Opinion ID: 627142
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Jeske's 2005-2006 Evaluations of Dass

Text: Jeske conducted three formal observations of Dass's performance in the classroom during the 2005-2006 school year. Those observations took place on January 10, April 28, and May 16, 2006. After Jeske's January 10, 2006 observation of Dass, Jeske checked the strength column in 27 out of 30 applicable categories on the Classroom Teacher Visitation Form. While the district court referred to Jeske's evaluation of Dass's performance as generally positive, Jeske's deposition testimony shows that a checkmark in the strength column did not necessarily mean the teacher being observed was doing well in that category. Jeske testified a checkmark on the left side of the strength column meant the teacher was doing a real good job in all those areas. However, a checkmark on the right side of the strength column indicated [t]hat you are not doing so well in that. You need to work on it. Many of the checkmarks in the strength column appear to be on the right side of the column on the performance form for Dass. Jeske also noted on the form that Dass needed to improve classroom management so lessons are actively participated in by students. The Classroom Teacher Visitation Form that Jeske completed following the April 28, 2006 observation of Dass's classroom reflected far more negatively on Dass's performance than the January 2006 review did. Jeske marked many more weaknesses than before. Additionally, Jeske noted that the English lesson on sentences is fragmented and that kids were shooting rubber bands, dancing, talking, out of seats, drawing [and] brushing hair. Jeske observed Dass on May 16, 2006, and gave Dass another negative review. Jeske's notes following this observation indicated there were 22 children present in class, but only 7 were following along with Dass, that three boys were up throwing paper balls, a boy and girl were hitting each other, one boy was fanning himself with a book, two boys were making paper animals, one boy was sitting backwards on his chair, and one girl was doing her hair. Dass did not reprimand any of them. Finally, Jeske gave Dass an unsatisfactory rating on her annual evaluation at the conclusion of the 2005-2006 school year. Jeske thought that Dass had poor classroom management and that most of the students were off task during class. Moreover, Dass frequently had to refer students for discipline. Finally, Jeske noted that Dass did not follow suggestions made by the administration. Dass admitted she experienced difficulty in managing and disciplining students. However, Dass denied that her disciplinary problems were more abundant than those experienced by other teachers.