Mercedes Schneider reports that the National Council on Teacher Quality received a formal evaluation for the first time in its 15-year history, and, the results are “not pretty.”
Created by the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Foundation/Institute to encourage alternative routes into teaching, NCTQ labored in obscurity for several years. Then, with the rise of the corporate reform movement, NCTQ became the go-to source for journalists looking for comments about how terrible teachers and teacher education are. It also became a recipient of Gates’ funding. See its 2011 report on teacher evaluation in Los Angeles here.)
Now NCTQ issues an annual report published by U.S. News & World Report, rating the nation’s colleges of education and finding almost all of them to be substandard. Among its standards is whether the institution teaches the Common Core. It bases its ratings on course catalogues and reading lists, not on site visits. Some institutions, skeptical of NCTQ’s qualifications and motivation, have refused to cooperate or send materials.
NCTQ recently agreed to collaborate with professors at Vanderbilt University and the University of North Carolina to assess the quality and validity of NCTQ’s ratings of colleges of education. The bottom line: the ratings do not gauge or predict teacher quality.
The full study opens with these conclusions:
“In our analysis of NCTQ’s overall TPP ratings, we find that in one out of 42 comparisons the graduates of TPPs with higher NCTQ ratings have higher value-added scores than graduates of TPPs with lower ratings; in eight out of 30 comparisons graduates of TPPs with higher NCTQ ratings receive higher evaluation ratings than graduates of TPPs with lower NCTQ ratings. There are no significant negative associations between NCTQ’s overall TPP ratings and teacher performance. In our analysis of NCTQ’s TPP standards, out of 124 value-added comparisons, 15 of the associations are positive and significant and five are negative and significant; out of 140 teacher evaluation rating comparisons, 31 associations are positive and significant and 23 are negative and significant.
“With our data and analyses, we do not find strong relationships between the performance of TPP (teacher prep program) graduates and NCTQ’s overall program ratings or meeting NCTQ’s standards.”
What does it mean?
Gary Henry of Vanderbilt Universoty was quoted here:
“The study also examined teacher evaluations but failed to establish a strong relationship between good teacher evaluations and NCTQ standards, according to Henry.
“The conclusion was the same,” Henry said. “Higher NCTQ ratings don’t appear to lead to higher performing teachers.”
I think that means the NCTQ ratings have no value in rating institutions or their graduates.
So, even using the flawed, as in basically meaningless VAM scores, the pride and joy of all things reformy, NCTQ reports remain an insult to the bottom of bird cages everywhere. Can’t wait to see how they put a positive spin on having had such great help shooting themselves in the foot again.
I would think that most college teacher prep programs recognize that common core standards, like every other fad, will come and go. Teachers need to be prepared for a lifetime instructing children.
“I think that means the NCTQ ratings have no value in rating institutions or their graduates.”
I agree.
The NCTQ is a sham rating system that does not deserve the publicity it receives.
It is another of the Gates funded campaigns to install his vision of education and teacher education, aided and abetted by one of Gate’s subsidiaries, in this case Thomas B. Fordham Foundation/Institute.
A look at the criteria for evaluating programs shows the same sort of ignorance and arrogance evident in marketing the Gates-funded Common Core.
Why on earth did the faculty and administrators in charge of teacher preparation not kill this operation years ago?
I know the answer. Refusing to cooperate was presented as a failure to “be transparent” meaning that only Gates and Fordham could be trusted to examine teacher education programs…no other accreditation systems allowed.
And the publicity machine is at the ready to claim that this first and only review of the scheme is superficial and wrong.
Here’s Jeb Bush and Arne Duncan planning ed reform:
“I know this is hard, but your continued courage and clarity of thought is vital to giving our nation’s children a chance in life,” Duncan writes. “They are lucky to have someone with your tenacity as their champion.”
It doesn’t matter who you vote for. You get the Bush Family agenda for public schools. Going on two decades now! Thoroughly entrenched in DC.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ilanbenmeir/jeb-bush-offered-to-help-obama-administration-re-authorize-n#.sgdBj207x
Trying to compare anything to VAM scores is a fools errand.
Garbage in/garbage out.
It’s no accident that US News is publishing this garbage.
Publisher/Editor Mortimer Zuckerman shares with Bill Gates the philosophy that US teachers suck and are the source of all problems faced by US schools.
I wrote about the NCTQ — United Way Greater Los Angeles connection in 2011. http://rdsathene.blogspot.com/2011/06/now-on-schools-matter-nctqs-lausd.html
Now that the politicians have tried to usurp the public school education system they are now starting at the college and university level.
People might not like THEIR public school but our college and university system has been the envy of the world sending their best students here.
One can only scratch their head at the abysmal ignorance, stupidity, or just plain greed to access even more money from the taxpayers in trying to understand these myopic and short sighted undertakings.
Parasites don’t take the long view. The only thing they worry about is finding an attachment point to start feeding off their host.
They will lie to the rafters because NCTQ’s entire reason for existence is to destroy the teaching profession.