New York to release teachers' ratings

[Frank Booth]

Source: Los Angeles Times

The New York City school system announced Wednesday that it will release ratings for nearly 12,000 teachers based on student test scores, potentially giving the public an unprecedented window into the effectiveness of instructors at the nation's largest school district.

The move, which the city's teachers union said it would fight, is certain to escalate a national debate over how teachers should be evaluated and what role test scores should play in the process.

The release, planned for Friday, was prompted by requests from several news organizations and follows a series of Los Angeles Times stories in August that analyzed 6,000 elementary school teachers' effectiveness in raising students' math and English scores. It was the first time such data had been made public.

New York City's Department of Education officials, who originally told union representatives that they intended to keep the sensitive information private, said they could not find an exemption to state records laws that would preclude disclosure.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1021-new-york-value-added-20101021,0,5150820.story?

[madfloridian]

1. Score one for another city using teachers as scapegoats.

You do know that the school heads in NYC were recently condemned for dumbing down the tests for years to make them look good and give Bloomberg more power.....and now they will grade teachers publicly on those scores?

[Frank Booth]

2. I edited my comment, because I think the release of this data

could lead people to think that those teachers who best prepare their students for the tests are necessarily the best teachers, when I'm sure there's not a perfect correlation.

That said, I do think there need to be ways of objectively evaluating teachers, and this type of data can be a component of that.

I know quite a few people who teach in the Los Angeles school district, and whether they agreed with the LA Times' release of rankings or not, they did say for the most part they weren't surprised by who ranked well and who didn't.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. Do you agree with these 'ratings' being published in the NY Times?

[madfloridian]

4. You can't objectively evaluate teachers by what students do.

To do that you must evaluate the parents, the home life, the poverty level, and advantages, etc.

You can NOT blame the teachers for problems that are caused by the whole of society.

[Frank Booth]

6. I mostly agree.

That's why it's completely wrong to compare, say, a 3rd grade teacher in Beverly Hills against one in Watts.

I do think it is appropriate, however, to compare similarly situated teachers. If a Ms. X's Watts 3rd grade students consistently improve their scores at significantly higher rates than Mr. Y's, there's a strong probability Ms. X is a better teacher.

[Egnever]

20. yes, but it could also mean teacher X does a better

job teaching to the test, and do we really want students only being taught how to take a test, or do we want to encourage authentic learning?

[Smarmie Doofus]

27. Let's think this thru:

Isn't there also a strong possibility that Mr Y and/or Ms X will maneuver politically within the school to land kids that are going to "improve the scores" and avoid the kids that are going to drag them down?

PS change is much more complicated than "reformers" make it sound. Which is why amateurs *alone*... even if they are well intentioned.... cannot make things better, they can only make things worse.


Note: The ranks of the "reform" movement are dominated by amateurs. They're *proud* of it.

[boppers]

13. Can you reward teachers who succeed *in spite of* society?

What metrics do you accept (if any) for evaluating teachers?

[SoapBox]

8. Ditto...Ditto...Ditto.

This makes me so mad, after the way they were published here, by the Los Angeles Times.

...it's all the teachers fault...always the teachers fault...blah, blah, blah.

BULL!

So many factors contribute to kids doing well or poorly..."the" teacher in the over
crowded room, is only one single factor.

This crap is outrageous.

And no...I'm not a teacher and I don't know any teachers.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. RIP Rigoberto Ruelas

[Frank Booth]

7. Go to hell, A.J. Duffy.

It has never been confirmed that Ruelas killed himself because of the LA Times.

A.J. Duffy, a man who is so offensive that he has managed to turn tens of thousands of Angelenos against the UTLA, sunk to his lowest depths yet when he crassly used the tragic suicide of Mr. Ruelas for his own benefit.

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. You aren't worth the comment I'd like to make

[Bozita]

9. +1

[webDude]

10. NOTICE how the LA Times puts this, as if it is a given that the TOTAL...

...measure of a teacher is the test scores: "potentially giving the public an unprecedented window into the effectiveness of instructors at the nation's largest school district."

If you were teaching piano, would you be rated, or paid, by how well your student did on a performance? I would not bet my life on it.

[boppers]

14. If you're teaching, and not rated on how much you taught... it might be good to work elsewhere.

To use your piano metaphor, if I had a choice between a teacher who taught scales (teach to the tests) and a teacher who taught how to play (teach far beyond the minimum), HELL YES I'd take that into account.

Are teachers so far away, emotionally, from their students, that they just don't give a damn about how well a student does? Your post seems to imply that.

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. Teachers ARE evaluated

To continue this analogy, let's say you never practice and you didn't come to your lessons consistently. Would it be fair to call your teacher inadequate because you aren't a good piano player?

[boppers]

22. If I didn't practice or come to lessons, it's probably because the learning process sucked.

The teacher bears a large part of the burden for ensuring that the process is not just something that students are forced into, but making the process of learning into something students *want* to do.

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. So it's the teacher's fault when the student doesn't practice.

That's what you're saying?

:rofl:

[boppers]

25. Few want to please an uncaring teacher.

:shrug:

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. So an uncaring teacher is the ONLY reason a student doesn't practice

Keep digging. You'll hit China eventually.

[No Elephants]

19. How much a teacher teaches and how much a student learns do not

necessarily bear any relation to each other.

[Catshrink]

29. Teachers care passionately about how their students do.

One test doesn't say much. A far better measure is a before/after assessment tied to the subject/content. How much do students grow? This might level the playing field between those who teach AP courses, whose students presumably kick butt on the BIG TEST, and those who teach lower achieving students. A before/after assessment might show that the AP kids didn't grow that much while those in lower levels posted significant gains. This would contradict the results of the BIG TEST.

[boppers]

12. Medical doctors object to patient survival statistics.

I wonder how that would go over?

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. Cause that's exactly the same thing!

:sarcasm:

[No Elephants]

18. Because a doctor's treatment is the only reason a person lives or dies, just as a

teacher's skill and effort are the only reasons any child learns or doesn't learn.

[proud2BlibKansan]

24. So when a smoker dies of lung cancer, it's the doctor's fault

This line of argument is getting ridiculous. LOL

[AngryAmish]

21. Hospitals fought this forever

We finally made them disclose.

[RobinA]

17. Disgusting

This should make teachers everywhere want to flock to work in NYC schools. Does wonders for recruiting teachers to difficult environments.

[Smarmie Doofus]

28. There's a teacher glut. Right now. Because the economy...

... is a basket case.

When/if the economy gets better, supply/demand will dictate the junking of the ed "reforms" of the Obama era. *Someone* will have to be in the classroom.

Right now, the job SUCKS. Moronic politicians want to make the job suck worse than it already does.

It's ( i.e. what the $$ media calls "reform") is a means to an end, politically. In the vast majority of cases,"reform" advocates couldn't care less about urban public schools. They will never use one. No one they know socially will ever use one.