That old sorcerer has vanished
And for once has gone away!
Spirits called by him, now banished,
My commands shall soon obey.
In Goethe's classic, the apprentice uses a sorcerer's spell to ease his daily chores. Chanting the master's words, he brings a broomstick to life and tells it to fetch water to clean the workshop. The broomstick obeys, only too well. It races between the well and back until the workshop begins to flood. Although the apprentice had enough knowledge to set magic in motion, he could not think ahead to what he did not know.
I worry about a similar flood of unintended consequences if the Los Angeles Times moves forward with its plans to publish a database that places 6,000 Los Angeles third- to fifth-grade teachers on a spectrum from "least effective" to "most effective." The Times believes that the data will be a powerful tool to force better teaching, but it cannot anticipate all of the consequences. For example, consider that capable prospective teachers might avoid a profession in which they risk public embarrassment based on an undeveloped science. Consider the well-documented estimates that 25% of the value-added assessments are likely to be in error.
Publishing the database might easily undermine parent and teacher morale and make it more difficult for principals to advance school improvement. Being told that their child's teacher is "ineffective," or even marginally less effective than a teacher across the hall, may lead some parents to pressure the principal to place their child with a "high-scoring" teacher. Pitting parents against one another or against their principal is not a recipe for school improvement.
The Times' teacher effectiveness rankings are based on an elaborate statistical model created by Richard Buddin, a senior economist and education researcher at the Rand Corporation. (Significantly, Buddin did not attach teachers' names to his analysis; that was done by the Times.)
Buddin is one of many researchers across the country exploring so-called value-added approaches to assessing teacher quality. The assessments measure gains that students make on standardized tests from one year to the next. For example, researchers compare test scores of fourth graders with their scores as third graders to determine the "value added" by the fourth grade teacher. Proponents believe that the "value added" reliably distinguishes between more and less effective teachers. And they think that school officials would use such comparisons to target support to struggling teachers and motivate them to do better.
Yet value-added analyses focus narrowly on standardized tests, usually in math and English Language Arts. These tests give important information about student learning, but they ignore much learning that matters to students, parents, and teachers. That's why it can be a useful tool, but cannot possibly stand alone as a measure of "effectiveness." The National Academy of Sciences has identified several of the problems posed by value-added methods. These cautions should be taken seriously.
The National Academy of Sciences concluded that value-added analysis "should not be used as the sole or primary basis for making operational decisions because the extent to which the measures reflect the contribution of teachers themselves, rather than other factors, is not understood."
And yet, the Los Angeles Times is about to publish a database with the teacher effectiveness rankings of 6,000 elementary school teachers. The Times argues that its role is to provide "parents and the public ... information that would otherwise be withheld" about the "performance of public employees." The Times should not believe in the magic of this data, and should realize that it cannot foresee or control all of the consequences.
Follow John Rogers on Twitter: www.twitter.com/UCLA_IDEA
Michelle Rhee, Chancellor of D. C. Public Schools, has recently fired a number of teachers which her system has determined to be “ineffective.†If we are following the guidance of the ABA and the AMA we can assume that provisions are being made for the appropriate teacher’s professional organization to hold hearing in these cases. Naturally, if these teachers are
shown to be ineffective their teaching certificates should be immediately rescinded. We would not want ineffective teachers anywhere in the system. Using the ABA/AMA model we would assume that a formal hearing has been held for each teacher involved, the applicable teaching certificates have been revoked, and that there is an appropriate appeal procedure (I would be surprised if this is the case).
But I think the use of tests to evaluate students or teachers leads to teaching to the test, not real teaching and not real learning.
Teach teachers better to begin with. Don't have coaches with teaching degrees in PE teach math. Make teachers work longer to achieve tenure. Make teaching an honorable profession with appropriate pay and working conditions. Everyone talks about learning in a bad school with limited materials, but teachers have to teach in these conditions too. In CA a recent news report stated that, on average, California teachers spend about $1000.00 a year on basic supplies for their students. This type of thing is ridiculous.
I spent a lot of time when my kids were in school arguing with bad teachers and deaf administrators but at the same time, value-added is no solution and race to the top is worse than useless.
Ironically, as I wait to have my name submitted to the LAUSD Board for dismissal as a teacher, I am painfully aware that teacher accountability will not be used to get rid of bad teachers who go along with LAUSD institutional incompetence, but rather good teachers that try to teach all students at the highest level. At www.perdaily.com we try and talk about what is really going on in public education and how to fix it. Interested?
I was considered by administrators, parents, fellow teachers, and students as a good elementary teacher. (Forgive my apparent lack of modesty. I am trying to make a point.) In this new "plan", my evaluation could be considered very good in one year and lousy in the next year. Did my abilities change? I don't think so. What does change are factors the teacher has no control over. To name a few-- high student turnover throughout the year, poor parent interest and support, high number of discipline problems, and high number of special education students.
In those difficult years, I actually worked harder. Some of my successes were huge in terms of student attitudes and developing self confidence. I felt very good about their overall progress. However, none of this can be measured. I would be considered a poor teacher under the new plan.
What is forgotten by those who have never spent any real time in a classroom, is that students are not "widgets". They are human beings of infinite variety. Finally, when will "they" learn that not everything can be measured?
Reducing this argument to a shouting match between "unions trying to protect bad teachers" and "pro-business model policy wonks pushing testing as the be all to end all" helps no one, least of all the students and parents being served by LAUSD.
I wanted to be a teacher but chose to become a computer programmer when I saw how little money and respect teachers were getting. They are the whipping boy for everything wrong in our society. Hey parents, TURN OFF THE TV.! Read to your children!
My kids did great in school but my husband and I allowed them very little television viewing time and no video games before age 12. We also bought them any books they wanted, and I read to them every night until they were 9 or 10 and wanted to read to themselves before bed. The idea that the teacher should be blamed for an unmotivated, un-parented child's test performance is ridiculous. . And, if you really want to publish the teacher's effectiveness ranking, I say, publish the names of the parents of low test scorers as well. That would be the fair thing to do.
All measures have their flaws - it's that way in the private sector as well - that doesn't mean all measures are meaningless or can be easily discounted. I personally welcome the VAA as one of many tools we can use to measure teacher effectiveness and the opportunity it brings us to tailor or differentiate the lessons to meet the needs of each student.
Unintended consequences? Geez. LA just spent $578 Million on ONE school for 4200 kids, in a district with a 50% dropout rate.
We had BETTER be testing and grading.
I don't mean to downplay parental involvement at all, but just that a comment that attempts to alleviate teachers from any responsibility for the failures in their classroom would also preclude them from taking credit for the stories of success.
This championing of standardized test scores as a cure-all in education (while simultaneously agreeing to slashing every other aspect of education) is not just erroneous, it’s fundamentally duplicitous and unfair. Finally, it is students who will be punished and dunned with these endless standardized tests, the boring curriculum that will be tailored to the tests, and the substandard schools which will continue to languish without educational programs that are actually meaningful to students. But, of course, Skelton and the test champions will never have to face the kids.
As with any job the employee is graded on different aspects of their performance .This should be no different for Teachers, especially since they are in charge of our most precious commodities.
Assessing the Administrative portion of schools and the Superintendents role should looked at more than the Teachers. I know of many school where the Administrators and the Superintendents salaries rival those of big business. Many make over 6 figures. Is Education a business or should it be an investment in our future.