Archives for category: Teacher Evaluations

This is a stunning article about the teacher evaluation system that Michelle Rhee put in place in the District of Columbia. The article was written by Ben Nuckols of the Associated Press. He is not usually an education writer, but he dug deeper than many education writers.

Rhee fired about 1,000 teachers during her time as chancellor.

Since her evaluation system was put into place, 400 teachers have been fired.

Since the evaluation system was put into place, the federal test scores for the District went flat.

Some teachers get big bonuses. One teacher, at the end of the article, says she is rated “highly effective” and she turned down the bonus.

As Mary Levy, a long-time analyst of the DC school system, says in the article: We have gone from a system where almost no one was terminated, no matter how bad, to the other extreme, where good teachers as well as bad are terminated,” said Mary Levy, an attorney and a longtime analyst of city education policy. “The latter is probably more damaging due to the stress and demoralization it causes.”

Advocates of merit pay and test-based evaluation claim that it will strengthen the teaching profession because teachers will be drawn to the chance to earn a big bonus or higher salary.

This isn’t happening. As the article says, “But many teachers aren’t sticking around long enough to enjoy the higher salaries. The district has one of the highest teacher turnover rates in the nation. Half of new teachers leave the system after 2 years, according to Levy’s analysis, compared with about one-third nationwide. Levy recently began examining individual schools and found two-year turnover rates as high as 94 percent at one elementary school and 66 percent at a high school.

Tim Daly of the New Teacher Project, founded by Rhee, says it is too soon to judge the evaluation system. Give it 5 to 10 years, he says.

Question: Why are we foisting on the entire nation a method that has not been proven successful anywhere? Why not give it 5-10 years and see what happens before making it a national mandate, imposed by state legislatures at the behest of the Race to the Top?

A reader has a suggestion:

I suggest that we create similar VAM tests for doctors, lawyers, and politicians and start ranking them according to their contributions.  Oh, and reporters and news editors too.  That will solve this problem real soon!

Tim Slekar of Penn State has been watching NBC’s Education Nation, for which we are all grateful. Someone has to do it.

Today he watched the teacher town hall and discovered that a matter that has been settled in research was turned by NBC into a matter of opinion. And whose opinion counted was, in Tim’s view, questionable.

A reader sees how the pieces of the reform movement fit together:

I think that all the double-speak is just to divert attention away from the major process of dismantling education that has been taking place across the country, and the smoke and mirrors is to conceal the intention to ultimately declare brick and mortar schools obsolete and teachers expendable and unnecessary. Effectively, the goal is to not have teachers anymore.

One online teacher I work with put it this way recently, “We’re just glorified graders now.” Honestly, for a teacher, there is no glory when your job boils down to just grading. But politicians, corporate reformers and companies like Pearson and K-12 seem to think that education can be reduced to presenting material on a screen and testing, and that they can train virtually anyone to be graders.

Actually, online, you can set it up so that tests are self-administered and automatically generate grades, so currently instructors are grading papers, class discussions, group projects, participation, etc. and I can see how that might one day be considered superfluous to the powers that be.

If you happen to be in New Orleans this Saturday September 22, you won’t want to miss this fascinating panel discussion about “The Education Experiment: Petri Dish Reform in New Orleans and Louisiana.”

And even if you can’t get there for the panel discussion, open the link and see what they are talking about.

New Orleans is the first American city to wipe out public education and replace it with a charter system (80% of the students are in charters). Louisiana has passed legislation that will transfer $2 billion in public fund away from public schools to voucher schools.

Pay attention.

Will Richardson has his own blog, where he writes about many topics, especially technology.

I invited him to write for us, and he graciously consented.

Will Richardson writes:

Last week I had the opportunity to work with a group of teachers and administrators in a state that is supposedly leading the way in education “reform” here in the US. It’s a state where schools are getting letter grades, where teachers are being assessed in large measure by results of student tests, and where not surprisingly, educators at the ground level are not given a very large voice in the conversation.

Two things struck me in my discussions with them over those two days. First, despite the barriers, these 100 or so educators were more than willing to tackle the conversation around what now needs to happen in classrooms and schools now that we have access to so much information and knowledge and so many teachers through the devices we carry around in our pockets. Almost all agreed that we urgently need to begin to redefine the value of schools and rethink what relevant learning looks like if we are to fully prepare our students for this new world of learning that the Web is creating on a global scale. Their excitement and energy were palpable

But what struck me even more was this: their appetite for that change conversation is being driven in no small measure by their sincere frustration with what the state is imposing in their classrooms. Frequently, teachers spoke of their inability to take risks, to be creative in their practice, or to deviate from the script for fear that results on statewide assessments would regress. One teacher told me that when administrators visited her classroom, the expectation was that she should be teaching the same topic in the same way at the same time as all of her colleagues who were teaching other sections of that class. Another said that regular weekly objective assessments to measure “progress” were raising her kids’ stress levels “through the roof” as well as her own. Lesson plan titles reflect the day of the school year (as in “Day 47”) rather than the unit or goal of the lesson. And more.

Some of the administrators I spoke with expressed concern that many excellent veteran teachers are choosing to retire rather than deal with the new expectations. One actually said that he counseled his son to pursue a career outside of education given the new realities of the evaluation system and its after-effects. And almost all of them said they felt hamstrung by the ever narrowing measures that the state was placing on “learning.”

But here might be the most troubling piece: according to most of the folks I talked to, parents, by and large, just want the scores. Policy makers and corporate reformers have done a great job of convincing the public that the tests tell all, that if a school gets a “D” by some formula that didn’t exist a year ago, that means the kids in that school aren’t learning much. And if their kids don’t do well on the tests, it’s their teacher’s fault.

We have many battles to fight if we’re to build an effective counter narrative to the “reforms” that seem to be currently in vogue across the country. I’m becoming more and more convinced, however, that until we articulate a message for parents that can scale, one that can convince them that their children need much more than the tests are measuring and that there is a lot more to “learning” than just numbers on a scorecard, we’re going to have a very difficult time gaining a voice in the “reform” space.

(Will Richardson blogs at willrichardson.com, Tweets @willrich45, and is the author of the just released “Why School? How Education Must Change When Learning and Information Are Everywhere.” Details at whyschoolbook.com.)

Some of the tests that Chicago teachers complained about, the tests on which their evaluations would depend, the tests at the heart of the strike—are administered by a subsidiary of Fox News.

Media Matters, a public-interest watchdog, pointed out that Fox News aired 89 segments about the strike in a one-week period without disclosing the financial ties between Fox News and Wireless Generation, both of which are part of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation empire.

Full disclosure might also imply the need to disclose that Murdoch donates significant sums of money to charter schools and to Michelle Rhee’s StudentsFirst.

Then there is the fact that Joel Klein heads the education division of News Corporation. Klein is a member of Jeb Bush’s board and chairman of the Broad Center Board, and Rhee is on the Broad board, and so is Wendy Kopp, and so is her husband, and so is Margaret Spellings …

Such a tangled web of relationships, and all devoted to the same purposes: privatizing the nation’s public schools, selling technology to replace teachers, weakening unions and eliminating any rights that teachers have or had.

During the Chicago strike, there was a lot of hostile media coverage. One of the critics of the strike and the union was Dylan Matthews, who blogs at the Washington Post.

This refreshing article shows how Matthews consistently misinterpreted research to reflect his own opinions. The author, Mike Paarlberg, is a Ph.D. candidate and lecturer at Georgetown University who understands statistics and reads research studies with care.

Paarlberg shows that Matthews doesn’t understand statistics and that he repeatedly misrepresented and exaggerated the research findings. Matthews claimed that seniority was bad, test-based evaluation was good. He also tried to demonstrate that strikes hurt student achievement. In each instance, Paarlberg pins him for his shoddy use of statistics and research.

I guess Matthews didn’t say anything about the extensive research showing that reduced class size improves achievement or that value-added assessment says more about which students were assigned to the class than about teacher quality.

This teacher had a terrible class. She had one student in particular who was impossible and who didn’t want to learn. But then the teacher started telling a story about Ben Franklin, and Ruby was hooked.

What changed Ruby? What was the a-ha moment? Can the state measure what Ruby learned? Can they find a way to measure what the teacher did? Will the Gates Foundation videotape it and show it to others? Is there a rubric for that moment?

The teacher never forgot what her department chair told her:
“But if we spend all this time preparing them for a test, when will they ever have the chance to just appreciate something beautiful?”

Ruby found something that was beautiful to her. Can it be standardized?

Who is hurting the kids? Reverend Jesse Jackson knows.

A lot of pious preaching came from reformers who opposed the Chicago teachers’ strike. They said, “You are hurting the children by keeping them out of school.”

We never hear them say that the Mayor and the school board are hurting the children by denying them small classes, decent facilities, a good curriculum, social workers, the arts, and well-maintained facilities.

The money’s all gone, the reformers say, but there’s always enough to give subsidies to developers and big corporations. The only time the till is empty is when the topic is public schools.