Arthur Goldstein is a teacher-blogger who terrifies corporate reformers like State Commissioner John King. That is because Goldstein is a career teacher who knows what he is talking about; also, he writes lucidly and has a dry sense of humor. King, on the other hand, taught for two years in a “no excuses” charter school with a high suspension rate (at the same time that he miraculously earned both a law degree from Yale and a doctorate in education from Teachers College). King has one big advantage over Goldstein: He was a classmate of Merryl Tisch in one of TC’s QuickTime doctorate programs, and Dr. Tisch is now Chancellor of the New York State Board of Regents, which hired the inexperienced King to be State Commissioner.
In this post on his marvelous blog, Golstein describes the sheer absurdity of the New York State evaluation plan.
Listen to this:
“I’m hearing stories all over about the DOE’s agents doing practice observations with administrators. Armed with their adapted Danielson rubrics, with the three domains they have determined are inevitable, they do 15-minute observations. During these 15 minutes, they determine whether teachers are highly effective, effective, developing, or ineffective. The fact that the evaluation system does not yet exist deters them not at all. The fix is in, they figure, and Reformy John (King) will grant them whatever they ask.”
It just goes downhill from there.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
John King appears to have taught for two years in a private school in Puerto Rico, followed by a year in a Boston charter. After his brief teaching experience, he was the co-director of Roxbury Prep, which was very tiny at the time …. in his dissertation he argues how important it was to have two directors of the this small school and he argues that a small student caseload was important for teachers…..
Neither have been a priority for him at SED.
Not only was King earning his law degree in New Haven Conn, as he was earning his doctorate at TC in NY, he was also leading the Uncommon Schools Charter Chain–all at the same time.
He was Ms. Tisch’s classmate in a small cohort of students that began their studies at Teachers College in 2000. When Ms Tisch became Chancellor in 2009, he followed almost immediately as Deputy Commissioner. When Steiner abruptly left, after a short tenure, King was appointed Commissioner without a search.
Thanks for this information, Carol. I so appreciate the reason and passion you bring to the deform discussion in New York. I remember the day Steiner resigned and King was coronated as the commissioner. No one knew who he was. Most still do not know. New York teachers and administrators need to know more about WHO Tisch and King are. The Corporate media will not make this known. How can we spread this message? Seriously, who gets a law degree and a doctorate at the same time? Who is this man? Why would one get both those degrees WHILE leading a school?
The only guy I know who did this sort of thing was pretty smart. He got a law degree and a PhD in philosophy during the same two year period at the University of Michigan and then went off to California to teach philosophy of law and publish his dissertation as his first book. Of course, he wasn’t running a school at the same time . . . but still, fairly impressive. And a really nice guy too. Smart, but not arrogant. Just effective. I wonder if this wonder is anything like him. Do I detect a little brainus envy?
Harlan, you do realize that this fellow basically has a sinecure. While the degres he earned are impressive, he is head of the public schools in New York state; yet he sends his own children to a non-common core Montessori school? So this is a legitimate question. WHO does this if his OWN interest, or the interest of his own children, is in the private sector? Why would one do this? Who is paying him, for what, and how much? Harlan, you are truly an elitist in education, but you somehow miss that other people are motivated by money and power.
I’d say he definitely qualifies as a shyster!!!
According to good sources, although i do not know it for fact, he began law school because he failed the doctoral comp exams. I do not believe he ever took or passed the bar exam. He is smart but
highly ambitious and yes, his own children attend a posh Montessori school not the very nice local public school.
I am not one to love or even like schemes like Danielson. In fact, I haven’t seen a formal and standardized means of evaluation that I do like. However, there is always a need to know how well teachers are doing in regard to what students in their classroom are learning. So some form of evaluation is needed and, part of the reason that the too many have become victims of the current approaches to evaluation is that teachers themselves haven’t developed their own forms of evaluation. In a sensible system, there is a notion of high stakes and those high stakes are related to the value of education that students need for whatever reasons students need education. So the starting point is to answer the question of the purposes education is to serve. Then we can look at the work we and our colleagues are doing to determine whether or not the work is getting done, if students are getting what they need or not. In a sense, what needs to happen is that the eyes need to be on the goals and career paths determined in relation to an individual’s contribution to moving students toward those goals. Despite the tone of some of the notes on this site, not all teachers are good teachers and there are consequences for any student who has one of the not so good teachers. Any sensible parent will tell you that they do care that their children have good teachers and that their kids are learning what they understand kids to need to learn. So, teachers should be doing something other than showing disdain, deserved as it is, for the current mechanisms of evaluation. They should be doing what professionals do and that is evaluating themselves by means that they develop or access for their goodness at getting at the goodness of what is transpiring in the classroom. Such evaluation should lead to collegial discussion of what needs to be done for and to individuals as a result of such evaluations, what needs to happen for the individual to improve if such is determined to be need or what should happen with the individual if it is determined that necessary change in not possible. Get the outsiders off our backs by finding ways for the insiders to show that they are concerned, first and foremost, with the educations they and their colleagues are offering students by offering some kind of evidence to those who have every right to know who is doing the educating and their ability to get the work done.
What we need is both introspection and quality means for determining whether we and those with whom we work are doing what needs to be done.
Hey, good points, but let me throw in my two cents.
I feel qualified to speak on any educational topic, as I have taught in seven different high schools (not including student teaching) of varying social economic status. That is, from rich mostly-white private schools, to poor mostly-minority public schools, and everything in between. Add to that, I have a master’s in Educational Leadership (although I have no desire to be a principal in our current state of education, as I am not a “yes-man.”)
Here’s what I’ve seen over the years…for starters, educators tend to be “self-reflective” as it is. We are constantly changing and adapting to become better at our craft. I am not unique in this regard. It’s part of our nature. What has been changing are the instruments that are being used to evaluate me. In ANY means of evaluation, there is ALWAYS some degree of subjectivity. Always has been, always will be. This goes for the private industry, as well. Except in the business world, everyone tends to think their boss is an idiot…and he’s the guy who does the evaluation! It’s all subjective. Teachers are not against evaluations. They are against nonsense. Let me repeat that. Teachers are not against evaluations. They are against nonsense.
Are there “bad” teachers out there? Sure. But the numbers are significantly less than what the media would have you believe. Out of the seven schools I’ve been a part of, I would make an educated guess and say less than 10 percent are “bad” teachers. It’s probably less than 5 percent, in actuality, because again…evaluations, including mine, have a degree of subjectivity. If a principal really wants to get rid of someone, all it takes is time and documentation.
Most teachers are dedicated professionals, and when we are not treated as such, we tend to “show disdain” for the nonsense.
You can’t get rid of the bottom 10% as Jack Welch did at GE with LIFO in place. Just sayin’.
What does GE have to do with a school or classroom?
You’re right Harlan, got to have a way to get rid of the bottom 10%. I wonder what would be more efficient, gas chambers or just have them, the bottom 10%, dig a huge hole and climb in it and be executed.
Yes, that is real scientific. You whole existance is at stake for a 15 minute observation by someone who may or may not know what they are doing and whatever. You know they do not run their personal and business lives this way.