New Mexico is one of the lowest performing states in the nation on the NAEP. It ranks about 49th in the nation. It also has the highest child poverty rate in the nation. Unfortunately the state has a Republican governor who has swallowed the Jeb Bush formula of high-stakes testing, test-based evaluation of teachers, and privatization of schools as the answer to the state’s problems. New Mexico education has not improved at all during the reign of the Bush acolytes.
Hannah Skandera was the State Secretary of Education for seven years. She has been replaced by TFA alum Christopher Ruszkowski. He has just proposed taking control of the state’s teacher education institutions and having sole power over whether they should continue to be allowed to prepare teachers.
The Secretary-designate is proposing to assert authority that now resides with the legislature.
New Mexico’s teacher evaluation model–one of the most punitive in the nation (test scores are 50% of a teacher’s grade)–are currently suspended while a judge considers whether they are valid.
Being a true “reformer,” Ruszkowski wants to impose letter grades on teacher education programs.
Given the persistent failure of the state’s Public Education Department over the past eight years, it would be a mistake to allow its leader to control teacher education in New Mexico.
The state Public Education Department is pushing to have more direct authority over teacher development programs, including taking on the oversight duties now provided by national accreditation groups.
But some are questioning whether the proposal is within PED’s authority.
By this time next month, PED wants a rule in place that allows it to rate educator preparation programs – which ultimately license teachers – through site visits and a scorecard system.
PED Secretary-designate Christopher Ruszkowski said he thinks they would end up evaluating about 12 to 15 New Mexico institutions, such as the University of New Mexico, New Mexico Highlands University and New Mexico State University, if the rule goes through.
The proposed evaluation system mirrors PED’s teacher evaluations and school grading efforts. Both systems have generated controversy in public school districts statewide.
PED’s proposal would allow the agency to decide whether a teacher education program may remain in operation, regardless if the institution is private or public. An institution can appeal a revocation but ultimately PED has final decision-making power, according to the rule.
Rule requirements
PED’s proposed requirements include: The program’s pedagogy, or instruction in teaching methods, has to align with PED standards; teachers in training would undergo observations by PED; the institution would be required to store documentation of the observations for at least five years; and teacher trainees would be evaluated using methodology of NMTEACH, which is the state teacher evaluation system.
PED would annually score the programs, rating them on an A to F scale and evaluating their effectiveness through factors like acceptance rates of candidates into the program, how they do on performance and licensure tests and how those who complete the programs are rated in NMTEACH.
Right now, teacher preparation programs are being reviewed by national accrediting bodies like the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education or the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation.
But Ruszkowski said the measures those organizations provide aren’t rigorous enough and they don’t review the programs frequently enough.
“The PED has the ultimate decision-making authority over teacher preparation programs that impact K-12 education directly,” Ruszkowski said. “And what states did historically is they took the NCATE or the CAEP and used it as a rubber stamp of approval.”
While UNM declined to comment, the university has previously called NCATE the “gold standard for teacher preparation.”
If PED’s new rule goes into effect, institutions already offering teacher prep programs will have to reapply under the new standards.
Instead of imposing letter grades of institutions of higher education, New Mexico needs fresh thinking about teaching and learning. It should start by throwing out the failed Florida model of test and punish.

How clever of Christopher and his cabal to wait until the legislature was no longer in session to propose this rule change…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cowardly, very cowardly.
Pray for NM.
LikeLike
This is disgraceful.
LikeLike
DISGRACEFUL is right.
LikeLike
Off thread, but right now (6- 7 PM Central Time), a channel called “Newsy” (it’s Channel 487 on our Comcast) has a show called, “Walkout: the School Funding” about Oklahoma. If you have it/can watch, turn it on NOW! (Otherwise, find out later if it’s available on YouTube or something else.)
LikeLike
Is this the video you referenced?
https://www.newsy.com/stories/walkout-the-school-funding-rebellion/
LikeLike
Ruszkowski is shoveling more regurgitated puke from the autocratic democracy hating kleptocrats.
LikeLike
Pray for NM. https://exceptionaldelaware.wordpress.com/2017/06/09/pray-for-new-mexico-surfer-boy-is-in-charge-now/
LikeLike
The A to F grading system for teacher education is being enabled nationally by the wealth of 76 individuals and foundations, eight of these listed as “anonymous” who fund the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ).
The NCTQ April 2018 report is a study in ideology translated into the A-F rating scheme for teacher education. Some all too familiar names appear as if experts on teacher education. If you like the idea of teacher education being infected with Doug Lemov’s non-nonsense discipline and Sir Michael Barber’s Deliverology, you will be fine with this report.
Technical Panel for the Review
David W. Andrews, Sir Michael Barber, David Chard, Ed Crowe, Harriet Fayne, Dan Goldhaber, Kati Haycock, Edward J. Kame’enui, Cory Koedel, Thomas Lasley, Doug Lemov, Meredith Liben, Linda Ann Patriarca, Mark Schug. In memoriam: Barry Kaufman and Sam Stringfield
Audit Panel for the Review
Dr. Rebecca Herman, Dr. Amber Northern, Dr. William H. Schmidt, and Dr. Grover J. “Russ” Whitehurst.
If you work in teacher preparation and want texts for your classes that will pass muster with the NCTQ, then go for it. I kid you not. They presume to rate texts on teaching reading as if there is one best way, in one text, with others not passing muster.
I have checked NCQT reports on reading and classroom management. They are often footnoted with reports from the What Works Clearing House (Institute of Education Sciences) as if that review process is perfect. It is not. But if you look at the reports at the Clearinghouse, you will see that NCQT chooses to expand the Clearinghouse recommendations about “scientifically based practice” to include studies with only moderate support, not “strong support.”
For example, the April report on teacher education from NCQT refers to the need for student teachers to learn “the “big five” strategies of classroom management (identified by the Institute of Education Sciences based on their strong research support and broad applicability), p. 2.
In fact, of the actual report (Note 1) discusses five strategies, but only rated two of these as having “strong” evidence to support the strategies. I have found that pattern of hedging more than once.
NCTQ has a big problem understanding the relationships between collegiate majors in any subject, the work of teachers in schools, and the curriculum mandates/standards that frame so much of their work, but are not under the direct control of teacher or teacher education programs.
See for yourself what NCTQ thinks about “proper” teacher education. If you have the interest, look at the criteria and methodology for assigning A-F ratings to teacher preparation programs. See also the list of funders. https://www.nctq.org/dmsView/2018_Teacher_Prep_Review_733174
LikeLike
This is the same fool, following in the footsteps of Skandera and Jeb Bush, that stated in a conference last December, ““This is a country built over the last 250 years on things like freedom, choice, competition, options, going west, Manifest Destiny — these are the fundamental principles of this country,” he was reported as saying by the Albuquerque Journal. “That’s why charter schools make so much sense — high-quality options — in the context of where we are as a country.”
You can on imagine he flack he caught from the Native Americans of the term “Mainfest Destiny”. He had to apologize but that did not work either. There is no forgiving or forgetting on this issue.
He also wanted to rewrite the science standards but Teachers, Administrators, and Scientists went after him in mass. He had got back down on these changes.
What he wants to do now is exactly what Skandera and Governor Martinez want to put in place. This guy is a bigger fool than Skandera and his changes of being confirmed by the NM Senate are slim to none.
LikeLike
After the next election, he will be gone.
LikeLike
It’s not as if they pay their teachers a decent wage to require so many hoops to jump through. Ultimately there will be very few who will want to teach in this state or any colleges left that are willing to train teachers (who wants to go through all that hoopla).
Let’s just wipe out public education and pay parents to stay home and teach their own kids or go to for profit schools with a never ending carousel of unqualified personnel.
What a mess!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The biggest irony of all is that PED can barely manage to function as it is since Skandera axed dozens of positions several years ago and never filled them. Districts continue to be frustrated at the lack of response if you call or email PED, even on critical issues, forcing school staff to scramble to remain in compliance. And now Commandant Christopher has decided to take on monitoring and grading higher ed in addition to K-12. Absurd. I feel a guest commentary submission coming on…
LikeLike
“test scores are 50% of a teacher’s grade”
Insane is as inane does as invalid is as insane does. . .
. . . and on and on and on ad infinitum.
LikeLike