October 10, 2017 4:00 pm
After a long court fight in Houston, the school district agreed not to use value-added scores to evaluate teachers, because it was unable to explain what the algorithms for evaluating teacher performance meant or how they were calculated. The district also agreed to pay the lawyers’ fees for the Texas AFT, which fought the use of VAM.
What is the purpose of unions? To fight for the rights of teachers. No individual teacher (unless married to a lawyer) could have pursued this remedy on his or her own. The union had the resources to protect teachers from an unfair, nonsensical, illegitimate way of evaluating their teaching.
By the way, the courts in Houston were a lot wiser than the courts in Florida, which upheld the practice of evaluating teachers based on the test scores of students they do not teach in subjects they do not teach. The court in Florida said it was “unfair,” but constitutional. How can it be constitutional to have your teaching license depend on the work that others do, in which you have no part at all?
For Immediate Release
October 10, 2017
Contact:
Zeph Capo
713-623-8891
zcapo@hft2415.org
Janet Bass
202-879-4554
jbass@aft.org
Federal Suit Settlement: End of Value-Added Measures
for Teacher Termination in Houston
HOUSTON—In a huge victory for the right of teachers to be fairly evaluated, the Houston Independent School District agreed, in a settlement of a federal lawsuit brought by seven Houston teachers and the Houston Federation of Teachers, not to use value-added scores to terminate a teacher as long as the teacher is unable to independently test or challenge the score.
Value-added measures for teacher evaluation, called the Education Value-Added Assessment System, or EVAAS, in Houston, is a statistical method that uses a student’s performance on prior standardized tests to predict academic growth in the current year. This methodology—derided as deeply flawed, unfair and incomprehensible—was used to make decisions about teacher evaluation, bonuses and termination. It uses a secret computer program based on an inexplicable algorithm: = + (Σ∗≤Σ∗∗ × ∗∗∗∗=1)+ .
In May 2014, seven Houston teachers and the Houston Federation of Teachers brought an unprecedented federal lawsuit to end the policy, saying it reduced education to a test score, didn’t help improve teaching or learning, and ruined teachers’ careers when they were incorrectly terminated. Neither HISD nor its contractor allowed teachers access to the data or computer algorithms so that they could test or challenge the legitimacy of the scores, creating a “black box.” In May 2017, the federal district court in Houston issued a decision stating that, “HISD teachers have no meaningful way to ensure correct calculation of their EVAAS scores, and as a result are unfairly subject to mistaken deprivation of constitutionally protected property interests in their jobs.”
HFT President Zeph Capo said: “This victory should mark the end of a destructive era that put tests and a broken evaluation system over making sure our students leave school well prepared for college, career and life. As a practical matter, this ends the use of value-added to terminate teachers in HISD because the district does not have a contractor that is willing or able to meet the constitutional due process standards spelled out by the court.”
Daniel Santos, one of the plaintiffs and an award-winning sixth-grade teacher at Navarro Middle School who was rated ineffective by the flawed EVAAS method, was elated with the settlement.
“I have always been devoted to my students and proud of my teaching skills. Houston needs a well-developed system that properly evaluates teachers, provides good feedback and ensures that educators will receive continuous, targeted professional development to improve their performance,” Santos said.
American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said the agreement not to use value-added measures for this purpose is the latest nail in the coffin of using tests as a punitive tool. The Every Student Succeeds Act, the federal education law that replaced the No Child Left Behind Act, eliminated the emphasis on test scores.
“Testing and EVAAS don’t measure critical or analytical thinking skills, don’t allow for engaging learning, and certainly don’t improve or create joy in teaching or learning. Instead of value-added methods, let’s value what kids really need: attention to their well-being, engaging and powerful learning, a collaborative school environment, and opportunities for teachers to build their skills throughout their careers,” Weingarten said.
In addition to agreeing to restrict its use of value-added measures, including EVAAS scores, the school district agreed to create an instructional consultation panel—with representatives from the district and the faculty—to discuss and make recommendations on the district’s teacher appraisal process. The settlement also requires HISD to pay Texas AFT $237,000 for attorney’s fees and expenses related to the lawsuit.
Here is the amended summary judgment opinion.
Posted by dianeravitch
Categories: Houston, Teacher Evaluations, VAM
Tags:
Mobile Site | Full Site
Get a free blog at WordPress.com Theme: WordPress Mobile Edition by Alex King.
“(unless married to a lawyer)”
Not even then. I assume the union had more than one lawyer working on this. I assume these lawyers all got paid for months (years?) of work on this matter. I assume these lawyers had clerks, paralegals and secretaries working with them. And, perhaps most importantly, I assume these lawyers were all labor lawyers.
I’m really doubting any teacher is married to multiple labor lawyers who themselves are willing to work for free and who have staff also willing to work for free.
LikeLike
By dienne77 on October 10, 2017 at 4:08 pm
Dienne,
I was thinking of Shari and Bruce Lederman. Shari is a highly regarded fourth grade teacher on Long Island, with many years of experience.
She always got great evaluations from her principal. Then a VAM arrived that gave her a low rating (probably because her highly able students did not perform even higher). Her husband Bruce dedicated his time to trying to understand the evaluation system. He fought it in court, and the judge said the VAM was “arbitrary and capricious” and threw out the rating. Bruce did not have an army of lawyers. He did it for his wife and they won.
LikeLike
By dianeravitch on October 10, 2017 at 4:17 pm
Yes, but the Lederman case was an individual case. This was a class-action case against VAM as a whole. Not something that can be litigated by a single attorney working alone.
LikeLike
By dienne77 on October 10, 2017 at 4:23 pm
Yes. Lederman wa not a class action. VAM will be back in NY. It is temporarily suspended by Cuomo to shut up teachers and parents.
LikeLike
By dianeravitch on October 10, 2017 at 4:50 pm
Thanks Dianne for thinking of us. You are correct thay our case was limited to individual facts and was not a class action. From what a hear and read, the problems have not gone away. Perhaps the union in NY will be encouraged by this settlement and take action .
LikeLike
By Bruce H Lederman on October 10, 2017 at 6:28 pm
Diane, VAM is not dead in NY. 40% of NYC teachers’ evaluation are still calculated using some kind of test. For HS teachers who teach a class ending in a Regent’s exam, this means the exam. For HS teachers who don’t teach a class ending in a Regent’s exam, this can mean being evaluated on other’s test scores. The same goes for art and music teachers. English as a Second Language teachers are evaluated on their students’ NYSESLAT scores. While the state ELA and math tests aren’t used for elementary and middles school teachers, they are VAMMED using a bizarre baseline assessment. Last year, world language teachers were assessed on their prediction of how they thought their students would do. Our union has done NOTHING to get rid of this sham.
LikeLike
By RL on October 10, 2017 at 6:39 pm
RL,
Thank you for pointing this out about the NYSESLAT.
LikeLike
By Norwegian Filmmaker on October 11, 2017 at 7:13 am
The VAM is dead and that is great news. Now they will come up with another scam to judge teachers by a test score. Unless we offer true assessment, not done by administrators but retired teachers whose focus is on a quality education for student. Whose focus is on improving education not destroying it.
It’s time to take action to present our better ideas.
LikeLike
By caplee68 on October 10, 2017 at 4:11 pm
We don’t need to provide anything. As the brilliant Peter Greene has said, we don’t need to give an alternative for someone infliciting physical pain on us. We shouldn’t have to say, “Stop hitting me. How about kicking me instead?”
LikeLike
By Threatened out West on October 10, 2017 at 7:48 pm
We need to provide assessment for support rather than punitive. The thought that we do nothing is what got us in the mess in the first place. It opened the door for the reformers. When does assessment for the benefit of helping and supporting teacher come under the categorie of pain? Time to get our heads out of the sand.
LikeLike
By caplee68 on October 10, 2017 at 9:24 pm
Regardless of whatever assessments are developed for students, those assessments can never be used to evaluate teachers.
Furthermore, the assumption (or, rather, ASSumption) behind VAM is that we need one “objective” universal (or at least state-wide) system to evaluate teachers in some kind of grand stack-ranking system. That assumption is false. To whatever extent we need “accountability” for teachers, it can be handled the way it always has been. Teachers should be available for parent conferences. Parents should be welcome to come visit or volunteer in their kids’ classrooms. Community members should be invited into the schools for band concerts, science fairs, art exhibitions, etc. Principals should know what’s going on in their buildings and formally and informally observe as needed and be available to community members to discuss concerns. In other words, schools should be accountable to the people they serve – the students, parents and other community members/taxpayers of their own communities. Mrs. Jackson teaching at Oak Elementary school in Hometown, Illinois should be accountable to the students in her class, the parents of those students, and the community of Hometown. She should not be accountable to every stinkin’ bureaucrat in Springfield or every random Joe in the state. Just like in any other profession, an employee’s job performance is only relevant to the people s/he works with and his/her supervisors. Not the whole darn world.
LikeLike
By dienne77 on October 10, 2017 at 8:37 pm
The assessment I talk about doesn’t resemble test scores. Classroom observations by retired teahers. Like I said ten years ago, if we don’t change, public schools will perish. And that’s exactly what’s happenning when our only defense is whinning.
LikeLike
By caplee68 on October 10, 2017 at 9:28 pm
Louisiana uses VAM for teacher evaluation.
LikeLike
By Lee Barrios on October 10, 2017 at 9:37 pm
dump it
LikeLike
By caplee68 on October 10, 2017 at 10:40 pm
This may well have implications for the examining the way the “value added” concept is embedded in computer delivered instruction. Since “content delivery” and teaching are done by the computer program, how can a classroom teacher be held accountable for the “work” of said program? Will the program be evaluated for its efficacy instead? Will the scoring and adaptability algorithms of the program be revealed so they can be analyzed for efficacy and accuracy? Let’s rip open this pandoras box for all to see.
LikeLiked by 1 person
By Jon Lubar on October 10, 2017 at 4:17 pm
GOOD questions. Will anyone, anyone at all, ever have to pay for screwing up kids lives with poorly constructed — and too often culturally and gender exclusive — curricula?
LikeLike
By ciedie aech on October 11, 2017 at 12:12 pm
That’s a great point – Jon Lubar. If students don’t learn with these online “blended” programs how can the teacher be held responsible?
LikeLike
By leonie haimson on October 10, 2017 at 4:27 pm
Amen! When non certified and inexperienced people tell us what to do, they DAMAGE students learning!
This entire DEFORMATION of education is JUST ABOUT $$$$$$$$$$ for those few who have NO CLUE!
LikeLiked by 1 person
By Yvonne Siu-Runyan on October 10, 2017 at 4:38 pm
VAM is neither reasonable or the least bit scientific. VAM is a political move to put teacher’s on the defensive. VAM scores have already included students that a teacher may not teach. I am happy the union did its job in Houston.
LikeLiked by 1 person
By retired teacher on October 10, 2017 at 5:30 pm
The good news is not everyone can be bought.
In Houston, at least, common sense prevailed.
LikeLike
By flos56 on October 10, 2017 at 5:00 pm
While it’s completely absurd to judge students from tests in subjects they don’t teach, I’m uneasy with that as a talking point, because it somewhat seems to validate the evaluation of teachers through tests in subjects of students that they do teach. That’s how they do it in Ohio, and it’s still arbitrary and capricious, imo.
LikeLike
By Ohio Algebra II Teacher on October 10, 2017 at 5:48 pm
Good point.
LikeLike
By dienne77 on October 10, 2017 at 6:33 pm
I take your point—and it’s a good one.
But it puts the VAManiacs on the spot: what sort of evaluation system so easily lends itself to such an obvious absurdity as judging teachers by the students they didn’t have? And since it often leads to the preceding inanity, what sort of numerical assessment system can then justifiably claim immunity from scrutiny by those questioning its inner workings and operations?
But, in any case, thank you for the good catch.
😎
LikeLike
By KrazyTA on October 10, 2017 at 7:26 pm
“VAMmunity”
The VAMmers claim VAMmunity
From scrutinizing eyes
And also claim VAMpunity
For all their VAMmy lies
LikeLike
By SomeDAM poet on October 10, 2017 at 9:05 pm
Congratulation to the lawyers, experts amd plaintiffs who fought this case.
Bruce (lawyer husband of Sheri who fought the battle in New York)
LikeLike
By Bruce H Lederman on October 10, 2017 at 6:20 pm
Thank you for getting the ball rolling. I think your case gave people hope that this thing can be beaten.
LikeLike
By Dienne on October 10, 2017 at 6:31 pm
I second Dienne’s thank you, Bruce!
LikeLike
By andrewdavidmitchell on October 11, 2017 at 1:50 pm
Awesome. Very good news. My, Lord, it’s taking people a long time to figure out what a load of numerology VAM is. Kudos to those who fought this!
LikeLike
By Bob Shepherd on October 10, 2017 at 6:48 pm
On a related note.
I just noticed the VAMbot ECONOMAD was recently overruled by the Virginia Supreme Court
http://vamboozled.com/virginia-sgp-overruled
LikeLike
By SomeDAM poet on October 10, 2017 at 7:19 pm
That is great news!
Remember reader VIrginia SGP used to write daily about the value of VAM?
He is in a rage.
I put him in moderation because he posted 8-10-12 times daily. He lived for the release of VAM scores.
Glad to see he lost in court.
LikeLike
By dianeravitch on October 10, 2017 at 7:38 pm
Oh, that was HIM? Excellent news on both fronts there!
LikeLike
By Threatened out West on October 10, 2017 at 7:49 pm
Justice is sweet! Oh, that is heartening news. I think Virginia SGP deserves a poem, maybe even a Greek tragedy. If only we knew someone who could…
LikeLike
By LeftCoastTeacher on October 10, 2017 at 8:14 pm
Not worth the ten minutes it would take.
LikeLike
By SomeDAM poet on October 10, 2017 at 8:21 pm
Incidentally, this fellow is not tragic.
Just pathetic.
LikeLike
By SomeDAM poet on October 10, 2017 at 8:32 pm
True.
LikeLike
By LeftCoastTeacher on October 10, 2017 at 8:53 pm
Mr. Davison’s comments: http://www.loudountimes.com/news/article/va._supreme_court_says_vdoe_cant_provide_teachers_identifiable_info_in432
LikeLike
By Ohio Algebra II Teacher on October 10, 2017 at 10:48 pm
I noticed he is quoting half century old Virginia Supreme Court decisions to “prove” how unreasonable the justices now are.
Irrational does not even begin to describe his “argument”.
It appears that the court case is not all that he has lost.
LikeLike
By SomeDAM poet on October 11, 2017 at 12:10 pm
“How can it be constitutional to have your teaching license depend on the work that others do, in which you have no part at all?”
Or how can it be constitutional if the district is “unable to explain what the algorithms for evaluating teacher performance meant or how they were calculated”?
Indeed, it’s a big question, if VAM makes any scientific sense whatsoever.
LikeLike
By Máté Wierdl on October 11, 2017 at 3:52 am
Mathturbation by economists who are not good enough in math to realize that what they are doing is nonsense.
LikeLike
By SomeDAM poet on October 11, 2017 at 8:30 am
Agreed…and yet think they are EXPERTS on everything they discuss.
LikeLike
By Ohio Algebra II Teacher on October 11, 2017 at 8:55 am
The Unions need to sue the testing companies and establish on the record once and for that their instrument does not evaluate teachers no matter what algorithm is used. The test were designed to evaluate a student’s performance on a given day. It is not designed to evaluate a teacher’s performance on a given day.
LikeLike
By AlwaysLearning on October 11, 2017 at 9:16 am
This is a question for the assorted attorneys and legal experts commenting above- since this decision was in federal court can it be used elsewhere as a legal precedent to block VAM evaluations of teachers in other states – citing denial of due process?
LikeLike
By leonie haimson on October 11, 2017 at 4:53 pm
Never mind that testing does not measure knowledge or learning in any way. I have grown to question even my own questions. Using test scores just gives unscrupulous administrators ammo to bother the people they do not like.
LikeLike
By Roy Turrentine on October 11, 2017 at 6:50 pm