Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Teacher Evaluations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
VEA representative warns Halifax County schools may be using evaluations that conflict with board policy and state procedures
Summary
Alice Willingham, a Virginia Education Association representative, told the school board that Halifax County’s teacher evaluation program omits an updated standard and uses outdated rating labels; the superintendent said staff will investigate and report back.
Alice Willingham, the Virginia Education Association representative for Halifax County Public Schools, told the school board during public comment that the district’s teacher-evaluation program does not match the board’s revised policy and state guidance.
Willingham said the school board revised policy GCN on June 14, 2021, to adopt updated teacher-evaluation criteria approved by the Virginia Board of Education on March 18, 2021, and that the district’s evaluation system currently “only has 7” standards while the updated criteria include eight. She also said the district’s rating labels remained the older set ("exemplary, proficient, developing, needs improvement, and unacceptable") rather than the revised labels she described as "highly effective, effective, approaching effective, and ineffective." She added that, "Using an evaluation program that violates your own school board policy creates liability for each of you as elected officials who vote to terminate teachers."
Willingham cited two Virginia codes by number during her remarks and said those statutes set procedures for teacher nonrenewal and dismissal; she also described required timelines and pre-vote conferences that, she said, were not being followed. "For non renewals, a conference is scheduled between the teacher and superintendent where the teacher must be given at least 15 days notice about the time and place of the conference," she said. Willingham urged the board to follow the statutes and noted teachers with continuing contracts have a right to dismissal hearings.
Board member Michael Bonucci (spoke during the meeting) asked for a response. The superintendent (unnamed in the transcript) said the district will investigate the discrepancies Willingham raised and will work with Director of Instruction Miss Miller to report back to the board. The superintendent said he was not aware of the disconnect and that some changes appear to have occurred during the COVID period; he emphasized he did not believe there had been "malintent."
The item remained a request for staff follow-up rather than a formal board action. The board did not adopt specific changes at the meeting; the superintendent said he will gather details and return with findings and recommended next steps.
Why it matters: Willingham tied evaluation differences to legal risks, saying improper use of an evaluation system could affect nonrenewal and dismissal proceedings. The superintendent’s pledge to investigate signals the board may receive a staff report and possible policy or practice changes at a future meeting.
Sources and next steps: Willingham’s public comment and the superintendent’s reply, both on the meeting record, were the substantive exchanges on this item. The board did not take a vote on evaluations; staff committed to follow up and brief the board.
