More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Beth Fertig

Beth Fertig

Posted: October 5, 2010 11:15 AM

There's been tremendous controversy over using student test scores to measure which teachers are most effective. Through its "Race to the Top" grants, the Obama Administration has encouraged states to use test scores as part of the mix, but not make them the sole determinant.

While teachers, politicians, talk show pundits and parents debate the issue, New York City is already using student test scores to measure its schools. And the results have provided lots of confusion.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration took a tip from Florida when it introduced A-F letter grades for schools back in 2007. These report cards are called progress reports because they measure how much progress schools make in helping to increase student achievement.

Eighty-five percent of a school's grade is based on state test scores. The remaining 15 percent is based on surveys of a school's environment by teachers, parents and students. But it's not really so simple. Within this formula, the city compares individual schools to 40 other "peer schools." It also compares them to the citywide average.

This way, the city can see whether a school in a wealthy neighborhood of Brooklyn, for example, has made more progress with its fourth graders than a school in Harlem. If the school in Harlem made more progress even though it had lower scores than the school in Brooklyn, it can wind up with an A while the Brooklyn school gets a C. Schools also get extra credit if scores go up for English Language Learners and special education students, as well as others considered at a higher academic risk.

Last year, scores on the state's math and reading tests went up by more than 10 percentage points in New York City. As a result, 97 percent of city schools got A's and B's. But this year, New York State decided to make its tests harder to pass. The state acknowledged that its exams had gotten too easy and is now phasing in higher, national standards. By requiring students to get more correct answers this year, the percentage of students deemed proficient fell by more than 25 points in New York City and throughout the state.

The city tried to compensate for every school's lack of progress by grading them on a curve. Only 60 percent of schools got A's and B's when the grades came out in late September. There were also more D's and F's. Not surprisingly, principals groused when their grades went down.

The Earth School in Manhattan's East Village went from a B to a D. The principal of the well-regarded elementary school, Alison Hazut, told WNYC Radio the grading system is flawed because it still relies on a single year's scores. "All the small schools like ours, especially schools that are trying to be diverse and progressive, we're all fluctuating all over the map so how can that be?" she asked.

The city's answer is that it needs to rely on a single year's scores to avoid letting schools slide based on prior accomplishments, and to reward schools that make improvements. It also claims that its progress reports have been getting more accurate over time as it adjusts the formulas. But principals, teachers and parents are still confounded when they see schools with excellent reputations wind up with lower grades than those where only 40 or 50 percent of students are considered proficient.

Now that the city and the state are moving ahead with a new way of measuring teachers, everyone will be watching the role of test scores. And if the progress reports are any measure, there will be lots of questions when teachers finally do get their own marks.

 

Follow Beth Fertig on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bethfertig

There's been tremendous controversy over using student test scores to measure which teachers are most effective. Through its "Race to the Top" grants, the Obama Administration has encouraged states to...
There's been tremendous controversy over using student test scores to measure which teachers are most effective. Through its "Race to the Top" grants, the Obama Administration has encouraged states to...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Beth Fertig
08:35 PM on 10/11/2010
Thanks for the link, Bklyn54. I have read that article and it's very interesting. I'm sure WNYC will consider it as we continue to cover the rating of teachers. It's still in development now that New York state has passed a new law and districts have to figure out their own criteria to go with the test scores. Stay tuned!
06:47 PM on 10/06/2010
Beth, you didn't mention the Annenberg Institute study that shows that the process the city will be using for rating teachers according to test scores is totally flawed. Did WNYC even cover this story? http://gothamschools.org/2010/09/17/wide-margins-of-error-instability-on-citys-value-added-reports/
03:08 PM on 10/05/2010
Just reading this reinforces our need to oppose all of these statistical performance measures in education. This entire story is about how the data is being manipulated to fit a desired result. As a result, it is flawed. When I assess a student, I look at the score and provide them with opportunities for improvement in that specific content or skill. My response needs to be tailored to each individual student to ensure their success. Reformers need to take the same approach to schools. Collect data on a specific item: attendance, ACT scores, passing rates, parent involvement, community contributions, funding equality, learning environment, local poverty, whatever factor you want. Then determine if that is an adequate result. If it is NOT an adequate result, devise a specific plan for that specific factor and provide the school the resources necessary to implement that plan. Schools are community institutions with a mission to support the needs of their community. Teachers are trained, certified professionals committed to supporting our nation's future generations despite all of the undue scrutiny and low pay. We must embrace what is fundamentally correct in education and direct ourselves toward specific problems within existing institutions. Destroying careers with mass firings or creating upheaval in neighborhoods by closing schools or chastising teachers and students because of a test score that fails to reveal all pertinent information does is NOT reform. It is nothing less than using children as pawns in a self-serving turf war.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Joel Shatzky
05:49 PM on 10/05/2010
I agree with "Oppressed Teacher" that the "statistical" approach is a very inprecise and, in fact, destructive method of measuring student learning. The fact is that schools have been in a "crisis" in this country for forty years, not because we have fallen down in educating, but because the countries with which we compare ourselves have caught up and surpassed us, particularly in Asia. If educational gurus want to "improve the schools" they have to look holistically at the environment, which is the case of poor performing schools is integral with poverty, the cultural elements in the neighborhood that could be improved to promote good learning, and those students who have "special needs" and are learning a new language as part of those issues that must be addressed to make progress with young learners. In Europe and modernized Asia, moreover, not all school-aged students take academic programs. Rightly or wrongly, the students we compare ourselves to in these other countries are already "selected" just as those in specialized schools are selected here. If we were to compare that group to those in the academic programs in other countries, we would not be "behind." Once that was settled, perhaps we could look at the basic problems that plague students in low-performing schools through examining the systemic issues that make the five to eight-year-old learner into a ten and eleven-year-old who has "given up" on learning.