Archives for category: Teacher Evaluations

The most important voice in state education policy today is the American Legislative Exchange Council, known as ALEC.

ALEC has 2,000 state legislators as members, and dozens of corporate sponsors, including the biggest names in business.

Here is an excellent summary of ALEC’s legislative priorities.

ALEC writes model legislation. Its members carry it home and introduce it as their own in their states.

ALEC promotes charters and vouchers.

ALEC likes the parent trigger.

ALEC likes it when the governor can create a commission to approve charters over the opposition of local school boards.

ALEC favors unregulated, for-profit online schooling.

ALEC wants to eliminate collective bargaining.

ALEC doesn’t think teachers need any certification or credential.

ALEC opposes teacher tenure.

ALEC likes evaluating teachers by test scores.

You should learn about ALEC. Read up on it. It is the most influential voice in the nation on education policy.

Remember that the LA Times created a firestorm in 2010 when it created value added ratings for teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District and released the names and ratings of thousands of teachers. Arne Duncan said it was a good idea, but many researchers warned that the ratings were volatile, inaccurate, and unstable. And others saw a violation of confidentiality as well as ethical issues. In the aftermath, a teacher named Roberto Riguelas committed suicide, and his family said he was depressed to see what he thought was an unfair rating of his work.

New York City released the teacher ratings earlier this year, and again there were many complaints about inaccuracy. This time, Bill Gates published an op-Ed opposing the practice on grounds that it makes it impossible for supervisors to counsel teachers when their ratings are published.

Be all that as it may, the Los Angeles Times is now suing LAUSD for access to teachers’ names so they can release their ratings again.

I am still trying to understand what the newspaper thinks it is accomplishing, what purpose is served other than selling papers.

A teacher reflects on how teachers are perceived, how little support they get, and how teaching has changed:

Being in the teaching profession, most of the public generally hates you because they ‘see’ you with the summer off and a pension, which most of us hope will be intact by the time we get there. If summers off were only true. During the summer is when most of your planning and professional growth goes on…’behind the scenes.’

I went into this profession because of kids and making an impact in their lives. Believe me it wasn’t for the money and it wasn’t for the summers off. If money was my primary motivator, I certainly wouldn’t have went into education. I would have went into the private sector with a car and expense account.

I have been in education now for thirteen years. When I look back over my career, I am saddened by how much it has changed. It has gone from keeping kids after school for projects, helping kids during lunch, talking with kids through problems and challenges they are facing. Basically, genuinely caring about the child as ‘whole’ person. It has gone from parents standing behind the teacher and enforcing what the teacher taught at home. To teachers having to answer and explain their every move – grading, discipline, etc.

How things have changed. Society has changed, and I am afraid to say, not for the better. I had the pleasure of working with a man for a few years before the end of his career. I looked up to him and had great respect for him for who he was, who he is, how he taught, and what he stood for. My last year working with him I remember discussing a tough school issue. Our discussion ended in him telling me that I will be saying ‘these were the good old days.’ I never thought that that statement would ring true, but it does.

Our greatest resource is our children. It doesn’t take being in education to know that. New York State is no longer holding children as our primary focus. New York State is holding greed as the number one goal. It is insulting and degrading what they are attempting to do to the public school systems. It is tragic. This state can not blame everything on education, but that is exactly what the media is doing. If we had to play the blame game, I would blame state testing. Kids hate the tests, and so do the teachers. It has taken the ‘real’ learning out of school and made learning into a ‘teach to the test nightmare.’

I am good at what I do. I love what I teach. I have motivated and inspired many students and parents. I have battled my share too, for the child. My job’s dynamics have changed drastically over the years. To say I work hard would be a gross understatement. I work hard every single day. I take work home nightly and work extensively on weekends to catch up and work ahead. My ‘growth score’ from the 2012 NYS ELA is ‘developing.’ It is insulting to say the least for many different reasons. One thing is for sure, I will not apologize for how my students perform on a three day exam. My students work hard and do their best.

In China, the people respect doctors, lawyers and teachers. The parents stand behind the school and enforce education at home. Take a close look at how their society runs. In America, the people respect rock stars and professional athletes. The parents fight the teachers tooth and nail. The system fights the teacher tooth and nail.
Take a close look at how our society is currently functioning?

Public education is not to blame for the budget issues this country faces. It never was and never will be. However, public education is the scapegoat.

I suggest all of the ‘professionals’ designing this APPR for our country come on into the classrooms and teach for a year to see what it is like.

Also, I would like some facts from NYS: how much did testing cost NYS last year – isn’t it to the tune of $385 million dollars? If we follow the money of Pearson, policy makers, and charter schools, what would we find at the end of the road? I would like to see the policy makers salary too. I know it is greater than mine at $57,000. I know it is greater than my brother in law’s who has been education for close to 26 years making $90,000. People in the private sector after 26 years are making well above $90,000 a year. Believe me.

Public education and school taxes are an easy target to get people fired up about because school taxes are one of the only things they have the control to vote on. So what a great way to get people enraged.

I wonder what validity is this APPR? What is the purpose? I wonder, if I ran my classroom the way the state is running the schools what that would look like?

“Thank you for coming to your child’s conference Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Your child’s average is a 73% in ELA. Why? Well, I can’t really tell you that. I do not grade papers for parents to see. I have my own formula that is a secret. You will just have to trust me. Your child is below average. What can you do to help? Oh, I can’t really tell you that because it is a moving target.”

As Troy Aikman said at last week’s tragic football game due to poor referee calling, “This is a joke.” I agree, this APPR scam is a complete joke. Even though APPR is out to destroy the unions and the public school system, the true tragedy at the end of the day is the children and our society loses at the end.

The state’s agenda is to conquer and divide the unions and public education for nothing more than their own greed. Bring it. Get the attorneys in place. When it is uncovered and exposed to the true agenda, and it will be, these policy makers may need to leave this country.

Widen your lense to see the big picture. We will not let our children and this country suffer. Game on.

Carol Burris, who was recently named to the honor roll as a hero of public education, wrote a letter to President Obama. Carol understands how excessive testing is harming students and demoralizing teachers. She warns the President how this policy–at the heart of Race to the Top–will do increasing damage as it is institutionalized.

Dear Mr. President:

First, thank you for all you do.

I am writing because as the principal of South Side High School, an integrated high school in New York, I am deeply concerned about the inclusion of test scores to rate teachers that is a mandated part of Race to the Top and in the waivers. Because of this mandate, my state New York, has implemented an evaluation plan which is not respected by the majority of principals and teachers, and excessive testing against which parents are rebelling

Our high school’s philosophy has been “kids, it’s you and your teacher against the test.” If students fail an exam, we prepare them to try again. The goal is for students to take the most challenging courses they can, even if their scores are not the best. Our results have been great, with the school selected consistently as one of the top 100 high schools in the United States by Newsweek, and last year by US News and World Report.

But this student-centered, healthy approach to testing is changing now that we are forced to use student scores to evaluate teachers. In classrooms all over New York State, it is no longer “teacher and student against the test” but rather “teacher and test against the student.” How students do on the test will play a key role in deciding whether or not teachers and principals keep their jobs. Not only that, because parents are allowed by law to see the teacher’s score, it will shortly result in the public embarrassment of some teachers, based on measures of dubious value.

This approach is trumpeted as judging educators by their performance, which may resonate with some people who are not immersed in the daily labor of reaching a wide variety of students in a wide variety of ways. Although the New York model technically allows educators to earn up to 60 points for measures other than student achievement, the system is rigged so that it is nearly impossible to be rated effective or even “developing” if the test-score components are low. In short, test scores trump all.

The biggest losers of these new evaluation policies, in my school and beyond, will be students. A teacher will look at each student as potential “value added” or “value decreased” – that is as a potential increase or decrease on the score the teacher is ultimately assigned. With his or her job dependent on those students’ test scores, this teacher will now have a set of incentives and disincentives very different than in the past.

For teachers with young families and college debt to pay, the student who comes late to class, or who does not do his homework will become a threat to her job security. The troubled child who transfers in will be nervously welcomed. The student with disruptive behavior will be a threat to the scores of the rest of the class instead of a person to be understood and whose needs should be met. The score, not the well-educated child, will become the focus. The pressures will build to engage in exclusionary and non-educative practices designed to improve numbers at the cost of learning. Instead of pushing students to take physics and advanced algebra, schools will discourage weaker students so that the aggregate score for the teacher and principal does not go down.

This isn’t an argument against holding teachers accountable; it’s an argument against holding them accountable for the wrong things and in a way that will result in very negative unintended consequences. I wouldn’t want to teach in that environment, and I wouldn’t want my children or the students at my school to try to learn in that environment; but the incentives for teachers to teach to the test and teach to the best will be unavoidable.

And to what end, Mr. President? For over a decade we have engaged in increased testing with punitive consequences under No Child Left Behind. There is no evidence that the massive outlay in tax dollars and learning time has produced increased learning. SAT scores have not gone up. NAEP scores have remained flat. Remediation rates at community colleges have not gone down. Our students have not improved on international assessments. Rather than acknowledging that testing is not the lever for increased learning, the plan is now to increase the pressure. There will be consequences, but better learning outcomes will not be one of them.

There will also likely be endless lawsuits brought by principals and teachers questioning the fairness and legality of the use of test scores and these unproven evaluation systems for termination of employment. Yes, the New York State Board of Regents and others will certainly attempt to include all important factors that impact learning in their test-score-based “growth models.” But these models have serious weaknesses. The recent score that was issued was characterized as a “first attempt” at being fair by the research firm that generated them. Not a “good attempt”, not even our “best attempt”, but a first attempt. Nevertheless, the scores were disseminated by the New York State Education Department and teachers were labeled “ineffective”.

Models are intended to be simplified versions of reality, but they can be manipulated – and they will invariably leave out important unmeasured (and immeasurable) elements. Some factors beyond a teacher’s control depress students’ test scores (think here of behavioral issues, traumatic life experiences, drug involvement, or lack of home supervision). Other factors beyond a teacher’s control increase students’ test scores (think here of summer enrichment activities, private tutors, and simple parental help with schoolwork and other learning). These are nonrandom student characteristics, and the growth model’s assignment of students to teachers can be complex and problematic. Similarly, the practical decisions about these assignments are troubling. Should I continue to assign my best teachers the most challenging students, knowing that those students might pull down those teacher’s scores?
.
If teachers have a choice between working in a district with high wealth and college-educated parents or a struggling district with high numbers of students of poverty, and they know that their employment is dependent upon test scores, which should they choose? Which are most of them likely to choose? While growth models do minimize the effects of poverty on outcomes, those effects remain substantial. Accordingly, one of the many unintended consequences of the new evaluation system will be even less incentive for good teachers and principals to work with the students that need them the most.

I had hoped that your administration’s educational leader, Mr. Duncan, and you might rethink this policy. But it appears that you are going “full steam ahead”. That makes me feel sad. Last election, my husband and I gave you considerable support. This year, we are unsure who we will vote for or if we will vote for president at all.

I hope that you will rethink this misguided policy and recommend an evaluation system not based on test scores but on the encouragement of approaches to teaching that are associated with increased learning. We need policies that work to reduce racial isolation in schools and in classrooms and that encourage schools to include all students in excellent curriculum, regardless of test scores.

Great leaders have the courage to change course when they realize that their policies are misguided.

I thank you for reading. I cannot tell you how discouraged teachers and principals are across this nation. I am a 59 year old grandmother who will retire in 3 years. This policy will not negatively impact me personally. However, for the sake of our public schools and our public school children, especially our students of color and poverty, I ask that you rethink the Race to the Top requirements before horrible damage is done.

Sincerely,

Carol Burris, Ed. D.
cburris@rvcschools.org

Daniel Willingham is a very smart and sensible psychologist at the University of Virginia. He has a talent for explaining complex issues in simple language.

In this video, he gives six reasons why value added assessment and merit pay are unfair–all in three minutes.

This letter was written by an early childhood educator. It expresses succinctly what many readers of this blog believe to be true:

Dear President Obama,

Please wake up and see that the education policies your administration is promoting are decimating our public schools, harming our children, demoralizing our teachers, and threatening the future of our democracy. Worst of all, your policies are promoting inequities in our education system and diminishing the opportunity every child in the nation should have for an excellent education

Your mandate for more charter schools is fast creating a three-tiered education system in our country. Children of the wealthy and privileged such as your daughters attend elite private or public schools. Children of less affluent families who are relatively able students with better informed parents increasingly find their way to charter schools, many of which have access to private funding and greater resources. But the third tier is left for the majority of poor or working-class children who must attend underfunded, under resourced, mostly inner-city public schools.

I am an early childhood educator and I can say with certainty that your policies are impacting the early childhood field in many negative ways, but that the greatest harm is falling on our nation’s poorest children. They are getting the worst of test-based, restrictive, standardized, rote instruction, while children in more affluent communities continue to benefit from more play and activity-based curriculum. More often the teachers in lower income communities have less training and are therefore more dependent on the standardized tests and scripted curricula that are a result of your misguided policies.

Standardized tests of any type don’t have a place in early childhood. Children develop at individual rates, learn in unique ways, and come from a wide variety of cultural and language backgrounds. It’s not possible to mandate what any young child will understand at any particular time.

Early childhood teachers are leaving the field in great numbers. They can’t teach using their professional expertise and many detest having to follow prescribed curriculum that they don’t agree with. As one teacher said recently, “I see kids with eyes glazed who are simply overwhelmed by being constantly asked to perform tasks they are not yet ready to do. I finally had to leave my classroom and retire early.” (www.deyproject.org).

Please look closely at how your education policies are impacting children, especially our youngest and poorest children. Your focus on competition and market-driven reforms is resulting in greater inequities in our education system and an undermining of our public schools. A vibrant, flourishing public education system is the cornerstone of our democracy. Please be willing to re-examine and reverse the direction of your approach to education. Please don’t be the President who abandoned our nation’s children and our public education system.

Respectfully,

Nancy Carlsson-Paige

Professor Emerita
Lesley University
Cambridge, MA

No one has been more active in opposing untested evaluation methods than high school principal Carol Burris.

Burris was a key figure in organizing New York principals to oppose the state’s test-based evaluation system, which has never been validated or worked anywhere.

Burris has written articles frequently. She is tireless.

I visited her school, South Side High School in Rockville Center, Long Island. It is an excellent and beloved community school that serves all the children of the community. it has no tracking. It has a strong IB program.

Carol went to the first public hearing of the Cuomo commission, but was not allowed to speak. When the commission held hearings on Long Island, she got her chance. She got a standing ovation.

Please read her testimony.

How many times have you heard a leader of the reform privatization movement say,

“We don’t have time.”

“The kids can’t wait.”

This reader from Montgomery County, Maryland, which has the nation’s best teacher evaluation system (it does not rely on test scores but on professional judgment) writes:


We in MoCo don’t hire inexperienced people. The people that are hired in Montgomery County are well vetted professionals with earned degrees and experience. They are also well compensated and most who opt to come here can be reasonably assured of a long and productive career.

In addition, in MoCo there is a culture of high expectations for all students. Parents, teachers and students are involved and engaged in the schools and the educational process. Employees are treated with courtesy and respect. Unlike their teaching counterparts in major urban areas, their isn’t the daily and constant teacher bashing, vilification and demonization in MoCo.

In addition, we spend over $2.2B per year on our public schools. One last thing, unlike the major urban and close in suburban schools that are supposedly “failing” in MoCo they aren’t testing every day in the name of achievement. Surprisingly, there is real teaching and learning taking place. What’s not to like.

Can this model be replicated? Yes. Will it in urban areas? No. Why? It takes time. Something, according to Arne, Michelle, and Joel we don’t have.

The Reading (Pa.) Eagle has a smart editorial questioning the state’s rating system for schools. It seems that quite a few local schools did not make “adequate yearly progress.”

The editorialist wrote:

“…we do not believe this is a sign local districts suddenly are doing a poor job. It’s a sign of an incomprehensible system that sets up schools to fail and encourages an educational structure focused on getting high test scores rather than well-rounded learning.

“Only a bureaucrat could comprehend the regulations involved. Some schools on the warning list achieved higher scores than others that were judged to have met the standard…

“It is noble to say that schools should aim for every child to succeed, and they should, but the reality is that for a variety of reasons some students will not, regardless of what educators do. The current system of arbitrary benchmarks does not seem to recognize that.”

How remarkable that the Reading Eagle understands that the system itself is fundamentally flawed and that it sets up schools to fail? Sooner or later, the newspaper will realize that this predictable failure is part of someone’s business plan.

How is it possible that the Reading Eagle understands what is happening, while the influential New York Times stubbornly supports the metrics, no matter how absurd they are?

Maybe someone who writes for the Reading Eagle has children in the public schools. Maybe they have talked to real teachers.

Mike Petrilli of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute summarizes “What’s Next” for reformers (some prefer to call them privatizers).

Race to the Top was a great coup for the privatizers/reformers.

Now they plan to follow up with a direct assault on schools of education, abetted by NCTQ’s forthcoming rankings, to be published by US News. NCTQ was created by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation a dozen years ago, and saved at the outset by a $5 million grant from Secretary of Education Rod Paige. In 2005, it got caught up in a federal investigation for taking money from the Department to speak well of NCLB. Read here to learn more about NCTQ.

The privatizers intend to move on principal evaluation, to make it more like teacher evaluation (test scores matter).

Pension reform will be high on their agenda.

Privatizers will promote digital learning by removing seat time requirements and following the guidance of former Governor Jeb Bush on this subject. No mention is made of the negative evaluations of cyber charters, both by Stanford’s CREDO and the National Education Policy Center, or of exposes that appeared in the New York Times and the Washington Post about the awful performance of cyber charters.

Gird your loins, folks, the privatizers are flush with victories in Wisconsin, Louisiana, Ohio, Michigan, Maine, Florida, and other states, and they are coming back to do some more reforming.