-induced reduction in force, the state mandates that metropolitan districts use seniority, not performance, to determine layoffs. Other districts must consider performance; however, because Missouri does not have strong teacher evaluations, effectiveness cannot accurately inform dismissal decisions. With regard to tenure, teachers receive this status after serving a five-year probationary period. Attainment of tenure is not tied to performance, and while revocation of tenure can be based on performance, this is not required. 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. Missouri sets a minimum salary schedule for teachers based on years of experience and degree type. School districts can participate in a supplemental pay career advancement program, but teachers can only participate after five years of service and pay increases are not tied to measures of effectiveness. The state does allow metropolitan school districts to offer performance-based salary stipends to participating teachers. To best support and reward effective teachers, the state should prohibit automatic salary increases for master's degrees alone and require school districts, regardless of location, to implement performance-pay systems that prioritize student outcome measures.

Missouri restricts offerings to a two-year, provisional teaching certificate for candidates with a bachelor's degree who go back to a college of education program. Those with a bachelor's degree and 2.5 GPA or higher can enter the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence (ABCTE) program and become certified in certain subjects after passing content and pedagogy exams. A doctorate degree and pedagogy exam allow initial certificates in specific subjects. To improve the pool of high-quality candidates, the state should increase the selectivity of its admissions criteria, allow non-university providers outside of ABCTE, and allow alternative certification in all subjects. Missouri regulations describe the approval and evaluation process for all teacher preparation programs, but reviews are unclear regarding teacher effectiveness based on evaluation data. Missouri can improve alternative certification accountability by explicitly including student data and decommissioning ineffective programs.

Missouri must take a number of steps to ensure that parents have access to meaningful information that enables them to engage in their schools and make informed decisions for their children. First, the state should require that all PK_12 schools receive an annual report card that includes an A_F letter grade based on student achievement. Missouri also needs to begin notifying parents when their children have been placed in a classroom with a teacher who has been rated ineffective and require parental consent for placement of a student with an ineffective teacher. Additionally, Missouri can 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.

Missouri should ensure its students are not trapped in failing schools by increasing high-quality school choice options for parents. Missouri took important steps toward providing more choice for parents by greatly expanding allowable locations for charter schools and creating an expedited approval process for high-performing operators. The state also has a new strong accountability process for both schools and authorizers. The state should leverage this accountability system and remove its remaining restrictions on charter growth to allow high-performing schools to flourish. Additionally, Missouri should create a publicly funded scholarship program that allows low-income students in chronically failing schools to attend a high-performing private school. Any private school accepting a publicly funded scholarship should have to adhere to 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. Missouri public charter schools receive funding comparable to traditional public schools. However, Missouri should revise its skimming provisions that currently allow up to 1.5% of a charter school's funding (up to $125,000) to be retained by the charter's authorizer. Missouri law is generally silent on charter school facilities. Missouri should provide charter schools with access to unused school facilities and financing programs for charter school construction.

The ability to turn around failing schools is often hampered by bureaucratic red tape and politics. Missouri has created some flexibility regarding school governance in that the state provides for limited state control of low-performing schools or districts when the schools or districts lose their accreditation. If a school district loses its accreditation, a Special Administrative Board (SAB) is appointed by the State Board of Education to intervene. The SAB assumes all the powers of the school board for up to three years. The state could increase school governance flexibility by allowing the SAB to intervene for as long as necessary. Also, to streamline accountability at the local level, Missouri should allow mayoral control of low-performing districts.

Given the limited resources available for public education, states must ensure that districts spend as many dollars as possible in the classroom rather than in bureaucracy and that the dollars invested drive the greatest change. Missouri has established maximum class sizes for all by removing ineffective class-size restrictions past the third grade and other restrictions that limit districts' ability to reallocate resources to their greatest needs. Moreover, Missouri should empower data-driven decisionmaking by improving the financial data it collects and linking spending to academic achievement. The law should enable 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. Currently, there are three teacher retirement funds in Missouri; all are defined benefit plans, and all public school employees are required to participate. 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, Missouri should move to a portable employer-sponsored retirement plan and permit public charter schools to opt out of the plan.