Teacher Data Report Post, Take 2

I had a long rant of an entry that was accidentally deleted. I take it as a sign from the universe to breathe, rethink and try again.

I feel it is important for readers to understand why teachers and the UFT were so opposed to Teacher Data Report results being published.

1. This format was a trial run that was discontinued.Why was it discontinued, you may ask? Simple. It was statistically invalid and unreliable. It had a margin of error of up to 54 out of 100 points! For those who are unfamiliar with what that means, the easiest way to say it is this, " Those reports were not worth the paper they were written on."

2.  Even the latest chancellor,who was appointed by the same mayor who appointed the last 2 chancellors who were in power when these reports were created, admits that the above statement is true.

3. This was an algorithm that was NEVER intended to rate teacher's performances in this way. Hence why it was promised to be kept internal. But the chancellor lied and the media was allowed to print  information that even the courts who released it bascially stated were innaccurate.

As a teacher, I have no issue with evaluation. Have at it. I am a damn good teacher who has requested every year for the last 5 years to be placed in a SELF-CONTAINED classroom while others would run screaming from the same task. But if you want to print my review, it damn well better be accurate and valid, or you can expect to have my lawyer sue you for libel.

There is no "Union Conspiracy"or cover-up here. We just don't want to be judged by a system that is only slightly more accurate than flipping a coin for each of the indicators. If you hear someone spouting that anti union rhetoric please be informed, and ask them if they would be content to be rated and then publicly shamed by a system with that accuracy rate.

And please be aware that I did not have a TDR and therefore have no personal vested interest by saying any of this.

Processing the latest information

I am glad to say that the UFT is stepping up measures to allay the fears of thousands of teachers like myself. They have made it a point to reiterate their position that only 20%  of the  new teacher evaluation is guaranteed to be tied to standardized testing. They even released a framework for how evaluations will be measured.
I believe the UFT when they say they will fight for more authentic measures of learning to be used as measures of growth. While I trust them, I do not trust those they will bargain with. The interjection of the line concerning value added growth measures being able to outweigh other aspects of the framework will continue to concern teachers...especially those who teach special needs students. I am trying to be cautiously optimistic, but having been burned so many times in the past by the politics of Tweed, it is a difficult feat.

Until negotiations are completed there remains a knot in my stomach. I have confidence that our union is fighting the good fight. The problem with fighting the good fight is that your opponents are rarely bound to the code of ethics you may carry into battle. In an ideal world good and just always wins but in the shade of gray world that we exist in this is seldom the case.

Please take the time to read the UFT response in Edwize. I believe in trying to see all sides of an issue. For those who maybe strapped for time, I have added the framework mentioned in the article below.

http://www.edwize.org/setting-the-record-straight-on-teacher-evaluations-scoring-and-the-role-of-standardized-exams#more-11225

This is taken from the article, "Setting The Record Straight On Teacher Evaluations:
Scoring and the Role of Standardized Exams" by Leo Casey

Here then is a schematic of the general framework of teacher evaluations in New York:

MEASURES OF TEACHER PERFORMANCE (60 of 100 points)		MEASURES OF STUDENT LEARNING (40 of 100 points)
Minimum of 31 Points	Up to 29 points	20 Points	20 points
Supervisory Observations	Other Measures such as Peer Observations and Portfolios of Artifacts of Teacher Performance	For Teachers of ELA and Math, Grades 4 through 8:Value-Added Growth from State Standardized Exams	For All Teachers:Growth on Local Assessments, such as Performance Assessments
		AND	OR
		For All Other Teachers:Growth Measures on “Student Learning Outcomes”	For Some Teachers:Different Measures of Growth from State Standardized Exams

Angered by Politics

This has been a sad week in education in NY. So much so that I am finding it hard to write about it all. So what I am going to do is sum up what has happened and will ask that you take the time to read some of the attached articles. Please pass them on! People need to understand what politicians are doing to our education system!

1. After a show down between the UFT (United Federation of Teachers) and the mayor of NYC, Michael Bloomberg, Governor Cuomo took it upon himself to break the stalemate by threatening to implement his own teacher evaluation plan by inserting it into a budget bill. The brilliant "compromise" that resulted... teachers will now be graded on a 100 point system. 20 points on state standardized tests (which is ridiculous in NY considering it was only a few years ago the state had to throw out their scores because they were proven to be invalid, unreliable and in short a statistical joke. Now teachers jobs will depend on the very same tests); 20 points on other standardized tests or the same ones used in a different way (I have no clue what "used in another way"could mean so I won't even try to guess) and 60 points on performance in the classroom.

Now if that were the end of it, it wouldn't sound so bad. However the state department added language to the agreement which states,  “Teachers rated ineffective on student performance based on objective assessments must be rated ineffective overall.” This means that a teacher who does not raise test scores will be found ineffective overall, no matter how well he or she does with the remaining sixty percent. So in the world of politics, math has now changed. The 40 percent allocated to student performance actually counts for 100 percent. Two years of ineffective ratings and the teacher will be fired.

Now think of it from a special needs teacher's point of view...my kids come to me on the average of 2-3 years behind in reading and math. Usually my students come to me at a kindergarten level. By the end of a year in my classroom many students are on the cusp of reading at a high second grade level. I have had students who have gone up as many as 10 reading levels in pretty much a yearly basis since 2006. Very few of my students do very well on these tests though. This system means that I will be most likely be in a firing position within 2 -3 years. Ask any of the parents I have worked with if they feel I am "ineffective" and they will either laugh or go off at that idea.  I have parents asking to have their children in my class, even though they know I teach a self contained class. I am not an "ineffective" teacher. Quite the opposite.

2. The UFT lost the suit to keep teacher's names and their students testing scores out of the media. The media has every right to create "bad teacher lists" and publish them. They can do this even though it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be erroneous and invalid.

These two events make strong special needs teachers wonder if this job is worth it anymore. I plan to stick it out and try to fight for my rights, but many teachers will not be as masochistic as I am in this case.

Just writing this is upsetting me. I will post again later once I have cooled down. Sigh.

Without futher ado...the links I mentioned earlier. Please pass this information on to others.

http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/feb/21/no-student-left-untested/

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2012/02/a_dark_day_for_new_york.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/you-are-so-smartwhy-did-you-become-a-teacher/2012/02/19/gIQA2vBNNR_blog.html