Lisa Fleisher of the Wall Street Journal reminds us what investigative reporting looks like.
In New York City, we nearly forgot, especially since Michael Winerip of the New York Times was taken off the education beat.
Fleisher filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out whether top officials at the New York City Department of Education receive job evaluations. As we know, the Bloomberg DOE evaluates everyone in its reach.
Except those at the top of the DOE.
“Top administrators at the city’s Department of Education haven’t been subject to formal evaluations during the Bloomberg administration, a break from past practice and an unusual occurrence among school districts across the U.S.
“The disclosure follows the culmination of a yearslong battle by Mayor Michael Bloomberg to implement tougher teacher and principal evaluations in the district.
“Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott, who has been on the job since April 2011, said formal job reviews weren’t necessary because he informally evaluated his staff daily, and he was evaluated daily by the mayor. Teachers, he said, were in a different position.
“They’re in front of the classroom and teaching our children, and we need to have a sense of how well they’re doing,” he said. “With us, we’re not teaching children directly, we’re setting policy. And I don’t think it’s hypocritical at all.”
As Leona Helmsley once famously said, “Only the little people pay taxes.” Apparently, under Bloomberg, only the little people get job evaluations.
The following officials are exempt:
“In a response dated June 11, the department’s public-records officer said no evaluations had been created since at least 2001 for the following positions: chancellor, chief of staff, chief academic officer, senior deputy chancellor, chief schools officer, chief operating officer, chief financial officer, deputy chancellor and general counsel. Mr. Bloomberg has appointed three permanent chancellors.”

I’m not sure even the superintendents or the network leaders are evaluated, although it may be a top down thing we principals never participated in. My superintendent was ignorant of the most basic statistical analysis, didn’t comprehend the new evaluation systems for schools or teachers, couldnt comprehend basic statistical scenarios i oresented to her showing that the school grades were inherently unstable, did little to nothing on any matter of substance. My network leader spent a lot of time in the subway visiting schools, not accomplishing much, I think she had been a school leader for like 2 years, maybe an MBA.. It was ludicrous to have these folks be leaders of principals with three times their educational knowledge and experience, PhDs, etc.
LikeLike
Here is a very old saying, and one of my favorites, which should apply to every organization public, private, profit, non…”Authority flows downward…Accountability flows upward”. These people in New York are cowards, and it seems to be the norm these days for our “leaders”.
LikeLike
What, no DOMA posts today? Come on!
LikeLike
Post away Flerp! Take the lead.
LikeLike
What’s DOMA? Or did you forget the G?
LikeLike
Defense of marriage act
LikeLike
That’s what I thought. So FLERP! you got me on that one! Oh well, I can be a little “thick” sometimes.
LikeLike
O Frabjous day! It’s about time the Supremes figured out what the equal protection clause means? We’re going to have to depend on that one a LOT more in the future!
LikeLike
unbelievable.
LikeLike
Outrageous! Deceitful. Shameful. This exposé is an OMG! Shows the deception, the corruption, and utter arrogance mixed with a lot of “dumbness” and corruption of those making policy.
LikeLike
We can always evaluate them on test scores. Right? I mean, if the first graders can’t run a mile in whatever time it is that a median 6 year old takes to run a mile, the administrators are obviously ineffective.
LikeLike
It’s the same reason that the precious snowflakes attending schools like Lab or Sidwell don’t need standardized testing – we already know how unique and creative and brilliant they are. It’s only the rest of the nation’s urchins, especially the poor ones, who need to prove their “achievement” on standardized tests (in order to know if they’re worthy of being Wal-Mart clerks).
Similarly, the leadership doesn’t need to be evaluated – look at the brilliant things they’ve done. They’re obviously worth every penny of their six-digit salaries (and more than that as soon as we can figure out how to get rid of more of those overpaid lazy LIFO-lifer teachers). It’s only the low-life teachers who need to prove that they’re still worthy of working longer hours for less pay and fewer benefits.
LikeLike
Wow. Now that’s real accountability. I’m sure New Yorkers are so pleased with this new revelation, as well as mayoral control.
LikeLike
And I also informally evaluate my students daily, but somehow that’s not good enough. My supervisors also informally evaluate me constantly, but that’s not good enough, either. BTW, I count the principal, assistant principals (2 at last count), special ed supervisor in the building, and special ed director at district level. I’m being evaluated out the wazoo on a daily basis, but none of it carries any weight…
I wonder, who “evaluates” the mechanic who works on my car? How else will I ever know if he is ‘effective’ as a mechanic? Oh, the horror!
LikeLike
My comment on The Answer Sheet:
“They’re in front of the classroom and teaching our children, and we need to have a sense of how well they’re doing.”
How about, “They’re up in their air-conditioned office with working toilets and water fountains setting policies that affect millions of students and teachers and families, and WE need to have a sense of how THEY are doing?”
With them, they’re “not teaching children directly,” they’re “setting policy” and as such should be even MORE accountable to the taxpayers who pay not only their salaries but those of the people whom the ed-elite affect with their whims and decisions (teachers, administrators, other school employees). “And I don’t think it’s hypocritical at all” to ask that if anything, they be held to an even HIGHER standard. Isn’t that why they get paid such high salaries? To do MORE, BETTER?
LikeLike